Climbing the Wealth Ladder • Hacker News Board

Re: Climbing the Wealth Ladder

#251

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 8:00 PM UTC

Izkata wrote: post #209

greedo wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't provide any context in your attempt at a wry comment, and then you compound it by not only reinforcing the ageism, but adding in classism as well. You're defining the cashier by their job/role, as well as how they spend their money on saving for retirement. Textbook classism. My anecdotal reply would be that I've made it to this golden age, I've earned far less than the average, saved more than the average,…

> I've married, raised a family, and had memorable trips with them. I think this part is their point. Even you are looking backwards at what you have done, instead of future plans, implying the younger years are the more interesting ones.

[deleted]

Re: Climbing the Wealth Ladder

#252

Post by wolfgang42 » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 8:03 PM UTC

disintegore wrote: post #180

pathseeker wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Outside of real outlier status where you're paid really, really large amounts of money for your services (like notable entertainer or cardiac surgeon) the way to wealth is to own the means of production. Period. This is a lazy view, or a really privileged one at least. I know a couple of people in their fifties who have retired from putting as much money into the market as possible (post-tax and pre-tax) while livin…

Are you aware of the fact that your anecdotal evidence from the fifties may no longer be pertinent? Have you seen what happened to wages since then? To the cost of living? To the cost of homes?

In their fifties, so born in the 1960s and probably started their retirement fund in the '80s or so.

(Not that things also haven't changed since then, but it is a pretty big difference.)

Re: Climbing the Wealth Ladder

#253

Post by BeetleB » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 8:04 PM UTC

icedchai wrote: post #247

BeetleB wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I suggest you look up what stock ownership means. Stock ownership traditionally means partial ownership of a business. Except that you almost have no decision making power unless you own a lot of stocks, and that's not going to happen while working a simple middle class job. It also doesn't mean that the company will pay you a portion of their profits. It is entirely up to the company whether they want to pay you a…

My portfolio works for me 24x7, doesn't complain, doesn't send annoying emails, bother me after hours with an "emergency", or cause loss of sleep. I am highly diversified with index funds. You want to "own a lot of stocks"? Start a small business. Your stock starts off worth nothing, and probably stays that way.

I am having trouble connecting your comment to mine. Perhaps you replied to the wrong comment?

Re: Climbing the Wealth Ladder

#254

Post by philwelch » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 8:05 PM UTC

BeetleB wrote: post #224

philwelch wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you buy one share of Toyota Motor Company, you are now a part-owner of a car company, including all the factories and equipment and supply contracts and whatnot that such a thing entails. Owning stock literally entails “owning the means of production”. Buy some stock today and become an evil capitalist!

> If you buy one share of Toyota Motor Company, you are now a part-owner of a car company, including all the factories and equipment and supply contracts and whatnot that such a thing entails. Assuming this is not specific to Toyota, what does "owning" mean? If I own one share of a company, it's incredibly rare that I have any say on any of the things you listed above. I usually do not get to vote on those. I also do…

> I mean, if I'm part of a joint venture with others to own a 100 unit apartment complex, I would expect to get some of the profit, at least. Likely about as much as my ownership stake.

You might want to look into REITs.

Re: Climbing the Wealth Ladder

#255

Post by icedchai » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 8:05 PM UTC

BeetleB wrote: post #253

icedchai wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My portfolio works for me 24x7, doesn't complain, doesn't send annoying emails, bother me after hours with an "emergency", or cause loss of sleep. I am highly diversified with index funds. You want to "own a lot of stocks"? Start a small business. Your stock starts off worth nothing, and probably stays that way.

I am having trouble connecting your comment to mine. Perhaps you replied to the wrong comment?

No, I replied to the correct one. I am pointing out some of the benefits of stock ownership and "no decision making power."

Re: Climbing the Wealth Ladder

#256

Post by hultner » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 8:07 PM UTC

jdashg wrote: post #242

greedo wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A mortgage for a $1M property is roughly $4-$5k depending on credit etc etc.

$5100 for $1M borrowed (a low) 3%, excluding down payment, property taxes, and likely PMI, given how onerous saving 20% of seven figures is.

Is the interest rate that high in the US?

If you negotiate with a couple of banks in Sweden you can easily get sub 1% (0.79% is what I seem to be able to get). Heck I just checked my bank and I can even get a line of credit up to 1M SEK at 1.74% for up to 50% of my portfolio without any property as security.

Re: Climbing the Wealth Ladder

#257

Post by Wheaties466 » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 8:07 PM UTC

Pfhreak wrote: post #171

lazyguy2 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's entirely possible for a wage earner to become a millionaire in the USA. Anybody with a middle class income can do it. It's not even complicated or hard to figure out. The problem is that it requires discipline and living under your means. The first step is to eliminate debt and don't make stupid purchases. Debt includes credit card, personal loans, car loans, and mortgages. Stupid purchases are things like expen…

I mean, I agree about envelope budgeting and smart saving. Avoid debt is essential to financial health. > Anybody with a middle class income can do it. This seems obviously false to me. Let me construct a reasonable case for someone who is middle class income but who I do not believe will be able to meet your savings goals. Let's assume a single parent, at the median income level of $31,000/year living in Seattle. Th…

I hate to break it to you buddy but 31k is the poverty line, not middle class.

http://www.commerce.wa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/DRAFT-...

Re: Climbing the Wealth Ladder

#258

Post by disintegore » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 8:09 PM UTC

wolfgang42 wrote: post #252

disintegore wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you aware of the fact that your anecdotal evidence from the fifties may no longer be pertinent? Have you seen what happened to wages since then? To the cost of living? To the cost of homes?

In their fifties, so born in the 1960s and probably started their retirement fund in the '80s or so. (Not that things also haven't changed since then, but it is a pretty big difference.)

Big tunnel vision moment on my part.

Re: Climbing the Wealth Ladder

#259

Post by mcguire » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 8:25 PM UTC

disintegore wrote: post #8

I understand this isn't the point of the article, but it seems like a roundabout way of saying "don't overspend". This part in particular bothers me : > More importantly though, the best way to climb the wealth ladder is to spend money according to your level. As far as I (a non-economist) can personally tell, any notion of climbing up some abstract wealth ladder is synonym with a salary increase for the vast majorit…

"I understand this isn't the point of the article, but it seems like a roundabout way of saying "don't overspend"."

Well yes, but...that's completely useless advice and the article is considerably more concrete and useful. (On the other hand, I'll dispute his 1-basis-point: I think it should be closer to .1 basis point.)

You are right about the difference between income and net worth. To a point, anyway.

Re: Climbing the Wealth Ladder

#260

Post by mcguire » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 8:30 PM UTC

wolfgang42 wrote: post #252

disintegore wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you aware of the fact that your anecdotal evidence from the fifties may no longer be pertinent? Have you seen what happened to wages since then? To the cost of living? To the cost of homes?

In their fifties, so born in the 1960s and probably started their retirement fund in the '80s or so. (Not that things also haven't changed since then, but it is a pretty big difference.)

Born 1968, never made more than $80k/yr until 2011, resigned 2014 (came back very part time because there's something wrong with me, 2017). Started saving and investing 1990.