Author Topic: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'  (Read 46726 times)

AdrianC

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1211
  • Location: Cincinnati
Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« on: September 30, 2016, 07:28:48 AM »
Thought some of you might be interested in this BBC article:

Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-37508968

People in their early 30s are half as wealthy as those now in their 40s were at the same age, a report finds.

Today's 30-something generation has missed out on house price increases and better pensions, according to research by the Institute for Fiscal Studies.

Those born in the early 1980s have an average wealth of £27,000 each, against the £53,000 those born in the 1970s had by the same age, said the IFS.

They will also find it harder to amass wealth in the future, it added.




rantk81

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 905
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Chicago
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #1 on: September 30, 2016, 07:58:00 AM »
I'm from '81, and this sounds about right, based on hearing about the situation a lot of my peers are in.

boarder42

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9332
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #2 on: September 30, 2016, 08:40:44 AM »
yeah its hard to amass wealth when you're an over consumer ...

Bucksandreds

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 866
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #3 on: September 30, 2016, 08:56:33 AM »
yeah its hard to amass wealth when you're an over consumer ...

Missing the point.  The 80's born kids are no more 'over consumers' than the 70's born ones.  The difference is lower income, less generous retirements and unaffordable housing. The baby boomers in their insatiable lust for more, destroyed the futures of the younger generations. Good riddance to the worst generation as they disappear. (I understand that kids of the 70's are not baby boomers, I am talking about the system that is still largely run by the boomers)

mlejw6

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 223
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Alexandria, VA
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #4 on: September 30, 2016, 08:57:56 AM »
It's hard to amass wealth when you miss the boom times of the 90s because you were too young, then start working after 9/11. Though if you were able to ride out the last recession, you could be just fine. I wasn't.

franklin w. dixon

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 283
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #5 on: September 30, 2016, 09:14:50 AM »
The methodology is flawed.  I used to write about wealth creation and modern companies/economies do not just measure hard assets as wealth. 

The value of information and human capital assets has increase significantly (knowledge, education, patents, process efficiency, access to data) and human capital (potential for wealth creation via wages or work).  If you measure wealth you need to also measure access to compute power, telecommunications, and information, all of which are orders of magnitude more accessible/ cheaper.  It is like if housing cost 5% what it used to for those asset classes.

Also, if one measures wealth, you should look at the wealth of all nations.  There may have been a leveling of wealth globally, so perhaps a Brit has less hard assets, but their country may have just been part of a global leveling of wealth throughout a globalized economy.  Wealth will find those who need/are willing to work for it most.  When barriers are removed, the increased wealth from global growth will likely be disproportionately focused on increasing the wealth of many Indian or Chinese families before it lands in the hands of a British family.  Billions of people need the tide to rise for the British and Americans to expect such high living standards to be sustainable.

Welcome to the new reality of our global economy.  That said, a MMM lifestyle is the perfect anecdote.  We use our access to free information assets to build a wealthy life (especially relative to the intangible wealth factors of happiness, sustainability and personal satisfaction).
Now throw in the value of my kidneys... assume I'll live to age 500... divide by the odds of getting space scurvy from a Martian... multiply by the discount rate... assume I can get away with a few muggings... I'm a millionaire!!

franklin w. dixon

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 283
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #6 on: September 30, 2016, 09:18:29 AM »
What if instead of "money" we measured wealth in virtuons, hypothetical particles that accumulate to morally upstanding choices such as following the rules, steering clear of flavorful foods, praying the rosary, and arguing in favor of the status quo on internet forums.

deadlymonkey

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 400
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #7 on: September 30, 2016, 09:20:43 AM »
The methodology is flawed.  I used to write about wealth creation and modern companies/economies do not just measure hard assets as wealth. 

The value of information and human capital assets has increase significantly (knowledge, education, patents, process efficiency, access to data) and human capital (potential for wealth creation via wages or work).  If you measure wealth you need to also measure access to compute power, telecommunications, and information, all of which are orders of magnitude more accessible/ cheaper.  It is like if housing cost 5% what it used to for those asset classes.

Also, if one measures wealth, you should look at the wealth of all nations.  There may have been a leveling of wealth globally, so perhaps a Brit has less hard assets, but their country may have just been part of a global leveling of wealth throughout a globalized economy.  Wealth will find those who need/are willing to work for it most.  When barriers are removed, the increased wealth from global growth will likely be disproportionately focused on increasing the wealth of many Indian or Chinese families before it lands in the hands of a British family.  Billions of people need the tide to rise for the British and Americans to expect such high living standards to be sustainable.

Welcome to the new reality of our global economy.  That said, a MMM lifestyle is the perfect anecdote.  We use our access to free information assets to build a wealthy life (especially relative to the intangible wealth factors of happiness, sustainability and personal satisfaction).
Now throw in the value of my kidneys... assume I'll live to age 500... divide by the odds of getting space scurvy from a Martian... multiply by the discount rate... assume I can get away with a few muggings... I'm a millionaire!!

Silly...you can't get space scurvy from a martian as long as you are practicing safe space sex.  It is the jovians with their acidic fluids that are the real danger.

boarder42

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9332
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #8 on: September 30, 2016, 09:25:56 AM »
yeah its hard to amass wealth when you're an over consumer ...

Missing the point.  The 80's born kids are no more 'over consumers' than the 70's born ones.  The difference is lower income, less generous retirements and unaffordable housing. The baby boomers in their insatiable lust for more, destroyed the futures of the younger generations. Good riddance to the worst generation as they disappear. (I understand that kids of the 70's are not baby boomers, I am talking about the system that is still largely run by the boomers)

Yeah so hard to amass wealth. I was born in the mid 80s. I have a mountain

Bucksandreds

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 866
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #9 on: September 30, 2016, 09:29:17 AM »
yeah its hard to amass wealth when you're an over consumer ...

Missing the point.  The 80's born kids are no more 'over consumers' than the 70's born ones.  The difference is lower income, less generous retirements and unaffordable housing. The baby boomers in their insatiable lust for more, destroyed the futures of the younger generations. Good riddance to the worst generation as they disappear. (I understand that kids of the 70's are not baby boomers, I am talking about the system that is still largely run by the boomers)

Yeah so hard to amass wealth. I was born in the mid 80s. I have a mountain

You are still totally missing the point. The point is only comparison between decades of birth not absolute difficulty.  You are arguing something that's not being discussed in this thread.  There are 30 year old millionaires born in the 70's and 80's.  The point is, all else being equal, the younger are poorer.

Cathy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1044
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #10 on: September 30, 2016, 09:29:29 AM »
yeah its hard to amass wealth when you're an over consumer ...

Missing the point.  The 80's born kids are no more 'over consumers' than the 70's born ones.  The difference is lower income, less generous retirements and unaffordable housing. The baby boomers in their insatiable lust for more, destroyed the futures of the younger generations. Good riddance to the worst generation as they disappear. (I understand that kids of the 70's are not baby boomers, I am talking about the system that is still largely run by the boomers).
You are still totally missing the point. The point is only comparison between decades of birth not absolute difficulty.  You are arguing something that's not being discussed in this thread.  There are 30 year old millionaires born in the 70's and 80's.  The point is, all else being equal, the younger are poorer.

No, I actually think boarder42 correctly identified the point here. The problem with your argument is that you seek to ascribe importance to an insignificant difference between two figures that are each approximately zero. Both £27,000 and £53,000 are a laughably low net worth for people in their "early 30s". The difference between those two figures is negligible, considering that with a little bit of self-discipline, a person in the early 30s can be a millionaire. Your posts are the epitome of complainypants.
« Last Edit: September 30, 2016, 09:37:17 AM by Cathy »

Jack

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4725
  • Location: Atlanta, GA
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #11 on: September 30, 2016, 09:53:01 AM »
What if instead of "money" we measured wealth in virtuons, hypothetical particles that accumulate to morally upstanding choices such as following the rules, steering clear of flavorful foods, praying the rosary, and arguing in favor of the status quo on internet forums.

Then I'm at negative infinity and proud of it! (And also reject the premise that any of those things are virtuous.)

The difference between those two figures is negligible, considering that with a little bit of self-discipline [and good enough luck not to be unemployed between 2008 and 2012 because of structural economic issues that had nothing to do with their work ethic or skills], a person in the early 30s can be a millionaire.

FTFY.

clarkfan1979

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3352
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Pueblo West, CO
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #12 on: September 30, 2016, 09:57:17 AM »
yeah its hard to amass wealth when you're an over consumer ...

Agreed.


I am a hard worker, college educated, not materialistic, and willing to take calculated risk. Many of my good friends have similar attitudes. Over the last 5 years of my life (32-37), I have noticed that many of my friends are accumulating large amounts of wealth. I am a little behind because I went to graduate school for 7 years full-time. However, I have exceeded my own expectations and very happy. Most of my good friends no longer live anywhere close to our hometown. They saw opportunities that existed beyond our home town, including myself.

For the people that absolutely refuse to move from my hometown, it can be a struggle. There are systematic hardships that exist. However, if you are willing to move for a higher paying job and take some calculated risk, it's pretty easy to accumulate wealth.

BlueMR2

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2313
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #13 on: September 30, 2016, 10:03:29 AM »
yeah its hard to amass wealth when you're an over consumer ...

Missing the point.  The 80's born kids are no more 'over consumers' than the 70's born ones.  The difference is lower income, less generous retirements and unaffordable housing. The baby boomers in their insatiable lust for more, destroyed the futures of the younger generations. Good riddance to the worst generation as they disappear. (I understand that kids of the 70's are not baby boomers, I am talking about the system that is still largely run by the boomers)

I have to disagree.  The 80's kids DO have a lot higher consumption for their critical early years.  For the 80's generation, having expensive cable TV, Internet, and a smartphone with data plan is the standard that they've started with.  That's thousands of dollars MORE in base consumption than the '70s kids had at that point in their lives.  The bulk of life's necessities track well with inflation.  If anything, housing is *under* priced now.  Ditto for cars, they don't cost as much as they *should*.  It's all those expensive add-ons.  One exception, sort of, is College.  Prices are much higher there, BUT, a lot of that appears to be due to people going for degrees that wouldn't have in the past, and the default seems to be the pricy out of state place now (back in my day, the default was the small cheap local place, and they do still exist, they're just struggling for attendance).

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 17497
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #14 on: September 30, 2016, 10:45:48 AM »
yeah its hard to amass wealth when you're an over consumer ...

Missing the point.  The 80's born kids are no more 'over consumers' than the 70's born ones.  The difference is lower income, less generous retirements and unaffordable housing. The baby boomers in their insatiable lust for more, destroyed the futures of the younger generations. Good riddance to the worst generation as they disappear. (I understand that kids of the 70's are not baby boomers, I am talking about the system that is still largely run by the boomers)

I have to disagree.  The 80's kids DO have a lot higher consumption for their critical early years.  For the 80's generation, having expensive cable TV, Internet, and a smartphone with data plan is the standard that they've started with.  That's thousands of dollars MORE in base consumption than the '70s kids had at that point in their lives.  The bulk of life's necessities track well with inflation.  If anything, housing is *under* priced now.  Ditto for cars, they don't cost as much as they *should*.  It's all those expensive add-ons.  One exception, sort of, is College.  Prices are much higher there, BUT, a lot of that appears to be due to people going for degrees that wouldn't have in the past, and the default seems to be the pricy out of state place now (back in my day, the default was the small cheap local place, and they do still exist, they're just struggling for attendance).

There's a lot of data to back this up too: single-family homes are larger today than in the 1980s. The percentage of people who take overseas vacations has gone way up. The amount spent on restaurants is much higher today.

The bottom line is that real-median income of people in their 30s is slightly higher today compared to where it was in the 1980s.  The money is simply being spent and not saved.  Not surprisingl given the personal savings rate went from 9-10% in the 80s to around 4% today (and current 30-somethings saving at/around 0% of their income).

Luck12

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 423
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #15 on: September 30, 2016, 10:49:57 AM »
considering that with a little bit of self-discipline, a person in the early 30s can be a millionaire.

You have to be fucking kidding me!   That's 10 yrs after college.  You'd have to be making an average of 100K per year with a savings rate of near 100% after tax.  This is assuming generous rates of return too. 

Also, no, people in their early 30's are no more consumers than people in their early 40's.  Savings rates by age group over time show this to be true.      Link below shows the 0-34 age group had lowest savings rate in 2000-2005, that's the group that's now in early 40's!    And you can see by the low savings rate 1990-1995 for 0-34 age group that those now in their 50's were no better than those now in their 30's. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/catherine-rampell-the-coming-of-age-ritual-of-spend-now-save-later/2014/11/13/5fd9314e-6b73-11e4-a31c-77759fc1eacc_story.html?utm_term=.ec8be44036cb
« Last Edit: September 30, 2016, 10:53:17 AM by Luck12 »

Lis

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 774
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #16 on: September 30, 2016, 10:59:51 AM »
This is the longest millennials suck/millennials have it harder argument I've seen that doesn't use the term millennials. 

franklin w. dixon

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 283
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #17 on: September 30, 2016, 11:02:07 AM »
What if instead of "money" we measured wealth in virtuons, hypothetical particles that accumulate to morally upstanding choices such as following the rules, steering clear of flavorful foods, praying the rosary, and arguing in favor of the status quo on internet forums.
So you get joy and feel superior by are aggressively criticizing my post in the disguised form of an attempt at humor?

Your thinking is buried in the past.  People have actually paid millions of dollars for my advise on these topics and gone on to form companies with valuations and influence that are shaping the world.

When you have actual comments to post on the thread topic, please feel free.

On topic, my point is that you can't take such a limited statistic to say a group is less well off than their preceding generation.  I have analyzed this topic in depth when a management consultant and this study is very flawed.  You need to normalize for many, many factors, only one of which is the price and quality of goods that are measured in currency perhaps not being equal.

So you are saying a person owning a cell phone from the 80s at a cost of $1000 has more wealth than a person with an iPhone 6 bought on eBay for $25 that has computing power equal to a supercomputer of the 80s?  That is my point about measuring wealth.  A car, home, phone manufactured in 2016 has measurably higher value than the equivalent manufactured in the 80s.  Some items have gone backwards, but the vast majority are vastly superior.

This type of normalization makes wealth comparison studies highly flawed.  Most are funded by politicians with an agenda to pursue and the researchers have a point of view to publish that is pre-determined.  Also, you can't ignore that the economy is now globalized so a UK housing price is local, not global.  Perhaps this also applies to China (housing has skyrocketed) but if you don't study all people you are only describing a local phenomenon, so again a flawed study.

But my bad for expecting an intelligent dialog on the Internet.  I will stop posting to the thread on topic and leave it to those who want to complain that the world is not the way they want it, wealth wise.  It's all there for those who try., 30 something or not.  That is MMMs message.

One more example.  This whole forum, it's content, MMMs career as a blogger.  All would not even have been possible 20 years ago.  So an entire form of wealth creation would have been measurably less effective. He would have had to write a book or get a column on a paper, convinced someone to publish it, let the ideas spread slowly, visit people to lecture in person to build a community....

How can someone participating in the forum claim it is crazy to realize that is a substantive thing that effects us all, especially 30 something's.  I won't even get started on topics like public infrastructure investments as wealth that all members of a country 'inherits', and how that can grow or shrink generationally. It is one reason why Africa remains so poor.  Cell phones are impacting this in a big way, though as on the telecom dimension, poor countries are leap frogging the asset inheritance gap.
All this free "advise" and I didn't even have to pay millions of dollars!

I'm a red panda

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8186
  • Location: United States
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #18 on: September 30, 2016, 11:06:29 AM »
This is the longest millennials suck/millennials have it harder argument I've seen that doesn't use the term millennials.

Not everyone in their 30s is a millenial. Only about half of them.

boarder42

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9332
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #19 on: September 30, 2016, 11:13:10 AM »
considering that with a little bit of self-discipline, a person in the early 30s can be a millionaire.

You have to be fucking kidding me!   That's 10 yrs after college.  You'd have to be making an average of 100K per year with a savings rate of near 100% after tax.  This is assuming generous rates of return too. 

Also, no, people in their early 30's are no more consumers than people in their early 40's.  Savings rates by age group over time show this to be true.      Link below shows the 0-34 age group had lowest savings rate in 2000-2005, that's the group that's now in early 40's!    And you can see by the low savings rate 1990-1995 for 0-34 age group that those now in their 50's were no better than those now in their 30's. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/catherine-rampell-the-coming-of-age-ritual-of-spend-now-save-later/2014/11/13/5fd9314e-6b73-11e4-a31c-77759fc1eacc_story.html?utm_term=.ec8be44036cb

only takes a 65% savings rate to reach 1MM in 10 years.  at 7% interest.  on a 100k income.

StarBright

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3270
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #20 on: September 30, 2016, 11:14:43 AM »
yeah its hard to amass wealth when you're an over consumer ...

Missing the point.  The 80's born kids are no more 'over consumers' than the 70's born ones.  The difference is lower income, less generous retirements and unaffordable housing. The baby boomers in their insatiable lust for more, destroyed the futures of the younger generations. Good riddance to the worst generation as they disappear. (I understand that kids of the 70's are not baby boomers, I am talking about the system that is still largely run by the boomers)

Yeah so hard to amass wealth. I was born in the mid 80s. I have a mountain

Obviously the folks on this board are going to be different than the status quo. Another 81er here and I am doing better than almost anyone I know - but it certainly isn't easy. I think amassing wealth IS hard, takes a lot of work and self-sacrifice, and I don't find it particularly pleasant.

I've said this in another thread a while back, but even though I am saving money, I'm working twice as hard as my folks did (especially if you factor in that I am the breadwinner and am doing a large share of the housekeeping - but childcare is outsourced) and I'm making less money doing so than my father made at a 40 hour a week job the same age. Doesn't mean I'm not growing my nest egg, just means I have to work a little harder to do so.

franklin w. dixon

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 283
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #21 on: September 30, 2016, 11:15:25 AM »
I love the bizarre technofetishism that's like "Ah! But they invented the iPhone! How about them apples!" because it's so trivially incoherent. Like every single time the argument is trotted out line item one is like A Computer Has One Quadrillion Times The Processing Power Of A Scribe! Take THAT, ancient Egypt! with no reference to any connection between Limitless Gigahertz and people's ability to "be alive" or "have a house" or "go to the doctor" or "attend school."

So there's this bizarre backwards reasoning which hypothesizes that the iPhone didn't exist in 1980... therefore... if I invented the iPhone in 1980 I coulda had a billion dollars... therefore... everyone with an iPhone is a billionaire. Transitive property. Basically. QED!

And I'm like "Yes I can see why someone would pay millions of dollars for this very smart thinking."

boarder42

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9332
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #22 on: September 30, 2016, 11:17:27 AM »
This is the longest millennials suck/millennials have it harder argument I've seen that doesn't use the term millennials.

Not everyone in their 30s is a millenial. Only about half of them.

article based on people in their early 30s having it rougher than people in their early 40s .... ie millenials.

i'm a millenial ... 30 in 1.5 months. life has been a cake walk ... smart parents who were boomers who taught me how to save alot ... then found this site and my dad is crazy impressed with how this is all possible.

i'm not a come from nothing to something but my parents were.  i'm not gonna say i didnt have it way easier than some i probably did and do but to blanket blame another generation? for our generation's ignorant continued consumption is just a complainypants way to look at the world.

franklin w. dixon

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 283
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #23 on: September 30, 2016, 11:19:18 AM »
Like "my car has 1000 times the fuel capacity of idk an old timey whale oil lamp" mmhm that's a fact which proves I'm 1000 times richer than... a hypothetical past person... who used a lamp... ? ?

boarder42

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9332
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #24 on: September 30, 2016, 11:23:00 AM »
yeah its hard to amass wealth when you're an over consumer ...

Missing the point.  The 80's born kids are no more 'over consumers' than the 70's born ones.  The difference is lower income, less generous retirements and unaffordable housing. The baby boomers in their insatiable lust for more, destroyed the futures of the younger generations. Good riddance to the worst generation as they disappear. (I understand that kids of the 70's are not baby boomers, I am talking about the system that is still largely run by the boomers)

Yeah so hard to amass wealth. I was born in the mid 80s. I have a mountain

Obviously the folks on this board are going to be different than the status quo. Another 81er here and I am doing better than almost anyone I know - but it certainly isn't easy. I think amassing wealth IS hard, takes a lot of work and self-sacrifice, and I don't find it particularly pleasant.

I've said this in another thread a while back, but even though I am saving money, I'm working twice as hard as my folks did (especially if you factor in that I am the breadwinner and am doing a large share of the housekeeping - but childcare is outsourced) and I'm making less money doing so than my father made at a 40 hour a week job the same age. Doesn't mean I'm not growing my nest egg, just means I have to work a little harder to do so.

wait a minute  just wanna back up here.  your statements contradict themselves or mustachianism IMO. correct me where i'm wrong in assumptions below and fill in the gaps please

1. you said you're the Breadwinner - assume you have a spouse who doesnt earn income
2. you're doing a large share of the house keeping - spouse doesnt earn income doesnt compute
3. youre outsourcing childcare -  spouse doesnt earn income does not compute

Spouse is
A. handicapped or unable to do things
B. an artist of some kind trying to make it
c. something else that doesnt earn an income but requires lots of time
D. doesnt exist

all of the above 4 are unique circumstance and choices that could have affected anyone in any generation this is not a product of the year you were born.

So please fill in the gaps for me where my brain computer went WTF.

Jack

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4725
  • Location: Atlanta, GA
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #25 on: September 30, 2016, 11:25:53 AM »
only takes a 65% savings rate to reach 1MM in 10 years.  at 7% interest.  on a 100k income.

You do realize how much of an outlier even reaching a $100k income by age 34 is, let alone having $100k every year for the 10 preceding years (or a salary progression that would allow similar wealth accumulation), right?

life has been a cake walk ... smart parents who were boomers who taught me how to save alot ... then found this site and my dad is crazy impressed with how this is all possible.

i'm not a come from nothing to something but my parents were.  i'm not gonna say i didnt have it way easier than some i probably did

Even with that attempt at acknowledging your advantage, you are way, way underestimating it.
« Last Edit: September 30, 2016, 11:38:29 AM by Jack »

boarder42

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9332
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #26 on: September 30, 2016, 11:31:13 AM »
only takes a 65% savings rate to reach 1MM in 10 years.  at 7% interest.  on a 100k income.

You do realize how much of an outlier even reaching a $100k income by age 34 is, let alone having $100k every year for the 10 preceeding years (or a salary progression that would allow similar wealth accumulation), right?

life has been a cake walk ... smart parents who were boomers who taught me how to save alot ... then found this site and my dad is crazy impressed with how this is all possible.

i'm not a come from nothing to something but my parents were.  i'm not gonna say i didnt have it way easier than some i probably did

Even with that attempt at acknowledging your advantage, you are way, way underestimating it.

i'm not saying a single person i was figure 2 50k salaries sorry i didnt indicate that.  either way i dont know how people are trying to say its harder now.  in 1981 the internet didnt exist i didnt have this wealth of knowledge for how to minimize and communicate with like minded people from all over the country. oh yeah and i can access that in my pocket 24/7

Bicycle_B

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1809
  • Mustachian-ish in Live Music Capital of the World
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #27 on: September 30, 2016, 11:37:00 AM »
I love the bizarre technofetishism that's like "Ah! But they invented the iPhone! How about them apples!" because it's so trivially incoherent. Like every single time the argument is trotted out line item one is like A Computer Has One Quadrillion Times The Processing Power Of A Scribe! Take THAT, ancient Egypt! with no reference to any connection between Limitless Gigahertz and people's ability to "be alive" or "have a house" or "go to the doctor" or "attend school."

So there's this bizarre backwards reasoning which hypothesizes that the iPhone didn't exist in 1980... therefore... if I invented the iPhone in 1980 I coulda had a billion dollars... therefore... everyone with an iPhone is a billionaire. Transitive property. Basically. QED!

And I'm like "Yes I can see why someone would pay millions of dollars for this very smart thinking."

(brandishes cane) You say tomayto, I say tomahto.  You say incoherent, I say perfectly clear. 

I was alive in 1980...living in a house...making occasional doctor visits...going to school.  Similar today except I learn online for fun.  I don't find the internet trivial, though it's what I most often access on my iPhone.

Two cheers for PizzaSteve.

Jack

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4725
  • Location: Atlanta, GA
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #28 on: September 30, 2016, 11:38:12 AM »
You do realize how much of an outlier even reaching a $100k income by age 34 is, let alone having $100k every year for the 10 preceding years (or a salary progression that would allow similar wealth accumulation), right?

i'm not saying a single person i was figure 2 50k salaries sorry i didnt indicate that.

Even as household income, that situation is still an outlier!

StarBright

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3270
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #29 on: September 30, 2016, 11:41:12 AM »

wait a minute  just wanna back up here.  your statements contradict themselves or mustachianism IMO. correct me where i'm wrong in assumptions below and fill in the gaps please

1. you said you're the Breadwinner - assume you have a spouse who doesnt earn income
2. you're doing a large share of the house keeping - spouse doesnt earn income doesnt compute
3. youre outsourcing childcare -  spouse doesnt earn income does not compute

Spouse is
A. handicapped or unable to do things
B. an artist of some kind trying to make it
c. something else that doesnt earn an income but requires lots of time
D. doesnt exist

all of the above 4 are unique circumstance and choices that could have affected anyone in any generation this is not a product of the year you were born.

So please fill in the gaps for me where my brain computer went WTF.

Sorry - I probably should not have used breadwinner (though I was until this last year). I used it out of habit. I always thought of the term used as the main earner of the household, not necessarily the ONLY earner.

DH was a PhD student for years so I was the breadwinner and primary home person as well (that also explains childcare being outsourced).Now he has a job though I still make significantly more money. I understand that Academia is often a weird outlier when it comes to job/income conversations because it is years of low/no wages with a generally decent payoff at the end.

I guess I always find conversations like this so interesting because my DH and I live a VERY comparable life to my parents and they will even say that they had it easier than we do.  I guess I'm sort of shocked when people pass it all off as "complainy-pants."

Don't get me wrong, there is plenty of consumerism out there, but health insurance, education costs and child care costs legitimately take up a huge chunk of income (on top of income stagnating).


franklin w. dixon

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 283
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #30 on: September 30, 2016, 11:41:59 AM »
I love the bizarre technofetishism that's like "Ah! But they invented the iPhone! How about them apples!" because it's so trivially incoherent. Like every single time the argument is trotted out line item one is like A Computer Has One Quadrillion Times The Processing Power Of A Scribe! Take THAT, ancient Egypt! with no reference to any connection between Limitless Gigahertz and people's ability to "be alive" or "have a house" or "go to the doctor" or "attend school."

So there's this bizarre backwards reasoning which hypothesizes that the iPhone didn't exist in 1980... therefore... if I invented the iPhone in 1980 I coulda had a billion dollars... therefore... everyone with an iPhone is a billionaire. Transitive property. Basically. QED!

And I'm like "Yes I can see why someone would pay millions of dollars for this very smart thinking."

(brandishes cane) You say tomayto, I say tomahto.  You say incoherent, I say perfectly clear. 

I was alive in 1980...living in a house...making occasional doctor visits...going to school.  Similar today except I learn online for fun.  I don't find the internet trivial, though it's what I most often access on my iPhone.

Two cheers for PizzaSteve.
but

but

your description is literally my exact point

"Similar today except I learn online for fun" is why "phones exist" doesn't magically negate economic reality

Luck12

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 423
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #31 on: September 30, 2016, 11:44:39 AM »
only takes a 65% savings rate to reach 1MM in 10 years.  at 7% interest.  on a 100k income.

No you're wrong.   If you make 1M gross in 10 years, after tax that's like say 750K.  You are telling me .65*750K=488K invested over a median of 5 years (10/2) is enough to amass 1M?  I don't think so.  Not to mention how ludicrous it is to expect most people to gross 1M in 10 years.  Come on people, let's get real!   

Even MMM himself and his wife didn't reach 1M in 10 years. 

franklin w. dixon

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 283
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #32 on: September 30, 2016, 11:50:22 AM »
PLUS as always I'm like "????" that people can look at stuff like



and be like "well In My Opinions the reason is that young people SUCK. Not like us smart and good old people, who rule." As if, again, generational cohorts have fluctuating values of virtuons and that's what explains economics rather than, you know, material reality, or all history heretofore.

boarder42

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9332
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #33 on: September 30, 2016, 11:57:01 AM »
only takes a 65% savings rate to reach 1MM in 10 years.  at 7% interest.  on a 100k income.

No you're wrong.   If you make 1M gross in 10 years, after tax that's like say 750K.  You are telling me .65*750K=488K invested over a median of 5 years (10/2) is enough to amass 1M?  I don't think so.  Not to mention how ludicrous it is to expect most people to gross 1M in 10 years.  Come on people, let's get real!   

Even MMM himself and his wife didn't reach 1M in 10 years.

65k compounded at 7% is worth right around 1MM in 10 years.

also what country are you in that you pay 25% tax on all your income?

grossing IMM isnt hard with 2 engineers. we will hit it in 10 years quite easily

say you made 100k a year for 10 years from day one.  with 2 people each making 50k ... they max their 401k's 36k tax free they max their HSA 6750 tax free they max their IRAs 11k tax free ... total taxable is now down to 46250 - standard deduction of ~20k and we're at actual taxable income of 26250

taxes annually on 26250 would be 2563 including my state taxes.  add in 7.5% for fica on all but the HSA cont.   7k so total taxes in 10 years would be around 100k ... and it would take this couple saving nothing else 12 years to hit 1MM at 7% and 53750 in savings. 
« Last Edit: September 30, 2016, 12:06:41 PM by boarder42 »

Bicycle_B

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1809
  • Mustachian-ish in Live Music Capital of the World
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #34 on: September 30, 2016, 12:00:15 PM »
I love the bizarre technofetishism that's like "Ah! But they invented the iPhone! How about them apples!" because it's so trivially incoherent. Like every single time the argument is trotted out line item one is like A Computer Has One Quadrillion Times The Processing Power Of A Scribe! Take THAT, ancient Egypt! with no reference to any connection between Limitless Gigahertz and people's ability to "be alive" or "have a house" or "go to the doctor" or "attend school."

So there's this bizarre backwards reasoning which hypothesizes that the iPhone didn't exist in 1980... therefore... if I invented the iPhone in 1980 I coulda had a billion dollars... therefore... everyone with an iPhone is a billionaire. Transitive property. Basically. QED!

And I'm like "Yes I can see why someone would pay millions of dollars for this very smart thinking."

(brandishes cane) You say tomayto, I say tomahto.  You say incoherent, I say perfectly clear. 

I was alive in 1980...living in a house...making occasional doctor visits...going to school.  Similar today except I learn online for fun.  I don't find the internet trivial, though it's what I most often access on my iPhone.

Two cheers for PizzaSteve.
but

but

your description is literally my exact point

"Similar today except I learn online for fun" is why "phones exist" doesn't magically negate economic reality

The similarities are real, but so is the improvement in connectivity and cheap computing power. 
Because of the similarities, I know a significant difference when I see one.  Hello, internet!

Since some things are the same and others are much better, overall it's somewhat better.  Saying nothing has improved since 1980 is as false as saying that everything is much better. 

That is economic reality.  PizzaSteve seems to be a credible source, making reasonable points.

PS. If you wish to argue that some of the increased computing power is wasted through inefficient usage, I will agree.  Much  "advancement" is also invalidated by using technology in ways that weaken us (cars instead of bicycles, escalators into the gym, etc).  But those things still don't change the fact that overall there is improvement.

wenchsenior

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3789
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #35 on: September 30, 2016, 12:03:03 PM »
only takes a 65% savings rate to reach 1MM in 10 years.  at 7% interest.  on a 100k income.

No you're wrong.   If you make 1M gross in 10 years, after tax that's like say 750K.  You are telling me .65*750K=488K invested over a median of 5 years (10/2) is enough to amass 1M?  I don't think so.  Not to mention how ludicrous it is to expect most people to gross 1M in 10 years.  Come on people, let's get real!   

Even MMM himself and his wife didn't reach 1M in 10 years.

65k compounded at 7% is worth right around 1MM in 10 years.

also what country are you in that you pay 25% tax on all your income?

grossing IMM isnt hard with 2 engineers. we will hit it in 10 years quite easily

If that math didn't work, our plan would be screwed LOL! (Thankfully, it does, and we're right on schedule).

DA

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 73
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #36 on: September 30, 2016, 12:08:21 PM »
Three rather important categories of goods have indisputably become a lot more expensive in the last 30 years:  housing, education, and medical care.  The first two weigh rather heavily on people in their 30s.  Medical care is more of a problem for older folks, but they're covered by Medicare (not saying it pays 100%, but they're still covered). 

But even though this is true, and no matter whose fault it is, people who live in the U.S/Canada/Australia/Western Europe are absurdly rich in material terms, even if they are relatively poor within in their own society.  MMM's critique that people waste too much money and don't save/invest enough is still accurate, even if factors out of the control of 30-somethings are making their entrée into middle-class adulthood a lot harder than their parents' journey. 

Jack

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4725
  • Location: Atlanta, GA
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #37 on: September 30, 2016, 12:15:20 PM »
grossing IMM isnt hard with 2 engineers. we will hit it in 10 years quite easily

First of all, not all kinds of engineers gross even $50K each early in their careers (for example: civil engineers). Second, even among engineers, many are not in double-engineer households. Third, the vast majority of people are in jobs that make much less than even the lowest-paid engineers!

If you want to make arguments about millennials as a group, you need to start with assumptions a lot closer to the median -- and the median is pretty much what you'd make being a cashier at Wal-Mart, not an engineer.

trek240

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 27
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #38 on: September 30, 2016, 12:23:45 PM »
This is the longest millennials suck/millennials have it harder argument I've seen that doesn't use the term millennials.

Not everyone in their 30s is a millenial. Only about half of them.

article based on people in their early 30s having it rougher than people in their early 40s .... ie millenials.

i'm a millenial ... 30 in 1.5 months. life has been a cake walk ... smart parents who were boomers who taught me how to save alot ... then found this site and my dad is crazy impressed with how this is all possible.

i'm not a come from nothing to something but my parents were.  i'm not gonna say i didnt have it way easier than some i probably did and do but to blanket blame another generation? for our generation's ignorant continued consumption is just a complainypants way to look at the world.

I'm sure some male white privilege factors in to why you had such an easy time. And good on your parents.

Luck12

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 423
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #39 on: September 30, 2016, 12:26:34 PM »
65k compounded at 7% is worth right around 1MM in 10 years.

grossing IMM isnt hard with 2 engineers. we will hit it in 10 years quite easily


First of all, you can't compound over 10 years since even if you average 100K over 10 years, you're likely not starting at 100K.  More likely you start at say 70K. 

Second, FICA is 6.2%, then you have state taxes, health premiums, etc and easily you could have maybe 75-80% of your gross income to save. 

Third, of course it's easier to reach 1M if you're married, but not everybody gets married by age 30.  And it's not easy to find a frugal, high income person to marry either.   

Your posts are full of "bootstraps" thinking.  Newsflash:  Not everyone has been as fortunate as you, you cannot assume just because you did it that it's so easy for everyone else. 
« Last Edit: September 30, 2016, 12:28:41 PM by Luck12 »

trek240

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 27
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #40 on: September 30, 2016, 12:29:11 PM »
only takes a 65% savings rate to reach 1MM in 10 years.  at 7% interest.  on a 100k income.

No you're wrong.   If you make 1M gross in 10 years, after tax that's like say 750K.  You are telling me .65*750K=488K invested over a median of 5 years (10/2) is enough to amass 1M?  I don't think so.  Not to mention how ludicrous it is to expect most people to gross 1M in 10 years.  Come on people, let's get real!   

Even MMM himself and his wife didn't reach 1M in 10 years.

65k compounded at 7% is worth right around 1MM in 10 years.

also what country are you in that you pay 25% tax on all your income?

grossing IMM isnt hard with 2 engineers. we will hit it in 10 years quite easily

say you made 100k a year for 10 years from day one.  with 2 people each making 50k ... they max their 401k's 36k tax free they max their HSA 6750 tax free they max their IRAs 11k tax free ... total taxable is now down to 46250 - standard deduction of ~20k and we're at actual taxable income of 26250

taxes annually on 26250 would be 2563 including my state taxes.  add in 7.5% for fica on all but the HSA cont.   7k so total taxes in 10 years would be around 100k ... and it would take this couple saving nothing else 12 years to hit 1MM at 7% and 53750 in savings.

Well you should realise that engineers make up a very small portion of the population. And many make significantly less than 100k. The 90s dot com boom is over.

boarder42

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9332
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #41 on: September 30, 2016, 12:31:19 PM »
can someone find the last thread on this where we had comparisons of actual stuff in there like how much safer and cheaper cars are now. and how all things considered in housing if size and appliances were equal its cheaper now. i think this was comparing the 50s to modern day but we are just gross over consumers and even if you cant earn a high income you can still save more and retire quite comfortably in your early 40s. 

coming out of school in 2010 my wife (civil) had a 50k a year job that was pretty much the basement in the mdwest. i as an electrical was at 55k ... new hires now are bringing in 60 and 65k in the midwest.  at 65k engineer and a teacher making 35k you hit 100k gross.

talking in terms of numbers like 1MM etc dont make a ton of sense ... the comment that MMM didnt have 1MM isnt entirely accurate b/c he had a paid off house and it was 2008 and 800k then had the buying power of 1MM now ... r

boarder42

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9332
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #42 on: September 30, 2016, 12:33:33 PM »
only takes a 65% savings rate to reach 1MM in 10 years.  at 7% interest.  on a 100k income.

No you're wrong.   If you make 1M gross in 10 years, after tax that's like say 750K.  You are telling me .65*750K=488K invested over a median of 5 years (10/2) is enough to amass 1M?  I don't think so.  Not to mention how ludicrous it is to expect most people to gross 1M in 10 years.  Come on people, let's get real!   

Even MMM himself and his wife didn't reach 1M in 10 years.

65k compounded at 7% is worth right around 1MM in 10 years.

also what country are you in that you pay 25% tax on all your income?

grossing IMM isnt hard with 2 engineers. we will hit it in 10 years quite easily

say you made 100k a year for 10 years from day one.  with 2 people each making 50k ... they max their 401k's 36k tax free they max their HSA 6750 tax free they max their IRAs 11k tax free ... total taxable is now down to 46250 - standard deduction of ~20k and we're at actual taxable income of 26250

taxes annually on 26250 would be 2563 including my state taxes.  add in 7.5% for fica on all but the HSA cont.   7k so total taxes in 10 years would be around 100k ... and it would take this couple saving nothing else 12 years to hit 1MM at 7% and 53750 in savings.

Well you should realise that engineers make up a very small portion of the population. And many make significantly less than 100k. The 90s dot com boom is over.

they should be we have a shortage we also have a shortage of trade laborers which could easily be making in the mid 50s by their early 20s.

trek240

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 27
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #43 on: September 30, 2016, 12:39:15 PM »
only takes a 65% savings rate to reach 1MM in 10 years.  at 7% interest.  on a 100k income.

No you're wrong.   If you make 1M gross in 10 years, after tax that's like say 750K.  You are telling me .65*750K=488K invested over a median of 5 years (10/2) is enough to amass 1M?  I don't think so.  Not to mention how ludicrous it is to expect most people to gross 1M in 10 years.  Come on people, let's get real!   

Even MMM himself and his wife didn't reach 1M in 10 years.

65k compounded at 7% is worth right around 1MM in 10 years.

also what country are you in that you pay 25% tax on all your income?

grossing IMM isnt hard with 2 engineers. we will hit it in 10 years quite easily

say you made 100k a year for 10 years from day one.  with 2 people each making 50k ... they max their 401k's 36k tax free they max their HSA 6750 tax free they max their IRAs 11k tax free ... total taxable is now down to 46250 - standard deduction of ~20k and we're at actual taxable income of 26250

taxes annually on 26250 would be 2563 including my state taxes.  add in 7.5% for fica on all but the HSA cont.   7k so total taxes in 10 years would be around 100k ... and it would take this couple saving nothing else 12 years to hit 1MM at 7% and 53750 in savings.

Well you should realise that engineers make up a very small portion of the population. And many make significantly less than 100k. The 90s dot com boom is over.

they should be we have a shortage we also have a shortage of trade laborers which could easily be making in the mid 50s by their early 20s.

I'm just saying what I see from working with many clients. Most hire Indians for bottom dollar. You can get high salaries like you are describing but they are usually in HCOL areas. And usually it makes more sense financially to take a lower paid position in a LCOL area.

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 17497
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #44 on: September 30, 2016, 12:42:40 PM »
I'm finding all this talk about how fast a motivated couple can reach the $1MM milepost a bit off the mark.

What's being examined here how 30-something's NW has halved in a decade, from £53k ($68.8k) to £27k ($35K).  To put it another way, median net worth is now equatable to about 7 months pay. Awful by any metric.

Luck12

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 423
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #45 on: September 30, 2016, 12:45:42 PM »
the comment that MMM didnt have 1MM isnt entirely accurate b/c he had a paid off house and it was 2008 and 800k then had the buying power of 1MM now ... r

So what if he did have 1M?  Point is if even he (with high income + high income, frugal wife) barely made it, how do you expect most people to make it?   

The original 1M comment made it seem like anyone could do it when truth is some small % can do it given certain conditions. 

Jack

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4725
  • Location: Atlanta, GA
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #46 on: September 30, 2016, 12:53:02 PM »
can someone find the last thread on this where we had comparisons of actual stuff in there like how much safer and cheaper cars are now. and how all things considered in housing if size and appliances were equal its cheaper now.

"If X were equal" only matters if that equal thing is actually available. I mean, sure -- an economy car in 2016 is a lot fancier than one from 1980, and conversely, a new but 1980-quality economy car would be pretty damn cheap. But the point is moot because the damn things don't exist and therefore it is not a choice to buy them!

Similarly, yes, a new "starter house" built with the same size, quality and amenities as the average "starter house" from 1980 would be very affordable -- but good luck finding one!

coming out of school in 2010 my wife (civil) had a 50k a year job that was pretty much the basement in the mdwest.

No. At worst, it was "pretty much the basement" among the jobs that actually existed. Coming out of school in 2009, I was unable to find a civil engineering job at all for over a year because there was very little construction happening due to the recession. When I did finally find one, it was at $40k.

franklin w. dixon

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 283
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #47 on: September 30, 2016, 12:54:17 PM »
Well you should realise that engineers make up a very small portion of the population. And many make significantly less than 100k. The 90s dot com boom is over.
AND what always happens in every one of these dang threads is that people conflate what makes sense as like, advice to one person, with description of a social class. That's why you always get the posts that are like YEAH WELL YOU CAN MAKE FIFTY LARGE AS A HOME APPRAISER. CASE CLOSED. which isn't strictly false but also isn't particularly useful because it's not like 50 million unemployed people can all be home appraisers, or mighty engineers astride the slide rule of history, or welders, or whatever dumb thing. So the whole conversation becomes a back and forth between "the state of the world is X" and "everyone should be above average" which is like. Ok. Everyone "should" shit bricks of solid gold but my old nemesis material reality has stymied me yet again.

StarBright

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3270
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #48 on: September 30, 2016, 01:17:17 PM »
can someone find the last thread on this where we had comparisons of actual stuff in there like how much safer and cheaper cars are now. and how all things considered in housing if size and appliances were equal its cheaper now. i think this was comparing the 50s to modern day but we are just gross over consumers and even if you cant earn a high income you can still save more and retire quite comfortably in your early 40s. 


I can't find it - but didn't that thread also conclude that appliances and similar items are one time purchases while childcare, medical, housing, and education are often expensive and ongoing expenses?

IE- I can buy a cheap used washing machine and save myself a few hundred bucks, but if my medical insurance costs are hundreds of dollars every single month does the cheap washing machine really help me that much?

franklin w. dixon

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 283
Re: Wealth of people in their 30s has 'halved in a decade'
« Reply #49 on: September 30, 2016, 01:38:18 PM »
can someone find the last thread on this where we had comparisons of actual stuff in there like how much safer and cheaper cars are now. and how all things considered in housing if size and appliances were equal its cheaper now. i think this was comparing the 50s to modern day but we are just gross over consumers and even if you cant earn a high income you can still save more and retire quite comfortably in your early 40s. 


I can't find it - but didn't that thread also conclude that appliances and similar items are one time purchases while childcare, medical, housing, and education are often expensive and ongoing expenses?

IE- I can buy a cheap used washing machine and save myself a few hundred bucks, but if my medical insurance costs are hundreds of dollars every single month does the cheap washing machine really help me that much?
"how 2 pay off ur $300000 medical bills by kickin' the starbucks habit, you lazy sack of shit young person" by engineer dad, king of math. "weird how my kids don't call" muses engineer dad unrelatedly

 

Wow, a phone plan for fifteen bucks!