Author Topic: faster 100k or 100k to 1,000,000  (Read 3998 times)

dafoe1999

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 50
faster 100k or 100k to 1,000,000
« on: December 08, 2013, 10:45:41 PM »
Is faster to get to 100k or 100k to 1,000,000 when it comes to investing?

Left

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1159
Re: faster 100k or 100k to 1,000,000
« Reply #1 on: December 08, 2013, 11:25:05 PM »
not that I've reached 1m.... but I've hit 100,000. It took me a few years, but without getting a lot more income (I'm not anticipating it either)... I don't see how I can get 1 million in same time period. I save about 30,000/year so it's about a 3rd of 100,000. Even with good returns I doubt  I could save a 3rd of a million each year when I make 50,000.

dafoe1999

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 50
Re: faster 100k or 100k to 1,000,000
« Reply #2 on: December 09, 2013, 01:02:28 AM »
I know compounding will help obviously, but I just don't see myself getting to 1,000,000 in faster time then it took me to get to 100,000

dragoncar

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8252
  • Registered member
Re: faster 100k or 100k to 1,000,000
« Reply #3 on: December 09, 2013, 01:15:00 AM »
The million will take longer for the vast majority of us.

marty998

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5995
  • Location: Sydney, Oz
Re: faster 100k or 100k to 1,000,000
« Reply #4 on: December 09, 2013, 01:26:21 AM »
There's a $50m lotto draw tomorrow in Oz.

Ok on a serious note. Circumstances can always change, you never know when you could strike oil, and you've always got to either grab every opportunity with both hands or be very good at making your own opportunities.

msilenus

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 514
Re: faster 100k or 100k to 1,000,000
« Reply #5 on: December 09, 2013, 02:23:36 AM »
If you were starting from a 10k stache to get to 100k and not saving a dime of income, it would take the same amount of time. 

The reason the 100k -> 1m time is longer is because you *are* saving, but the amount you're saving each year is much larger relative to 100k than it is to 1m.  (There are some assumptions baked in there about income levels and how fast they're growing, but they should hold for almost everyone.)

arebelspy

  • Administrator
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *****
  • Posts: 27225
  • Age: -999
  • Location: Traveling the World
Re: faster 100k or 100k to 1,000,000
« Reply #6 on: December 09, 2013, 08:05:49 AM »
If you were starting from a 10k stache to get to 100k and not saving a dime of income, it would take the same amount of time. 

The reason the 100k -> 1m time is longer is because you *are* saving, but the amount you're saving each year is much larger relative to 100k than it is to 1m.  (There are some assumptions baked in there about income levels and how fast they're growing, but they should hold for almost everyone.)

Eloquently put.
We are two former teachers who accumulated a bunch of real estate, retired at 29, and now travel the world full time with two kids.
If you want to know more about me, or how we did that, or see lots of pictures, this Business Insider profile tells our story pretty well.
We (occasionally) blog at AdventuringAlong.com.
You can also read my forum "Journal."

catccc

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1668
  • Location: SE PA
Re: faster 100k or 100k to 1,000,000
« Reply #7 on: December 09, 2013, 08:51:27 AM »
I think it is definitely faster to get to $100K.  That took me almost 4 years after college.  The next 300K (to reach 400K) has taken about 6 years.  So it's faster per $100K, but there was no way (without some type of windfall) that I would have gotten to $1M in the same 4 years or less that it took me to get that first $100K.

simonsez

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 717
  • Age: 32
Re: faster 100k or 100k to 1,000,000
« Reply #8 on: December 09, 2013, 09:39:24 AM »
I'm the opposite depending on when you define "start investing".  Does that mean first savings bond given to you as a child?  Does this simply mean from birth?  Or from first 401k contribution or taxable amount?  Or does it mean from net worth=$0 and on after that?

I'm putting along paying down student loans and will not be at a net worth of 100,000 for awhile, so depending on when you are defining it, it could take me longer to get to 100k than it will be for the phase after that. 

Also do you mean per person?  So for a couple would this be measuring 0-200k and then 200k to 2m?  I'm sure there is a proportion that will never attain 1m per person.