name the player,or post whatever you friggin' want

Yes, mortgage is a debt, but these day's there are so many that don't have it paid off that everytime they talk of debt, it's ususally referring to non-mortgage debt (like credit cards and personal loans). My dad bought his first house in 1965 for $21k, by 1971 his mortgage was already paid off. He retired in 1992 at the age of 58, he's lived a real good life. My folks travel, they enjoy their garden and keep close with family. They have good savings and with their pensions combined with a little bit of rental income from their basement, they live a pretty good life. I consider my dad a role model when it comes to middle class living, so many from his generation have also done the same or better. In today's world, we're looking at couple in their late 30's with a $500k mortgage, or just renting and living off their last check. There was a study that came out, over 50% of people don't even have a savings account and if they were to get laid off they would be in big trouble. It's all planning and thinking about it years before you get there, it takes discipline. These day's couples want the expensive car, trips, fine dining, nice clothes, saving is the last thing they think about. There's a lot of highly educated people with really good paying jobs that have nothing to their name.

 

A lot of people conflate "want" with "need". It's easy to think it's futile to start saving because they cannot fathom having enough to retire comfortably. So, they don't start. (Based on your numbers, more than half the people fall into this group.)

An element of home ownership vs. renting is that a mortgage is anti-inflationary. The mortgage payment is fixed over its term, and rent rises with inflation. Everyone who possibly can should buy. They should also pay off the mortgage as aggressively as possible. In our low interest rate environment a 15 year mortgage is probably doable. Make the equivalent of 13 monthly payments per year by paying 1/2 the monthly mortgage every other week (26 1/2 pymts. vs. 12 full pymts.).

If your employer matches a certain amount of your contribution to a savings plan then max that out. Then, raise your contribution rate a bit each year. In a few years it's not that hard to save 20% of one's income. Remember that if you save 20-25% that you're accustomed to living well below your means. When you do retire you do not need as much to replace your income.

All of these are not hard or painful. It takes a commitment to stick to a plan and a small amount of discipline to just got started.

 

Mostly, but not all cases when it comes to savings it's relative to your income. I think if you're a couple it's a lot easier with the combined income. Then again, there's no guarantees you'll be a couple forever. If you bring in 7 to 10k a month combined, even with a burn rate of 5k a month you're still in good hands as far as saving. There' a good chance to save 60k a year, which is amazing. If you're making 4k a month and your burn rate is $3500, then it becomes a challenge, especially when your vehicle gets over ten years old and you're looking to buy another one. There's no easy solution for people earning minimum wage or even a little higher, with taxes increasing all the time, a lot of people feel stuck. People should be starting young, after 55 it does seem futile because income potential lowers and you have healthcare issues, plus, if you have children in need that could also take a hit on your savings.

 

There is usually a much more common situation that one's "burn rate" is in direct proportion to their income.

People that make less have one (albeit very minor) advantage over those with higher incomes. They learn to live on less income and that means they need to replace a lower income when they reach retirement. (Replacing income is the key to knowing how much one needs to save.)

Most people, can in fact, save money if they establish a budget and stick to it. In fact, if savings are a payroll deduction it is relatively painless since the money is never in their hands, (bank account).

It should be easier for people with higher incomes to save - I agree whole heartedly. Unfortunately human nature interferes. They do not (often) save much more because they spend a lot more.

Failing to save anything, regardless of one's income, is another failure due to human nature. It cannot be attributed entirely to circumstances.

 

Dan, aren't you a tad young to have a heart attack?

Thanks to my brother in law- I am a prepper and I am prepping with supplies, heat sources, blankets, medical supplies, can goods, clothes, extra income, and weaponry in case something happens...

 

Cat, unfortunately there really is no such thing as "too young" for some things. I am not a high risk candidate based on life style, health condition, and doctors' assessments. I guess that this means that if I could have a heart attack, that anyone could.

Just remember that people have been declaring the end-of-the-world for millennia. Yeah, it could happen, but the odds of total doom and destruction befalling us are miniscule. Prep for disaster if you wish, but also plan for a long life. You are actually much more likely to live longer than you expect than you are to die before your time.

 

i should dwell more on your wisdom dan but i read this in my mother's voice.

 

The big advantage higher income earners have in canada is a they could take advantage of an $11k a year tax free savings account, plus there are retirement savings plans r.s.p they could also use as a tax shelter. The reality for a lot of low income earners is that with the constant rising costs in hydro, cable, car insurance, rent/home prices, child daycare, gas, groceries etc, many don't see any hope so they might as well enjoy themelves. The only way to really make do with a low income is to live in an affordable part of the city, this usually means a higher crime rate and a much lower standard of living. The only other escape is to just keep driving until you find a small town where you see affordable housing prices. I could see a self-employed tradesman doing well here, as he could network his services in a whole new area, or someone that opens shop in town (gas station, convenient store, restaurant), you see a lot of immigrants usually doing this. In today's culture, asking people that were born here to not go watch a movie or go out with friends for dinner is not easy. The older generation that wasn't born into that world had a much easier time doing without.

 

http://6abc.com/news/reports-of-foul-odor-in-philly-surrounding-areas-/1671323/

At first they thought it was those fat guys that order up all the cheesesteaks at geno's letting out gas.

 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/china-canada-dog-rescue-1.3912160

This is why canada's the best country in the world, I'm looking into getting one of these pooches.

 

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pckNsrbZU0U[/video]

 

skinny-I would love to see an AMERICAN write-up of why they don't want to be a part of Canada. haha.

 

skinny-how do you feel about EE leaving the Jays?

 

Aug.24 1814, canada burnt down the white house. Neither my ancestors were canadian or yours american at that time.

 

It sucks, I think they rushed signing morales, EE could've tried to make it work more. Just more evidence that it's a business. If the indians don't pick up the option on his 4th year he still get's $5M, but he'll be out $15M overall.

 

?? how do you know that? the old skinnys could go back a few hundred years or so. mine weren't in America as they came over to Newfoundland from Ireland, but thanks to that book and a chart my sister found, we are going to research all of the names to go back as far as we can.

 

yeah on the bb thread, I read he turned down a 4th yr from Oakland for $20 mil. can you imagine?

 

The first irish catholics started coming into canada around 1850. A lot of them were adopted into french families as orphans of the potato famine. In 1814 there were only natives, british wasps and french in canada.

 

Oaklands deal had a buyout option in the first year. The jays had the only offer that guaranteed him $80M.

 

the 1814 potato famine was not nearly as serious as the 1815 vodka famine, IMO