>Isn't the simple act of saving money the sure way to

>>1656345
Because when people tell you they want to be a millionaire they really mean they want to spend a million dollars, but to be a millionaire you actually have to earn a million dollars and then -not- spend it.

File: Nihilism.gif (92KB, 576x747px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 576x747px

what if I told you
you have to spend millions to make millions?

Yeah, you have to constantly maintain the value of financial freedom above crap like new Jordan's, drug benders, a new car, a house that you just barely afford, that trip to wherever-the-fuck, chasing young socialist pussy, etc.

If people spent as much time making good money as they spent figuring out how to spend it, they'd be set desu.

>>1656358
a house that you can barely afford and young socialist pussy are actually pretty good investments.

considering most americans at least don't own anything but the equity in their house, and getting a working woman cuts your bills in half. Plus tax write offs for your spawn and being forced to make more moneys to support the little brats.

cars, trips, Jordans and drugs are verboten tho.

File: 1414907511481.jpg (7KB, 175x258px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 175x258px

>>1656345

Who knows.

I drive a shitty car, the only thing I really invest money into is suits for work and a relatively high-priced gym membership because I want to take care of myself.

The rest goes into reducing my debts and investing. I have acord and robinhood, I make sure that I'm putting away ~10k/year. Any interest gets re-invested. Everyone's out chasing tail and buying bullshit. I know people who work multiple jobs just so they can eat out every night and blow their money on an expensive apartment and a nice car. Yeah, it's good to have a reliable car, but you don't need a fucking Tesla on 50k/yr, that shit's just irresponsible.

People forget that American society is built on owning things and protecting investors. Everyone freaked out when they bailed out the banks, but they did that so grandpa would still have a fucking retirement. Everyone's so up in arms about "the one percent" that they never stopped to wonder if their smelly hair bullshit was ever really worth it to begin with. If they were actual adults they would have realized that the only way to move ahead is to invest in your future and plan, not bitch because they can only get a job at Starbucks and expect life to give them some 60k office job where they sit around a table and jerk off. Fucking kids these days.

>>1656359
You lack the ability to think long-term.

Socialist pussy is a depreciating asset. They quickly like your money better than making their own and want to start popping out your babies. They get "sick" or something and stop working altogether. The rest is history.

The house that's too large is trapped money; it doesn't make you anything while you hold your money there and MAYBE it goes up in value. Better to rent or buy a small house and buy investments that pay dividends, rents, etc. as they also fluctuate in price.

>>1656372
>You lack the ability to think long-term.
so I've been told.

you trade the pussy in for new every now and then.

should be doing the same with the house as well. That way if you get nothing else out of life you'll have a few hundred thousand dollars in equity when you retire.

>>1656374

> trading the pussy in

Yeah, get ready to get fucked in court by some crazy bitch who pokes holes in your condoms. If you were really thinking long-term you'd be aiming for a good woman who you can work with who'll help you cover the bills.

Just settle down with a 20 y/o college Asian at 30. If she still doesn't look good in 30 years you can just go to some foreign country and buy pussy with your retirement, Trump style.

>>1656374
I hope you know that was not a refutation of the argument that I made.

No problem living your life like that, but it's awful investing advice.

>>1656377
This guy knows what's up.

Hope you didn't learn first-hand like me- brohemian. Love you either way :)

>>1656378
>I hope you know that was not a refutation of the argument that I made.
your argument as I read it is that there are better investments out there.

I never said those were the best investments available.
I never said they were the only investments available.

so you appear to be arguing against what you imagine I mean rather than what I said.

there's no point in 'refuting' the arguments you have in your head.
sorry.

>>1656377
>get ready to get fucked in court
alimony runs out. Child support too. you recover from losing half your assets.

what you're left with is the ability to earn more than you need.

>>1656345
Because its not?

>>1656358
Whats the point of money if you dont spend it

>>1656377
>using condoms for long term birth control
Nigga youre just asking for it

>>1656382
What I'm saying is that you are buying liabilities, not investments at all.

Irrefutable.

File: IMG_1278.png (107KB, 640x1136px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 640x1136px

>>1656400
Source 1

>>1656400
>Irrefutable.
false dichotomy.
most investments are also liabilities.
some liabilities are also investments.

>>1656401
yes, yes, I get it.

and stocks aren't investments because they cost you money to buy and you have to pay taxes and commissions on them. Sometimes they even lose value.

can you do better than pretending an investment must not cost anything or ever lose value?

>>1656401
>what is appreciation

>>1656408
don't spoil the party with your long term thinking now.

>>1656405
There's a point you're still missing. I'm not arguing that an investment costs nothing. Far from it.

Good stocks pay dividends the entire time you hold them. You buy them once, receive dividends the whole time you hold them.

Same with rental property. You buy a multi unit property, rent it out, make some money and maybe even add value to it so that it rents for higher.

Good investments like these, it does not matter if you ever sell. You're making money, often in a way that is much more efficient than working for it.

>>1656412
*tax-efficient than holding it

>>1656414
*tax efficient than working for it.

Sorry I'm fucking my grammar so bad.

I can understand why people with social lives have bigger expenses, I guess.
But I barely need any room to function and my hobbies are very cheap.
I'm an accountant, I live in a small house because I don't need any more room, I work, i work out, I come home, I watch anime. Having a pseudoneet lifestyle works really well for savings anyway. I'll be able to retire a good 20-25 years before my peers.

>>1656412
Is this a joke?

>>1656412
well your house is increasing in value whether you like it or not, and if you want you can certainly capitalize on that without selling.

but I think your definition is wrong since not all investments return dividends or income before sale. Stock for example doesn't cease to be an investment simply because it doesn't pay dividends.

Ultimately I don't think it matters though. If you believe that buying a house and getting married are bad financial choices then you hopefully won't do them. In time when you compare your wealth to those that made those choices I certainly hope you come out ahead, but statistically there's no reason to think you will. Granted, those statistics are skewed by the fact that pretty much everyone buys a house and gets married, but perhaps the correlation is causation.

I'm not going to go to any lengths to convince you to buy a house though, that's your business. I'm just pointing out that most americans only have one asset of value, and it's their house.

>>1656421
Not an argument

I'm going to bed. I know I'm right. I've made my points. You don't want to learn anything, I'm not interested in arguing with you.

It's all in books anyways if you change your mind someday. GL

>>1656412
Buying a house is a much better investment than renting from someone else. Not sure what the fuck youre talking about

>>1656425
Seriously you think renting is better?

>>1656425
>I know I'm right.
and there's no arguing that

>>1656429
I'll tell you why bc you're new and I actually believe you're curious.

How much does a single-family unit cost? Let's call it 200k. Nothing crazy.

Here's another option for your 200k: go look for a deal on a multi-family unit. Go shopping for anything under a million dollars.

Banks are much happier to lend large sums like this to people who are making money with it than people who plan to live on the property they're buying.

You're looking for a crappy property that's already generating a 10-15% NOI before you do anything to it. High occupancy percentages.

The bank will loan to you between 3-6%. So minimally you're making 4% per year on a million dollars when all you had was 200k.

>>1656441
Yes because maintenence insurance remodels and vacancies will never happen to you. And you completely failed to address my point. Why should i rent a house from someone else instead of owning my own?

>>1656445
>>1656445
Go look up NOI

Renting something a little too small does a lot for you. It pisses you off enough to make more. But more importantly, that 200k that I was talking about is in a deal rather than in your house. It can be leveraged often about 4-5x. And when you start making deals like this, you'll be moving up in houses in shorter time than 5-10 years which is often a recommended minimum for homebuying rather than renting due to taxes & fees.

>>1656457
you've got a valid point, your money is usually better off in a business than in your home.

other anon also has a point though- you can do both easily enough.
In my experience where your guidance fails is in thinking it's easier or anywhere as cheap to get a loan to buy a rental.

it is in the US at least MUCH easier and cheaper to buy a home than a rental.

You should save up a bare minimum of 50k before you decide to do any sort of investing or stock trading.

Any lower and you'll likely just fail and end up broke

> try to save money
> live in Sydney
> no jobs
> rent is $1000 a fortnight
> parking is $10-20/day
> a McChicken costs $6.50

what's the solution if you live in a shithole like this? do i move to a different country?

>>1656462
Thank you, that's not the information that I have but I will be researching further on your point about cheaper/easier loans on personal homes than multifamily.

If you want to help a brother out and provide a source, I would be very grateful to you.

>>1656457
>that 200k is in a deal rather than your house
Mortgages are literally as cheap as rent in most areas. Youre still spending money monthly. Only one disappears forever opposed to owning which will appreciate in value

>>1656471
I have no source, I've just bought both.
I've owned two homes and one rental house in my life. Buying the home I live in was much easier with an FHA loan. I had a lower down payment, lower interest rates, and lower insurance costs. I think my down payment on my house was 3%, while I had to get 20% to get my second home and my rental.

My first mortgage was expensive, 8%, but that's because I'm self-employed and had to do a no-doc loan. I refi'd to 3.75 I think. I'd have to check. Rates on the second home and the rental were both over 7% on a 15 year mortgage.

I don't have the second home or the rental anymore though.

>>1656494
Were these multifamily properties? How many units?

>>1656469

>no jobs
Not true
>rent is $1000 a fortnight
Wait you're paying $500/week living on your own and yet apparently you're trying to 'save money'?
>parking
Hahahaha rich people can afford to piss away money on city parking, everyone else catches public transport.
>maccas is too expensive
If you cant afford maccas maybe stop buying maccas? Make your own damn food like everyone else

Your actual problem is that you're a lazy shit who blames his lack of $$$ on 'Sydney', rather than facing the reality that you'll actually have to work to get what you want.

Why would any other country want you?

Tbh pretty sure this is a trollpost by a foreigner, cause rent in aus is usually weekly not fortnightly.

>>1656358
I definitely agree with you anon. You made a lot of sense.

>>1656345
saving money is only part of the answer
staying low debt or debt free and investing is the rest

>>1656345
You're right that cutting expenses is usually more effective than trying to increase gains. You're right that steadily saving money is a surefire way to amass substantial wealth. And you're right that plebs somehow fail to understand this concept.

You're wrong that this path leads to becoming "rich" though. You'll top out at lower middle-class that way. Still, you're not worrying about lack of money anymore and can afford pretty much anything you would want for a middle class life.

But becoming rich is a different beast entirely. Low-balling it at 2% interest you'd have to save 1,000 bucks every month for 50 years to make your first million. This is absolutely not an option for your average pleb.

You also seem to misunderstand debt. Debt is nothing inherently bad. Debt to invest, i.e. to make future profits is a good thing! Debt for consumer spending is a surefire way to go down the drain. But if you actually want to become rich, you have to take risks, leverage your capital and take out massive loans.

>Why can't plebs understand this simple concept?
Be glad they don't. Consumerism keeps our economy going. If suddenly everyone started saving money religiously the whole fucking system would come crashing down. It's one of the cruel ironies of capitalism that you *need* dumb and poor people that buy recklessly to keep the cycle going. Saving syphons money out of the economy and is pretty bad on the large scale.

>>1656350

This. My dad used to tell me "Son, you don't get rich by making a lot of money. You get rich by not spending it all."

Served me well. I'm on track to retire by 50.

File: tumblr_le9ftbUOMX1qfu4tho1_400[1].png (7KB, 360x279px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 360x279px

>>1657448

you finally living the dream at 50.... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA

>>1656345
how are you supposed to save if you are in college and commute or pay rent and in college.

File: Education.png (301KB, 480x449px) Image search: [Google]

301KB, 480x449px

>>1657699
If you can't then you don't which implies you are a new age economic debt slave.
It's a type of lottery, sure you could land a dream job with that piece of paper and spend the rest of your days accumulating wealth, then die, but even then, are you winning?

>>1656365
where do you work?

>>1656408
I don't appreciate your tone.

Check MATE.

What's the secret of making enough money to enjoy life but saving enough brehs?

I don't want to wait till I'm 50 to be a millionaire.

>>1658135
Define "enjoy life". The people who enjoy working their asses off in a competitive environment or those who work tirelessly on their own company usually have no problem with earning enough money.

The thing is that someone will tell you get into a specific thing like finance but if you don't enjoy the place you are spending the majority of your time awake you are not enjoying life.

>>1657208
>consumerism is inherently dumb
Jew detected. Some people like having nice things

>>1658213
>are spending the majority of your time awake
that's the problem.

you shouldn't be spending most of your time making money. That's no way to enjoy life.

File: money.gif (1MB, 175x150px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 175x150px

>>1656350
wagecuck cope

>>1656345
I think everyone but complete idiots understands that saving = you have more money.

The thing is some people actually want to experience fun things in life (most of which costs $$$). You know that when you croak at 80, you're not going to take your bank account with you.

>>1658304
>at 80
life is dogshit past 50 and thats pushing it

File: Animals.jpg (61KB, 620x459px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 620x459px

>>1656355
>you have to spend millions to make millions?

It's not "spending" millions to make millions.

It's leveraging millions to make milliions.

>>1658307
Trump? Warren buffett? Literally anyone who's very rich?

>>1656469
Move interstate senpai. Melbourne and Sydney, the living expenses are outrageous compared to the rest of the country.

>>1657120
Arts grad from Melb Uni. Where the can I earn $$$? Unemployed atm

It's literally impossible to be upwardly mobile in those towns unless you've got a brilliant hustle or went to fucking Scotch college and daddy asked his old business partner to give you that unadvertised job.
>I didn't say I'm not trying to find dat brilliant hustle

>>1657690
This. Although seriously, you can "live the dream" and not be rich. Pussy is easier to get when you're young. And you don't mind going without luxuries when you're young to. You'll drink shitty beer and still have a good time. Staying in youth hostels instead of the Park Hotel.

>>1658317
>It's leveraging millions to make milliions.
nice

>>1658333
How is that an argument? Just because they're old and rich doesn't mean they enjoy life. Sure it's EASIER for them to enjoy old age because of affluence, but no doubt Trump would give anything to wind back the clock 40 years. He's even said that's why he builds buildings and doesn't do plastic surgery.

Buffett is a weirdo also, the only thing he's ever cared about is investing. He was that way when he was 12, he's that way now. He's had no regrets because he's never been a "making memories" kind of guy.

>>1658228
consumerism is not inherently dumb but it is inherently the wrong path to riches (and that's what this thread is about)

did you bother to read to the bottom of my post? i'm also writing how consumerism is propping up the system and allows the more fiscally responsible people to amass their wealth. consumerism is great! just not if you do it yourself and want to build net worth at the same time.

>>1658708
>consumerism is great! just not if you do it yourself and want to build net worth at the same time.
isn't interesting how the wealthy keep spending shit tons of money and keep getting wealthier?

it's almost like the real secret to building net worth is not being scared shitless to lose it.

>save a million dollars
>in ten years you have 800000 dollars

Saving is for plebs, rich people want assets not money.

File: Screenshot_2016-12-08-02-24-34.png (599KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

599KB, 1080x1920px

Is this actually working?

>>1656377
>who pokes holes in your condoms
>what are vasectomies

If you're sexually active in ((current year)) and you don't have a vasectomy, you're a fucking idiot who deserves to be cucked by some whore

>but I want kids someday

Assuming you are a grade-A moron who fell for that meme, then put some sperm on ice. Simple.

>>1658785
WTF is going on with that math,
20yo saving $730 per year for 45 years until 65 is $32,850 and with an annual return of 12% it doesn't even get close to 1 million

>>1658831
you suck at math. With 12% p.a. it comes down to $1.077.638,87

>>1658841
*of interest. So $1.110.488,87 in total.
12% p.a. is unrealistic tho.
8% p.a. only gives you $304.721,03

Except anyone who knows Econ 101 knows that saving everything instead of spending is actually bad for the economy.

>>1658851
Fuck the economy, I want money.

>>1658712
Interesting argument - do you have any data to support it?
I think you're naively confusing absolute numbers with relative terms. If a person earning a million bucks a month blows 200k on stupid shit they're still saving 4/5th of their income. So if a guy earning 1k a month spends 200 bucks and saves 800, I'd say that's definitely the right path to getting rich - and pretty far from mindless consumerism.

Also, please spell out to me how spending money on stuff with no returns (i.e. consumerism) leads to "building net worth". I agree that you can't be scared to *invest* your money and in my original post I even said that taking up debt for promising investments is a great strategy. But we're not arguing about investments here.

>>1656345
Because it's hard as fuck to save and beat inflation just to live like a cuck after 60 years of living like a cuck...

>>1659309
Nice rebuttal, retard.

Lack of spending equates to less consumption and incentive to invest in the economy which leads to less growth and a fall in capacity.

>>1656345
unused money, is wasted money

>>1659319
> Lack of spending equates to less consumption and incentive to invest in the economy which leads to less growth and a fall in capacity.


The chinese can't keep pumping funny money into their economy just to build empty buildings, in empty cities, with empty infrastructure.

Sooner than later, their lack of spending and reliance on government infra investments is going to collapse in dramatic fashion.

>>1656345
Inflation eats away at savings.

It you want to be wealthy, you need to acquire assets that will appreciate in value or provide income. Ideally they with do both.