297
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 14 Apr 2024
297 points (100.0% liked)
News
22907 readers
3599 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
It probably is something you should have after a certain age. If not a work supplied 401k, then at least your own managed Roth IRA. And if you're still on the younger side, it's perfectly understandable not to have a 401k yet.
From where should I have gotten the money to invest in it?
If you work for a company that has a 401k then you need to sign up for it. If the company has a match percentage then that is the absolute minimum you should contribute. And when you are younger you should set it up as a Roth so you pay taxes on it now.
This isn't a thing you should do at a certain age. The younger you start the better. The money just comes out of your paycheck, same as taxes.
I do not work for a company that offers such a thing. And I never have.
This is what I'm saying about assumptions.
You can sign up for a Roth IRA then, there's no need for anything from your employer to get one. As far as I recall there's no minimum amount of money you need to put in at start.
I don't know why you're being down voted. I swear, some people would rather complain than make the smallest effort to help themselves. It's good advice.
Even very small contributions to a retirement account can make a big difference in old age.
This is really good advice. There’s no minimum, but there is an annual maximum of $7K.
If your employer doesn't offer a 401k or similar plan, the IRA limits are actually higher.
With what money?
The money your earn for working.
Yes, all the underpaid people having to choose between food and rent just need to bot spend money on either so they can invest it.
Yes, great insight!
You don't need anyone to invest the money for you. You can get a free account, with free trades, and then just buy index funds.
Even 5 dollars a day can put you close to millionaire over a 40 years.
I love that you assume people who can't afford both rent and food have 5 bucks a day just laying around.
I responded specifically to the claim that you need to hire a bot to do it for you. I made no assumptions about anything.
While I feel for people who really can't save anything because their situation is so dire. But that's not true for plenty of people and this idea that it's too expensive to save is just an excuse to never do so.
No, you replied to my post about people who can't afford both rent and food, whoch was preceeded by comments about how everyone has a job with a 401k whiach was proceeded by a comment about not having any extra money to invest after loving expenses.
Surr, most people should invest, but we were originally talking about how not everyone can do that and nobody listened because they assumed everyone has easy access to retirement investment options through their jobs and extra money to do so.
Go back and read the actual posts.
I responded to you obnoxiously claiming that you have to pay something (in your case, a bot) to do it for you.
I explicitly started my post with "you don't have to most someone to do it" to make it clear what my argument is about.
I'm sorry it wasn't clear. I'll try to do better in the future. Could you give me a pointer?
Provide the quote where I said that.
My bad. I translated that as you saying you "just need a bot to spend" but now see it was just a typo, and the meaning still should have been clear to me.
Seems weird that you focused on that and not the proceeding part about not being able to afford both rent and food. Why would a bot even be able to solve a situation where they can't afford things in the first place?
I apparently fixed it since I see "just need to not spend" and don't remember fixing it. Probably a delay in federation.
If you’re absolutely scraping by, where you can’t even spare a few bucks a week on something like this, then yeah, maybe you just can’t do it. But if you can spare even a tiny amount, then it’s wise to do that small amount starting as early in life as possible.
Well if you stopped buying frivolous items like GROCERIES you'd have plenty to invest. Then you could enjoy your retirement for a comfortable 3 years before going back to work
We were talking to my daughter about this just yesterday. It's not even groceries. People think that if you spend $30 or $40 a month on things that make you and those you love happy, you'll never save enough to make yourself marginally more comfortable in the last 10-20 years of your life (if you're lucky) that will be uncomfortable no matter what.
So I suppose maybe if I denied myself and my child every pleasure in life, sure, I could put money in a 401(k). That is not something I would do and I certainly do not think it's a good lesson to teach a child. I'm sure someone will call that some sort of "live for today" or YOLO attitude rather than not giving your child the most miserable childhood you can.
But that's unproductive hyperbole. Not every pleasure in life costs money, and lots of things you spend money on can be optimized. And even after doing that, if you still feel too squeezed, it might be worth considering a career change and a plan for how to get there.
It might be unproductive hyperbole, but I've been told that exact same thing more than once right here on Lemmy.
Sounds like you have an axe to grind. Sorry life has been hard for you friend. Hope it gets better. Hang in there.
You were telling your daughter that you're spending $30/mo on her to make her happy instead of saving it for your old age? I don't know how you communicated that, but on the surface that does not sound like a healthy thing to tell a child.
If you're worried about providing your daughter a fulfilling childhood, maybe also consider prioritizing time with her? You spend a lot of time on Lemmy dude, is that time you could be spending with her? Or are you on your phone a lot when you're with her?
Do you think that maybe you don't pay attention to what actual times of day I'm on Lemmy vs. when I'm not on Lemmy and think that maybe I spend those times with my family?
I'm here a lot because I'm currently very sick (I recently got back from the Mayo Clinic). I suppose that's my fault?
No, I've never paid attention to when you're online, I just see you average 100 comments and posts per day. I still think telling your daughter that you're spending $30/month on her instead of saving for retirement is not healthy.
I know a lot of people taking care of their elderly parents. I have yet to meet one who says they regretted their parents buying them toys. Do you know any?
Also, as I already said, I am on Lemmy a lot because I am very sick and have nothing else to do most of the time.
You're misunderstanding my point. I'm saying it's not healthy to tell your young child explicitly that you're making this choice between buying them a toy or saving for retirement. This conversation started with you saying you just had that conversation with your daughter yesterday.
Do you think the conversation was literally "I'm making a choice between buying you this toy and saving for retirement?" For one thing, she's almost 14.
Egad man, what is happening in your head
Here is what is happening in my head.
You said:
I agree. But I don't have a young child anyway.
That was not the conversation we had.
I hope this clears things up.
You should probably go up top there and change where you said "I just had this conversation with my daughter yesterday"....
I did not say that. That is false. This is what I said and this is it in context:
In other words, I was talking to my daughter about people who think you should invest money rather than buy groceries.
Once again, I hope this clears things up.
Not even a little 😕 Who exactly is telling you to invest your money instead of buying groceries?
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/may/15/australian-millionaire-millennials-avocado-toast-house
The only person I've seen attempting to make that argument in this thread is you. It's been a really weird strawman thing.
You can put $5 a week into it if you want to. $38/ week ($2k/yr) will get you the full $1K savers credit if you don't have access to a retirement account through work. So essentially you're only contributing $1k and doubling it with the tax credit.
That doesn't sound like enough to retire on.
Fine, then think of it as free money to supplement your income with when you're 60+.
You would be wrong. Compounding is an absolute beast. It's nearly a Million. Let's say you are 25 and just starting out. You manage to put in $1000 a year and get the $1000 credit. Let's say you do this exact same thing until you are 65. You invest it in the S&P500 Index which historically returns ~10% annually...
Balance at 65: $929,444
Total contributions: $80,000
Employee contributions: $80,000
Employer match: $0
Investment returns: $849,444
If only I had an extra $1000 a year.
Gotta give up the avocado toast.
/s in case it isn’t obv.
I'd be willing to bet that medical bills at the generally accepted "retirement age" will eat through most of that inside of 5-10 years. A retirement home even faster.
"Millionaire" doesn't mean what it used to.