Just over half of Americans have anything invested. This includes all retirement accounts as well as individual holdings.
90% of the value of the stock market is held by 10% of investors.
"The Fed estimates that 58 percent of U.S. households have some money in the stock market, mostly through retirement funds like IRAs and mutual funds. But given that just 7 percent of stock market wealth is owned by the bottom 90 percent, with only 1 percent owned by the bottom 50 percent of households,"
It is a depressing reality, but it is reality. More people need to understand that the stock market is irrelevant to everyday life for everyday people. It's a game, and we don't get to play.
My wife and I have used our 401k and 403b to build an incredible amount of money to retire on. Neither of us have ever made over $100K and we literally have millions of dollars for retirement (for now). If you are not using your 401k I strongly suggest you do so now.
You aren't going to convince the foolish to not be foolish. It's a wonder how immigrants come here and make it with just the shirt on their back and no connections. Yet Americans born here pretend it's just impossible.
I'd gladly open our boarders for those who beileve and try for the American dream and send these people to the socialist economies they love so much
On the surface 401ks are great, but they are a shitty replacement for pensions, which are practically unheard of these days
Yeah max out your 401k if you can… get the match, and I could talk your ear off on investing, but this safety net got a lot of holes in it. Mostly worried about less fortunate people.
I don't disagree, but everyone historically underfunded pensions because they could. Instead, they they used the money to grow the company or to give back to management or shareholders. Then the unrealistic pension assumptions caught up with them over time and the unfunded liability was so great it became crippling to many employers (both private and government). While great for the employees, pensions put all market risk in the employers hands and companies don't like risk. It isn't ever coming back.
My uncle worked for an airline at the time of 9/11. After that, the pension benefits were cut. The PBGC (pension benefit guaranty corporation) does guarantee something in the case of a corporation/pension going bankrupt, but that benefit is much less than what a typical person would get from a pension. Those are risks with a pension. It isn't really your money until you get it. A 401k is your money. There is no changing your benefit and there is no I'm sorry we underfunded it for the past 30 years. When you leave an employer, you can take the 401k funds with you (via rollover to new employers or ira).
Yep, any issues with the 401k not making money are squarely on the owners shoulders. With the internet anyone can learn the basics of investing and there are low fee companies that make it do-able for not a lot of money. It's hard when you are making min wage to do anything at all investing wise, though.
pension over 401k any day. when i retire ill get 80% of the average of my best 5 earning years till I die. you add social security to that its pretty much 100%. I’ll also get subsidized healthcare. i could do a 401k on top of it but most people here dont need that. 401k might be a totally workable option for alot of people but I’d love to see a big come back for the pension.
when i retire ill get 80% of the average of my best 5 earning years till I die.
Assuming the pension is and stays properly funded and the company doesn't dissolve. Perhaps I'm cynical but I'd rather be the steward of my own financial security than trusting someone who doesn't know me from Adam to do it.
One can acknowledge that the tools are getting worse and try to change it. My grandfather was a union truck driver who was able to retire comfortably on his pension. Didn’t finish highschool. Didn’t have to invest in anything but his house
I will probably be able to retire, but I am an outlier, I’m paid very well in a high demand field. And I’m smart with money/investing. People used to be able to retire after working an “unskilled” job their whole life… that no longer exists
This is a crazy bunch of statements. I work with 60 dudes that drive trucks and make 100k-120k a year. Most of them are millionaires when retirement rolls around from their 401k alone. Not to mention their homes and properties that they own. Then throw on a few thousand/month in social security…
My one friend is mid 30’s with 3 kids with 200k+ saved already, I’m in my 20’s with 6 figures saved, I will certainly be able to retire. I think the common theme on the internet is a constant “gloom and doom” about how much the world sucks. It really doesn’t suck that bad for a lot of people.
The old unskilled job is the new skilled job. It’s not a bad thing. More people are more educated and they do work that is less physically demanding, which also allows more women to participate in the job market. Both you and your grandfather are a product of your time and both are/was/will be doing well. But in a way your life is easier on the body. We live more leisurely lives now.
they can, but their job is as hard as it was 60 years ago. where as the more educated will be able to retire with jobs that are easier on the body to do.
Do you live under a rock? My point is that these used to be union jobs that took care of you. Today you’re an I9 and it’s “your fault” you didn’t do X to make sure you could retire
I will probably be able to retire, but I am an outlier, I’m paid very well in a high demand field.
Lol, you are hardly an outlier in being able to retire. I help people retire for a living, a lot of them with "mediocre" lifetime incomes. You can always outspend your income and that's what a lot of people do. Never cash out IRAs or employer retirement accounts and contribute what you can as early as you can. The hard part is not cashing it out when you can and living slightly below your means.
People used to be able to retire after working an “unskilled” job their whole life… that no longer exists
Name me the unskilled job you are referring to here, if you don't mind.
If I had to choose, it would always be a 401k over a pension. Too many times, retirees have had to go back to work because of some incompetent management. Granted, most people are too uneducated on investing to manage a 401k which is a shame considering how easy it is.
Pensions are guaranteed. 401ks ride the market so god forbid you plan to retire and the bottom drops out, forcing you to keep working to help recover the costs.
Also: retirement fund fees are straight fraud. It’s beginning to get more attention but the whole lack of “fiduciary responsibility” is resulting in trillions being removed from older Americans’ 401k accounts in the form of fees.
So yeah, I’m ok with a pension provided it’s well funded and not used by company/govt as a relief fund when they need cash.
Nothing in life is certain except death and taxes. All it takes is one accounting scandal, bankruptcy, or failure to fund the pension, and you get pennies on the dollar. At least with a 401k, what you put in is what you keep plus or minus gains/losses. When I picked my 401k allocation, I had the option to choose low fee funds .03% or higher fee funds .35%. It really depends on what your company plan offers.
“What you put in” minus an atrocious amount of management fees. Average fees for a 401k are about 2.23% of total assets (so about $22,000 gone if you’ve socked away $1m which doesn’t I close the federal taxes when you withdraw).
Many accounts can have fees as high as 4-5% (so about $50,000 gone out of $1 M)
Anything above 1% is a total ripoff. If your fees are between 0.03 - 0.80 you’re doing well.
I am also 100% for 401ks, but dont sugar coat what they are.
401ks are set up by wall street to take 30% of your profits. They were originally designed to be tax free like Roth IRA's, but Ronald Reagan took that away when he was president.
Pensions also force employees to stay employed even if they don't necessarily want to remain with a company. My gov position had it removed because the official in place basically said that he wanted employees to stay because they wanted to stay and not because they felt required.
Like yeah, we have a lot of people who come in for the training and free school and leave. However, we also have a lot of older burned out guys who probably shouldn't be around anymore because of the pension.
What has happened is that, our leadership has decided to increase wages borderline exponentially for the past 4 years. We are talking 8% every year for 3 years and we have a 12% around the corner. This is on top of our insane benefits(100% price match retirement) and 4% step raises. My job now pays so much that I cannot leave without taking a substantial pay cut. Surrounding counties are trying to keep up and struggling to do so.
401ks are portable and transferable upon death. There are not so many pension plans that donthe same. The match is a good incentive, but so are the tax implications.
So be married, and don't outlive your spouse or it's gone when you die. Meanwhile, my 401k can go to my daughter to help her with some extra financial security.
It depends on the plans - which are varied and have all sorts of fine print in both cases (pension and 401k.)
There are pensions you can name your children as beneficiaries if you (and your spouse) die.
You can’t name a minor child as a 401k beneficiary; you can name a minor child as a pension beneficiary
Pensions have not been modernized like 401ks simply due to the latter being more favored by private sector over last 50 years. If we wanted to remake pensions, we could. It’s just policy, not rocket science. And 401ks need a ton of reform (bc I’m sure you don’t love the idea that 5% of your contributions are taken for fees?). Say im 41 yrs old with a 401k valued at $280,000 and I contribute 15,000 a year with an employer match. If I want to retire at 66 and have 1% fees, I lose out on more than $500,000 in retirement income just in fees - and that’s before taxes kick in.
Many 401k mgmt fees can be 5%. Now you’re talking about millions being taken by financial mgmt firms.
You can’t name a minor child as a 401k beneficiary; you can name a minor child as a pension beneficiary
Well, I did on mine. And if for some reason I couldn't do so directly I could just name my trust the beneficiary so she would get it regardless.
c I’m sure you don’t love the idea that 5% of your contributions are taken for fees?)
Mine isn't, but I don't think some fee is unreasonable. The people who are investing/managing it presumably aren't working for free. Do you think pensions have no fees and the management companies just do so out of the goodness of their heart?
My work stopped the pension plan and went to 401k right before I started and my 401k is way better than what their pension is. And I’m not nearly as limited either
Immigrants don't do that though. The lucky few that get to come over are basically hand picked. Most immigrants are more affluent than your average American. They're not representative of the countries they come from.
Statistically you dunce. What good comes out of cherry picking feel good stories? Immigrants from pretty much every country are more educated than the population they came from, this is a fact. Visas aren't a lottery, they're a status symbol.
Good to know next time I here some liberal talking like being a white man in America is like hitting the lottery of chance at making something out of yourself ill know they are just a dunce
Thanks for waking me up. Ill.be sure not to vote for these idiots who talk this nonsense making it sound like being a white man in America is some guarantees of success
The down vote to this comment exposes clowns for who they are. They have no explanation on why someone can come here with just the shirt on their back barely able to speak the language and end up so successful .
Nope they are just professional victims. If you are a white man in America and not successful it's likely a you problem. Now some may have a legit excuse as to why they aren't as successful as they would like to be but for the other 99 percent of white liberal men crying and blaming America for not gift wrapping their successful and spoon feeding it to them it's a you problem
This is straight up racist. You're framing immigrants as inherently more industrious based on the one's whose quality of life was so poor that picking vegetables and living out of a trailer in the US is still an increase in status. How many Mexican immigrants do you know that got a million dollar return on their 401k?
This is straight up classist. You've never seen a white guy in a dead end job? Sounds like you've just rationalized that brown people get the bad jobs and any white men who don't find success in the US just simply don't register as people to you.
If the economy was as robust as you claim, there wouldn't be so many "crying liberals" and I wouldn't be hearing conservatives blame Biden for the price of a gallon of milk everytime I go to the store. Calling younger generations stupid for not trusting 401k's doesn't make you sound smarter. It's a horrible indictment of what defunding education has done to this country.
Education hasn't been defunded . It's more funded then ever but had gotten worse. That's why people like you are to ignorant to know over a life time at any time in America you can't go wrong investing is stock market.
But kinda funny huh how since the creation of the department of education and the billons of tax we have spent since it's creation education as you agree had gotten worse!!
Great maybe now you starting to wake up and learn you can give government billons in tax for something and it actually gets worse
Which party was it that did no child left behind, again? Leave it up to a conservative to call cutting free lunches and increasing administrator pay increased funding in education.
It's like how you guys can't admit that wages have been stagnant because even though it hasn't kept up with inflation, the total number is higher than it was twenty years ago.
It's really ironic to rail on the government for mismanaged allocation of funds in a thread about stock buybacks.
https://www.vox.com/2015/3/25/8284637/school-spending-US
Here you go even from liberal VOX.
Look at the big picture look at the last 50 years of funding. It's a good thing people are starting to wake up and look to charter schools. I'm sorry they are fools like you and are able to read data and say gee wiz even though we have increased public funding for education like crazy over the years the system is getting worse. Obviously this liberal clowns in government don't know what they are doing. Let's stop being liberal morons and stop saying Der duh here more money o nothing got better. Here more money o nothing got better here more money again nothing got better. Now this is where a non brainwashed liberal says hey let's maybe stop giving the money here and try elsewhere. But the liberal moron says nope keep giving more money.
I guess 50 years just isn't long enough maybe liberals need to 100 years. Then they will be like umm ok time to try something else.
I'm going to ask you honestly if you read the article that you posted to me. There's no shame in admitting that you may have skimmed through it thinking it was defending what your point was. I don't want to interact with you in an attempt at a "gotcha". I've done the same thing before. But if you haven't read the article, and even if you have, I suggest reading it through one more time.
Everything that article is saying is quite contrary to the point you're trying to make. I just want you to be aware before we go into this any further. The main takeaway that I got from it is what you were essentially mocking what you would assume the "liberal" would say about re-allocating funding to where it would be more effective.
I read it apparently you can't read.
Were education levels higher before creation of department of education and the billons that went into education with it creation?
Yes yes they were.
The highest education levels achieved in this nation were done with far far far far less funding.
That's not true. And if you would like to read an actual study on this, instead of randomly googling "schools don't perform well with higher funding" like I know you did to find that random vox article you clearly didn't read, I'll be happy to share this with you:
Everybody can't read except you. Name me a time when America was more educated on average than it is now for less money. If the original statement had been "We need to pay teachers more" would you still be trying to argue semantic bullshit about the department of education?
Bottom line is money going to public education today is still way way way way more than it was years and years ago when education levels were much higher.
Facts don't care about your feelings.
Maybe you should figure out what you want to say on a comment before you impulse comment multiple times. Because you sound pretty motivated by feelings, not facts.
I don't need to put much thought it to rebutting your points. They are laughable and full of holes. Unlike you I'm not a brainwashed liberal who needs to think real hard to say facts. You see when you live by facts they at top of mind.
Also the charter school push is not that old. Of you are ok with sitting around for 50 years as we put more and more funds into department of education just to see education levels get worse and go no where than you can't say shit about charter schools and school of choice. It could even fail for 49 years and you can't say shit because you are ok with the current system not doing shit for 50 years
Well good sir, I believe you're just putting words on my mouth. I don't believe that I ever said that I was "ok" with the current system.
The only thing I have done at this point is deny your claim about education funding not being cut. If you would like to hear my opinion about the current system, I'd be more than happy to share it, but I believe your Vox article kind of spells out what my opinion is (which is also what you mocked as far a liberal's answer to re-allocation of funds, and I'm very sensitive about being mocked since I'm a weak liberal snowflake) but you let me know and we can have that conversation if you want 👍
The vox article clearly does not support your position that education had been defunded it directly refutes it.
Sorry you feel dumb now that I showed you education had gotten worse as more funds have been thrown at it. You opinion is not important until you know basic facts.
Were education level higher BEFORE the creation of the department of education and the billons upon billons that went into education with its creation? Answer is yes yes they were
I sure do. Because unlike you I'm not ignorant. The amount going into public education today is still far far far far greater than it was decades and decades ago when education levels were much higher.
You explain to me how education system has gotten WORSE since the creation of the department of education, WORSE since we started dumping billons of federal dollars into it.
The united states has spent more and more on education year after year so you are just ignorant.
The united states spends more on k-12 education than almost every other nation in the world
My simpleton liberal friend who can see any in between. Either full centralization in the federal government or private full private. I never said anything about state funding. Just department of education.
Serious you are not educated enough to debate me
State funding is still government spending. Now you're just compartmentalizing your own beliefs to rationalize the inconsistencies in your conservative world view.
Education has not* been defunded.* It is* more funded the even but has* gotten worse. That is* why people like you are too* ignorant to know over a lifetime* at any time in America that* you cannot* go wrong investing in* the* stock market. However* (cannot start a sentence with but), it is* kind of* funny (omit huh, not proper writing) since the creation of the department of education and the billions of tax dollars* that* we have spent since its* creation, education as you agree,* has* gotten worse!*
Nah, I just found it ironic that you are a failure of the education system calling for its dismantlement when it is pretty clear that you do not care about learning or holding an educated position. There are plenty of free resources to pick up if you want to learn how to write and express an idea properly. You just need to have a will to learn.
Yes cause typing on reddit quickly is a big deal. I'm sorry but I figured you weren't retarded and would be able to understand what I was saying.
But even if you take it the way you did it would prove my point. Lol
Pretty heavy survivors bias my dude. Sure, someone can come to the country and make it, but absolutely not many or even most. It's a fact that in many states minimum wage barely covers living conditions or falls below it, and somebody will always have to do these jobs for the country to function. Sure, some will get raises and better jobs, but it is completely neccessary that the minimum wage jobs are filled, and those people are fucked through no fault of their own. If you can barely afford monthly bills, you cannot make meaningful investments.
And thus, even if the stock market soars, the people who would most need that money can't afford to take part in the game in a meaningful way while they are the ones to create that value in the first place.
Dude the fact that you keep saying “if you are white and American and can’t make it it’s a you problem” is what people are saying is racist. To the reader it seems that you are implying just by being “white and American” that it’s somehow an obligation for white Americans to become wealthy. When there are Americans who come from generations of blue collar workers who have never had the opportunity to obtain a higher education or get one of those magical jobs that will net you 6-7 figures. That’s not even taking into account people with kids. I have one, and let me tell you it’s not cheap. And it’s on going to get more expensive as everything around us gets more expensive while there are people who don’t get paid enough to afford food for the week. We get by, and until I finish school, that’s how we’ll be. Even after I’m done I know my field isn’t a profitable one, but I’m ok with that because I will enjoy my work and be able to spend time with my family instead of spending every waking moment at work.
Bro, trump's campaign slogan is "make America great again". What is tucker Carlson, Steven crowder, and Ben famous for? Crying about America being bad.
Republicans cry the loudest. Open your eyes, mate.
It's unfortunate because up until the late 20teens they had many very talented writers doing excellent work over there, along with very strong editorials.
Bill Buckley had created something very special. Kevin D Williamson remains an excellent writer, but he's over at The Dispatch now.
These days, from what I can tell, there aren't any highly serious conservative publications out there and that's a shame - but that's likely what you're going to get if you take Donald Trump seriously.
It’s unfortunate because even a flaming liberal like me thinks an intellectually honest and good faith conservative discourse can improve liberal arguments and policy through meaningful critique.
I'm a moderate conservative - not flaming - but I agree. Understanding the oppositional arguments are the best way to strengthen the positions you support.
I could have picked out the sorts of people mentioned in that article from my yearbook back in high school. Somehow everyone else managed to get their shit together and make something of themselves yet these people simply failed to launch. Many of them gamed the SSI/Disability routine for some money, got free cell phones, free medical, and a free place to live all while aspiring to achieve nothing more than just that. It just blows my mind.
Some people are just too afraid to go out into the world and they never get the push they need from the people around them to break free of it. Once you get comfortable on free money your skills start to atrophy and before long it's simply too late for you to make anything of yourself. At that point you really do need the money because you become unemployable and then you're stuck on welfare for the rest of your life. Doesn't seem like a fulfilling existence to me personally.
For every immigrant that is a success story there are many more who never are able to rise beyond being exploited laborers. A lot of these things are just being in the right place at the right time to be able to take advantage of opportunities. No doubt a native born citizen has better access to these opportunities, but there's no guarantees.
Additionally, most successful immigrants are the wealthy of their own nations. Poor eastern peoples would have no chance of affording a flight to the US in the first place; they're struggling to survive.
You're racist and you believe in the lie that anyone can break out of poverty if they just work hard enough. That's not enough. You need luck on your side too.
After reading this, a tear rolled down my cheek, and as it dried, it started radiating incandescent red white and blue. This long diatribe sounds like a cheesy early 90s family sitcom about how America is the land of opportunities if not even for our shirtless darker brethren that cross the border !
I can't help but feel mildly irritated by your misguided dreamlike opinion, given that I'm a "white liberal man" crying and blaming my country for not giving me a spoon of success wrapped in fine giftwrapping paper. But enough about me...
Let's be real. The immigration vetting system for the US is one of the toughest in the world, and the immigrants who usually get through it (ones who are allowed here to on a student or work visa) are ones that already have a fair degree of financial security, or at least to be fair, have it more than an immigrant who is undocumented. I think that's a fair claim, no? But that wasn't the previous comment's focus, I know....
The immigrants who "cross the border with barely a shirt on their back" or something of the like quoting from the previous comment you were replying to, I'm to assume are crossing the border illegally. What's their rate of success? Undocumented workers on average have about a $34-38k net worth. A very small percentage of those undocumented immigrants I'm sure DO become successful, but I would imagine, given their net worth, that percentage is much more smaller than the success ratio of someone who is legally working here, or who is otherwise a citizen. The truth is, most undocumented workers do not find the level of success I'm assuming you're emphasizing here (401k nice house and all). What we do tend to see is that their children or children's children are the ones who might have that range of success - based on THEIR parent's hard work and struggle, but even that isn't nearly the success ratio you want to make it out as, in comparison to an immigrant family who came here legally and had better opportunities to accumulate wealth with higher paying jobs from higher education.
To ignore the diminishing returns of the average American through the last century, to ignore every statistic out there telling us how harder it is to move up and get by in this country, and presume the real grievances people have as (working class) Americans is just "whining", I find a little disingenuous just because perhaps it was YOU who pulled out of it alright. Well, I'm proud of you, dude. I really am. And your accomplishes should not be overlooked. But their grievances shouldn't be either.
I stopped reading at " let's be real the immigration system in US as toughest vetting.. that is so delusional and the furthest thing from real.
We have zero vetting if you cross illegally and claim asylum hence the recent rapes and murders of children by immigrants.
Sorry but if an immigrant can come here with nothing and no connections and make a success of themselves it's a you problem of you a white man in America and cant.
They're called illegal immigrants for reason. We have a lot of those because the VETTING SYSTEM to be a CITIZEN or even to get a VISA in this country is extremely hard, and harder than most countries in the world. That's what a vetting system does. It doesn't mean this iron wall that electrocutes anyone who tries to climb the border, you goofball.
At this point you're just frustrating me with your ignorance.
I'm sorry my ignorant friend but liberals say no person is illegal and they are called migrants.
More over you have to have ur head so far up your butt to ignore how easy it is to migrate to America.
The stupidly of what you are saying is ridiculous. Let's say I want a car. I can buy it or steal it either way I have the car. Who cares if it's hard to buy when it's so easy to steal. It's how easy it is to obtain the care is the relevant part.
I know it destroys your argument and you need to completely ignore all.the migrants who just skip doing it legally and you need to pretend they aren't here. But I live in reality
At this point I'm wondering three things: Are you just stupid or crazy, are you just like 15 or something, or are you still just trolling?
Let's take immigrants who arrive here because they overstayed their travel visa. I would imagine that would be the easiest way to "migrate" over to the US. There's only a select amount of countries in the world that are able to obtain a visa, and the majority of countries around the world need to go through a type of lottery system to get one. This varies based on the relationship we have with said country.
And the countries that have relative ease of getting a travel visa are mostly European , and your usual whitewashed other country (Canada, Australia...). For most of the world and the population of the world, it is very difficult to get a travel visa for the US. For one, it's an expensive process, and two, the vetting system. For many countries you literally have to have an interview at the US embassy JUST FOR A TRAVEL VISA.
Those are the migrants, by and large who come to the U.S. if you're trying to tell me that crossing the border from Mexico is easy, well, thats because you're a(enter from choices in first sentence).
You sincerely do not understand what you're talking about.
Sorry you are the fool.
It's like you have a yard and stand at the gate and you say you have the hardest yard to get into. Meanwhile while you check everyone at the front gate millions of people just walk in thru the back yard. Now you have 30 million in ur back yard and are like see look I only allowed in 100 it's so hard to get on my yard.
U are serious braindead
You still can't explain why an immigrant can come here with nothing and white liberals with college degrees are like rolling tears saying they just can't make it and need a hand out
Immigrants especially overseas ones are usually highly driven, smart and often have connections, or they would not have made it to the US. Yes with hard work you can do very well in America. But hard work is hard. And if your life is already decent because you are born here, it’s harder to sacrifice for the future.
I know liberals vote to help immigrants more than their fellow Americans. But even with said help if you are white and can't make it in American it's a u problem
The thing that amazes me is they do it the hard way with a physical business, taking long term risks that they need to grind on for decades. Growing up here you can just get a good education, grab a decent paying desk job, prevent lifestyle inflation, stuff extra money into a 401k and you'll end up with generational wealth if you work until 60.
Ok but there’s tons of reasons why that can’t work for everyone. For example someone loses their job then has a medical emergency, which can easily wipe out 10s of thousands of dollars.
Just because it works for some people doesn’t mean it’s a great solution for the country as a whole.
I also personally don’t think people should be punished for the rest of their lives because they made a mistake at the age of 18/19 like taking out a giant student loan that they probably shouldn’t have been eligible for at that age.
You can find tons of reasons why it can work for people too. My wife and I stopped paying into our 403b’s when we had kids. Once they went to kindergarten, we started paying back in and are on track again. It’s about priorities, and she had student loans. Yes we are lucky that we didn’t have medical issues when we weren’t covered by insurance, but we had other problems. That’s life.
I didn't want to pay out to all the fucking companies who pocketed the mostly forgiven loans during COVID but none of you people bitching about student loan forgiveness ever have a peep to say about it. Where the fuck was your outrage then? Conservatives don't have any testicles when it comes to applying their own standards to private enterprise.
It's really not though. 70% of businesses that took COVID loans had them forgiven. You think I heard a single libertarian ask who's going to pay for it, or insist that we make them pay it back?
The only difference is that conservatives view private enterprise as the backbone of the economy but the workers who run businesses are replaceable cattle. Maybe if the businesses we bailed out didn't require a bachelor degree for entry level jobs, we wouldn't have to bail out the entire generation we bankrupted in exchange for a lower quality of life than their parents.
Those loans were used to pay employees. So that money went to the common man. But your right employers should have just laid them off and they would have gotten even less money lol
"Why should I have to pay for the common man?" Is literally the argument you've come here to make. You're just mad when it isn't filtered through a business.
If the market says you need to be able to weather an unprofitable year to survive, why is it on the taxpayer to bail them out. Rules for me not for thee
How do we know that’s where the money went when we fired the oversight watchdog? It was basically apply and get money based on the local businesses I talked to.
If they were designed to be forgiven it wasn't a loan was it? You willful dumbass.
So if the student loans had all just been grants from the beginning you wouldn't have a problem with taxpayers footing the bill then? Suddenly you're okay paying for someone else's education? Yeah right.
You know there's a double standard. But you'll just spin your wheels and say anything to keep from admitting you don't give a fuck when private enterprise gets handouts. Just the students. Because no one on fox told you to be upset about PPP loan forgiveness.
I don’t have a student loan. So I’m not sure why you’re saying that like you know me.
Just pointing out that we allow a system to exist that is predatory on our youth and can affect them for decades and their ability to retire. Seems like a major flaw in our long term system. We’re also the only country that I know of with that system.
Also the poor can include people who took out dumb loans…
Edit: I do love the implication though that I can only want to help people out if it benefits me (student loans). You’re kind of telling on yourself and your thought process.
Your solution to being unemployed is pay your bills? If you really have that nest egg, you stumbled into it. You are way too fucking stupid to have done it on purpose.
Low fee market index funds are the way to go. But being a retail investor is playing a losing game. Institutional investors have more information and better access.
"We have never made over $100k" is a clever way to disguise that you make much more than the median American household. Lots of people could invest more with a 25-30% bump in pay.
50 x 52 x 30 is 78000. Average rate of 401k annual growth is around 6-8%. So if you started with 78000 (not slowly growing it over 30 years $2600 at a time) in the 401k and got 8% annual increases over each of those 30 years not accounting for people tanking the stock market and cleaning out peoples 401ks every 10 years or so) you end up with a grand total of 265,200 dollars. You’ll end up with a fraction of that slowly paying into the 401k. So unless you magically hit on a shitload of market guesses or have some other magical influx of wealth you’re not going to be sniffing the “millions of dollars” this person claims to have putting the in amount of money you seem to think will achieve.
And yes I know you’re just a discount store troll and this response will be of no use to you.
120 per month over 40 years at 8% would net you about 430k. If you are doing 8% that's below average. 13% gets you to 2 million. Add matching 401 at say 4% of input and it goes up from there. No troll, 55 with 2 houses and a condo, Range Rover and Tesla in the garage next to off road toys and multiple millions in the market. Started investing 40 years ago. The response you made was of no use. But keep being a victim or open your eyes.
Have you seen what the Investment Funds take is fo managing the 401k? They earn Compounded Interest
Save 1 million over 20 years after hedge funds cut It breaks down to about 300k for u and 700k for them
something like 60
Same. We would never have been able to retire if the hadn't lived frugally all our lives and socked away everything we could. Went to Disney once (some people go every year!), never rented a beach condo every Summer, no boat, few vacations, smallest house in the neighborhood etc. Our vacations were to family or to cheap campgrounds and free outdoor stuff. Lots of people can't do that either, but lots of people treat themselves every year for vacation and that's their choice. We threw it into nontaxable accounts and now can live off that because it compounded over the years due to dividends and capital gains.
It's not that normal people can't benefit, it's that normal people benefitting is an afterthought, and 90% of the benefit does not (and will not ever) go to normal people.
There are plenty of opportunities in life to build success off the residue from the ultra rich, but it's generally a bit of a gamble and those opportunities to vary over time and space, but it's not somehow evidence that things are working well.
Your numbers dont add up. There have been studies where a hypothetical couple invested max 401k contributions for their entire careers, and did not have enough money to retire, let alone millions.
The household median income isn't anywhere near 100k even now and has been lower up until this point. You are talking about a maximum combined income of 200k. Yeah, if I had 90k of fun money left over each year I could certainly invest a ton of that too. Your feel good story could never apply to the vast majority of people. Many people could invest more, but it really is a rich man's game. If you invest 1k each year for 40 years at a 7% return average, you will end up with only 200k at the end. That's assuming people have the money to invest and no economic downturns that slow growth down/reverse it. You don't reach the absolute minimum boundary of "millions" (2 million) until you contribute a bit over 10k per year. That's about $833/month that you have to have left over after all your bills and taxes. Most people can't even dream to afford that. People are less frugal with money than they should be, but they aren't spending that much on nonnecessities every month for 40 years
35 years of 25% for my wife and 10% for me has totaled 2.1 million dollars as of last statement. We retire in 5 years and 1 month. Start young and be diligent.
People also have a spending problem on non necessities. Yes groceries are stupid expensive but even saving a little is better than not at all. I have a family and am just barely over paycheck to paycheck and still invest for our future. Sure things have gotten rough but not that bad yet when people are still buying cigarettes alcohol and lottery tickets plus hair and nail salons over the necessary things.
I believe they have to earn income to contribute to retirement accounts talk to your tax guy about it. But they can have a regular juvenile custodial investment account that will be taxed
There’s an argument to be had for using the additional money you would have put in the 401k over your employers match to max out some personal traditional IRAs, but that’s really only useful if you’re actively managing them. Most 401ks have pretty decent fund customization options nowadays so they’re really nice for playing the set it and forget it game. I like having my personal traditional IRA that I can use to take the occasional gambles on stocks, while the majority of my retirement is “safe”ish in my 401k
Is it possible for someone earning $90,000 to have over $2,000,000 in retirement income by investing in their 401K over 40 years using broad index funds (e.g. S&P 500)?
The federal contribution limits alone would be a huge limiting factor -- over 30 years (1986 - 2016) it went from $7,000 to $18,000. But even assuming they invested $7,000 every year as cash for 10 years into their 401K (1984 - 1994), and then finally invested it into S&P 500 in 1994 ($70,000) and never touched it again, that would be $700,000 today. If they did that again (1994 - 2004) but using $9,000 (new IRS minimum) that's another $450,000.
Repeat again for 2014 and 2024 and yeah, $2,000,000 ("millions") seems to be within reach.
Really depends if you wanted to live frugally on that 90k and you had a job that assisted. Basically the max contribution limit to 401ks was 7,000 per individual, but there was a maximum of 30,000 for all accounts such as including salary deferrals, Roth 401(k) contributions, employer contributions, and personal non-tax-deductible (not Roth) contributions if allowed by the plan per year. If you were able to get 30,000 added to your investment account per year then you could easily make 2,000,000 without modifying how much you add over 30 years with a 5% return.
s it possible for someone earning $90,000 to have over $2,000,000 in retirement income by investing in their 401K over 40 years using broad index funds (e.g. S&P 500)?
9 percent return, $10,000 starting, and $1000 a month for 40 years is $4.5 million.
You don’t seem to understand how it could work for you. Read “A Random Walk Down Wall St.” Burton Malkiel. I didn’t invest a dime into the stock market until I was 36 and after reading that book. My only regret is not reading about it and understanding it 1-2 decades sooner. I’d have well over a million dollars by now if I had another 15 years invested.
366
u/Groovychick1978 5d ago
Just over half of Americans have anything invested. This includes all retirement accounts as well as individual holdings.
90% of the value of the stock market is held by 10% of investors.
"The Fed estimates that 58 percent of U.S. households have some money in the stock market, mostly through retirement funds like IRAs and mutual funds. But given that just 7 percent of stock market wealth is owned by the bottom 90 percent, with only 1 percent owned by the bottom 50 percent of households,"
https://inequality.org/great-divide/stock-ownership-concentration/#:~:text=Based%20on%20this%20estimate%2C%20the,dollars%20in%20stock%20market%20wealth.