It doesn't matter at all. The first 100k is the hardest, as is the first 200k, and the first million too. That's how interest works. The question is, how fast are you working? That determines which number matters most to you. For example, I save 1,600. (It used to be more for a while.) In that case, the first 100k doesn’t make much of a difference. Still, I’ll probably get from 100 to 200 faster than from 0 to 100.
The saying is highly simplified anyway. What do you do if the stock market performs poorly for five years? Then the second 200k is significantly harder to come by than the first.
The saying is highly simplified anyway. What do you do if the stock market performs poorly for five years? Then the second 200k is significantly harder to come by than the first.
•
11
•
@SchlaubiSchlumpf What's got into you today?
••
@DonkeyInvestor Obviously a donkey 😘
Nah, no idea. I've heard that "100k" line way too often and always thought, "Mathematically speaking, it doesn't make sense to give a specific number."
Nah, no idea. I've heard that "100k" line way too often and always thought, "Mathematically speaking, it doesn't make sense to give a specific number."
•
22
•@SchlaubiSchlumpf What do you think? I think that’s a useful benchmark. Especially when you consider the expected return in relation to the average savings rate.
••
The thing is, the average is just that—an average. A lot of people don’t earn an average income. For someone who saves 50 euros a month, 100k is already way out of reach 😁
•
22
•@DonkeyInvestor But of course, the principle is important and correct
•
22
•