What kind of retirement plan do you guys have?

**brooks85** · 12-07-17, 08:39 AM

^lol look how you two are trying to consort with each other after I've kicked each of your asses.

Pathetic and typical of what children do when they have lost. Birds of a feather...

**grease lightnin** · 12-07-17, 08:40 AM

Originally posted by brooks85

hey anymore hilarious articles from washington post that PROVE nothing that you can post to give me a laugh?

hey washington post says everything is ok! They also said hillary was going to win! Trends you moron.

Donald Trump’s chances of winning are approaching zero

What a waste of time you are.

Posts like this ^^^ are an admission of defeat.

Me: “Proof on unfunded liabilities numbers?”

Brooks: “Trump, Trump, Trump. Foxnews good. Washpo bad”

**grease lightnin** · 12-07-17, 08:44 AM

Originally posted by The Kraken

Grease I've said it at least 100 times before but I feel bad even arguing with Brooks

Ask yourself this, if you went to the special olympics and a participant wanted to race you, would you dust them? No!

It's kinda like picking on the janitor at work

I'm gonna back off him a bit

Yeah good point.

But if the handicapped person unrelentingly trolled the shit out of you with countless unfounded claims of you being slow, even when you are a professional athlete.....

You just might strap up and dust that ass.

Just saying.

**brooks85** · 12-07-17, 08:44 AM

Originally posted by grease lightnin

What a waste of time you are.

Posts like this ^^^ are an admission of defeat.

Me: “Proof on unfunded liabilities numbers?”

Brooks: “Trump, Trump, Trump. Foxnews good. Washpo bad”

you don't know what "proof" is you moron.

op-eds =/= proof

now factor in where the article is from... wow you are a sucker and EXACTLY why I should have went into politics.

Notice how you never address the fact you're an idiot who got suckered into a bet he had NO chance of winning because you're embarrassed by it. You know it's just another piece of evidence that proves you're an idiot.

**grease lightnin** · 12-07-17, 08:48 AM

Brooks where is the proof on your unfunded liabilities numbers?

Quit deflecting. It is not working.

**brooks85** · 12-07-17, 08:50 AM

Originally posted by grease lightnin

Brooks where is the proof on your unfunded liabilities numbers?

Quit deflecting. It is not working.

your own ARTICLE acknowledges the debt you moron!

It's there, your dumbass just "hopes" it will be fixed like the idiot who wrote that article lol

**brooks85** · 12-07-17, 08:53 AM

lol poor grease, about to be exposed again

search " unfunded liabilities" in google and the FIRST article that comes up..

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2013/10/23/does-the-united-states-have-128-trillion-in-unfunded-liabilities/

the article you posted!

lol wow you are lazy!

**brooks85** · 12-07-17, 08:56 AM

from your hilarious stupid op-ed

"Throwing out figures such as $128 trillion without context (percentage of GDP) or explanation (this is over an infinite horizon) does a disservice to listeners"

yep, unfunded liabilities can reach any number solely because time will not stop moving forward!

that is your defense grease?

haha wow

**grease lightnin** · 12-07-17, 08:57 AM

Originally posted by brooks85

your own ARTICLE acknowledges the debt you moron!

It's there, your dumbass just "hopes" it will be fixed like the idiot who wrote that article lol

We are talking about your claim of “unfunded liabilities that 100% tax rate couldn’t put a dent in”.

Yes there is national debt. $20.24 trillion.

The trajectory of which flattened after the sequester.

That course is reversing under your boy Trump.

What do you have to say about that?

**brooks85** · 12-07-17, 08:58 AM

Originally posted by grease lightnin

We are talking about your claim of “unfunded liabilities that 100% tax rate couldn’t put a dent in”.

Yes there is national debt. $20.24 trillion.

The trajectory of which flattened after the sequester.

That course is reversing under your boy Trump.

What do you have to say about that?

yeah, grab a calculator you moron lol though you won't know how to use it obviously.

this is why I should have went into politics. Worst president in history doubles national debt in 2 terms and you think everything is ok because of 1 story. Sheep!

nothing else can be said but you're an idiot, you're like a creationist.

**grease lightnin** · 12-07-17, 08:59 AM

Originally posted by brooks85

from your hilarious stupid op-ed

"Throwing out figures such as $128 trillion without context (percentage of GDP) or explanation (this is over an infinite horizon) does a disservice to listeners"

yep, unfunded liabilities can reach any number solely because time will not stop moving forward!

that is your defense grease?

haha wow

Can you read you fukking idiot?

That means the numbers you threw out have no context because there is no time horizon attached to them.

Therefore THEY ARE BOGUS!!

**brooks85** · 12-07-17, 09:01 AM

Originally posted by grease lightnin

Can you read you fukking idiot?

That means the numbers you threw out have no context because there is no time horizon attached to them.

Therefore THEY ARE BOGUS!!

no you moron, try reading and using English.

His defense is the numbers don't matter because there is no time limit... lol you're an idiot if you don't get why that is hilariously stupid. You're an idiot. You're too dumb to play out what that means and why it's 100% incorrect.

again, you're like a creationist.

**brooks85** · 12-07-17, 09:03 AM

"infinite horizon" lol yeah, unfunded liabilities can be 500 trillion one day, how about 2 quadrillion?! It's infinite horizon everyone!

**brooks85** · 12-07-17, 09:05 AM

"yeah my SSC got cut again, but it's cool. Infinite horizons and all. Washington post told me the numbers are not real so this cut in SSC must be fake."

**grease lightnin** · 12-07-17, 09:09 AM

You literally do not understand.

They are talking about Coburn’s numbers.

They do not make sense because there is no context set. They are pulled from thin air.

**brooks85** · 12-07-17, 09:10 AM

Originally posted by grease lightnin

You literally do not understand.

They are talking about Coburn’s numbers.

They do not make sense because there is no context set. They are pulled from thin air.

says the moron who enters into bets he has 0% chance of winning because the bet has to do with topics he knows nothing about. Yeah, good point grease..

no they are not which is EXACTLY why that article is only on washington post and EXACTLY why you took the top search link in google. You're lazy.

In fact, the number is even higher than 120 trillion you fool. You're ignorant as penetrate. Trends.

remember you also posted on 9/11 and 28 pages WITHOUT even reading them... this is what you do. You post about things you know NOTHING about.

**brooks85** · 12-07-17, 09:19 AM

grease man up for one time in your pathetic life and address the fact you entered into a bet you had NO chance of winning because you don't understand economics.

Address the fact you post about things you don't even know about like 28 pages and many other examples.

Address the fact you've got wrecked when discussing Obamacare's affect on the market as opposed to QE.

Address the fact you were caught using spaghetti monster logic to justify trump/russia connection even though all evidence points to a hillary/putin connection.

Yet you think you're in a position to post as if you know something? lol again, you remind me of a creationist.

only an idiot would respect your posts grease which is exactly why you have kraken.

**grease lightnin** · 12-07-17, 09:36 AM

You wasted 20 minutes writing a bunch of nonsense.

Congratulations

**brooks85** · 12-07-17, 09:38 AM

what part of this is nonsense?

Originally posted by brooks85

grease man up for one time in your pathetic life and address the fact you entered into a bet you had NO chance of winning because you don't understand economics.

Address the fact you post about things you don't even know about like 28 pages and many other examples.

Address the fact you've got wrecked when discussing Obamacare's affect on the market as opposed to QE.

Address the fact you were caught using spaghetti monster logic to justify trump/russia connection even though all evidence points to a hillary/putin connection.

Yet you think you're in a position to post as if you know something? lol again, you remind me of a creationist.

only an idiot would respect your posts grease which is exactly why you have kraken.

lol see how you penetrate yourself? Your childish reply in an attempt to dodge the truth about you will further solidify that you have the mental abilities of a child.

**grease lightnin** · 12-07-17, 10:01 AM

You have to give brooks credit.

He is a special troll.

Like Hitler, he hopes if he just repeats a lie over and over, people will believe it.

**brooks85** · 12-07-17, 10:05 AM

^damn I'm good

Originally posted by brooks85

what part of this is nonsense?

lol see how you penetrate yourself? Your childish reply in an attempt to dodge the truth about you will further solidify that you have the mental abilities of a child.

**grease lightnin** · 12-07-17, 03:45 PM

Originally posted by brooks85

^damn I'm good

Most people wouldn’t refer to being compared to Hitler as “good”.

**7deuceoff$uit** · 12-07-17, 03:59 PM

betpoints. Haha! Have a 401k plan that gets matched up to 5%. Also have a company retirement plan which I'll be fully vested in by September.

**brooks85** · 12-07-17, 06:24 PM

Originally posted by grease lightnin

Most people wouldn’t refer to being compared to Hitler as “good”.

well given you're a lying idiot I'm not worried by the fact you can read lol

**brooks85** · 12-07-17, 06:24 PM

Originally posted by brooks85

what part of this is nonsense?

lol see how you penetrate yourself? Your childish reply in an attempt to dodge the truth about you will further solidify that you have the mental abilities of a child.

Originally posted by grease lightnin

You have to give brooks credit.

He is a special troll.

Like Hitler, he hopes if he just repeats a lie over and over, people will believe it.

damn I'm good

**grease lightnin** · 12-07-17, 09:25 PM

No, you are garbage.

**lakerboy** · 12-07-17, 09:28 PM

Grease and Brooks get together for a beer and a joint

**grease lightnin** · 12-07-17, 09:29 PM

Originally posted by lakerboy

Grease and Brooks get together for a beer and a joint

If I ever see brooks I am stomping a mud hole in his ass.

Straight up

**brooks85** · 12-07-17, 09:32 PM

Originally posted by grease lightnin

If I ever see brooks I am stomping a mud hole in his ass.

Straight up

lol wish you were not such a coward, turn you into a youtube star and your kids can see what a bitch their dad is but no doubt they already know

**grease lightnin** · 12-07-17, 09:35 PM

Originally posted by brooks85

lol wish you were not such a coward, turn you into a youtube star and your kids can see what a bitch their dad is but no doubt they already know

If you only knew.

**brooks85** · 12-07-17, 09:35 PM

^I do that's why I said I wish you were not such a coward. Pay attention.

**grease lightnin** · 12-07-17, 09:40 PM

Originally posted by brooks85

^I do that's why I said I wish you were not such a coward. Pay attention.

You don’t know anything but Trump and pigshit.

**brooks85** · 12-07-17, 09:46 PM

Originally posted by grease lightnin

You don’t know anything but Trump and pigshit.

you post like a child but that is known by anyone who reads your posts. Trends.

**grantingyou** · 12-09-17, 04:50 PM

Originally posted by grease lightnin

You cannot make a full deductible contribution to a traditional IRA if you are covered by an employer sponsored plan and make more than $62k as a single and $99k married filing joint.

If you are maxing out your 401k, and you fit within those income limits, kudos on saving a huuuge part of your income. Never seen somebody do that and I have seen it all.

You should look at Roth instead of Traditional. If you are making nondeductible contributions to your traditional ira because you are over the Roth income limits, you should backdoor them to Roth.

I make too much to qualify for Roth IRA, but I do some amounts using the back door Roth method (Pay taxes now and transfer to Roth IRA). I invest the max in a Traditional IRA to go with my Roth 401k at work, with a 4% max. You absolutely can do both, I've been doing it for years. The reason why I like Traditional IRA is that I expect my tax bracket to be much lower int he future than it is today. Love the fact that the growth is tax-free, so I do a little of both.

**grease lightnin** · 12-09-17, 06:22 PM

Originally posted by grantingyou

I make too much to qualify for Roth IRA, but I do some amounts using the back door Roth method (Pay taxes now and transfer to Roth IRA). I invest the max in a Traditional IRA to go with my Roth 401k at work, with a 4% max. You absolutely can do both, I've been doing it for years. The reason why I like Traditional IRA is that I expect my tax bracket to be much lower int he future than it is today. Love the fact that the growth is tax-free, so I do a little of both.

Dude. You CANNOT deduct your Traditional IRA contributions if you don’t qualify for a ROTH.
Growth is NOT tax free in a Traditional IRA.

If you are making non-deductible contributions, you will have to file form 8606 when you take distributions to establish basis, and you will pay your income tax rate on the growth.

This makes zero sense.

Period.

If you are maxing a Traditional IRA contribution and your aren’t backdooring it to a Roth, you are screwing yourself royally.

If you have been doing this, or if you have been claiming a deduction on Traditional IRA contributions, go see a CPA pronto.

2017 IRA Deduction Limits - Effect of Modified AGI on Deduction if You Are Covered by a Retirement Plan at Work

English

More In Retirement Plans

If you are covered by a retirement plan at work, use this table to determine if your modified AGI affects the amount of your deduction. See IRAs for more information.

single or head of household	$62,000 or less	a full deduction up to the amount of your contribution limit.
more than $62,000 but less than $72,000	a partial deduction.
$72,000 or more	no deduction.
married filing jointly or qualifying widow(er)	$99,000 or less	a full deduction up to the amount of your contribution limit.
more than $99,000 but less than $119,000	a partial deduction.
$119,000 or more	no deduction.
married filing separately	less than $10,000	a partial deduction.
$10,000 or more	no deduction.
If you file separately and did not live with your spouse at any time during the year, your IRA deduction is determined under the "Single" filing status. https://www.irs.gov/retirement-plans...t-plan-at-work