Glad I'm not a millennial

[Fedup]

I told my husband, the longer we live the more money we have thanks to compounding. My spreadsheet does show that amount. His parents were 87/91, and he has an uncle who is 94, still coherent. I told my kids not to expect anything either but it may come as a surprise.


Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum

 

[unclemick]

It doesn't have to be this way, You just have to work harder and smarter then your peers and spend less than you make. No magic formula needed, there is still opportunity out there but you have to go out and take it. You cant expect a pension or job security, but those who really want to succeed will be fine.

Putting the compound interest curve on a laptop/computer graph or a spreadsheet table doesn't mean it's changed any.

The math is still the same.

heh heh heh - 1976 K&E Engineering Graph Paper for me. Is that retro or what?

 

[kcowan]

1976 K&E Engineering Graph Paper for me. Is that retro or what?

What? No sliderule!

 

[Lsbcal]

Our son is 31 (older end of millennial I guess). He is in a small start up but with no equity share. He works very hard, gets decent pay, and has learned a ton. He's starting to appreciate us more and we are appreciating him more too (if that is possible). He even mentioned a few days ago that he was reading that book I gave him awhile back "How to Win Friends and Influence People".

He's not a planner but tries to be careful with money. He's now got a girl friend with a head on her shoulders (plus pretty as a bonus) as opposed to the just-pretty ones before her. I don't worry as someday he'll inherit what we have but we have not discussed it and I don't think this is in his plans.

Just thought I'd add this to the discussion. I'm not going to try to generalize about a diverse set of millions of young people.

 

[Independent]

The OP says that the class of 2015 has to retire two years later than the class of 2013.

As almost anyone here can attest, when we retire is mostly about the choices we make between spending and saving. The Co2015 can retire at exactly the same age as the Co2013, they just need to spend a little less along the way.

If the OP has a point, it's that the class of 2015 has X% less income available after rent and loan payments, than the class of 2013. IMO, calculating X and putting it in the headline would have made more sense than trying to calculate a retirement age.

 

[sergio]

I'm in my late 20s and think in some ways, we have it easier. It's certainly easier and cheaper to invest, there's TONS of good, free resources out there about early retirement (like this forum.) If I hadn't accidentally stumbled upon this forum while aimlessly web-surfing one night, I don't know if the idea of retiring before age 65 would've ever occurred to me.

Some things are definitely cheaper (cars, electronics, mortgages, etc...) while some are definitely more expensive (college tuition, health care.)

The one thing that worries me going forward are the market returns we'll see in the next 20-25 years compared to those of previous generations. I don't know if we'll ever see a bull market like 1982-2000 again, and the difference between 6-7% and 2-4% (post-inflation) returns can mean years of extra work. I started investing in late 2014, and seeing the market returns from 2000-today is depressing. What's worse is that most of those gains occurred from 2010-2014, and may be artificial due to government meddling in the economy.

This is why I'm starting to look into real-estate (land-lording) as a way to diversify my portfolio and improve future cash flow.

 

[unclemick]

What? No sliderule!

Heh heh heh - in the 60's had the straight one(several) and a circular before the hand held calculators came on strong.

 

[zesty]

unfortunately they are almost certainly in a DC-only world (unless they are in the public sector) and are faced with saving 20% a year in order to fund a decent retirement benefit, above and beyond any SS they might get

I'm at the upper end of millennial classification, and this is true. Everyone says how bad things are going to be, so I have prioritized saving money above everything else.

I did manage to score a job with a pension and I'm trying to get 15 or 20 years on that before retiring. I also save 50% pre-tax from my main job, and spend most of my free time working on projects to build passive income.

Is living like this particularly fun? No, not really. It's alright, but I'd love to save 30% and go on nice vacations, get some newer gadgets, and generally have more fun.

But between having to save enough for my retirement to compensate for extremely low returns, AND save enough to cover my parents as well, it doesn't leave much room for spending.

 

[zesty]

In my admittedly limited but still non-trivial experience, my observation is that there is a different work ethic - attitude really - between millennials and the broader population. Younger people seem much more "9-to-5'ish." Perhaps their productivity per hour is higher, but young people are less likely to work evenings/weekends.

Haha, you say that like it's a bad thing. I did a solid year of 60-70 hour weeks and it was absolutely awful for the quality of my life.

If someone needs it for a week or two, I can do it. But any more than that and I push back. Luckily the place I'm at now almost never requires anyone to work over 40.

In addition, they are more likely to want to bounce around between jobs. It's a problem in my work area due to the long learning requirement. We don't want people to leave after the 2-3 years it takes to train them. When hiring, we seek people interested in long-term assignments.

Unfortunately, that's the way to make more money nowadays. When raises cap out at 3% but going to a new company gets you a quick 20% increase, it becomes financially punitive to work at the same place for a long time early in your career.

Without the 2 job switches I made in the first 5 years of my career, I would probably be making $20k less per year than I am now.

 

[purplesky]

The game has changed in the last 30 years and the millennial generation is screwed.

The race to the bottom economy is still alive and well.

Its very funny people in this thread are attacking this younger generation and their cell phones.


I hear the media report that the Millennial generation prefers renting and that they are not interesting in cars. Thats a lie!

If they actually made a living wage they would buy homes and cars.

Millennials have been handed this "race to the bottom" economy that has lowered the American standard of living.

 

[kcowan]

I think these people will adapt to their environment, benefit from technology, and come out just fine. Just look at how the people of Europe have adapted.

The problem arises when meddling parents like us try to "improve their lives" based on our standards. My youngest just sold his second car because with Uber and smart sharing of parental responsibilities, they can flourish with just one. Plus they are determined to walk everywhere, including the gym.

 

[target2019]

Glad I'm not the parent of a millennial gen Y. LOL. Wait, I am!

 

[trixs]

I dont know if I buy into the stereotypes. Personally, I am on the upper end of the millennial bracket in my early thirties. Don't have a dataplan, cable tv, or home phone. I do have a few top of the line computers and the fastest internet I can purchase in my area.

On the monetary front I have managed to accumulate 400K in liquid assets from a 60K/year (after tax) j*b. Additionally I will have a military retirement in 5.5 more years. I would say that this forum, and Nords specifically, have significantly influenced me. If I didn't find this forum over a decade ago who knows if I would have ever even considered early retirement or even investing for that matter. I certainly didn't learn about it from my Baby Boomer parents.

 

[papadad111]

I actually find the advent of the constantly connected world and smart phone to be net-positive.

The ability to acquire accurate and multi-point validated information instantly versus hours of research (only to learn that the research or conclusion was wrong &waste of time ). is a huge boon to personal productivity.

There are downsides too- like not making eye contact because everyone's face is in their phone.

But above is huge wrt productivity of mankind. It's not all Facebook and selfies and food-porn photos - I'm amazed at what I now do on my phone that I used to do on my PC or by manually looking something up in the (sic.) library.

I predict personal interaction will be a 100-level freshman college course before long. Think of the possibilities.

 

[Shawn]

Haha, you say that like it's a bad thing. I did a solid year of 60-70 hour weeks and it was absolutely awful for the quality of my life.

Working 9-5 as opposed to 60-70 hours a week is neither good nor bad. However, it is a choice, and choices have consequences. In general, people who are more dedicated to their jobs/careers are better compensated than people who are not. Money may not be everything, but it still provides a lot of fringe benefits - like the ability to ER.

The same is true with LBYM/savings. Saving 50% of pretax income - like you do - is neither good nor bad. But it has consequences. These consequences may be negative in the near-term (e.g., can't buy the latest toys) but are positive in the long-term (e.g., the ability to ER).

In general, the ability to ER results from a lifetime of reasonable choices. It has little if anything to do with being a Boomer or a Millennial.

 

[frayne]

People are people, there probably won't be substantial differences between the millennial's and boomer's retirement successes or failures. Some people can handle money, some can't.

Pretty much my take as well.

 

[Greencheese]

Working 9-5 as opposed to 60-70 hours a week is neither good nor bad. However, it is a choice, and choices have consequences. In general, people who are more dedicated to their jobs/careers are better compensated than people who are not. Money may not be everything, but it still provides a lot of fringe benefits - like the ability to ER.

The same is true with LBYM/savings. Saving 50% of pretax income - like you do - is neither good nor bad. But it has consequences. These consequences may be negative in the near-term (e.g., can't buy the latest toys) but are positive in the long-term (e.g., the ability to ER).

In general, the ability to ER results from a lifetime of reasonable choices. It has little if anything to do with being a Boomer or a Millennial.

To be fair there is a similar discussion on MMM about this...

Enough with this "millenial" bullshit!


And one "idea" stood out in particular to me. When working 9-5 =2% raise while busting your ass and working 60-70 hours = 3% raise and job hopping = 15% raises why should I bother working more than the middle of the road? Clearly in today's world hard work is often not proportionally rewarded and without something like a pension to tie you down its often better to just move onto greener pastures than bother to be a true rockstar at any one company. Granted if you have no talents 2% is the best you can hope for but if you have in demand skills get the experience and move on, 1% raise be damned when there's 15%+ potential at play on the open market.

Are millenials lazy or have they just seen past the false stories of promised rewards by a company tomorrow and instead want the guaranteed reward today, which more often than not are better than the promises of something tomorrow...

 

[rodi]

And one "idea" stood out in particular to me. When working 9-5 =2% raise while busting your ass and working 60-70 hours = 3% raise and job hopping = 15% raises why should I bother working more than the middle of the road?

To true. After raises were canceled during the downturn (2008 or 2009) I had a coworker ask (with full deadpan face and delivery) "Exactly how much unpaid overtime do we have to work to lock in our 0% raises?" It was telling because we'd been in a super push to get a product out - working lots of weekends/late nights... and the 0% annual increase was a slap in the face. The manager didn't have any idea how to respond. Folks in the room didn't know how to respond. I started applauding - because I thought it was a good question.

Most of us were older than millennials but we quickly learned that quality of live might be more important than unpaid, unappreciated extra effort. Management had a hard time firing us up to do more than a 2 week "crunch" after that.

Aubry - if you're out there... I commend you.

 

[scrabbler1]

Nothing is sillier than the label slapped on me....I was born in 1964 and thus labeled a "baby boomer". At best I should be labeled the next one, whichever it is. My dad was not even in high school when the War ended. So yes, I agree they are silly.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Same here. I was born in 1963 and my dad was born in 1931 and was not nearly old enough to have served in WWII. The first time I heard the term "baby boom" was decades ago and the full name of the term was "Post-War Baby Boom" referring to the huge number of babies born to couples whose male had just returned from the War, got married, and had kids, mainly in the late 1940s and through the 1950s.

One thing the Millennials are doing differently from previous generations is delaying or deciding against having children. I guess they are so busy staring into their SmartPhones or living in their parents' basements they have less interest in dating or starting families?!?!

 

[Totoro]

One thing the Millennials are doing differently from previous generations is delaying or deciding against having children. I guess they are so busy staring into their SmartPhones or living in their parents' basements they have less interest in dating or starting families?!?!

Children are a financial liability with a very steep and ever increasing sticker price, also in quality of life. They used to be an asset.

So most motivated women wait until they feel secure in an increasingly insecure environment (e.g. financial / job wise). That takes a while. Some never get there.

Interest in dating drops off also because both men and women are increasingly untrained to give the other what they want out of a pairing, the associated rewards are much smaller than they used to be, and the social stigma of a failed pairing has almost vanished.

So both look at the other side and ask themselves: Why? And many don't like the product as advertised, so decide not to buy.

*gets off horse*

 

[hnzw_rui]

One thing the Millennials are doing differently from previous generations is delaying or deciding against having children. I guess they are so busy staring into their SmartPhones or living in their parents' basements they have less interest in dating or starting families?!?!

Children are expensive. Divorce/alimony plus child support even more so.

 

[kgtest]

I think these people will adapt to their environment, benefit from technology, and come out just fine. Just look at how the people of Europe have adapted.

The problem arises when meddling parents like us try to "improve their lives" based on our standards. My youngest just sold his second car because with Uber and smart sharing of parental responsibilities, they can flourish with just one. Plus they are determined to walk everywhere, including the gym.

This made me chuckle. I recall when my 4yr older sister sold their car as she works from home and they were certain they wouldn't need it.

Then they started borrowing my dad's car, then they started asking to use my car on the weekend, and now they bought a second car, a Prius. Not sure how much they saved doubling down on sales tax for two new vehicles, only to sell one of them. We live in MN where its cold and cars are almost required unless you want to freeze to death walking.

 

[kcowan]

Yes my son is in a walkable neighbourhood of downtown Toronto called The Beach. And the streetcar/bus service is great. Having private parking for only one car was also a factor.

(We lived on an acreage with a 3-car attached garage and plenty of outdoor private parking before we came to our senses.)

 

[Shawn]

Are millenials lazy or have they just seen past the false stories of promised rewards by a company tomorrow and instead want the guaranteed reward today, which more often than not are better than the promises of something tomorrow...

I don't believe they are false promises. In general, employees who dedicate themselves to their jobs/careers receive (significantly) higher compensation than those who don't.

The typical 9/5 employee at my company has received an average annual raise of about 4% over the past 25 years (3% due to generic wage growth or inflation, and 1% due to career growth or merit). I've received an average raise of 6+% during my 25 year career. This is primarily because I work 60 hours/week on a regular basis. This is not a trite claim. It is a reality.

My additional 2% every year may not sound like much but it compounds. It means I now earn about 60% more than the average employee with similar work experience (and my company has a relatively flat salary structure). We have a pension. This means that the average employee must work about 15 more years than me to have a similar annual pension payout. If I retire at 60, they must work until 75. Even ignoring the pension and incorporating other factors such as taxes, the numbers do not change very much.

My hard work has put me way ahead - 15 years ahead. I would not be where I am today if I regularly worked 9/5.

The point is that retirement - let alone early retirement - is enabled by choices. One choice is to work hard and focus on a career. Another choice is to save/LBYM. A third choice is to make common sense investment decisions. This is true for everyone, not just Millennials.

I don't buy the argument that a Millennial (or anyone), in general, "needs" to work until age 75. It is a choice to work 9/5. It is a choice to buy the latest smart phone or the latest toy. It is a choice to invest all savings in a zero-risk bank money market account earning 0.1%. These choices aren't necessarily bad. But they have consequences. It is why some people can retire early, and other people cannot.

 

[MasterBlaster]

This is primarily because I work 60 hours/week on a regular basis.

My additional 2% every year may not sound like much but it compounds. It means I now earn about 60% more than the average employee with similar work experience (and my company has a relatively flat salary structure)

60% more money for 60 hours a week or 50% more hours at work than the average person. After taxes, I would suggest that you lost somewhat. Your after tax rate per hour worked is less than the average Joe.

Yes you received more money and recognition but you gave up your life.

Millenials and myself look at people like you and wonder.... Is it really worth it ? Where did your life go ?