Anonymous wrote:Car payments are for the poors.

OP here. I disagree - my rate is a bit under 4%. I can do much better (and am doing much better) than that putting money in the stock market. In a sense, car payments are for "poors" if you take one on because you have to. But they sometimes make sense.

Car payments are for the poors.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think Millionaire next door says assets should be equal to (annual income x age)/10. So 40 year olds making 200,000 should have at least $800,000k in assets.

And a 20 y.o. making $50k should have at least $100k.

He's not talking about 20 year olds.

Anonymous wrote:I think Millionaire next door says assets should be equal to (annual income x age)/10. So 40 year olds making 200,000 should have at least $800,000k in assets.

And a 20 y.o. making $50k should have at least $100k.

Anonymous wrote:I think Millionaire next door says assets should be equal to (annual income x age)/10. So 40 year olds making 200,000 should have at least $800,000k in assets.

He probably pulled that formula out of his arse, I reckon?

I think Millionaire next door says assets should be equal to (annual income x age)/10. So 40 year olds making 200,000 should have at least $800,000k in assets.

I think if you are saving north of 20 percent of income you are doing very well, and I'd include employer max. Basically I'd max 401k, then do Backdoor Roth IRAs, then say 1-2k split among 529, ibond, and a total market index fund, depending on what percent of your income that is, how tight a budget that would be, how many kids you have etc.

Anonymous wrote:Ideally, you should have 30% of income for needs (housing, food, health, etc), 30% for wants, and 40% for savings - with rejiggering to fit your needs - but not too much or you will feel either deprived or that you don't have a safety net.

I've never seen anyone recommend a 30/30/40 ratio before. Saving as your biggest category - sure, it's great, but highly unrealistic for the majority of folks and pretty conservative. Most people would do fine with a 50/30/20 ratio, especially if that's after retirement is taken out.

$17,500 contribution for each of us. One has a match of a few grand a year. The other doesn't. Both mid-30s. Total investments are around 250k in 401(k) accounts. Bought a house last year, so drained all taxable investment accounts and cash and put a bit over 100k down.

Tell us more about what "maxing out 401ks" means. What percentage of your incomes is that? What is the total annual monetary amount of your contributions? How much is your total annual retirement savings, including any employer matches?

Anonymous wrote:No childcare expenses? I'd aim for between 4 and 5 K a month. We have children and we net 16K. We save about 7 K a month.

Are you including 401(k) contributions? If so, I don't think we can swing that. 4k would really be pushing it but probably unrealistic because we couldn't really spend money on going out to eat, would have to cut cable, etc. Plan was to do $3k to $3500 above maxing out 401(k).

Ideally, you should have 30% of income for needs (housing, food, health, etc), 30% for wants, and 40% for savings - with rejiggering to fit your needs - but not too much or you will feel either deprived or that you don't have a safety net.

I would think 3k would be good, 4k better.

No childcare expenses? I'd aim for between 4 and 5 K a month. We have children and we net 16K. We save about 7 K a month.

~11k net monthly, after both of us max out 401(k).
$3k mortgage
$500 in student loans and car payments
$800 or so in utilities

TY