But the Fed is doing QE, which is buying longer maturity treasuries, creating artificial demand, which lowers interest rates.
Short-term treasuries and the fed rate are also directly related. Increase the fed fund rate, and short-term treasury interest rates will have to go up as well to remain competitive.
The problem is that high paying jobs in HCOL cities are highly, highly competitive. There is no guarantee that the OP will be able to come back to high-paying job in HCOL after moving out. In fact, it will be quite difficult, as the move will signify negative things to potential employers.
It is difficult to go wrong if you invest in businesses that are providing real value to people and trade at attractive valuations. It is unlikely to make you wealthy, but it is unlikely to make you poor either.
The problem with 'joining in with the fools' is that it relies on the 'greater fool theory' to make superior returns. And you could well end up being the 'greater fool'.
Can the Fed raise interest rates significantly without bankrupting the Federal government?
The Federal debt needs to be rolled over every now and then. At certain interest rates, the costs of servicing the debt become unacceptably high. Where is that 'breaking point'? If you see some serious analysis of this, please let me know.
But there is a higher bound to which the Fed can feasibly raise interest rates. So it is possible that the Fed will be forced to choose between keeping rates low, keep buying Treasuries and destroy the dollar through runaway inflation, or raise interest rates and bankrupt the US government.
I think though the overly positive replies in this thread are a bit... misleading. And frankly read a lot like something extremely religious people would write about their newfound religion. It doesn't read like rational discourse.
Of course, once you already have children, you are not going to be regretting it. It would just feel horrible to do so. The children, no matter how difficult they might make your life, are innocent little creatures, and you make it work - what else are you going to do? And the effort you put in, helps with the bonding. And of course you try to focus on the positives and forget the negatives - for your own wellbeing and sanity.
What's misleading is that the people replying are not considering the counterfactual in good faith. What would their life be like had they not taken the plunge? After all, it probably wasn't all that horrible before they made the decision either. Could it be that other options would've made their life better? Perhaps, the stress of children had led to deterioration in their relationship with their spouse, or made both of them age a lot, and they would've been able to enjoy each other's company so much more without. Perhaps it meant they had to give up some of their childhood dreams. Perhaps they had to cling to a job they didn't particularly like (or, indeed, hate) because they could no longer afford to take risks. Perhaps they no longer had the time to grind leetcode and get into a FAANG. Perhaps they would've got the benefits of having children and fewer of the downsides by caring for their nieces and nephews instead, or by just getting a cat.
Otherwise it becomes meaningless. You could ask someone that had children at the age of 16 if they regret it, and you would probably get the same responses as in this thread - 'of course not, best thing that ever happened to me; yes it has been tough, yes it meant I had to make sacrifices with my education and career, but I wouldn't trade the experiences with my child for anything in the world'. Yet we all recognize that having children at 16 is not the smartest idea.
What is your take on the Ray Dalio view? The way I understand it:
1. Lending to the US government (buying treasuries) at low interest rates is not profitable, as you will be paid back in devalued currency. As is, real rates are negative.
2. Investors demand higher interest rates to make it worth their while.
3. US government has to roll over its debt or borrow more, but has to do it at higher interest rates that it cannot afford (what rate would that be?). Fed comes to the rescue by buying treasuries with new money, creating more demand and driving interest rates down.
4. That makes points 1 and 2 even more valid, so fewer 'real' investors turn up to buy treasuries, and those that hold treasuries try to sell them (you don't want to be getting fixed returns in currency that is losing value). That increases supply of treasuries even more.
5. Recognizing this dynamic, people rush to 'cash in' their dollars - buy anything tangible they can. US stocks sell off relative to 'hard' assets, as companies reporting in dollars are not be able to operate effectively.
6. This results in hyperinflation. The above unfolds relatively quickly with no advance warning (you don't want to alert others as you are trying to offload your dollars), turning low inflation into hyperinflation.
Short-term treasuries and the fed rate are also directly related. Increase the fed fund rate, and short-term treasury interest rates will have to go up as well to remain competitive.