8 ms·

There's a subreddit dedicated to this idea, although I warn you it's largely terrible. http://www.reddit.com/r/financialindependence http://www.reddit.com/r/fi

There's a subreddit dedicated to this idea, although I warn you it's largely terrible. http://www.reddit.com/r/financialindependence http://www.reddit.com/r/financialindependence Basically the only reason most people struggle financially in the US is due to their own financial illiteracy and living above their means. If you manage not to fall victim to either of those then you can save a substantial portion of your income towards a very early retirement should you choose to do so. Kids are pricey though, so this approach is most viable for those who've eschewed the traditional family.

Rapzid 11y ago
Mr Money Mustache also also comes to mind. It's too late for my 30s being 31, but this stuff has really woken me up and I'm shooting for FIRE close to 40.
- ncphillips 11y ago
  I'm checking this out right now. Looks interesting!
- bigtunacan 11y ago
  Mr Money Mustache is good; I also really like Budgets Are Sexy.
fweespeech 11y ago
> Basically the only reason most people struggle financially in the US is due to their own financial illiteracy and living above their means. If you manage not to fall victim to either of those then you can save a substantial portion of your income towards a very early retirement should you choose to do so. That is really only true for households above the median income. So "most" is not a factual statement. About half of the country can save [at most] a few thousand dollars a year unless they want to ruin their health and take other risks that are essentially gambling. That is part of what pisses me off about /r/financialindependence. Alot of the "suggestions" those people make are essentially gambling. [e.g. going without proper insurance coverage, high risk investments if you cannot save much due to income, eat unhealthy to save money which will cost you later] Or they assume you are making $60k a year so you can save $20k/year. You can't save $20k/year if you are making $30k.
- Omniusaspirer 11y ago
  If you can only save a few thousand a year then you fall firmly into the "living above their means" category in my personal opinion. Having children you cannot afford is a common way that lower income people live above their means, even if it sounds crass to word it in that way. My anecdotal experience working alongside lower class workers is that most of them run into trouble through trying to live a middle class lifestyle without the income to support it. They buy new cars, they eat out often, they refuse to work more than 40 hrs/wk, and they live in pricier apartments without roommates. All of these mistakes tie into the financial illiteracy that plagues people who were never exposed to those with good money habits.
  - zzalpha 11y ago
    Or, alternatively: the erosion of wages in the face of rising inflation has placed a reasonable lifestyle out of the reach of many people. No longer can a household function on a single income while owning a home and raising a couple kids. Unfortunately society demands such a lifestyle from folks in order to be deemed a "success" and so people life beyond their now eroded means because they only alternative is to give up the dream they were sold every time someone opined about the "American Dream". Of course the alternative view is to blame these folks and tacitly assume that the right to a comfortable lifestyle with a couple kids is a luxury only for the rich.
    - Omniusaspirer 11y ago
      I don't mean to assert this is an optimal scenario, but it is the one we've all been placed in. What choice do we really have but to try and live according to the circumstances we were born into?
      - TheOtherHobbes 11y ago
        >What choice do we really have but to try and live according to the circumstances we were born into? We can also work to change those circumstances for future generations.
zachalexander 11y ago
What is terrible about the subreddit? Your following paragraph ("Basically...") sounds very reasonable.
- ctdonath 11y ago
  Some ideas are sensible, but a particular discussion thereof may not be.
learnstats2 11y ago
People on or below median income (i.e. "most people") live above their means, because they have little choice.
- caseysoftware 11y ago
  Some portion of them, yes. But something as simple as cutting cable can save $500+/year, usually over $1k/year. And to someone who is below the median, either of those numbers is non-trivial. Exclude a few other optional behaviors and the numbers shift more positive pretty quickly. Examples: smoking, iphone plans, pets. Someone doesn't have to go without those things forever but cutting out all the non-necessities for a few years to stabilize and build a little savings is a great thing everyone should be encouraged to do.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - TheLoneWolfling 11y ago
    As a student, I've gotten laughed at for having a prepaid (and cheap) cell phone. Saves me several hundred a year, easily. Ditto: I don't drink, and I don't have a car. And I still struggle. Don't know how some students do it.
    - caseysoftware 11y ago
      The good news is that if you're working in STEM, this is probably the worst time you'll ever have.
      - hrehhf 11y ago
        "probably" may be true, but do not listen to this comment and become complacent! Struggle in work/school will be necessary for a long time to get out of being poor and comments like this make it sound like its as simple as getting a STEM degree or job. Its not.
jseliger 11y ago
Basically the only reason most people struggle financially in the US is due to their own financial illiteracy and living above their means We've also chosen, collectively and as a society, to make a lot of high-productivity places artificially expensive: http://www.amazon.com/Rent-Too-Damn-High-Matters-ebook/dp/B0078XGJXO http://www.amazon.com/Rent-Too-Damn-High-Matters-ebook/dp/B0...
- juliangregorian 11y ago
  They are desirable places for high earners to live. Basic market forces at work. Now rent control would be "artificial".
Clanan 11y ago
As a parent I've found that "kids are pricey" can easily stem from financial illiteracy as well. It's easier than people think to have kids and not blow the budget. Don't go crazy on Christmas gifts, limit eating out, buy secondhand clothes (which are usually in great condition), etc. We always chuckle when our friends talk about how expensive their kids are, right before mentioning their three cross-country trips. Financial literacy can apply to child-rearing too!
- draz 11y ago
  Agreed on all the of above. However, when the going rate for daycare in NYC is $3K/month per child, you need to make an extra $50K/year (pre-tax) to just cover that (if you were to maintain your pre-kids lifestyle). Then there are other expenses. Point it, kids aren't free. That's where you need to start making choices (less eating out, etc.)
- __abc 11y ago
  THIS! I have two kids, and it's fairly easy (at least before starting school / sports) 1 - Second hands clothes, toys, etc are super cheap 1.1 - Hand me down across the extended family and your family (seriously, they grow out of it in minutes, try not to buy it new) 2 - Your kids don't need a lot of toys and crayons and paper are cheap 3 - GO TO THE LIBRARY 4 - Parks are really fun, and really cheap, as in free Where it adds up, at least for me, is I now have a 2 & 4 year old in school and that's $1K a month (drops to zero once they hit public schools), but for a few years that's hefty. However, that's also a choice 1 - I chose private school for preschool, so that's costlier 2 - I moved to a specific area for the 10/10 public schools to save money
  - ashark 11y ago
    Most places, the areas with the "10/10" public schools cost more to live in, between property taxes and higher purchase prices for houses (because the schools are good, so demand is high). They may also be farther from where the jobs are (more often than not, I'd guess), unless you want to pay even more for both prime location and good schools, assuming such a thing even exists where you live. Higher transportation costs, more time commuting. You pay either way. Picking the nicer location is probably cheaper, but I wouldn't bet on that always being the case. It's difficult to quantify the costs of location to compare the two.

Rapzid 11y ago

Mr Money Mustache also also comes to mind. It's too late for my 30s being 31, but this stuff has really woken me up and I'm shooting for FIRE close to 40.

ncphillips 11y ago
I'm checking this out right now. Looks interesting!
bigtunacan 11y ago
Mr Money Mustache is good; I also really like Budgets Are Sexy.

fweespeech 11y ago

> Basically the only reason most people struggle financially in the US is due to their own financial illiteracy and living above their means. If you manage not to fall victim to either of those then you can save a substantial portion of your income towards a very early retirement should you choose to do so. That is really only true for households above the median income. So "most" is not a factual statement. About half of the country can save [at most] a few thousand dollars a year unless they want to ruin their health and take other risks that are essentially gambling. That is part of what pisses me off about /r/financialindependence. Alot of the "suggestions" those people make are essentially gambling. [e.g. going without proper insurance coverage, high risk investments if you cannot save much due to income, eat unhealthy to save money which will cost you later] Or they assume you are making $60k a year so you can save $20k/year. You can't save $20k/year if you are making $30k.

Omniusaspirer 11y ago
If you can only save a few thousand a year then you fall firmly into the "living above their means" category in my personal opinion. Having children you cannot afford is a common way that lower income people live above their means, even if it sounds crass to word it in that way. My anecdotal experience working alongside lower class workers is that most of them run into trouble through trying to live a middle class lifestyle without the income to support it. They buy new cars, they eat out often, they refuse to work more than 40 hrs/wk, and they live in pricier apartments without roommates. All of these mistakes tie into the financial illiteracy that plagues people who were never exposed to those with good money habits.
- zzalpha 11y ago
  Or, alternatively: the erosion of wages in the face of rising inflation has placed a reasonable lifestyle out of the reach of many people. No longer can a household function on a single income while owning a home and raising a couple kids. Unfortunately society demands such a lifestyle from folks in order to be deemed a "success" and so people life beyond their now eroded means because they only alternative is to give up the dream they were sold every time someone opined about the "American Dream". Of course the alternative view is to blame these folks and tacitly assume that the right to a comfortable lifestyle with a couple kids is a luxury only for the rich.
  - Omniusaspirer 11y ago
    I don't mean to assert this is an optimal scenario, but it is the one we've all been placed in. What choice do we really have but to try and live according to the circumstances we were born into?
    - TheOtherHobbes 11y ago
      >What choice do we really have but to try and live according to the circumstances we were born into? We can also work to change those circumstances for future generations.

zachalexander 11y ago

What is terrible about the subreddit? Your following paragraph ("Basically...") sounds very reasonable.

ctdonath 11y ago
Some ideas are sensible, but a particular discussion thereof may not be.

learnstats2 11y ago

People on or below median income (i.e. "most people") live above their means, because they have little choice.

caseysoftware 11y ago
Some portion of them, yes. But something as simple as cutting cable can save $500+/year, usually over $1k/year. And to someone who is below the median, either of those numbers is non-trivial. Exclude a few other optional behaviors and the numbers shift more positive pretty quickly. Examples: smoking, iphone plans, pets. Someone doesn't have to go without those things forever but cutting out all the non-necessities for a few years to stabilize and build a little savings is a great thing everyone should be encouraged to do.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- TheLoneWolfling 11y ago
  As a student, I've gotten laughed at for having a prepaid (and cheap) cell phone. Saves me several hundred a year, easily. Ditto: I don't drink, and I don't have a car. And I still struggle. Don't know how some students do it.
  - caseysoftware 11y ago
    The good news is that if you're working in STEM, this is probably the worst time you'll ever have.
    - hrehhf 11y ago
      "probably" may be true, but do not listen to this comment and become complacent! Struggle in work/school will be necessary for a long time to get out of being poor and comments like this make it sound like its as simple as getting a STEM degree or job. Its not.

jseliger 11y ago

Basically the only reason most people struggle financially in the US is due to their own financial illiteracy and living above their means We've also chosen, collectively and as a society, to make a lot of high-productivity places artificially expensive: http://www.amazon.com/Rent-Too-Damn-High-Matters-ebook/dp/B0078XGJXO http://www.amazon.com/Rent-Too-Damn-High-Matters-ebook/dp/B0...

juliangregorian 11y ago
They are desirable places for high earners to live. Basic market forces at work. Now rent control would be "artificial".

Clanan 11y ago

As a parent I've found that "kids are pricey" can easily stem from financial illiteracy as well. It's easier than people think to have kids and not blow the budget. Don't go crazy on Christmas gifts, limit eating out, buy secondhand clothes (which are usually in great condition), etc. We always chuckle when our friends talk about how expensive their kids are, right before mentioning their three cross-country trips. Financial literacy can apply to child-rearing too!

draz 11y ago
Agreed on all the of above. However, when the going rate for daycare in NYC is $3K/month per child, you need to make an extra $50K/year (pre-tax) to just cover that (if you were to maintain your pre-kids lifestyle). Then there are other expenses. Point it, kids aren't free. That's where you need to start making choices (less eating out, etc.)
__abc 11y ago
THIS! I have two kids, and it's fairly easy (at least before starting school / sports) 1 - Second hands clothes, toys, etc are super cheap 1.1 - Hand me down across the extended family and your family (seriously, they grow out of it in minutes, try not to buy it new) 2 - Your kids don't need a lot of toys and crayons and paper are cheap 3 - GO TO THE LIBRARY 4 - Parks are really fun, and really cheap, as in free Where it adds up, at least for me, is I now have a 2 & 4 year old in school and that's $1K a month (drops to zero once they hit public schools), but for a few years that's hefty. However, that's also a choice 1 - I chose private school for preschool, so that's costlier 2 - I moved to a specific area for the 10/10 public schools to save money
- ashark 11y ago
  Most places, the areas with the "10/10" public schools cost more to live in, between property taxes and higher purchase prices for houses (because the schools are good, so demand is high). They may also be farther from where the jobs are (more often than not, I'd guess), unless you want to pay even more for both prime location and good schools, assuming such a thing even exists where you live. Higher transportation costs, more time commuting. You pay either way. Picking the nicer location is probably cheaper, but I wouldn't bet on that always being the case. It's difficult to quantify the costs of location to compare the two.