I assume you know what this means (from the Ritholz arty above): If not, let me make it real simple: if you wanted to generate 2.40 for every 1.10 invested, over 16 years, your rate of return would only have to be 5.6%. Now, we know the 1.1 bil wasn't all invested upfront, which is why someone has to sit there and do the work of analyzing the ins and outs. And when the WSJ got done, as the Ritholz article shows, the returns were very much to the south of 88%. The only way you get returns that are in excess of the bull market in force at the time using the returns Bain actually made, which were, once again, far less than 88% overall, as they showed, is through leverage. Leverage isn't available, except in a very limited way, in IRAs and 401k's. So it's far more likely that without any weird shit, Mitt would have made market returns or, if he was really really good, maybe a bit more. Now, I have known two people who made large sums in their retirement accounts. What they did was to put 100% of their money into their own company's stock when it was teetering on bankruptcy. It didn't actually go bankrupt, so they wound up making 30:1 returns on their money. That's the only way I know of to turn the kind of money you can contribute to an IRA, SEP-IRA, 401(k), or any other defined contribution retirement account you can name, into the kind of serious money we're talking about here. So yes, he did artificially deflate the value of the assets he placed in his accounts, and having done that, he was able to make the kind of money that allowed it to grow to 103 million dollars. If you know math and you know investing, there is no other way. Anything else is bullshit. Pure, unrefined, probably Texas, bullshit.
Very dumb post. I have always wondered what the hell people are doing on this site if they dont think that you can get better returns than the market averages..... If you dont think it is possible to beat the market averages you have no business attempting to be a trader, you may as well just stick your money in an index fund.
I would not be surprised if some readers have asked something like " What the hell are you doing on this site then?"
LOL, hows that 100$ trading account treating you? You rich yet? Your trading account is a rounding error to most people.
Sorry dude but there is NO LIMIT on the conversion of a 401k to Ira. That's how I got my IRA up to over 1 million. Defined benefit plan converted to Ira all in one step.
Once again you PROVE you know jack shit about qualified plans. As a business owner you can put in way more money than a traditional 401k. It's possible to contribute 100% of gross income in one year. I myself put in $90,000 one year so all I ended up paying was the max on social security ,medicare: my federal taxable income was like 5-$6000 by the time I finished my business deductions and the deduction for the contribution to my 412i.
Nice work getting a million into an IRA I have been trying to pay more attention to mine cause i realize just how big the numbers can get when compoounded without taxes, but im still young, so mine is still tiny, and every time i see a good trading opportunity im much more concerned about getting the trade on in my prop accounts, for ten times the size, and i always end up hating myself later for missing good opportunities..... Probably something im going to be kicking myself for down the road.....
You are full of shit I can get around 1600% leverage if I wanted to in my IRA. I certainly don't advise it but leverage and margin are NOT the same animals. margin (ie stock, selling short etc)is not allowed in a qualified plan leverage is allowed (futures , options on futures ,) the only difference is during regular trading hours in a qualified plan you are limited to overnight margin requirements for initiation and maintenance. so depends on the contract how much leverage you can use and officially you have used "no margin"