Hey. This thread is getting interesting. Someone mentioned Roth IRAs. You are only allowed $2k in tax-free Roth contributions per year. Other tax-deferred IRAs are silly. It is not a tax-free investment. You are deferring your taxes, and will pay higher rates when you withdraw your capital (when you are retired... OUCH.). Tax-deferred IRAs are a financial spin on the roulette wheel, and a very poor strategy overall, IMHO. Better to put it somewhere with higher growth, and use your small business license to offset some of those capital gains (creative tax strategies... not sure I should list any in detail here). As to how I will make money on my car, the math is quite simple: The interest earned on the payments I make will exceed the depreciation on the value of the car, whether it is invested into funds or forex (I am doing 50% each, as the forex has much greater earning potential, and the funds are much lower risk). According to the average performance of my investments over the last 5 years - I should see approx. 8.7% annual growth on that capital over a 3 year term, and that is after taking the hit on depreciation (without depreciation, it's closer to 19%). If I were to keep it for 5 years, and took a 40% hit in depreciation, I would actually average about 9.1% annual growth on the investment. That is about the same growth I can expect with an index over that same period, yet it is backed with a usable durable good which can not lose more than the purchase value minus depreciation. I like to think of it as an extremely fun (and totally childish) stop-loss mechanism. Heh heh. Not sure how it works? I can post the raw equations for you if you'd like, and you can run those into your HP calculator and look at the graphs yourself. It is only the first two years where the capital is exposed to loss by depreciation of the durable good. It does, however, require paying for the car approximately twice, although capital is returned nicely, the upfront investment is quite large. As for those "millionaires" and their $200 suits... If you want to wear Walmart clothing and look like a sleezebag or a used-car dealer, go for it. I prefer that my clients see me as the epitome of SHARP. You do business with me, and you are doing business with a truly first-class organization in every regard. I want my clients to be so impressed when they meet me (with my appearance, my communication, my manners, etc) that they will feel the upmost confidence entrusting my firm with whatever needs they might have. I don't think twice about what our lunch will cost and I don't look at the bill, I just pay it, because that is merely a business expense, and it is proper ettiquette. Why should my attire, the first thing they notice, be any different? Just as I would NEVER consider meeting a client without brushing my teeth or shaving, I would NEVER show up in a cheap suit. And every real businessman knows that his clothing expenses are tax deductable, because they are a business expense. I showed a printout of the article to an associate at lunch today, and he got a laugh, too. He said something along the lines of, "I think that's how they do it out in the Midwest. That shit would never work in NY or LA, though. Especially on the East Coast. Nobody would take you seriously. A cheap suit... that's worse than ripping a huge fart at a business lunch." I don't know about that last line, but it's funny nonetheless, although somewhat crude. Overall, the point in the article was valid: "Live beneath your means, and invest aggressively". But it's so obvious and basic, it's not even worth mentioning. Why not say something a little less basic but more helpful to those just starting out, like "Always pre-plan your entry and exit, and NEVER trade without a stop", or describing some of the basics about using margin, or how to trade the ForEx. And, the author took it a little too far. Living beneath your means does not equate to being a cheapskate or wearing tacky cheap suits and second-hand clothing. I mean, get real. Take a walk down to the Financial District and see how many of those wealthy men you can find wearing cheap suits, and then compare that number to the well-dressed ones. You will find a very large differential here. And those boys don't even blink at a million bucks. It's nothing. $35m deals don't even make news on Wall Street. There are condos that sell for more than that on the Upper Eastside. Are these people not really wealthy because they're wearing a Kiton or Canali, or some bespoke Italian getup? If that's the case, half of the execs in America (and their attorneys) must be broke. A good suit is a business expense, period. And when I can afford one, you better believe I will be flying to either Milan or Manhattan (or possibly London) to pick up one of those snazzy $10k bespoke suits that are so gorgeous. And I will wear it every chance I get, and buy another to alternate when I can afford it. Heh heh. BTW - I like this forum. Some of you guys on here are pretty clever. This topic made for a fun lunchtime chat today, and my associate got a kick out of it too. Thanks. And sorry for the delayed reply, I had to wait until I got home from work.