Trading Places is one of my favorite movies of all time and it is even a little bit of a Christmassy movie.
My question is not about the climactic scene at the end involving orange juice-- that is covered in plenty of places on the internet.
My question is about the remark that hooker Ophelia (Jamie Lee Curtis) makes to Dan Aykroyd before the big push at the end. She gives Dan her nest egg to invest in the scheme that the two boys have come up with. She says, as near as I can remember, “I’ve saved 42 grand and it’s in T-bills earning interest. I figure I have three more years on my back and then I can retire.”
The movie came out in 1983, but even in the years of double digit inflation, how on earth would even twice this much money be enough to retire on?
One of my favorites also. When I watched it back in the day, I had no concept of cost of living; 40K seemed like a ton to me and I didn’t give it another thought( btw, I think she delivers those lines I near the beginning of the film, when she first takes Louie home with her).
When I’ve watched it in recent years, I’ve wondered the same thing as @ThelmaLou.
She does say she’ll work for three more years, and she’ll still be earning interest. Still probably not a realistical retirement plan.
I suspect that the line is meant to convey that Ophelia isn’t “just” a hooker – she’s got brains, financial savvy, and a plan for her future.
But, as noted here, and in the old thread, even given high interest rates back in the early '80s, it’s not a sum that would, in any way, lead to a realistic actual “retirement” (and certainly not for a woman who’s only in her 20s).
Either it’s just a poor choice of a number on the part of the screenwriter, or we could (charitably) interpret “I can retire” as “I can retire from being a prostitute, and do something else, using my savings as a starting point.”
She was 25 in 83. Maybe she made that money in three years. So today that would be worth 113,000. And lets say she can double that in three years. So by todays standards thats 226,000 total and the interest earned bumps it up to…lets say…250,000 accruing.
Retire? No. But not too shabby for a 28 year old with no debt.
As noted in the other thread, maybe she made that $42K in three months. Pulling in another $500K over the next three years plus interest is enough for a modest retirement.
Well, what was the going rate for those, uh, services in 1983, and how many, uh, customers would a proprietor of said services engage with per month in that particular city? She may have been on-pace for an early and comfortable retirement - the prototypical FIRE lifestyle.
Maybe she was just planning to retire from ‘the trade’. Set herself up in a shop or something. Put a down payment on a house. I doubt, in her 20s, she was planning to give up life and start gardening.
It’s Hollywood. The script line is not well thought out. Or maybe $42K meant something symbolic to the script writer. When she propositions Louie she demands 5 figures, “I’m talkin’ about a business proposition, Louis. I help you get yourself back on your feet and you pay me, in cash, five figures. That’s the deal and it’s not subject to negotiation. Understood?”
5 figures ain’t that much.
When I think of Ophelia, that’s not the first thing I remember about her.
