To get rich slowly, hang on to that beat-up old sedan.
In an EconLog post on December 7, Giorgio Castiglia surprised me with the following story:
At a 10-year high-school reunion, a middle school math teacher arrives in a beat-up old sedan and an old buddy of his pulls up in a shiny new convertible and all the trappings of wealth. The math teacher recalls that this friend barely squeaked by in his high school classes. “You seem to be doing well”, he says as he greets his friend, “what’s your secret?” The friend replies, “I just follow the 5 per cent rule. Buy something for $5, sell it for $10.”
When I read the first sentence, I thought Giorgio was going to go in a completely different direction.
There was a famous book published decades ago titled The Millionaire Next Door. I could tell the story in length about how the authors came up with the content and the title. It’s a fascinating story and one I love to tell.
But I’ll be brief. The main insight in the book is that most millionaires don’t buy expensive things. When the authors studied millionaires, they found that the vast majority lived modest life styles. They didn’t spent a lot on shoes, clothes, or watches, and many bought used cars rather than new ones and hung on to their cars for a long time rather than trading them in every 3 years or so.
Two economists, who are also friends, Dwight R. Lee and Richard B. McKenzie, wrote a great book in 1999 on how to get rich slowly. They aptly titled it Getting Rich in America: Eight Simple Rules for Building a Fortune and a Satisfying Life. I highly recommend it to people of all ages but especially to people under age 40. The latter have longer for the law of compound interest to yield its wonderful results.
In my Wall Street Journal review of the Lee/McKenzie book, I wrote, “‘Getting Rich in America’ is the how-to handbook for becoming the millionaire next door.”
So when I read Giorgio’s story, I thought the middle school math teacher driving the beat-up sedan would be the one getting rich. Think about it. If you’re a teacher in a government school in America, you’re making pretty decent money, you have over 2 months off in the summer and you could get a nice vacation while still spending one of the months doing lucrative tutoring, you have incredible job security, and you have very generous health insurance. So it shouldn’t be that hard to save 10% of your gross income and invest it in a market index fund such as the Vanguard Total Market Index. Indeed, you probably don’t need to save 10% to get rich because if you last in your job for 35 years or more, you can typically get the now-rare defined benefit pension. If you save even 8% of your gross income and invest it in a total market index and do that for 30 years, then, when you’re 60, your net worth, including the present value of your defined-benefit pension (assuming that your life expectancy conditional on reaching age 60 is 20 years or more), you will have a net worth of well over $1 million.
READER COMMENTS
john hare
Dec 11 2024 at 4:28am
My daughter in law got her degree in 2010 and teaching contract the next year. Now she has a quite useful salary AND a side business that nets somewhat more than fast food worker wages. Her and my son went from rental mobile home to owning nice house on acreage. Plus investments and retirement accounts.
David Henderson
Dec 11 2024 at 9:38am
Nice.
Knut P. Heen
Dec 11 2024 at 7:29am
I have heard this joke before from one of my colleagues. I don’t think it is a true story. The point is that the guy who don’t know percentages is wealthy and the math teacher is not. A 100-percent margin is, of course not, a 5-percent rule, but it will make you wealthy anyhow.
David Henderson
Dec 11 2024 at 9:39am
Ah, I missed the joke. I knew it was 100%, but I forgot to recognize that he was talking to a math teacher, who would clearly know better. Of course, pretty much everyone should realize that 5 on top of 5 is 100%.
Thanks for clarifying.
TMC
Dec 11 2024 at 8:29am
“I could tell the story in length about how the authors came up with the content and the title.”
Please do, if you would. The book was great and I find your stories fascinating.
David Henderson
Dec 11 2024 at 9:41am
Thanks, TMC.
If I told the story, I would simply be retelling the story they told in their original edition. Since you’ve read the book, you probably know the story.
But if you want me to, I will. I need to first check if I’m remembering correctly. My copy burned in my 2007 fire, and I didn’t really need to replace it. But if you want, I’ll get it from the library and tell it.
Do you want me to?
TMC
Dec 11 2024 at 4:53pm
Oh! Sorry, no need. I can look it up. It’s been a long time. I thought you had a ‘behind the scenes’ story.
David Henderson
Dec 11 2024 at 5:30pm
No. It’s just that the authors’ preconceptions and how that led them to buy expensive wine, the beer (“What kind of beer do you like? Answer: Two kinds–Bud and free) and the cheese and crackers are such a fun story.
Peter
Dec 11 2024 at 9:03am
There is no enjoyment in being a miser for most people, live a little. Also if you can afford to give away 5% your income to your future possibly dead self, maybe you should give it in something more worthwhile in the present like charity or tithing.
I find middle class misers who die “rich”, as we are wont to hear around this time of year of janitors dying leaving millions to a school, tend and have spent a life unlived, unloved, unexamined, and remiss in religion obligations. Had a friend recently die at 73 with nearly $20M, never once in his adult life did ever go to a restaurant or vacation or in a date because that would have been a lost opportunity cost to his retirement fund. Spent his entire life taking the bus the same. Near the end, he regretted all of it as he should have.
David Henderson
Dec 11 2024 at 9:43am
Yup. You can overdo everything. That’s actually another reason that Lee’s and McKenzie’s book is worth reading. It’s in the 8th rule, which is about helping others. As I noted in my WSJ review, they mess up by calling it giving back. It’s simply giving.
Craig
Dec 11 2024 at 12:02pm
“Also if you can afford to give away 5% your income to your future possibly dead self, maybe you should give it in something more worthwhile in the present like charity or tithing.”
The money is deployed, not a squirrel hiding away nuts. The income generating activities create tax revenues which is what is genuinely necessary for taxes to support food stamps, Medicaid, etc.
Peter
Dec 11 2024 at 2:46pm
That money is being taxed regardless what it’s being spent on, whether it’s paying financial advisors and bank shareholders or the liquor store sales clerk after the homeless guy you have $20 immediately goes in and buy a fifth hence that argument is a red herring. Nor is paying taxes charity to be frank which is what you seem to be saying.
But that isn’t really the point here, the point is you can’t take the money with you, get to living now and if you have excess, maybe help others the same. Historically charity and tithing were seen as a obligatory matter, a must pay as opposed to something that completed against a Netflix subscription or your retirement; or hell spend it on friends and family. 5% your annual income is a nice dinner once a month your kids might enjoy instead of Ruby Tuesdays. Or an impromptu vacation once a year. Go on a drug and alcohol fueled bender. Go get yourself that nice mattress you always wanted but never could bring yourself to buy because of a pathological need to save for the future that may not turn out like you are planning anyways. You can get hit by a bus tomorrow, go bankrupt, prison, randomly get ALS, lose your job and be long term unemployable, get chronic back pain and shoot a CEO, etc. No amount of savings is going to fix that, at best it might delay the inevitable a year or two so you might as well live it up while you can. All the wealth in the world isn’t going to save Puff Daddy from dying in prison but at least he’ll have his memories; Hussein spent his wealth hiding in a hole waiting to be hung.
This is something I find people lose as they move up in socioeconomic classes whereas I still routinely see the poor give money or goods away that can’t afford at an actual sacrifice to themselves to help others, they understand wealth is temporal. Talk to a Salvation Army bell ringer sometime around Christmas, they will tell you they pull in more money from poverty neighborhoods that affluent ones.
I’m not one to say don’t save but as I’ve taught my own kids, wealth is a poor life goal and retirement savings is discretionary, it comes out of the same budget as coffee. Pay your bills, live your life, help others, drink, and be merry. Money comes and goes, enjoy it while you have it.
If you still have 5% your income to squirrel away after everything because your income is high enough, good for you and by all means, save it, compound interest is great. But I’d suggest most people don’t have that high of an income level, especially in the upper middle class (and down) hence it’s a fools errand and they wouldn’t be as miserable (which plagues the middle class) if they just lived a little rather than worry about the opportunity cost of going out on a date vs. the compound interest that $200 might make over thirty years. Or maybe instead of stepping over that passed out homeless drunk when leaving 7/11 go back in, buy him a refill, and leave it under his blanket rather than worry about how that $15 will compound.
john hare
Dec 11 2024 at 5:02pm
You seem to be suggesting “spend it all because you don’t know the future”. If that is the case, you will stay broke for lack of investment. Spending it all now is a recipe for not having it when you need it.
Monte
Dec 11 2024 at 6:02pm
Peter,
You’re right to point out that the pursuit of wealth is a poor life goal, but preparing for the future should be a priority for us all, especially those under the age of 40. Quality of life is important at every age, maybe even more so during the golden years. Don’t sell compound interest and saving for retirement short. They’re the best way to get out of the rat race with plenty of cheese!
MarkW
Dec 11 2024 at 3:44pm
Or will it to something more worthwhile in the future if you happen not to live long enough to need it. I had a grandfather who lived to be nearly 100 and a father who didn’t make it past 65. That’s a nearly 35 year difference. If my wife and I end up on the shorter end, there’ll be a sizeable bequest for charity when we’re gone (even if our kids and any hypothetical grand children need some support). But if we live into our 90s and end up requiring expensive care? Who knows.
David Henderson
Dec 11 2024 at 5:34pm
Good points.
I added up my gifts to charity for 2024 and in nominal terms, they’re almost 3 times the amount in 2019. Why 2019? Because that was a normal year. We went all out in 2020 to give money to businesses that the California government and thugs in Minneapolis destroyed. That was our highest amount in real terms.
Home care when we’re old is the only kind I want. We’ve saved enough to pay for 10 years of home care at $200K per year.
Monte
Dec 11 2024 at 11:47am
Sage advice. The problem is that an alarming number of Millennials and Gen Z have become increasingly pessimistic about the future and are choosing instead to live for today by “doom spending” rather than saving for retirement. Getting rich slowly is meaningful only to those who are optimistic about the future.
David Henderson
Dec 11 2024 at 5:34pm
It depends on how pessimistic. If you think things can be bad but the world won’t end, you might want to save more than otherwise.
David Seltzer
Dec 11 2024 at 12:29pm
For nearly ten years I drove a VW Passat. about 160,00 miles on the odometer. My daughter chastised me for driving a “hoopty.” You can afford a Bentley she admonished. Why drive that old VW? My response. I can afford a Bentley because I drive this hoopty. I believe Sam Walton drove his ten year old truck long after becoming wealthy.
Giorgio Castiglia
Dec 11 2024 at 3:01pm
Great post, David. Yes, in reality, it wouldn’t be surprising to find out the teacher is much wealthier, and is probably more often the case.
David Henderson
Dec 11 2024 at 5:36pm
Thanks, Giorgio. And now, with help from commenter Knut P. Heen, I at least get the joke.
Joseph Smith
Dec 11 2024 at 6:01pm
I am 81 and my three children are all in their 50’s. All of them got as a Christmas present two books when they were in high school–The Millionaire Next Door and the Wealthy Barber. Plus lectures from their mom and dad about saving early, living within your means, etc.
A friend of mine added another rule to follow. Do not get divorced as the costs involved over time can seriously reduce ones retirement nest egg. This point may be in the books mentioned above.
I am amazed how clueless so many young adults are today about basic individual or family financial matters.
Jose Pablo
Dec 11 2024 at 11:21pm
Do not get divorced as the costs involved over time can seriously reduce ones retirement nest egg
According to some good friends, this is the best money ever spent.
john hare
Dec 12 2024 at 4:29am
That applies if you have a reasonably good partner. If you have one that is working against you, getting out can be the right move. The mistake may not be the divorce, but rather the particular partner in that marriage. From bitter experience.
The sage advice is dependent on making good choices in the first place.
Jose Pablo
Dec 12 2024 at 7:30am
The mistake may not be the divorce, but rather the particular partner in that marriage.
I don’t think that always qualifies as a “mistake.” You end up with a partner who could easily be significantly different from the one you married several years ago. And you, yourself, are different from who you were. People change with time and experiences (at least if they are interesting. Boring people change less)
No mistake. Just change. Spending money to face the consequences of change is the rational thing to do. No mistake is necessarily involved.
Saving and compounding is sensible … until is it not. It doesn’t make sense not to have surgery to remove a cancer to save and compound. Divorce belongs to that category. Getting cancer is not necessarily your fault.
John hare
Dec 12 2024 at 9:08am
When I got a woman that was more interested in a good time, I thought that we would outgrow that. When years later the bill money is going to a bar tab or pot dealer, that’s a problem I should have foreseen. You can’t live a quality life when the future is squandered.
Thomas L Hutcheson
Dec 11 2024 at 7:04pm
“The main insight in the book is that most millionaires don’t buy expensive things.”
If we had a personal consumption tax, even fewer would. 🙂
Dale Courtney
Dec 11 2024 at 7:45pm
I always understood exponential growth from my math and physics background, but it really clicked when I heard some senior officers on my submarine discussing compound interest. That’s when I realized the power of investing early and consistently. Inspired, I took my entire first nuclear bonus and invested it for my 1-year-old’s college fund. 18 years later, that single investment covered everything! It just goes to show that slow and steady wins the race. (For my own investments, I use dollar-cost averaging, but that’s a story for another time!)
Henri Hein
Dec 12 2024 at 3:33pm
Steve Landsburg would like to have a word with you:
https://www.thebigquestions.com/2021/06/29/mamas-dont-let-your-babies-grow-up-to-be-dollar-cost-averagers/
https://www.thebigquestions.com/2010/07/14/eggs-and-baskets/
Mike
Dec 13 2024 at 8:07pm
I have an associates degree and a paid off 2012 car @115k miles. Between 401k, IRA, HSA, various matching, I “pay myself first” about 48% of my annual baseline gross wages and have retirement funds of over 300k at 35 and a 6 month emergency fund. My wife is SAHM, we have a girl. We got a house in early 2023 @ 5.25% rate with 20% down. My income was 35% higher than base this due to staffing so we also paid off her car and student loans.
Comments are closed.