If you had to make a choice....

[doomdragon6]

As for saving money here, I just have two accounts. One is the "I made this" account, and the other is the "x percent of 1st account goes in here" and I put the card to Account 2 somewhere so that it's not just "on" me. Thus I save money, and I don't feel compelled to touch it. It happens every month, so I don't feel like I'm getting less money than usual.

 

[Chibibar]

you know. I was having a conversation with my wife on this topic. While the original scenario is extreme to extreme, we review on WHY we are in the current state.

What we have discover is that when Maron moved to Texas, she didn't have anything and I had little money. So we use credit card to get her going. Of course this became a habit even after she got a job and a place to live. We gotta have furniture it is a vicious circle really.

We finally paid off some but still have a few more to go. We are hoping to clear them all out by 2-3 years or less

The question is why do have to live like this? We broke down the numbers and see what is the minimum require to "live as is" without debts
* "Live as is" would be mortgage, insurance, life insurance, utilities (electric, water, gas, cable and internet+phones)
we break down the gas cost and food.

The question would be can we live with less and thus save more. Maybe we can "retire" early and reduce our budget to a minimum (house will be paid off in 12 years)
It is possible but it will take some work.

 

[sixpackshaker]

Money problems are the leading cause of stress and marital disharmony. Just taking out those two things alone does wonders for the existential search for true bliss.

So, you are going to take the wife out of the equation?

 

[Chibibar]

So, you are going to take the wife out of the equation?

You know what is interesting? sometimes when people are stressing over money on their own it is not too bad, but when you have people depend on you (spouse, kids, extended family, friends) then it can be stressful.

 

[sixpackshaker]

My statement also plays to what a lot of the rich guys I know say about their wives... It don't matter how much money you make. If you are unlucky you can find a woman that can out spend you.

 

[GasBandit]

My statement also plays to what a lot of the rich guys I know say about their wives... It don't matter how much money you make. If you are unlucky you can find a woman that can out spend you.

I don't think you even have to be unlucky to find one. Fortunately, I have not. Although, if we take the rules of the question as binding, if you only can "scrape by" and never hope to increase your wealth... shouldn't the opposite be true and the 40 year option would be wealthy such that even no wife of any sort could possibly spend it all? Unthinkable as it may be.

 

[Chibibar]

I don't think you even have to be unlucky to find one. Fortunately, I have not. Although, if we take the rules of the question as binding, if you only can "scrape by" and never hope to increase your wealth... shouldn't the opposite be true and the 40 year option would be wealthy such that even no wife of any sort could possibly spend it all? Unthinkable as it may be.

that is what I'm thinking hence my initial answer of 40 go nuts. Can you imagine how much good I can do with that much wealth?

 

[Mathias]

Let's assume for a moment that "scraping by" is minimum wage, which here, is $7.50/hour. If you work 40 hours a week every week for a year, which most people do, you're making $14,400 per year. Or, $1,200 a month.

That's what I live on right now. $1,200 per month. And I live well. I have a nice, comportable apartment, and this amount covers rent, water, electricity, internet, and MUCH MORE! I have enough money to do whatever or buy whatever I care to without "really" worrying about it. As a matter of fact, I've been too lazy to go grocery shopping this month and I've been eating almost nothing but fast food each day-- and I pay for my girlfriend every time. And I STILL have money at the end of the month. If I weren't that extravagant, I could probably pay car payments and insurance and all that, with just enough left over "just in case."

If scraping by is minimum wage, it would be doable to live like that your whole life. (In this magical realm where you somehow cannot progress to a better job. Again, I just cannot see not making my situation better.)

Chibibar's scraping by, however, sounds pretty bad.

$7.50 an hour @ 40 hours a week is $15,600 a year; you're also not taking out the solid 3 grand that the fed, medicare, and social security take a wet bite outta your ass for. I'd argue that's about $12600 a year or about 242 a weekly paycheck or about $969 a month.

Where in the hell do you live that you can get by nicely on 900-1000 bucks a month? I blow about 1200 a month on my mortgage alone, and I live a solid hour from any major city in a normal middle class neighborhood. Hell, apartments in the shitty ends of Philadelphia start at like 600 a month. If we're talking my version of scraping by with maintaining some sort of resemblance of the American Dream - one car garage, 1500 sq ft house with a white picket fence - then we're talking at least 3 grand a month combined income, after taxes.

That to me is scraping by - just able to keep your head above water without keeping up with the Jones'. Scraping by = about 36k a year for a family of four. Living the good life = 100k a year for a family of four. Yo is rich sucka = 250k + for a family of four that if they were taxed like the 30k-80k bracket, would be taking home only about 150k.
Added at: 19:05

I don't think you even have to be unlucky to find one. Fortunately, I have not. Although, if we take the rules of the question as binding, if you only can "scrape by" and never hope to increase your wealth... shouldn't the opposite be true and the 40 year option would be wealthy such that even no wife of any sort could possibly spend it all? Unthinkable as it may be.

Well, that's what I assumed the OP implied. You die wealthy. I would die a happy man knowing that my kids and wife would be financial stable and secure long after I'm gone.

 

[phil]

$7.50 an hour @ 40 hours a week is $15,600 a year; you're also not taking out the solid 3 grand that the fed, medicare, and social security take a wet bite outta your ass for. I'd argue that's about $12600 a year or about 242 a weekly paycheck or about $969 a month.

Where in the hell do you live that you can get by nicely on 900-1000 bucks a month? I blow about 1200 a month on my mortgage alone, and I live a solid hour from any major city in a normal middle class neighborhood. Hell, apartments in the shitty ends of Philadelphia start at like 600 a month. If we're talking my version of scraping by with maintaining some sort of resemblance of the American Dream - one car garage, 1500 sq ft house with a white picket fence - then we're talking at least 3 grand a month combined income, after taxes.

That's also assuming the place you work at can afford to keep you around for 40 hours. My Dunkin Donuts has been going down in sales for a bit and now most people are looking at 20-30 hours a week.

Plus min. wage is only 7.25. Not THAT much of a difference but it comes out to a month's rent every year depending on where you live.

I'm able to get by, mostly due to not having any debt. Car is paid off, don't have any student loans, still on my folk's insurance etc. This allows me to save a bit and I haven't been hurt by cutting back on hours.

Still though, living to 80 like this? I don't think I'd want to do that.

 

[Shegokigo]

Scraping by, still working past 60? What are you going to be a Wal-Mart greeter?

Again, to those who cherish family over everythingelse, they won't mind coming home every night after that.

 

[Terrik]

Well hey, my grandfather is 88 and still gets up to work every morning. Although I suppose it helps that his work is a tool company he started (Reed Tool and Die--for anyone that lives in Penn.), and it helps that he built has house on top of the shop.

 

[Shegokigo]

Starting your own company and running it doesn't exactly = the "scraping by" part of the question.

 

[makare]

Seriously people some of the comments in this thread in fact most of them are NOT actually referencing the original question. We are just having a general conversation about the issues the question raises.

 

[sixpackshaker]

Discussions die fast if you stick to the shallow topic at hand.

 

[Chibibar]

Seriously people some of the comments in this thread in fact most of them are NOT actually referencing the original question. We are just having a general conversation about the issues the question raises.

Actually, I do believe that is the point of the questions. (if we were in a philosophy class) Generally you get people to start choosing one or the other (no middle ground) and then people talk about WHY they chose this way. It is a good way to learn about people and their thinking.

We can see already that many of us are family oriented people. We look after our own and want to cherish that as long as you can. Some of us look at the "bigger picture" (like me) and hoping that after I'm gone, my family is well off regardless of the economic downturn or dependence of my working. Heaven forbid they need to survive off my Social Security check! ugh.

 

[GasBandit]

Starting your own company and running it doesn't exactly = the "scraping by" part of the question.

It does if the company doesn't do very well.

 

[TommiR]

We can see already that many of us are family oriented people. We look after our own and want to cherish that as long as you can. Some of us look at the "bigger picture" (like me) and hoping that after I'm gone, my family is well off regardless of the economic downturn or dependence of my working. Heaven forbid they need to survive off my Social Security check! ugh.

This is a valid way of looking at it. Another take on a "bigger picture" view might be to think that your family needs a good husband and father / wife and mother beyond the age of 40 more than they need to be filthy rich. And believing that the best gift a parent can give to their children is providing them with the immaterial tools of succeeding in life, rather than a fat bank account.

Though if success in life is measured by the amount of property one has, then of course leaving your offspring with oodles of material goods means they will automatically be more successful than they'd likely be if you stuck around for 40 more years, no matter how good you were at raising children.

 

[Chibibar]

This is a valid way of looking at it. Another take on a "bigger picture" view might be to think that your family needs a good husband and father / wife and mother beyond the age of 40 more than they need to be filthy rich. And believing that the best gift a parent can give to their children is providing them with the immaterial tools of succeeding in life, rather than a fat bank account.

Though if success in life is measured by the amount of property one has, then of course leaving your offspring with oodles of material goods means they will automatically be more successful than they'd likely be if you stuck around for 40 more years, no matter how good you were at raising children.

Agree.
The only counter would be if you are not busy "scraping by" the parent would actually have TIME to be with their children and raise them.
Note: The following is observation of my own sister and her son for I am not blessed with children of my own yet.

My sister and her husband work to keep a home. My nephew goes to daycare during the weekdays. Now the interaction does him good, but during the early years, the mind is still "moldable" I remember reading somewhere that after a certain age, it is hard to "change" their basic nature. So with the vast wealth, parent(s) can teach their kids at a good pace without worries and don't have the stress of paying child care.
Note: my sister currently paying around 600$ a month for daycare.

IMPORTANT NOTE: I am in NO WAY SAYING SHAPE OR FORM. That parents who are working and daycare doesn't raise good kids. (With this forum I have to make it clear since some people will imply that). Not all children are alike. Yes there are studies/report that even with parents being home all the time, some kids turn out bad, some turn out good. I don't have the answers to that, but that is part of my thinking.

What I do know that lack of money DOES cause some stress, now unlike other people (not on this forum) I realize I brought this upon myself and thus does not invoke the wrath on my spouse. Thus we don't have marital stress due to money (actually we don't have much really)