How much savings do you have?

Remove this Banner Ad

Considering I'm still young and would like to travel and enjoy myself in my twenties I'm torn on my decision but leaning towards getting into shares to start off with as I'm single and don't really want the hassle of worrying about paying loans and s**t at this point of my life

Go travel with at least some of it. You could readily spend $20k and travel for a year if travelling to cheaper countries. You won't regret travelling, you might regret not travelling down the track though.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

There are people out there with billions and they keep trying to make billions more. **** that, I'd be out well before then. If I won $10m or more tomorrow I reckon I'd pull the pin at 33.

And do what though? You can't sit around all day it gets dull very fast. There's a reason why Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos etc still take an active role in their companies, without a purpose life is squandered.
 
And do what though? You can't sit around all day it gets dull very fast. There's a reason why Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos etc still take an active role in their companies, without a purpose life is squandered.

When you have enough money you can do whatever the hell you want. Want to buy an old 1950s car and spend the year doing it up? Do it. Want to go sailing around the world or driving around Australia? Do it. Just sitting around doing nothing would drive you nuts but not having the stress of money would be give you plenty of freedom.
 
Money doesn't make you happy after a certain point, but the stress relief of not having to worry about tough times is a benefit. I have been lucky to save quite a bit in my job but have spent some of the best years (26-28) in saving it all up.

I went down the path of an investment property, 20% deposit, then also about to buy shares (awaiting eagerly and hoping for a crash but it's not overly important as I want to hold for 10+ years) and I should have enough for another holiday around the world.
 
I've just learnt that you really shouldn't save anything these days in a traditional way (unless it's for a property). That might seem odd, but the reason is inflation, and because each year the price of a lot of goods and services, housing goes up, saving doesn't really make sense, even if you have 3-4% interest per year. You will still lose money saving over time. Weird to think about. It's a depreciating investment.

You are far better off finding multiple income streams in assets and passive income or stocks, an example might be investing in a property stream that is low risk but gives you 5-10% returns.

It's weird to wrap your head around. But unfortunately it's how the system is set up these days. It's not like the 20th century where things were way more balanced out, so saving made more sense.

conclusion: you are better off spending your cash on appreciating goods and assets or just goods in general, because if you spend your money, then you will get back the value of that cash for the exact amount that you have right now in line with current year prices, before they go up over time and savings loses value over time.
 
Last edited:
It's weird to wrap your head around. But unfortunately it's how the system is set up these days. It's not like the 20th century where things were way more balanced out, so saving made more sense.

Yup - certainly wasn't any damn inflation around in the 20th century to erode our precious savings like there is now!!!!
 
I've just learnt that you really shouldn't save anything these days in a traditional way (unless it's for a property). That might seem odd, but the reason is inflation, and because each year the price of a lot of goods and services, housing goes up, saving doesn't really make sense, even if you have 3-4% interest per year. You will still lose money saving over time. Weird to think about. It's a depreciating investment.

I agree that I wouldn't want my entire net worth in a bank account, but there is certainly a case that can be made for having some of it in cash. Cash aside for emergencies like health issues or job loss are a must, I'd also suggest having some aside is in anticipation of the inevitable downtown in the markets.

You are far better off finding multiple income streams in assets and passive income or stocks, an example might be investing in a property stream that is low risk but gives you 5-10% returns.

I'm a fairly conservative investor, not a massive fan of stock picking etc but I think anything above 6-7% return is too good to be true (particularly consistently), I'd caution investing too much money with an expectation of above 7% return.

The issue for Australian investors is they are often limited by the ASX, which has seriously underperformed international markets if people have access to the US market, I'd suggest putting some money there.

Property has a place in a retirement plan, but it's an illiquid asset for which the costs to hold are often underestimated. Again personally, I only consider the return on property to be the savings in rent, capital gains will only be appreciated by my heirs.

conclusion: you are better off spending your cash on appreciating goods and assets or just goods in general, because if you spend your money, then you will get back the value of that cash for the exact amount that you have right now in line with current year prices, before they go up over time and savings loses value over time.

Overall I agree with this, but it's a long game and you have to have an emergency fund.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Property has a place in a retirement plan, but it's an illiquid asset for which the costs to hold are often underestimated. Again personally, I only consider the return on property to be the savings in rent, capital gains will only be appreciated by my heirs.

If you have the risk profile for it or can stomach it, you could look at a 'Living Off Equity' Strategy and reap the rewards far sooner.
 
I've just learnt that you really shouldn't save anything these days in a traditional way (unless it's for a property). That might seem odd, but the reason is inflation, and because each year the price of a lot of goods and services, housing goes up, saving doesn't really make sense, even if you have 3-4% interest per year. You will still lose money saving over time. Weird to think about. It's a depreciating investment.

What about when housing doesn't go up?
 
I've just learnt that you really shouldn't save anything these days in a traditional way (unless it's for a property). That might seem odd, but the reason is inflation, and because each year the price of a lot of goods and services, housing goes up, saving doesn't really make sense, even if you have 3-4% interest per year. You will still lose money saving over time. Weird to think about. It's a depreciating investment.

You are far better off finding multiple income streams in assets and passive income or stocks, an example might be investing in a property stream that is low risk but gives you 5-10% returns.

It's weird to wrap your head around. But unfortunately it's how the system is set up these days. It's not like the 20th century where things were way more balanced out, so saving made more sense.

conclusion: you are better off spending your cash on appreciating goods and assets or just goods in general, because if you spend your money, then you will get back the value of that cash for the exact amount that you have right now in line with current year prices, before they go up over time and savings loses value over time.

this post is a little misguided.

you're definitely correct that in general, the purchasing power of units of currency decreases over time. however, it's irrational to conclude that it's a good idea to spend everything you earn due to inflation- in almost no instances are there things called "appreciating goods". you know, unless we're talking collectables (fun fact, i "invested" about $300 in star wars figures in the late 90s. they're worth about $50 extra 20 years later).

if you saved, say, $40K over 10 years but thanks to inflation it was only worth $35K when you wished to spend it- you'd still have $35K to spend. if you purchased $40K worth of consumer goods during that same period you'd have $5K worth of goods. so, as you note it's worth putting that money into assets, not goods.

im about to sell one of my (thoroughly unimpressive) properties, in order to move somewhere nicer. when i apply for my next loan, the banks will be interested in how much i can cough up for deposit- they don't ask me how many star wars figures i managed to buy during my savings period.

the system that was "set up in days previous" included notable events like the great depression, the 19th C bank panics, and stagflation. in the 20s and 30s, people's purchasing power was constantly increasing- but nobody had any money. if you could marry an increase in purchasing power with full employment and adequate consumption, you would win the nobel prize in economics.
 
this post is a little misguided.

you're definitely correct that in general, the purchasing power of units of currency decreases over time. however, it's irrational to conclude that it's a good idea to spend everything you earn due to inflation- in almost no instances are there things called "appreciating goods". you know, unless we're talking collectables (fun fact, i "invested" about $300 in star wars figures in the late 90s. they're worth about $50 extra 20 years later).

if you saved, say, $40K over 10 years but thanks to inflation it was only worth $35K when you wished to spend it- you'd still have $35K to spend. if you purchased $40K worth of consumer goods during that same period you'd have $5K worth of goods. so, as you note it's worth putting that money into assets, not goods.

im about to sell one of my (thoroughly unimpressive) properties, in order to move somewhere nicer. when i apply for my next loan, the banks will be interested in how much i can cough up for deposit- they don't ask me how many star wars figures i managed to buy during my savings period.

the system that was "set up in days previous" included notable events like the great depression, the 19th C bank panics, and stagflation. in the 20s and 30s, people's purchasing power was constantly increasing- but nobody had any money. if you could marry an increase in purchasing power with full employment and adequate consumption, you would win the nobel prize in economics.

Well said! Makes way more sense actually!
 
I'm curious, how you pull the equity out of your house without selling it, taking out a reverse mortgage or some other bank facility that incurs interest?

Renting it out seems the most obvious, though not pulling out equity as such.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top