Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We have a crises coming. Too many people will be old, and very few of them have anything saved to pay for when they can no longer work. My estimate is that less than half of people my age (mid 50s) have any significant savings or other retirement funding available. It may well be less than 10% have significant savings or other retirement funding sources. An awful lot of people I know have nothing at all avaualbel for retirement.
Social security cannot pay enough to keep them alive and there will not be enough people working compared to the numbers who are too old to work and have no money saved.
The government is not going to simply allow these people to starve, but the government simply does not have money to pay for their old age. There is one pocket of money available to resolve this crises. The 401K funds and other investments of those who saved for retirement. Given the option of letting the masses just starve to death, or simply killing them off, or finding a way to tax/take 401K and other retirement investments and redistribute it so the non-savers do not starve to death. It seems pretty obvious to me which the government will choose.
Sure the people who saved will still likely be better off than the non-savers, but the great hopes of deferred or non taxed income are not going to materialize. The government will have no other choice, it will re-distribute a portion of your 401K or other retirement funding.
People deny this is possible. It cannot happen (because they really really really do not want it to be possible, and therefore deem it impossible) however when asked where else the money will come from, they simply repeat that it is impossible. The law does not permit it (and of course laws never change). So apparently, their answer is the government will simply allow the other people to die.
If you think this is incorrect, then where do you think the money is going to come from to support all the masses of soon to be elderly people with no retirement whatsoever?
Honestly, I think we'll be getting off easy if this is the worst that happens. I truly hope I am proven wrong.
Things are about to change in ways most of us would never have believed, and I for one fear for the well being of my children and grandchildren.
I fear for my own well being. I don't think we'll have to wait as long as the future of your grandchildren for some unprecedented ugliness to play out.
Last edited by mysticaltyger; 02-19-2019 at 02:57 AM..
how the hell can the govt take 401k money? That is unconstitutional and theft of private property.
The government has already been doing countless unconstitutional things over the last few generations and the pace has only been speeding up since September 11, 2001.
Not sure about 401Ks specifically, but I believe we will have some derivative of Cyprus-style bail-ins in the future. Bet the people of Cyprus never thought it would happen......
Pretty much no one wants to believe these things can happen--until they do. The people who warn about the possibility are usually early, sometimes by years or even decades--so they're ignored.
At this point, probably the best thing you can do is take what you think is the wisest course of action for yourself and those closest to you. The bad omens are already there for those who want to see them. For those who don't see what's happening, nothing you can say will convince them.
of course the flip side is , when it comes to investing , always thinking " this time is different " and planning around "different " has been the most expensive , costliest words in our dictionary .
we can win the lottery too ,,, it is always possible , but planning around it and dwelling on it would likely be a waste of time and effort
Social security cannot pay enough to keep them alive
You'd be surprised at how many old folks can live on social security checks and very little savings. They might not be cruising to the Bahamas or enjoying the glorious gilded walking paths of Del Boca Vista but they aren't dying hungry in the streets either. This country has far more resources and excesses than you give it credit for, old folks dying in waves due to starvation isn't going to happen for economic reasons any time in any of our lifetimes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldjensens
Given the option of letting the masses just starve to death, or simply killing them off, or finding a way to tax/take 401K and other retirement investments and redistribute it so the non-savers do not starve to death.
Are retirees who were non-savers current'y starving to death? I doubt if I go look up some statistics on mortality for senior citizens in the United States will I find "starvation" represented well among the usual suspects cancer, hearth failure, etc. I'm not sure why you think we're about to have some pivot where people who haven't saved for retirement will no longer be able to eat.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger
The people who warn about the possibility are usually early, sometimes by years or even decades--so they're ignored.
You might entertain the possibility that they're ignored because their logic is faulty.
The government has already been doing countless unconstitutional things over the last few generations and the pace has only been speeding up since September 11, 2001.
Yes, but property rights are actually getting stronger. For reference, in recent decades many states have moved to require a criminal conviction before taking property in civil asset forfeiture, even when not forced to do so by any federal courts. There is a nationwide movement to that effect as well. I see no sign that private property rights are being weakened in any grand sense, even though some state and local laws will try to chip away at the edges.
You'd be surprised at how many old folks can live on social security checks and very little savings. They might not be cruising to the Bahamas or enjoying the glorious gilded walking paths of Del Boca Vista but they aren't dying hungry in the streets either. This country has far more resources and excesses than you give it credit for, old folks dying in waves due to starvation isn't going to happen for economic reasons any time in any of our lifetimes.
Are retirees who were non-savers current'y starving to death? I doubt if I go look up some statistics on mortality for senior citizens in the United States will I find "starvation" represented well among the usual suspects cancer, hearth failure, etc. I'm not sure why you think we're about to have some pivot where people who haven't saved for retirement will no longer be able to eat.
You might entertain the possibility that they're ignored because their logic is faulty.
there you go again ruining perfectly good story lines with facts... on c-d we are never supposed to let facts get in the way of good stories . i know , i admit i am guilty of it too .
People forget how spoiled we are today. When social security was implemented in the 1930's, life expectancy was only around 60 years old. The idea of retiring and living on social security for multiple decades is relatively new. I'm not sure we should expect to be able to live a comfortable lifestyle for any length of time on SS alone.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
