LOL no . Student loans made sure this would never happen. If I hadn't had student loans, then absolutely yes.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
"By 35, You Should Have Double Your Salary Saved" - Do You?
- Thread starter BWoog
- Start date
I want bonus points for guessing OP there.
Yes, I have total net worth (paid-off house, cash, 401(k), 529s, investment account) probably 6-7x salary, I'm 40.
Not calling you out specifically, but just speaking generally, I think the idea of working hard to save money for a house down payment just to have to work hard to pay it off for 30 years (until you're probably 55-70 years old) feels like such a broken system and ideology. I wish there was a better way to make these goals achievable without a lifetime of debt and stress.
Well you shouldn't be stressed about the work and debt most of the time for starters.
I agree. However, there are plenty of polls/surveys showing that the majority of people are stressed not only about the work, but the debt they put themselves in (whether it's credit card, student loan, mortgage, or some other form of debt).
I agree about debt in general but mortgages are different from the other credit you listed. They are almost invariably offset by an asset that exceeds it in value, so even if you can't pay it you can liquidate without being ruined. You also increase your equity in an asset that should increase in value over most time periods. Credit card debt is terrible by comparison. Of course people can and have gotten in trouble with mortgages but it's less purely destructive.
All my money is in the house that I own/mortgage.
In my savings account I have £160, I am exactly 35 years old, currently not working a full time job either due to moving country for my wifes career.
In my savings account I have £160, I am exactly 35 years old, currently not working a full time job either due to moving country for my wifes career.
The house is an asset that will increase in value though.
By the time you're 55, you could choose to sell, downsize, and retire with your superannuation + savings + profit you made on the house.
You could always use the equity on the house to buy an investment, rent that out and keep repeating that too.
31 and nope. Month to month and it will just be much harder.
ed: with Mortage dropping soon. At that is for a flat...
ed: with Mortage dropping soon. At that is for a flat...
Last edited:
I'm not convinced that you really make much profit based on the, what, 3-8% annual home price increase? Even that 8% is optimistic I believe after the 2008-2009 correction. By the time you take out taxes on the sale, annual upkeep, annual real estate taxes, inflation, and the opportunity cost of not putting your money elsewhere, there's almost no way that you are doing more than breaking even. Now, there's something to be said for the value you gain by owning a home, but I don't think it's realistic anymore to think of home purchases as an asset that increase in value in any significant way. Breaking even is probably what you're looking at.
100% correct! On top of that, the new tax legislation passed means most people won't specifically benefit from a mortgage interest deduction any more since the standard deduction was increased so much. A house is a place to live and store your stuff; it's not a vehicle for retirement savings. And considering that very few people work for the same company their entire career, there is value in having the flexibility that comes with renting instead.
Yeah, I think a lot depends on where the place is, and what you're using it for.
My grandparents had a second home in Naples, FL; nice 3 BR condo. Got it for about $250k about 20 years ago. My grandmother sold it this year for $500k. Now, the place was completely paid off, so you figure a $250k profit. But, not really. You have to take out realtor fees, taxes on the gain, interest that they paid on the mortgage when they were still paying on it, etc. Also, the place costs about $20k per year just to hold, between utilities, property taxes, HOA fees, etc. So over 20 years, that's about $400k alone.
They only stayed there for like 3 months out of each year, so they COULD have done well to rent it out during the months that they weren't there, but they didn't start doing that until about 2 years before they sold.
So while I'm sure it was nice to get a big check at closing, they didn't really make anything on the house, even though the place doubled in value. Again, mileage may vary depending on the location and what it's used for, but it doesn't always make sense.
well I was in a bit of a rarified situation but it is possible. our Toronto house doubled in value inside 8 years. so I sold it in spring and moved somewhere way more affordable, and am mortgage-free now.
so I don't have the OP's listed amount of money "saved" (which would be useless anyways) but in equity, for sure.
Assuming my company sells in 2/3 years time (when I'll roughly be 35 and it's currently on track to do) then yeah, I'll have double my salary and then some.
That's extreme. Ideally everyone should have 6 months of their earnings saved to absorb sudden unemployment plus some other incident. I usually manage to save 4 months but something comes along and takes a huge chunk of my savings preventing me from going higher than that.
C'est la vie.
C'est la vie.
I'm 42 and there's no way in hell that's possible for me. I've owned two houses, have two kids and daily/month expenses doesn't allow for that. Cost of living keeps going on, stuff breaks and you gotta get it fixed. Cars are expensive as is the upkeep, medical bills and so forth.
Maybe if we got raises that weren't.25 cents and only every three years, things would be different.
Maybe if we got raises that weren't.25 cents and only every three years, things would be different.
Uh, does money in my house count? If so I probably have about 1.3 my yearly salary saved. I just turned 35. Ugh.
Yeah, that's some bullshit. I hate when people say shit like this, because they're obviously in a situation where their expenses are only a fraction of their income, and they assume everyone else is in the same boat. They expect what, half your income to go directly into savings? Shall we bring up the other chart that talks about the percentage of middle class Americans who live hand to mouth every month?
I'm 30 and have over double saved in retirement accounts.
That's not saying much because I don't make all that much though. Despite being at over double I would merely consider myself on track and not ahead.
That's not saying much because I don't make all that much though. Despite being at over double I would merely consider myself on track and not ahead.
