11F...

"who actively trade"....those are the most important three words in your post. This is why most of us, professional and individual, fail to beat the market IMO. Because we "actively trade." Professionals are active because otherwise there is no commission to be earned. And if they just barely keep up with the market, then what's the incentive for anyone to use them? So they have to try and beat the market. Individuals fail because we're emotional creatures and tend to sell low, despite telling ourselves we won't. But that's where we, as individuals, have an advantage over professionals. We don't have to be active. Buying and selling constantly, trying to time the market, is a very difficult proposition. I'm a firm believer that markets (prices) are irrational in the short term, but over the long term, they are not. That is, today's price and tomorrow's price may go up and may go down, but over the long term, prices definitely bounce around a mean that is reflective of a valuation. If anyone doesn't have a ton of $$ and cheap commissions available to diversify their investments though, I wholeheartedly agree with Vetter that the best thing to do is passively invest in low cost index funds, periodically rebalance, and just not stress about it. 15-20 years from now, you'll thank your younger self. Just for discussion which I think this thread was all about, TGT, VFC, and maybe SBUX are consumer disc companies I like at today's prices. QCOM in tech (CSCO also, but less so). CAH in healthcare. T in telecom. Utilities are all overpriced...SO maybe? Consumer Staples I can't find hardly anything right now....WMT, perhaps. I just bought HRL recently, though I don't think it's really a steal of a deal. TD for financials (it's a Canadian bank though). But you can see none of these are big growth companies. All very boring, based on my investment style. Now, I'm also the guy who said I thought TGT was slightly undervalued last summer at $67 or so. So take my thoughts for what they're worth....not much :) My average TGT price is in the low to mid-60's so I'm definitely at a "paper loss" there. But based on an earlier comment in this thread about TGT though, I do still think TGT is greatly undervalued here. They still have tons of cash and cash flow, they don't even pay out half of it in the form of a dividend and that's even with their reduced guidance. Excellent credit rating, yield at an all time high and payout ratio still less than 50%, P/E ratio is very good, but poor leadership IMO and losing revenue to WMT and AMZN online is certainly a risk factor. That said, TGT's % online growth was more than even AMZN's last quarter (though obviously the scales don't even warrant a comparison really). I could see TGT dropping slightly even further in the short term, but I have no concerns about TGT long term, at this time. I've got a $56 put expiring next week on them and would be very happy to pick up a hundred shares at that price. (And again, for full disclosure, even if I pick up these hundred shares, TGT is still only 3.5% of my total portfolio, so unless you're willing to accept a ton of risk, buying individual stocks should be accompanied with a ton of diversification). If anyone is looking for short term gains though, I wouldn't touch TGT (or really anything else for that matter, since I don't have any confidence in prices short term). In today's market, I do think it's pretty difficult to find many companies that are undervalued. Not a ton of bargains out there right now, IMO. Great thread, by the way. I'll be interested to see the comments of others on here over time, though I suspect that most folks on here prefer (wisely) just dumping money into index funds, which makes most of this discussion unwarranted.

Don't have much input to help you other than to say ENJJPT is at Wichita Falls and I see no way that base is ever BRAC'd for that reason. I suppose it could happen at some point, but with so many countries heavily invested in that location, that seems like a darn near impossibility that it's going to be BRAC'd and if nothing else it's got to be at the very bottom of the list. Not to mention it's only a small portion of the base.

Spaceman, First of all, we're pilots so there's no shame in asking us anything. Just like yourself, we pride ourselves in knowing everything, even if we don't know shit! More importantly, I think the answers you've been given already have been awesome and spot on. mcbush, and nsplayr nailed it on the loan vs. invest questions. Rate vs what's the better return, vs what's better peace of mind for you? And I wholeheartedly agree with MtF on the decision to convert. I did this a few years ago for my wife, the second we PCSd and she had her 401K sitting there. We chose to pay a very small tax on it now (even better for you given your situation) and then that thing grows tax free for 30 years. No brainer in my opinion to convert. I would add a few extra things to think about. I'm no CPA, but I think student loan interest is tax-deductible up to a point ($2500 maybe). I'm too lazy to look it up, but 5 seconds of googling will tell you how much interest you can deduct and what the max income threshold is. With your levels of $$, you'll almost surely be able to deduct it all. $30K at 5-ish% interest is $1500 a year or so in interest, and if you can deduct that full amount, then you're really only paying maybe overall 4% or so instead of the 5%. So that would factor into my "what's the better return" question. Even in today's market and with that deduction, I'd personally still opt for paying off the debt first, then invest (with a small caveat, explained below). Also, this goes without saying, but pay off the higher interest loan first if you can. Once it's at 0 balance, then pay off the lower one. Even if it's within one account, you can still call and ask if you can apply the payment towards 1 vs the other. I suppose all they can do is say no? I also agree with MtF about not losing out on your 2016 Roth contributions if you can't pay the student loan off in full first, which you can't at $3K a month. But you have until April 17th of 2017 to make contributions toward 2016 IRAs. Basically you've got until the filing deadline. So I personally would pay off my student loans (higher interest first, if at all possible) aggressively until the point where you need cash flow going to your Roth. With 3 to 3.5K left over each month, I'd pay down student loans until around Jan of next year, then start maxing out the 3-3.5K into my 2016 Roth, to ensure it gets to the fully funded $11K by the April filing deadline, then immediately going back to fully paying down student loans until it's gone, then you'd still have until mid April 2018 to contribute to your 2017 Roth, if for any reason you guys got into a cash flow crunch. My opinion only. And nice work doing this as an O-2. Keep this up and you'll be set sooner than later.

To offer a counter to what HelloHello just posted above, I just closed with NBKC and had an insanely positive experience. 30 year VA, 3.25%, 6K lender credit, 0 random fees and lender credit was spelled out every step of the way. My originator was Amy Stuhr Paterson. Contact info for her is: 913-253-0190 800-375-8096 x 0190 email address: apaterson@nbkc.com I literally could not recommend anyone more than Amy. Never met the woman, don't get any kickback obviously, but I found her from this very forum and I've gotten great gouge on tons of stuff on here from other bros so wanted to offer the same. I'm pretty sure she mentioned that her husband was a prior Active Duty pilot, because she knew about this forum. Feel free to PM me if you want more details, but in a nutshell, I'm extremely anal and shopped around quite a bit. No one could touch NBKC with rate + credit. My eventual realtor was convinced it was BS and of course wanted me to use her "preferred lender" who couldn't come close to matching. This was my second VA loan, so I only had partial entitlement left. No issues at all with NBKC (nor should it be), but several banks refused to help me when I told them I only had partial eligibility left (including USAA, which I only called for a laugh anyway). Put an offer on one home, but I needed a 60 day close due to overseas PCS from a non-US base (so no good notary options). I didn't use a realtor (tried to get a for sale by owner direct to me on this first home), and seller used world's worst realtor. Amy actually helped out quite a bit in protecting us from a few minor issues from seller's agent. Way above and beyond what an originator would be required to do. I ended up backing out of the house less than a week to close. Offered and contract accepted on a second home. Walked away during inspection. Finally closed on a third home. I was super anal and petty about every line (as I should be, right?!) through every step of the process, and while Amy was surely irritated with me at times, she never let it show and was professional throughout the entire process. She answered every question to my satisfaction and the end result was, with a $1500 realtor credit plus NBKC's $6K, I ended up with a small overall credit after closing costs. Basically my down payment was about $1000 less than what it should have been due to the lender + realtor credits (and $0 closing costs). Anyway, non VA loan rates weren't nearly as competitive, but I would use Amy again in a heartbeat and highly recommend you at least calling her to compare terms if you're in the market.

1) It is most certainly a feature you can opt out of. In fact, you have to sign up for it (at least on wealthfront), and there is a FAQ section for what happens if you change your mind and turn it off. 2) I do understand the concept of tax harvesting. And I understand why it makes sense based on a passive portfolio of ETFs with thousands of investors pooled together, and they can take advantage of daily (I assume) shifts. I can't do that anywhere remotely as efficiently as an individual investor. So I understand and concede that if this was my investment vehicle, while I'd have to look into it in more detail, it is very likely that it would make no sense to "opt out." But I also understand the concept of selling low and buying high (which I get, is not necessarily exactly what's happening here, as they "shift" their ETF into "similar" portfolios rather than "sell" them per se). Obviously they sell them, but you and I both know what the process is. So they sell and buy at the same/similar price. But first of all, they can't be exactly the same ETFs, otherwise the concept goes out the window due to wash rules. But even if they are similar and you're only washing a small portion of that ETF, still by definition a tax loss harvesting strategy means you are selling at a loss. And secondly, from my previous posts one can tell that I'm more of a buy and hold investor. I don't like the concept of selling something at a loss, just because the price has dropped. If the fundamentals have changed validating the price drop, then it's a different story and it makes sense to me. Not based on automation. I think the confusion lies in that I don't like the idea of "tax loss harvesting", because I'm an individual investor but if I was just one in a pool of 10 thousand, then I'd probably buy into it. 3) That said, just like investing into a portfolio of index funds in Vanguard and rebalancing one's self, or using a service like this is not my cup of tea, thud's comment above was spot on. It's better than not investing. Way better. 4) It needs to be reiterated that this entire tax loss harvesting concept is thrown out of the window when it comes to tax protected retirement accounts (i.e., IRAs). Which is probably the highest priority for any citizen to get fully funded. Now once that's done, and folks are looking for additional ways to invest, then this is a seemingly valid option like many things out there. I've said in the past on here, I don't think there's a right way to invest, but there is a wrong way. This would be a right way for some people perhaps. There is a wrong way though.

blue, never heard of them but just looked on their site. Let us know how they do if you end up using them. My two cents...why pay them for something you can do yourself? It looks like they just invest in index ETFs. As has been preached on here before, you can do that yourself and save the .25% commission by logging onto vanguard.com or a variety of other sites. I'm pretty sure Vanguard or any other of the big investment firms have a little risk tool you can use to build your own little market of etfs if you want. Just log in once a quarter and rebalance or set up a lifecycle fund thing, etc. Further, this wealthfront site clams to brag about this fancy tax loss harvest strategy. First of all, that's the kind of thing I'm not a fan of at all (selling at a loss just for tax benefits). Second of all, that's something that will help you none if you're using them for an IRA or 401K, as those are already tax havens. But it looks like maybe you can opt out of this feature....didn't look hard enough. Good luck.

Eindecker, I've never heard of that site before but read through several of the comment streams the other day and thoroughly enjoyed it. Would give the site a plus 1 recommendation for any folks thinking of delving into real estate. Some great discussions on there, particularly from numerous people just thinking of starting out. I will caution any newbies though that some of it seems a bit "too good to be true." I see lots of investors/RE newbies on there overestimating their Cash Flow potential, or perhaps more accurately underestimating the hidden costs of RE investing. And I'm by no means an expert. Further, there seems to be a ton of folks who really over-leverage themselves and encourage others to do the same, at least according to their comments. Some of the strategies I read seem to work great right now, but there is little margin for error. As soon as a crisis hits (major MX required, vacancy, bad tenant requiring eviction which may lose a few months of rent while the legal process works)...any event like this would seem to cause a domino effect and their personal house of cards will crumble. Anyway, very cool site. Thanks for linking.

thud, I'd also add that I whole-heartedly agree with your sentiments about the dangers of non-diversification. Also the illiquidity of RE being discounted by some. Just like you mentioned, future cash flows are difficult to analyze, regardless of investment vehicle. All three spot-on comments.

thud, First of all, thanks for adding to the discussion. Your comments bring up one important question people must ask themselves. What is your goal? You speak of RE having potential costly effects during transfers. For some, this may not be a factor and for others frankly, this may not be of any concern at all depending on what their goals are. You said that trusts cost money, but so do capital gains taxes. But these are good things, as it means you have profitable assets! I find it laughable when folks argue about not selling something because of a tax...shouldn't we all be so lucky! When you asked me about looking at something from various perspectives, not just total return or income...that may or may not be relevant to me. For some people, income is their only concern. I'm not a true income only investor, but I lean heavily this way as I am a very reluctant seller of equities (and a patient buyer...I acquire many and miss out on more by selling puts). For others, it may be total return. For anyone who plans on retiring and using the "sell 4% of my assets each year", then total return is crucial for them, since by their philosophy they need return to generate $$. For even others, it may only be to outpace the S&P 500 with whatever combination of investment vehicle. Or inflation, or whatever metric one wants to use as a measuring stick. So while your comment about confirmation bias is a somewhat intriguing one, another (equally if not more dangerous) threat in my opinion is investors constantly switching their strategy because they have no goal other than to just "make money." If the market does well, some folks get disappointed that their portfolio is struggling compared to so many others, so they switch strategies. Or conversely when the market dumps, it's tough for many to swallow such a big loss so they switch. Or they hear their friend/relative/random internet forum guys doing this or that, which works great (right now) so they switch. But more accurately, I think the fatal flaw is that they don't have any goal they are trying to achieve. Come up with a well thought out goal, whatever that may be, and then come up with a plan to get there. Then one can re-evaluate (think constantly debrief yourself) on how you can improve your plan along the way. As has been discussed on here previously by several other posters, I think the dollar cost averaging/index fund/low cost mutual fund/etf approach with a periodic rebalance is one of the best plans out there for people who want to maximize their profit potential and minimize their risk and effort put into it, while having no real "goal" set in mind. Lastly, I'm not at all familiar with RS Metrics or what they are selling. Nor am I interested in a consumer discretionary/staples portfolio only. I only used Target as an off the cuff example in an effort to not just speak in vagaries, as is often the case with investment discussions (I find). There's much more worthy of discussing, but probably not worth getting bogged down in the forum over it (such as your graph you linked, which is fine and well, albeit generic and irrelevant unless someone is maybe invested in a REIT vs. Consumer staple/disc ETF). Anyway, again thanks for continuing the discussion here as I think it's one that is severely underrepresented in this community.

Okay, the looking way to deeply may be a valid point. If that's the case, I apologize. But I don't think it's honest to say this board is full of washed-up pessimists. You seem to equate pessimism with the complaining and/or disagreeing with the party line. The best leaders (by far) that I've ever had in my AF career were just like any one of these so-called "washed up pessimists" on this board. Some of them were IDE select patches that chose to quit. The best Sq/CC I ever had was this type of dude. It was amazing how high the squadron morale was in spite of all the BS because he was such a non yes-man. And for full disclosure, quite surprisingly, he was actually handsomely rewarded for constantly telling senior leadership that XX is total BS, and I'm not making my guys do this. That said, he chose not to accept his reward and moved on to greener pastures instead of continuing up the senior leadership path. It's been 6 years and he has absolutely no regrets (non-airline job). Rather than preach "must be counterbalanced with a more sensible message from leadership", what folks will respect infinitely more is just honesty. Not a BS party line to counterbalance the sport bitching on this forum.

Do it. Also, go guard, but do it. I hate my life at times. The USAF lifestyle is tough, it's unfair, it takes a toll on a marriage, you might get some raw deals. But I would do it again in a heartbeat (and I'm a leader of the disgruntled). What pisses most of us off are that we have solvable problems that are not being solved, not even being attempted at being solved, and so we're fed up and most now (look at the numbers) are choosing to say "F it, I'll at least go to a place where I can make twice as much and work half as long after serving my country for 11-12 years." No one joins the Air Force, and certainly not as a pilot, because they want to make a ton of money. That appears to the be only true fix your USAF is willing to offer future you. But pilots don't want more money. They want a better QOL, in a nutshell. But all of that said, I don't regret joining at all. Some people do, but not me. For me, I have experiences and memories and friends that I wouldn't trade for anything. My family has the same, even though our life has sucked because of big blue at times. We've also lived in places and made friends that my wife and kids will treasure forever. The USAF afforded me that opportunity, despite all the stress and suck and crap that comes along with it. I took the bonus because of a sweet assignment far away from the USAF that took me well past my commitment anyway, so I figured I only had a few years to retirement on the backside of that job. I do regret taking the bonus at times. And I regret not having ever heard about the guard or reserves when I joined. And I regret the $40,000 I've spent on scotch and beer in my life. Scratch that last one. But other than those changes, I would do it again and would recommend you do the same if this is what you're willing to endure/gain.

I think this statement above confirms that Chang is pulling our chain. And job well done. And not only does it seem to be fun for folks to argue with him, but there seems to be something healthy about the airing of grievances, especially when so many others say the same thing. But read the couple of sentences I quoted. That isn't the kind of talk any GO would spew. "leadership will fall over themselves to give you the choice assignments you want"...come on. That kind of statement, including the next sentence, is 100% intended to rile up the masses. Again I say: Job well done. And I, along with others, will continue to argue with this troll for no reason other than my own self-healing.

This is the killer for me. I don't understand why more people didn't like this post. 69 people will like a post telling General Chang to piss off, but no one wants to acknowledge that with our income, from day 1 in the military, none of us should ever have to work another day in our lives (if you stay until 20 anyway). I think military officers are typically embarrassingly bad money mangers (guilty), and part of it is because we know (at least for a time) that we have guaranteed income while in the service, and most likely guaranteed once we're out. But I'm with you on this decision of work a bunch/make a bunch or work none/make some being a no-brainer. When I was in ROTC, a First Command (I'll buy you a drink AND save you $20,000 if anyone is actually still investing with them...PM me) and a USAA sales pitch were the only 2 "mil sponsored" $$ briefs I ever got while in school. That is embarrassing and borderline criminal for our service members. I was too busy eating chicken wings and drinking beer (amongst other things) to pay much attention in college, but if I would have had half a brain and mapped out my financial life at age 22, I would be set for life by now. If I didn't have a family now, I would never work a day after retiring and live the exact same lifestyle/standard of living as I do now. Because I do have a family, I will continue to work, and maybe for the airlines one day. But not by choice, and certainly not for 20 more years. I'm attempting to build a passive income stream, and that's where I 100% agree with your philosophy. Mil folks, enlisted for sure, but certainly officers, have absolutely no excuse to end a career, whether that's 5, 12, or 20 years, without a solid foundation of passive income built up already. I assume, like you, I can't live off my passive income once I quit right away, but I can definitely take a job at McDonalds if I want to, for fun. Or take 6 months off. Or coach high school baseball and teach "maths" or something. Pretty much until I don't want to anymore. One quick half-drunken proofread of this leads me to say 2 things. 1) I use a lot of commas. 2) target is again slightly on sale today closing at $67.06 (reference my random stock example in a previous post). This is only posted for future accountability/ridicule/disclosure, and since most free stock advice is rarely specific. Also, TGT increases their dividend next month...2003 is the last time they haven't had a double digit dividend increase (that includes that great recession we had from 08 to 09). For those looking at a reasonable long term investment, the transgender bathroom sensation is a perfect example (IMO) of how to take advantage of buying stocks on sale.

What a huge crock. The only thing truthful in this statement is "money in the airlines isn't everything." Which is ironic coming from you. WTF is wrong with someone deciding to go on to a different career path, especially after serving 12 years of his life in honorable military service. I understand you're always ganged up on this forum and thus feel the need to be defensive at every turn, but what is wrong with a guy getting out to earn more money and have a better QOL with his family. He may very well find out that it was a mistake on the outside (and god forbid continue to serve in our guard or reserve force), but shake his hand, or on the message boards of the interwebs version, wish him good luck. He's already made his choice, so no need to tell him what a dumb ass he is for making it. Instead, why not say "thanks for your service, please tell all the kids that you give wings to to fly for the USAF, and I'm sure the guy that gets your spot at IDE will be grateful and kick ass since 99% of us do." That's how you tactfully respond as a leader. Even on the anonymous internet. Not by being a dick. A WG/CC of mine years ago made an 11F who just quit (and not to join the airlines mind you, but just to go AGR) report to his office for a severe ass chewing for being a quitter and effectively gave him a much more foul mouthed version of what you basically just told wolfpack. Then he finished and said, "I want you to go back to the squadron and tell every MFer what just happened here in case any one of them is thinking of quitting." And he did. Immediately. The effect of this crossfit loving 1 star did not go as intended. No one felt threatened. Everyone did though have their "he's a dick" suspicions validated.

Your last sentence is a false statement. Not all online MBAs are created equal. Many of the AF square filler online degrees are exactly like what you speak of, but the world is a busy place today and there are lots of online degree programs that are challenging and filled with full-time working career minded students, just like those of us in the military. I would argue that one of the biggest perqs of my "online" degree was the networking it built. 2 unsolicited job offers from on-line student peers (not the random headhunter crap on link'd in), and I have connections that I've used multiple times. Bottom line, like everything, do your own research as there are pros and cons to both, but to dismiss all "online" MBAs as a waste of time is big false stereotype. Many do fit that description though and I would completely agree that if this is for square filler purposes, ACSC, ERAU, Touro, and the like are all excellent choices at achieving the desired result with minimal time, effort, and $$.