Robert Kiyosaki's Rich Dad poor Dad

[darkrose50]

I don't think that's very often true in real life.

Mostly not with luxury goods, but with things that everyone needs/uses. Like eggs, milk and bread. Or soap, toilet-paper, hygiene products, and underwear (I bet most self-made millionaires and billionaires wear the same undies there mommy used to get them).

I know if I win several million dollars in the lottery tomorrow that I will still end up using the same eggs, milk, bread, soap, toilet-paper, hygiene products, and underwear.

In fact, I'm among the ones in here (the only one?) who are on the side of the argument that Kiyosaki's correct. And I've been "a businessman" for 15+ years, with a net worth nowadays that would probably have me accused of lying if I tried to be honest about it on an anonymous internet forum, and it was partly helped by reading these two "gurus" while in university. Certainly moreso than any of my teachers. Including university ones (let alone elementary school!!!)

I insist, IMO it's clear that [random white people] / [random teachers] are a "bad", not "good" source of information in a world where there are many much better sources of information at your fingertips.

There's an opportunity cost to chatting with a random person, and there's greater danger vs reward in applying that person's advice compared to doing what you personally think is the smartest.

Right now, if you offered me a choice between "continue to manage your wealth like you've been doing so far" and "ask a random white person on the street, and you're bound to follow whatever advice he gives you", the latter would be a recipe for greatly slowing down my year-over-year gains.

You MUST be correct in order to be a conman, or at least include some truth. That is how they con someone.

Now schools do not have an adequate curriculum surrounding wealth (it was once part of Home Economics, and the girls would learn how to manage the money in order to buy groceries). This is not the same thing as teachers do not know what they are talking about.

It seems to me that he is (a) making people feel good that they are not the reason they are bad with money, and (b) discrediting a potential source of competition is a thing. If his book read randomly ask white people about money advice, and/or randomly ask teachers about money advice (more specifically have your kids do this) . . . then who would go to his $250 seminar or his $35,000 seminar?

Imagine this . . . you got to a $250 seminar. The junior con-man picks an easy target that everyone has shared experience with and then says "We all had teachers, and we all know that they did not teach us enough about money." This is a self fulfilling observation. If teachers taught them and/or they learned enough about money, then they would not pay $250 for a seminar. So everyone is like yeah, that makes sense, this guy is a genius. THEN some of them pay $35,000 for a second seminar to get taught by the grand-high-puba con-man. It is PART of his sales-pitch. Also part of this is that the stock market is not the way to go. So you know emptying your 401(k) and paying $35,000 to REALLY learn how to be rich becomes a thing.

[Willie the Duck]

Mostly not with luxury goods, but with things that everyone needs/uses. Like eggs, milk and bread. Or soap, toilet-paper, hygiene products, and underwear (I bet most self-made millionaires and billionaires wear the same undies there mommy used to get them).

I know if I win several million dollars in the lottery tomorrow that I will still end up using the same eggs, milk, bread, soap, toilet-paper, hygiene products, and underwear.

I think it was Michael Bloomberg that stated that his favorite food was an overripe banana (presumably the same kind you or I can get) on slightly burnt Wonder Bread toast with Skippy peanut butter.

Germane to LB's assertion (refuting " Rich people have innumerable ways of saving money in the long run by spending more money upfront" and responding with "But I don't agree that people with money are in a better position to live cheaper lifestyles."), those same eggs, milk, bread, soap, toilet-paper, hygiene products, and underwear are cheaper for the rich person because they can afford the spending of more money upfront. Buying in bulk, or heck just buying the large size box in the grocery isle is almost always more cost-efficient per unit, but when the small sized one costs $5 and the large one costs $10 (despite having 2.5 x as much as the $5 one) but you only have $5 left in your paycheck, you often make the only choice you have.

Way to make me feel like my dragon hoard is inadequate.

It's a really weird place for me to be in. I never expected it from my life (both because of the head injury and for having peeled my drunk *** off the pavement and gotten my life turned around just 15 years ago). I've wanted to talk about how weird it feels, but it seems impossible to do without looking like you are bragging or something.

[darkrose50]

No, and I don't think anyone meant to suggest such. The topic is teachers (well, the original topic was Robert Kiyosaki, but the topic that has drifted to the fore is teachers) and so we are discussing teachers, which is a source (well, source type, obviously. You have more than one teacher). Cazero listed an alternative to a main topic, but that does not mean he thinks people will (or should) have one singular source of learning, any more than you do.

Fair enough. I would want to talk to real people about it. Todays kids have YouTube, and the interwebs (text, audio, forums, comments, and whatnot) to help them with that. All the same talking to people is pretty useful.

[Keltest]

Fair enough. I would want to talk to real people about it. Todays kids have YouTube, and the interwebs (text, audio, forums, comments, and whatnot) to help them with that. All the same talking to people is pretty useful.

Only if they have something valuable to say. In this day and age, managing finances is as much a skill as computer programming or physics, so expecting the average lay-person to have any idea what to do is, IMO, pretty unreasonable. Most people will know enough to avoid actively losing money over time, simply because that's a necessary skill, and nothing beyond that. If they need more, they track down somebody who has actually studied the field and become an expert in it, rather than just asking random people who are sometimes adjacent to those experts.

[darkrose50]

In fact, I'm among the ones in here (the only one?) who are on the side of the argument that Kiyosaki's correct. And I've been "a businessman" for 15+ years, with a net worth nowadays that would probably have me accused of lying if I tried to be honest about it on an anonymous internet forum, and it was partly helped by reading these two "gurus" while in university. Certainly moreso than any of my teachers. Including university ones (let alone elementary school!!!).

I told my mom, and she quickly told me not to tell anyone. I am frankly shocked that I managed to pull off a 11.3% yearly return from 2004 till now-ish. It could be totally random luck, but it is still exiting. I live in a house with a loan that is 1/4 the house I could get a loan for (notice I did not say that I could afford). Getting a job with Asperger's Syndrome, and keeping it, can be difficult, so I need to prepare appropriately for the possibility of loosing my income, and that trying to find a new job could take a long time.

I insist, IMO it's clear that [random white people] / [random teachers] are a "bad", not "good" source of information in a world where there are many much better sources of information at your fingertips.

Yes, but conversations with real people who may be able to give you good advice, and point you in the right direction of what to read and study more about is good. Heck I did not even know how to college when I first went to college. Someone handing me a book with the unwritten rules in it would have been helpful, but having a real person explain it to me who I could ask questions to would have been extremely useful. Been there, done that, you can do it as well talks are useful. Especially if you look up to that person as it adds credibility.

There's an opportunity cost to chatting with a random person, and there's greater danger vs reward in applying that person's advice compared to doing what you personally think is the smartest.

Right now, if you offered me a choice between "continue to manage your wealth like you've been doing so far" and "ask a random white person on the street, and you're bound to follow whatever advice he gives you", the latter would be a recipe for greatly slowing down my year-over-year gains.

I think that the notion of looking for advice and/or information is kind of like networking. Networking is a thing. I am not all that good with it. But just letting people know you are looking for a job can get you a job. I would not expect a job after networking with people, but I would definitely do it. I would also use other sources when getting a job.

Only if they have something valuable to say. In this day and age, managing finances is as much a skill as computer programming or physics, so expecting the average lay-person to have any idea what to do is, IMO, pretty unreasonable. Most people will know enough to avoid actively losing money over time, simply because that's a necessary skill, and nothing beyond that. If they need more, they track down somebody who has actually studied the field and become an expert in it, rather than just asking random people who are sometimes adjacent to those experts.

The point is that you do not know if they have valuable information, if you do not ask. If you ask, then you might get some profitable nugget of information to add to your collection.

It's a really weird place for me to be in. I never expected it from my life (both because of the head injury and for having peeled my drunk *** off the pavement and gotten my life turned around just 15 years ago). I've wanted to talk about how weird it feels, but it seems impossible to do without looking like you are bragging or something.

When I was 5 being told that the IQ tester never seen anything like what he saw when he tested me did not help my aspirations (as in thinking big). Then again I think I needed a nudge in self-confidence as I also have dyslexia. So for a kid with dyslexia who is struggling in school, it was likely more helpful than harmful to tell me this. I did not catch up to my peers until I was somewhere between 11 and 13.

I usually thought and/or hoped that I would do as well or better economically as my parents did. I just wanted to be as a good of a man as my father. I do not think that I will ever be able to, or be able to tell myself that I am.

[lio45]

The point is that you do not know if they have valuable information, if you do not ask. If you ask, then you might get some profitable nugget of information to add to your collection.

Your "but you have nothing to lose, and you might or might not get decent advice, so it's a net positive and you should do it" (variations of which you expressed many times over the past 10+ pages) is a fallacy. You DO have something to lose: your time.

And on average, my impression is that it's a net negative to waste your time talking to random [white people and/or teachers] when instead you could have been, say, googling "basic investment advice" and taking a look at the results.

Your argument is like saying that if someone gives you a free metal detector, then you should definitely use it to explore your entire county, because it doesn't cost anything and you might find some profitable useful nugget, and you have nothing to lose. In fact, some guy _did_ find an Anglo-Saxon hoard full of gold somewhere in Mercia, England a while ago. (And is now, IIRC, a multimillionaire. Not too bad for the time he invested.)

In the real world though, you're better off flipping burgers for minimum wage than spending that same time (without getting paid) combing the woods of your local area with a metal detector in the hopes you'll find something useful.

[Rogar Demonblud]

I dislike quoting myself, but...

...

How did I learn about investing you ask? I watched a movie called Trading Places and went to the library to try and figure out what they were doing in the third act (quick answer, selling short*).

*snip*

The only money advice remotely worth a damn I ever got from a teacher or professor was that money belongs in a bank. They meant a savings account making a fraction of a percent of interest, but the concept that money just sitting around is money wasted is actually true.

Way to make me feel like my dragon hoard is inadequate.

I believe the traditional response is "Kill them and take their stuff".

[lio45]

Way to make me feel like my dragon hoard is inadequate.

This awesome hoard was found a mere ~15 miles outside Birmingham!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Staffordshire_Hoard

I say you get yourself a metal detector, and comb the entirety of non-urban Jefferson County with it during your free time. Nothing to lose, good wealth to gain!

[Keltest]

Your "but you have nothing to lose, and you might or might not get decent advice, so it's a net positive and you should do it" (variations of which you expressed many times over the past 10+ pages) is a fallacy. You DO have something to lose: your time.

And on average, my impression is that it's a net negative to waste your time talking to random [white people and/or teachers] when instead you could have been, say, googling "basic investment advice" and taking a look at the results.

Your argument is like saying that if someone gives you a free metal detector, then you should definitely use it to explore your entire county, because it doesn't cost anything and you might find some profitable useful nugget, and you have nothing to lose. In fact, some guy _did_ find an Anglo-Saxon hoard full of gold somewhere in Mercia, England a while ago. (And is now, IIRC, a multimillionaire. Not too bad for the time he invested.)

In the real world though, you're better off flipping burgers for minimum wage than spending that same time (without getting paid) combing the woods of your local area with a metal detector in the hopes you'll find something useful.

Exactly this. If the goal is to actually learn, then you need to do more than just randomly ask people, you need to proactively seek out sources more certain to have the knowledge that you seek. Just asking teachers is basically trusting luck to give you what you want. Its slightly better than literally just doing nothing at all, but only just barely.

[Peelee]

This awesome hoard was found a mere ~15 miles outside Birmingham!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Staffordshire_Hoard

I say you get yourself a metal detector, and comb the entirety of non-urban Jefferson County with it during your free time. Nothing to lose, good wealth to gain!

That was my hoard! Also, I know what's in non-urban Jefferson County. I'll pass.

[darkrose50]

Your "but you have nothing to lose, and you might or might not get decent advice, so it's a net positive and you should do it" (variations of which you expressed many times over the past 10+ pages) is a fallacy. You DO have something to lose: your time.

You are a kid, in class. There is likely some time that you can ask questions, if not at least during a lesson that included money. This could be the only time that a kid will have experience with this socioeconomic group. Kids as a population and teachers as a population.

And on average, my impression is that it's a net negative to waste your time talking to random [white people and/or teachers] when instead you could have been, say, googling "basic investment advice" and taking a look at the results.

In class, as a kid. Heck you could look up another source, and then ask your teacher about it.

Your argument is like saying that if someone gives you a free metal detector, then you should definitely use it to explore your entire county, because it doesn't cost anything and you might find some profitable useful nugget, and you have nothing to lose. In fact, some guy _did_ find an Anglo-Saxon hoard full of gold somewhere in Mercia, England a while ago. (And is now, IIRC, a multimillionaire. Not too bad for the time he invested.)

In the real world though, you're better off flipping burgers for minimum wage than spending that same time (without getting paid) combing the woods of your local area with a metal detector in the hopes you'll find something useful.

We can narrow the probability down. Now metal detecting one location that might be an old WWII battlefield otherwise undisturbed could be quite interesting and/or profitable. It might take you 12 locals that you think this battle was fought on, but it could be profitable. There is a difference between wandering around, and wandering around where there is evidence.

Now in this case you are a kid, in school, with teachers for likely 14+ years. These teachers have a high(er) likelihood to have experience with investing. More than the population as a whole. Dismissing the proximity (you are there, at school anyways), and the probability that you will eventually find some teachers with experience with investing is a likelihood. I know that I did. I did not actively search this information out, but I was always interested in resource management (buying, selling, trading, investing), and efficiency (investing via compound interest is efficiency on rocket-fuel).

-----

My brother-in-law and his friends are looking for an old lost silver/gold mine from the 1800's. The area he and some of his friends go to is littered with them. Apparently no on knows where this guy's mine was. They try to use clues to find it, and just do not wander around aimlessly. They found a hunk of silver (at least one) just lying on the ground in the forest. The miners would hide their claims, and be secretive about it. They have it narrowed down, but if they find it, then it could be quite profitable. This is also a vacation for he and his friends to get together and wander around the wild-ish area in hopes of not getting eaten by a bear.

[Peelee]

You are a kid, in class. There is likely some time that you can ask questions, if not during a lesson that included money. This could be the only time that a kid will have experience with this socioeconomic group.

So you're positing that rich teachers generally go and teach in poor areas? And not in, say, rich areas, where rich teachers would live?

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Exactly this. If the goal is to actually learn, then you need to do more than just randomly ask people, you need to proactively seek out sources more certain to have the knowledge that you seek. Just asking teachers is basically trusting luck to give you what you want. Its slightly better than literally just doing nothing at all, but only just barely.

Heck, that reminds me: we haven't even touched upon the fascinating sidetopic of false positives. Since even if we took OP at their word of the statistical probability (and not adjusted it further to remove "rich people with no money-management skills that go into teaching", etc.), the chance of a kid randomly obtaining useful information is a mere 17%. That means that the chance of getting un-useful information is 83%, of which a percentage will be outright deleterious misinformation. Can't put numbers to it, but I'd guess it'd be above 17% overall chance. So it is not just time you are wasting, you are also risking receiving bad information for your troubles, that'll leave you significantly worse off than if you had not asked in the first place.

In the metal detector example, it is the equivalent of having to factor in the chance that you'll trip, fall, break something and be saddled with a hospital visit.

Grey Wolf

[lio45]

There seems to be a lot of disagreement on the boundaries of 'bad,' 'not bad,' and, 'good.' Which sources of information do you think that the average... whomever we are using as our base population looking for wealth-management advice/education... both have at their fingertips and ought to be referencing rather than teachers?

The internet. Books on the subject. Their wealthiest relative/acquaintance.

That's three right there that are already superior to asking a random white person (or teacher).

Also, out of curiosity, what was your general path...?

Without doxing myself, the general lines is that after uni, I got a decently well-paying job and worked like a whipped slave for about one year while having the most spartan lifestyle (including living rent-free at my parents), and then I had gathered enough to put a down payment on a run-down 4-story mixed use building in the downtown of a city that was on the verge of great improvement (maybe not "the next Brooklyn" but not that far), a building that was a headache to the seller in the condition it was in, and he accepted to finance me the difference between my downpayment and the mortgage I managed to get (a mortgage that was backed by my parents, in the case of that first one).

I cleaned up and fixed up that building (wasn't for the faint of heart) on my free time, creating a lot of value (also, the renter clientele went from people on welfare and drug addicts to university students), then I used it as stepping stone, refinancing it in order to buy my second building nearby the following year as the signs the area was improving were starting to be more obvious, rince and repeat.


Ironically, I ended up applying many of the basic concepts that Robert G. Allen "teaches" in his book:

- Spend your money on "guns" not "butter" (don't spend anything on "keeping up with the Joneses" items that depreciate; put everything you have into the best investments you think you can find)

- Try to find a "don't wanter" (someone who right now is at a point where he - almost irrationally - sees his real estate as a problem he needs to get rid of).

- Try to leverage other people's money and put it to work for you

So... even though the guy is a certified conman (and he's on John T. Reed's red flag list), his book was nonetheless a good read. (Even "young me" could spot which parts were a bit too good to be likely to be true.)

I'm curious, what's your (very general) situation, and it is applicable to anyone? I find that my own is impressively applicable to nearly anyone, come to think of it.

[darkrose50]

So you're positing that rich teachers generally go and teach in poor areas? And not in, say, rich areas, where rich teachers would live?

The teaching profession is lousy with teachers that tend to be from the upper two quintiles. They commonly take jobs in working-class and poor areas (many have a strong tax base, and pay comparatively well).

My wife works in an area where the median household income is ~$44,000, and is right next to Chicago with a median income of ~$68,000. They have ~$24,000 per household less (~35% less) median yearly income than the area. These are not wealthy people.

She works with teachers with lake houses, who live in wealthy areas, and with teachers who commonly talk about all the rich people stuff like you do (vacations, summer homes, their parents and such). If you work with folks that have wealth, then it will just come up in casual conversation. Not bragging, just "what did you do this summer?", or "what did you do this weekend?" She has a co-worker in this poor area (likely way more than one) that lives in a home worth like a million-dollars, but teaches in one of the poorest areas around. It is crazy just how many of her co-worker friends are either wealthy, or will inherit wealth. This is above and beyond the pensions (but the pensions tend to be not too shabby).

[lio45]

That was my hoard!

Look on the bright side: they only took your stuff. ;)

I believe the traditional response is "Kill them and take their stuff".

[Peelee]

The teaching profession is lousy with teachers that tend to be from the upper two quintiles. They commonly take jobs in working-class and poor areas (many have a strong tax base, and pay comparatively well).

I think you're taking your personal experiences and assuming that it's the norm. It is not.

Look on the bright side: they only took your stuff. ;)

Fortunately for me, it is quite difficult to kill a dragon.

[Willie the Duck]

Also, out of curiosity, what was your general path...?
…
I'm curious, what's your (very general) situation, and it is applicable to anyone? I find that my own is impressively applicable to nearly anyone, come to think of it.

Sadly, I'd say my path was about as atypical and 'needing to start out in a certain place' as possible. It was more of:
-be one of those 'really impressive to the powers that be' types in my early learning such that I got into a good university and did a triple major
-get my head nearly caved in in a mugging in '98 and spend 6 months relearning basic life functions and two years relearning how to live with my newfound life
-enter grad school, complete the coursework, then stall out due to unresolved PTSD and using alcohol as a coping mechanism
-seek help
-finish doctorate
-have rich and powerful friends and relatives frame this experience as an 'overcoming adversity'-story in recommendation letters and help me into an top 10 MBA program.
-get a job I probably don't deserve with a surgeon-esque level of compensation
-but unlike a surgeon be able to buy 3 y.o. Jettas or Priuses as my car of choice, and me and my wife buy a <2000 sf home in the middle middle class region of the big city rather than a 5000 sf mcmansion in a luxury suburb
-pay off house in 5 years, always buy cars with cash, always max out retirement contributions. Have no expensive hobbies and live the same lifestyle as our neighbors, while earning 3x as much (and not having kids).

So, no, my situation isn't applicable to nearly anyone. I started out in a good place, and got multiple golden trampolines when things headed south for me.

[darkrose50]

Also, out of curiosity, what was your general path...?

I did not understand college, and did not finish until I was in my 30’s.

I got a job working for Media-One/AT&T/Comcast doing tech support, and worked my way up to engineering technician. I was stupid good at that job (likely one of the best 3 out of ~30[?]). I was definitely the fastest. I could do 160% of a days worth of tickets in 30-90 minutes, and then was told to stop so that others would have work to do. I kind of worked about a dozen people out of a job using efficiency, and writing procedures. I misunderstood a job-offer, and took the severance package. That is one of my biggest regrets.

I invested 10% of my income. I had a match. Mostly I invest in what seems to be an industry backed by the political climate. I just pick the sector, not the individual companies. I then pick a fund in that sector with a high Morningstar Rating. If we get a recession then I might go into a dividend mutual fund and/or an S&P 500 fund. Also if we go into recession, then I will likely up my investing as much as I can.

I was always able to buy, sell and trade for profit. I can earn a ~40% on average in 1-2 years buying, waiting for, and then selling a Kickstarter board game. Some that I pick loose money (not too many), some barely make money, and some make money. I can walk out of GenCon with more money that I went in with (well after eBay). I made so much money trading MTG cards before calling it quit after getting a side-bar stolen at a tournament. I bought my engagement ring on MTG profits.

I had various jobs on-and-off. I was a stay-at-home dad for about 7-years.

I needed a job, my wife found this posting, and I got the job. Basically if you pass the insurance test they hire you for the season, and if you do well enough, then they hire you. My second or third year I emailed hundreds of people, and they called me directly to re-enroll. No one else was emailing these people, and they were just calling them. In fact the my boss’s boss said to email them and call them, and then my boss was like you are wasting your time, just call them. No-one on any team emailed any of them. But I did. These ended up being “extra credit” and shot my “batting average” though the roof. I worked a stupid number of hours, I had sales, the batting average, and a low in-bound call rank (I was basically on the bench). I was hired, and won a corporate trip to the Bahamas.

I also noticed that a great many of the calls from some phone numbers that we were getting were being turned off at 4PM when the main office closes . . . this left us with 3+ hours per-day upwards of maybe 75-ish agents not getting these calls. This would have been a lot of money for my office, and the company . . . we were also paying people to sit around when these numbers could have been feeding them calls and sales.

I now invest 6% with a 1/2 match, but last-or-so year I was investing the maximum that I could invest, in an evil plot to take over the world . . . well to pay off my house. My wife said that she wanted the house paid off before we retire, so I was going to put my income into my 401(k) at my current job, take a loan out, pay a bunch of the house off, and re-pay myself with interest, and not the bank. This would also be a way to take profits now-ish in case of a market tumble. My guess is that we would have a recession around 2021 (just a feeling). Then one of my daughters found competitive cheer (it is expensive, but trust me, it is very good for her, and might be needed).

I would like to invest more, but life happens. Normally my wife is quite frugal, but she might be going though a mid-life-crisis and wants to vacation 24/7. She figures that the kids are young and this would be the time to vacation, rather than invest all that money for retirement as would be my preference. I am okay with all these vacations, concede the point, but I would rather have one of these vacations per year. When I was a kid I think that I had three of these vacations that my kids go on like three times per year. I am positive that they would be thrilled just renting a hotel and swimming for a week. Seriously the whole summer feels like it is constant vacationing.

[Rogar Demonblud]

We can narrow the probability down. Now metal detecting one location that might be an old WWII battlefield otherwise undisturbed could be quite interesting and/or profitable.

I'll take "Interesting" for $200, Alex.

Make sure you know how to contact the local bomb disposal and emergency medicine types.

[darkrose50]

I'll take "Interesting" for $200, Alex.

Make sure you know how to contact the local bomb disposal and emergency medicine types.

Yes excavating without training in these areas could be (more) deadly. But there could also be history buried in that mud. People keep finding old vehicles and such. Original parts for those WWII vehicles must go for a fortune.

[Peelee]

Yes excavating without training in these areas could be (more) deadly. But there could also be history buried in that mud. People keep finding old vehicles and such. Original parts for those WWII vehicles must go for a fortune.

"Must?" No. "Can?" Sure, depending on a whole bunch of factors. May as well play the lottery.

[darkrose50]

"Must?" No. "Can?" Sure, depending on a whole bunch of factors. May as well play the lottery.

I wonder how much money these guys make finding old WWII tanks in Russia.

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/2018...-from-the-dead

[Peelee]

I wonder how much money these guys make finding old WWII tanks in Russia.

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/2018...-from-the-dead

Professional salvagers? Don't know, but more than you or I would if we went out and tried to do the same thing.

[lio45]

Sadly, I'd say my path was about as atypical and 'needing to start out in a certain place' as possible. It was more of:
-be one of those 'really impressive to the powers that be' types in my early learning such that I got into a good university and did a triple major
-get my head nearly caved in in a mugging in '98 and spend 6 months relearning basic life functions and two years relearning how to live with my newfound life
-enter grad school, complete the coursework, then stall out due to unresolved PTSD and using alcohol as a coping mechanism
-seek help
-finish doctorate
-have rich and powerful friends and relatives frame this experience as an 'overcoming adversity'-story in recommendation letters and help me into an top 10 MBA program.
-get a job I probably don't deserve with a surgeon-esque level of compensation
-but unlike a surgeon be able to buy 3 y.o. Jettas or Priuses as my car of choice, and me and my wife buy a <2000 sf home in the middle middle class region of the big city rather than a 5000 sf mcmansion in a luxury suburb
-pay off house in 5 years, always buy cars with cash, always max out retirement contributions. Have no expensive hobbies and live the same lifestyle as our neighbors, while earning 3x as much (and not having kids).

So, no, my situation isn't applicable to nearly anyone. I started out in a good place, and got multiple golden trampolines when things headed south for me.

Well, there's actually a general path there that is accessible to any teen or young adult who is smart and hardworking:

Focus on school. Get excellent grades. Pick one of the lucrative fields to study in at uni. Finish your studies. Get a job that'll leave you with yearly net earnings into the 6 figures. Meanwhile, live as modestly as possible, while investing all your excess money into stocks and REITs while always keeping a high level of diversification.

By the time you're middle-aged, you're almost guaranteed to be a multi-millionaire.



Let me say though that doing the above is not automatically a guarantee of happiness. There's always some sacrifices to make. BTW, one part of my story that I forgot to mention is that my gf at the time (while I was working on my first building) left me because I was just too absorbed by work and didn't care enough about her. (I was with her before getting into real estate.)

I hope not but I may have given up a potential family in exchange for wealth, in fact. (Can't help but notice that you and I are both childless at the moment.)

[Peelee]

Well, there's actually a general path there that is accessible to any teen or young adult who is smart and hardworking:

Focus on school. Get excellent grades. Pick one of the lucrative fields to study in at uni.

Or the trades.

[lio45]

Or the trades.

Exactly, that works too.

Another very general "you should do this if one of your goals is to get rich" advice is to keep in mind the time value of money, and make sure you don't have kids until you're at least 35 years old.

If you're in a high-paying skilled trade starting in your early 20s, after nearly 15 years you'll have at least a couple million in investments which can now work for you as you decide to slow down work, take time for yourself, and consider having kids.

The risk, of course, is that you may miss the boat on finding the right significant other. Life's full of trade-offs.

[Peelee]

Exactly, that works too.

Another very general "you should do this if one of your goals is to get rich" advice is to keep in mind the time value of money, and make sure you don't have kids until you're at least 35 years old.

If you're in a high-paying skilled trade starting in your early 20s, after nearly 15 years you'll have at least a couple million in investments which can now work for you as you decide to slow down work, take time for yourself, and consider having kids.

The risk, of course, is that you may miss the boat on finding the right significant other. Life's full of trade-offs.

The risk is also higher chances of the child having issues like autism or down syndrome when having children after 35.

Obviously, the key is to be born rich or marry rich. Preferably both.

[lio45]

Obviously, the key is to be born rich

Which will be the case of the kid with down syndrome I'll have at 40.

[Peelee]

Which will be the case of the kid with down syndrome I'll have at 40.

....Touché.