|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On October 28 2016 05:56 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2016 05:43 KwarK wrote:
Igne, I don't know why you can't use Excel so I can't speak for your numbers, only my own. Your assumption of the same amount being saved in the first year of working (18?) and the year they retire (58, good for them, early retirement) is unrealistic. People typically experience an increase in earning potential with age. However 700k will produce a reliable median income to live on for our early retiree. As for taxes, with just 5k a year and having him be low income for life, that's ROTH IRA territory. No taxes to pay. Not that he's owe taxes on that kind of yield anyway, so the tax status isn't important. Your completely hypothetical and totally unrealistic retirement saver who saves less of his paycheck year on year and retires early, he's fine. Sorry bro. you are basically assuming an upper middle class worker then. if the contributions go up over 5k maybe we should assume a young'n with a ~30k annual salary and no contributions till age 29. i assume you know what "median" means? do i need to pull up a graph of real wages vs time for the last three decades? you pretend like im ridiculous and wave your hands "its math, open an excel worksheet". yah ok. youve proved that kwarks everywhere can expect at least 700k. sadly not even millionaires.
thing is that those same "kwarks everywhere", if they stopped making poor purchasing decisions, could live off of less than that almost indefinitely especially when combined with social security etc. but the I phone itch is too strong so putting away 5k per year wont even happen.
|
On October 28 2016 05:53 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2016 04:26 plasmidghost wrote:
If this is true, were polls not nearly as reliable in 1980 as they (mostly) are now? Is no one going to point out that he's basically implying Clinton should win by a massive landslide the way that tweet is worded.
that's not how Trump logic works tho
|
On October 28 2016 06:03 IgnE wrote:
these kinds of assumption flaws are typical of what passes for financial "common sense" these days. a 22 year old worker starts at median wage and then his his salary increases steadily until he dies right guys????
Yeah, absolutely not. I went to grad school because I saw shit was gonna be real awful with a BS. I'm making well above average household income now, which just highlights the enormous gap. I was looking at around $20/hr with not much room for growth with my BS in chemistry. Sure, there were some 60K/year jobs, but not the sort of thing I could assume I would get. By getting my MS I more than doubled my income, but obviously not everyone does that.
People in my position can cruise into retirement on a 401K, but not everyone can.
On October 28 2016 06:06 Trainrunnef wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2016 05:56 IgnE wrote:On October 28 2016 05:43 KwarK wrote:
Igne, I don't know why you can't use Excel so I can't speak for your numbers, only my own. Your assumption of the same amount being saved in the first year of working (18?) and the year they retire (58, good for them, early retirement) is unrealistic. People typically experience an increase in earning potential with age. However 700k will produce a reliable median income to live on for our early retiree. As for taxes, with just 5k a year and having him be low income for life, that's ROTH IRA territory. No taxes to pay. Not that he's owe taxes on that kind of yield anyway, so the tax status isn't important. Your completely hypothetical and totally unrealistic retirement saver who saves less of his paycheck year on year and retires early, he's fine. Sorry bro. you are basically assuming an upper middle class worker then. if the contributions go up over 5k maybe we should assume a young'n with a ~30k annual salary and no contributions till age 29. i assume you know what "median" means? do i need to pull up a graph of real wages vs time for the last three decades? you pretend like im ridiculous and wave your hands "its math, open an excel worksheet". yah ok. youve proved that kwarks everywhere can expect at least 700k. sadly not even millionaires. thing is that those same "kwarks everywhere", if they stopped making poor purchasing decisions, could live off of less than that almost indefinitely especially when combined with social security etc. but the I phone itch is too strong so putting away 5k per year wont even happen.
Yeah I'm a dipshit and buy stuff like really nice beef jerky on amazon because I still end up coming out ahead. I imagine a lot of it is because this is my first year out of school, but I am a clear example of the fact that making "a lot" of money does not mean saving a lot of money. 401K is ideal for me because I can never spend it. I also claim a lot on my taxes so that I get a sweet bonus at the end of the year. I'd have just spent the money on stupid shit like megaman figurines and fancy beer, so may as well semi-save it so I can make a big student loan payment at the end of each year.
|
United States42992 Posts
On October 28 2016 05:56 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2016 05:43 KwarK wrote:
Igne, I don't know why you can't use Excel so I can't speak for your numbers, only my own. Your assumption of the same amount being saved in the first year of working (18?) and the year they retire (58, good for them, early retirement) is unrealistic. People typically experience an increase in earning potential with age. However 700k will produce a reliable median income to live on for our early retiree. As for taxes, with just 5k a year and having him be low income for life, that's ROTH IRA territory. No taxes to pay. Not that he's owe taxes on that kind of yield anyway, so the tax status isn't important. Your completely hypothetical and totally unrealistic retirement saver who saves less of his paycheck year on year and retires early, he's fine. Sorry bro. you are basically assuming an upper middle class worker then. if the contributions go up over 5k maybe we should assume a young'n with a ~30k annual salary and no contributions till age 29. i assume you know what "median" means? do i need to pull up a graph of real wages vs time for the last three decades? you pretend like im ridiculous and wave your hands "its math, open an excel worksheet". yah ok. youve proved that kwarks everywhere can expect at least 700k. sadly not even millionaires.
We've done this dance before and I'm sure we'll do it again before you learn to use Excel but basically right now I make an unremarkable income (still a while from finishing my CPA) but I still save far more than 5k/year and certainly wouldn't reduce my savings as a percentage of total income over time. You start with the assumption that it can't be done, set conditions that mean it won't be done and then conclude that you're right. The only problem being people like myself who are defying all your ironclad assumptions.
Hell, something as simple as donating blood plasma ($20/hr 4 hours a week) and throwing it in savings is worth half a mil over a working life. You are the textbook example of the crab bucket mentality. You refuse to take responsibility for improving your own life and so you must try to undermine anyone who disproves your own delusions of helplessness.
|
United States42992 Posts
Mohdoo $20/hr is a shitton of money and that's before we get into total compensation.
|
On October 28 2016 06:13 KwarK wrote:
Mohdoo $20/hr is a shitton of money and that's before we get into total compensation.
2 bedroom apartment in my area doesn't go much lower than $1200. $20/hour is about $2200/month. Add about $250/month in student loans too.
|
LOL you can't donate plasma every week of your life.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Living in a low/semi-low COL area is a blessing.
|
United States42992 Posts
On October 28 2016 06:15 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2016 06:13 KwarK wrote:
Mohdoo $20/hr is a shitton of money and that's before we get into total compensation. 2 bedroom apartment in my area doesn't go much lower than $1200. $20/hour is about $2200/month. Add about $250/month in student loans too.
Is the person in the other bedroom covering their half?
|
United States42992 Posts
On October 28 2016 06:16 Nevuk wrote:
LOL you can't donate plasma every week of your life.
And yet people do. All the time. Years and years of it. The money adds up crazy fast.
|
On October 28 2016 06:16 LegalLord wrote:
Living in a low/semi-low COL area is a blessing.
I was about to say. Our mortgage is not that expensive, but I’ll be in awe if we can pack away 5 K a year every year. We save a lot, but that would be some ground breaking shit.
|
United States42992 Posts
Bullshit. I refuse to believe that I'm as exceptionally gifted as you guys are insisting that I am.
|
On October 28 2016 06:18 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2016 06:16 Nevuk wrote:
LOL you can't donate plasma every week of your life. And yet people do. All the time. Years and years of it. The money adds up crazy fast.
The logistics behind doing that and having the donation centers not catch on is sort of breaking me right now.
|
United States42992 Posts
On October 28 2016 06:21 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2016 06:18 KwarK wrote:On October 28 2016 06:16 Nevuk wrote:
LOL you can't donate plasma every week of your life. And yet people do. All the time. Years and years of it. The money adds up crazy fast. The logistics behind doing that and having the donation centers not catch on is sort of breaking me right now.
What? They encourage it. Plasma is twice a week. That's the normal amount. They tell you to do that.
|
On October 28 2016 06:17 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2016 06:15 Mohdoo wrote:On October 28 2016 06:13 KwarK wrote:
Mohdoo $20/hr is a shitton of money and that's before we get into total compensation. 2 bedroom apartment in my area doesn't go much lower than $1200. $20/hour is about $2200/month. Add about $250/month in student loans too. Is the person in the other bedroom covering their half?
Well, I will just ignore that I live with my girlfriend and propose another scenario where I was single and didn't go to grad school:
$20/hr = $2200/month. Lowest I ever see a 1 bedroom in my area is $800/month for a complete piece of shit apartment. So, I will assume $900/month so I don't hate my life.
So after my rent, I am down to $1300. After student loans, $1050.
Internet = $70
Power = $120
Phone = $60
Car payment = $100
Food = $300?
$1050 - $650 = $400. And that's not accounting for all the other non-ideal shit like my car breaking down, needing new clothes or new other stuff. That doesn't include going out with friends or anything. $20/hour is really not that great at all in non-rural Oregon. I would absolutely hate my life if I only made $20/hour in my area.
edit: I left out car insurance lol. Probably left out a bunch of other shit. Netflix!! $10/month!!
|
United States42992 Posts
Mohdoo, I'm away from my spreadsheets right now but it looks like you're over withholding to get the take home to 2200 but even if we accept that the discretionary income could be doubled by basic shit like the aforementioned plasma. I just don't understand why people think this stuff is outside their control. Or why they think things like living alone with empty second bedrooms etc are anything other than luxury expenditures. I'm not saying don't have luxury, I have my own place, but own the decision and appreciate how good it is rather than treating it as the minimum acceptable living quality.
|
let's all start donating blood plasma. im sure thats a good idea.
the difference between you and me kwark is not that i have a crab bucket mentality. it's that i'm not operating under the delusion that the infinity of variables in the system remains constant when i universalize kwark-like behavior. what kind of asinine suggestion is it that everyone should go donate blood plasma for 80 free dollars a week? why do you make such asinine suggestions when you presumably know how markets and equilibria work? it's almost as if you thought that there was a bunch of free value hidden in the economy that everyone could exploit. sure one person can do it successfully so that means everyone can.
the faltering long term growth is not just a problem for kwarks and their bottom line. its a problem for the economy as a whole when a lot of pension funds and retirement plans assume unrealistic 7+% returns in all their calculations.
|
On October 28 2016 06:28 KwarK wrote:
Mohdoo, I'm away from my spreadsheets right now but it looks like you're over withholding to get the take home to 2200 but even if we accept that the discretionary income could be doubled by basic shit like the aforementioned plasma. I just don't understand why people think this stuff is outside their control.
I make maybe 6-7k a year. It's somewhat by choice, but also because the last job I worked at that paid a normal amount made me literally suicidal, and it's hard to work up the energy to want to run right back into the work force when you've had exorbitantly bad experiences.
My theory is that you probably don't understand why people think that stuff is out of their control as a justification for your own disproportionately gifted life. Once you accept that it's just the whims of fate that you aren't the person in an alley choking down drugs it's harder to feel smug and superior.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
It's perfectly possible to live quite reasonably with an even more extreme situation, like living on minimum wage in NYC, LA, or SF, if you're good with finances.
Problem is that most people who are good with finances don't stay that poor for very long. Selection bias plays a role here.
|
On October 28 2016 06:28 KwarK wrote:
Mohdoo, I'm away from my spreadsheets right now but it looks like you're over withholding to get the take home to 2200 but even if we accept that the discretionary income could be doubled by basic shit like the aforementioned plasma. I just don't understand why people think this stuff is outside their control.
Maybe Oregon is just different. $20 --> $2200 is for sure the best it gets with withholding in oregon. I'm not sure what else to tell you. Let's even assume $2400/month. That's still not really that much better.
I also think the idea of giving plasma as a necessary part of income is completely insane. I did not go to college to live like that.
I vote in favor of every possible tax increase in Oregon so that people like me can help people like non-grad-school-me not have to live like that.
On October 28 2016 06:31 LegalLord wrote:
It's perfectly possible to live quite reasonably with an even more extreme situation, like living on minimum wage in NYC, LA, or SF, if you're good with finances.
These people are not likely to be living in a low crime, nice neighborhood. My underlying assumption here is that if someone goes to college for something useful, they should be able to live in a nice area and not have to give plasma every week.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
