I'm 27 with 10k in the bank making $15/hr. I hope to finish school soon. I want to get my retirement figured out. I want to learn what mutual funds, IRAs, Roth 401ks are and how to use them.
I don't know what all of these are exactly but I wanna get it figured out. I have a 401k and I noticed my employee has the option for a roth 401k and I want to know if I should take advantage of that. I've been meaning to open a Roth IRA regardless. Does it matter where I open it? I already have a Schwab account should I just do it there? Once I open an IRA account how do I know how to set up my investments? Is it something I can figure out? It seems confusing.
Again I have no idea what mutual funds, IRAs, index funds, etc are. Any input is appreciated. Thanks.
Edit. So many replies. I'm going to wait till Sunday to read everything so I have time to fully research. I GREATLY appreciate all the feedback. I love you all.
Starting a Roth IRA would be good - like US market index funds, something like VTSMX. Index funds track the movement of the market, and regularly outperform top managed funds/individual stocks. You can contribute up to 5.5k each year (as long as you made that much in taxable income) and your gains are tax free. As for where to set it up, I would recommend Vanguard or Fidelity based on their low fees and good index fund options.
I would suggest sticking to a regular 401k and a Roth IRA for balance, as the 401k is pretax money, and you will be limited by your employer's investment options there, while the Roth IRA is post-tax money, and you will get to pick your investments based on where you open your Roth (both Vanguard and Fidelity have lots of good options). You pick what you invest in with both accounts, but usually your employer only offers specific funds through their 401k plan. Happy to answer other questions if you have them.
Anyone know why Ariel, The Little Mermaid wears seashells?
Because b-shells are too small and d-shells are too big! 🦀🐠
Unda da C, that's where I'll be!
It is like 7F outside and it usually does not get below freezing here, so like a good parent I woke my teenagers up and dragged them outside to blow soap bubbles and shatter them.
I've never been into his music, but I have a lot of respect for the guy after his Bowling For Columbine interview. He was asked "If the kids were here today what would you say to them?" and his answer was "Nothing, I'd listen to them, which no one else did".
Why do doctors bother with painkillers like oxycodon, etc, that barely differ from morphine?
Specifically what I'm asking is why bother having so many different strong opiates if they all have very, very similar profiles?
Besides duration, and the ceiling of the painkilling effects (i.e. codeine vs. morphine), the differences are very slight between these drugs. In fact I believe only morphine makes the WHO's list of essential medicines for a healthcare system. Why bother stocking all the rest?
Edit:To add to this, I'm mostly interested in what, if any, implications the often slight alterations in morphine's analogues have that make them more desirable than morphine itself. Primarily I'm interested in how these small changes effect a drug's structure-activity relationship. Opiates are really just an ideal example I picked, if you know something regarding this in other kinds of drugs, that's also of help.
I am aware of the following points: Pharma pressures doctors to use new but not very innovative products, and that doctors like to rotate a person's pain medication to reduce tolerance effects.
While there are some differences within the group of opiods/opiates, you are right to question the clinical value of them.
Oxycodon may have a better metabolism (morphine has active metabolites and is more reliant on kidney function) and a more predictable bioavailability.
In some surgical protocols you want a very short half-life (you might have continuous administration) which makes remifentanils pharmacological properties beneficial.
There are some opiods that have secondary effects, suchs as tramadol and tapentadol (monoaminergic reuptake inhibition).
There might also be a difference in documentation, for instance a pharmaceutical company might have been more willing to perform a study on a "new condition" using drugs that they still own - and we are more willing to use drugs with good studies backing them up.
A very down to earth reason is that daily dosages of morphine in the 400 mg range i.v.parenterally (with extra doses around 70 mg) evokes more worry than 80 mg of hydromorphone.
Beer in hand.
How it feels to watch a video that always makes you laugh knowing you'll never be as happy as the people who made it or have as fulfilling of a life as them.
kids probably a PCMASTERRACE
Whats with the jewish triforce?
50 year old guys, 20 year old girls