Literal copy-paste of your first post. The math in my first reply showed you were wrong, that "saving a few hundred" wasn't enough. Your take, somehow, was, I quote:

Your comment shows exactly why not many become millionaires, because many people don’t know how to invest.

I have literally no idea how "500 per month for 35 years will only get you 210k" and "You need ~2500 per month every month for 35 years to earn a million" could ever mean "people don't know how to invest, that's why they don't become millionaires".

My reply was a snarky "Ah yes, tell me more about how everyone has an extra 2.500 lying around every month". Which you simply dodged because I "ignored the context" and because interest rates exist - they still won't make less than 250k into 1 million if you start from zero. Also, allow me to remind you the context that you set up:

Anybody who works their entire life and can save a few hundred bucks per month can be a milliionaire.

Now:

I was writing about people who earn enough to save, just read my comments.

At no point in any of your other replies, to me or other posters, you ever mentioned "people who earn enough" in a direct or indirect manner. The only time you ever pointed to any group was "anybody who works their entire life".

[–] SwingingKoala@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The math in my first reply showed you were wrong, that “saving a few hundred” wasn’t enough.

You can't even do basic math, https://www.investor.gov/financial-tools-calculators/calculators/compound-interest-calculator, but thanks for playing.

[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You can only get 1m or more under SPECIFIC situations, one of them being: IF interest rates keep a mean of 7.5% per year for the whole 35 years AND the compound happens quarterly.

Using the current USA fed rates as an example, of ~5.33%, you can "get" a million IF: the compound is calculated daily AND there's a 2.3 variance upwards in interest rates, making it go as high as ~7.4%. Obviously, that happening later on is much more profitable than early on, when you have much less money to get the compounds on. If, however, something like the early 2010s happens again, where interest rates were below 1% for roughly 6 years straight, you won't get to the million mark.

The fact that you never, at any point, did your part to actually try and show how, why and where my math "was wrong" shows that you're acting on bad faith. You just say "you're wrong" without giving counterproof. You fail to point how I'm "wrong", you just point to a site and say it. Under specific conditions, yes, I am "wrong", but under more likely conditions, you're wrong. Unlike you, I'm also pointing out the where and how: most situations where interest, especially later on, is below 7%.

[–] SwingingKoala@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm so glad you finally made a minimal effort to understand what I wrote! Congrats!

[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ironic that I put more effort than you did in any of your replies

[–] SwingingKoala@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

All you ever said what not everybody can do what I said some can do. I already knew that.

[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 0 points 1 year ago

And you never showed why-how-where I was wrong, you just said it and called it a day. The situation where you are right is so unlikely that assuming you're wrong makes more sense than assuming I was wrong