Live data from Hacker News

Man Built a $188M Fortune Investing in Stocks Then Donated It to Charity

joshuakennon.com

141–150 of 161 posts

Re: Man Built a $188M Fortune Investing in Stocks Then Donated It to Charity

#141
post #92
post #88

Here’s a guy who saved his money and invested it and made a huge fortune from an inherited fortune, all so he could give it away. The response - “ugh what an a-hole, who inherited his wealth”. I’m so sick of hacker news. I mean if you were defending someone who squandered their opportunities but the bias was in the system, I applaud that defense. We should be very aware that some people are screwed and oppressed. But…

The religion analogy is great, because that's what this is. Wealth, privilege is now original sin for a lot of people. There is no real way to get out of it. See here. Even giving it away means you stay guilty. Never mind the guy didn't even spend his money on anything. Just having it is sin. I think the only way you can get rid of this original sin is by donating to climate change efforts or BLM or something similar…

[deleted]

Re: Man Built a $188M Fortune Investing in Stocks Then Donated It to Charity

#142
post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Putting some stonks your kids name when they are born might not be a bad idea.. There's probably some tax benefits. And a good chance they won't touch it for the first 18 years -- By which time you might have given them a taste for compounding interest :)

The only tax benefit is if your state offers one for 529 plans.

Not true. Realize capital gains each year in a UTMA account up to the kiddie tax limits. File a return for the kids instead of putting their gains on the parent's return. It can be significant over 18 years.

Re: Man Built a $188M Fortune Investing in Stocks Then Donated It to Charity

#143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not $188 million rich, but certainly $2-5 million rich.

something like 60% of people can’t reach 1 million let alone 2, given their position in the lifetime income distribution. i’d be all for changing policies with the sole focus of giving everyone the opportunity, but not the right, to reach $2 million in wealth by retirement age. that would require some wealth redistribution to start, and radical shifts in how we allocate income. since that disfavors the already wealth…

I don't want to be too combative because you do have a point that, especially with kids, its hard to not live paycheck to paycheck. But if you start early all you have to do is bust your butt and live cheaply for a couple of years and wait for compound returns to kick in.

Back of the hand says that if you invest 10,000/yr from 20 to 30 you'll have saved ~$100,000. And then 7% and with the rule of 72 is then: 30: 100,000 40: 200,000 50: 400,000 60: 800,000 70: 1,600,000.

S&P is closer to 12% than 7% which means you might be able to get away with saving less aggressively or earlier retirement. If you are able bodied and willing to learn a trade you should be able to make atleast 20/hr. I made 19/hr right out of college as a manufacturing technician and saved ~1000 month. You have to sacrifice to do this e.g. live with roommates in a cheap area, rarely go out to drink/eat etc., but if you start early, don't have kids and save aggressively its very doable. I didn't completely live like a monk, I bought a canoe and went canoeing most weekends and had a rock gym membership for one year while doing this and a martial arts membership the other year. I also lived one block from the projects in a 3-1 with 3 other people so rent was tiny and ate rice and beans + chicken thighs or eggs 3-4 times a week for dinner to keep the cost of food down. Its straight forward on median salary, but you have to sacrifice. The budget is straight forward too: The budget is simple, you get 400 for rent, 400 for food, 400 for transportation, 400 for bills (internet, electric, water, sewage), 200 for health care expenses, 100 float and 100 for fun. You can even do it in SF if you do two people to a room (just like dorms in college) in a large house--transportation will goes down, rent might go up and food probably goes up as well.

You could also work 50 hours a week and save that extra 25% of salary which again at entry level in the trades would yield you close to 10,000/year (minus taxes but hello IRA). The Dave Ramsey retirement calculator says that if you save 1500/month from 22-25 you with 10% returns and no savings after that you'll become a millionaire at about age 53. You can make that happen as an entry level mechanic who lives like I did who works an average 10 hours of overtime a week.

Re: Man Built a $188M Fortune Investing in Stocks Then Donated It to Charity

#144
post #3

From the article: Most millionaires opt for stealth wealth. Their friends don’t know, their coworkers don’t know, their extended family doesn’t know. In a few cases, not even their children know! Wealth is accumulated through habits; at least in a free society like ours. At the moment, something like 1 out of 25 households falls into the millionaire category, most of it self-made. From the comments: Your right in Jac…

I often visit bogleheads.org, where thrifty investors hang out and share ideas.

There are many fantastically wealthy people there who got rich exactly as this article described.

Go check it out, you'll find it's true.

Re: Man Built a $188M Fortune Investing in Stocks Then Donated It to Charity

#145
post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you care to elaborate on what relevant difference there is between 5% interest in a savings account and 5% growth of stock portfolio? Compound interest is compound interest. 5% or 7% or 11% matters, where that comes from doesn't.

There are no savings accounts with interest comparable to stocks. If that was so nobody would invest in stocks because one has big risk and the other zero. You are very financially illiterate and I don't mean it as an insult. Sadly these things should be taught at schools. Also, there are currently no 5% saving rates in any of the big currencies.

It literally doesn't matter if there are savings accounts with 5% interest. The example was illustrative and focused on the percentage, not the vehicle through which it was earned. You're being pedantic to the point of distraction here and not adding any value to the subject at hand.

Re: Man Built a $188M Fortune Investing in Stocks Then Donated It to Charity

#146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

something like 60% of people can’t reach 1 million let alone 2, given their position in the lifetime income distribution. i’d be all for changing policies with the sole focus of giving everyone the opportunity, but not the right, to reach $2 million in wealth by retirement age. that would require some wealth redistribution to start, and radical shifts in how we allocate income. since that disfavors the already wealth…

I don't want to be too combative because you do have a point that, especially with kids, its hard to not live paycheck to paycheck. But if you start early all you have to do is bust your butt and live cheaply for a couple of years and wait for compound returns to kick in. Back of the hand says that if you invest 10,000/yr from 20 to 30 you'll have saved ~$100,000. And then 7% and with the rule of 72 is then: 30: 100,…

> Back of the hand says that if you invest 10,000/yr from 20 to 30 you'll have saved ~$100,000.

So you're telling me that all most Americans have to do is put at least 1/3rd of their paycheck into savings in order to have a chance to retire well? I'm sure they will get right on that sound financial advice.

Re: Man Built a $188M Fortune Investing in Stocks Then Donated It to Charity

#147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

something like 60% of people can’t reach 1 million let alone 2, given their position in the lifetime income distribution. i’d be all for changing policies with the sole focus of giving everyone the opportunity, but not the right, to reach $2 million in wealth by retirement age. that would require some wealth redistribution to start, and radical shifts in how we allocate income. since that disfavors the already wealth…

I don't want to be too combative because you do have a point that, especially with kids, its hard to not live paycheck to paycheck. But if you start early all you have to do is bust your butt and live cheaply for a couple of years and wait for compound returns to kick in. Back of the hand says that if you invest 10,000/yr from 20 to 30 you'll have saved ~$100,000. And then 7% and with the rule of 72 is then: 30: 100,…

don't wanna be overly combative either, and i didn't double-check the math, but that's an awful lot of constraints and assumptions built into that docket.

one i'll question immediately is 12% returns, which is quite high given historical means and a figure you'd expect a reversion to sooner rather than later. you'd also need to have a brokerage/retirement account of some sort and have enough financial literacy to know to invest in the s&p vs the thousands of other options available. you'd also have to be lucky enough not to hit a severe recession/depression too early or at another inopportune time in your life, like while having a serious medical condition.

with that said, yes, you can totally live off of $2000/mo and save $1000/mo (i've done it for a short time) if those stars do line up (like being young, having no kids, and finding $400/mo rent) for some number of months, but i'm not sure it's feasible longer term for most people most of the time. circumstances and people change.

Re: Man Built a $188M Fortune Investing in Stocks Then Donated It to Charity

#148
post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Wealth is accumulated through habits" is a great story to tell people but it seems very often to be complete BS. I see a lot of these. One of my favorite examples is https://www.businessinsider.com/how-ebony-horton-paid-off-22... . "How one 31-year-old paid off $220,000 in student loans in 3 years" is the exciting title. You have to get to paragraph #7 to learn "work at your parent's charity" is one of the techniq…

That sounds tough. Everybody else just voted Democrat.

That sounds dumb.

Re: Man Built a $188M Fortune Investing in Stocks Then Donated It to Charity

#149
post #92
post #88

Here’s a guy who saved his money and invested it and made a huge fortune from an inherited fortune, all so he could give it away. The response - “ugh what an a-hole, who inherited his wealth”. I’m so sick of hacker news. I mean if you were defending someone who squandered their opportunities but the bias was in the system, I applaud that defense. We should be very aware that some people are screwed and oppressed. But…

The religion analogy is great, because that's what this is. Wealth, privilege is now original sin for a lot of people. There is no real way to get out of it. See here. Even giving it away means you stay guilty. Never mind the guy didn't even spend his money on anything. Just having it is sin. I think the only way you can get rid of this original sin is by donating to climate change efforts or BLM or something similar…

Not a fan of grabbing into the 'ole anti-communist propaganda box. I'm not saying communism is a great ideology, I'm saying that we are far from bolshevism, and calling people that have gotten used to fighting privilege and have thus become ideological 'bolsheviks' is unoriginal and boring. I do think that if you were born with privilege, you don't lose it. Can't undo the past. So yes, even if you give your money away, you are still the 'inheritor of privilege'. It's not about trying to lose that title, it's about what you do with the title. If you donate it all, that's great! But gotta acknowledge where it came from, and not pretend like it was only "habits and hard work". Face the fact that you are privileged, it's not shameful. Another Comment in this thread already explained that it's not about this guy in particular, but the people who pretend like privilege is not a thing.

TLDR: No matter how much you donate, don't deny your privilege if you don't want to be called out for it.

Re: Man Built a $188M Fortune Investing in Stocks Then Donated It to Charity

#150
post #52
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those risks are risks because they very often don't pan out. The folks that "make it" get to deliver clever speeches about how self-made they are and what a nice pair of bootstraps they used to get where they are today. What's left out of those stories is how many folks tried the same thing and failed. If all it took was the audacity to take a step others are not taking then it wouldn't be a risk in the first place,…

Luck is still subjective. A good investor does not feel like he is gambling. He just knows industries well enough to make educated guesses that are likely to happen. Someone else could put up the same amount of money because he overheard a tip in a bathroom. In my opinion, that person is gambling. But really its all the same and it's all subjective. The gambler was lucky, the investor was smart, who cares they both w…

You're essentially not engaging with my comment at all, just repeating what you said before. I don't find that a compelling way to have a conversation.
Post reply on HN