5 ms·

Indeed. That partly seems to be based on the advice to build (save/invest) money while you are younger, which seems a bit contradictory. I suppose everything i

Indeed. That partly seems to be based on the advice to build (save/invest) money while you are younger, which seems a bit contradictory. I suppose everything is easier when you are rich, including ageing.

psunavy03 2y ago
It's not contradictory at all. As Einstein said, "compound interest is the most powerful force in the universe."
- oldpersonintx 2y ago
  [dead]
cjbgkagh 2y ago
The current crop of old people had money when interest rates started high and ended low, which is far better than the opposite of starting low and ending high. There is a lower bound for interest rates and there is a risk component to the rate, especially for regular borrowers. Now consider that during the period of lowering interest rates the risk temporarily dips lower because in general all asset holders are making money. This doesn’t happen if the interest rates merely stay still, in time the risk component will increase and the rate at which people can borrow will increase along with it. I’m not sure what the takeaway should be from this, dysfunctions can last longer than people’s lifetimes so it’s not always a sure bet to bet against it. My prediction which I’ve held for a long time is that the economic dysfunction will create civil unrest. The increase of security cost will undermine profitability impares the ability for asserts to maintain their high values and this will trigger a downturn. It does appear to me that we are in the early stages of civil unrest.
- wakawaka28 2y ago
  It's good advice anyway. You have to try pretty hard to end up worse off for saving money. Much of what we're going through was experienced in the 70s, and those people lived through it. Even if things really fell apart, order would probably be restored within a decade. Lots of undesirable changes could happen as a result of a crisis, but it could also lead to positive outcomes like a renewed focus on the country's self-sufficiency.
  - cjbgkagh 2y ago
    I'm not sure if I agree with that. Money saved will be inflated away, so lets assume you mean money invested which I would suggest is buying into the ponzi economy and could very well be a good idea. I consider being a miser as good practice as restraint builds efficiency and resilience which will probably hold you in good stead no matter what else is going on in the world. I'm not sure where you get the 'order restored within a decade' from but if you are pulling from historical examples then I think you should be careful with survivorship bias. I can think of a number of examples where empires fell only to be replaced by their adversaries, so let's say the US does collapse, would order being restored be in the form of China taking over? In that situation it would be hard for me to imagine that working out well for the average American.
    - wakawaka28 2y ago
      >I'm not sure if I agree with that. Money saved will be inflated away Some property can't really be inflated away, although disposing of it for a fair value after an inflationary collapse could be difficult. Nobody is printing more land, but property taxes can be raised to infinity. >I'm not sure where you get the 'order restored within a decade' from but if you are pulling from historical examples then I think you should be careful with survivorship bias. I'm talking about the average war, natural disaster, or inflationary event that you could see in your lifetime, especially if you live in the US. Nobody knows the future but if you're worried about things that affect the economy then I think it's unlikely to stay down forever if it collapses. >I can think of a number of examples where empires fell only to be replaced by their adversaries, so let's say the US does collapse, would order being restored be in the form of China taking over? In that situation it would be hard for me to imagine that working out well for the average American. Have you ever heard of trying to control the things you can and to live with the things you can't? What do you think the odds of having ordinary economic hardships versus China invading any nuclear-armed country, much less the US? I think it could be argued that saving valuable resources would help in any situation, as long as it isn't 100% in worthless paper. There are far more people who lived large and ended up impoverished in old age, than any war casualties in all the wars ever fought. Even Germany, which was severely beaten down by two massive wars, managed to recover from all of that in the span of one lifetime. Ideally, you would invest your money and get a return. But in my lifetime, the stock market has crashed multiple times. If you were all in on that, especially as you near retirement, you could lose too much money.
PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
"Money doesn't buy happiness, but it sure does make the bad times easier" - some 40s/50s Hollywood starlet.

psunavy03 2y ago

It's not contradictory at all. As Einstein said, "compound interest is the most powerful force in the universe."

oldpersonintx 2y ago
[dead]

cjbgkagh 2y ago

The current crop of old people had money when interest rates started high and ended low, which is far better than the opposite of starting low and ending high. There is a lower bound for interest rates and there is a risk component to the rate, especially for regular borrowers. Now consider that during the period of lowering interest rates the risk temporarily dips lower because in general all asset holders are making money. This doesn’t happen if the interest rates merely stay still, in time the risk component will increase and the rate at which people can borrow will increase along with it. I’m not sure what the takeaway should be from this, dysfunctions can last longer than people’s lifetimes so it’s not always a sure bet to bet against it. My prediction which I’ve held for a long time is that the economic dysfunction will create civil unrest. The increase of security cost will undermine profitability impares the ability for asserts to maintain their high values and this will trigger a downturn. It does appear to me that we are in the early stages of civil unrest.

wakawaka28 2y ago
It's good advice anyway. You have to try pretty hard to end up worse off for saving money. Much of what we're going through was experienced in the 70s, and those people lived through it. Even if things really fell apart, order would probably be restored within a decade. Lots of undesirable changes could happen as a result of a crisis, but it could also lead to positive outcomes like a renewed focus on the country's self-sufficiency.
- cjbgkagh 2y ago
  I'm not sure if I agree with that. Money saved will be inflated away, so lets assume you mean money invested which I would suggest is buying into the ponzi economy and could very well be a good idea. I consider being a miser as good practice as restraint builds efficiency and resilience which will probably hold you in good stead no matter what else is going on in the world. I'm not sure where you get the 'order restored within a decade' from but if you are pulling from historical examples then I think you should be careful with survivorship bias. I can think of a number of examples where empires fell only to be replaced by their adversaries, so let's say the US does collapse, would order being restored be in the form of China taking over? In that situation it would be hard for me to imagine that working out well for the average American.
  - wakawaka28 2y ago
    >I'm not sure if I agree with that. Money saved will be inflated away Some property can't really be inflated away, although disposing of it for a fair value after an inflationary collapse could be difficult. Nobody is printing more land, but property taxes can be raised to infinity. >I'm not sure where you get the 'order restored within a decade' from but if you are pulling from historical examples then I think you should be careful with survivorship bias. I'm talking about the average war, natural disaster, or inflationary event that you could see in your lifetime, especially if you live in the US. Nobody knows the future but if you're worried about things that affect the economy then I think it's unlikely to stay down forever if it collapses. >I can think of a number of examples where empires fell only to be replaced by their adversaries, so let's say the US does collapse, would order being restored be in the form of China taking over? In that situation it would be hard for me to imagine that working out well for the average American. Have you ever heard of trying to control the things you can and to live with the things you can't? What do you think the odds of having ordinary economic hardships versus China invading any nuclear-armed country, much less the US? I think it could be argued that saving valuable resources would help in any situation, as long as it isn't 100% in worthless paper. There are far more people who lived large and ended up impoverished in old age, than any war casualties in all the wars ever fought. Even Germany, which was severely beaten down by two massive wars, managed to recover from all of that in the span of one lifetime. Ideally, you would invest your money and get a return. But in my lifetime, the stock market has crashed multiple times. If you were all in on that, especially as you near retirement, you could lose too much money.

PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago

"Money doesn't buy happiness, but it sure does make the bad times easier" - some 40s/50s Hollywood starlet.