6/15/2014 10:53 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 6/15/2014 10:09:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 6/15/2014 7:59:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/15/2014 7:16:00 PM (view original):

I love it when BL tells everyone everything they should do, everything they think.

In this case, I somewhat agree with him.   At some point, enough is enough.   But this is where the road forks.  I don't know how much is enough for moy, BL, tec or possibly even myself(not to mention anyone else).    Fortunately, for us, we have BL to set the number for everyone in the world.

I'm not saying what the number is. I'm saying the number exists for everyone.
In your opinion.
It's a fact. For everyone there's a point where more money does nothing.
6/15/2014 11:10 PM (edited)
Posted by bad_luck on 6/15/2014 10:53:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 6/15/2014 10:09:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 6/15/2014 7:59:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/15/2014 7:16:00 PM (view original):

I love it when BL tells everyone everything they should do, everything they think.

In this case, I somewhat agree with him.   At some point, enough is enough.   But this is where the road forks.  I don't know how much is enough for moy, BL, tec or possibly even myself(not to mention anyone else).    Fortunately, for us, we have BL to set the number for everyone in the world.

I'm not saying what the number is. I'm saying the number exists for everyone.
In your opinion.
It's a fact. For everyone there's a point where more money does nothing.
Well all the millionaires I know and work with over the last 15 years or so haven't hit that # yet and I've managed banks in the north shore of Chicago. They are still working 80 hours a week to make more money. You should tell them that. "Hey- you're beyond the point where money matters - stop asking for raises - stop investing your money- it doesn't matter anymore cause of the law of diminishing returns"


Which by the way is a law commonly used for production theory.... Not for amassing a nest egg. I've never once heard an investment advisor tell someone not to invest money towards retirement because of the law of diminishing returns. Never. Once.
6/15/2014 11:34 PM
Remember though, in this example we are living in the land of 100 million IRA's.
6/16/2014 12:21 AM
Regardless of whether I'm getting "diminishing returns" on my next dollar of income, IT'S MY ******* MONEY.

It shouldn't be taxed extra so it can be re-distributed to people who didn't work.  IT'S MY ******* MONEY.

6/16/2014 12:52 AM
Posted by moy23 on 6/15/2014 11:10:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 6/15/2014 10:53:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 6/15/2014 10:09:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 6/15/2014 7:59:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/15/2014 7:16:00 PM (view original):

I love it when BL tells everyone everything they should do, everything they think.

In this case, I somewhat agree with him.   At some point, enough is enough.   But this is where the road forks.  I don't know how much is enough for moy, BL, tec or possibly even myself(not to mention anyone else).    Fortunately, for us, we have BL to set the number for everyone in the world.

I'm not saying what the number is. I'm saying the number exists for everyone.
In your opinion.
It's a fact. For everyone there's a point where more money does nothing.
Well all the millionaires I know and work with over the last 15 years or so haven't hit that # yet and I've managed banks in the north shore of Chicago. They are still working 80 hours a week to make more money. You should tell them that. "Hey- you're beyond the point where money matters - stop asking for raises - stop investing your money- it doesn't matter anymore cause of the law of diminishing returns"


Which by the way is a law commonly used for production theory.... Not for amassing a nest egg. I've never once heard an investment advisor tell someone not to invest money towards retirement because of the law of diminishing returns. Never. Once.
It's not diminishing returns. It's diminishing marginal utility. See the cheeseburger example.
6/16/2014 12:52 AM
Posted by bad_luck on 6/15/2014 7:55:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 6/15/2014 6:50:00 PM (view original):
No, I don't think so.

You're special.
Nope. It's everyone.

If you were hungry and had one cheeseburger, that would be great. It would fill a need. If you had a second, it would probably also be great. But you probably aren't hungry after two, so a third doesn't do you as much good. A forth does even less. A fifth less than that and by the time you got to burger 6, you're probably in negative utility range.

Agree, yes or no?
Moy?
6/16/2014 7:37 AM (edited)
Posted by bad_luck on 6/16/2014 12:52:00 AM (view original):
Posted by moy23 on 6/15/2014 11:10:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 6/15/2014 10:53:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 6/15/2014 10:09:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 6/15/2014 7:59:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/15/2014 7:16:00 PM (view original):

I love it when BL tells everyone everything they should do, everything they think.

In this case, I somewhat agree with him.   At some point, enough is enough.   But this is where the road forks.  I don't know how much is enough for moy, BL, tec or possibly even myself(not to mention anyone else).    Fortunately, for us, we have BL to set the number for everyone in the world.

I'm not saying what the number is. I'm saying the number exists for everyone.
In your opinion.
It's a fact. For everyone there's a point where more money does nothing.
Well all the millionaires I know and work with over the last 15 years or so haven't hit that # yet and I've managed banks in the north shore of Chicago. They are still working 80 hours a week to make more money. You should tell them that. "Hey- you're beyond the point where money matters - stop asking for raises - stop investing your money- it doesn't matter anymore cause of the law of diminishing returns"


Which by the way is a law commonly used for production theory.... Not for amassing a nest egg. I've never once heard an investment advisor tell someone not to invest money towards retirement because of the law of diminishing returns. Never. Once.
It's not diminishing returns. It's diminishing marginal utility. See the cheeseburger example.
The point you're missing (shocking!) is that it's not up to YOU (or anybody else) to decide that, because YOU (or anybody else) don't know how that money is going to be used.
6/16/2014 7:09 AM
Posted by bad_luck on 6/16/2014 12:52:00 AM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 6/15/2014 7:55:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 6/15/2014 6:50:00 PM (view original):
No, I don't think so.

You're special.
Nope. It's everyone.

If you were hungry and had one cheeseburger, that would be great. It would fill a need. If you had a second, it would probably also be great. But you probably aren't hungry after two, so a third doesn't do you as much good. A forth does even less. A fifth less than that and by the time you got to burger 6, you're probably in negative utility range.

Agree, yes or no?
Moy?
Again... This is a law regarding consumption of goods and services.... You are going to the wrong investment advisor if they are talking to you about eating 6 cheeseburgers. Mine discusses risk tolerance, principle guarantees, and ROI.

Unlike my stomach my bank account doesn't get 'full'.... Nor do I suffer side effects like obesity and high cholesterol from making what you would call 'too much' money. The more money I have gives me more options.... Hey someday I might want to buy my favorite sports team in which I'd need way more than $100 million dollars. If the money is not there I can't buy it so its not just about consuming cheeseburgers today..... But more about having enough access to cheeseburgers for the rest of my life.... And then my kids lives... And my grandchildrens lives. You keep looking at this issue in a vacuum TODAY.... Savers save for the unknown. 'You can never save enough money cause you never know what will go wrong'.... I'm saving for an uncertain future which means I have a minimum threshold that I feel comfortable with (so I can sleep at night) and I don't have a maximum threshold because I don't know what the future holds. Make sense?
6/16/2014 7:53 AM
Worst analogy ever. 

6/16/2014 8:47 AM
Posted by moy23 on 6/16/2014 7:09:00 AM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 6/16/2014 12:52:00 AM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 6/15/2014 7:55:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 6/15/2014 6:50:00 PM (view original):
No, I don't think so.

You're special.
Nope. It's everyone.

If you were hungry and had one cheeseburger, that would be great. It would fill a need. If you had a second, it would probably also be great. But you probably aren't hungry after two, so a third doesn't do you as much good. A forth does even less. A fifth less than that and by the time you got to burger 6, you're probably in negative utility range.

Agree, yes or no?
Moy?
Again... This is a law regarding consumption of goods and services.... You are going to the wrong investment advisor if they are talking to you about eating 6 cheeseburgers. Mine discusses risk tolerance, principle guarantees, and ROI.

Unlike my stomach my bank account doesn't get 'full'.... Nor do I suffer side effects like obesity and high cholesterol from making what you would call 'too much' money. The more money I have gives me more options.... Hey someday I might want to buy my favorite sports team in which I'd need way more than $100 million dollars. If the money is not there I can't buy it so its not just about consuming cheeseburgers today..... But more about having enough access to cheeseburgers for the rest of my life.... And then my kids lives... And my grandchildrens lives. You keep looking at this issue in a vacuum TODAY.... Savers save for the unknown. 'You can never save enough money cause you never know what will go wrong'.... I'm saving for an uncertain future which means I have a minimum threshold that I feel comfortable with (so I can sleep at night) and I don't have a maximum threshold because I don't know what the future holds. Make sense?
Just for the sake of the argument, do you agree with the point regarding the burgers?
6/16/2014 8:48 AM
Posted by tecwrg on 6/16/2014 7:37:00 AM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 6/16/2014 12:52:00 AM (view original):
Posted by moy23 on 6/15/2014 11:10:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 6/15/2014 10:53:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 6/15/2014 10:09:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 6/15/2014 7:59:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/15/2014 7:16:00 PM (view original):

I love it when BL tells everyone everything they should do, everything they think.

In this case, I somewhat agree with him.   At some point, enough is enough.   But this is where the road forks.  I don't know how much is enough for moy, BL, tec or possibly even myself(not to mention anyone else).    Fortunately, for us, we have BL to set the number for everyone in the world.

I'm not saying what the number is. I'm saying the number exists for everyone.
In your opinion.
It's a fact. For everyone there's a point where more money does nothing.
Well all the millionaires I know and work with over the last 15 years or so haven't hit that # yet and I've managed banks in the north shore of Chicago. They are still working 80 hours a week to make more money. You should tell them that. "Hey- you're beyond the point where money matters - stop asking for raises - stop investing your money- it doesn't matter anymore cause of the law of diminishing returns"


Which by the way is a law commonly used for production theory.... Not for amassing a nest egg. I've never once heard an investment advisor tell someone not to invest money towards retirement because of the law of diminishing returns. Never. Once.
It's not diminishing returns. It's diminishing marginal utility. See the cheeseburger example.
The point you're missing (shocking!) is that it's not up to YOU (or anybody else) to decide that, because YOU (or anybody else) don't know how that money is going to be used.
What am I deciding?
6/16/2014 8:52 AM
You're deciding if and when something has diminishing marginal value.
6/16/2014 8:56 AM
Cheeseburgers DO have a diminishing value.    But everyone else is talking about money.  
6/16/2014 8:58 AM
Posted by tecwrg on 6/16/2014 8:52:00 AM (view original):
You're deciding if and when something has diminishing marginal value.
Not when. But everything, even money, has diminishing marginal utility.
6/16/2014 9:10 AM (edited)
I like to take my extra cheeseburgers home in a doggy bag. I did pay for them and I'm going to be hungry tomorrow.
of 123

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.