Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Question about 401K

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Question about 401K

    Hey guys,

    Not sure if any of you can help me, but I figured it would be worth a shot.

    I am trying to set up my 401K for my new job, and I have three options. I can do a pre-tax, roth, or after tax.

    I can't imagine why anyone would pick "after tax". So that leave roth or pre tax., and I honestly am stumped.

    I did some research of google, and maybe I am just to tired to think straight, but I really am not sure which route is "better". (Is there even a "better" route, or are they about equal)

    Thank you for any and all help.

    -Adam

  • #2
    Re: Question about 401K

    The best thing to do is, if you can afford to, contribute as much as you can into the 401K that your employer will match. My employer for example will match at 50% up to 3%. So in other words I have 6% taken out employer would contribnute 3%. The idea is the amount your employer will match is "free money". So max that out.

    All this pre-tax obviously.

    if your employer does not match at all, or if you want to save for retirement above the matching of the 401K, then invest in a Roth.

    Hope that is clear.

    I wish I had started saving for retirement when I was your age. Put in as much as you can afford now, even if you think well maybe in 5 or 10 years when I have a family of my own I won't be able to contribute this much, you will have that money already in there. if in 5 years you need to cut back in your contribution that is OK. But getting the money in their at a young age is key.
    Last edited by Unclebuck; 07-14-2010, 10:00 AM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Question about 401K

      I'd only do a 401k if my employer matches, typically the 401k return is quite low. A young person would be better off to open a Roth IRA, and contribute after tax money. That way when you are 65 all the money and interest earned is not taxed when you take it out. Its a no brainer. If you can average 10% a year on the interest with no taxes to pay at the end, your money will grow exponentially.

      There is no telling what the tax rate will be in 2040 or 2050.
      You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Question about 401K

        Thanks guys.

        I actually had a 401K with my old company, and I had it set up at either 10 or 15%.

        I am looking at 15% for this job (the company matches 50% up to your 6%).

        I am still a bit confused as to pre-tax vs roth. From the way it sounds either one would be fine. Is that correct?

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Question about 401K

          I am really slow when it comes to finances, so I had to go back and read those two posts a couple of times to fully understand them.

          For what its worth, this is what I found off of the internet:

          In general, the difference between a Roth 401(k) and a traditional 401(k) is that the Roth version is funded with after-tax dollars while the traditional 401(k) is funded with pre-tax dollars. After-tax dollars represent money for which taxes are paid in the current year, and pre tax dollars are those that do not represent federal taxable income in the current year. Typically, the earnings on Roth contributions will be tax free as long as the distribution is made at least 5 years after the first Roth contribution and the attainment of age 59 and one half, unless an exception applies.

          A Roth 401(k) plan will probably be most advantageous to those who might otherwise choose a Roth IRA, for example, younger workers who are currently taxed in a lower tax bracket, but expect to be taxed in a higher bracket upon reaching retirement age. Another consideration for those currently in higher tax brackets is the future of income tax rates in the U.S. (if income tax rates increase, current taxation would be desirable for a wider group). The Roth 401(k) offers the advantage of tax free distribution, but is not constrained by the same income limitations. For example, normal Roth IRA contributions are limited to $5,000 ($6000 if age 50 or order); whereas, up to $16,500 could be contributed to a Roth 401(k) account, provided no other elective deferrals were taken for the tax year (no traditional 401(k) deferrals

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roth_401(k)

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Question about 401K

            Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post

            I am still a bit confused as to pre-tax vs roth. From the way it sounds either one would be fine. Is that correct?
            from what I know it is probably best to contribute only as much as the company will match on the 401K, then contribute the max to the Roth per year (not sure what the max is but it is a certain dollar figure but I think it is $5,000 per year) if you reach the Roth limit and still want to save for reitrement, then go back and increase your 401K as much as you want, even though employer won't match

            Roth will earn a better interest rate from what I am told, so even though it is after tax dollars it is better than a non-matching 401K .

            so in your situation I would do the 6% 401K, as co will match 50% and then contribute the max per year in a Roth IRA. And then if you have other money you want to invest (give it to me) then increase your 401K
            Last edited by Unclebuck; 07-14-2010, 11:38 AM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Question about 401K

              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
              from what I know it is probably best to contribute only as much as the company will match on the 401K, then contribute the max to the Roth per year (not sure what the max is but it is a certain dollar figure but I think it is $5,000 per year) if you reach the Roth limit and still want to save for reitrement, then go back and increase your 401K as much as you want, even though employer won't match

              Roth will earn a better interest rate from what I am told, so even though it is after tax dollars it is better than a non-matching 401K .
              Thanks UB. I really apprecaite it.

              I know this is worth it, but man there seem to be a lot more options for my new companies 401K then I had with my previous employer (they also matched more, but hey, free money is free money)

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Question about 401K

                Depends on what tax rate you think you'll be paying when you withdraw the funds.

                Historically, I've been a big fan of making pre-tax deposits, letting it all accumulate tax-free, and then paying the tax later when I'm not working and my income will be lower.

                But since 2000, both major political parties have worked together to put multiple trillions of dollars on the government's credit card and eventually taxes will have to increase substantially to pay for all the fun we've been having keeping the economy alive this way.

                Pre-tax vs. post-tax is a tradeoff between whether you think the investment earnings (interest, dividends, capital appreciation) will outpace (or underperform) taxes.

                If you've got enough to go around (and young people usually do since they aren't likely to be married, supporting children, and haven't yet overcommitted on a mortgage -- THE AMERICAN WAY!!), then think about a pre-tax 401k for the full amount of the match and then opening a Roth IRA for the difference. Then you're indifferent. There's no real reason to make a prediction about tax rates 30, 40 years down the road. UB's numbers look about right.

                The most important thing is not choosing between pre-tax and Roth. Its maxxing out the contibutions you can make while you are young so that the dollars accumulate under compound interest.
                Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                And life itself, rushing over me
                Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Question about 401K

                  I will soon be celebrating my 25th birthday and I've already lost about $3,000 from my 401k thanks to this recession.

                  The stock market will make either choice moot when the next one hits.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Question about 401K

                    Originally posted by The Toxic Avenger View Post
                    I will soon be celebrating my 25th birthday and I've already lost about $3,000 from my 401k thanks to this recession.

                    The stock market will make either choice moot when the next one hits.
                    You are in it for the long haul and you will win in the end

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Question about 401K

                      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                      from what I know it is probably best to contribute only as much as the company will match on the 401K, then contribute the max to the Roth per year
                      This is the right answer.
                      This space for rent.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Question about 401K

                        Originally posted by The Toxic Avenger View Post
                        I will soon be celebrating my 25th birthday and I've already lost about $3,000 from my 401k thanks to this recession.

                        The stock market will make either choice moot when the next one hits.
                        You're off to a good start if you've already got that much invested.

                        If anybody ever promised you that the balance would never go down then they lied, and if you believed them you should know better. There's risk. But unless you're a Wall Street insider, don't try to time the market. The "market timers" tend to goof it up and sell at the bottom and buy at the top. Oops. Just stick it in an index, or if you believe you can find a portfolio manager that beats the market 2 year out of five (like the five-star managers try to do -- that's right a 40% success rate) AND doesn't kill the returns with an exorbitant management fee (the premium you pay so that the market index can outpeform the active manager 60% of the time - whooppeeee!!!) then just stick it there and leave it alone, except to occasionally rebalance. Annually.
                        Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                        Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                        Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                        Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                        And life itself, rushing over me
                        Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                        Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Question about 401K

                          Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                          You're off to a good start if you've already got that much invested.

                          If anybody ever promised you that the balance would never go down then they lied, and if you believed them you should know better. There's risk. But unless you're a Wall Street insider, don't try to time the market. The "market timers" tend to goof it up and sell at the bottom and buy at the top. Oops. Just stick it in an index, or if you believe you can find a portfolio manager that beats the market 2 year out of five (like the five-star managers try to do -- that's right a 40% success rate) AND doesn't kill the returns with an exorbitant management fee (the premium you pay so that the market index can outpeform the active manager 60% of the time - whooppeeee!!!) then just stick it there and leave it alone, except to occasionally rebalance. Annually.
                          You'd think I had a lot but really the statements read something like, "Well, we've just lost your entire last monthly investment and a good percentage of what you had already invested. Thank you for investing again this month! Your balance is now $989"

                          SO, its not like I'm losing big chunks at a time its just that every month posts a loss and I just keep investing like a schmuck. I really do wish that I had waited to invest until this year. At about the time I started my 401k I also opted into health care and dental so my monthly income dropped dramatically and I have nothing to show for it. Hindsight is always 20/20 but I wish someone had warned me that my hard earned cash would be going down the drain. And yeah, I'm young and I have "time" so I'm put into the 'high risk group' which means that I'm just giving my money away. They warn you about that when you get into it but I'm still waiting to go positive.

                          BUT, its with State Farm and have posted good numbers as of late (with whatever they are investing in), they are nationwide, "reliable", and if worst comes to worst its transferable between employer. So I'm keeping it "staying in it for the long haul" like a good little peon. Hoping it'll pay off someday.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Question about 401K

                            Originally posted by The Toxic Avenger View Post
                            You'd think I had a lot but really the statements read something like, "Well, we've just lost your entire last monthly investment and a good percentage of what you had already invested. Thank you for investing again this month! Your balance is now $989"
                            Oh, mine look the same, but since I've been doing it for longer there are extra zero's in the "loss" column. I'm not happy about it, but I know I'm not alone and I know the "market timers" have lost even more by selling low and re-purchasing after the stock market has risen.

                            Originally posted by The Toxic Avenger View Post
                            So I'm keeping it "staying in it for the long haul" like a good little peon. Hoping it'll pay off someday.
                            I assume you already know this, but I'll point it out anyway.

                            Let's assume (for simple math, which I need) If you started investing at a unit price of $1 then you get ten units. It initially goes down to $0.7, then yes you've lost 30% to $7. But with the next paycheck, you're buying at $0.7 so you are accumulating more units per dollar (14 units). Now you've got 24 units so when the price gets back to $1 then you've made $4 even though the market is "flat." During the accumulation phase, that's good.

                            We have to trust that the market grows for the long term, and quite obviously it does.

                            If you're in a tax-deferred product you aren't investing for the short term but for the long term. Hang in there - you're showing financial discipline and that's great. Nobody said "discipline" would be easy - you've correctly pointed out the cost: a bit less cash in your pocket today. But if you learn to live on less than your full paycheck when you're young then it will be even easier to invest larger amounts as your earning capacity increases.
                            Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                            Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                            Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                            Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                            And life itself, rushing over me
                            Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                            Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Question about 401K

                              TRY BUYING A FARM WITH YOUR PAYCHECK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X