Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 01-15-2011, 01:20 PM   #21
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
youbet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,965
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post
The present administration is having difficulty producing any inflation at all
Really? There has been consistent inflation throughout the period of this administration. (There may have been one month of deflation, can't recall at the moment.) Inflation in food and energy is definitely hitting our house. Price reductions are present in some areas, such as high tier electronics, but since we don't need a large screen TV or new computer, aren't helping us a bit.
__________________

__________________
"I wasn't born blue blood. I was born blue-collar." John Wort Hannam
youbet is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 01-15-2011, 01:20 PM   #22
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
teejayevans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,222
Why stop at 62, lets extend full SS benefits to those 50 or older :-)
TJ
__________________

__________________
teejayevans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 01:22 PM   #23
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
youbet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,965
Quote:
Originally Posted by RonBoyd View Post
So, "Get out there and find a job" is your best shot?
So mooching off society and surviving at the expense of others is your strategy?
__________________
"I wasn't born blue blood. I was born blue-collar." John Wort Hannam
youbet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 01:23 PM   #24
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,929
Quote:
Originally Posted by Midpack View Post

Typical liberal POV with no discussion as to how we'd pay for it...what a moron. Why restrict it to 62? Make it 40 and there will be no shortage of jobs for those 39 or under I'm sure. Where do I submit my pointless article and how much does that kind of work pay?
Oh, that's no problem. Just lower the average age of death until the available funds cover the retirement period. That'll probably help ease the Medicare crunch, as well.
__________________
M Paquette is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 01:24 PM   #25
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
RonBoyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Denver, Colorado
Posts: 5,280
Quote:
Originally Posted by youbet View Post
So mooching off society and surviving at the expense of others is your strategy?
Yeah, we can all go back to sleep now.
__________________
"It's tough to make predictions, especially when it involves the future." ~Attributed to many
"In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. But, in practice, there is." ~(perhaps by) Yogi Berra
"Those who have knowledge, don't predict. Those who predict, don't have knowledge."~ Lau tzu
RonBoyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 02:01 PM   #26
Moderator Emeritus
Nords's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Oahu
Posts: 26,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by youbet View Post
So mooching off society and surviving at the expense of others is your strategy?
So far, so good!
__________________
*
*

The book written on E-R.org, "The Military Guide to Financial Independence and Retirement", on sale now! For more info see "About Me" in my profile.
I don't spend much time here anymore, so please send me a PM. Thanks.
Nords is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 02:07 PM   #27
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,072
That economist must be 62 years old.


Many criticized the idea.... But it it probably would have been a better idea that what we did. We have spent a lot of money trying to create jobs.

Consider how many people would qualify for this program (in a 3 year window) that might be able afford to do it (lose their paycheck). There is a finite number. pick a number in the millions... say 4M

Consider the difference paid on the average payout difference between FRA and 62. Run that out till life expectancy and bring it back to a PV.

It is probably no more than we are spending to try to stimulate the economy and extend unemployment benefits (but I did not bother to calculate the amount).

It would immediately open up 4M jobs (using my fictitious number). The retirees would continue to spend (for their living expenses) and the people replacing those that exited the jobs would begin spending (because they are earning a full wage).

Many of those that are unemployed will be the people buying houses once they get a chance to restart their lives.
__________________
chinaco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 02:44 PM   #28
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
haha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Hooverville
Posts: 22,386
Quote:
Originally Posted by youbet View Post
As our population continues to crowd the earth and as easily harvestable natural resources dwindle, the burden of supporting a percentage of the population not engaged in any productive activity (retired) will become unmanagable. Yes, we could print money and pass it out to those not engaged in supporting themselves. But in the end, we survive by dividing among us all the resources available to share. Having fewer contributing to the aggregate pool while still requiring their slice of the pie isn't going to do it .
It is my opinion that we should start worrying about the burden of the retired who have worked long and productively, right after we deal with the burden of those of not only do not work and have no intention of working, but through their crime and anti-social behavior place burdens on society far beyond the 15-20 years of retirement that retired workers "enjoy".

If anyone thinks that prudent retired people are going to go off and find an ice flow to die on, he should put away that ganja and get real.

Ha
__________________
"As a general rule, the more dangerous or inappropriate a conversation, the more interesting it is."-Scott Adams
haha is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 02:58 PM   #29
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
harley's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Following the nice weather
Posts: 6,430
Quote:
Originally Posted by haha View Post
It is my opinion that we should start worrying about the burden of the retired who have worked long and productively, right after we deal with the burden of those of not only do not work and have no intention of working, but through their crime and anti-social behavior place burdens on society far beyond the 15-20 years of retirement that retired workers "enjoy".

If anyone thinks that prudent retired people are going to go off and find an ice flow to die on, he should put away that ganja and get real.

Ha
I promise you, that's not what we waste our time thinking about.
__________________
"Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgement." - Will Rogers, or maybe Sam Clemens
DW and I - FIREd at 50 (7/06), living off assets
harley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 02:58 PM   #30
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,437
Quote:
Originally Posted by chinaco View Post
That economist must be 62 years old.


Many criticized the idea.... But it it probably would have been a better idea that what we did. We have spent a lot of money trying to create jobs.

Consider how many people would qualify for this program (in a 3 year window) that might be able afford to do it (lose their paycheck). There is a finite number. pick a number in the millions... say 4M

Consider the difference paid on the average payout difference between FRA and 62. Run that out till life expectancy and bring it back to a PV.

It is probably no more than we are spending to try to stimulate the economy and extend unemployment benefits (but I did not bother to calculate the amount).

It would immediately open up 4M jobs (using my fictitious number). The retirees would continue to spend (for their living expenses) and the people replacing those that exited the jobs would begin spending (because they are earning a full wage).

Many of those that are unemployed will be the people buying houses once they get a chance to restart their lives.
The more I hear about ideas like this, the more sense they make to me. This flys in the face of my long standing free market conservative beliefs. However this appears to be a rational alternative to make work projects that have little or no impact. If this allows some people to retire early while creating employment for others maybe we'll pull out of this slump a little quicker.
In any event I'm going to renew my builder license and be thankful I can wait it out at mega corp for another couple years.
__________________
foxfirev5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 03:01 PM   #31
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Purron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,584
Quote:
Originally Posted by youbet
So mooching off society and surviving at the expense of others is your strategy?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nords View Post
So far, so good!
And to make matters worse, you've written a book to teach others how to do the same thing

It's hard to gripe about it though since the proceeds will go to charity. Plus, it will likely teach people how to properly plan for retirement and become less of a burden to thier families or society. Seems to me this is a lesson many of us 'round here could teach those millions of boomers we've heard about who haven't prepared for retirement or the possibility of unemployment.
__________________
I purr therefore I am.
Purron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 03:07 PM   #32
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 11,044
Artificially shrinking the work force by incentivizing early-retirement for the masses might do wonder to improve the unemployment rate in the short term, but personally I think it would damage the country fiscally and economically in the long term. I grew up in a country who famously asked people to work fewer hours per week in order to artificially create jobs for the unemployed and the results have not held up to the promises.

In addition, people could take their full SS benefit at 62 and still hang on to their jobs a few more years.
__________________
FIREd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 03:20 PM   #33
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,437
Quote:
Originally Posted by FD View Post
Artificially shrinking the work force by incentivizing early-retirement for the masses might do wonder to improve the unemployment rate in the short term, but personally I think it would damage the country fiscally and economically in the long term. I grew up in a country who famously asked people to work fewer hours per week in order to artificially create jobs for the unemployed and the results have not held up to the promises.

In addition, people could take their full SS benefit at 62 and still hang on to their jobs a few more years.
Good points. However one of the programs I've seen simply lowers the payout for SS by an additional 8% / year for ages below 62. This really wouldn't create an extra burden but would encourage those that saved enough an incentive to retire.
__________________
foxfirev5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 03:20 PM   #34
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,929
Quote:
Originally Posted by youbet View Post
So mooching off society and surviving at the expense of others is your strategy?
Well, that's a dilemma we all face. After a while, we tend to lose our capacity at producing. Now, admittedly it would be most economical for the current producers to ship us off to the Soylent plant lest we become parisites, unsightly moochers claiming your production by tears, or unpleasant looters demanding pension funds and insurers make good on their promises.

Alas, these producers are part of what we call a 'human society', a group of people outlined by the bounds of functional interdependence. Now, the producers derive some benefit from participating in 'human society', including access to common social benefits such as infrastructure, provided through public or private means by other participants in society, a common defense against aggression from outside the bounds of society, and a common basis of exchange provided by public or private means (Midas Mulligan or the Federal Government). A 'human society' may also provide additional infrastructure for what is perceived to be a common good, including in some environments a minimal level of support for individuals within that society.

Producers who reap the benefits of a human society are expected to contribute to that society as well, fulfilling their part in the network of social obligations. Unfortunately for the viewpoints of some, the particular society we participate in does seek to provide a minimal level of support for individuals within that society. Unlike other important corporate resources such as carbon paper, human beings are not viewed by this particular society as being disposable.

Should some one, as an individual or corporation, wish to reap the benefits of society without contributing to that society, then that one would be considered a parasite.

I would not consider a typical retiree to be a parasite, moocher, or looter. The retiree has worked within the human society for many years, producing goods or services in exchange for a combination of current income and a future pension or annuity (as from SSI) income stream. The current trend toward demonizing older individuals as parasites on society so as to avoid having to make good on obligations for pensions or annuity income streams is, to be blunt, the rationalization of parasites who managed to deceive members of society concerning their degree of contributions, and now that the jig is up, wish to deflect interest away from their own deceit and vilify the individuals that they are indebted to.

The original interviewee's responses are a little bit flippant.
__________________
M Paquette is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 03:38 PM   #35
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Gone4Good's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 5,381
Quote:
Originally Posted by chinaco View Post
It would immediately open up 4M jobs (using my fictitious number). The retirees would continue to spend (for their living expenses) and the people replacing those that exited the jobs would begin spending (because they are earning a full wage).
Of course where the rubber meets the road is the spending difference between an older worker who's probably at peak lifetime earnings moving into retirement and a younger, and likely lower paid, replacement worker moving into the workforce. Does that create an increase in aggregate demand? Hard to say.

But at the very least, it reduces aggregate wages which is one way to move the economy back to full employment.
__________________
Retired early, traveling perpetually.
Gone4Good is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2011, 03:43 PM   #36
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
GregLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Waimanalo, HI
Posts: 1,881
Quote:
Originally Posted by M Paquette View Post
The current trend toward demonizing older individuals as parasites on society so as to avoid having to make good on obligations for pensions or annuity income streams is, to be blunt, the rationalization of parasites who managed to deceive members of society concerning their degree of contributions, and now that the jig is up, wish to deflect interest away from their own deceit and vilify the individuals that they are indebted to.
Hey, wow! That's telling 'em.
__________________
Greg (retired in 2010 at age 68, state pension)
GregLee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011, 04:34 AM   #37
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,072
Quote:
Originally Posted by M Paquette View Post
...
The current trend toward demonizing older individuals as parasites on society so as to avoid having to make good on obligations for pensions or annuity income streams is, to be blunt, the rationalization of parasites who managed to deceive members of society concerning their degree of contributions, and now that the jig is up, wish to deflect interest away from their own deceit and vilify the individuals that they are indebted to.

...

Here Here... and they need to be voted out of office since the seem to want to continue to spend our money on other govt programs and now claim it will be a hardship on tax payers to have to pay it back because they do not want to raise the taxes.

It seems to me that when they collected the SS tax and spent it and placed an IOU to themselves (claiming it to be the trust fund) that they created a stealth tax 30 years ago because they did not want to create the real tax back then!

Those politicians (some are still around) and parties (both sides) that decided to fund their pet projects with SS are facing the day the payment is due!

Shame on them for deceiving the public and abusing their power (that they received via our votes)!


Bottom line: cut the govt bloat and raise taxes to pay the bill that is due. The businesses and wealthy that really took advantage of the Reagan and Bush tax cuts the last several decades will be paying it back with interest! The payment is due on that IOU!

After all.... how do you think those Reagan tax cuts were dealt with?? They certainly didn't cut spending during those years.

Those Reagan tax cuts occurred 30 years ago... those wealthy people are dying.... time to jack up the estate tax to 1950's levels to recoup the loan (with interest)!

Folks we were deceived by smoke and mirrors!
__________________
chinaco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011, 06:55 AM   #38
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Midpack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 11,977
Quote:
Originally Posted by M Paquette View Post
Well, that's a dilemma we all face. After a while, we tend to lose our capacity at producing.

I would not consider a typical retiree to be a parasite, moocher, or looter. The retiree has worked within the human society for many years, producing goods or services in exchange for a combination of current income and a future pension or annuity (as from SSI) income stream. The current trend toward demonizing older individuals as parasites on society so as to avoid having to make good on obligations for pensions or annuity income streams is, to be blunt, the rationalization of parasites who managed to deceive members of society concerning their degree of contributions, and now that the jig is up, wish to deflect interest away from their own deceit and vilify the individuals that they are indebted to.
Interesting post, thanks for taking the time. I guess the "dilemma" is - am I a parasite if I exit the workforce before I "lose [my] capacity at producing" just because I am financially (independent) able? While it may draw emphatic emotional answers - the answer is not crystal clear IMO.

I suppose in an ideal world, I guess we'd all work as long as we're productive even if we reach FI before the end of our work days. I'd start a thread, but I've had some bad experiences here with topics along these lines...
__________________
No one agrees with other people's opinions; they merely agree with their own opinions -- expressed by somebody else. Sydney Tremayne
Retired Jun 2011 at age 57

Target AA: 60% equity funds / 35% bond funds / 5% cash
Target WR: Approx 2.5% Approx 20% SI (secure income, SS only)
Midpack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011, 06:57 AM   #39
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
REWahoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Texas Hill Country
Posts: 42,117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Midpack View Post
I suppose in an ideal world, I guess we'd all work as long as we're productive even if we reach FI before the end of our work days.
One man's "ideal world" is another man's nightmare...
__________________
Numbers is hard

When I hit 70, it hit back

Retired in 2005 at age 58, no pension
REWahoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2011, 09:21 AM   #40
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 174
Quote:
Originally Posted by Midpack View Post
...I guess the "dilemma" is - am I a parasite if I exit the workforce before I "lose [my] capacity at producing" just because I am financially (independent) able? While it may draw emphatic emotional answers - the answer is not crystal clear IMO.

I suppose in an ideal world, I guess we'd all work as long as we're productive even if we reach FI before the end of our work days. I'd start a thread, but I've had some bad experiences here with topics along these lines...
As we endlessly hear from the tax cut crowd, if we let folks keep more of their money, they will save and invest it productively in private enterprise, creating jobs and economic activity for the collective good - "rising tide raises all boats" and such.

So, if I have saved and invested enough to sustain my lifestyle while no longer reporting to the office, then by that argument I have done my share of "contributing", and continue to do so via remaining invested and spending the proceeds on the goods and services provided by others- so, no, not being a parasite at all.

Now it's up to the captains of enterprises in which I've invested to do the promised job creation or, absent that, perhaps for the tax cut crowd to rethink their rhetoric on this point.

I have no further obligation to punch a clock, fashion widgets for others, or what not. My investments and day-to-day expenditures satisfy any obligation for contribution on my behalf.

And then of course there's volunteering, being there for others, etc., which put an entirely different spin on "working as long we're productive" in and for the benefit of society.
__________________

__________________
rockyj is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Do you really need a lower SWR for longer retirement? accountingsucks FIRE and Money 37 07-14-2010 09:37 AM
Diversifying Doesn't Lower Risk, But It Does Lower Potential Gain justin FIRE and Money 44 11-05-2005 05:16 PM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:51 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.