That has a lot of implications, and none of them good IMO.
That has a lot of implications, and none of them good IMO.
I won't argue that one, but where do you draw the line with
> have no real job yet
I would argue that as long as you are working, you have a real job.
Probably the best would be to track both 25-30 and 18-30 and see how it changes.
If you're working nights in a warehouse while you finish your degree that will get you into an industry with nearly six figure starting salaries then I would argue that you're not "working yet" you're just a student with income.
Or what about blue collar workers who aren't going to school, and are at that same warehouse? Are they not working at a real job?
That being the case, I think that the study would be best off tracking those 18-30 who are living individually and are not attending school. Thoughts?
As for a real job, well, let's say that in Spain, it's complicated
Massive Caveat: I've not lived in Spain for over 20 years though I have friends and family
This seems like an obvious place to look if you're looking for reasons why 25-30 year olds don't have much money.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/23/most-americans-dont-have-the...
These people struggle to pay rent each month let alone think about "investments".
Sure you will lose a little bit, like 2 or 3% a year. But if you have nothing saved then what will you do in case of an emergency? such as losing a job?
This is money for when you lose your job for instance
Your appetite for risks and circumstances determine how big it should be (a good rule of thumb is six months worth of salary) but there are countless stories of people trying to be clever with their emergency funds and storing them in ETFs or riskier investments only to find that when the need comes, their fund is not enough and get in financial distress.
https://www.treasurydirect.gov/indiv/research/indepth/ibonds...