Passive Dividend Income

Dividends are great until you have to do your taxes.

But if it is working for you then that's great

I'll start:

>Vanguard high yield dividend etf

>>982487
The tax rates on dividends aren't so bad. Especially compared to how much you lose in a high income tax bracket

A dividend portfolio is for people who already have wealth. You are wasting your life when you could make a larger return investing in a growth portfolio.

File: 1441382978483.jpg (167KB, 560x618px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 560x618px

>>982515
Who is to say I don't already have wealth? Besides it's foolish to enter now with a downturn around the corner. Dividends are king. 7%-10% hell yeah!

>>982519

A growth company grows regardless of what the rest of the market is doing. That's why it's called a growth company. You're also implying that dividend stocks are recession proof. That 7-10% means nothing when the stock is down 30%. You're still losing, just not as much as the S&P. Meanwhile the growth stocks are still soaring.

>>982524
Name 3 that grew regardless of the market in 2008. The dividend companies I have maintained their dividend and didn't miss a single payout during the recession. All the safe indexes all the high risk growth stocks, there is a time and place for them, but in my mind they don't compare to my dividend stocks.

>>982519
>Besides it's foolish to enter now with a downturn around the corner.
[citation missing]

>>982530
We're at all time highs, a rate hike is imminent, every other point of an extended spree of all time highs only means that a downturn will come sooner rather than later. Buy low sell high, not enter at the absolute market height and wait 10 years to get your money back when it finally returns.

>>982531

Historic highs are not an indication of market correction. Any community college Economics class will tell you this. And a half point rate hike will have little meaning. Over 70% of the media and general public think there will be a rate hike this month or in 2016, while less than 50% of big banks think the same.

Enjoy your speculation though. Recessions are good for investors anyways, unless you are retiring in 5-10 years. Anybody who panics or worries about them is a fucking retard.

>>982487
It's at the lowest tax rate anyway, capital gains (if you've held for more than 3 months or whatever the time period is).

Sure, selling growth stocks is good too but 1) if you start with a finite number of shares eventually you will run out and 2) you get taxed when you sell anyway.

>>982531
>We're at all time highs
Markets are at or near all-time highs on 33% of all trading days. That's what happens when there's an inherent upward bias to the markets.

If you freak out just because of new market highs, you're gonna have a bad life.

>>982515
While that is true, a vast majority of the decent blue chip stocks give dividends. Sometimes avoiding them is a crutch.

>>982567
not unless you hold on to the stock as long as you can.

File: 1448574063925.jpg (21KB, 534x516px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 534x516px

>>982485
Dividend paying stocks statistically underperform non-dividend paying stocks. Just that you know.

>>982531

but we're not at all time highs

>>982595
>what is rsi

Not all trading days are are months into a spree of consecutive all time highs.

Again, we're overdue, and there's a rate hike coming soon.

>>982607
On average yes. Some do however beat high risk growth stocks, also value is given consistently and a sell off of your shares isnt necessary to free up capital thanks to the dicidend payments. most dividend stocks pay a pittance true. Hence the entire sectors relative underperformance (that ignores how dividend stocks are much less risky though.)

I also have some excellent ones that defy the averages. Dividend payout percentages are something you can see instantly and you can make a judgement from that while doing your DD. Speculating on whether a growth stock will go up or down is much less reliable.

IFF.. Been long it for awhile. Might just keep it forever.

>>982636
>Not all trading days are are months into a spree of consecutive all time highs.
>
>Again, we're overdue, and there's a rate hike coming soon.
You sound like the kind of person who's convinced that if a roulette wheel comes up black 4 times in a row, there's a greater chance it'll land on red next turn.

>>982684
>What is rsi

>>982705
>rsi
>A measurement based on the average of up closes and down closes
Son, the market doesn't care whether it went up or down yesterday. The market does't "rest" on down day, nor does it get "tired" on up days. The only thing that "RSI" tells me is that you believe in voodoo.

>>982718
>rsi is voodoo!!!

LOL only on biz would I read something like this.

>>982724
>LOL only on biz would I read something like this.
And yet you can't defend it on a rational basis. Just making a naked assertion that some technical indicator is relevant isn't going to convince anyone (except you, apparently). There's a thousand technical indicators, market patterns, curve slopes, and magic signals that people swear by. And yet, there's no respected academic support for any of it.

So, yes, RSI is voodoo. And you're stupid for suggesting otherwise. Stop being so gullible.

File: 1442523234896.png (234KB, 500x400px) Image search: [Google]

234KB, 500x400px

>>982738
You have the wrong set of interests if metrics are voodoo to you. I reccomend v or Co instead.

>>982742
>you can't defend it on a rational basis
>a naked assertion that some technical indicator is relevant isn't going to convince anyone
>there's no respected academic support for any of it
>Stop being so gullible
These were the key points, since you seem to have missed them the first time. Color me shocked.

>>982756
I got the distinct impression that you had no idea what an RSI is before our conversation. Is ir correct to assume that?

>>982759
There's no reason I should have known it. It's not a reliable indicator. Like I said earlier (you can read, right?) there's thousands of fabricated market indicators that people swear will make them millions.

Let's slow down, sport. Read the following words and respond, if you can:

>you can't defend it on a rational basis
>a naked assertion that some technical indicator is relevant isn't going to convince anyone
>there's no respected academic support for any of it
>Stop being so gullible

>>982762
Woah there sport, you just found out about RSI today, there's plenty of time to look at the academic papers about it. No need to rush and say there is none!


:)

>>982768
>you can't defend it on a rational basis
>a naked assertion that some technical indicator is relevant isn't going to convince anyone
>there's no respected academic support for any of it
>Stop being so gullible

I'm still waiting, kid.

>>982772

Stop replying. This guy is a troll, or Riley.

>>982636

The RSI for SPY is below 60 on a daily, weekly or monthly chart. I like RSI, I think it's one of the only decent technicals but isn't really worth a look unless it's >85 or <15 on a daily chart imo

>>982599
>as long as you can
>implying eventually you do sell

So you will eventually 1) run out of shares and 2) get taxed when you sell. I don't understand your point.