- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 50% of Americana aged 45-54 have a $95K net worth or less
Posted on 3/26/25 at 8:47 am to lsu777
Posted on 3/26/25 at 8:47 am to lsu777
quote:
I dont think it has to be liquid to be counted though. Know plenty of well off people that have 8-10 houses that wouldnt be liquid.
Not living there makes it a lot more liquid.
I understand the point in counting home equity, but if you want your true financial picture, you should exclude it. Especially when you factor in if you need to sell your house because the economy sucks, it’s going to be really hard to sell your house
1
Posted on 3/26/25 at 8:47 am to theliontamer
quote:
500k house with 2 kids
quote:
compared to a more modest house
$500k house is more modest in a lot of places in this country now. That's a part of the problem.
Where I live, if I pay less than that, I'm in the hood or 45 minutes away.
Posted on 3/26/25 at 8:48 am to StringedInstruments
quote:that’s country bumpkin prices… and you said Birmingham “area” so it might be in the Chalmette equivalent
so not country bumpkin prices
Posted on 3/26/25 at 8:48 am to AUFANATL
Every 40 year old on the OT has over 1m in their 401k so I feel poor as hell
Posted on 3/26/25 at 8:50 am to stout
Based on this calculator, my income percentile is fairly close to my net worth percentile. I guess this makes sense? I wonder if others see similar results? Could be helpful in allowing one to decide if they're savings rates are inline with peers with similar incomes. If net worth is lower than income percentile, you're fricking up. If net worth percentile is better than income percentile, you're doing well.
Posted on 3/26/25 at 8:51 am to chalmetteowl
quote:
that’s country bumpkin prices…
I meant for the area overall. Birmingham is a midsized city with affordable living expenses compared to most metro areas.
quote:
and you said Birmingham “area” so it might be in the Chalmette equivalent
We’re in the Over the Mountain area near Vestavia and Mountain Brook. It’s a fixer upper and we’ve put in nearly $75k the past five years (still needing about $50k more), so maybe saying $235k without that caveat was disingenuous.
My main point was that people spending $500k on a house with $125k income is insane. It’s hard enough with my modest numbers.
This post was edited on 3/26/25 at 8:52 am
Posted on 3/26/25 at 8:53 am to stout
Let’s just keep it real.
With what things cost now, 100k is not that much. After deductions, taxes, bills etc a person isn’t left with a bunch of money.
Your take home twice a month is 2900-3000 after taxes. Approximately. I’m sure someone is gonna think 100k would get taxed less.
Now start paying bills.
And that’s just living a normal life without super fancy things. You ain’t making it rain anymore
With what things cost now, 100k is not that much. After deductions, taxes, bills etc a person isn’t left with a bunch of money.
Your take home twice a month is 2900-3000 after taxes. Approximately. I’m sure someone is gonna think 100k would get taxed less.
Now start paying bills.
And that’s just living a normal life without super fancy things. You ain’t making it rain anymore
Posted on 3/26/25 at 8:54 am to MRTigerFan
quote:
I disagree. Net worth should definitely include equity. Liquidity =/= value.
I can see both sides of the argument. I included my primary home equity because I have a 2nd home (small condo) that's currently a rental, but that I'll move into in retirement in 3 years. At that point the primary residence will be sold, so I consider it part of my net worth since it will be liquidated in 3 years. Besides, if you own the home outright and are not paying rent or a mortgage, that's no different than having that same amount of income coming in.
Posted on 3/26/25 at 8:54 am to AUFANATL
quote:
The big life preserver for this generation will be inheritance. I know a lot of people who aren't properly saving for retirement because they know when their boomer parents die they will inherit a McMansion and a seven figure 401k plus a bunch of "stuff".. Why sacrifice and save now when you know the account will be topped up in the future?
This is a dangerous game. End of life care is expensive as frick
Posted on 3/26/25 at 8:58 am to stout
Just like including jewelry and cars ( excluding colletors)...
I think that # is low, tbh
I think that # is low, tbh
Posted on 3/26/25 at 8:58 am to stout
I mean, it’s the single biggest asset in most portfolios at a time where demand is high and supply is low; why not exclude it?
Posted on 3/26/25 at 8:59 am to stout
This is household too id expect?
Posted on 3/26/25 at 9:00 am to Mingo Was His NameO
quote:
This is a dangerous game. End of life care is expensive as frick
Just got a quote for my father in law to be in a memory care assisted living facility with dementia. $15k/month.
The other side of the coin is that boomers are stubborn as frick. My FIL and MIL are both refusing to consider it.
Posted on 3/26/25 at 9:02 am to CatfishJohn
Not saying it's the always the best or easiest option, but people can always move. No one is forcing anyone to live in a certain place. This is another problem I see, with people complaining about affordable living in very desirable places. Obviously everyone would like to live in a nice waterfront house with a great view but these places are limited. And if everyone lived there, it would start to suck. "Affordable" housing initiatives don't help anyone and usually just ruin the area they are built.
Posted on 3/26/25 at 9:03 am to AUFANATL
quote:
The big life preserver for this generation will be inheritance.
Boomers are going to transfer anywhere between 20 to 40 Trillion to their heirs. But, you do bring up a good point about things like nursing homes and even worse memory care if one or both parents end up with dementia or Alzheimer's etc. those things can drain the accounts very fast.
Posted on 3/26/25 at 9:03 am to theliontamer
quote:
Not saying it's the always the best or easiest option, but people can always move
Can they though?
Posted on 3/26/25 at 9:04 am to HoustonChick86
quote:
Is it unfair not to include home equity?
Can you eat your house when you retire?
Posted on 3/26/25 at 9:06 am to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
Can you eat your house when you retire?
You can sell your home and move into something cheaper, pocketing the cash. You can sell your home and use the cash generated from the sale until death, in some cases it might be a large enough amount to afford you housing til death and money on top of that.
Posted on 3/26/25 at 9:07 am to StringedInstruments
Yea, maybe 500k was a little high. But even a 400k house applies to the logic. And you're pretty close to that with 235+75+50. Very doable, but hard to manage large expenses and save. Congrats on the fixer upper, I've got one myself and have enjoyed the process. Learning how to do things yourself is an incredible skill and helps people make smart financial decisions. Drives me crazy talking to people that cant afford a house but are unwilling to learn how to fix one themselves and want a brand new one.
Posted on 3/26/25 at 9:07 am to stout
Many roots to this problem. One of the more important roots is financial knowledge in 20’s and decision making in 20’s and 30’s.
By choosing not to prioritize financial future and NOT enjoy time value of money, many make bad choices early years.
Most don’t even realize or think they are making hundreds of thousands of dollars (if not millions) decisions when then do not start saving for retirement in their 20’s. Or the knucklehead consumerism dumb decisions to buy fancy chit they don’t need at the expense of the wealth (freedom) of their future selves.
By choosing not to prioritize financial future and NOT enjoy time value of money, many make bad choices early years.
Most don’t even realize or think they are making hundreds of thousands of dollars (if not millions) decisions when then do not start saving for retirement in their 20’s. Or the knucklehead consumerism dumb decisions to buy fancy chit they don’t need at the expense of the wealth (freedom) of their future selves.
Page 2 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News