Ths is quite unrelated to you're bragging about what big assets you have yesterday.
Liberalizing the definition of savings is a stupid idea that will drive the country further into debt.
It's bad enough that idiots like yourself call your car savings without convincing everyone to do so.
How is counting 401k and IRA contributions "liberalizing" the definition of savings? If capital gains taxes are subtracted from savings how is adding the capital gain "liberalizing" the definition of savings?
It's bad enough that idiots like yourself call your car savings without convincing everyone to do so.
No one called a car savings. It's idiots like you who claimed a car isn't an asset.
Dear x5452,
I missed the post where someone called his car "savings."
Could you point it out?
Thanks,
sitetest
Your car can't be called savings because it's a depreciating asset. Expenditure for any asset that's acquired for investment should reasonably be called savings. If somebody's investing 14% of his pre-tax income in a 401(k), the income from which is also accumulated on a tax deferred basis, that's definitely long term savings. If you don't think so, you must not have a 401(k). Indeed, once somebody has put 14% of his pre-tax income into a 401(k), there's little left for ordinary post-tax savings.
Principal payments on a house are also legitimately viewed as a form of savings, since most houses are appreciating assets and money used to retire the principal on a note reduces the amount of interest the debtor has to pay. Once a house is paid for it gives the owner a virtual income equal to what he'd have to pay to rent it, plus the opportunity to gain from any appreciation in its value. Economically, it's the same thing as putting the money into a stock that appreciates and pays a dividend equal to the loan's interest rate. As the homeowners equity builds up it can be used to secure other loans, just like any other investment.
Please explain logically why you think these are not forms of savings.