Meet the millionaires

100k p.a. is where it begins for many professionals straight out of university. Where it ends up is what matters.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...rs-hardest-hit-in-new-tax-20140429-zr1el.html

The vast majority of investors cannot reliably generate 300k gains year on year for over a long period of time whereas certain professions will generate that reliably for several decades after graduation.

The ABS begs to differ.........

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected] 2013~Main Features~Starting salaries~2320
 

Interesting that the median for males is higher then women,

followed by the qquote "The differences in overall median starting salaries between males and females can be partly explained in terms of the differing enrolment profiles of males and females. However, there are many other factors that can influence starting salary differences. While males and females may have studied in the same field, differing employment factors such as occupation, type and location of the employer, or the hours worked, can also have an impact on the earnings"

Basically says that the men work longer hours, or choose the harder/inconvenient jobs hence the slight variation, all at a graduate stage of their life
 
A reason might be because people that go to college are surrounded by more people that think the right way about money so that influence wears off

Not convinced about that . The people who I know who are wealthy ( talking 3 mill plus ) who've gone through Uni are either the ones who have an income of 500 k plus ( either high level job or both working ) or a handful ( income 2-300 k ) who have got into investing for what ever reason eg , grew up in a Greek family working in the family take away and business / investing was just their way of life , or people who had their moment on the road to Damascus and realised they had to do something different .

Most of the professionals I've know ( I know a lot ) are comfortable but not wealthy .

Cliff
 
Wow some very high incomes there.

Just under a quarter of the millionaires surveyed had a household income of more than $200,000.

The point that I like from the study in the OP is that most of the millionaires don't/didn't have super high incomes. They're just normal people who worked hard and saved hard and invested their money over their long lives.

Which means that even I have a good chance of doing well.
What I love about Stanley's books/studies is that the light is shone on all the high income earners who waste their money trying to keep up with the Joneses.

The article in the OP also says
Seventy-eight percent of millionaires believe the cause of income inequality is wealthier households having greater access to education.
Still, education isn't the No. 1 contributor to wealth creation.

so I think Blair007 is right.
But I bet that most of these people made their own fortunes, too.

Please keep in mind that not everyone who goes to uni has ridiculous expectations or came from a wealthy or even comfortable family, especially in Australia.
 
No way my wife and I could have built our investment portfolio without our degrees (both undergrad and postgrad), simply because the income we have makes it easy.

For everyone who drops out of uni and succeeds spectacularly, I reckon I could show a thousand who don't. Financial intelligence is not determined by the study you do, yuou either get it (or learn it) or don't.
 
Whet Berlina says...

I, as Cliff puts it, had my moment on the road to Damascus. I was working for a management consulting company at the time earning OK money around $120K odd and I realised that to get anywhere financially I had to put as much effort, if not more, into my investing as I did into my day job. Shortly thereafter I went back into industry, where its a lot cushier than consulting, and focussed on my investing.

I'm in a senior role for a mining company now over $200K but still put the bulk of my effort into my wealth creation. I'm not super rich by any stretch and have a net worth in the $1-2M range so not anything outstanding, but I'm 43 and on the right path now I think. If I do nothing else on the investment front and just let time do its thing, then I will have a strong position in retirement.

It pays to start early but it also pays to have a strong salary to service the debts required to really do well in property. No way known I could have done my $1.2M construction loan in Sydney if I didn't have my salary to service it. That loan went right to the wire arguing I didn't have the servicability and I just managed to get it across the line. Now those units are my anchor investment with over $1M equity in them.

Education is what got me to where I am, and where I am is what feeds my investment endeavours.

Cheers,
Michael
 
Interesting that the median for males is higher then women,

followed by the qquote "The differences in overall median starting salaries between males and females can be partly explained in terms of the differing enrolment profiles of males and females. However, there are many other factors that can influence starting salary differences. While males and females may have studied in the same field, differing employment factors such as occupation, type and location of the employer, or the hours worked, can also have an impact on the earnings"

Basically says that the men work longer hours, or choose the harder/inconvenient jobs hence the slight variation, all at a graduate stage of their life

I read this the other day and found it really interesting. Basically says the biggest reason for the salary difference, under representation of women in top tiers, etc. is that women put themselves forward for those sorts of positions less frequently than men, and not because they're busy having babies. Says that women don't put themselves forward for a promotion/job/payrise unless they think they fulfil all the relevant criteria, while men will happily put themselves forward if they only fulfil 50%. Says a bunch of other stuff too, but all relates back to a confidence gap between men and women.
 
I read this the other day and found it really interesting. Basically says the biggest reason for the salary difference, under representation of women in top tiers, etc. is that women put themselves forward for those sorts of positions less frequently than men, and not because they're busy having babies. Says that women don't put themselves forward for a promotion/job/payrise unless they think they fulfil all the relevant criteria, while men will happily put themselves forward if they only fulfil 50%. Says a bunch of other stuff too, but all relates back to a confidence gap between men and women.

Hi Luce

Thanks for that link , just forwarded it to my daughter . Interesting reading .

Cliff
 
For everyone who drops out of uni and succeeds spectacularly, I reckon I could show a thousand who don't. Financial intelligence is not determined by the study you do, yuou either get it (or learn it) or don't.

This is spot on. Education is what allows one generation to rise in social / financial class and status. That is why many parents who have aspirations for their children to have a better lot in life invest heavily in education.
 
And I'm not talking about making 300k pa as an investor. people that are making that sort of money only have to be in the game for 10 years and they are in that top tier bracket, which is not what we are talking about.

Wow, you make it seem so easy.

How much do you make pa?
 
Wow, you make it seem so easy.

How much do you make pa?

Maybe you misunderstood me.

china was saying that a person with a good degree, surgeon etc could consistently make 300k pa and that a property investor could not do this as easy. I was saying this is not really what we are talking about because we are talking in general and anybody on those sort of annual incomes is in a class above.
 
Maybe you misunderstood me.

china was saying that a person with a good degree, surgeon etc could consistently make 300k pa and that a property investor could not do this as easy. I was saying this is not really what we are talking about because we are talking in general and anybody on those sort of annual incomes is in a class above.

Actually if you're only making 300 k as a surgeon , your not doing that well....

Cliff
 
Not enough to have no worries :(

Keep at it, don't give up. When I started my first professional role at 23 years old I was making less per hour than when working in the service station that helped pay my bills when I was studying.

Things are very different now, though.
 
Keep at it, don't give up. When I started my first professional role at 23 years old I was making less per hour than when working in the service station that helped pay my bills when I was studying.

Things are very different now, though.

Don't get me wrong. Luckily I make a lot, in the top 1% percentile of income and assets...

But I feel that the more I have, the more stress I have.. especially with budget announcements like today and the current state of the economy.
 
Don't get me wrong. Luckily I make a lot, in the top 1% percentile of income and assets...

But I feel that the more I have, the more stress I have.. especially with budget announcements like today and the current state of the economy.

We're probably in a similar boat, although I really enjoy my job.
 
Back
Top