Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
I completely agree with the idea that many people should pay more attention to living and less to making a living. And if you're one of the fortunate minority at risk of dying with a surfeit of cash, there are many worthwhile things you can do with that money to solve this "problem".
But I do take issue with how the figures are presented.
" the average inheritance in the U.S. being $177,000(the median is closer to $69,000)" The two numbers come from different sources. Which is curious, because the writer had available figures from the same source (Survey of Consumer Finances) on the page he cited: $707,291 (average) and $69,000 (median).
By mixing numbers from different sources, he makes it appear as though average and mean are not all that far apart. So don't worry when he then gives only average figures: "The average retired adult who dies in their 60s leaves behind $296k in net wealth, $313k in their 70s, $315k in their 80s, and $238k in their 90s."
The median respondent that died in their 60s had about $3,000 in liquid investments within two years of their passing, which increased to $10,000 for respondents that died in their 70s and $15,000 for those that died in their 80s.
Without liquidating or otherwise monetizing their homes (if any) many people have virtually no assets to live on.
Indeed, about 46 percent of senior citizens in the United States have less than $10,000 in financial assets when they die. Most of these people rely almost totally on Social Security payments as their only formal means of support
The shift from inheritance (used in the original piece) to liquid asset data in the quotes I gave is deliberate. If we're talking about trading money for time, we're talking about the money that you have to spend, not how much your heirs will inherit.
If one has the resources, or projected future earnings, to take more time for oneself, definitely go for it. But for far more people than his figures suggest, being able to do so is only a dream.
Yes, that article really spoke to me, too. @msf makes great points here. "If one has the resources, or projected future earnings, to take more time for oneself, definitely go for it. But for far more people than his figures suggest, being able to do so is only a dream."
Sadly true. What will it take for constructive, purposeful financial literacy to happen in the schools? Is "youth wasted on the young," as they say? Are high-schoolers constitutionally unable to fathom the vital truth about compounding over time, for instance? Or has it "just not been tried?"
Comments
But I do take issue with how the figures are presented.
" the average inheritance in the U.S. being $177,000(the median is closer to $69,000)"
The two numbers come from different sources. Which is curious, because the writer had available figures from the same source (Survey of Consumer Finances) on the page he cited:
$707,291 (average) and $69,000 (median).
By mixing numbers from different sources, he makes it appear as though average and mean are not all that far apart. So don't worry when he then gives only average figures:
"The average retired adult who dies in their 60s leaves behind $296k in net wealth, $313k in their 70s, $315k in their 80s, and $238k in their 90s."
However, from the source of that quote also comes this:Without liquidating or otherwise monetizing their homes (if any) many people have virtually no assets to live on. https://news.mit.edu/2012/end-of-life-financial-study-0803
The shift from inheritance (used in the original piece) to liquid asset data in the quotes I gave is deliberate. If we're talking about trading money for time, we're talking about the money that you have to spend, not how much your heirs will inherit.
If one has the resources, or projected future earnings, to take more time for oneself, definitely go for it. But for far more people than his figures suggest, being able to do so is only a dream.
Sadly true. What will it take for constructive, purposeful financial literacy to happen in the schools? Is "youth wasted on the young," as they say? Are high-schoolers constitutionally unable to fathom the vital truth about compounding over time, for instance? Or has it "just not been tried?"