# What would YOU do with $50,000 savings?



## matthewl (1 April 2011)

Hi,

I'm 22 years old and have a little over $50K in savings.

I understand that you can't provide me with financial advice, so what would YOU do if you had $50k to invest?

Thanks,
Matt


----------



## poverty (1 April 2011)

matthewl said:


> Hi,
> 
> I'm 22 years old and have a little over $50K in savings.
> 
> I understand that you can't provide me with financial advice, so what would YOU do if you had $50k to invest?




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QS0q3mGPGg


----------



## youngone (1 April 2011)

matthewl said:


> Hi,
> 
> I'm 22 years old and have a little over $50K in savings.
> 
> ...




How? im almost 25 and hardly over $10K in saving and struggling to pay bills and rents. My newbie suggestion would be, to ask the bank for a home deposit, providing you have good financial record, $40k toward a $200k house. Or another long term strategy would be in shares. $50k in a 3 years investment share is fruitful, imagine a 40% return per year from $50k,  . DYOR


----------



## nioka (1 April 2011)

Think carefully, research in depth and remember "spend in haste, regret at leisure".


----------



## nunthewiser (1 April 2011)

lunch


----------



## prawn_86 (1 April 2011)

Im a couple years older than 22 and have a bit more than that in savings.

Plans are:
Get married  (25%)
6 - 12 months travel (30%)
Maybe consider buying a house when we get back if the numbers stack up, otherwise leave the balance in current investments [Cash (50%), Hybrids(5%), Silver(5%), Value stocks(22%), and a couple spec stocks (18%)]


----------



## inq (1 April 2011)

Put in on my home loan.

However if I had a clean slate and 50k I'd buy a house, along the lines of what YoungOne said. 

If I were to not put in on the house, I'd put 40k into blue chips Value.Able style, while the remaining 10k into early miners with assets on the ground.


----------



## nioka (1 April 2011)

inq said:


> , I'd put 40k into blue chips Value..




Blue chips can also go down. Nothing guaranteed there, look at a 2 or 3 year chart for any of them. I don't own ANY blue chips.


----------



## GumbyLearner (1 April 2011)

matthewl said:


> Hi,
> 
> I'm 22 years old and have a little over $50K in savings.
> 
> ...




I wouldn't buy an expensive car or lend it to anyone.


----------



## Agentm (1 April 2011)

nunthewiser said:


> lunch




i was thinkin this myself


----------



## againsthegrain (1 April 2011)

put it in a ubank saver account while you have a good think about it


----------



## inq (1 April 2011)

nioka said:


> Blue chips can also go down. Nothing guaranteed there, look at a 2 or 3 year chart for any of them. I don't own ANY blue chips.




Never said they don't Noika. A bit silly to assume I am that green.

What I was suggesting was that I would put the money into mature businesses which be able to retain profits largely, so the negative spectrum would be stagnation not receivership. retail staples, monopolies with high cost entry barriers etc, protected industry. 

I have time on my side, so risk doesn't factor in as highly into my calculations. Though I do still have a relatively high exposure to speculative small caps.


----------



## nunthewiser (1 April 2011)

Agentm said:


> i was thinkin this myself
> 
> View attachment 42204




Righton!

i think me and you need a play date one day


----------



## Reasons (1 April 2011)

matthewl said:


> Hi,
> 
> I'm 22 years old and have a little over $50K in savings.
> 
> ...




Hi Matt

Do what 97% of the population never does and plan for your short, medium and long term future. I think you have done really well to accumulate $50K at your age.

Assuming you have no high interest debt like a car and credit cards outstanding as this is what you need to pay off first. No point having those commitments and getting lower returns elsewhere; and people do exactly that when they don't know any better.

*Medium term* you will probably want to buy a house. The First Home Saver Accounts that the Govt. is offering pays you 17% ($850) on a max. of $5000 p.a. You should get at least 6% from the account, giving you a very respectable ~23% gross, with a max. of 15% tax. I would allocate say $15K to this financial year, keep $5K back and allocate it in the next financial year in July to get the next 17%. Do your research on this to be comfortable it is ongoing and undersxtand that is you don't use it for a house it can only be allocated to your Super fund. I would wait and see what happens to the housing market, I think the odds are on your side for cheaper than more expensive; or sideways at best in the medium term.
http://www.ato.gov.au/individuals/pathway.asp?pc=001/002/066

*Long term *you will want to retire and live comfortably. The earlier you can start plannning for this and compounding your capital the more successful you will be and the more you will have. Ignore all the naysayers (and that will include many of you friends) and get yourself into Super if you have not already, but take an active interest in its performance always (90% don't). Minimise your fees, but 'happily' pay them if your Fund is performing OK and learn as much as you can from them. Sack them and move your money if they don't. At your age I would allocate say $20K to this purpose to get you roughly up to speed capital-wise to attain $1m easily. Super is the most tax effective vehicle you can get and you should leverage it to the nth degree across your life.

Work out how much you want to retire on - $2m/$3m? - and then salary sacrifice a small amount all your life, but without fail, actively manage your money through a SMSF once you think it is cost effective to do so, and I will guarantee you will easily and simply meet your end goal. Read Ashley Ormond's, 'How to Give Your Kids $1 Million Each if you have not already, to see how little you need to contribute early compared to later to achieve your goals.

*Short term* (with long term aims) I would allocate $10K to increasing your financial intelligence and to start learning about the share market, bonds, property and other assets, by actually investing and eventually trading even. Sure you will lose money learning, but that is one of many ways how you pay for your financial education. Don't be scared to pay someone who is smarter than you for good advice EVER; it always pays dividends; do your due dilligence, but NEVER be scared to pay for good property and share courses either, they won't always work, but when they do they can pay back high dividends. Find mentors that are good at making money and hang with them where you can. If you have skills that they don't, you will be surprised how much time you can get from them if they find it a reciprocal relationship.

Having $50K already, you sound more financially astute than most people two or three times your age. If you have not already, read Robert Kiyosaki's Rich Dad. Poor Dad, if for no other reason than to get your head firmly around how important paying yourself first really is to successful wealth creation and budgeting as we all do throughout our lives, regardless of how little or much we earn.

All the also-rans will constantly tell you that you will be dead by the time you can access your money at 60, the Govt. will change the rules, and a thousand other excuses they are using to convince themselves that Gerry Harvey, etc, will surely give them their money back later in life.

Develop a wealth plan to bridge the gap between the time you are say 45 (or whatever) when you plan to be financially independent so you can meet your Super at some point, but not have to work if that is what you choose to do.

*Finally*, I have had this discussion elsewhere; you can't have your cake and eat it generally in life. Doing the above means you have to make some calculated lifestyle sacrifices; most believe that the world owes them a good lifestyle and that is what is important and borrow and pay Gerry accordingly. You can still have fun; but if you do something like the above you are betting that while all you friends are still working past 65, you can be enjoying a more relaxed lifestyle and not have to worry about being an employee and that fortnightly pay cheque at the age you have planned.

90% of the population is either dead or dead broke at 65. Keep building on whatever financial strategy you choose. Always keep it in context; these 90% are the same people that will be giving you 'helpful' financial advice all your life. Learn to nod and smile nicely.


----------



## inq (1 April 2011)

Reasons:

Excellent post, however I wonder. If you have a 22 yr old with demonstrated savings skills and a willingness to invest, is it still a smart option to suggest extra super contributions. With accessible date being 45 years away, retirement should be easily feasible before 50. Having that funds in super means having to wait a further period for an obscure gain. This is just my opinion, as I am slightly younger the the OP and find that super doesn't cater for my needs.


----------



## Reasons (1 April 2011)

inq said:


> Reasons:
> 
> Excellent post, however I wonder. If you have a 22 yr old with demonstrated savings skills and a willingness to invest, is it still a smart option to suggest extra super contributions. With accessible date being 45 years away, retirement should be easily feasible before 50. Having that funds in super means having to wait a further period for an obscure gain. This is just my opinion, as I am slightly younger the the OP and find that super doesn't cater for my needs.




It is the end $$ goal you are trying to achieve. If you can do it another way without fail that is fine. The low tax threshold inside Super accellerates your gains compared to any other PAYE investing option. Regardless of age, you need to understand the financial benefits that Super affords to the velocity of your capital appreciation.

If you have a target of $2m by the time you are 60 for example and attain half inside Super at a lower input effort due to its tax friendly nature and half outside Super at a higher taxed rate, why not do it?

You still get to the same result, but theoretically with less effort due to the nature of the Super tax environment for capital gains and tax generally. The rules at the moment are that once you are 60 it is all *totally* tax free. If you were 60, had $2m outside Super, you would likely be in the ~40% tax bracket. I don't know about you, but I know what environment I would rather have my money in.

You can argue the rules will change and they could, but they could change back again by the time you are 60 or whatever. I have seen it all before over 30 years of contributing to Super, and I still know where I would rather have the bulk of my assets allocated.


----------



## inq (1 April 2011)

Oh I agree, what I was suggesting however is that with a young starter, a goal at 60 might now be appropriate, considering it is some 40 years from that point.

For instance, starting at 20 might want to reach a self funded retirement at 40, at which point super is of no use. I know I'd rather have 2 million in funds at my disposable at ANY age, than 2.5 million in super, that's for sure.

The thought of waiting a FURTHER 20 years for a tax benefit, bugger that. There are structures in place which can be of greater advantage to those who want to make use of it.


----------



## Junior (1 April 2011)

I strongly disagree with adding any voluntary contributions to super while in your 20s.  At this stage, you won't be able to access any of it for at least 30-35 years, probably longer!  Over that period of time the government can increase earnings tax, or push out the age at which you can access your super.

If you're successful in you're working life and end up on a high salary, you're employer will be making large contributions each year anyway.


----------



## Reasons (1 April 2011)

inq said:


> Oh I agree, what I was suggesting however is that with a young starter, a goal at 60 might now be appropriate, considering it is some 40 years from that point.
> 
> For instance, starting at 20 might want to reach a self funded retirement at 40, at which point super is of no use. I know I'd rather have 2 million in funds at my disposable at ANY age, than 2.5 million in super, that's for sure.
> 
> The thought of waiting a FURTHER 20 years for a tax benefit, bugger that. There are structures in place which can be of greater advantage to those who want to make use of it.




Yep, having the required passive income assets at 40 is very good, but you have to be highly disciplined, entrepreneurial or remunerated to do that successfully, assuming normal family outgoings that most people have that constantly compete for priority during that time of one's life. A few people definitely do it, we just have to be realistic that most don't, but can do it a bit later if they plan.

I am just suggesting a blended mix to increase the odds of success. Have enough to bridge the gap, but have your feet in both camps to take advantage of Super's benefits. Most people find that working until 55 is fine and even enjoyable and that it comes around so fast you wonder what happened. It is also a time when you can be getting tired of working for a boss, or more vulnerable to becoming unemployed, if nothing else for health reasons (you just don't know your genetics outcome until you get there). 

Realistically, 50-55 is when most people who have planned for it will have accumulated their capital base to the point they are financially independent. The gap is fairly easy to bridge at this time. If you have money inside and outside Super, you can bridge an 'x' year gap and meet your low taxed Super later at 60, especially if it is only for ~5 years. The plan then is to be able to move those assets outside into Super as fast as possible.

If you can achieve $2m at 40, I agree it is a long time to wait. If you achieved that outcome at that age, using Super from that point onwards to tax effectively further accellerate future wealth by building within that low tax environment would then come into play.

The main trap I have seen with my friends and associates is that they always had the best intentions of achieving their goals outside Super many years ago. When it is locked away from Uncle Gerry, anectodally only, Super has produced more financially independent individuals from that group and in the main been achieved around 55 years of age.


----------



## skc (1 April 2011)

Junior said:


> I strongly disagree with adding any voluntary contributions to super while in your 20s.  At this stage, you won't be able to access any of it for at least 30-35 years, probably longer!  Over that period of time the government can increase earnings tax, or push out the age at which you can access your super.
> 
> If you're successful in you're working life and end up on a high salary, you're employer will be making large contributions each year anyway.




I had the same thoughts when I was in my 20s but 10 years later I see it a bit differently. 

I have actually never spent the first $50K I have saved. Being a decent saver with a decent income, that $50K (imagine if I earmarked that money) is still being put to use on investments etc. By the time I needed money for my wedding and first home, we've saved up additional money.

At this point I don't foresee that I will ever need to actually spend that $50K unless something truely dramatic happens. In *hindsight *that $50K in super would have yielded better retruns given the tax advantage. 

Obviously everyone is different. If you know you have big spending items coming up, then by all means keep it outside of super. But if you think that, by the time you get married (say) you would have saved up enough from your ongoing income anyway, then putting in super is a worthy consideration.

What you need is a 'life long cashflow' forecast. Sounds silly and it will involve some pretty big assumptions (e.g. you won't get married until 28... then you knock up your girlfriend next week ), but you might discover how high or low the chance of that $50K ever being spent actually is.


----------



## sinner (1 April 2011)

Probably buy a productive small business.


----------



## tech/a (1 April 2011)

Develop a few APPs.


----------



## R35 (1 April 2011)

LEVERAGE - that is the goal at your age and I wish I did more of it when younger...it's a double edged sword but it's the only way to riches..and wilth amount of cash you need to find a way to apply it to some investment that can make you multiples....investment property(safe but slow in this environment unless your doing reno's) , sharemarket is another but you need to study hard so you don't blow-up,  business investment - higher risk, higher return...either way you need to increase your financial knowledge to reduce your risk and increase your returns.

Good luck.


----------



## nioka (1 April 2011)

R35 said:


> LEVERAGE - that is the goal at your age and I wish I did more of it when younger...it's a double edged sword but it's the only way to riches..and wilth amount of cash you need to find a way to apply it to some investment that can make you multiples....investment property(safe but slow in this environment unless your doing reno's) , sharemarket is another but you need to study hard so you don't blow-up,  business investment - higher risk, higher return...either way you need to increase your financial knowledge to reduce your risk and increase your returns.
> 
> Good luck.




Not the ONLY way to riches and can help direct you on the road to poverty. Use with caution and read the fine print.


----------



## romeo (1 April 2011)

mate all I can say is well done.

I'm 26 and I've got 24k right now, but I've only been in my job for a year and a bit though.

Maybe I should start a thread "what would you do with $24000 savings"?, 24 is a little too small to do anything with right now so I'm just saving away.


----------



## El Tigre (1 April 2011)

I'm in the same boat.

Decent whack of cash but still quite a few years off a house.

- I general move between 50-90% invested (FPO shares only so far)
- rest in the bank - The problem is at 6.5%, turns into 4.5% after tax (30c bracket), more like 1.5% with inflation. hardly seems worth it. 
- no managed funds

I hold a low/medium risk portfolio, all been good so far. Investing with little knowledge hasn't been a problem, set entry and exit, basic diversification, generally longer holds, buy when it's down, take profit when i see it, don't let the falls and gloom bother me.

Some would _definitely_ disagree with me though. But I accept there is short term risk. 

And capital gains is still bitch come tax time.


----------



## kermit345 (1 April 2011)

I'm in pretty close to the same position, i'll give you a run down of where I am at and some small suggestions that may help you also. Not sure if you are working or a student either but will assume that your working.

I'm 24 yearsn old. I have only about $3k in the bank, however i've just finished paying off a car worth about $16k, I have $67k in shares however $35k of that is owing on a margin loan. I pay a portion off of this margin loan each pay (fortnightly) and as it reduces, if I see any more opportunities in the stock market I buy again and extend on the loan again. Note this is not a strategy for everyone, however I work in the finance industry, understand the risks and lucky enough to still be mooching off the parents hehe. Theres a couple of other bits and pieces i've got but nothing else of any significant value.

The first thing I would 100% suggest in regards to superannuation, is that if your annual income is low enough throw $1,000 into your super each year so that you maximise the government co-contribution. This is just money for jam and you will be absolutely amazed at the difference contributing $1,000 of your own money and getting even a $600 co-contribution for the next 5 or so years will make to the compounding of your superannuation assets through to age 60.

Other options depend largely on your personal situation, my sister doesn't have much against her name but has seen europe, new zealand, thailand and bali. I've only been to Thailand and will probably do the rest later in life, its all personal preference, but don't be afraid to put $5k to the side and give yourself a holiday with mates.

If your looking at buying a home in 4 years time then the first home saver account is a viable option, but i'd suggest you do some in depth research to some of the fineprint in regards to the account. i.e. you have to contribute $1,000 at least per year across 4 financial years to gain access to the funds and many other small parameters. If you'd like more details feel free to PM me and i can try help out.

If buying a home isn't on your radar just yet, or you'd like to take the more aggresive route like me, then investing in shares has the potential to be very rewarding, but also has the risks attached as well. Do some research, learn the ins and outs, and work out what type of investor you'd like to be as there a many niche's, combinations etc etc. I learnt the hard way that you can't just buy willy nilly and that having a strategy in place really helps.

I don't think anyone can tell you exactly how to split the $50,000 but in basic terms this is what i'd look at if it was me:

$5k ready for a holiday or any other personal luxuries i decide on at a later date
$10k in high interest bank accounts (take your $1,000 super contributions from this annually) and also contribute some of your pay to this as well.
$35k in shares to build funds toward a home with the possibility of also having an additional $20k markin loan if you can handle to risk to try build these funds at a faster rate and for the tax advantages (i'd also add money to this each pay to help build faster)

Hope that helps, feel free to PM me to discuss further. Its good to hear others in their 20's looking to secure some of there future, not just throw cash around partying and travelling.

Josh


----------



## Reasons (1 April 2011)

romeo said:


> mate all I can say is well done.
> 
> I'm 26 and I've got 24k right now, but I've only been in my job for a year and a bit though.
> 
> Maybe I should start a thread "what would you do with $24000 savings"?, 24 is a little too small to do anything with right now so I'm just saving away.




You could easily do a cut down version of what I suggested. An important thing to do is to make all 24 of those big ones work their guts out for you at all times and keep adding to them. $24K is not a bad start and I know some pensioners that would kill to still have that much capital (so watch out for pensioners ).

Always chase the best returns. If that means opening a new bank account every month because you are chasing those sorts of returns, pain that it be, do it. Flog those 24 little buggers to death. Set high but achievable targets for yourself and review them regularly.

At the same time learn about bonds, hybrids, shares, derivatives, property, business, etc; over time those 24 will have lots of mates that you can flog harder again because you know more. You will also mitigate some of your risks as you will not be like the majority who just know shares or property. Way too dangerous and limiting to your future wealth creation and capital protection; you see it all the time in threads when someone defends an asset class like property to the death; if that is all you know you become attached and emotive. It takes effort to learn and that is why the Super funds have so many detainees on their books; their clients hate their fees and performance, but take no responsibility or action to fix the problem.

Money is attracted to the people who like it (not in love with the stuff), and that is only because those people just pay closer attention to what it is doing and where it is going.


----------



## tech/a (1 April 2011)

Reasons said:


> You could easily do a cut down version of what I suggested. An important thing to do is to make all 24 of those big ones work their guts out for you at all times and keep adding to them. $24K is not a bad start and I know some pensioners that would kill to still have that much capital (so watch out for pensioners ).
> 
> Always chase the best returns. If that means opening a new bank account every month because you are chasing those sorts of returns, pain that it be, do it. Flog those 24 little buggers to death. Set high but achievable targets for yourself and review them regularly.
> 
> ...




Nice theory.


----------



## Reasons (1 April 2011)

tech/a said:


> Nice theory.




Yup, pretty much; I guess it comes down to your 3% thing.


----------



## ENP (1 April 2011)

Buy a house and get flatmates in to pay off the mortgage for me.


----------



## explod (1 April 2011)

prawn_86 said:


> Im a couple years older than 22 and have a bit more than that in savings.
> 
> Plans are:
> Get married  (25%)
> ...




Best post so far but would add:

try to avoid the mariage bit till you are at least 35,

about 5 grand on a painting by Yvonne Audette will double in price every five years and trebble at least when she dies.

buy and read over a number of times, "Trend Following" by M Covell and "Rich Dad Poor Dad" by R Kyosaki.

Trust no one but yourself and if you have any doubt on any decision *do not do it*.

But overall, a good thead.


----------



## LiL_JaSoN (1 April 2011)

I just turned 22 and have a 40+k portfolio and and $$$ in high interest savings account.

looking for a property soon, when the time comes and possibly travel next yr when i finish my degree.

Depending on your situation, Id put a deposit on a property, high interest account or shares, bonds, etc


----------



## Julia (1 April 2011)

Well done on saving $50K.

At your age, I'd only be putting into Super what you need to in order to get the government co-contribution.  Imo you are too young to want to tie the greater part of your money up in an area which you cannot access until you may not have the capacity to enjoy it.

I'd be going for the FHBG and getting into entry level property.  Quite apart from it likely being a sound investment if you choose carefully, the whole satisfaction of owning your own place should never be underestimated imo.  It gives you security, no one can tell you to leave or what you may do to it.

Good luck, though I suspect you won't need it as you're clearly well on the way already.


----------



## So_Cynical (2 April 2011)

poverty said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QS0q3mGPGg




LOL brilliant...thanks



nioka said:


> Blue chips can also go down. Nothing guaranteed there, look at a 2 or 3 year chart for any of them. I don't own ANY blue chips.




And you also don't get much if any dividend yield.


----------



## Reasons (2 April 2011)

I did not agree with Julia initially, but on reflection and doing the math now partly do. Because of your age, compounding interest and the Super Guarantee % works in your favour extremely well. 

At age 22 the average person can easily be a millionare plus at 60 thanks to the Super Guarantee.

Assuming you got the average wage of $64K, that would give you ~$6K from your employer at 9% for the Super Guarantee and if you added $1K and got the Govt. $1K, that is $8K into Super per year. Compounded at a not unrealistic average of 7%, you would have nearly $1.5m by the time you are 60! Pretty cool for not really trying – but once it was over $200K you would want to manage it yourself to get the return and outcome, or you surely wont.

So for the huge sum of $19 per week ($1K p.a. from you) up to the age of 60, under this scenario you should end up a millionaire and a half at age 60. You would have $1.1m if you ignore the extra $2K p.a.

The humorous part is because the BB’s did not have the Super guarantee like you do, they do not have the Super assets that you guys should have at the same age. So anyone paying attention to their Super at age 22 onwards will be very well off at age 60, whether you like it or not. Even more so if the Govt. jack up the rate to 12%. Just remember, many will never do the simple math or will just ignore their Super and will wonder what happened at 60 when the ones who did pay attention are very comfortably retired.

OK, now to take care of the 38 year gap that ~22 year olds can’t see past. This is a bit tougher, but can get nearly impossible for most fairly quickly.

A 22 year old has 28 years to go to 50. So what advantages does he have over someone older?

Let’s assume the same net return of 7% every year on the capital compounded.
For every one thousand dollars per annum, he has to find about $19 per week.
On the average wage of $64K you get about $1K per week clear. 

Scenario 1 - 28 years to go to bridge the 10 year retirement gap:
He uses the $20K as a lump sum in year 1, and adds $8K of his own p.a. including year 1.

He has to find $152 plus the $19 for Super per week for the next 28 years and he has about $820K when he is 50. 

If he does not use and compound the $20K, under the above scenario he would only have $690K at age 50.

On the average wage it is just possible.

The decision is then yours if it is off to Gerry Harvey’s or delayed gratification and your retirement at 50? The odds are heavily against you having the required discipline to retire at 50.

Scenario 2 – 18 years to go to bridge the 10 year retirement gap:
He now needs to find $22K p.a. to have $800K
That is $418 until 50 plus the $19 for Super per week until he is 60.
On the average wage, my guess is no chance.

Scenario 3 – 8 years to go to bridge the 10 year retirement gap:
He now needs to find $75K p.a. to have $820K at 50.
That is $1425 until 50 plus the $19 for Super per week until 60.
On the average wage…errr, no.

As the rules will change over the years it would be up to you to fine tune your Super and gap strategy to get the required outcome. 

And don't forget you have to keep contributing to your Super between 50 and 60 to make up the missing employer contribution to maintain the target.

You can do your own compound interest calcs here if the gap capital amount is too big or small, etc:
http://www.moneychimp.com/calculator/compound_interest_calculator.htm


----------



## white_goodman (2 April 2011)

vegas, hookers, world series main event entry, have a white christmas

winning


----------



## nioka (2 April 2011)

Reasons said:


> At age 22 the average person can easily be a millionare plus at 60 thanks to the QUOTE]
> 
> What will $1M be worth when you are 60. When I was your age it was touted that you could retire in comfort if you had 10,000 pounds. Try retiring now on $20,000.


----------



## Julia (2 April 2011)

So_Cynical said:


> And you also don't get much if any dividend yield.




This was said with respect to blue chips.
Seems a peculiar comment when you consider that most of the banks, with franking included, offer around 8 - 9%!


----------



## Wysiwyg (2 April 2011)

white_goodman said:


> vegas, hookers, world series main event entry, have a white christmas
> 
> winning



If you put it away until your 60's you could have a million dollars to do all that.


----------



## tech/a (2 April 2011)

Wysiwyg said:


> If you put it away until your 60's you could have a million dollars to do all that.




In 34 yrs (When the poster is 60) a million dollars will be like $395K now if inflation over the last 34 yrs is a guide.---not a lot---hardly a deposit on a decent  home in 34 yrs!



	

		
			
		

		
	
.

If the Property thread is anything to go by most will STILL be waiting for property to become--"affordable"


----------



## Silhouetteau (2 April 2011)

Hey Matt,

I'm 22 this year turning 23 and the thing that I think about the most is what do you want to do with the money?
I personally invest a lot of my income now because I hope by the time I'm 30 I will have enough passive income to be able to work 9 months a year and be able to travel for the remaining 3 months every year.
I don't like contributing extra to my super fund because I back myself to out-perform their results so I want to keep as much as I can for myself. But I also enjoying investigating stocks etc and studying investing topics so I'm happy to put in the time to get the results.
It also takes a lot of sacrificing of spending now for future gain, which you may not want to do?


----------



## againsthegrain (2 April 2011)

haha super is such a scam, why would anybody waste their time making voluentary contributions, inflation, unstable world in 30+ years,  death or sickness in young age will all be laughing at you.

When you are 60 it is too late to impress a few girls here and there with your ss or wrx.
Not saying to splurge all your savings but don't keep waiting till you are in your coffin to start using your money.

You are much better off managing/investing the cash now in your own hands not having it locked in until you are 60 and having somebody dictate to you when you can have it or not.


----------



## Reasons (2 April 2011)

tech/a said:


> In 34 yrs (When the poster is 60) a million dollars will be like $395K now if inflation over the last 34 yrs is a guide.---not a lot---hardly a deposit on a decent  home in 34 yrs!
> 
> View attachment 42224
> 
> ...




Trying to define between the two broad assets classes; property and everything else can trick you in the perceptions of what happens over time. They both act the same in that neither stays still inflation-wise or cash input-wise.

Properties are always being improved, built on, made better, repaired, refurbished over a 34 year period which both adds value and appreciation, but has a definite cost against it (that most people choose to ignore as it does not make the end result look anywhere near as good). If you did nothing to a property over 34 years, you are unlikely to have it appreciate anywhere near as well over time compared to its neighbours, and it could only be worth land value at the worst case scenario.

For example. the last PPOR I owned for 10 years and it exactly doubled in that time when I sold, which sounded great. As I do not consider my PPOR to be an asset, I am here to tell you I do not spend any money on it if I can avoid it until the last minute to make it look really good for sale. Once I took out lost opportunity costs, minor repairs over that time, ducted evap A/C, some bank interest in the first 4 years and rates, a very small amount to make it look good (my hard work) and the agents fees (not high), I made an actual return of 54% over those 10 years.

The same happens with equities etc, they appreciate with inflation and dividends over the years. In the case of salaries they go up with inflation and therefore so does the Super Guarantee %. Both of these mean that at age 60 there will be double, triple, or who knows how much in there at 60. It just keeps pace with inflation as long as you attend to the details to make sure it does.

So property goes up over time roughly proportionate to input and inflation the same as all other assets. They just do the same thing, but differently. Both require attention if you want to ensure the end game meets your expectations, and neither gives you a free ride or a theoretical better outcome when you project 34 years into the future.

You just have to do your calculations in todays dollars and manage the outcome across your lifetime.


----------



## nioka (2 April 2011)

Wysiwyg said:


> If you put it away until your 60's you could have a million dollars to do all that.




A friend of mine the other day said something often heard. " I've saved all my life to afford the things only the young can enjoy". 

So you need to strike a balance as a lot of people my age did enjoy their youth and now cant afford good dental,medical etc without even thinking travel, a new car or luxury foods.


----------



## Bill M (2 April 2011)

nioka said:


> A friend of mine the other day said something often heard. " I've saved all my life to afford the things only the young can enjoy".




That is so true...

To the OP, if I was 22 and I knew back then what I know now I would put put 40k in a UBANK account and get 6.51% interest on it and then take the other 10K and do a real good back packing adventure around South East Asia. Hook up with some like minded travellers and drift about for 6 Months or so. Whilst on the trip just think about what you are going to do with the money. 50K for me now (much older) would go straight into super.


----------



## So_Cynical (2 April 2011)

nioka said:


> Blue chips can also go down. Nothing guaranteed there, look at a 2 or 3 year chart for any of them. *I don't own ANY blue chips*.






So_Cynical said:


> And you also don't get much if any dividend yield.






Julia said:


> This was said with respect to blue chips.
> Seems a peculiar comment when you consider that most of the banks, with franking included, offer around 8 - 9%!




I said 'you' as in Nokia...Nokia doesn't own any blue chips or to my knowledge any light blue chips....so there fore doesn't get much if any dividend yield.


----------



## niwire (2 April 2011)

I would like to ask where is money come from?
As you can earn $50K as you are so young, then you must have more plans to invest those money. If I have, I will establish my own business


----------



## Julia (2 April 2011)

Reasons said:


> So property goes up over time roughly proportionate to input and inflation the same as all other assets. They just do the same thing, but differently. Both require attention if you want to ensure the end game meets your expectations, and neither gives you a free ride or a theoretical better outcome when you project 34 years into the future.



The phrase "both require attention if you want to ensure the end game meets your expectations" is so true.
Most of the people who claim "Super is a scam" don't appreciate that Super is just a tax advantaged vehicle for holding assets, and you need to actively manage those assets, not just leave it to some overpaid fund manager who has only his own interests at heart.




nioka said:


> A friend of mine the other day said something often heard. " I've saved all my life to afford the things only the young can enjoy".
> 
> So you need to strike a balance as a lot of people my age did enjoy their youth and now cant afford good dental,medical etc without even thinking travel, a new car or luxury foods.



So true, and the point I was trying to make earlier.


----------



## Wysiwyg (2 April 2011)

niwire said:


> I would like to ask where is money come from?
> As you can earn $50K as you are so young, then you must have more plans to invest those money. If I have, I will establish my own business



 I know what you mean. These internet posters that claim they are young with X amount must have very well paid jobs at their age. My first year wage was $110/week.


----------



## Silhouetteau (2 April 2011)

It is possible with hard work and making sacrifices though too.

I had $4k around this time last year starting my first graduate job on an average graduate engineer wage and now have more than $50k.


----------



## suhm (2 April 2011)

I think all the young posters would probably have decently paid jobs or seed capital from family or else we wouldn't have the opportunity to accumulate enough capital to make investing worth the time it takes to be good at whilst still young.


----------



## Reasons (2 April 2011)

Silhouetteau said:


> It is possible with hard work and making sacrifices though too.
> 
> I had $4k around this time last year starting my first graduate job on an average graduate engineer wage and now have more than $50k.




Therefore being considered sacrifices, it proves conclusively why we BB's need to charge you lot rent or evict you all ASAP


----------



## nioka (2 April 2011)

So_Cynical said:


> I said 'you' as in Nokia...Nokia doesn't own any blue chips or to my knowledge any light blue chips....so there fore doesn't get much if any dividend yield.




The only dividends I have received in the last three years has been from CFE which is not really a dividend but rather a share of trading profits. Anyone following CFE will know what I mean. Also a small distribution from CER and I mean small. However CER returned me 1200% so far in about two years so looking for dividends is the last thing on my mind. I want capital growth in large doses. I'm happy to cash in some stocks now and then.
 Check out the charts for ADI,AUT,EKA,TXN,SDL,NTU &CER. Even a loser in some eyes like EDE has returned close to 300% lately with plenty of opportunity to buy in at less than 5c for the faithfull.

I do however rate some stocks like LYC and AUT as "light blue stocks"


----------



## LiL_JaSoN (2 April 2011)

Wysiwyg said:


> I know what you mean. These internet posters that claim they are young with X amount must have very well paid jobs at their age. My first year wage was $110/week.




Compound interest and exponential growth is your friend.

I'm a 22yo uni student, and i work whenever i can, especially during the holidays.

I still go out, enjoy a few drinks with mates, buy a few things, and spend ~ 150-200$ a wk on food.

I just don't blow money on useless things.


----------



## Julia (2 April 2011)

LiL_JaSoN said:


> spend ~ 150-200$ a wk on food.



 Wow, that seems a lot for a young single person to spend on food.  Are you including meals out in this?


----------



## LiL_JaSoN (2 April 2011)

Julia said:


> Wow, that seems a lot for a young single person to spend on food.  Are you including meals out in this?




Reason so high is due to recreational sport, so i have a very high calorie requirement.

Lately iv been able to get to down to $100 from buying in bulk. So that saves a fair abit.

Like some people say, avoid hobbies - save money lol.

Jason.


----------



## Wysiwyg (2 April 2011)

LiL_JaSoN said:


> Compound interest and exponential growth is your friend.
> 
> I'm a 22yo uni student, and i work whenever i can, especially during the holidays.
> 
> ...



If you're a part time worker then you might be able to save 100 bucks per week. So maybe 5000 per year saved if you use newspaper to wipe your botty.


----------



## youngone (3 April 2011)

LiL_JaSoN said:


> Reason so high is due to recreational sport, so i have a very high calorie requirement.
> 
> Lately iv been able to get to down to $100 from buying in bulk. So that saves a fair abit.
> 
> ...




That is quite a lot of expenses on food alone if you are trying to live smart. My average expenses is about $50 a week (not including bills, rents, fines, cars, random important crap), that means no eating out or going out unless i have to meet clients. I have learn to cut down to 2 shopping trip per week. If you are like me and lives in Adelaide, Central Market in the Adelaide city is quite nice on a Friday. You can buy almost anything at $1 per kg.

On a good productive week i reward myself. like last week with a dozen of Oysters 



sinner said:


> Probably buy a productive small business.




Do explain.. What business can one buy? Im looking to start up a graphic/web design business with a couple of friends. If anyone can give me advise that would be great, I have many clients and now looking to move from freelance work into a team company base in the industry.




tech/a said:


> Develop a few APPs.




Do explain..Im currently working for a client developing an iPhone game. Its not going to be as big as Angry Bird. But the game is almost in the final stage of development. I have been fortunate enough to work on this game, as have been contracted to gain a small percentage of the games income if and when it sells. 




kermit345 said:


> I'm in pretty close to the same position, i'll give you a run down of where I am at and some small suggestions that may help you also. Not sure if you are working or a student either but will assume that your working.
> 
> I'm 24 yearsn old. I have only about $3k in the bank, however i've just finished paying off a car worth about $16k, I have $67k in shares however $35k of that is owing on a margin loan. I pay a portion off of this margin loan each pay (fortnightly) and as it reduces, if I see any more opportunities in the stock market I buy again and extend on the loan again. Note this is not a strategy for everyone, however I work in the finance industry, understand the risks and lucky enough to still be mooching off the parents hehe. Theres a couple of other bits and pieces i've got but nothing else of any significant value.
> 
> ...




My thick, dumb, 24 years old skull is ringing like a bell, and nothing is going through. I dont like numbers  But can we be friends? I need to have more smart friends at my age, who knows how to control and manage their money, instead of clubbing and spending money of luxury. 

No pain no gain!
(how to insert banana dance)


----------



## tigerboi (3 April 2011)

*$50.00 expenses per week...sheesh how do you do it?*



youngone said:


> My average expenses is about $50 a week (not including bills, rents, fines, cars, random important crap)





Me...i would seriously like to know how you live on $50 a week...TB


----------



## Synergy (3 April 2011)

$50 a week for food alone is quite achievable if you are trying:

box of cereal + milk: $7

2 loaves of bread + spread : $8

Leaves $5 / dinner which is easily achieved if you're not cooking for just yourself. 
Rice, pasta, potato and budget meats.

Doesn't leave any room for having fun though.


----------



## romeo (3 April 2011)

I am no expert on the super topic but to get the maximum dollar for dollar government co contribution you need to be earning equal to or less than 31,920. The super co contribution decreases incrementally and finally stops at the upper threshold of 61,920 (fy 09 to 12). 

http://www.ato.gov.au/individuals/content.asp?doc=/content/42616.htm&page=3#P34_3099

So this adds another element to the equation and should be included in your thinking. In my scenario it tips the scale the way opposite of voluntary super payments as I earn over the higher threshold.

I don't know what your situation is but if you can afford to pay this while still at uni (HELP or whatever its called now) to get the 20 or 25% discount then that could be a good option. Unfortunately while at uni I was a bit dumb and had an expensive car that I poured money into and I didn't work all too much (I am still a bit dumb now; trying to learn though). This has seen my HECS debt grow with inflation to 38 G. I will voluntarily pay some to get the 10% discount. If I was massively confident that with the money I could out perform that discount then I would use it that way; however I am not at this stage. 

I would be a bit wary of leveraging for shares unless you are confident you can outperform the interest in the margin loan.


----------



## Dowdy (3 April 2011)

Synergy said:


> $50 a week for food alone is quite achievable if you are trying:
> 
> box of cereal + milk: $7
> 
> ...




depends what you consider fun. I prefer keeping fit and active which cost next to nothing as opposed to going out to eat with drinks afterwards which you'll probably spend $30 - 50 on dinner and god knows how much on drinks..


----------



## LiL_JaSoN (3 April 2011)

*Re: $50.00 expenses per week...sheesh how do you do it?*



tigerboi said:


> Me...i would seriously like to know how you live on $50 a week...TB




Youngone, 

Do you still live at home? or out?


----------



## ENP (3 April 2011)

I'm 22 also, working full time at a major bank in New Zealand. I get paid and budget fortnightly but this is my usual weekly budget. 

$560 income per week

Less:

$135 rent 
$60 bills (I put this aside for bills such as electricity, internet, medical, dentist, car bills, etc)
$80 for spending (includes sports, travel, discretionary spending, etc)
$135 for daily living (petrol, phone, food)

Leaves $150 per week, I "pay myself first" with these savings and live on the rest ($7800 per year for savings/investments)

Is this about normal?


----------



## KurwaJegoMac (3 April 2011)

ENP said:


> I'm 22 also, working full time at a major bank in New Zealand. I get paid and budget fortnightly but this is my usual weekly budget.
> 
> $560 income per week
> 
> ...




A 22 year old with a budget is definitely not normal :

But in terms of your actual budget it's quite sensible - there is no 'normal' budget as everyone's circumstances is different. But at a basic level i use a budget of:

10% for myself (going out, gadgets, holidays, etc)
20% for investing
70% for living expenses (includes mortgage, bills, food, petrol, etc)

I always express it as a % term because as you start to earn more money your contributions to the three categories will change. You want to make sure your budget is balanced and fair and that you are enjoying some of your new, higher income but not going overboard (hence the static 10% for myself - ill get to spend a little bit extra on fun, but i will also be putting a little extra into investments and living expenses). Also i try not to increase my standard of living too much with each pay rise and instead use the extra $$ allocated to the 70% category to go to repaying the mortgage.


----------



## Wysiwyg (3 April 2011)

Synergy said:


> $50 a week for food alone is quite achievable if you are trying:
> 
> box of cereal + milk: $7
> 
> ...



Here we go.  https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13967&highlight=jokes


----------



## Julia (3 April 2011)

Synergy said:


> $50 a week for food alone is quite achievable if you are trying:
> 
> box of cereal + milk: $7
> 
> ...



No fresh fruit or vegetables other than the dreaded potato?
Hardly nutritionally adequate.


----------



## VSntchr (3 April 2011)

Julia said:


> No fresh fruit or vegetables other than the dreaded potato?
> Hardly nutritionally adequate.




Yeah I agree. While I know im off topic here...I find that a large majority of the population are not consuming what I would constitute as adequate nutrition...no fresh fruit or vegetables at all is shocking. I spend AT LEAST $30 a week on that alone.


----------



## youngone (3 April 2011)

*Re: $50.00 expenses per week...sheesh how do you do it?*



LiL_JaSoN said:


> Youngone,
> 
> Do you still live at home? or out?




I am currently renting, and i have left home since i was 17. Rent is $100 a week. As for the question how can i live on $50 a week on food its simple.

2 Shopping trip per week, one shopping trip every 3 days, cannot spend over $20 per trip.
For example on my last shopping trip I spent

2kg on chicken wings = $5
1 cabbage = $1
1 kg potato = $1
2 pasta sauce = $5
1kg of pasta = $3
1kg mince meat $5

Its not exactly the most nutritional meal, but the most affordable type of meal. As i do reward myself other meals on a good productive week


----------



## LiL_JaSoN (3 April 2011)

Personally id starve eatting that in a wk

my weekly list consist of;
meats/poultry; chicken breast, red meats (rump, porterhouse, kangaroo, mince (from top rounds), canned tuna/chicken, eggs

and then rest on base foods such as rice, oatmeal, pasta, beans, potatoes, bread, and heaps of green veggies.

I'm trying to avoid eating out more often, but i might go out for a meal every here and there.


----------



## LiL_JaSoN (3 April 2011)

also if i can recall her name, i believe your avatar is of a famous female bodybuilder

vicky nixon


----------



## Tyler Durden (3 April 2011)

romeo said:


> I am no expert on the super topic but to get the maximum dollar for dollar government co contribution you need to be earning equal to or less than 31,920. The super co contribution decreases incrementally and finally stops at the upper threshold of 61,920 (fy 09 to 12).




I wonder why the upper threshold is $61,920...I remember reading somewhere here that the average salary in Australia was about $64,000? So if that's the case, then this super co-contribution thing isn't even available to the average Joe??


----------



## kingcarmleo (3 April 2011)

Probably spend about 5k on leisure and save the rest.


----------



## againsthegrain (3 April 2011)

LiL_JaSoN said:


> also if i can recall her name, i believe your avatar is of a famous female bodybuilder
> 
> vicky nixon




I thought it was some kind of a tranny


----------



## kingcarmleo (3 April 2011)

On second thoughts I'd probably go live in france.


----------



## Bill M (3 April 2011)

Tyler Durden said:


> I wonder why the upper threshold is $61,920...I remember reading somewhere here that the average salary in Australia was about $64,000? So if that's the case, then this super co-contribution thing isn't even available to the average Joe??




It was suppose to be an incentive for low income workers to put into super that might not have done so otherwise. To me it is free money and you would be mad not to take it if you can get it, cheers.


----------



## ParleVouFrancois (4 April 2011)

The super co-contribution seems really good for students, I don't work at all and free money is good money. 1,000 a year is so small for most people that it's definitely worth it if you can get it (obviously have to earn less than 62k or whatever it is). Anyway strange thought, now that shares are in my name, I might end up earning too much to get the free money LOL.

PVF.


----------



## youngone (4 April 2011)

LiL_JaSoN said:


> Personally id starve eatting that in a wk
> 
> my weekly list consist of;
> meats/poultry; chicken breast, red meats (rump, porterhouse, kangaroo, mince (from top rounds), canned tuna/chicken, eggs
> ...




My health isnt exactly in the best shape, I have high sugar level and high blood pressure, and im only 24! My grandpa recently died from a stroke, guess who is next!

Back to the topic, thats my average nutritional value, not exactly saying i have a good eating habit either. But to answer the earlier question. $20 per shopping trip and $50 per week is very possible.


----------



## suhm (4 April 2011)

Hypertension and diabetes at 24, NIDDM im guessing from the atrocious diet. That's a bit fed, your health is worth a lot more than money man.


----------



## alexc2005 (4 April 2011)

Firstly, man i feedchicken wings to my dogs, pretty sure people arent supposed to eat that crap haha.

I dont see why its so crazy for a 22 year old to have saved 50k?

I for one have been saving since i was 13 odd and when i was 20 i had a 40k share portfolio.

Now that im 22 i have almost 60k in shares and i own my 40k car. Add to that that i was studying engineering full time from 17 till 21.

I don't at all live conservatively with food, i eat very healthy and eat alot.

I'm generally pretty careful with my money, but if i want a new computer or something then its a done deal. 

If i had been more frugal i could have easily had 50k in the bank + my shares. But who wants to live like that?

When i got my job i splurged a bit with a 40k car, home gym, big tv, amp, new fridge etc.

In hindsight the car was probably silly, but im rectifying that at the moment (going to novated lease it).

To answer the OP's question though.

I'll soon be in a similar position with the 35k i get for my car, I plan to invest it wisely in shares. Maybe look at some high return shares for 10k of it, and some other low risk slow growing high div shares with the rest. Probably keep 5k or so in my bank just for keepsafe though.

It's hard to know what to do, but just be mindfull that with everything there is a risk. Be prepared to lose money as much as your prepared to gain money.


----------



## kermit345 (4 April 2011)

It wasn't that difficult to get in the position i'm in with a 16k car and 32k in shares.

Been working 2 and a bit years, had no a scrap of money to my name before that as was a uni bum. Live at home cos my parents are legends and they are happy for me to do so for free at the moment because they know i'm putting my money to good use, not blowing it on the latest flash car or TV.

While I haven't actually planned my budget formally it works something like this:

$1,400 income a fortnight.

$400 to food/going out/whatever
$300 off margin loan
$100 to savings account for home deposit
$100 to savings account for personal items

leaves $500 a fortnight for odds and ends like margin loan interest, car insurance, or throwing more towards shares / margin loan repayment.

I've been pretty fortunate with the job i've got, and working in the finance industry as a paraplanner it gives you an appreciation for money and its worth. Not only in its current form/sense, but just the power that $1 invested today can give you in say 5 years time when used correctly.

I'm not interested at all in repaying my HECS/HELP at the moment. I mean seriously it goes up at CPI so at most 3% as thats the upper limit the RBA aims for, while I can have money in a bank account worst possible scenario earning 4.5%. Just don't see the benefit personally.

Back to working in the finance industry, you really see some good and/or miserable things. Some people up to their eyeballs in debt, some needing to continue working when they are 65 because of lacklustre savings, some still retiring at 60 even with inadequate super/savings and just hoping centrelink will help them live. Or the flip-side of this is people who are well managed and have $1-2 million and can comfortably travel, retire or do whatever the hell they like.

I definitely want to be one of those people, and i'm happy to miss a night at the pub here and there if it means i can have greater control over my lifes path in 5/10/20 years time.

You don't need to miss out on everything, its about compromise. Find the happy medium , oh and have awesome supporting parents


----------



## romeo (4 April 2011)

alexc2005; I guess everything is relative.

For you, you see your monetary worth everyday so this is normal. Perhaps your peers are in a similar boat to you, adding to the normalcy of the situation? But I can guarantee you that if you did a bell curve of savings amount at 22 years old I'd bet you'd be at least a couple of standard deviations from the mean. It's not easy to be rich; otherwise everyone would be. 

One thing to note about the super co contribution: it decreases incrementally.

ie. if you earn under or equal to the lower threshold you get the 1 for 1 up to 1000 maximum.

if you earn over the higher threshold you get nothing.

if you earn halfway between the thresholds you get 0.5 to 1 up to 500 maximum etc...


----------



## prawn_86 (4 April 2011)

Interesting to how alot of people here are saying how much their cars are worth, i dont think this should even factor.

Personally i look at how much my car costs me, it certainly isn't an asset


----------



## alexc2005 (4 April 2011)

romeo said:


> alexc2005; I guess everything is relative.
> 
> For you, you see your monetary worth everyday so this is normal. Perhaps your peers are in a similar boat to you, adding to the normalcy of the situation? But I can guarantee you that if you did a bell curve of savings amount at 22 years old I'd bet you'd be at least a couple of standard deviations from the mean. It's not easy to be rich; otherwise everyone would be.




Actually no, most of my peers have not a dollar to their name. In savings or investments.

I don't by any means think i am normal. Up until i bought my car i was exessively carefull with my money (plus i didnt really drink throughout uni so that potentially saved me about $50/week over 4 years, which is substantial) . The car was like a big splurge for all the years of saving.

While i don't think im the norm, i dont think people should be like WOW at the money i have saved. But i guess its very dependent on peoples circumstances.. For example if you have kids when you are young, theres no way to hope that you could compete with someone who is single.


----------



## inq (4 April 2011)

Only the cool kids have xx,xxx's and a their own home. 

It is possible to live off $50 a week for food healthily also, a colleague of mine who is Indian feeds his wife and himself on such a budget. Markets + no meat diet is quite cheap.


----------



## NewOrder (4 April 2011)

inq said:


> Only the cool kids have xx,xxx's and a their own home.
> 
> It is possible to live off $50 a week for food healthily also, a colleague of mine who is Indian feeds his wife and himself on such a budget. *Markets + no meat diet is quite cheap*.




Yep I am a vegetarian and could live very cheaply if it were just me to feed. That would be living off a very basic vege diet but I tend to go for a lot of more exy foods which can cost a bomb if you are not careful.


----------



## youngone (5 April 2011)

NewOrder said:


> Yep I am a vegetarian and could live very cheaply if it were just me to feed. That would be living off a very basic vege diet but I tend to go for a lot of more exy foods which can cost a bomb if you are not careful.




I had this very same conversation with my friends the other week. I dont think its humanly possible to be a fat vegetarian.


----------



## GumbyLearner (5 April 2011)

youngone said:


> I had this very same conversation with my friends the other week. I dont think its humanly possible to be a fat vegetarian.




I worked with an adamant vegetarian from Pittsburgh once. He was nicknamed "Wookie" at work due to his giant frame of about 6 foot 5, excessive body hair and his Mr.Snuffleupagus shuffle. Although, I only observed his growls and grunts at a few workplace piss-ups. He ate 2 kilos of tofu, legumes and/or nuts a day. He certainly wasn't slim. 

I don't know what he would do with $50,000. He would probably throw it on texas hold'em.


----------



## NewOrder (5 April 2011)

youngone said:


> I had this very same conversation with my friends the other week. I dont think its humanly possible to be a fat vegetarian.





Ahhh you have to add alcohol into the equation though. I would be slim if I didn't drink so much


----------



## inq (5 April 2011)

If you do vegetarianism properly it is hard to actually maintain your weight.

That means eating the right amount of protein etc, which results in eating a lot of high calorie legumes, blah blah blah.

Pretend vegetarians have terrible nutrition, that's why aren't fat


----------



## NewOrder (5 April 2011)

inq said:


> If you do vegetarianism properly it is hard to actually maintain your weight.
> 
> That means eating the right amount of protein etc, which results in eating a lot of high calorie legumes, blah blah blah.
> 
> Pretend vegetarians have terrible nutrition, that's why aren't fat




Not sure what a pretend vegetarian is, do you mean vege v's vegan? I am not vegan so getting protein is easy, eggs, cheese, whey powder etc. Even vegans can get protein from tofu, heaps of veges etc so it doesn't have to all be about legumes. Chia seeds are also a good source of protein. For me the biggest problem is eating too many foods like pasta. 

Anyway getting a bit OT, sorry about that. Not sure if this forum goes with the flow of threads or do they need to stay On Topic?


----------



## inq (5 April 2011)

NewOrder said:


> Not sure what a pretend vegetarian is, do you mean vege v's vegan? I am not vegan so getting protein is easy, eggs, cheese, whey powder etc. Even vegans can get protein from tofu, heaps of veges etc so it doesn't have to all be about legumes. Chia seeds are also a good source of protein. For me the biggest problem is eating too many foods like pasta.
> 
> Anyway getting a bit OT, sorry about that. Not sure if this forum goes with the flow of threads or do they need to stay On Topic?




Nah, pretend vegetarian = only eats fruit and vegetables, however doesn't eat nutritionally, largely being deficient in protein etc. Hence skinny sick looking things 

That's right NewOrder: Cheese, legumes, eggs, milk etc. Great way to get protein, also requires discipline for many to maintain their weight with maintaining their weight.

Anyway as you said, bit OT so back to the topic:

Revising what I said earlier, 40k blue chips, 10k speccies, then leverage up a further 60k in blue chippers.


----------



## youngone (5 April 2011)

inq said:


> Revising what I said earlier, 40k blue chips, 10k speccies, then leverage up a further 60k in blue chippers.




What does leverage mean and how does it work, is that the same as margin lending?

If OP decides to put $40k into home deposit, and $10k into shares. Is it advisable to borrow more money from the bank to leverage his shares?


----------



## inq (5 April 2011)

youngone said:


> What does leverage mean and how does it work, is that the same as margin lending?
> 
> If OP decides to put $40k into home deposit, and $10k into shares. Is it advisable to borrow more money from the bank to leverage his shares?




Yes leveraging essentially means using borrow funds to increase purchasing of investments, like through margin loans, loans for investment properties etc.

Financial advice isn't allowed, however I can say that individuals who are taking on significant debt should understand that then leveraging into investments can potentially increase their risk portfolio. In other words its sometimes better to be safe, than lose the whole tower of cards to a stray breeze.


----------

