[chichirone]

Lance, like you, we have fur kids. No college savings. No weddings. But also leaves us reliant on "other" resources to assist in our care when age and health requires it. Unlike our parents, we don't have 4 children to bail us out when we have a need or cannot afford our lifestyle choices.

The greatest challenge we face is the intermediate funds required to bridge our financial freedom over the next 20 years when we can obtain access to our IRAs and long term retirement accounts is quite the challenge, even at higher than average earnings. We work extremely hard, sometimes to a fault of fun and life enjoyment, requiring us to remind ourselves to not take ourselves too seriously and get out there with friends, family and our hobbies. It is amazing how a great laugh with friends makes you feel "richer" than any gains in a stock portfolio. Greg's $1M/$60k = $40k after taxes income calculation is a killer. To pay yourself $10k per month one needs around $3M in the bank. Thinking forward 20 years. $10k per month is going to go quickly with inflation and rising costs of everything. Healthcare will require an inequitable share of the available funds.

So this leads me to why we got so hooked on this thread, Investing 102, to begin with. Dividend investing offers us a tool to generate income when we hit our target number to be what we consider financially free. Greg described it as comfortable.

So after the diatribe, here is a question...what is better? A stock with a higher dividend %, higher potential growth rate, riskier investment profile or a proven player. Take PM vs VGR. I lean towards PM but the 7.29% yield of VGR is really attractive. 40% greater revenue on every dollar invested if it stays price neutral but the risk of loss makes me somewhat uncomfortable. What is the best way to evaluate the stock beyond the surface metrics? Curious how you look at this and what lens to add in an evaluation of peers in a group such as "sin" stocks?