Ten Things to Stop Doing in 2006

[Jay_Gatsby]

Interesting article on Yahoo Finance today:

http://biz.yahoo.com/special/resolution06_article1.html

Most of them are obvious, but number 5 gave me some food for thought:

5. Stop counting on Social Security
This one's not for current retirees or for people near retirement. It's for people who are early on in their working careers or mid-career. It's not meant to be alarmist, but employers and the federal government are providing incentives for you to save for retirement for a reason. If your employer matches all or part of your contributions to a retirement plan, you should strive to contribute up to the limit of that match. Check out the new Roth 401(k) available in 2006. Start building a retirement war chest -- you're going to need it.

While most of us don't factor in Social Security as a part of our retirement, few commentators have gone beyond the standard response that it won't be there when we retire as the reason for doing so (or not doing so, as the case may be). It's interesting that someone has now indicated that many of the recently implemented tax-advantaged accounts (i.e. the Roth IRA and the Roth 401(k)) have been put in place to wean us off of relying on Social Security as a part of our retirement. The problem I see with this rationale is that those of us who are paying into Social Security will never see our money again, which goes against the premise of mandatory contribution to Social Security, namely, that we will eventually see that money again someday as a safety net against poverty in our old age.

On a more inspirational note, I also enjoyed reading number 10:

10. Stop missing out on smelling the roses
Easier said than done, I know, but there's more to life than working to pay the bills. Find a way to put joy in your life if it's missing or add to your joy if it's not. People make New Year's resolutions because they're hopeful as to what the New Year will bring. Go beyond fitness and finances to figure out what you want out of life and work towards it.

[Spanky]

Stop working overtime.
Stop being greedy (know when to quit).
Stop timing the market.
Stop playing politics.
Stop to meditate.
Stop being judgemental.
.........etc.

[Jay_Gatsby]

Originally Posted by Spanky

Stop working overtime.
Stop being greedy (know when to quit).
Stop timing the market.
Stop playing politics.
Stop to meditate.
Stop being judgemental.
.........etc.

Those all seem to fall under Number 10.

The problem I see with this rationale is that those of us who are paying into Social Security will never see our money again, which goes against the premise of mandatory contribution to Social Security, namely, that we will eventually see that money again someday as a safety net against poverty in our old age.

Just think about the first folks to cash their Social Security checks - They never paid in a dime! - Were they lucky - Well, I would not want to trade places with them. They were living in the Great Depression.

Social Security is not that different than a lot of Insurance programs. If you never get in a car accident, you don't get your premiums back. You pay medical Insurance and hope you never have to use it! If you don't have kids you still have to pay property taxes that pay for schools.

This is the price of society. With no armed forces draft today, you don't have to 'pay' for your freedom either - works both ways.

In the words of JFK - 'Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country'

[Jay_Gatsby]

Originally Posted by Cut-Throat

Just think about the first folks to cash their Social Security checks - They never paid in a dime! - Were they lucky - Well, I would not want to trade places with them. They were living in the Great Depression.

But wasn't Social Security intended to provide a safety net for those people whose life savings were eliminated in the Crash of 1929?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_(United_States)

[guesswho]

humm...
* * Everyone pays into social security but you will only receive it based on your net worth upon retirement? Possible solution, maybe. Would people save less in order to qualify for social security, I don't think so. If you have a net worth capable of getting you through retirement then why should you get social security any way?
* * If you make say 50k a year in retirement then you've taken care of yourself and you can leave the safety net for someone of less fortune. Then if say 30 years down the road your portfolio dries up then the safety net becomes available once more.

[REWahoo]

Originally Posted by guesswho

humm...
Everyone pays into social security but you will only receive it based on your net worth upon retirement? Possible solution, maybe. Would people save less in order to qualify for social security, I don't think so. If you have a net worth capable of getting you through retirement then why should you get social security any way?
If you make say 50k a year in retirement then you've taken care of yourself and you can leave the safety net for someone of less fortune. Then if say 30 years down the road your portfolio dries up then the safety net becomes available once more.

Hello guesswho and welcome to the forum. Noticed you have just registered and this is your first post. I would like to invite you to go to the "HI, I am..." board and tell us a little about yourself. Where are you on your journey to financial independence and retirement?

How is any of this helpful for younger workers ?

Dude! - What makes you think it should be?

If you are planning on retiring at 39, who funded your public education? Protected your ass from foriegn and domestic invaders?

Oh - You're the guy that doesn't believe in living up to his word anyway.

[dex]

Originally Posted by Cut-Throat

Just think about the first folks to cash their Social Security checks - They never paid in a dime! - Were they lucky - Well, I would not want to trade places with them. They were living in the Great Depression.

Apparently, the first person paid it a nicle!

In March 1937, this Cleveland streetcar Motorman received the very first Social Security retirement benefit payment. It was a one-time, lump-sum payout. How much was it for? For those persons retiring before the start of monthly benefits in 1940, a single lump-sum payment was made. Ackerman worked one day under Social Security, earned $5, and paid a nickel in payroll taxes. His lump-sum was equal to 3.5% of his wages—so he got 17 cents.

I wonder if history will repeat itself? I'm counting on getting mine. However, I think it will eventually be amended to a means testing formula.

http://www.ssa.gov/history/puzzles/quiz26a.html

What the heck is a domestic invader?

Think mugger - And the police force that saved your ass!

[HFWR]

SS should be made actuarily sound. Pick your poison...

[oldcrowcall]

Click on or copy and paste this link and if you have a media player just set back and listen to # 4.* ok. things have changed a little since the Sons of the Pioneers sang this but nothing is going to happen to SS.

http://www.artistdirect.com/nad/stor...166225,00.html

[whitestick]

One of the things that for some reason, I remember quite vividely, is in or about 1969, while looking at the "bite" that SS was taking out of my paycheck, and thinking why should I be paying in to this, 'cause I'll never see a dime of it. All of the pundits at at the time were in agreement that it would run out of money, or any of a hundred other reasons, as to why it would be eleminated long before I would reach my 40's, never mind my 60's. And I also remember thinging that after all it was on a pay as you go basis, to help out the folks retired then, and needing the money, and I had time to earn and save for my own retirement. Actually some of the same exact words, I'm shamed to say, that other youngsters are saying now.
The more things change, the more they stay the same. They young feel that it won't be around, so why should they pay for it. They ones panning for it, feel that they are entitiled to include it as one leg of their multi-legged stool of FI.
I almost hate saying this as it makes me sound as old as Mr. Galt, but I'm really only in later 50's. Didn't some of you that have the benefit of longer time on this planet, have similar occasions to think the same things back in your early 30's as well.

[Marshac]

Not related to SS, but one thing I plan on doing in 2006 is to stop losing my hair. Yup.

[haha]

Originally Posted by oldcrowcall

Click on or copy and paste this link and if you have a media player just set back and listen to # 4.* ok. things have changed a little since the Sons of the Pioneers sang this but nothing is going to happen to SS.

http://www.artistdirect.com/nad/stor...166225,00.html

Thanks Old Crow. I'm going to buy that CD. There is one tune that was kind of a weird anthem of my childhood- actually lots of them were popular in the 40s when I wa a young kid, but one in particular stuck in my mind becaue it was so odd and made such compelling pictures in my mind.* I used to have lunch at my Dad's bar, and often some drunk would be playing the jukebox.This must have been right after the War, or maybe even earlier. Anyway, the song is "Rye Whiskey". On this CD it appears as an instumental. But I still remember many of the words-

"If the ocean was whiskey,
And I was a duck,
I'd swim to the bottom
And never come up.

Rye whiskey, rye whiskey, rye whiskey I cry,
If a tree don't fall on me,
I'll live till I die."

I doubt I have heard this in 60 years, but there it is like yesterday. It may not be Disney, but thanks for the memories.*

Ha

[Spanky]

Originally Posted by WhodaThunkit

You need to trade places for about a year with someone who lives the native lifestyle in Sudan. What we have in the US is pretty damn good. Not perfect by any means, but worth a little respect, gratitude, and appreciation, and probably better than a lot of us deserve.

I do appreciate the fact that one can openly criticize the government as opposed to other forms of repressive government in which a person can be jailed or punished for making any statements regarding the government.

[MasterBlaster]

The best way to shore up SS is to send all those lazy ER's back to work to pay their 'fair share' of SS and other taxes. *

Or we could have an implied SS deficient tax charge for ER's. Or we could just grab a big portion of those excess nestegg accumulations so that ERs pay their 'fair share'.

[REWahoo]

Originally Posted by MasterBlaster

The best way to shore up SS is to send all those lazy ER's back to work to pay their 'fair share' of SS and other taxes.

I can see where this is leading: The gummit will initiate a SS draft to force all under the age of 65 back to work to fund SS.

OK all you ER's, get ready to burn your SS card and chant "Hell No, We Won't Go!"

Eugene McCarthy checks out just when you need him...

[haha]

Originally Posted by WhodaThunkit

So, I take your answer to mean that you would be willing to trade with the fictional guy from Sudan, or at least consider it.* If you're willing to live at his level, why not retire right now?* One of our many liberties is the liberty to move on if we're not happy.* No need to continue to seethe and suffer here in the US, to "bust your ass," to live under a repressive government, rub shoulders with those hateful baby boomers, and so forth.* You would be rich beyond measure in Sudan, and evidently more satisfied.* More power to you, my friend!*

This is an amazing red herring. Wht does wanting value for his taxes have to do with the Sudan for God's sake?

Ha