Rants and WTF are you talking about and Coronavirus!

[Pistons]

Take a look at France and see what's happens when you implement lockdowns.

Unemployment up, national debt way up, bankruptcies up, mental health problems up and COVID-19 related deaths way up.

That's what we call an epic failure.

I can't believe that some idiots want the Indians to starve to death.

Most central banks around the world have already increased the money supply in advance of massive UBI checks in February, March and April. Next week Biden will be the first to usher it in in the USA. Not like that guy is anything more than a puppet. He can't even walk up stairs. I guess in Scandinavia we've had some sort of that for awhile. But it will be different with UBI. Most central banks are hiding their M1, M2 etc figures now. But you can find US and Japanese figures for example. Expect the same in France and India. And then it will calm down. Food production and logistics can easily be automated.

[Pistons]

And the Brazilian?

First analyzed by Mursenary and BigB in their high tech offices on top of the World Trade Center.

[Pistons]

Take a look at what is happening in India and see what happens when you let the number of cases go up uncontrollably.

As was expected?

They tried restrictions in India at the start of this. But result was pretty much that more people died due to the restrictions than from covid. Just have a look at how crowded public transport is in India! People died walking 400 miles back to their village due to starvation because the busses weren't allowed to run. And they needed food because there were no basic income checks.

[Mursenary]

UK, south African and Brazilian were not born in continental Europe, when they did spread elsewhere before spreading and killing in our continent. And not sure vaccines are now efficient versus these mutants.

No one here can know this. Just like Rocky mentioned, the variants are only named after the locale from which they were discovered. Links to adequate efficacy of vaccines to those variants (although perhaps less efficacious) have already been pasted despite the poster's repeated claims suggesting otherwise.

[Mursenary]

GT is reopening 19 May.

So Swiss clubs already open. Austria in May. Are clubs in Spain already open? Czech? We're waiting on you Germany!

Are all you other vaccinated people enjoying that new third testicle? Maybe it's just a blood clot growing in my groin.

[Mursenary]

RE: Not having first world habits and ability to delay instant gratification. This type of financial discipline can also be deployed by immigrants to save money for their luxury purchases. Eat nothing but instant noodles and have six roommates, then purchase the latest iPhone, or luxury watch, purse, used-BMW. So it can be both extremes of frugal and frivolous. Although this would usually be immigrants (aged 20-40) who still crave social status. Senior citizen immigrants stop caring at some point.

Good point, some immigrant cultures can be very materialistic also. But just like black American culture, buying $150 Jordans is a drop in the bucket compared the cost of $2000 per month for putting your kid in the fancy day care.

Point is, immigrants still find a way to "flex" back home. In the old days, that was just building a big house near all the shacks. Now it is via social media.

Funny how the reverse flex can be seen today with the millennial's minimalist, travel lifestyle Instagram account.

Migrant workers who work in a rich country and send money back home are probably the ultimate money-saving hack. Since they are transient it makes no sense to accumulate material possessions. So they can live in a high-wage city, then share cramped quarters with their countrymen to offset the high-rent. Food can also be purchased in bulk to cut costs. Just make a trip to Frankfurt main station and you can see this immigrant communal mindset at work: old Sprinter vans with Romanian license plates, workers trying to get a ride back home or to their next job location in Western Europe, people picking up sending packages. The difficulty for the migrant is just figuring out how to safely and cheaply get their cash back home.

Migrants take that shit to a whole other level. Then again, I've recently spent a week sleeping in a Korean spa with a sleep room for $30 per day rather than opting for a $100/ night hotel room. #ContractWorkerLife.

[Mursenary]

"Caucasians at $1 M, I could see living frugally. Seems like there are enough millennial (mostly Caucasians) attempting this for it to be classified as a movement. " -Yes, but they are not there yet, are they? When they get to that level and still live frugally, we can have a discussion. Even as they reach half that level, their temptations will kick in and mindset will change. "Ah, I have $500 K in the bank, let me buy this or that" -- it starts with small purchases, feels good, they rationalize it and before you know it new habits are formed.

I'm a millennial. I have that much in the bank (well, not in cash just sitting and depreciating). I still live pretty frugal. Not van-life but a modest sub $200 K house in a blue collar neighborhood in a southern city with a car worth less than $10 K.

Small sample size, but two of the three people involved in this sub-thread meet these conditions yet live very frugal. You know anything about that yourself McA? How much is your rent again? Cheap bastard, LOL.

I think this string of posts where things like lawn maintenance expense is deemed anything more than a luxury just reinforces my opinion regarding the financial priorities of various socio-economic demographics. I'm not even saying that American-born people need to live like frugal immigrants. I'm just saying that the opportunities Americans are afforded makes it pretty easy for people with non-American lifestyle expectations to make a comfortable life for themselves. You don't have to live off of $15 K, that's just an old world mindset of previous generations, but their habits are passed on to their children and some frugality remains instinctual. I suspect that is one reason why many native-born Americans never become financially secure. Without the third world thirst but instilled with first world spending norms and expectations, they spend on things deemed necessities when to the really impoverished populations, those are still luxuries.

[McAdonis]

These examples get played up in the media because they are not common and sound exotic. Many millennials are actually not in a super great situation. Many of them came into working age population in the 2008-12 time frame and did not find proper first jobs and there is a ton of research that shows that if you are unlucky to come into employee pool in a bad year, it does set you back. Of course there will be exceptions but that is the general trend.

Yes, but they are not there yet, are they? When they get to that level and still live frugally, we can have a discussion. Even as they reach half that level, their temptations will kick in and mindset will change. "Ah, I have $500 K in the bank, let me buy this or that" -- it starts with small purchases, feels good, they rationalize it and before you know it new habits are formed.

Yes, due to the misfortune of being born at the wrong time, many millenials will not have reached their $1 M retirement target But working towards that target trains their "saving" muscle. And gives them an idea of what they can comfortably live on without feeling deprived. I believe the formula is to save at least 50 percent of their pre-tax income per year. So a married couple making a combined $200 K, should aim to save $100 K per year, which means trying to live on $45 K per year. Ultimately, they need to readjust to find a living standard that is sustainable over the long run: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jrose/2...-all-50-states.

It might take them 15-20 years to hit their retirement number. That is 15-20 years of practicing a minimalist lifestyle, and I suspect by that time those money-saving habits will have become second nature, and continuing the minimalist lifestyle even after they hit their retirement number should not be an issue. Ofc, some people will do FIRE for three years, and then return to consumerism. But that will happen with any lifestyle change. To me it is sort of like saying a large portion of obese people who diet, always gain 100 percent of their weight back. It's hard to predict what will change in 15-20 years: salary stagnation, stock market, higher taxes, inflation. Like any financial plan, the couple practicing FIRE would need to continually reassess.

[Mursenary]

Keeping the personal aspect of mother aside;

The rest of the items on my list: if someone already had millions, they would not live that frugal lifestyle, unless extremely miserly.

Low six figures as unmarried or even $200 K as a married couple with possibly one or two kids living normally will not cut it to become a millionaire. Here millionaire is someone who thinks they are reasonably wealthy, not about strictly having one million

BTW, lawn maintenance, fertilizer, pool maintenance etc are not luxuries. If you buy a decent house, they come with it and then unless you maintain them well, your house value degrades fast; if your lawn has weed and spreads to your neighbor's, he will pick a fight.

A woman who is making very nice money on her own will not put up w / that; it is not just keeping up w / Joneses, more a natural evolution of thinking and circumstances. You can't make these statements unless you have experienced the situation. .

That mother example was not to be personal. It is just an example of numbers I know directly. There are likely hundreds of thousands of second generation immigrants who have first generation parents with much the same expense sheet.

No one is saying 1 million is wealthy. It is just a milestone point. Again, this conversation started with immigrants coming over to the US. And for someone whose family had nothing, $1 million is a big milestone that certainly signals that you are not living in poverty. That's all.

Yes living that frugal sounds miserable to you and I, but that's because we grew up with certain expectations. But we are talking about people who grew up shitting outside where cleaning your ass means spraying it with a garden hose. Hell that's how I cleaned my ass up til the age of 6. Different expectations for people from different backgrounds.

To understand, you have to change the lens in which you view life. Regarding people immigrating here to make 7 figures and old first generation retirees, why are we even talking about dating upper middle class white women and home property values? Pulling upper middle class women is not the top concern for immigrants. Home depreciation is not either. Hell, we had a lawn that was 50/50 dirt and grass. There were no trimming of hedges, just a chain linked fence keeping the neighbor's pit bull from chomping on a kid's neck. First gen immigrants are not exactly dating McKaylas and Britneys with Gucci sunglasses and Patagonia vests. Hell, even if he spent the cash, social class intangibles makes that not likely anyway.

As for 200 K having to live frugal to get to millions, that's not even necessary. Literally, a 30 year old married couple making 200 K annually only needs to save 10% per year invested at a modest 7% annual return, that alone is $2,600,000 by the time they are 65. And that's not factoring any rise in income whatsoever. That's millions by saving only 10%.

Are you saying that 10% savings is too much to ask for the 200 K couple? Does that even require frugality? If you are saying it does, that's quite a truckload of bull-fertilizer.

[Pessimist]

FIRE: Financial Independence, Retire Early.

There's a growing movement toward this mindset comprised by many strategies. Obviously you would have to shed expectations of owning a pool, having a lawn guy, a house cleaner, or living in a Karen-operated HOA community. Taking on a mortgage for a 3000 sq foot home would probably be a bad idea. Anything meant to Keep Up with Karen Jones would be prohibited.

Basically the point is to save, save, save, save until you reach a modest threshold principal for long term investing. Say when you reach something very doable like $150-200 K at a younger age, say by your early thirties. At that point, you can leave the "rat race," let your investment grow conservatively over the next two decades or so. Meanwhile, you live a minimalist life, earning only what you need to fund that lifestyle. No more looking to advancing your career, no more working towards raises, but also not taking on debt that traps you into payments which requires a higher income..

Anything is *possible*, especially when talking at the individual level. At the population level stratified by groups, changes are more glacial.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/14/the-...an-family.html

As CNBC says:

"And here's the median net worth of USA Families based on the age of the head of household:

Age 35 or younger: $11,100.

Age 35-44: $59,800.

Age 45-54: $124,200.

Age 55-64: $187,300.

Age 65-74: $224,100.

Age 75 or older: $264, 800."

Another link:

https://www.stlouisfed.org/~/media/F...rman-paper.pdf

This paper is a bit old but the data presented in various tables shows (a) married households and married households w / children tend to be 3 to 5 times richer than households headed by unmarried / singles. Home ownership follows a similar pattern.

All these media stories about FIRE etc feel good. In reality, when observing data accumulated over decades, you will see otherwise.

Anything is *possible*, especially when talking at the individual level. At the population level stratified by groups, changes are more glacial.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/14/the-...an-family.html

As CNBC says:

"And here's the median net worth of USA Families based on the age of the head of household:

Age 35 or younger: $11,100.

Age 35-44: $59,800.

Age 45-54: $124,200.

Age 55-64: $187,300.

Age 65-74: $224,100.

Age 75 or older: $264, 800."

Another link:

https://www.stlouisfed.org/~/media/F...rman-paper.pdf

This paper is a bit old but the data presented in various tables shows (a) married households and married households w / children tend to be 3 to 5 times richer than households headed by unmarried / singles. Home ownership follows a similar pattern.

All these media stories about FIRE etc feel good. In reality, when observing data accumulated over decades, you will see otherwise.

Again, you can present exceptions, say "I am single, never married, I have $10 M" - fine. Good for you. But at a group level, trends are very obvious.

I have not done the research, I am not a social scientist, I can't say why numbers showcase the above trends. Perhaps singles lose motivation to keep making huge amounts of money over time, and seek ways to splurge and have fun. Having a family responsibility is a powerful motivation to cut down on personal fun and splurging and provide for others, and you tend to work more, maximize income and savings? Work longer?

And BTW, a million dollar house may look like splurging to you but it is actually a wealth transfer from the government to the rich through a large tax break. Likewise, 401 K limits keep going up every year another $500 or $1000 and that is a big break to the wealthier strata. Many people in the sub $100 K struggle to maximize their contributions, far from it.

And while you think from the perspective of a single man, which is appropriate for this forum, the average person in the country is more like married, or divorced (with alimony and child payment responsibilities). So, all those #s you present need to account for a higher level of expense.

You can present exceptions, say "I am single, never married, I have $10 M" - fine. Good for you. But at a group level, trends are very obvious.

I am not a social scientist, I can't say why numbers showcase the above trends. Perhaps singles lose motivation to keep making huge amounts of money over time, and seek ways to splurge and have fun. Having a family responsibility is a powerful motivation to cut down on personal spend / splurging and provide for others; you tend to work more, maximize income and savings? Work longer?

And BTW, a million dollar house may look like splurging to you but it is actually a wealth transfer from the government to the wealthy through a tax break for mortgage interest. Likewise, 401 K limits keep going up every year another $500 or $1000 and that is a big break to the wealthier strata. Many people in the sub $100 K struggle to maximize their contributions, far from it. Fidelity publishes median account balances and you can see that. It is also likely the larger company 401 K matches accrue to those who are already wealthy.

And while you think from the perspective of a single man which is appropriate for this forum, the average person in the country is more likely married or divorced (with support and child payment responsibilities). So, all those #s you present need to account for a higher level of expense.

The examples you present sound Utopian: very few work diligently to accumulate $200 K by the age of 32, leave it serenely in an investment account untouched till it grows to $2 M and then retire to a low cost location. In between life happens, unexpected expenses happen, job losses happen, other crap happens and they raid the $200 K piggy bank vowing to put it back as soon as they make the money back.

If it was so easy to accumulate wealth, all the data tables would be saying so and not such sorry net worth numbers at the median for every age group.

[ShooBree]

Take a look at what is happening in India and see what happens when you let the number of cases go up uncontrollably.

Take a look at France and see what's happens when you implement lockdowns.

Unemployment up, national debt way up, bankruptcies up, mental health problems up and COVID-19 related deaths way up.

That's what we call an epic failure.

I can't believe that some idiots want the Indians to starve to death.

[Mursenary]

Caucasians at $1 M, I could see living frugally. Seems like there are enough millennial (mostly Caucasians) attempting this for it to be classified as a movement. Objective for many is to save $1 million or 30 times their yearly expenses, so let's say $33 K depending on desired lifestyle:

I have never been but I imagine places like Bali have sizable population of Caucasian millennials from rich countries trying to retire early. Here is a attractive, late 20's, early 30's, solo Caucasian female embracing a minimalist lifestyle as a van-lifer: https://youtu.be/ryPBLk90xEQ.

FIRE: Financial Independence, Retire Early.

There's a growing movement toward this mindset comprised by many strategies. Obviously you would have to shed expectations of owning a pool, having a lawn guy, a house cleaner, or living in a Karen-operated HOA community. Taking on a mortgage for a 3000 sq foot home would probably be a bad idea. Anything meant to Keep Up with Karen Jones would be prohibited.

Basically the point is to save, save, save, save until you reach a modest threshold principal for long term investing. Say when you reach something very doable like $150-200 K at a younger age, say by your early thirties. At that point, you can leave the "rat race," let your investment grow conservatively over the next two decades or so. Meanwhile, you live a minimalist life, earning only what you need to fund that lifestyle. No more looking to advancing your career, no more working towards raises, but also not taking on debt that traps you into payments which requires a higher income. The point is to avoid higher ticket items and expenses that traps you into the perpetual luxury item-monthly payment cycle. You spend on what truly makes you happy, for me $20 K per year on hookers actually makes me happy. $4 K per month on mortgage / tax payments on a giant home would bring no more happiness than a modest $1500/ mo mortgage on a 1800 sq foot home. That 8 year old luxury sedan still looks and runs great. Purchasing a $100 K AMG does not provide any more happiness. If those high ticket items pull more women, are those the high maintenance women that I want?

End goal is once your first investment reaches an acceptable amount, then you live off of the dividends or growth of your investments. And like McA mentions, retirement does not have to be in an expensive western country. If in 25 years, your now $ 2 million retirement balance pays a 5% dividend of 100 K per year, imagine the live that affords you if spending your golden years in Belize or Indonesia.

[Sirioja]

And the Brazilian?

UK, south African and Brazilian were not born in continental Europe, when they did spread elsewhere before spreading and killing in our continent. And not sure vaccines are now efficient versus these mutants.

[Pessimist]

Caucasians at $1 M, I could see living frugally. Seems like there are enough millennial (mostly Caucasians) attempting this for it to be classified as a movement. Objective for many is to save $1 million or 30 times their yearly expenses, so let's say $33 K depending on desired lifestyle:

I have never been but I imagine places like Bali have sizable population of Caucasian millennials from rich countries trying to retire early. Here is a attractive, late 20's, early 30's, solo Caucasian female embracing a minimalist lifestyle as a van-lifer: https://youtu.be/ryPBLk90xEQ.

These examples get played up in the media because they are not common and sound exotic. Many millennials are actually not in a super great situation. Many of them came into working age population in the 2008-12 time frame and did not find proper first jobs and there is a ton of research that shows that if you are unlucky to come into employee pool in a bad year, it does set you back. Of course there will be exceptions but that is the general trend.

Also, millennials chose to rent and not buy because they saw what happened with housing debacle; they also did not have as much trust in stocks as prior generations did. So, they did not benefit from the booming market of last decade, as much as they could have.

"Caucasians at $1 M, I could see living frugally. Seems like there are enough millennial (mostly Caucasians) attempting this for it to be classified as a movement. " -Yes, but they are not there yet, are they? When they get to that level and still live frugally, we can have a discussion. Even as they reach half that level, their temptations will kick in and mindset will change. "Ah, I have $500 K in the bank, let me buy this or that" -- it starts with small purchases, feels good, they rationalize it and before you know it new habits are formed.

[Pessimist]

The Indian guy was not living that frugally. He was just an example of cultural savings norms. The $15 K cost of living, I'm picturing first gen senior citizen immigrants. You had it right when you said "live for your kids. " That's the mindset of many first generation immigrants.

Your views come from a white collar American with kids. HOA, Private school, manicured lawns, etc. Those are not concerns of the poor working class, much less poor immigrants. That's the point of the whole conversation, different standards and habits if you grow up with different expectations.

Pool maintenance? First Gen Immigrant: You have pool? We buy inflatable pool from WalMart.

Fertilize manicured lawns? First Gen Immigrant: Dog shit on yard for free. Why you try to impress neighbor Karen?

Vacation? First Gen Immigrant: We drive 6 hour to cousin house in Florida.

Private school? First Gen Immigrant: Aye yah, so stupid, public school free, study harder.

Example finances of a senior citizen immigrant living in the American south:

No mortgage, no car payments, insurance via Medicaid..

Keeping the personal aspect of mother aside; yes, private schools are and can be a wasteful expense, and that costs me a boatload; my wife and I came through public schools. Probably a mistake but we are doing this.

The rest of the items on my list: if someone already had millions, they would not live that frugal lifestyle, unless extremely miserly. Low six figures as unmarried or even $200 K as a married couple with possibly one or two kids living normally will not cut it to become a millionaire. Here millionaire is someone who thinks they are reasonably wealthy, not about strictly having one million which in most urban and semi urban settings in the US no longer qualifies as any real wealth. Yes, making $200 K as a couple, living a frugal life, can accumulate a million by the time they are in 60's if they stay disciplined.

Taxes alone subtract so much. If you did not buy a reasonable sized house and don't have deduction benefit, what else helps? Even w / 2 kids and just the standard deductions, might end up paying a good chunk to the tax man, especially if you also have a high state tax.

BTW, lawn maintenance, fertilizer, pool maintenance etc are not luxuries. If you buy a decent house, they come with it and then unless you maintain them well, your house value degrades fast; if your lawn has weed and spreads to your neighbor's, he will pick a fight. In my neighborhood, we do have a fair number of owners that do their own thing. They may be saving money, have more time, or enjoy doing it. I don't and I pay. But that work has to be done by you or some paid worker. You could live in a condo but that goes back to my point about if you and your spouse make decent money, wanting to live so frugally is not a natural instinct. Even if one of the two is inclined that way, the other has to agree which rarely happens. A woman who is making very nice money on her own will not put up w / that; it is not just keeping up w / Joneses, more a natural evolution of thinking and circumstances. You can't make these statements unless you have experienced the situation. Akin to some old lady that never had much of a sex drive claiming that mongering is unnecessary because no person needs this much sex.