Hacker News Reader

Comment by czbond | Hacker News Reader

You're using that as an excuse..

Okay, so I'll make a spreadsheet where I assume a 50% annual return and then show it's so easy to retire in less than 10 years! For ANYBODY! On only $50 per month of savings! YOU'RE AN IDIOT FOR NOT DOING THIS!

The point is that eventually a quantitative difference becomes a qualitative difference. Few people can make a 10% annual return and many, many fewer still can make a 50% annual return. But if you just buy index funds, it's fairly straightforward for just about anyone to make a 4% annual (real) return.

Given the gigantic difference in how these curves grow over time, it's entirely fair to point this out.

Even then... which index funds? At what allocation? And how often to rebalance? It's still way too easy to try and get into timing the market even if you just stick to index funds.

Vanguard's Target Retirement funds are great for this. I make automatic monthly contributions and never worry about rebalancing.

That wasn't the point of the article, and you can get more than a 10% return. Sitting in the public markets doing what everyone else does wont' get you there. I've been down voted because of everyone's limited thoughts in what it takes to achieve this. Why do I know this? Because I'm in a very similar position as the author.

Not knowing how to get 10% return on your investments is not an excuse, it's a critical flaw in any guide.

It's like this popular meme:

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/572/078/d6d...

Yes the beginning looks easy, yes I like where you got in the end, but you seem to have left out some important details on how you got there...

Untrue, life isn't a set formula of do X then Y then Z. He's laying out a rough guide, not an exact plan. You can get more than 10% in smaller scale investments (eg: not high risk) - but not in traditional methods. You have to think further than "invest in stocks".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com