ACROSS all areas of our lives we've learned
that a one size fits all approach will never work. And when we hear of an
average sized 10, or earlier this week when we heard the average Australian was
a 37-year-old single woman working and living in the inner city, it all seems
bizarre that we set a generalisation for life.
Just today it emerged - according to news.com.au -
that Australians are saving more than ever. Not any of my neighbours.
The latest ING DIRECT Financial Well-being
Index has revealed that the average household has amassed around $15,427
in the bank in the first quarter of this year, up more than $5000 compared to
two years ago.
But my fellow South Australians and those
aged between 35 and 49 it's more than likely you're not saving as much as some
of your countrymen (Duh - South Australians average a lower income and average
bigger families).
According to the index, Gen X (35-49) are
saving the least with a median savings bank of $8060 compared to $14,377 for Gen
Y (18-34) and $17,744 for baby boomers (50-64).
And in a light-bulb kind of moment ING
Direct has assessed the reason behind GenXers losing in the savings stakes just
may be the fact that most of them have got children underfoot.
By my calculations this means Gen Xers are
actually achieving far more with their finances. This month, research
undertaken by Associate Professor Paul Henman, of the School of Social Work and
Human Services at the University of Queensland, considers it costs at least
$300,000 to raise a child - not including education costs, private health
insurance or involvement in sporting or extracurricular activities. These costs
could add another $10,000 a year to raising a child.
In other words Gen Xers, don't be
disillusioned to hear we aren't saving as much as Gen Ys or Baby Boomers. After
all , most of us are shelling out $26,000 per child per year - getting far more
bang for our bucks than other generations. My question is - why isn't the
savings divide even wider?
No comments:
Post a Comment