Save $10k per year

>save $10k per year
>put it in a basic ETF portfolio with an average 20-year return of 7%
>be a millionaire in 30 years

What's the catch, exactly?

Other urls found in this thread:

investopedia.com/terms/t/timevalueofmoney.asp
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

You have to wait 30 years.

>implying 3.5% constant annual inflation rate over 30 years.

Your 1,000,000 would be like 350k in today's money

>He still thinks a million dollars is a lot of money
With inflation, user, a million dollars in 30 years will only be worth what $410,000 is today. So you're 30 years for the likely but not certain chance of getting $410,000 worth of value by today's standards.

That's the catch.

Family home in my hood in 1995 = $160,000
Family home in my hood in 2015 = $550,000
Family home in my hood by the time you save $1,000,000 = Probably $3,000,000

30 YEARS

T
H
I
R
T
Y

Y
E
A
R
S


Are you retards actually this desperate for a million? You could literally spend that in less than a week...Youre gonna wait THIRTY years and then still have to be careful

Why not just put it in the S & P? They get better returns than that.

>30 years

what are you going to do with all that money when you have to take boner pills and your teeth are falling out?

There is no catch

>Inflation
Inflation affects all investments. The smart ones, like OP describes, and the dumb ones, like the fakecoin ponzi schemes, daytrading, and stock picking that Veeky Forums seems to love. There's no way to escape inflation, so anyone who thinks that's a downside to investing is simply too stupid to hold a credible opinion.

>Thirty Years
Its true that sound investing takes time to mature into its full capacity. That's because the power of compounding applies exponentially as your wealth grows. Much of your wealth growth will occur in the later portion of your investment horizon because you'll have more capital then.

Which then begs the question, why are you only saving $10K per year? If this is just an academic exercise, then fine. But in real life your income -- and your savings -- should be increasing with time. Thus, in the real world, its shouldn't be hard to to meet and exceed your savings goals as long as you apply yourself to grow your salary/wage over time life most adults.

That is, unless you're one of these "YOLO 420" fags who think saving for retirement is dumb because they know they'll be dead of meth addiction by age 32, or that only obtain an income from clicking sponsor ads from the basement of their parent's house, or that are simply too stupid to know that the most valuable asset anyone has is their lifetime employment potential.

The nice thing is ... when you're a millionaire, all the kids who cried "inflation" in this thread will be there to make your lattes, bag your groceries, and pump your gas, and all the morons who cried "30 years" will be dead, in jail, or still safely locked away in in some dingy basement.

>what are you going to do with all that money when you have to take boner pills and your teeth are falling out?

Pay for boner pills and new teeth. Besides, most 60-year-olds don't have that problem.

He's asking what's the catch with an investment that turns you into a millionaire in 30 years, it is the fact that you have to wait 30 years. You either pay in risk or time or effort. That's how live works.

>the most valuable asset anyone has is their lifetime employment potential
That's some pretty good advice you rarely here.
Income from 30 years of employment is an order of magnitude larger than a lump sum 10k investment. I would also add be flexible so weigh home ownership and family plans if any into the equation. And don't buy into housing bubbles, wait for a correction at least.

I know what he's asking and I don't see the catch. There's only a catch if there's a downside, and there's only a downside if there's a better way to do it.

Unless you happen to know a better way to invest that yields greater risk-adjusted returns? In which case please (a) enlighten us, and (b) get yourself to Wall Street immediately because there's a 7-figure salary waiting for you.

>Inflation is 3%
>Get returns higher than 3%
>No way to escape inflation
How dumb can you be lad?

That's not what I'm saying. He is wondering what's the catch with an investment that results in a million dollars after 30 years, it's the fact you have to wait 30 years. He is asking because it seems to good to be true. It isn't. You are just compounding and saving over the years. So the catch is you have to wait and save for 30 years. There is nothing wrong with it, it's just that you are paying with time.

>Housing bubbles never burst

>Inflation is 3%
>Get returns higher than 3%
>No way to escape inflation
>How dumb can you be lad?
You really want to dive into this? 'Kay, let's have some fun.

1. First of all, inflation isn't 3%. It's closer to 2% and has been lower that 2% for many years and hasn't topped 3% on an annualized basis since 2007. It's a small point, but you're wrong, and these things matter when you're compounding over many decades.

2. An equity index fund/ETF is likely to perform much better than the 7% used in OP's example. Historically, an equity index has returned 10.3%, based on 84+ years of market data. 10.3% is significantly higher than 7%, again especially when compounded over decades.

3. What does this tell us? That OP is already using an inflation-adjusted return in his calculation. So every person who cries "inflation" in this thread is 100% wrong because OP's numbers ALREADY account for inflation.

>BOOM, headshot.

4. Moving forward nonetheless, even if OP's numbers were not already adjusted for inflation, my point still stands: all investments are subject to inflation. Your buttcoins, your meme stocks, your lottery winnings, and your chip warmer fortune are all eroded by the same inflation as OP's index portfolio.

5. In order to suggest that inflation is somehow "a catch" or a downside to OP's hypothetical, you must be implying that there is a way to invest that avoids inflation. Go ahead and tell us how you manage that trick, kid. Because there's a Nobel Prize in Economics in your future if you can. And a lifetime of mowing lawns if you can't.

>mic drop

only real catch is investopedia.com/terms/t/timevalueofmoney.asp
what could you do with that money if you didn't invest it? for most people the answer to that is nothing, so passively investing it is the right answer.

I fail to see how that's "a catch" or a downside. You can compound anything for 30 years: index funds, penny stocks, gold, or cuckcoins. You can also compound all of them for 30 days or 300 years.

There's nothing magical about "30 years" other than its what OP used in their example. We could change it to any arbitrary number and the math would still work in the sense that OP also chose an arbitrary rate of return (and made no provisions for volatility).

If all you're saying is that long-term investing takes a long time, then aren't we entering "DUH" territory here? But if you have a more germane point to make, I'm afraid you aren't explaining it very well.

>you might be implying that there is a way to invest that avoids inflation
Wasn't implying that.

>BOOM, headshot

You don't seem to understand how this works.

>Next time use the >implying gif, kid.

>If all you're saying is that long-term investing takes a long time, then aren't we entering "DUH" territory here?

That's exactly what I have been saying. I thought it was "DUH" territory but we went back and forth so many times, I wasn't sure if you were screwing with me or what.

Well, it's the same as if you had posted, "If you're money is invested in a ETF then you can't spend it on chicken tenders." True, I suppose, but also obvious and pretty much irrelevant to the point of the thread.

>7%

More like 5% honestly.

The catch is it takes 30 years to get a measly 1 million.

These humblebraggers who imply that million dollars is not a lot to them are the worst.

triggered

>More like 5% honestly.
More like 11% honestly.

>someone knows more than me
>must troll them
Doing god's work, kid.

Think about it, if you are 25 now and in 30 years you have a million waiting for when you are 55 years old. You could easily make 1mil last you another 20+ years easy especially at 50k a year which is a lot more than most people even make.

is this the most butthurt boglehead we've seen yet on biz?

t. poorfag NEET coinfag

50,000 a year in 2047 is ~24,000 a year now, so not quite as luxurious

shut up nerd

>save $10k per year
>put it in a basic ETH portfolio with an average return of 300% per year
>be a millionaire in 5 years

What's the catch exactly?

What's a good online trading thing like E-trade if you want to be aggressive but want to pay the least amount of fees possible?