
I Went from $80,000 in Debt to a Net Worth of $200,000 in Six Years - Mz
https://features.wearemel.com/into-the-black-i-went-from-80-000-in-debt-to-a-positive-net-worth-of-200-000-in-six-years-da4975858885#.a5tnu7qn0
======
frank_jaeger
Is this not just a humblebrag? I really fail to see the point of this. It is
really cool to read about people who find inventive ways to overcome economic
obstacles. It's somewhat boring to read that someone got a high paying job,
and married someone with a high paying job, and then things worked out.

~~~
misiti3780
what was inventive about what she did - she lived cheaply and saved money
every month

~~~
alttab
Sadly enough that is considered "advice" these days. Compare this to the girl
who tried to live in SanFran as a low paying worker and got fired from her job
for complaining about it.

Mentality is _everything_.

------
savanaly
1\. Get a job that pays upwards of 100k/year

2\. Live below your means so you can save ~50%

3\. Continue for six years

4\. Boom, you're up 300k from where you started.

There some minor things you can do to boost your savings like make sure to put
all savings in low cost mutual funds and don't save a penny until all loans
are paid off (and pay them off in order of interest rate, not in order of
magnitude of the loan!) but that's the essence of it.

~~~
GuiA
5\. Don't forget about taxes

100k a year will probably end up being ~65k after taxes, which means living on
32.5k a year to save 50%. For a frugal single person that's doable, beyond
that it gets tricky (if you're in the kind of city where 100k and above
salaries are common, you're probably paying 30k a year in rent alone).

And even then, that only nets you $195k, not $300k.

~~~
wahern
By my calculation I get $74k filing single or $78k filing jointly, using a
marginal rate of 9% (California) and 25% (Federal), but that's if you're
married. It pays to be married.

Sales tax won't substantially change things because housing is usually the
biggest expense and isn't taxed. And if you're saving and being frugal you're
not buying many taxable items.

People tend to overestimate their tax burden. The difference between your gut
figure and the actual numbers is almost 10% of income, which is a huge
difference.

~~~
vonmoltke
I think your calculation ignored FICA, which is a flat 7.65%.

~~~
wahern
Excuse me while I pick the feathers out of my teeth ;)

------
carlob
> Eating out was a luxury, two to three times a week. Frozen pizza was a good
> friend to me then.

Wow I thought eating out 2-3 times a week was in the normal/high range. Maybe
it's one of those US vs Europe things.

Also frozen pizza is kind of an expensive meal once you have access to a
kitchen.

~~~
sandworm101
Honestly, I don't eat out unless a client is somehow involved. They must
either be at least at the table, if not covering the bill, before I bother.
Anyone eating out so often either has too much money or cannot cook. (Don't
talk about time. Cooking it yourself almost always takes less time than going
out.)

~~~
nilkn
What about all the people who actually enjoy eating out? It's fun, it's
social, you potentially get to go somewhere new, you get out of the house,
etc.

Cooking can be fun too. But you're definitely making a false dichotomy here.

~~~
sandworm101
>> It's fun, it's social, you potentially get to go somewhere new, you get out
of the house, etc.

Yes. That's also why it's optional. Those struggling to get out from under
debt don't have the time for such luxuries.

~~~
nilkn
All I'm saying is that this statement is not true and ignores a huge gulf of
people:

> Anyone eating out so often either has too much money or cannot cook.

The only way this can be true is if you define "too much money" precisely to
be any amount over the smallest amount necessary to fund eating out
frequently, in which case I think the statement is not meaningful.

Your response is talking about something else entirely.

------
curiousgal
TL;DR

Postdoctoral researcher at the University of Washington with $80k in student
loans and a $40k salary turned Hardware engineer at a medical device company
with a $105k salary.

~~~
bbctol
Yeah, it seems more like a "person with a valuable degree realized industry
pays better than academia" story than anything else.

------
exolymph
As someone who's not on a programmer's salary, $40k is definitely not "shit".
The lack of context in how this piece was framed deeply annoyed me, so I
responded: [https://medium.com/@sonyaellenmann/frankly-this-was-very-
fru...](https://medium.com/@sonyaellenmann/frankly-this-was-very-frustrating-
to-read-5659ec87e96e#.2ors4vctl)

~~~
rifung
In fairness, I don't think that'd get you very far in Seattle, which I assume
the guy went to since he went to UW.

I imagine that's part of the reason they enacted the $15 minimum wage

~~~
exolymph
I live in the Bay Area — just not San Francisco or Oakland — and the minimum I
could live on is $2,000 per month (before taxes). But that comes to $24k per
year, with is substantially less that $40k.

Also the author was a woman, just FYI.

~~~
seanmcdirmid
My 60k CHF post doc was more than enough to live in Lausanne, which is way
more expensive than SF or Seattle. I was also able to save about half since
eating out was too expensive to consider.

------
fhood
What is the point here? If you take a postdoc position that means that you are
aiming for academia, and expect to be paid poorly. And if you have a PHD in
electrical engineering you should be able to find a job that pays at least
100k with no problem.

Is the surprise here that postdocs aren't paid well? Because everybody and
their dog knows that.

------
nathanvanfleet
In my life I was always pretty worried about money. I put myself through
school, worked full time etc etc. I didn't really splurge on anything and I
just sort of lived a simple life. At this point I guess I've managed to amass
enough value by having a house and a job that pays better than the jobs I
worked back then, and wowee I'm not under water anymore.

I don't really live my life any differently. But I do have that feeling where
I could spend a few grand on something that was meaningful to me and not
really be all that bothered by it.

But isn't that just the result of playing your cards kind of right and living
long enough? It just seems like there is a certain point in your life where
the math of it starts working out in your favour.

Then again I guess I know people about my age who struggle a bit more...

------
niftich
Summary: person in anecdote got a new job offer and negotiated a good salary,
then paid down the debt, while ostensibly leaving their lifestyle and expenses
largely unchanged from before.

~~~
merpnderp
So, the debt was a very good investment and this is a success story?

------
hacker_9
From someone from the UK, $100,000 seems like an enormous amount within 6
years of leaving university. Is that sort of thing even possible here?

~~~
rossng
Edit: I thought you were referring to debt, not salary. My mistake. I'll leave
my post intact in case anyone finds it useful.

Yes, absolutely. Fees are £9000 per year. The minimum guaranteed maintenance
loan, if you take it, is £3821 per year (though you may be entitled to a
larger loan depending on your family circumstances).

If you're doing a four year course, this comes to 4 x £9000 + £4 x 3800 =
£51200 ~= $68000.

If you come from a poor background (and so your parents cannot provide
financial help), you may be entitled to a maintenance loan of up to £10700 per
year. Grants (money you do not have to pay back) that used to cover most of
this have recently been eliminated, leaving poorer students with larger loans.

Over four years, this would be £78800 (approximately $104k).

Having done three-year courses, many people go on to do a one-year masters at
a cost of £10-15k.

On top of that, the current interest rate on the loan is 3.9% - meaning that
most people will actually be in increasing debt until they earn £40-50k.

The only bright spot is that you pay 9% of any earnings over £21k towards the
loan (like an extra tax). If you earn less than this, you pay nothing. The
debt is wiped after 30 years. As a result there is no US-style problem of
graduates struggling to make repayments. However, with the government having
shown itself willing to retroactively rewrite the terms of the loan, who knows
what will happen.

------
pm90
I don't understand the anxiety that most Americans have about paying off
student debt. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that interest free and
structured for flexible payments? In other words, one of the best kinds of
debts to have. Why not pay it down when one really does have extra, or pay it
down in small amounts?

Edit: I stand corrected. It seems like only a minority of students get
interest-free loans.

~~~
nickparker
A small minority of US student debt is interest free. Federal loans are
4.5-7%, and private can be much more than that.

Some programs defer interest until graduation, and others defer until
employment, but neither of those is universal by any stretch.

------
vbtemp
This kind of thing triggers my crazy buttons: What kind of person goes into
debt to get a PhD and then becomes a postdoc?

Why not just leave off with a masters or BS and go off to get a great paying
job and do actual work with a livable lifestyle?

------
tardo99
I'm sure a lot of the entrepreneur folks on here have much more impressive
stories: "I made my first million at age 23" and the like.

------
jordache
yawn

