4 ms·

> But having a pile of money beyond those things "just because" does not really serve the purpose of money: as a medium of exchange for goods and services. Mone

> But having a pile of money beyond those things "just because" does not really serve the purpose of money: as a medium of exchange for goods and services. Money in itself is not useful, it is only useful for the things it can give you: shelter, water, food, and the various other things as you work your way up Maslow's hierarchy. Neither you nor anybody else has any business in telling me what my hard-earned money is meant to be used for. I put blood, sweat and tears into earning it, and I deserve the reward for my work. Maybe I'm saving it up for my future descenants to finally lift my family line from poverty that they've been in for generations, or want FIRE for myself. Maybe I'm saving up for a flight into space. It's none of you g-damn business. Get your hands off my money. This is exactly why I'm against both negative bank interest rates, and high inflation.

pc86 6y ago
If your idea of achieving generational wealth involves a bank savings account there are some bigger educational issues you need to address first. Bank savings accounts rarely, if ever, keep up with inflation regardless of interest rates. You are losing purchasing power in a savings account even if the nominal value of the account increases year over year. I'm not saying it's anyone's business what you do with your money, but keeping more than 6-ish months of expenses in a savings account is objectively burning money and a pretty idiotic thing to do in general. Anything more than that should be invested. Hedges exist for a reason. There are dozens - hundreds? - of ways to hedge your investment and keep market exposure by limiting or even eliminating downside. Hell, Mark Cuban has a great story about after the broadcast.com acquisition where he was fully invested in the market but also heavily hedged in case his stocks tanked. When the market crashed he made money. All that is to say that yes it's totally your right to keep half a million dollars in a savings account. But it's an objectively stupid thing to do.
imtringued 6y ago
>This is exactly why I'm against both negative bank interest rates, and high inflation. The reason why we have negative interest and mild inflation (2%-3%) is that the Fed wants the economy of the US to continue to exist in the next 100 years, which is in line with your goals. Owning a growing share of a shrinking economy is amazing for people born in the past and terrible for people born in the future, owning a shrinking share of a growing economy is acceptable for people born in the past and good for people born in the future. The former is deflation, the latter is inflation.
- toomuchtodo 6y ago
  The Fed can print dollars, but not future consumers and taxpayers. As long as the total fertility rate continues to decline, they’re bailing water out of a boat forever.
throw0101a 6y ago
> This is exactly why I'm against both negative bank interest rates, and high inflation. Use it however you wish. But having it sit around, even with positive bank interest rates and low inflation, will still have it lose value over time. If you have a savings goal, then for any period beyond 5-10 years you'll have to invest it. And negative rates are not unreasonable: * https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-08/the-non-weirdness-of-negative-interest-rates https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-08/the-non-w... * https://archive.is/zlyRi https://archive.is/zlyRi

pc86 6y ago

If your idea of achieving generational wealth involves a bank savings account there are some bigger educational issues you need to address first. Bank savings accounts rarely, if ever, keep up with inflation regardless of interest rates. You are losing purchasing power in a savings account even if the nominal value of the account increases year over year. I'm not saying it's anyone's business what you do with your money, but keeping more than 6-ish months of expenses in a savings account is objectively burning money and a pretty idiotic thing to do in general. Anything more than that should be invested. Hedges exist for a reason. There are dozens - hundreds? - of ways to hedge your investment and keep market exposure by limiting or even eliminating downside. Hell, Mark Cuban has a great story about after the broadcast.com acquisition where he was fully invested in the market but also heavily hedged in case his stocks tanked. When the market crashed he made money. All that is to say that yes it's totally your right to keep half a million dollars in a savings account. But it's an objectively stupid thing to do.

imtringued 6y ago

>This is exactly why I'm against both negative bank interest rates, and high inflation. The reason why we have negative interest and mild inflation (2%-3%) is that the Fed wants the economy of the US to continue to exist in the next 100 years, which is in line with your goals. Owning a growing share of a shrinking economy is amazing for people born in the past and terrible for people born in the future, owning a shrinking share of a growing economy is acceptable for people born in the past and good for people born in the future. The former is deflation, the latter is inflation.

toomuchtodo 6y ago
The Fed can print dollars, but not future consumers and taxpayers. As long as the total fertility rate continues to decline, they’re bailing water out of a boat forever.

throw0101a 6y ago

> This is exactly why I'm against both negative bank interest rates, and high inflation. Use it however you wish. But having it sit around, even with positive bank interest rates and low inflation, will still have it lose value over time. If you have a savings goal, then for any period beyond 5-10 years you'll have to invest it. And negative rates are not unreasonable: * https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-08/the-non-weirdness-of-negative-interest-rates https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-08/the-non-w... * https://archive.is/zlyRi https://archive.is/zlyRi