25 year old.. How can I retire ASAP?
Options
Comments
-
This is all nonsense. Teachers can easily learn the content the night before and teach it to students. This isn't about how to be frugal or getting the best mortgage offer or whatever. This is just an introduction to how interest rates work, how mortgages work, stock and bond investments, how pensions work etc. Nothing complex, just a basic understanding.
I speak from specific professional experience. You completely underestimate what actually goes in to teaching. That isn't your fault, it is just the nature of things. Lots of teachers, just like lots of people in other occupations, do not understand how mortgages work, or stock and bond investments, or pensions. They are generally quite expert in their own field, and understand pedagogy and have some understanding of child psychology, special educational needs, and education law, but this does not mean that they understand all about personal finance.One hour class a week for a term should be enough. a maths teacher would probably be best positioned to teach this. they would grasp the content easily and can relay that onto the kids.
On what basis do you make that assumption? Do you have a lot of experience of curriculum planning? Or perhaps you are well-versed in pedagogy? I suspect that neither of these things are true. You seem to have no idea at what pace children may learn, nor the challenges in that learning. One hour per week would be problematic because it doesn't allow the child time to embed new learning and practise new skills. During the gaps between lessons, children will suffer learning loss, meaning that each week you have to revisit everything they were previously taught.
Your suggestion that the Maths teachers can, "relay that onto[sic] the kids," is indicative of a lack of understanding regarding pedagogy and how people learn. Teachers don't just stand at the front and talk with the children soaking it all up like sponges. There is a reason why teachers are trained at a postgraduate level, requiring two years to receive fully accredited qualifications (and continue to train after that).As for it having to be examined, well i did a history GCSE and a geography GCSE and i have forgotten pretty much all of it.
What has that got to do with the point I made? My point was about how children approach subjects that are not examined, i.e. they don't tend to take them seriously and do not commit to learning.Maybe you can teach personal finance every year for a term, once a week over the course of 5 years (from age 13 to 18). So it has more of a chance of sticking.
That isn't likely to have a significant impact. You are more likely to need at least two lessons per week and for there to be a qualification at the end of it. Even then a significant proportion of children will leave school not really remembering much, and certainly not continuing to do so over the coming years; by your own admission, you can't remember much at all of subjects that you do have GCSEs in.0 -
Go for it!
Live well below your means, save hard and invest. Being frugal is fun and contrarian.
I personally ignored all the nonsense spouted about needing to work for sense of purpose, fulfilment and other such tosh, it was normally from people who could never afford to retire early or had no interests outside of 'work'.
I bailed at 53 from a c.£170k job (admittedly with a pension pot starting with a two) but have spent nearly two years living on pennies. I walk and cycle everywhere and drive an old banger, it's an absolute hoot. It helps if your other half is not into Gucci handbags and stuff like that.
Life is very short so if you can pull it off why not? I could never find the time now for a job!Funnily, i've been pondering a small Caddy sized van to facilitate a side project i'm going to work on. I havent seen much movement yet, but in theory markets like pickups and vans are likely to be hit by the upcoming downturn.Would be interesting to hear if anyone has direct experience?Why? So you can argue with them?0 -
capital0ne wrote: »It's not surprising without the word Pension.
Two reasons - youngsters don't trust pensions when the hear about Carillion bosses spending it all, BHS non-existent pension fund and so on.
Second reason most people do not understand pensions because no one can explain them in plain English, those who do are seen as being salesmen only out to line their own pockets, again a trust issue.
People get very nervous when someone from the Government says 'We're here to help you!' In fact people get nervous when anyone with a finance background/qualification utters the same words.
Whose fault is that?
School for not including it in the curriculum, the government for allowing this to happen, fraudsters cold calling and ripping you off.
Education is the answer but how to do it I don't know.
I didn't bother mentioning my pension. I've been paying into a pension since I was 19. I pay in 4% and my company contributes another 8%. I ignore this and what I have will be what I have when I get it, I'm not expecting to rely on this when I'm older.0 -
You might hope to retire well before your NPA, but it may not happen. Investing in a pension is good sense. The tax relief alone makes it worthwhile.I didn't bother mentioning my pension. I've been paying into a pension since I was 19. I pay in 4% and my company contributes another 8%. I ignore this and what I have will be what I have when I get it, I'm not expecting to rely on this when I'm older.
Honestly, I don't think you are being realistic, and an 8 hour day isn't that bad. You've been working for less than 10 years, and while work might not fill your soul with joy and contentment, it is pretty much a fact of life.0 -
I think it is very doable for you. You already have 1 k from property so you need to find just 1 more k a month. A pot of £3OO would give you that at withdrawal rate 4% without touching the capital. To accummulate it may take 1O years of investments into ISA at about 2O a year if you add investment growth.
You can emabark on this journey and fine tune it as circumstances become clearer. As other posters say do not knock down work ; once you are not under pressure to do what you do not like doing at the time you do not like it can become very fulfilling. Even more - I would day that an individual that have not found what he likes doing has fewer chances of being happy.The word "dilemma" comes from Greek where "di" means two and "lemma" means premise. Refers usually to difficult choice between two undesirable options.
Often people seem to use this word mistakenly where "quandary" would fit better.0 -
Broken_Biscuits wrote: »If you genuinely earn £1100 from outside of your 40 hours a week and live off of £1250 a month then you can retire right now.
You just need to find a way to reduce spending by £150 a month. Or at worst take up a job that allows you to work 1-2 days a week that pays the shortfall from your rental income.
It’s likely , unless you have kept a budget of what truly gets spent, that you spend more than £1250 a month. Holidays and treats should be a part of your life at least occasionally!
I would suggest live a year recording spending and working out your true costs. In this time, stop paying off the mortgage and instead invest.
At 20k+ invested in a year you may find the returns from your investments help make up the shortfall you are looking for.
Lots of good suggestions here by previous posters re websites to consider on frugality and early retirement. they will have pages of information to read through about how you could retire faster by not paying off your mortgage etc.
If you decide retirement is not for you after you pulled the plug or you underestimated how happy you would be on the budget you have set... well, it’s not like you can’t return to work claiming it was just a gap year.
Best of luck whatever you do. You are in a fantastic position to make positive choices for your life.
i was wondering the same too. why did OP open a thread on how to retire early if his living cost is only 1250 and he is earning 1100 passively.....Aim to retire by 45.0 -
Well, teachers are really intelligent aren't they. they all have degrees, so picking up some basic financial acumen cannot be that hard. So that's the theory bit sorted.ValiantSon wrote: »1) Who is going to teach it? A level of expertise is needed and it would be wrong to just assume that all teachers have this.
2) When would it be taught? The curriculum is already packed full, so no time allocation exists.
When to teach it, well, tack it on to a maths class.0 -
capital0ne wrote: »Well, teachers are really intelligent aren't they. they all have degrees, so picking up some basic financial acumen cannot be that hard. So that's the theory bit sorted.
When to teach it, well, tack it on to a maths class.
Oh dear. Read all of my posts and see some of the problems explained.
Here's another one for you, though. There aren't enough Maths teachers. There is already a serious shortage of Maths teachers. If you increase the curriculum time required from them then you will make the staffing and recruitment crisis even worse.
I have no objection to the principle of financial education, but the idea that it can just be a bolt-on to the existing system is seriously misguided.0 -
Simples, move in with your girlfriend and rent the other 2 bedrooms (assuming you have 3 bed house) for £500pcm each making your income £2200pcm. Your house will then become a HMO (house in multiple occupation) so check the rules and regs that go with that.0
-
I sort of love this thread. I'm not sure why.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.5K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.9K Spending & Discounts
- 235.6K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.2K Life & Family
- 248.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards