retirement trends

Holy crap, how does collecting social security equate to commiting robbery ? This is the system I've been paying into for years and years, yet somehow when I start to collect this money at age 62 I'm commiting robbery ?

I'd really like to debate this with you, but I am so confused on where you are coming from that I really can not.

I apologize, Helen. I mistook you for someone who was complaining about having to pay into Social Security. Your previous message in no way implied that and I am sorry to have lumped you in with the rest.
 
Ditto!
Jeff

Ah, Jeff. If only it were as easy to apologize given what you wrote ...
If we have all contributed to this program why should we not take our money if we are conservatives. If on the other hand we could have opted out of this ponzi scheme in the first place most of us would have.
That is, you know it's a fraud - else why call it a ponzi scheme? - and, because you are now on the receiving end, you're perfectly content to stick it to your fellows.
 
Couldn't correct my post in time, caught me, Hyperborea!

Actually, another big factor that isn't counted in simple calculations is the disability and survivor insurance components. That will reduce the retirement benefit as some of the funds go to that.
 
NFS I also wrote
If only we had a choice. Our wonderful government forces (with high taxation) us to rely on their programs.

As stated by others if we could have invested our money ourselves instead of being forced into a forced government retirement program, we would be considerably better off. At my age 50, my wife and I could retire in comfort. Instead we must wait to get our pittance from the government largess.
Jeff
 
We're guilty of painting our skills and abilities across others. This is a big problem in a lot of discussions where you might say "I'm a reasonable and well balanced person and believe I should be able to own/have/do xyz...so everyone should". With the problem there being not everyone is as reasonable and well balanced as you are.

Without social security we'd have a lot of old folks working well past their ability to do so in order to eat, and a huge elderly class in deep poverty. Simply because people in general are inherently unable to plan past the end of their noses. As ER's who have the special gene that allowed us to figure out how to put our own money away, its natural that we feel that if we could only have had more money to put away, the better. From that, transference to the rest of the population that they'd have done the same.

You know, the same 'rest of the population' thats got 2 people living in a 4000 square foot house with 4 cars, 25k in credit card debt, 500k in mortgage debt, 150k in car debt, with next to nothing set aside for their retirement.

And yep, conservatives dont like these sorts of programs at all. Its 'paddle your own canoe'...err...kayak.
 
Actually, another big factor that isn't counted in simple calculations is the disability and survivor insurance components. That will reduce the retirement benefit as some of the funds go to that.


Yes....yes, missed that too. O.K., it's official, that was a lame calculation. I am humbly chastened :D
 
It seems like most of us here--left or right or center--support having social security and medicare. Is it not a small step to extend medicare (or some variation) to all, not just the elderly? To appeal to the conservatives, it would help small businesses that restrict their hiring in part because of insurance costs or the inability to obtain insurance for their group. It would promote hiring of older workers because the employer wouldn't have the worry that the older worker would result in higher health insurance costs.
 
I agree with Martha and perhaps go one step beyond her.

In an advanced industrial state, one of the functions of government is to ensure that its people have access to at least a minimal level of medical care and a minimal "social safety net" for their old age. Western Europe is clearly ahead of us in this regard, and yes, they're economy does not function as well as ours, but people seems to enjoy their lives a lot more. I think that is in part because they don't have to worry about health care or having to eat cat food in old age -- and those six weeks vacations to start with are a boon too.

Politically, I'm so middle-of-the-road that it's boring, but at some point, I think we have to realize that people do matter. (Meanwhile, not trusting the government, I've been a good little capitalist and accumulated enough to live well once I do FIRE - and I'm really looking forward to that day.)

Best wishes to all.

Playaman
 
As much as we enjoy slamming our officials in Washington, our government does reflect our values. What works in Europe, I believe, would not work here, at least not yet. Europeans live in smaller homes, often don't own more than one car, and spend lots of time in public areas (Parks, resturants etc.) with their families. The sense of "one big community" etc. is much stronger there. Here in America, we want our ranch estate, even if it's on 1/8 acre, with 8 foot fences all around. We drive 50k cars in mind numbing traffic and skip vacations for years, meanwhile Euro's take 8 week vacations in their 3 cylinder roller skates. Until the things we value change, I don't see a major change in our safety net.
 
Western Europe is clearly ahead of us in this regard, and yes, they're economy does not function as well as ours,
As to their economic performance relative to ours, in at least one very important way they are functioning better. We have a current account deficit which every year adds about 4-5% to what we owe the rest of the world. Not Europe, they pretty much live within their means. Markets seem to agree- look at the performance of the Euro vs. the Greenback over the past few years. (The years during which our current account deficit truly achieved Gargantuan status.

Maybe Europe has a better idea than we do all around. Kinder and gentler, and works better too.

Mikey
 
As much as we enjoy slamming our officials in Washington, our government does reflect our values.  What works in Europe, I believe, would not work here, at least not yet.  Europeans live in smaller homes, often don't own more than one car, and spend lots of time in public areas (Parks, resturants etc.) with their families.  The sense of "one big community" etc. is much stronger there.  Here in America, we want our ranch estate, even if it's on 1/8 acre, with 8 foot fences all around.  We drive 50k cars in mind numbing traffic and skip vacations for years, meanwhile Euro's take 8 week vacations in their 3 cylinder roller skates.  Until the things we value change, I don't see a major change in our safety net.

Well, from what you have said, either Americans psychotically and inexplicably prefer to live in remote stockades away from their fellows, are we are perhaps afraid that public spaces are not very safe and nurturing for us? Some spaces are attractive enough, but due to crime may be dangerous. Other locales actually have no public spaces worthy of the name. How many of us even live in neighborhoods with sidewalks? And if we do, how confident are we about walking down them at night? (Not that Europe doesn't have this problem too.)

Mikey
 
As much as we enjoy slamming our officials in Washington, our government does reflect our values.  What works in Europe, I believe, would not work here, at least not yet.  Europeans live in smaller homes, often don't own more than one car, and spend lots of time in public areas (Parks, resturants etc.) with their families.  The sense of "one big community" etc. is much stronger there.  Here in America, we want our ranch estate, even if it's on 1/8 acre, with 8 foot fences all around.  We drive 50k cars in mind numbing traffic and skip vacations for years, meanwhile Euro's take 8 week vacations in their 3 cylinder roller skates.  Until the things we value change, I don't see a major change in our safety net.
Laurencill:

Because you're a young guy, I'll try and answer you as if you were my son, (or possibly grandson).
Unless you believe in reincarnation, you have only one shot.
Live your own life, and don't worry about what's appropriate for Europe, or the U.S.
My wife and I raised two children, and played all the games required during that period.

I decided at age 49 that I'd had enough.
We live on the rim of a canyon that has a great view of the Sierras, and within walking distance of great trout streams.
We both couldn't care a big rats--- what is appropriate for Americans or for folks living in Europe.
As I stated before, (advice I have given to my kids), live your own life, and try to avoid being caught up with any Madison Ave. generated life style.
Be a man, my son.
 
Jarhead,
You are the man. I knew the Marines had more value than just charging up a hill. That post was sage advice.
 
ex-Jarhead,

I 100% agree. I was only making an semi-educated observation as to the vast cultural differences between our countries and speculating as to the differences in our respective governments policy priorities. We've (mostly) extricated ourselves from Madison avenue, in '02 we bought a brand new SUV and after the glow wore off, and the payments lived on, we realised what kind of suckers we are! Since then LBYM has been our mantra. I do worry too much, though. This board has been great for me, because most people, young or old, that I've met are stuck in these traps, it's refreshing to "meet" so many people who have stepped out of that game.
 
Oh yeah, and ex-Jarhead, from now on I'm referring to you as "Pop". :D

......and if you were 1st Seargant or Master Seargant, I'll call you "Top Pop!" :D :D
 
Oh yeah, and ex-Jarhead, from now on I'm referring to you as "Pop".  :D

......and if you were 1st Seargant or Master Seargant, I'll call you "Top Pop!"  :D :D

Lawrencewill: As I tell my wife, you can call me anything you want, just don't call me late for dinner. :)
Re-read my post, and will have to admit that I came on a little strong.
Your above comment shows you have a good sense of humor, which we all need.
By the way, the fact that you knew a lst. Sargeant was reffered to as "top", indicates you've either been in military, or someone close to you has.
I was a long way from being "top". Was in the "crotch"
at the tail end of Korean War for a 4 year enlistment.
Take care, Jarhead
 
LOL! No, I haven't served, but I work for a defense contractor, my boss is ex-Air Force, and I've got ex Marines and Soldiers all around me. One guy I have the greatest respect for was 1st Seargant for a large base at one point, which other soldiers explained to me meant he basically ran things, and had the CO sign off. One person I work with is a full bird in the Corp., and he made it very clear in how high a regard good officers hold their NCO's.

I didn't think you came on too strong at all, I love humor and I'm always willing to take my turn in the barrel. :D
 
Hello Rok Re. "distort and lie..........not our finest hour"
that is politics man, maybe the most ignoble profession yet invented and that includes the "oldest profession".
In fact, wasn't there a book about congress,
"House of Whores"? "Academy of Whores"?
Something like that.

Slightly off topic. The other day I was in a waiting room and saw an article on retirement. Of course, I read it and in the article they "exploded the myth" that you would need less income after you retired. They claimed
most people actually spend more. What a crock!
Everyone has an opinion. Trouble is that most of them are wrong.

JG
 
A broker I know, A.G. Edwards who is 69 and still works told me if he had invested his SS money from day one he would have 4 million in cash now. Not sure if he's telling me the truth but it's just what he told me.
 
MRGALT2U said:
Slightly off topic. The other day I was in a waiting room and saw an article on retirement. Of course, I read it and in the article they "exploded the myth" that you would need less income after you retired. They claimed
most people actually spend more. What a crock!
Everyone has an opinion. Trouble is that most of them are wrong

I had to go into a doctors office about 2 years ago for a physical. He had some investment rags that were at least a couple of years old. Apparently worldcom and enron were "must own stocks", and although they were expensive they were "a bargain at any price" because they had "nearly unlimited upside!!!". "Super-ultra blue chips!".

Geez, and I missed out on them because I always thought they were too expensive.

I did own a little enron a few days before they declared bankruptcy when I bought a bunch at somethink like 35 or 50c a share and dumped it shortly thereafter for almost a buck a share on the basis of some rumblings that they might escape bankruptcy. Made a good chunk of change on that little roll of the dice...
 
spike said:
A broker I know, A.G. Edwards who is 69 and still works told me if he had invested his SS money from day one he would have 4 million in cash now. Not sure if he's telling me the truth but it's just what he told me.
If he could have saved $375 a month for the past 47 working years assuming an annual return of 9.50%, yes he would have $4 mil by now.
 
Doubt he ever invested that much at the start, but he was pretty savy in the stock market. Me my timing has been off since day one, I do better in Vegas, not much but better. :eek:
 
Back
Top Bottom