Could a doctor afford...

[Hookersandblow]

Hi guys,

Our physician is 32 years old and just finished his onc/heme fellowship. Works in a state with no income tax, let's say in a PP-group in Austin in TX:

year 1 salary: 300k
year 2 salary: 400k
year 3 salary: 500k

Above with 50-55 hours a week.

Now, this guy is debt free too.

Would he be able to afford a lamborghini Huracan 2014 (80-130k second hand) and live in a 1,7 million dollar house at the age of 35 (year 3) and contribute so that the nest egg at retirement is 2mil at the age of 65?

If not, let's say he can work 60-70 hours and make 600-700k a year in that PP-group. Would that be sufficient?

Edit: Doc is single so no nagging wife or children

Thanks,

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Lonestar]

The answer is no. He needs to wait 3 yrs to partnership before he makes any major purchases. He could be fired after a year.

 

[Mman]

Would he be able to afford a lamborghini Huracan 2014 (80-130k second hand) and live in a 1,7 million dollar house at the age of 35 (year 3) and contribute so that the nest egg at retirement is 2mil at the age of 65?

Why is $2M in retirement account the magic number for this doc? At 3-4% withdrawal rate per year that will only provide him with $60K-$80K per year of income in retirement (plus whatever SS he gets).

 

[TMP-SMX]

$1.7 million and single? Planning to have a party with hookers and blow? The answer is no. Downpayment on a house like that is 350k to avoid PMI unless planning for a doctors loan. Taxes are going to hit hard as a single person. Agree with the above. With inflation in 30 years that 2 million is worth half of that in spending power.

 

[Hookersandblow]

Why is $2M in retirement account the magic number for this doc? At 3-4% withdrawal rate per year that will only provide him with $60K-$80K per year of income in retirement (plus whatever SS he gets).

Because this doc wants to live his life early and not until he's 65. However, with 2 million as nest egg at 65 he'll still be able to have a higher income than the median American. That is enough for him.

Yeah sure he needs partnership. That's why he's thinking about buying the car and house year 3 (when he gets partnered). The years before that will be used for saving up.

Why wouldn't the doc have enough? Can anyone illustrate with numbers? Not even loans would help?

 

[Mman]

Why wouldn't the doc have enough? Can anyone illustrate with numbers? Not even loans would help?

What numbers can you not do yourself? An excel spreadsheet can help you compound interest at a given rate of return over whatever number of years you want. Calculating taxes isn't that hard to do.

 

[Hookersandblow]

What numbers can you not do yourself? An excel spreadsheet can help you compound interest at a given rate of return over whatever number of years you want. Calculating taxes isn't that hard to do.

Sure, but I'm not in the US and don't know the system well. I study at university of Zimbabwe but thinking about doing residency in usa

 

[Retire Early MD]

Hi guys,

Our physician is 32 years old and just finished his onc/heme fellowship. Works in a state with no income tax, let's say in a PP-group in Austin in TX:

year 1 salary: 300k
year 2 salary: 400k
year 3 salary: 500k

Above with 50-55 hours a week.

Now, this guy is debt free too.

Would he be able to afford a lamborghini Huracan 2014 (80-130k second hand) and live in a 1,7 million dollar house at the age of 35 (year 3) and contribute so that the nest egg at retirement is 2mil at the age of 65?

If not, let's say he can work 60-70 hours and make 600-700k a year in that PP-group. Would that be sufficient?

Edit: Doc is single so no nagging wife or children

Thanks,

Short answer - No.

Lifestyle inflation, material desire, and greed will be the end of the said doctor above.

Smarter plan would be to buy a used reliable 4x4 daily commute all in cash. Rent for 2-3 years, then buy a $300,000-$400,000 home/condo all in cash in a desirable renter location that you can rent out later (duplex complexes are great rentals). Save 30% of your income and invest. Retire when you are in your 40s and work only when you want to.

 

[Hookersandblow]

Short answer - No.

Lifestyle inflation, material desire, and greed will be the end of the said doctor above.

Smarter plan would be to buy a used reliable 4x4 daily commute all in cash. Rent for 2-3 years, then buy a $300,000-$400,000 home/condo all in cash in a desirable renter location that you can rent out later (duplex complexes are great rentals). Save 30% of your income and invest. Retire when you are in your 40s and work only when you want to.

Yeah sure, retire at 40 and maybe live off 80k/year? Sure, no need to work but how is 80k going to give you that lambo and million dollar house?

 

[Mman]

Sure, but I'm not in the US and don't know the system well. I study at university of Zimbabwe but thinking about doing residency in usa

I guess if all I cared about was having a higher income in retirement than the median US income I probably wouldn't be worried about driving a fancy car when I'm young. Simply saving $150K for 30 years instead of spending it on a car would result in an extra $650,000 in savings 30 years later at a modest 5% return (although ignoring inflation) and they could have a far more lavish lifestyle later on or retire far earlier. And that's not saving $150K per year, that's saving $150K once and investing it for 30 years.

And for American physicians, you can probably estimate your tax liability at about 50% of your income. It might end up a little less, but 50% is close enough for guesstimating. So if you get paid $500K per year, you only take home about $250K per year.

 

[Hookersandblow]

I guess if all I cared about was having a higher income in retirement than the median US income I probably wouldn't be worried about driving a fancy car when I'm young. Simply saving $150K for 30 years instead of spending it on a car would result in an extra $650,000 in savings 30 years later at a modest 5% return (although ignoring inflation) and they could have a far more lavish lifestyle later on or retire far earlier. And that's not saving $150K per year, that's saving $150K once and investing it for 30 years.

And for American physicians, you can probably estimate your tax liability at about 50% of your income. It might end up a little less, but 50% is close enough for guesstimating. So if you get paid $500K per year, you only take home about $250K per year.

Yeah sure, but wouldn't the gross income open up certain privilegies that would allow the physician in this example to buy the car and house? As long as he can retire with 2 million at 65 he's happy.

I don't understand the mentality of saving up more than that. Why would you need a luxurious lifestyle when you're 65+? Money becomes less important the older you get. You would prob lift FI as another reason, but then why the heck would the physician sacrifise the 20s-30s and living like sht under residency only to get a job that he/she would quit in the 40s? Just sounds stupid to me.

But that's beside the point. I'm still looking for an answer regarding the initial question. An answer with numbers to why/why not the physician can't get the 3 things I mentioned in the start.

 

[Mman]

Yeah sure, but wouldn't the gross income open up certain privilegies that would allow the physician in this example to buy the car and house? As long as he can retire with 2 million at 65 he's happy.

I don't understand the mentality of saving up more than that. Why would you need a luxurious lifestyle when you're 65+? Money becomes less important the older you get. You would prob lift FI as another reason, but then why the heck would the physician sacrifise the 20s-30s and living like sht under residency only to get a job that he/she would quit in the 40s? Just sounds stupid to me.

But that's beside the point. I'm still looking for an answer regarding the initial question. An answer with numbers to why/why not the physician can't get the 3 things I mentioned in the start.

You can do whatever you want. A simple online search for auto loans shows you can get a loan for a $150K car that only costs you $2700 a month for 5 years. You can search yourself for mortgage rates and figure out how much house you can afford. Then you can do the math for what would be left over for savings and what various rates of return would yield various sums at retirement.

These aren't complicated calculations for a physician to do on their own. If you'd like someone to justify your decisions for you, that's kinda odd. Feel free to do whatever you want, but most people don't want to live like a king in their 40s and 50s and retire to a much lower standard of living. Most people would like to maintain a similar standard of living whenever they retire which is why spending less up front and saving more makes that math possible. But those people aren't necessarily living "like sht" as you put it during that time. You can still have a nice house and a nice car and save lots of money, it just might not be an insanely expensive sports car or a multimillion dollar mega mansion.

I'm personally hoping to be done working full time by age 50 with $10M in the bank and I can assure you I'm not living poor by any means. I just don't buy a new car all the time and live in a low cost of living area so my big ass house costs less than it would somewhere else.

 

[Hookersandblow]

You can do whatever you want. A simple online search for auto loans shows you can get a loan for a $150K car that only costs you $2700 a month for 5 years. You can search yourself for mortgage rates and figure out how much house you can afford. Then you can do the math for what would be left over for savings and what various rates of return would yield various sums at retirement.

These aren't complicated calculations for a physician to do on their own. If you'd like someone to justify your decisions for you, that's kinda odd. Feel free to do whatever you want, but most people don't want to live like a king in their 40s and 50s and retire to a much lower standard of living. Most people would like to maintain a similar standard of living whenever they retire which is why spending less up front and saving more makes that math possible. But those people aren't necessarily living "like sht" as you put it during that time. You can still have a nice house and a nice car and save lots of money, it just might not be an insanely expensive sports car or a multimillion dollar mega mansion.

I'm personally hoping to be done working full time by age 50 with $10M in the bank and I can assure you I'm not living poor by any means. I just don't buy a new car all the time and live in a low cost of living area so my big ass house costs less than it would somewhere else.

There are definitely societal pressure elements involved in this. When relatives have a six-figure salary in their early 20s while you have a negative net value until 32, there are expectations of you turning the tables and live way above your relatives standards 2-3 years into your life as an attending. But that's a different story.

10 million nest egg by the point you're 50? May I ask what your annual spending on average is prior to that age?

 

[Mman]

There are definitely societal pressure elements involved in this. When relatives have a six-figure salary in their early 20s while you have a negative net value until 32, there are expectations of you turning the tables and live way above your relatives standards 2-3 years into your life as an attending. But that's a different story.

10 million nest egg by the point you're 50? May I ask what your annual spending on average is prior to that age?

we probably spend $100K per year excluding housing

As for expectations of your life as an attending, when it comes to standard of living and savings for retirement, that isn't a different story, it is the story.

 

[Hookersandblow]

we probably spend $100K per year excluding housing

As for expectations of your life as an attending, when it comes to standard of living and savings for retirement, that isn't a different story, it is the story.

It still doesn't make any sense to me to why someone would maintain their lifestyle throughout all life years. How much money you spend should be inversely proportional to your age. Can you tell me what a 66 year old would do with 300k/year?

Maybe I misunderstand. If you're married and have kids then I can absolutely understand. I would guess the bigger chunk of your savings would be an heirloom. I guess that's the disparity here. Never in my life would I consider to bust ass only to make the life better for my next generation. This is my life and all I earn in this life is to me.

Edit: Obviously, no marriage. Maybe this piece of information makes it easier to relate to the cushy lifestyle described in this thread?

 

[Mman]

It still doesn't make any sense to me to why someone would maintain their lifestyle throughout all life years. How much money you spend should be inversely proportional to your age. Can you tell me what a 66 year old would do with 300k/year?

What can you do at 35 that you can't do at 66? You can drive the same car, take the same vacation, live in the same house, eat at the same restaurants. When I'm 66 I plan on living in a nice house on a beach near a golf course and taking frequent vacations from there. That costs a lot of money to fly first class and stay in 5 star resorts.

Now what do you do if you've been living a 5 star life for 30 years and then retire and all of a sudden you can't do that stuff anymore? Yikes. That's painful. Nobody wants that. You should plan for very similar cost of living in retirement as you were living before retirement. And then as you get into your 70s and 80s and your pleasure spending winds down, you'll just end up spending more on health care and assistance.

Ramping up your lifestyle at any point is very easy to do. You never ever want to find yourself in the situation where you are forced to wind it down because you can't afford to continue. That is far more painful.

 

[Hookersandblow]

What can you do at 35 that you can't do at 66? You can drive the same car, take the same vacation, live in the same house, eat at the same restaurants. When I'm 66 I plan on living in a nice house on a beach near a golf course and taking frequent vacations from there. That costs a lot of money to fly first class and stay in 5 star resorts.

Now what do you do if you've been living a 5 star life for 30 years and then retire and all of a sudden you can't do that stuff anymore? Yikes. That's painful. Nobody wants that. You should plan for very similar cost of living in retirement as you were living before retirement. And then as you get into your 70s and 80s and your pleasure spending winds down, you'll just end up spending more on health care and assistance.

Ramping up your lifestyle at any point is very easy to do. You never ever want to find yourself in the situation where you are forced to wind it down because you can't afford to continue. That is far more painful.

I mean, 75-80k a year (2 million nest egg) from 65 onward is still pretty good, isn't it? You just said that you live happily with your current annual income of 100k which isn't far off from 75-80k (and I guess you're married, so more over for me and less for a wife).

Some things come and go. Take video-games for example. Not so prevalent in your 60s+. Same principle for exotic cars and fancy houses. I'm pretty sure you can live really good with 75-80k + social security in your 65s.

 

[Lonestar]

75-80k income now is good. 20-30 years form now inflation will eat it in half. So you will need 150-200k in 20+ yrs to afford the same lifestyle. You need o shoot for 4 million by 60.

 

[Hookersandblow]

75-80k income now is good. 20-30 years form now inflation will eat it in half. So you will need 150-200k in 20+ yrs to afford the same lifestyle. You need o shoot for 4 million by 60.

The goal is to retire at 65 and from that point onward have an income of 75-80k + social security.

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that the way retirement money work is that the value increases with 7 percent annually. 4 % covers the inflation, and the rest of the 3 % is withdrawn together with a chunk of the nest lump money. If inflation is covered, wouldn't this still give a net 75-80k a year for at least 30 years?

 

[Lonestar]

Yes that goal works for someone who is 65 now. Not for someone who is 65 in 25+ years from now. Will you be able to afford a 30 dollar movie ticket on your 75k income in 25 years from now? How about a car that costs 50-75k vs 25-35k for basic cars now. So your goal is off by half if you think you need 75-80k in todays dollars to live comfortably.

 

[Hookersandblow]

Yes that goal works for someone who is 65 now. Not for someone who is 65 in 25+ years from now. Will you be able to afford a 30 dollar movie ticket on your 75k income in 25 years from now? How about a car that costs 50-75k vs 25-35k for basic cars now. So your goal is off by half if you think you need 75-80k in todays dollars to live comfortably.

I mean, if I had a 2 million lump sum today that didn't have any capital gains in percentages then yeah, for every year those 2 million dollars will afford less and less.

But that's not what I'm asking. The saving will be a continuous process starting at age 26 (when residency begins) until age 64 with money being deposited in accounts that generate a net +7 % of the cash. No matter what the money is in these saving accounts, they should still maintain their value and beat inflation. And I will stop depositing money once the sum is 2 million (and that value will be maintained thanks to the 7%). Isn't this how it works? Why this constant talk about needing 4 million? Why is the 7% net+ excluded when people talk about these things?

 

[Mman]

I mean, if I had a 2 million lump sum today that didn't have any capital gains in percentages then yeah, for every year those 2 million dollars will afford less and less.

But that's not what I'm asking. The saving will be a continuous process starting at age 26 (when residency begins) until age 64 with money being deposited in accounts that generate a net +7 % of the cash. No matter what the money is in these saving accounts, they should still maintain their value and beat inflation. And I will stop depositing money once the sum is 2 million (and that value will be maintained thanks to the 7%). Isn't this how it works? Why this constant talk about needing 4 million? Why is the 7% net+ excluded when people talk about these things?

Not exactly how it works.

For one, you don't know if you will get 7% return in an account. Also the point with the $2M and inflation is if you stop when you get $2M, you will have $2M worth of purchasing power at that future time. That will be less than the purchasing power of $2M right now. So if you think you'd live fine on $75K-$80K in 2018 dollars, you'd need $2M right now. To have the same purchasing power 30 years from now, you'd need a lot more, probably on the order of $4M (give or take). If you only had $2M 30 years from now you'd be living on the same as $35K-$40K right now.

So you need to figure out how much money per year you are spending now (or whenever you reach what you consider a reasonable sum to keep spending per year) and then add inflation to that each year to determine what it will actually cost 30 years down the road.

 

[Mman]

Some things come and go. Take video-games for example. Not so prevalent in your 60s+. Same principle for exotic cars and fancy houses. I'm pretty sure you can live really good with 75-80k + social security in your 65s.

I'm pretty sure nobody is spending $100K per year on video games. And I'm asking why you feel you'd want one kind of car when you are age 60 and another kind of car at age 66. Nobody suddenly wants to downgrade their house and car just because they got a year older.

For your own happiness, I'm suggesting you don't plan on drastically lowering your standard of living in retirement. While age 66 might seem old to you now, if you are in good health it will still seem quite young with decades left to live and enjoy plenty of expensive habits.

 

[Hookersandblow]

I'm pretty sure nobody is spending $100K per year on video games. And I'm asking why you feel you'd want one kind of car when you are age 60 and another kind of car at age 66. Nobody suddenly wants to downgrade their house and car just because they got a year older.

For your own happiness, I'm suggesting you don't plan on drastically lowering your standard of living in retirement. While age 66 might seem old to you now, if you are in good health it will still seem quite young with decades left to live and enjoy plenty of expensive habits.

I see what you mean now.

The 2 million dollar nest today will be the equivalent of let's say 4 million dollars down the road.

But how much I save, in percentage, should not change assuming my physician salary increases exactly the same amount as inflation. If my salary > inflation, then I might even be able to save less that particular year to achieve the lump sum that will give me 75-80k/year.

 

[TMP-SMX]

You need to get in the habit to save 20-25% of your gross income for retirement. Run some calculators and find out how you will do that.

 

[Hookersandblow]

You need to get in the habit to save 20-25% of your gross income for retirement. Run some calculators and find out how you will do that.

Wasn't 15 % enough too?

 

[TMP-SMX]

Wasn't 15 % enough too?

Depends when you want to retire and how much you plan to spend. A 1.7 million house will take a while to pay off. Download personal capital and do some hypotheticals. Given what you've said so far it sounds expensive.

 

[Black Coffee 24/7]

Why do you need a Lamborghini to pick up expensive escorts and blow? The look from donning wet sweat pants and workout shirt in a Toyota Prius while flashing $$$ can be very attractive for some women.

 

[TexasPhysician]

Wasn't 15 % enough too?

15% is low in my opinion. I would aim for 20% as a minimum.

 

[QueenJames]

and THIS is a prime example of why doctors are ****ty with money.

 

[Money Moniker]

Yeah sure, but wouldn't the gross income open up certain privilegies that would allow the physician in this example to buy the car and house? As long as he can retire with 2 million at 65 he's happy.

I don't understand the mentality of saving up more than that. Why would you need a luxurious lifestyle when you're 65+? Money becomes less important the older you get. You would prob lift FI as another reason, but then why the heck would the physician sacrifise the 20s-30s and living like sht under residency only to get a job that he/she would quit in the 40s? Just sounds stupid to me.

But that's beside the point. I'm still looking for an answer regarding the initial question. An answer with numbers to why/why not the physician can't get the 3 things I mentioned in the start.

It still doesn't make any sense to me to why someone would maintain their lifestyle throughout all life years. How much money you spend should be inversely proportional to your age. Can you tell me what a 66 year old would do with 300k/year?

Maybe I misunderstand. If you're married and have kids then I can absolutely understand. I would guess the bigger chunk of your savings would be an heirloom. I guess that's the disparity here. Never in my life would I consider to bust ass only to make the life better for my next generation. This is my life and all I earn in this life is to me.

Edit: Obviously, no marriage. Maybe this piece of information makes it easier to relate to the cushy lifestyle described in this thread?

I like this guy. OP, I'm in complete agreement with you. The sad truth of the matter is that life does not have a happy ending and the best case scenario for old age is that you'll be old, worst case scenario that you'll be dead. All the money in the world won't save you from the fate of becoming a decrepit geezer, so there is no point to deprive yourself of enjoyment of money while you're still healthy, young, and vigorous enough to fully enjoy it. A flashy geezer is still a geezer, no woman on the right side of menopause will be even the slightest bit intrigued by the sight of a geezer in a lambo unless that geezer is somebody super rich and famous on the scale of President of the United States or Mick Jagger. Nobody is ever jealous of a geezer, nor does anyone ever want to have anything to do with a geezer as youth is inestimably more valuable than money, a fact that humans are instinctively aware of without even consciously thinking about it.

There just really isn't that much a geezer can do with a paltry sum of money like $300k that he can't do with 80k, given that geezers are mere husks of their former selves and don't have the energy and health to enjoy moderately expensive activities like skiing, water sports, outdoor adventures, etc. I plan on maxing out my life from ages 30 to 60 by driving expensive cars, owning a decent boat, going on cool vacations, and improving my luck with chicks by virtue of my appealing lifestyle. Do I really care that doing so may leave me worse off in my (hypothetical, since I may well die by then) 60s than I would otherwise have been? Not really, cause again, life does not have a happy ending and whether I have a lot of money or not by the time I get to the ending of it is not nearly as relevant as the fact it IS going to be near the end. Depriving yourself in the prime of your life so that you can live like a baller as a geezer is an idiot's choice. Sure, I'm a single guy in my early 30's but I'm going to be driving a beat up Honda and living in a 200k suburban McCondo for the next 30 years of my life so that by the time I hit my 70's I can afford a pimped out nursing home and rub shoulders with all the other financially savvy geezers instead of those hoi polloi geezers at the regular nursing home...

 

[TMP-SMX]

snip

The point is financial independence early on by saving allows for whatever you enjoy in life much earlier. Passive investments don't require working until 75 and being enslaved to debt of cars and mortgage. With expenses of children and business expenses it makes a lavish lifestyle very difficult in the early 30s.

 

[calvnandhobbs68]

Sure, but I'm not in the US and don't know the system well. I study at university of Zimbabwe but thinking about doing residency in usa

lolololol

Nice trolling

 

[Mman]

I like this guy. OP, I'm in complete agreement with you. The sad truth of the matter is that life does not have a happy ending and the best case scenario for old age is that you'll be old, worst case scenario that you'll be dead. All the money in the world won't save you from the fate of becoming a decrepit geezer, so there is no point to deprive yourself of enjoyment of money while you're still healthy, young, and vigorous enough to fully enjoy it. A flashy geezer is still a geezer, no woman on the right side of menopause will be even the slightest bit intrigued by the sight of a geezer in a lambo unless that geezer is somebody super rich and famous on the scale of President of the United States or Mick Jagger. Nobody is ever jealous of a geezer, nor does anyone ever want to have anything to do with a geezer as youth is inestimably more valuable than money, a fact that humans are instinctively aware of without even consciously thinking about it.

There just really isn't that much a geezer can do with a paltry sum of money like $300k that he can't do with 80k, given that geezers are mere husks of their former selves and don't have the energy and health to enjoy moderately expensive activities like skiing, water sports, outdoor adventures, etc. I plan on maxing out my life from ages 30 to 60 by driving expensive cars, owning a decent boat, going on cool vacations, and improving my luck with chicks by virtue of my appealing lifestyle. Do I really care that doing so may leave me worse off in my (hypothetical, since I may well die by then) 60s than I would otherwise have been? Not really, cause again, life does not have a happy ending and whether I have a lot of money or not by the time I get to the ending of it is not nearly as relevant as the fact it IS going to be near the end. Depriving yourself in the prime of your life so that you can live like a baller as a geezer is an idiot's choice. Sure, I'm a single guy in my early 30's but I'm going to be driving a beat up Honda and living in a 200k suburban McCondo for the next 30 years of my life so that by the time I hit my 70's I can afford a pimped out nursing home and rub shoulders with all the other financially savvy geezers instead of those hoi polloi geezers at the regular nursing home...

you throw around the word "geezer" quite a bit. Anyways, when I'm retired in my 50s living the good life, I'll wave at you as you drive to and from work every day for another 20 years.

Nobody said you had to live like a hermit from age 30 to 60, just be cognizant of the foregone investment income you are giving up for everything you spend. I've taken the fanciest vacations you can imagine and live in a big ass house with a 3 car garage and a pool and a plenty nice enough car. But that's the money I spend after I max out my pension plan, 401K, Roth IRA, HSA, 529s, and taxable investment account. You gotta get the saving done first. And the dollars you save earliest in your career are the most important ones because they are the ones that have decades to compound. You can never make up for lost early savings in your career.

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

you throw around the word "geezer" quite a bit. Anyways, when I'm retired in my 50s living the good life, I'll wave at you as you drive to and from work every day for another 20 years.

Nobody said you had to live like a hermit from age 30 to 60, just be cognizant of the foregone investment income you are giving up for everything you spend. I've taken the fanciest vacations you can imagine and live in a big ass house with a 3 car garage and a pool and a plenty nice enough car. But that's the money I spend after I max out my pension plan, 401K, Roth IRA, HSA, 529s, and taxable investment account. You gotta get the saving done first. And the dollars you save earliest in your career are the most important ones because they are the ones that have decades to compound. You can never make up for lost early savings in your career.

You do realize that not all of us can afford to max all of those retirement/savings accounts and have much left over, right?

 

[Mman]

You do realize that not all of us can afford to max all of those retirement/savings accounts and have much left over, right?

People can do whatever they want. They just need to understand that short and long term financial consequences to it. Even lower income specialties can take a job in a lower cost of living area, do some moonlighting/locums on the side, etc. to help prop up their savings rates and decrease their annual spend.

Compound interest...you are either earning it or paying it.

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

People can do whatever they want. They just need to understand that short and long term financial consequences to it. Even lower income specialties can take a job in a lower cost of living area, do some moonlighting/locums on the side, etc. to help prop up their savings rates and decrease their annual spend.

Compound interest...you are either earning it or paying it.

Which goes back to the original post that you were arguing against. As an FP I could make more than I do now by working every weekend. But my QOL would really suck doing that.

There was an FP here in town a few years back. He was notorious for his savings. Didn't go on fancy vacations, lived very very modestly. He planned to retire at age 60 and really start enjoying life then. Died in a car wreck at 57.

Similar thing with my dad who died at 54. Would a few thousand less in savings/year have made a huge difference for mom now compared to doing more when dad was alive? She certainly wishes he'd gotten to do more.

Now that said, you do get the other end of the spectrum. My father-in-law is 70 and would likely be miserable not working, but he can't afford to retire even if he wanted to because of reckless spending his whole professional life.

So for those of us not making anesthesia money, there's a happy middle ground in there.

 

[Mman]

Which goes back to the original post that you were arguing against. As an FP I could make more than I do now by working every weekend. But my QOL would really suck doing that.

The original poster was asking if he could afford to buy a mansion and a fancy car. I was pointing out that perhaps his financial priorities were not optimal.

I would never argue that someone should work every single weekend or every week of the year. But every medical specialty has job opportunities that afford the opportunity to both have a nice quality of life and save plenty of money for retirement. And even if you are not in the absolute perfect job for that, there are always little extra things you can do to help.

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

The original poster was asking if he could afford to buy a mansion and a fancy car. I was pointing out that perhaps his financial priorities were not optimal.

I would never argue that someone should work every single weekend or every week of the year. But every medical specialty has job opportunities that afford the opportunity to both have a nice quality of life and save plenty of money for retirement. And even if you are not in the absolute perfect job for that, there are always little extra things you can do to help.

Completely agree.

And generally speaking, it doesn't take much. This is what I think lots of people don't get.

Let's use 38k/year (say from a 401k for you and spouse at current allowed maximums) over a 30 year career gets you 1.1 million. That's without even accounting for interest, which if we assume a 6% return is just over 3 mil.

 

[nimbus]

Hi guys,

Our physician is 32 years old and just finished his onc/heme fellowship. Works in a state with no income tax, let's say in a PP-group in Austin in TX:

year 1 salary: 300k
year 2 salary: 400k
year 3 salary: 500k

Above with 50-55 hours a week.

Now, this guy is debt free too.

Would he be able to afford a lamborghini Huracan 2014 (80-130k second hand) and live in a 1,7 million dollar house at the age of 35 (year 3) and contribute so that the nest egg at retirement is 2mil at the age of 65?

If not, let's say he can work 60-70 hours and make 600-700k a year in that PP-group. Would that be sufficient?

Edit: Doc is single so no nagging wife or children

Thanks,

Short answer - No.

Lifestyle inflation, material desire, and greed will be the end of the said doctor above.

Smarter plan would be to buy a used reliable 4x4 daily commute all in cash. Rent for 2-3 years, then buy a $300,000-$400,000 home/condo all in cash in a desirable renter location that you can rent out later (duplex complexes are great rentals). Save 30% of your income and invest. Retire when you are in your 40s and work only when you want to.

Lifestyle inflation is real.

For the lambo. How much is insurance? A brake job? Tires? Oil change?

For the mansion. Taxes and insurance? Water bill? Pool man? Gardener? Heating and ac? On top of that your supposed to budget 1% of the purchase price annually for maintenance. That’s 20k/yr down the toilet.

 

[Spectreman]

Lifestyle inflation is real.

For the lambo. How much is insurance? A brake job? Tires? Oil change?

For the mansion. Taxes and insurance? Water bill? Pool man? Gardener? Heating and ac? On top of that your supposed to budget 1% of the purchase price annually for maintenance. That’s 20k/yr down the toilet.

This whole thread is hilarious. OP is living in fantasy land on so many levels. “No nagging wife” and a heme/onc job is gonna get you a Lambo and a mansion, let me just bounce over from Zimbabwe and make that happen real quick... Just wow.

 

[Mman]

This whole thread is hilarious. OP is living in fantasy land on so many levels. “No nagging wife” and a heme/onc job is gonna get you a Lambo and a mansion, let me just bounce over from Zimbabwe and make that happen real quick... Just wow.

you might say wow, but plenty of people live like this. While lots of middle class people live paycheck to paycheck and rack up debt, the same thing happens to some physicians who calculate what they can afford based off whatever the monthly payment is. Just because it's probably not a wise idea for long term wealth, doesn't mean people don't do it.

 

[Spectreman]

you might say wow, but plenty of people live like this. While lots of middle class people live paycheck to paycheck and rack up debt, the same thing happens to some physicians who calculate what they can afford based off whatever the monthly payment is. Just because it's probably not a wise idea for long term wealth, doesn't mean people don't do it.

Or you could marry a nagging wife who also becomes a doctor and double your income.

The fact if you’re not even a in the US and you’re already picking what color lambo you’re gonna get shows you have basically zero understanding of how the world works.

Best of luck to OP and every other dreamer though, hope you get everything you’re wanting out of life.

 

[The White Coat Investor]

Hi guys,

Our physician is 32 years old and just finished his onc/heme fellowship. Works in a state with no income tax, let's say in a PP-group in Austin in TX:

year 1 salary: 300k
year 2 salary: 400k
year 3 salary: 500k

Above with 50-55 hours a week.

Now, this guy is debt free too.

Would he be able to afford a lamborghini Huracan 2014 (80-130k second hand) and live in a 1,7 million dollar house at the age of 35 (year 3) and contribute so that the nest egg at retirement is 2mil at the age of 65?

If not, let's say he can work 60-70 hours and make 600-700k a year in that PP-group. Would that be sufficient?

Edit: Doc is single so no nagging wife or children

Thanks,

Sounds like a good way to burn out to me. Could you buy a $100K car? Sure. That's only like 1/3 of your take home for one year by Age 35. Can you do that while living in a $1.7M house? I wouldn't recommend it. You could probably make the payments for a while though. Not sure why you think $2M is enough for retirement for someone who wants to live a lifestyle like you describe though. That nest egg is only going to kick out $80K a year in 2050 dollars, hardly enough to afford the now $6M house and fancy cars.

 

[QueenJames]

Why not just book a first class ticket to switzerland or some exotic/foreign country.... rent a lambo/ferrari there to live your dreams for a few days or a week... bang a hooker or two... indulge in the finest ganja or drugs you can come across and come back home on ur first class flight sippin' on some pinot.

You probably blew through ~$8-10,000 for the whole trip while you lived and dined in fine luxury and got it out of your system.

 

[finalpsychyear]

Rent the car a few times a year. Rent the crazy expensive house for 1 year.

Seriously, the OP is obviously some troll but the reality is I know too many people who truly suck at finances.

Our attending who was some very rich doctor said the best advice given to him was budget the same as you did as a resident but WORK like a resident for a minimum 3-5 years (he did it for 10 years) as you will gain experience/skill, pay off debt, and have a nest egg that has the potential to carry you the rest of your life.

He drove a ferrari and lived in a million dollar house. So you can have your cake and eat it too if you do it right but he worked A LOT for 10 years and lived on 3-4k/month as a resident.

P.S. If there was only some law that required people to "live like a resident and WORK like a resident for 3-5 years while being required to learn some basic financing" all doctors would truly have it great.

 

[chocomorsel]

There are definitely societal pressure elements involved in this. When relatives have a six-figure salary in their early 20s while you have a negative net value until 32, there are expectations of you turning the tables and live way above your relatives standards 2-3 years into your life as an attending. But that's a different story.

10 million nest egg by the point you're 50? May I ask what your annual spending on average is prior to that age?

I’m trying to figure out how your relatives in their 20s are making six-figure incomes IN Zimbabwe. That makes absolutely no sense to me. Unless they have left and are making that income in the US or somewhere abroad. Or are corrupt government officials or more likely their parents are. That income is not attainable for the vast, vast majority of Zimbabweans. Unless maybe you are White?

Please explain. I know this is an old thread but it’s got my curiosity peaked. And this is coming from a fellow African.

 

[redfish955]

I'd rather have a 500k condo in the city with great amenities with thrice a week maid service and twice a week chef that meal preps for me.

 

[chocomorsel]

I'd rather have a 500k condo in the city with great amenities with thrice a week maid service and twice a week chef that meal preps for me.

That’s your preference. Not everyone wants to live with neighbors above, below, to the right side and to the left side of you. No Thank you. If one person has bugs then you are sure to get them too.
Some of us like having a house with a yard not attached to anyone.
One can however live in a nice 500 to 700k house. I don’t get the 1.7 million price tag in Austin. Unnecessary and the taxes on that are ridiculous.