Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
it appears that few know anything about how easy it is to make 20% per year. After you remove taxes, avoid self employed SS tax and lose 5% (average) per year to inflation, that's a real 10% per year. If you're saving say, 20k per year, at a REAL 10%, annual interest-rate, it only takes 10 years to have 30k per year, (after tax and inflation) if income (on 300k) which is plenty to retire on, for one person, in the US. You can do the same thing, really, on 10k, in numerous other countries, which are quite nice to live in. Such as Portugal, numerous island nations, Uruquay, Tanganyika, etc.
If you've got a bit of adventurousness in you and you're willing to hustle a bit, 10k of passive income and your hustle will retire you ok in US, too. While "hustle" does not equal "retire", it can mean working at your own pace, in your own home, with no real hassles, at a rate of $20 per hour or more, untaxed, for say, 10 hours per week, which is not much to have things the way you want them.
Getting 10k per year of passive income can be very quick and easy to do, too. I know a guy who managed it with just a few k and a trip to a 3rd world country. He married a nurse, who proved her ability to pass the US/state nursing exam. He brought her to the US, and put her in college. Her grants paid her actual school expenses and he got her student loans. Since she already knew the subjects, it was quite easy for her to attend full time classes and also work full time for VA. VA gave her loans to further her nursing education and he got those, too. The total was 15k per year for him (untaxed, yet)
When a nurse continues a career as nurse, the nurse's student loans are "forgiven", one year of work begets one year of loans removed from the nurse's debt. So the cost to her was nothing, really, and she got out of poverty and now clears about 40k per year. So she's sending about 5k per year home to her country, which is more than 5 grown men (in her country could give to their families (beyond their own expenses). She's investing 15k per year (and will do more as she gets her master's degree) So she'll be after just 12 years of working in US. He got her loans for only 5 years, but there's thousands more just like her.
Uh, if it were really so easy to earn 20% risk-free or nearly so, why wouldn't they be signing up for as many credit cards and loans as possible with an interest rate below 20%?
The problem with your example of marrying a nurse is that you are ignoring the risk factor and the time factor. The risk factor (actually risk factorS) include being used and having her run off, or changing her mind about career, or being trapped in an unhealthy or unhappy relationship, making big life decisions on a whim only to regret it later, among others. A marriage established on a basis other than true love is not likely to last. The time factor also cannot be neglected - you have to forgo some income to engage in this practice, which should be considered part of the initial investment. Finally, unless you want to go the polygamy route, it is impossible to reinvest your earnings at the same rate.
All said and done, it is totally inane to rely on a strategy like yours for financial success.
While visiting the villages and small towns of rural Ecuador, we were reminded of just how little money it takes to lead a happy life.
I think you are confused about the term "miser". Being a miser and being poor are different things. A miser is someone who hoards money and spends as little of it as possible. Anybody, rich or poor, can be a miser. The reason I brought up this term is to point out that the only way someone with a "modest" income can become wealthy is if they are a miser.
I think you are confused about the term "miser". Being a miser and being poor are different things. A miser is someone who hoards money and spends as little of it as possible. Anybody, rich or poor, can be a miser. The reason I brought up this term is to point out that the only way someone with a "modest" income can become wealthy is if they are a miser.
And no matter how many of us point out the fallacy of this viewpoint, you refuse to believe otherwise.
What do you consider wealthy? Is there a certain dollar amount at which one becomes wealthy, or is it a subjective term? If it's the former, define it for us. If the latter, then my previous post should suffice to describe people who have become wealthy without being miserly. Personally, I think of wealthy as being able to live comfortably without having to worry about what you would do if you lost your job or had an emergency come up.
Well off to me is someone with a good job, a big house and maybe a holiday house..stuff I dont have.... wealthy however is another ball game... this is silly money who buy to keep up with other super rich..it must be hard work hahaha. but true... I feel some strive so much to keep one step ahead it becomes tiring..then above even this lot we have the super duper rich... the ones from Dubai.. who have nine storey houses with gold clocks and furniture...silly rich who honestly dont know what to do with what they have... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFAvvk9gM9U
and how its all down to taste.... Id have a Miss Marple cottage, while some seem to want this garage forecourt.. not for me... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmqUjkL62jgjeezo Id need skates to get round all that..
I remember a few really lean years in the early/mid 1980s in my mid 20's when I ate canned tuna, peas and green beans (as did my cat) for months on end to keep the heat and lights on. I finally got the picture that I couldn't drive a nice car, have upper end clothing on my salary and still have things like a decent roof over my head, heat and food, not to mention health care and other necessities.
Not getting a financial education of any type from my upbringing I started going to the library (it was the 80s) to read up on finance and frugality, putting what I learned to work. I also worked hard on getting promoted at work to improve my income. Fast forward 20 some years of living well below my/our means, having some luck with real estate and while we aren't rich per se, we are well within the top 10 percentile of net worth in the US. To be honest, we still can't afford to drive new luxury cars and wear designer clothes, keeping up with the Hiltons, and stay in the upper 10%. And frankly our priorities have changed. We aren't interested in a new BMW or trips to Saks. When we travel our accommodations are modest.
The über new money rich, they are outliers and another story altogether. There are some interesting case studies that show that being in the right place, at the right time with the right interests create opportunity for the few that take the path to huge wealth, Bill Gates and Steve Jobs being a few of those.
So OP if you are interested in raising your circumstances, get educated financially and to improve your job/career skills and then invest in your future, not in bling, fast cars and fashions that are tired in two weeks. Calling for pikes and pitchforks will only take by force what isn't yours to take.
The top 10th percentile by net wealth only requires 1M. Not a lot of money anymore.
In most places, that is not enough for a couple to have at retirement....
As you can see, the distributions foretell a dismal future for most Americans.
About 20% of Americans have no net wealth at all.
The median net worth of Americans ages 40-60 is only 100K.
Eh, no. You would be surprised at some of the stuff I read on CD about how people can't live without various "extras" and how living without them would be a crappy life, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 80skeys
The reason I brought up this term is to point out that the only way someone with a "modest" income can become wealthy is if they are a miser.
And I still don't agree. That's the problem with this stuff. Different terms mean different things to different people. "Wealth" & "Miser" are both loaded terms.
Financially independent. You don't need to work the rest of your life because you already have, in your possession, all the living expenses you require for the rest of your life. You don't depend on a pension or other outside source of money.
it appears that few know anything about how easy it is to make 20% per year. After you remove taxes, avoid self employed SS tax and lose 5% (average) per year to inflation, that's a real 10% per year. If you're saving say, 20k per year, at a REAL 10%, annual interest-rate, it only takes 10 years to have 30k per year, (after tax and inflation) if income (on 300k) which is plenty to retire on, for one person, in the US. You can do the same thing, really, on 10k, in numerous other countries, which are quite nice to live in. Such as Portugal, numerous island nations, Uruquay, Tanganyika, etc.
If you've got a bit of adventurousness in you and you're willing to hustle a bit, 10k of passive income and your hustle will retire you ok in US, too. While "hustle" does not equal "retire", it can mean working at your own pace, in your own home, with no real hassles, at a rate of $20 per hour or more, untaxed, for say, 10 hours per week, which is not much to have things the way you want them.
Getting 10k per year of passive income can be very quick and easy to do, too. I know a guy who managed it with just a few k and a trip to a 3rd world country. He married a nurse, who proved her ability to pass the US/state nursing exam. He brought her to the US, and put her in college. Her grants paid her actual school expenses and he got her student loans. Since she already knew the subjects, it was quite easy for her to attend full time classes and also work full time for VA. VA gave her loans to further her nursing education and he got those, too. The total was 15k per year for him (untaxed, yet)
When a nurse continues a career as nurse, the nurse's student loans are "forgiven", one year of work begets one year of loans removed from the nurse's debt. So the cost to her was nothing, really, and she got out of poverty and now clears about 40k per year. So she's sending about 5k per year home to her country, which is more than 5 grown men (in her country could give to their families (beyond their own expenses). She's investing 15k per year (and will do more as she gets her master's degree) So she'll be after just 12 years of working in US. He got her loans for only 5 years, but there's thousands more just like her.
i'm reading the title of this thread again, scratching my head. what is the alternative? when you have a modest income or less it makes sense to live modestly. it seems like we are so negatively focused on the supposed "hypocrisy" of "the rich". yet if you have more money to spend it makes sense that you would spend more money? where is the issue?
is this just the age old jealousy thing?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
