AIBU to find this depressing rather than inspiring?

[freecuthbert]

I really try my hardest to scrimp and save whilst on a low income. I'm a hard worker too but my industry is massively underpaid.

I keep seeing articles about people and how money savvy they are and how great their money management skills are, buying houses young and retiring early. But they usually have a good/high income to start with, some inheritance or gift from family etc.

Today another article like this has cropped up. A couple has over 5.5k income a month and have about 3k disposable income. They are set to retire early because they're so good at managing money and they would like to share their wisdom with us so we can achieve the same. Except me and my partner earn far far less than them. We'd feel well off on just the 3k, which is what they have leftover.

I am also pissed off that at the bottom of their expenses is "other costs: child support and repaying interest-free loan for a new boiler: £401.18". What a way to disguise the actual pittance the guy pays in child support, meanwhile he gets to hobnob it and retire at age 40? Also very telling that his child is simply just another expense no different to a new boiler.

I honestly haven't read past this because it really got to me. I don't feel inspired at all, I only think "what a knob". And I find it kind of depressing because I feel like no matter how hard I work I won't ever be able to achieve this, which they apparently think is purely down to good money management. I'm sure that is an aspect of course, but definitely a lot more to it than that!

So, AIBU? I'm sure I'll get a few responses telling me I'm just being jealous or to just not read these articles!

Article for those interested:
inews.co.uk/news/uk/how-i-manage-my-money-couple-photographer-royal-navy-plans-to-retire-40-earning-974132

Odds on one of them, or both of them relying on future inheritances in later life? Be funny if that's all eaten up in equity release or care home costs before the time occurs.

They're also on an interest only mortgage on their current home :/

Oh wow, I missed the part about the interest only mortgage. I thought they were trying to get mortgage free?

Me too! That's a terrible decision. I wonder what their plan is to deal with that?

See Candy you are overthinking it!

I think if anything this man really showcases to women the importance of ensuring they remain financially independent AND ideally plan kids around their own ability to fully financially be in charge of them (irrelevant of their partners income)

Given the cost of housing - rents & mortgages - and childcare, I reckon the majority of women wouldn't be able to have children.

@BettysCardigan

I don't think they would have clutched their pearls because their outgoings were listed in a particular order. It's only on this thread that people have decided that means he is a terrible absent parent, without knowing the very first thing about their lives.

I think commenting on how little someone who aims to retire early is paying towards his own son is hardly clutching pearls.

Are you the smug and tight man in the article's current wife?

@DioneTheDiabolist

YANBU OP. His contribution to his child is pitiful. My finances would look a whole lot better if I got 24/7 care for the DC for £300.

The article and its subjects seem unpleasant.

Indeed it is and only journalists appear to like it

Are you the smug and tight man in the article's current wife?

Ah ...The cut and thrust of debate on Mumsnet

@KateWinsome don't be a hypocrite, you did suggest I must know them in real life

@WeBuiltThisBuffetOnSausageRoll

So you've decided to ignore the fact that a journalist's name and picture is at the top of the article then?

Righto.

You must be one of the same journos we're talking about....

I would expect the journalist to interview, ask probing and thought-provoking questions and draw the information out of the subject, before putting it together in a coherent way, removing any waffle, small-talk or irrelevancies. I've no problem with them not reporting everything that the subject said - that's a large part of their job, filtering out tedious detail and getting to the crux of it; I just don't expect somebody to be directly quoted as saying something they didn't say.

Quality journalism will usually use closed brackets to indicate where the journalist has clarified, amended or added something to what the subject actually said, to better set the scene and/or enhance reader comprehension.

You’ve got this wrong I’m afraid. I’m a journalist. Ghostwriting a feature as a first-person piece from the subject is common, it is ethical as long as accurate quotes are used. It should include (and usually does) ‘as told to’ and the journalist’s name. I disagree with @BettysCardigan though that we don’t always use verbatim quotes - we do, or at least we should do. It’s a big no-no to change the entire wording. You remove ‘um’ ‘ah’ and other needless words for brevity and leave bits out but you don’t change whole quotes.

@KateWinsome

Are you the smug and tight man in the article's current wife?

Ah ...The cut and thrust of debate on Mumsnet

It's brilliant eh

I'm sure it used to be better. Or maybe that's just when I had little kids and was too tired to notice.

@TedMullins clearly my skills have escaped me today as you're the third person who didn't get what I meant

I basically meant the same as you, in that that particular sentence was more than likely tidied up to become one sentence, as it doesn't strike me as something someone would say. Unless they completed the answers via email in which case yes, they might write it that way.

[quote BettysCardigan]@TedMullins clearly my skills have escaped me today as you're the third person who didn't get what I meant

I basically meant the same as you, in that that particular sentence was more than likely tidied up to become one sentence, as it doesn't strike me as something someone would say. Unless they completed the answers via email in which case yes, they might write it that way.[/quote]
I see what you mean now. Yes, tidied up is right, completely changing words is not the done thing! You’re right about email though, responses often do sound more robotic and formal if someone wrote them

You’ve got this wrong I’m afraid. I’m a journalist. Ghostwriting a feature as a first-person piece from the subject is common, it is ethical as long as accurate quotes are used. It should include (and usually does) ‘as told to’ and the journalist’s name. I disagree with @BettysCardigan though that we don’t always use verbatim quotes - we do, or at least we should do. It’s a big no-no to change the entire wording. You remove ‘um’ ‘ah’ and other needless words for brevity and leave bits out but you don’t change whole quotes.

But that's exactly what I said I agreed with, wasn't it?! At least I thought it was! I have no issue whatsoever with tidying up what people actually said, removing inconsequential filler words etc. - even removing whole sentences if they're just waffle; that's precisely what I'd expect a journalist to do. indeed, it is ghostwriting: not re-writing.

I think there may be a few of us here arguing with each other from the basic same perspective

Let's call it time

Although with that level of decadence, how will I ever pay my mortgage off early?

Depressing that he doesn't expect his son to require any funding beyond the prescribed 18 year cut off point. What about university or even seeing his son.