401Ks

**Rawr** · 09-02-10, 04:49 PM

Originally Posted by jmw_man

Can you elaborate on this? Are you saying that this should be minimum if you have "no" other investment accounts?

I do 15% because I'm not trying to meet some kind of minimum, I'm playing catchup, I'm also playing the early retirement goal which is why I honestly don't feel comfortable putting every bit of my savings into an account I can't touch till there's a big chance that I'm already dead. So, aside from put money into 401k, I put money elsewhere, eventually I plan to set the percentage of my 401k to a minimum for max company match and I plan to do this when I think by the time I would access the account it would be something I could live off of. In the mean time, my goal is early retirement so I'm working on something that I would have access to, at any time.

oh, and I'm doing the ROTH 401k

I definitely prefer the Roth over the Traditional, especially since if you follow the rules you will never have to pay interest on your gains ever and you get off scott free at... 59.5 i think it is?

**CivilWars** · 09-02-10, 11:41 PM

It was her friend, who was the big boss.

http://economics.about.com/cs/financ...er_trading.htm

Martha Stewart has been in the news for several months because the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission believes that Martha Stewart was told by her friend Sam Waksal that his company ImClone’s cancer drug had been rejected by the Food and Drug Administration before this information was made public. This rejection was a huge blow to his company and the price of its stock went down dramatically. However, Martha Stewart wasn’t financially hurt because she had her broker sell her 4000 shares before this news was made public. If this is true, and it should be noted it hasn’t been proven yet, then Martha Stewart is guilty of insider trading.