My previous, actually rather dry, post on nutritional optimization attracted almost fifty times as much interest as its predecessors. This leads me to believe that:
· EITHER people are very interested in the mathematical nuances of dietary optimization subject to budget and nutritional constraints
· OR, that nudity gets hits.
The latter seems more likely. And given this universal law of the internet, I was weighing up the value of festooning this post with videos of kittens doing adorable things. I concluded that it might distract from my main message, but I retain the right to revisit this important debate later.
So be on the look out for:
Dumpster diving – With kittens!
Preparing pinto beans – In underwear! Surrounded by puppies!
Thrifting for cute t-shirts – Gangnam style!
Obviously the price of my dignity along any of these dimensions is a function of how much good we can do for the kids. :)
Back to serious stuff.
A few weeks ago I concluded that I couldn’t really afford health insurance on a minimum wage salary. Some friends helped me think through the consequences of this, and we decided that the best strategy was to buy a minimum level of health insurance – essentially tail-risk insurance that stops me dying, but doesn’t help much if I’m sick. At high levels of coverage I didn’t have enough money left to eat.
Here’s another question. Assume that I’m a good worker, working a minimum wage job until retirement and contributing to society. Because I value self-sufficiency and want to ensure a good life for my family, I try to plan for my own retirement without depending on government support. After all, I am in my early thirties and cannot guarantee that social security will still exist in 30 years. Can I actually afford to do this?
Right now, an annuity that guarantees a 65 year old a monthly payment in retirement of $1495 (the current SF minimum wage net tax) costs around $350k. (This calculation assumes an inflation-rate of 2% a year, a liability profile that grows with inflation, and a 25 year maturity annuity).
Today, if I buy a 30 year US government bond, I can get a return in excess of inflation of 0.35% a year. If I invest money at this rate every month, I have to invest $835 a month in order to get $350k (in inflation-adjusted terms) by age 65. This is over 50% of my monthly income, and after housing and utilities it leaves only $3.50 a day for ALL other spending.
Even if I assume that I can get a real return of 5% on my investments (and it is taking me all the willpower i can muster to avoid advertising my mutual fund here) I still need to stash away $350 a month.
The conclusion seems to be this: Excepting exceptional circumstances, on a minimum wage salary you cannot hope to fund your own retirement at 65. At this level of income, retirement security must depend on the continued existence of social security.
And kittens are adorable.
About Me and my Experiment
About Me and my Experiment
My name's Phil Hodges. I'm a 30-something Brit living in San Francisco, where I work for a money management firm as lead researcher on a $6 billion investment fund. I earn a little more than the San Francisco 2013 minimum wage of $10.55 per hour (the highest in the nation), or $21,100 a year.
Throughout January 2013 I will be living on minimum wage. There will be a few practical constraints but I intend to keep these to a minimum. At the end of the month, everything I earn and do not spend will be donated to Larkin Street Youth Services, along with any other donations that I can squeeze out of supportive individuals and corporations. The money will support the amazing work that Larkin Street with homeless, runaway and at-risk youth between the ages of 12-24 by providing street outreach and emergency shelter, primary medical care, transitional housing, and job training and scholarship assistance to get kids off the streets.
Please consider supporting Larkin Street at this link, or by using the donation widget on the right of this page.
No comments:
Post a Comment