If you're willing to work this hard, why not get a decent paying college degree or study a trade? You will make more money later in your career and work less.
Just based on what you said (which isn’t much). 3 out of 5 maybe? I’ve seen it time and time again. Burnout is real. 75+ hours a week, is not sustainable. Long term, balance will benefit you. Personal finance is a marathon, not a sprint.
Right now you’re averaging just about $23 an hour. Imagine if you cut your hours back to 40 hours a week. Put 10-15 hours or so towards improving your career skills, and put the rest towards relaxing and recharging.
Over the long run, those things would increase your productivity and long term career prospects by increasing your hourly wage/salary.
So no. You aren’t doing the best. You have tunnel vision, and are only thinking about the short term. Not the long term.
Oh for sure. I guess I assumed the OP didn’t have that because he mentioned the extra money is going towards investing. If he has debt and he’s putting money into investing my score would be 0/5 for that sole reason.
You’re absolutely right though.
It is where I am also - I only have about $3k in CC debt and have $10k saved but I just don't feel financially secure so going balls to the wall 2 jobs and eBay business.
I know it’s “technically” debt then. But honestly it’s not even worth mentioning as debt. When someone says they have credit card debt, people mostly mean they haven’t paid it off and are paying interest.
Even tho it is debt. It isn’t to you. It’s a credit card that you’re treating like a debit card. I just don’t really consider that debt in the traditional sense.
Like the others said, you might want to dial it back before you burn out. But I am impressed! I could never work 75 hours a week.
Just make sure you’re maxing out your ROTH IRA before investing in a brokerage.
Did that back in the day and all t taught me was that it's typically much smarter to work less for more than to work more jobs for more hours for what equates to less. Much better to get a job with OT if you're gonna be working crazy hours than 3 jobs with no OT associated for a ahit ton of those hours.
The even smarter plan is to find a career. OP has jobs right now. Not a career. It took an optometrist of all people to get me going down that path, but once she did I never looked back. Shout out to my old optometrist. You da Real MVP.
1 being the lowest 5 being highest.
1/5. Sure, you're probably doing well or hopefully amazing financially. But financial position isn't just about working. It's about having a good work life balance. What's the point in saving all that money if let's say you never have time for yourself or others.
Maybe that is fun for you. But nah it's insane you're working that much.
Your financial position is unclear to me.
What is your net worth? Do you have any debt? How long have you been making 7k for? Is the income you described pre tax or after tax?
Regardless, of your financial position, I don't think working 75+ hours per week is good for your well being and it's defienetely not sustainable in the long term. You are still young, and if you waste your youth working non-stop, you can't get that back.
Your montly income may be good, but your hourly income definetely isn't, you just work a lot.
Since you have more income than expenses, maybe see if you can quit one of your part time jobs and use that time to learn some skill that could eventually get you a job with a higher hourly rate, so that you can mantain your current income while working normal hours.
Oh I am making no mistake about it. Nothing is a 5/5 if the pinnacle of your financial accomplishment is how much you're saving. That's a rookie mistake. 5/5 describes a situation where your money is working for you, not the other way around. I live off my investments. I don't have to work. I don't have to save any a month if I don't want to, because my money earns more than I spend. If I have to work 75 hours per week at garbage pay that's hardly a 5/5.
Your financial position may be agnostic to how many hours you work, but it's not agnostic to what your net worth is.
OP could have been doing this for years and have hundreds of thousands on net worth, or maybe OP got a high income recently and coudln't invest until now so has a low net worth.
There is just not enough context provided and that's why I said it's unclear.
Your financial position is also not agnostic to risk management and future income potential. For example, I would say that someone who makes 50k in a career where they have opportunity for growth is in a better spot than someone making 50k in a dead end job with no chance of increasing income in the future or than someone who is making 50k working for a company that isn't performing well and has a high chance of laying off people.
But again, not much context in OPs situation. The fact that he makes a lot from working lots of hours in multiple relatively low paying jobs, suggest that they will most likely be able to find a similar paying job if they lose one, but on the other hand, since the pay is so low, it seems like OP doesn't really have much room for growth in those jobs. But again, not enough context.
Medical bills will eventually take all your savings due to poor health from working 75 plus hours a week. You need to find a way for your money to make money.
Pretty crap, honestly. If you're having to work 75 hours to save and invest then you're in a COL area your wages don't support. Either get a trade/degree so you can be a better earner or move somewhere that your $20-something an hour job will cut it.
Yes, but I don't necessarily agree with you. I know people who have happily work 60-70hr weeks for decades because they want to provide for their families, and they feel valued in their expertise.
Or they could just get a better job and actually participate with their families. If you're always working 70 hours a week you aren't a family member, you're an underwriter.
The guys I know make 150-250K/year and many are on plans to retire by the age of 45-50 while also having money set aside to aid the security of the children's futures. Many people have different priorities than you.
Yeah, I make 150-250k/year and have money set aside to aid...blah blah blah...all of that. But being an underskilled absentee father who has to work 75 hours to do it isn't being a family man or a father, it's being a sponsor.
Many people smoke crack. That's a different priority than mine. That's not really much of a refutation to the common theme in responses here that you're describing a pretty shite life that nobody wants.
My only argument is that there are people who are okay with it. Idk why that's so difficult for someone as skilled and worldly as you to understand.
I guarantee you that you couldn't do this work. to be honest, if you tried you'd probably die. and without these men, you wouldn't be able to do your job either. Most of us wouldn't be able to.
Crazy how you can make that and not have to miss your child's childhood, baseball games, recitals, dinner at home, dating with wife, etc. all while reitiring early as well. It's almost like working 70 hours a week isn't a requirement to retire early or live well in general.
Instead of being so close minded, how about realize that time is more precious than money and missing all that time to finally do anything at 50 can already be too late for many people to develop time with their now adult kids and distanced wife.
70 hours means spending a shit ton of time away from family to begin with. You don't get time back and most family members are better off maximizing time spent with each other than just money. Especially in OP's case where he has no career yet and is just working jobs right now. Been there. Realized a well paying skillset and career can be had and way more balanced in work life to be able to actually enjoy my money and time than just living to work all my life is way more pleasing then spending my life working for cooperations that don't give a damn.
Nobody on their death beds are saying "damn, wish I would have spent more time in the office working all day." Plenty that wish they spent more time with their own families and enjoying life outside of work for sure. Wishing they can spend time with their kids and spouse.
well, for starters they typically do 4 weeks on 1 week off. Plus the 150-250 does not include OT which they get at 1.5x or a 2x rate. None of them work in an office. The "older guys" are early forties and have kids in their pre-teens, but are 1-2 years from their retirement. Younger guys typically are single or have wives with no kids and working to retire early specifically so that they get to spend that time with their families. I do feel bad for the older guys because the compensation wasn't always what it is now. In some ways though it's a trade off between having all the time with your kids when they're a little older and missing a lot when they're young vs always missing something. These guys don't wait until their 60's to retire.
Yawn, tbh man, you can't replace time. You said 70 hours a week and now are flip flopping all over the place. You also said 150k and now again flip flopping and scrambling. They missed their kids growing up and spending time they can never get back period. Basically mostly absentee, because work is more important to them than family at that point.
You fail to realize how multiple people pointed out you don't have to work 70 hours to retire early. Ffs, I'm retiring/FI early and didn't have to work 70 hours to do so. I don't know what your fascination is with thinking you have to literally live to work instead of work to live, but you should realize, you don't have to work your life away for 50 years at the pace of 70 hours a week to retire early or provide well for a family.
I'm not flip flopping on anything. I just didn't explain the full scope to begin with because it doesn't really matter.
I never said you HAVE to work 70 hrs to retire early I said some people do it and some peopl are okay with it. I will retire early, and I won't be working 70hrs/week. Never once did I say that's I'm doing! All I've said is that there are people in this world who feel differently. There are people who can do it and feel it's what's best for their situations. Jfc this is what a lack of reading comprehension does to the world.
If you're willing to work this hard, why not get a decent paying college degree or study a trade? You will make more money later in your career and work less.
Just based on what you said (which isn’t much). 3 out of 5 maybe? I’ve seen it time and time again. Burnout is real. 75+ hours a week, is not sustainable. Long term, balance will benefit you. Personal finance is a marathon, not a sprint. Right now you’re averaging just about $23 an hour. Imagine if you cut your hours back to 40 hours a week. Put 10-15 hours or so towards improving your career skills, and put the rest towards relaxing and recharging. Over the long run, those things would increase your productivity and long term career prospects by increasing your hourly wage/salary. So no. You aren’t doing the best. You have tunnel vision, and are only thinking about the short term. Not the long term.
Great point - I also think there are times where it is necessary to go rambo on working and making money if you have debt & need to save for example.
Oh for sure. I guess I assumed the OP didn’t have that because he mentioned the extra money is going towards investing. If he has debt and he’s putting money into investing my score would be 0/5 for that sole reason. You’re absolutely right though.
It is where I am also - I only have about $3k in CC debt and have $10k saved but I just don't feel financially secure so going balls to the wall 2 jobs and eBay business.
Unless you’re paying off your CC’s in full every month, you should pay off that $3k CC debt today.
I'm pretty responsible with my CCs not to sound arrogant lol - 8 yrs of history and never paid interest and have around 780-820 scores.
I know it’s “technically” debt then. But honestly it’s not even worth mentioning as debt. When someone says they have credit card debt, people mostly mean they haven’t paid it off and are paying interest. Even tho it is debt. It isn’t to you. It’s a credit card that you’re treating like a debit card. I just don’t really consider that debt in the traditional sense.
Yea but it's something I have to pay off so it detracts from assets
Like the others said, you might want to dial it back before you burn out. But I am impressed! I could never work 75 hours a week. Just make sure you’re maxing out your ROTH IRA before investing in a brokerage.
Did that back in the day and all t taught me was that it's typically much smarter to work less for more than to work more jobs for more hours for what equates to less. Much better to get a job with OT if you're gonna be working crazy hours than 3 jobs with no OT associated for a ahit ton of those hours. The even smarter plan is to find a career. OP has jobs right now. Not a career. It took an optometrist of all people to get me going down that path, but once she did I never looked back. Shout out to my old optometrist. You da Real MVP.
How much money do you have, weird to not mention it Also burnout So 4, need to work smarter
1 being the lowest 5 being highest. 1/5. Sure, you're probably doing well or hopefully amazing financially. But financial position isn't just about working. It's about having a good work life balance. What's the point in saving all that money if let's say you never have time for yourself or others. Maybe that is fun for you. But nah it's insane you're working that much.
Your financial position is unclear to me. What is your net worth? Do you have any debt? How long have you been making 7k for? Is the income you described pre tax or after tax? Regardless, of your financial position, I don't think working 75+ hours per week is good for your well being and it's defienetely not sustainable in the long term. You are still young, and if you waste your youth working non-stop, you can't get that back. Your montly income may be good, but your hourly income definetely isn't, you just work a lot. Since you have more income than expenses, maybe see if you can quit one of your part time jobs and use that time to learn some skill that could eventually get you a job with a higher hourly rate, so that you can mantain your current income while working normal hours.
Yeah and he's around...he's answering other responses....he just doesn't want to answer yours because the points you make obviously hit close to home.
[удалено]
Oh I am making no mistake about it. Nothing is a 5/5 if the pinnacle of your financial accomplishment is how much you're saving. That's a rookie mistake. 5/5 describes a situation where your money is working for you, not the other way around. I live off my investments. I don't have to work. I don't have to save any a month if I don't want to, because my money earns more than I spend. If I have to work 75 hours per week at garbage pay that's hardly a 5/5.
Your financial position may be agnostic to how many hours you work, but it's not agnostic to what your net worth is. OP could have been doing this for years and have hundreds of thousands on net worth, or maybe OP got a high income recently and coudln't invest until now so has a low net worth. There is just not enough context provided and that's why I said it's unclear. Your financial position is also not agnostic to risk management and future income potential. For example, I would say that someone who makes 50k in a career where they have opportunity for growth is in a better spot than someone making 50k in a dead end job with no chance of increasing income in the future or than someone who is making 50k working for a company that isn't performing well and has a high chance of laying off people. But again, not much context in OPs situation. The fact that he makes a lot from working lots of hours in multiple relatively low paying jobs, suggest that they will most likely be able to find a similar paying job if they lose one, but on the other hand, since the pay is so low, it seems like OP doesn't really have much room for growth in those jobs. But again, not enough context.
Medical bills will eventually take all your savings due to poor health from working 75 plus hours a week. You need to find a way for your money to make money.
Pretty crap, honestly. If you're having to work 75 hours to save and invest then you're in a COL area your wages don't support. Either get a trade/degree so you can be a better earner or move somewhere that your $20-something an hour job will cut it.
Must be nice and yes create an emergency fund that can cover you for 3-6 months and invest it in what ever you desire!
You will burn out. But you are setting yourself up nicely right now.
Bruh 75 hours it’s too much
Too much to maintain for a long period of time. Not impossible for short term.
Not impossible but so bad for mental health
That really depends on the individual
Yea but you know what I’m saying
Yes, but I don't necessarily agree with you. I know people who have happily work 60-70hr weeks for decades because they want to provide for their families, and they feel valued in their expertise.
Or they could just get a better job and actually participate with their families. If you're always working 70 hours a week you aren't a family member, you're an underwriter.
The guys I know make 150-250K/year and many are on plans to retire by the age of 45-50 while also having money set aside to aid the security of the children's futures. Many people have different priorities than you.
Yeah, I make 150-250k/year and have money set aside to aid...blah blah blah...all of that. But being an underskilled absentee father who has to work 75 hours to do it isn't being a family man or a father, it's being a sponsor. Many people smoke crack. That's a different priority than mine. That's not really much of a refutation to the common theme in responses here that you're describing a pretty shite life that nobody wants.
My only argument is that there are people who are okay with it. Idk why that's so difficult for someone as skilled and worldly as you to understand. I guarantee you that you couldn't do this work. to be honest, if you tried you'd probably die. and without these men, you wouldn't be able to do your job either. Most of us wouldn't be able to.
Crazy how you can make that and not have to miss your child's childhood, baseball games, recitals, dinner at home, dating with wife, etc. all while reitiring early as well. It's almost like working 70 hours a week isn't a requirement to retire early or live well in general. Instead of being so close minded, how about realize that time is more precious than money and missing all that time to finally do anything at 50 can already be too late for many people to develop time with their now adult kids and distanced wife.
70 hours means spending a shit ton of time away from family to begin with. You don't get time back and most family members are better off maximizing time spent with each other than just money. Especially in OP's case where he has no career yet and is just working jobs right now. Been there. Realized a well paying skillset and career can be had and way more balanced in work life to be able to actually enjoy my money and time than just living to work all my life is way more pleasing then spending my life working for cooperations that don't give a damn. Nobody on their death beds are saying "damn, wish I would have spent more time in the office working all day." Plenty that wish they spent more time with their own families and enjoying life outside of work for sure. Wishing they can spend time with their kids and spouse.
well, for starters they typically do 4 weeks on 1 week off. Plus the 150-250 does not include OT which they get at 1.5x or a 2x rate. None of them work in an office. The "older guys" are early forties and have kids in their pre-teens, but are 1-2 years from their retirement. Younger guys typically are single or have wives with no kids and working to retire early specifically so that they get to spend that time with their families. I do feel bad for the older guys because the compensation wasn't always what it is now. In some ways though it's a trade off between having all the time with your kids when they're a little older and missing a lot when they're young vs always missing something. These guys don't wait until their 60's to retire.
Yawn, tbh man, you can't replace time. You said 70 hours a week and now are flip flopping all over the place. You also said 150k and now again flip flopping and scrambling. They missed their kids growing up and spending time they can never get back period. Basically mostly absentee, because work is more important to them than family at that point. You fail to realize how multiple people pointed out you don't have to work 70 hours to retire early. Ffs, I'm retiring/FI early and didn't have to work 70 hours to do so. I don't know what your fascination is with thinking you have to literally live to work instead of work to live, but you should realize, you don't have to work your life away for 50 years at the pace of 70 hours a week to retire early or provide well for a family.
I'm not flip flopping on anything. I just didn't explain the full scope to begin with because it doesn't really matter. I never said you HAVE to work 70 hrs to retire early I said some people do it and some peopl are okay with it. I will retire early, and I won't be working 70hrs/week. Never once did I say that's I'm doing! All I've said is that there are people in this world who feel differently. There are people who can do it and feel it's what's best for their situations. Jfc this is what a lack of reading comprehension does to the world.
you're the reason most people can't seems to get a job...