Two things about the numbers in this article don't work for me. First, Bill makes $23,505 after college? What's his degree, basket-weaving? Shoulda gone into

Two things about the numbers in this article don't work for me. First, Bill makes $23,505 after college? What's his degree, basket-weaving? Shoulda gone into engineering. Second, Bill and Ernie each save exactly 5% of their income--even though Bill earns much more than Ernie? This is not a basis for a fair comparison, it just means Bill is choosing lifestyle over retirement. I calculate that it would take Ernie about five years of living Bill's lifestyle to pay off his college debts and catch up to Bill's savings. And then he has 25 years of a higher income and hence options Bill doesn't have. Ernie's lack of financial planning does not negate the value of his degree. In fact, the fact that the article assumes financial illiteracy on the part of both parties is revealing and disturbing. And it reinforces the point that, at least in Ernie's case, he really would have done better to get a degree in something involving some sort of math background.