20 bucks a day? My parents used to be thrilled to have 20 bucks to TREAT (this used to be a big thing for us) the family to McDonalds. Sinful is pretty simple minded if he/she thinks it is feasible for the poor to put aside 20 bucks a day.
‘Why won’t they just eat cake?’ kinda thing.
Sinful
Let it be noted again that your response in the other thread you left would be appreciated. That is all on that matter.
Y’know what I choose not to save $20 a day. I could. I could not rent movies, I could eat Ramen much more often. I could cancel my vacation. Hell, I could walk the forty miles back and forth to work. I choose to live a balanced life that includes spending and saving. And in my own way that makes me a patriot.
Take a look at Japan. They have suffered fifteen years of economic misery and a higher than desirable savings rate is a major contributor to those problems. In a capitalist economy spending makes the world go round. So maybe you need to concern yourself a little less with your own moral superiority. We all make choices. If I were you I might choose to become better acquainted with the basics of economics.
Being only eighteen I don’t have a lot of experience but…
Isn’t there a happy medium? I have yet to find this as I spend way more then I should. I think I’m gonna go get the book from the library…
Ppl should still be able to save and spend things one entertainment if they budget right.
For those who haven’t checked out the other thread (mske gave a link above), it seems that our friend Sinful is developing a habit of starting GD threads filled with little more than opinionated rantings, and then refusing to return and defend his/her position in the face of others’ criticisms.
$20 a day!
Do you have any idea what the average wage is in the United States? Around $40K. Do you know how diffiuclt it is to put away over $7,000 a year on that sort of income.
And that’s not even taking into account all the people who live on much less than that.
Like some others in this thread, i’m of the opinion that our society could do with curbing some of its conspicuous consumption, but it’s not exactly the poor who are most responsible for buying useless crap. And, as some others have pointed out, the buying of consumable goods is one of the things that keeps the economy going. Basically, Sinful’s brilliant solution to poverty is that the poor should learn to save money that they don’t have, by not spending that non-existent cash on expensive things they can’t afford. What a genius.
This reminds me of A Tree Grows in Brooklyn. When Katie Nolan gives birth to Francie, her mother tells her to make a bank out of an old tin can and every day stick in five cents. And five cents was a lot of money to a poor family in Brooklyn of 1901. But there were ways to scrimp and save and maybe save money. Anyway, her mother tells her to save, so that when she gets fifty dollars, she can buy a spot of land.
She did it by working as a janitress in exchange for living rent free. They did without food and coal and sometime sat in cold, dark rooms to save money.
Well-guess what? The Nolan family never reached that fifty dollar goal. Their savings were wiped out when Johnny Nolan dies, and they have to take all of the money from the bank-about nineteen dollars-to pay for the funeral.
What’s my point? Sometimes in life, no matter how hard you try to save, something comes along and bites you on the ass.
Sometimes that money is wiped out for whatever reason.
Oh, hell,
Look, even sven, I was out of line in making remarks about your personal financial situation. I should not be getting personal on the SDMB, and certainly not in GD. I’m sorry.
I still disagree with the idea that all rich people got that way thru luck, but I should not be pointing fingers at you personally.
I withdraw that part of my post with my apologies for posting it.
Regards,
Shodan
From my full time job, I have $50 a week to live on. I’d be hard pressed to find $20 a week to invest.
If I wasn’t willing to baby-sit, clean houses, help people move, etc. etc. for cash, I wouldn’t have any money for “instant gratification.” I have “gratified” myself into a monster CD collection, which is also a damn good investment.
If you try, you might,
if you don’t, you won’t.
When I look at winners what I see above everything else is hard work and persistence, even more than luck, intelligence etc. And losers are mainly the one who don’t try hard. That’s the general rule.
People who blame everything on outside circumstances are losers. Winners work hard to win.
Yes, you can work hard and not make it, just like you can not smoke and get lung cancer, but you are not favoring the odds.
It reminds me of that joke where a guy keeps asking God to win the lottery and one day God, exasperated, tells him: “hey, help me out a bit here: won’t you BUY A LOTTERY TICKET?”
Maybe people have a hard time saving $20 per day, but what about $10? Or $5? Or even forgoing that Starbucks coffee in the morning for $1.63 and putting THAT away?
In the recession of the early 90’s, I was unemployed. I was living on unemployment, scrounging to pay for everything, and I was able to do it, but it was hard. I would not want to do it again. Yes, you should save, but you also need to enjoy your life. People can be multi-millionaires but die suddenly (God forbid). What good is that money then?
I like the rule of thumb to save 3 - 6 months living expenses, but that’s really hard to do. If you have direct deposit, try setting up an account at an out of state bank, without an ATM card. Send 1% or whatever you can to that account. At the very least, you get into the habit of saving, and you learn how to sacrifice in order to have something later on.
Indeed, some people can’t do even that, no question.
Well, I’m a saver myself – within reason – and I don’t have too many luxuries in my life except travel, but I don’t see the point of becoming a millionaire at the price of putting your life on hold for 37 years. What is the money for in that case?
Besides, if you think too much about money and not enough about living life, it corrodes your soul to the point where you can’t enjoy anything.
First of all, the Rich Dad, Poor Dad Millonare Next Door books are bullshit. As others have pointed out, what’s the point of squirling away all your money so you can be a millionare 40 years from now when a million dollars is worth the same as $200,000 today (look up Time Value of Money if you need it explained)?
Rich people don’t get rich by SAVING money. They get rich by EARNING more money than poor people. Poor people are poor because they don’t have jobs that afford them the ability to save money. Combine a low income with trying to keep up with the Jone’s and you end up with a lot of people living paycheck to paycheck.
**You should be, people have nothing valuable to contribute to society until they’re 40 
** That’s pretty cheap for a complex that pays utilities. Phone costs (if applicable) split between you and the roommate, I presume?
** Are these just car payments? You can’t forget gas, as well as routine maintenance (the more technically inclined can save a fortune by performing much of it themselves) as well as an allocation for more serious repairs. A car accident, even with insurance, can also be devastating.
** Hang on a sec here. You’re young, so maybe you can get away without health insurance for a little while. What happens if you break your leg? Have you got the cash to cover all of the expenses entirely?
** Pretty cheap. Is this just state-mandated liability insurance?
** At $21,000/year, they’re certainly not wealthy but the current poverty threshold for a household of two with no dependent children is $12,047. It was lower during whatever time frame you’re talking about.
** If all Sinful is pointing out is that saving money is a good idea, fine and dandy. While he/she’s at it, why not create a great debate thread about how children ought not take candy from strangers? The OP, as near as I can tell, is trying to solve the problem of poverty, and the solution seems to be “save money you don’t have, it’s easy 'cause I’m in college and can save 80% of my income.” Most of the respondent’s points are that this solution is, well, ignorant.
Yeah, “if.” My points are thus:
1.) Saving money and investing it in nice, sound income-generating investments is certainly a good idea, and about as controversial as advocating people get more exercise.
2.) It don’t really solve poverty issues, not here and certainly not in countries where poverty is an issue of life and death. At the risk of creating a true scotsman, if your income is high enough, and your expenses low enough, to save a significant portion of your income, you’re not quite what I’d call in poverty. If you do have the ability to save a decent portion of you’re income, and you’re still what most would call “poor” and you’re blowing it on DVD players and new rims for your car, you’re a fool.
Kiyosaki talks about buying a Porshe and his wife buying a Mercedes.
He claims to be teaching accounting.
He doesn’t say anything about depreciation of automobiles.
If you check SYLVIA PORTERS MONEY BOOK she talks about depreciation 5 times. 4 times she mentions depreciation of automobiles.
Accounting is 700 year old 5th grade arithmatic but it is not mandatory in schools. What good i 4 years of English literature?
Do a search on “Economic Wargames”
Dal Timgar
sailor, of course we should TRY. But the OP thinks that it’s a given that it’s going to make us millionaires.
I try to save, my parents do, my friends do, etc.
I’m just pointing out that people are not poor because they don’t have a little nest egg built away somewhere.
IMO that is the issue at the heart of the OP
Just to echo things that have already been said in this thread… rich people are rich because they spend money. Having money in the bank, and eating ramen noodles off of Corelware, is not being rich. If one has disposable income, one should make the most of it. In America at least, there is a lifestyle to fit every income–from the dry beans and ramen noodles lifestyle, to the filet mignon and gold jewelry one. You’ve got to understand which lifestyle your income supports.
Thats why people don’t do it. Apparently an hour of research is too much hard work for them. I spend 2 hours a day researching the property market, talking to other investors, asking older investors for advice, and learning to negotiate. Is that so much work?
Don’t forget that my estimation about the millionaire thing was simply what would happen if you put your money into a property and NEVER save any money again. Basically, if you put away $20 every day into a property fund, you will get a million IN ADDITION to whatever you’ve already spent.
However, if you actively spend your savings on accumulating more investments, it builds up. Say you earn $10,000 a year from a property. What if you used that $10,000 to finance another property? You’d have 2 properties, and double the income!
Ok, its a bit simplistic. However, my point is that ANYONE can be well off simply by not spending their money on useless crap. Up to 70% of your income can be saved and put into investment; why not enjoy life when you’re 30, and not have to bust your ass off at 35?
No, it’s not simplistic to suggest someone save 70% of their income when 90% or more of their income is needed - not wanted, but needed - for bare essentials. Not simplistic at all. Stupid. Ignorant. Idiotic. Blind. Not simplistic.
“Save money and you’ll live well,” is what you’re arguing? This isn’t a great debate. A mod should close this topic.