"People are poor for primarily one reason - because they made bad decisions."
That's not true at all. For example, there's an entire subset of Americans who've been systematically victimized by everything from slavery to family destruction to suppressed wages to redlining.
As for explaining the monetary side of that equation, I always use The Twin Test: If one twin starts maxing out their savings at 20, and stops at 40, while the other twin starts at 40...how old will they be when one twin's savings catches up to the other?
Some clients guess 20 years, some 30, some 50. Some, of course, give the right answer: the later-saving twin will NEVER catch up; the chasm between them will only get wider. After only 20 years of a head start.
Now apply that theory to "old" money in the US, after 20 decades. It's one of the reasons the wealthiest keep getting a larger slice of the pie.
It's also a good reason for a (more) progressive tax code.
"People are poor for primarily one reason - because they made bad decisions."
That's not true at all. For example, there's an entire subset of Americans who've been systematically victimized by everything from slavery to family destruction to suppressed wages to redlining.
As for explaining the monetary side of that equation, I always use The Twin Test: If one twin starts maxing out their savings at 20, and stops at 40, while the other twin starts at 40...how old will they be when one twin's savings catches up to the other?
Some clients guess 20 years, some 30, some 50. Some, of course, give the right answer: the later-saving twin will NEVER catch up; the chasm between them will only get wider. After only 20 years of a head start.
Now apply that theory to "old" money in the US, after 20 decades. It's one of the reasons the wealthiest keep getting a larger slice of the pie.
It's also a good reason for a (more) progressive tax code.