tech/a
No Ordinary Duck
- Joined
- 14 October 2004
- Posts
- 20,417
- Reactions
- 6,356
Generation 'Y' hooked on credit:
- Thread starter krisbarry
- Start date
I do not use credit for personal use full stop, too expensive for me.
Do away for a while with few things, save some money and spend on what you can afford now, which is much cheaper and can spread your money further.
Cook some stuff home opposed to take-away or night out, about 50% to 90% saving.
Brew some beer if you drink beer, make some wine if you prefer wine 30% to 80% saving (good site Joe).
Change oil yourself if car outside warranty.
Walk more
Enjoy simple things like running, swimming, even poetry evenings opposed to rental movies or movies.
Could make comments on a phone, Internet and other things too, but probably got everybody bored already.
Do away for a while with few things, save some money and spend on what you can afford now, which is much cheaper and can spread your money further.
Cook some stuff home opposed to take-away or night out, about 50% to 90% saving.
Brew some beer if you drink beer, make some wine if you prefer wine 30% to 80% saving (good site Joe).
Change oil yourself if car outside warranty.
Walk more
Enjoy simple things like running, swimming, even poetry evenings opposed to rental movies or movies.
Could make comments on a phone, Internet and other things too, but probably got everybody bored already.
Julia
In Memoriam
- Joined
- 10 May 2005
- Posts
- 16,986
- Reactions
- 1,973
krisbarry said:
Kris,
Re your second paragraph above, I don't think I made any comment about youth being unable to save due to the lack of role models.
My comment about role models was in the context of a kid being punished for swearing when such swearing was what is modelled in the home.
Julia
- Joined
- 14 February 2005
- Posts
- 15,180
- Reactions
- 17,162
I do take tech's point about investing in property for passive income. If I were in his position then I wouldn't necessarily sell my properties but I couldn't resist mentioning something.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/business...l/2005/08/22/1124562790666.html?oneclick=true
It seems that house prices in Sydney aren't falling a bit. They're falling rather a lot. No longer do we have that $580K+ average house price in Sydney (Commonwealth Bank figure), now it's down to just $495,000 and falling at $5000 a month.
To modify an advertisement somewhat "This house lost more today than it's owner earns".
But it gets even more interesting. Not content with falling at 1% a month, the rate seen in some historic property market crashes (notably the UK in the early 1990's), some suburbs are falling at three times that rate.
A few of those highly geared 100% loan property speculators must be getting a little worried I would think... If they sell now then they still have some debts to repay with prices falling like this. And if they sell tomorrow then it's worse.
And it's not just Sydney. Another article (I'll post the link if I can find it but it was a major newspaper) said that Hobart prices are going down even faster than Sydney's.
Now I did post this in good humour since we've had this property debate before.
I don't wish anyone bad luck with their investments but I maintain that now isn't the time to buy residential property. Wait until it's back to a reasonable valuation relative to incomes IMO.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/business...l/2005/08/22/1124562790666.html?oneclick=true
It seems that house prices in Sydney aren't falling a bit. They're falling rather a lot. No longer do we have that $580K+ average house price in Sydney (Commonwealth Bank figure), now it's down to just $495,000 and falling at $5000 a month.
To modify an advertisement somewhat "This house lost more today than it's owner earns".
But it gets even more interesting. Not content with falling at 1% a month, the rate seen in some historic property market crashes (notably the UK in the early 1990's), some suburbs are falling at three times that rate.
A few of those highly geared 100% loan property speculators must be getting a little worried I would think... If they sell now then they still have some debts to repay with prices falling like this. And if they sell tomorrow then it's worse.
And it's not just Sydney. Another article (I'll post the link if I can find it but it was a major newspaper) said that Hobart prices are going down even faster than Sydney's.
Now I did post this in good humour since we've had this property debate before.
I don't wish anyone bad luck with their investments but I maintain that now isn't the time to buy residential property. Wait until it's back to a reasonable valuation relative to incomes IMO. I’d thought I’d share my views on this topic….
Firstly it is reported that the Baby boomers are the wealthiest generation by far (according to this thread) and most of this wealth is attributed to real estate. I think this is taken slightly out of context as these people would be described as “asset rich” and not necessarily “cash rich” As majority of baby boomers I know are asset rich and cash poor.
Until they cash in their properties by selling them I don’t see how these people are being more and greedier by simply owning an appreciating asset?
So why are these people so lucky to own all of the appreciating assets that put housing out of reach for most people? It’s simply because they have had time on their hands. They struggled (as people do today) when they brought their house by saving up a massive deposit, putting on the best and begging with the bank manager for a loan to buy the house, then paying it off as quickly as possible living in fear the bank my recall the full amount at any time (a practice which I think was more common in the old days)
Fast forward 30 years & thanks to globalization, competition (whatever you want to call it) a young couple (let’s call them the joneses) decide to buy this property. They use a mortgage broker to organize the finance with 20 banks fighting for their business and they move in.
Now here is where I think you will find the differences between people and not generations. The joneses have good steady incomes; they are paying off their house and have no credit card debit, and use their surplus income for investing in appreciating assets. They go on the occasional holiday (after saving for it) drive nice cars and live a happy life.
In come Joe Blow (no reference to admin, his family, relatives or pets ) and sees this and thinks “that’s what makes people happy & why can’t I have the same as them” because all he can see it a nice house, car, holiday & all the material things.
But Joe is a younger generation who unlike older generations does not have to save for everything that he wishes to have now (even though he should), Thanks again to competition by signing a few pieces of paper he can have access to a line of credit (card/loan) for more money than he parents would of ever dreamed off.
So he does this and buy’s the car, clothes & phone all on credit so he can appear to have it as good as the joneses and so the vicious credit cycle starts.
So young Joe (Gen X-Y) has all these things without saving and here is where I see the deference in people and not generations
Because now Baby-Boomers who used to live in fear of the bank, now have the option of walking in with the title of their land and redrawing their equity for what ever purpose they wish.
And here you will find baby boomers who were forced to save and pay off the house in the past redrawing that money and buying boats, cars, holidays with the same regard to debit as Joe.
However there are also baby boomers who like the joneses (who must have had good role models) redraw their equity and buy some investments (shares, property, businesses) to enhance their wealth.
So at the end of the day I don’t think that one generation was a massive saving generation on their own, and now a younger generation is only a generation of spenders on credit.
I think both had different circumstances which resulted in the “perceived generalisations” of the generations. As the playing field becomes more similar you have the spenders, and the savers doing the exact same thing they would have done. In the boomers case they redraw money to spend in deprecating assets and the younger borrowing on credit to buy the same deprecating assets.
The main issue is education. People need to be made aware of the basics of “good debit” & bad debit” and stop trying to force a divide between the generations.
Tech – Thanks for your posts and willingness to be so open in regards to your personal experience. It provides great reading and I also agree with the theory property & shares, not property v shares
Kris – You seem to have a lot of information in regards to the older generations so why not use it further to your advantage (shares in lvl were a start, what’s the next share to benefit form the baby boomers? – Vaccines, artificial hips, sunscreen, or channel nine as they all love “ray?) Let us know your thoughts
Keep up the debate, I still don’t know If I’m Gen X or Y!
I've got the flu so excuse the length of the post
Firstly it is reported that the Baby boomers are the wealthiest generation by far (according to this thread) and most of this wealth is attributed to real estate. I think this is taken slightly out of context as these people would be described as “asset rich” and not necessarily “cash rich” As majority of baby boomers I know are asset rich and cash poor.
Until they cash in their properties by selling them I don’t see how these people are being more and greedier by simply owning an appreciating asset?
So why are these people so lucky to own all of the appreciating assets that put housing out of reach for most people? It’s simply because they have had time on their hands. They struggled (as people do today) when they brought their house by saving up a massive deposit, putting on the best and begging with the bank manager for a loan to buy the house, then paying it off as quickly as possible living in fear the bank my recall the full amount at any time (a practice which I think was more common in the old days)
Fast forward 30 years & thanks to globalization, competition (whatever you want to call it) a young couple (let’s call them the joneses) decide to buy this property. They use a mortgage broker to organize the finance with 20 banks fighting for their business and they move in.
Now here is where I think you will find the differences between people and not generations. The joneses have good steady incomes; they are paying off their house and have no credit card debit, and use their surplus income for investing in appreciating assets. They go on the occasional holiday (after saving for it) drive nice cars and live a happy life.
In come Joe Blow (no reference to admin, his family, relatives or pets
) and sees this and thinks “that’s what makes people happy & why can’t I have the same as them” because all he can see it a nice house, car, holiday & all the material things.But Joe is a younger generation who unlike older generations does not have to save for everything that he wishes to have now (even though he should), Thanks again to competition by signing a few pieces of paper he can have access to a line of credit (card/loan) for more money than he parents would of ever dreamed off.
So he does this and buy’s the car, clothes & phone all on credit so he can appear to have it as good as the joneses and so the vicious credit cycle starts.
So young Joe (Gen X-Y) has all these things without saving and here is where I see the deference in people and not generations
Because now Baby-Boomers who used to live in fear of the bank, now have the option of walking in with the title of their land and redrawing their equity for what ever purpose they wish.
And here you will find baby boomers who were forced to save and pay off the house in the past redrawing that money and buying boats, cars, holidays with the same regard to debit as Joe.
However there are also baby boomers who like the joneses (who must have had good role models) redraw their equity and buy some investments (shares, property, businesses) to enhance their wealth.
So at the end of the day I don’t think that one generation was a massive saving generation on their own, and now a younger generation is only a generation of spenders on credit.
I think both had different circumstances which resulted in the “perceived generalisations” of the generations. As the playing field becomes more similar you have the spenders, and the savers doing the exact same thing they would have done. In the boomers case they redraw money to spend in deprecating assets and the younger borrowing on credit to buy the same deprecating assets.
The main issue is education. People need to be made aware of the basics of “good debit” & bad debit” and stop trying to force a divide between the generations.
Tech – Thanks for your posts and willingness to be so open in regards to your personal experience. It provides great reading and I also agree with the theory property & shares, not property v shares
Kris – You seem to have a lot of information in regards to the older generations so why not use it further to your advantage (shares in lvl were a start, what’s the next share to benefit form the baby boomers? – Vaccines, artificial hips, sunscreen, or channel nine as they all love “ray?) Let us know your thoughts
Keep up the debate, I still don’t know If I’m Gen X or Y!
I've got the flu so excuse the length of the post
- Joined
- 14 February 2005
- Posts
- 15,180
- Reactions
- 17,162
Always been into that kind of thinking. Saves $$$ and you'll likely live longer too with the exercise etc.Happy said:
As for the phone and internet, I make a profit trading online so they're financially positive for me. And I wouldn't know half the stuff I know now if it wasn't for the internet so I'm quite happy to pay for that anyway. I don't have a mobile though and hopefully wont have to get one.
- Joined
- 5 August 2004
- Posts
- 1,996
- Reactions
- 0
tech/a said:
WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!!!!!!
Actually I spent sometime writing a reply and sent it via private email. I am not sure where the private email ended up maybe Joe could track it down.
I declined the offer due to two reasons:
The first reason was for the fact that my skills are not current. Most of what I learnt at Uni back in 1992-1996, would not be relevant in todays media industry. For example, I used VCR tape to tape editing. VCR cameras, basic sound programs that are not used anymore. etc etc.
My skills were no longer practised after I left uni, and the forms of technology are no longer used.
The second reason was for the fact that I no longer have any interest in the film and TV industry except for watching it. So why do something you are not interested in?
My passion lies in the stock-market now, that is what drives me and that is my yearning in life.
I also have a few friends in the film/t.v. industry that could get me work too, one who works for channel 9.
So get off your high horse and accept the fact that the private mail was lost in the post. I did respond end of story!
Will no longer be posting on this thread!!!!!
- Joined
- 28 May 2004
- Posts
- 10,856
- Reactions
- 5,246
krisbarry said:
It is possible tech/a didn't receive it if his PM box was full, although it would have told you that when you attempted to send it.
Just a reminder to everyone that it is easy to download all your PM's to your PC if you are running out of space. Click through to your Private Messages and look down towards the bottom, you will see this:
Download all Private Messages as :
XML | CSV | Text
Simply click on whichever option you prefer. Once downloaded you can delete all your PM's knowing that you have a copy of them all on your PC.
ghotib
THIMKER
- Joined
- 30 July 2004
- Posts
- 1,057
- Reactions
- 88
Yanno, this classifying behaviour by generations is a bigger load of self-justifying gabble than the Latham diaries. By McCrindle's classification system, the "baby-boom generation of consumers" took out 25 year mortgages and built a lifestyle on the basis that they had to be repaid. Is he seriously suggesting that wasn't long-term debt????krisbarry said:
Good Grief!!
Ghoti (I might be a fish, but I can still think better than that) the Curmudgeon
tech/a
No Ordinary Duck
- Joined
- 14 October 2004
- Posts
- 20,417
- Reactions
- 6,356
Fine Kris.
Why do you sign off K Barry B.V.A if its useless?
Goodluck then.
Why do you sign off K Barry B.V.A if its useless?
Goodluck then.
Julia
In Memoriam
- Joined
- 10 May 2005
- Posts
- 16,986
- Reactions
- 1,973
Reply to Dan:
Didn't include the quote because it was a long post.
Just wanted to say thanks for a sensible summing up of the discussion so far.
Julia
Didn't include the quote because it was a long post.
Just wanted to say thanks for a sensible summing up of the discussion so far.
Julia
- Joined
- 5 August 2004
- Posts
- 1,996
- Reactions
- 0
tech/a said:
I do this because I am proud of my achivements, even if not used or practised, they show status in the community, no matter the degree.
If you put in the hard yards and pay the money, the rewards of a signature should be of the owners choosing to use them or not.
I am also a qualified Dental Assistant too, so I can add this to my title if I wanted (Cert. D.A.).
tech/a, do you have any qualifications, if so what are they?
Have you ever considered going to uni/tafe?
What would you study and why?
Would you pay your fees up front or defer?
tech/a
No Ordinary Duck
- Joined
- 14 October 2004
- Posts
- 20,417
- Reactions
- 6,356
Well lets see.
A Diploma in Technical analysis.
A General builders licience which I had to study for.
6 yrs in Wing Chun in my 20s which is a discipline which has served me well for many years.
1988 Completed Benificial Finance 6 day Ultra Triathlon.
154K bike,205K bike,35K Canoe,35K Canoe,64K Run,Marathon 42.2k
After that NOTHING is impossible!
Funny you should mention it I have just paid the $4000+ fee x 3 for the Professional Management Program starting in October at the Adelaide Uni.
Why---They contacted me by phone then post.I thought it a worthwhile thing for 2 of my Staff---Office Manager and Production Manager to do so I decided that if I was going to send them--- along I would go as well.
Paid their fees too---guess their outperformance in my company has been rewarded with a scholarship!
So as you can see success and obviously greed isnt limited to the tertiary educated.
There are a few others here who evidently suffer from the same greed afliction as myself. I'm happy to help them in anyway I can in their pursuit of true financial freedom.
As you can see I prefer to be pro active in most things.
Life is good I really enjoy it and all those in it with me.
Kris I suppose you'll be limiting your success in stock trading to simply covering expenses and a few $$s for the odd frivolous indulgence?
Must say I enjoy your topics.
A Diploma in Technical analysis.
A General builders licience which I had to study for.
6 yrs in Wing Chun in my 20s which is a discipline which has served me well for many years.
1988 Completed Benificial Finance 6 day Ultra Triathlon.
154K bike,205K bike,35K Canoe,35K Canoe,64K Run,Marathon 42.2k
After that NOTHING is impossible!
Funny you should mention it I have just paid the $4000+ fee x 3 for the Professional Management Program starting in October at the Adelaide Uni.
Why---They contacted me by phone then post.I thought it a worthwhile thing for 2 of my Staff---Office Manager and Production Manager to do so I decided that if I was going to send them--- along I would go as well.
Paid their fees too---guess their outperformance in my company has been rewarded with a scholarship!
So as you can see success and obviously greed isnt limited to the tertiary educated.
There are a few others here who evidently suffer from the same greed afliction as myself. I'm happy to help them in anyway I can in their pursuit of true financial freedom.
As you can see I prefer to be pro active in most things.
Life is good I really enjoy it and all those in it with me.
Kris I suppose you'll be limiting your success in stock trading to simply covering expenses and a few $$s for the odd frivolous indulgence?
Must say I enjoy your topics.
RichKid
PlanYourTrade > TradeYourPlan
- Joined
- 18 June 2004
- Posts
- 3,031
- Reactions
- 5
Kris, I know tech is a bit full on at times but I hope you keep posting, your explanation re your refusal of his offer sounds perfectly reasonable to me, perhaps it suggests the importance of communicating rather than jumping to conclusions. I hope you two get on in future, whether you agree or not you have both learnt something from these exchanges.
Good luck with your course Tech, must be exciting preparing for something new (and a bit nervous too). It's never too late to learn something new. I have a feeling some of your lecturers will be engaged in some fierce debate come the enrolment of Mr Tech/a!
Glad to see you taking care of your own, some co's don't spend enough on internal development. I'm sure it'll be easier to study when you have your staff to share ideas with.
Good luck with your course Tech, must be exciting preparing for something new (and a bit nervous too). It's never too late to learn something new. I have a feeling some of your lecturers will be engaged in some fierce debate come the enrolment of Mr Tech/a!
Glad to see you taking care of your own, some co's don't spend enough on internal development. I'm sure it'll be easier to study when you have your staff to share ideas with.
- Joined
- 5 August 2004
- Posts
- 1,996
- Reactions
- 0
tech/a said:
For sure, there is no need for me to be wealthy.
Just need the basics...a roof over my head, food in my belly, friends, family, and a little cash.
Not interested in owning a multitude of wealth, that just robs others of a future. IMO.
I do not think that I am limiting myself in anyway, cannot take wealth to the grave!
Good to hear you have mastered many areas in life and have loads of qualifications, well done!
I am only 31 but have achieved great success already....my next 4 years will be dedicated to trading on the stock market to build up enough funds for a house deposit and purchase my first house at the age of 35 ish.
That is all I need, I am a simple man, and don't need to surround myself with the glitz/glam of wealth. I find that very off putting IMO!
So here comes the crunch tech/a...
The best finacial freedom/ help that you could offer me and many others is not advice at all, but action.
By action I mean sharing wealth, not advice, that would be the key to true financial freedom for others.
So here it is plain and simple, blunt and to the point!
What just happened in the housing market will not happen again for another 30 years. There was massive growth far beyond what was expected.
I put you to the challenge, can you face it, the success of letting go now...
So what I am asking of you now-or to consider is...
Sell a little wealth, downsize, free up that housing for the coming generations!
We would all like to buy an affordable house, raise children etc. you have had your time.
How does all this sit with you?
Now where is all that money tech/a is sitting on....?
ahhhh there it is
- Joined
- 5 August 2004
- Posts
- 1,996
- Reactions
- 0
Kauri said:
Very true, what is modern is the way depression is treated now days via the wide range of drugs out on the market.
Particularly the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) and the older style meds called tricylics (TCA). These drugs work on the serotonin, dopamine, and noradrenelin receptors in the brain.
These chemicals are responsible for pleasure, happiness etc. (the pleasure centres of the brain)
People can beome depressed when they spend a lot of money, and then to ease this depression they spend more money - addiction.
They then pop anti-depressants which mask pain and block out sad feelings.
Hence causing them not to worry about their financial pain and so they cycle continues.
This is a very concerning trend, are we over perscribing drugs to mask pain, the same pain that is needed to fix problems in the first place?
- Joined
- 14 February 2005
- Posts
- 15,180
- Reactions
- 17,162
What everyone does with their money is of course up to them but if it were me then rather than limit my income I would simply donate to charity or otherwise usefully spend (on others) any that I deemed excess to my requirements.
- Joined
- 5 August 2004
- Posts
- 1,996
- Reactions
- 0
Very true, there is always different ways to view wealth.
Some limit income...
while others have plenty of it and give most of it away
So really at the end of the day there is no difference is there?
...But to rob others of a future so as to have ones own self gratification, the need for greed, fulfilled, is morally wrong.
Some limit income...
while others have plenty of it and give most of it away
So really at the end of the day there is no difference is there?
...But to rob others of a future so as to have ones own self gratification, the need for greed, fulfilled, is morally wrong.
hi, i might have miss the core discussion in this thread but thought i'll share.
For the last 10 months, i have been sharing and catching up with a few close friends... you know, just general chat about life ove dinner and what each one of us want to achieve and so forth. These are close friends so i really didn't mind telling what i want to do for the next ten working years (ok, add another 5). Most of their replies are to travel and retire in a home and draw a pension. And mine, I told them I want to be rich and financially independent when i retire. And the expression on their faces (mind you, they were all on seperate occasions) were the same, disappointment and shock! I'll leave the experiences as that.
another incident was with my housemate. I was leaving with him for about 2 months. And every couple of days, i would bring back the AFR, money mag, personal investor and IPOs prospectus home etc to read. and one day while reading a company prospectus, he commented that i am obssesed with making money! we didn't dig deep on that statement. but was definitely surprise (and rude!)to hear something like that from a 40 year old man (not married) and shares ownship of his home with a the government (joint ownership... he was earning below a certain amount and thus able to qualify for such a loan). Well, he was volunteering for a non-profit organisation and his income comes thru donation and gifts.
all said and done, are people generally repellent of money? What's wrong with being rich or accumulating wealth? i do donate more to friends and organisations who are in need and do charity whenever i can. i give my parents about 15% of my monthly income, i pay my bills on time, i make extra repayments on my mortgage. I don't see myself doing that if i didn't get a high paying job and living on a bloody tight budget. situation will change when i get married and have kids. so what's wrong with 'making hay while the sun shines'...
i don't want to rely on the govt to support me. you'll never know what could happen in the next 15 to 20 years on pensioners. what if they decided to scrap giving allowances? what if the govt in running when i retire has a policy of 'bugga all the elderly'?there are countries where the eldlies are either dependent on their kids to support them or they work till they die!
i want to support my parents when they are sick. i don't want them to live on the public health system. i want them to get the best treatment where possible when they are ill. i want to provide as much comfort in their twlight years. if they are working at a retirement age out of need, i would be very very disappointed with myself and fail as a child of my parents.
i want to support my wife and kids comfortably... be it when they are young or working adults. Of course i am not negating any discipline but i want to help the kids when they are buying their first home or starting their own business. i want to accumlate wealth so that i don;t have to sacrifice family time for work!
i want to give when there is a need for volunteers who pursue a noble cause e.g sponsoring a child in africa, giving tithes to a church minister and other worthy causes. with time and no money worries, i want to coach the kids basketball team in the local club. i want to impart life principles or what i can give to allow them to be better friends, children of their parents and to contribute back to society.
the list can go on. i agree that there must be a line drawn on wealth accumulation. Like all things, it must balance. if it is obtained in a dishonored way, then of course, we are not to approve it. if it is at the expense of 'living', then it is not worth purseing. Like someone shared in this forum, if it thru hardwork and wise investment, why not?
For the last 10 months, i have been sharing and catching up with a few close friends... you know, just general chat about life ove dinner and what each one of us want to achieve and so forth. These are close friends so i really didn't mind telling what i want to do for the next ten working years (ok, add another 5). Most of their replies are to travel and retire in a home and draw a pension. And mine, I told them I want to be rich and financially independent when i retire. And the expression on their faces (mind you, they were all on seperate occasions) were the same, disappointment and shock! I'll leave the experiences as that.
another incident was with my housemate. I was leaving with him for about 2 months. And every couple of days, i would bring back the AFR, money mag, personal investor and IPOs prospectus home etc to read. and one day while reading a company prospectus, he commented that i am obssesed with making money! we didn't dig deep on that statement. but was definitely surprise (and rude!)to hear something like that from a 40 year old man (not married) and shares ownship of his home with a the government (joint ownership... he was earning below a certain amount and thus able to qualify for such a loan). Well, he was volunteering for a non-profit organisation and his income comes thru donation and gifts.
all said and done, are people generally repellent of money? What's wrong with being rich or accumulating wealth? i do donate more to friends and organisations who are in need and do charity whenever i can. i give my parents about 15% of my monthly income, i pay my bills on time, i make extra repayments on my mortgage. I don't see myself doing that if i didn't get a high paying job and living on a bloody tight budget. situation will change when i get married and have kids. so what's wrong with 'making hay while the sun shines'...
i don't want to rely on the govt to support me. you'll never know what could happen in the next 15 to 20 years on pensioners. what if they decided to scrap giving allowances? what if the govt in running when i retire has a policy of 'bugga all the elderly'?there are countries where the eldlies are either dependent on their kids to support them or they work till they die!
i want to support my parents when they are sick. i don't want them to live on the public health system. i want them to get the best treatment where possible when they are ill. i want to provide as much comfort in their twlight years. if they are working at a retirement age out of need, i would be very very disappointed with myself and fail as a child of my parents.
i want to support my wife and kids comfortably... be it when they are young or working adults. Of course i am not negating any discipline but i want to help the kids when they are buying their first home or starting their own business. i want to accumlate wealth so that i don;t have to sacrifice family time for work!
i want to give when there is a need for volunteers who pursue a noble cause e.g sponsoring a child in africa, giving tithes to a church minister and other worthy causes. with time and no money worries, i want to coach the kids basketball team in the local club. i want to impart life principles or what i can give to allow them to be better friends, children of their parents and to contribute back to society.
the list can go on. i agree that there must be a line drawn on wealth accumulation. Like all things, it must balance. if it is obtained in a dishonored way, then of course, we are not to approve it. if it is at the expense of 'living', then it is not worth purseing. Like someone shared in this forum, if it thru hardwork and wise investment, why not?
- Joined
- 5 August 2004
- Posts
- 1,996
- Reactions
- 0
Valid points, and well said.
I guess it comes down to the fact that....how many toes do you have to walk on to create that wealth only to give it to a very few on the other end?
Wouldn't it be wiser to reduce your capacity for wealth creating, and share your wealth along the way with all, and not just your chosen few, that would be the most moral thing anyone could do.
Alway remeber that the wealth you have created, has only been created by others giving up theirs!
I guess it comes down to the fact that....how many toes do you have to walk on to create that wealth only to give it to a very few on the other end?
Wouldn't it be wiser to reduce your capacity for wealth creating, and share your wealth along the way with all, and not just your chosen few, that would be the most moral thing anyone could do.
Alway remeber that the wealth you have created, has only been created by others giving up theirs!
Similar threads
