Originally posted by: JEDI
Originally posted by: dullard
I have a diverse set of 5 low fee mutual funds (US large growth, US large value, US small growth/value, international large, international small) and 1 bond fund.
why not just blend funds (mix of growth and value) instead buying separate growth and value?
Dullard wrote:
but it was cheaper to pay alimony than to fight her in court even though I would have won (she was the one doing the cheating, with proof)
it's the principle of the thing, not $. I wouldnt have given my cheating whore $. how much is 2yrs alimony?
I went with separate growth and value for two reasons. (1) It allows for me to better control my rebalancing and my proportion of growth and value. Suppose I was a little heavy on foreign growth, I make up for it by being a little light on US growth. Not a perfect solution, but it does its job. (2) I have very limited selection of funds that I can contriubute to from my employer. Thus, there weren't any good options that blended growth and value into one fund.
Alimony was right at about $10k. But alimony is not taxed, so in reality since I was in the 32% tax bracket, it cost me just $6800. However, that deduction put me low enough to get a portion of a few other deductions. Lets call it $6500 even. $6500 spread out at 0% interest is pretty darn good compared to double or triple that amount up front in lawyer fees. I'm happy with that decision. Plus, if she died or got married, it would have been even less. The stress reduction alone of not having a court case was worth the just over 1 month's salary (before tax, 2 months if you count after tax) that it cost me.
How the divorce really got me was the need to buy new furniture. Sure, the stuff I had at the time that I let her take was worthless crap 25-year old hand-me-downs. But, it still cost me money to buy nice replacements. That is really what put me off my plan more than alimony.