For the record, thousands of Australian university students live on less than US$10K per year. You seem to think we can't exist, but we do.
> No way you could afford that dental work after you pay rent on that.
And thanks, that is very helpful of you to remind me.
I think you need to revisit this in 10 or 20 years. I think you'll have a different opinion on this number.
$10k is not comfortable. That is poverty. And the question wasn't what is possible to survive on.
Again, I apologise if my comment/s seem impolite. I am not having a great day, but I don't mean to come across as disrespectful. I understand that I live in a different world to many of the people here on HN. I also think we may be talking past each other a little bit, using different definitions of "comfortable". I think it's possible that I don't know what comfortable is supposed to feel like, at least not the way most people here seem to be using the word. To me, comfortable is just having a loaf of bread in the cupboard, a roof over my head and a healthy body. I feel like that is all I need, and that's the point I was originally trying to make.
You might be happy as a PhD student, but your housing and life is entirely dependent on the university. You are one academic violation away from that all being in jeopardy.
What happens if you get a spouse and child? Will your current housing and savings be enough to support them and yourself if you both decide you want to stay with the baby instead of working?
What if your government passes legislation that costs you your job, your housing, or your healthcare?
The $10m money is about not worrying about anything other than global economic collapse and/or massive wars.
"Not worrying about money again" means never again. Not just while you manage to hold down a job.
I really like the peace of mind that gives me and everyone, even if that means I have to pay more taxes.
That's certainly better security, but it's still nowhere near the level I'm talking about. You're still having to concern yourself with money for things like smartphones, entertainment, holidays, etc. and you're one government crisis away from austerity taking a big chunk of that away. Also, keep in mind that there are still people alive who witnessed WW2. You can't take the stability of your country as a given.
The $10m number puts you in the position to even diversify away risks to your home country.
From the data it does not seem to make people here lazy, and being long-term unemployed is still bad for mental health and being part of society. I am not sure how much of this is cultural since it is surely connected to attitudes towards work.
Sure, but you're comparing apples and oranges. Almost 2 of those orders of magnitude disappear when you change $10M of assets into a few hundred thousand dollars of annual income.
A lot of the rest goes away when you notice that not worrying about finances "ever again" includes an awful lot of expensive things you don't pay for day-to-day or even year-to-year, such as the dental work you're putting off.
I think you might have a bias in your viewpoint here. At half would be 150k/year and is still significantly above what most developers make. And I am assuming only United states.
> above what most
I don't see the contradiction here?
Of course if you don't expect to invest, work or advance everything is going to be have to paid for up front and you will need a lot of money. But that isn't realistic for most people. It is very expensive to be a poor millionaire, but relatively cheap to be modestly wealthy.
We had obamacare which helped a lot.
I see people on HN talking about needing massive amounts of money to live and I just wonder where it all goes? What's it for?
Well there's the problem right there. Your salary should be higher than your cost of living because you're actively trying to save for retirement. Once you're actually retired you shouldn't need as much.
And I think they have a point: $100k is a lot of money, but what if you got sick and couldn't work anymore, ever? Wouldn't you be at the risk of starving or becoming homeless if you had to stretch that over 30 or 40 years?
Agreed.
> And I think they have a point: $100k is a lot of money, but what if you got sick and couldn't work anymore, ever?
That's a fair point. I don't really worry too much about getting sick and never being able to work again ever. I think some of this comes down to the level of risk that each individual is content to live with. If I had children or a family, perhaps I would be a lot more worried.
For example, if you wanted to spend $20k per year, then you would need $20,000 / 0.03 = $666,666 invested in index funds.
I'd be happy with something like $40k per year ($1,333,333 invested), or just a SaaS service that provides passive income. Running a business is far riskier, but it also gives you something to do.
And maybe I wouldn't mind having a nice house in an expensive city like New York, Melbourne, Vancouver, etc. $20,000 per year would be nice, but I think $200,000 would be pretty nice as well.
You're right, spending 40k for a couple is plenty to live on. It's all of the above that sucks up the rest if you want to retire (let alone retire early).
Give me $100k and I'll retire within the year. A few smart quick investments can really pan out. It can also fail, as we all should know.
10% is about the best return you can count on (very optimistically) I don't know what country you live in, but 10k in the US, even for a single person, would put you far below the poverty line. No way you could afford that dental work after you pay rent on that. And let's not even talk about all of the other huge expenses that will come up later in your life.
$10m * 3% = $300k/year
That's a high end salary in the US. You could cut this number in half, and that would be ok too IMO. Less than some developers make. But you can buy a reasonable house, car, etc. Not a farrari though, unless you're irresponsible.
If you actually intend to live on this money forever, then the return you receive is really the maximum you can spend. And that's really not as much as you would think. Especially when you figure there will be some years where you won't earn anything (during recessions).
Again, if you live in an expensive country like the US. If you live in a poor country, maybe 10K is enough. But this article and these numbers, aren't really about that situation.