I got through just fine but it sure helped that I stayed continuously employed in good jobs, had health insurance, etc. What happened to my investments was scary but I hung on and they recovered.
For many Americans the best and ONLY way that they can save is through home ownership, if you don’t save and compound that with no home ownership then your gonna be in really bad shape financially in your golden years
For many Americans the best and ONLY way that they can save is through home ownership, if you don’t save and compound that with no home ownership then your gonna be in really bad shape financially in your golden years
So I would fall in not having $1,000 in a savings account...
I left for work at 5:45AM each morning and 2 days a week when I had class I didn't get home till around 11PM.
I am also pretty pissed at all the ones who spend, spend, spend... and then have little savings which doesn't last, and then cry 'poor me' , 'you are so lucky' etc...
It bugs me a lot as I have a sibling who blew a $50K inheritance, and then told me she had to move into supported living and needs money.....
So I support her to the tune of $4K/yr, all the while I see if she had not blown the $50K, I wouldn't need to support her for the first 15 years
Was it uphill both ways?
.
So I would fall in not having $1,000 in a savings account...
+1 The "you are so lucky" phrase is particularly irritating for those of us who saved diligently during the working years. There is a victimization element to that argument that I think frequently is used to cover the fact that people who say it simply bought things they could not really afford.
How much would they have now if they had foregone that consumption and saved/invested the money instead?
They should listen to Mr. Earl, the investor who has never made more than $20K per year but now has a net worth of roughly $500,000 through consistent investing:
https://www.getrichslowly.org/parking-lot-attendant-worth-half-a-million-bucks/
The "you are so lucky" phrase is particularly irritating for those of us who saved diligently during the working years. There is a victimization element to that argument that I think frequently is used to cover the fact that people who say it simply bought things they could not really afford.
I'm of a similar mindset to Amethyst on this one. A few people have told me that I was lucky to be able to stop working when I did. I do feel lucky - lucky that I had parents who taught me how to save, and who set an example in that area, lucky that the art of delayed gratification has always come naturally to me, and lucky that I had the wherewithal to grasp some good opportunities (both in work and investing) when they came my way. I'm pretty sure that I passed on some potentially excellent opportunities but, luckily, (there's that "luck" word again), you only need to take advantage of a few good ones to tip the balance in your favor.
IMHO this just aint so. Most and I'm thinking 95% of Americans can save if only put aside a $20 when they get paid. It may not add up to sufficient savings to fund a retirement but you can save. There are a few that can't live on less than the paychecks but the vast majority can. Most can also improve the marketability by gaining skills or education. I earned my BS degree in 96 at the age of 40 after years of night school. I left for work at 5:45AM each morning and 2 days a week when I had class I didn't get home till around 11PM.
This is your life, you can choose to just watch or you can make decisions that can change the path. One son of mine is working retail at the cash register. He has some issues so he isn't going to retire with millions in his IRA. However, for most, retail at the cash register or doing fries at Wendy's isn't a career. It is a job. Again, not 100% but most can get a job that requires a skill work hard and move up when opportunities happen, gain more skills and earn more and save more.
We'd come pretty close. Emergency funds are in the checking account. If savings accounts paid more, that would likely change.
Comon be nice.....Was it uphill both ways?
PS One risk - if your friend likes beer and gardening, and works second shift, be prepared for a tipsy phone call about 1 AM, with something like "I just picked some carrots and they are delicious." .
In my opinion, one of the more pernicious myths is that you cannot possibly save for retirement unless you have a 401k/403b. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Although it may be easier with a 401k, you can always just save and invest money out of your take home pay. And an IRA is always available.
When I was in the Navy, I had no 401k, but I still saved my money. Since then, I've had 401k plans, but never, ever a match. The problem for these people is saving at all, not lack of a tax advantaged plan or an employer match.
This is your life, you can choose to just watch or you can make decisions that can change the path. ....not 100% but most can get a job that requires a skill work hard and move up when opportunities happen, gain more skills and earn more and save more.
It is true that this is the most common way for many people to accumulate some wealth. However, I do not see that it turns into a lot of income for them. My house is paid off but is only 7% of my NW and the income that I might get from it is minimal. It is mainly nice not to have the drain of the payment.