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.
Ask the greedy investor and his friend the filthy rich politician who sold out America and gave the foreigner the jobs and which undercut the work so the exercise tax does not get paid which allow foreign goods in the Country and below the market value for the Country of America can do .......See we need the exercise taxes for the workers as the investors can still make a profit with this tax so the hypocrisy in economics will not work and the economy will look good but will never recover to the good times now
Ask the greedy investor and his friend the filthy rich politician who sold out America and gave the foreigner the jobs and which undercut the work so the exercise tax does not get paid which allow foreign goods in the Country and below the market value for the Country of America can do .......See we need the exercise taxes for the workers as the investors can still make a profit with this tax so the hypocrisy in economics will not work and the economy will look good but will never recover to the good times now
Add to that mix the millions who adapted to the new economy and are prospering as greedy investors, perhaps not greedy but adaptive Americans. I am curious if you have figured out that the secret is a hunger for investing is their a reason you are on the sideline? Many funds can be opened with $100.
Ask the greedy investor and his friend the filthy rich politician who sold out America and gave the foreigner the jobs and which undercut the work so the exercise tax does not get paid which allow foreign goods in the Country and below the market value for the Country of America can do .......See we need the exercise taxes for the workers as the investors can still make a profit with this tax so the hypocrisy in economics will not work and the economy will look good but will never recover to the good times now
"Exercise taxes"?
Sounds to me like you really know a lot about this.
If you are a low wage worker, you should plan on spending at least 10 years, any 10 years, working in North Dakota out of a shelter and saving every dollar of that for a retirement investment account except cheap groceries
The rest of your life work the $20-hour job and don't tiuch that investment account at all..pretend you never had it
Then retire and withdraw from there and live like you did before
SS is not a retirement plan; its a supplement to a plan.. Low wage workers either stay employed or they end up on welfare type programs just like those younger who don't work. In past most retired and lived with relatives or children.mna of the rich I the world stay working at same until they die or get too ill to work.
*Thank you*!
SS was never intended nor ever could be a sole source of income for retirement or for a surviving spouse and children. Rather it was meant to be part of a three legged stool consisting of also savings/investments and pensions. Together all three were meant to allow some sort of security.
For reasons one is not going to stir-up right now SS has become the sole and or majority source of income for large numbers of seniors and widows/widowers. This is where the problems start fore unless one is getting the maximum benefit (and even then) it can prove very difficult to survive on SS alone.
To their credit many European nations do things differently. That is seniors do receive a *pension* but there is also a socially acceptable "floor" that is deemed no one should fall below. Between national health schemes, housing assistance and so forth seniors there have less stress on their checks than many do here in the USA. Retirement homes in France: Housing and care accommodation for the elderly - The Connexion
Everything you say is true. I just want to add that the average Social Security monthly retirement benefit is somewhere around $1200. And before someone says that a low wage worker will not attain that average level, let me point out that low wage earners get back a much higher percentage of their wages in benefits than high wage earners. And the average is also skewed downward by people like me who did not work very many years in jobs covered by Social Security; my monthly benefit is about $150, of which about $100 is withheld to pay the Medicare Part B premium.
That's the problem with "average". The extremes are leveled out but that doesn't mean that the average applies to many. A more useful figure would be the median SS retirement benefit, which would be the point where half recipients get above and half below. All I found on line was averages no median numbers.
A distribution chart/graph would be an even better illustration of how many retirees get how much. I didn't even bother looking for that.
Then the living expenses are too high. Expenses can always be lowered.
No matter what your hourly wage is, you should be saving 10%.
Whether it's $1.25 an hour or $50 an hour.
Spoken like somebody who's never had to support oneself and possibly others on 25 cents more than minimum wage. In most states, statistics show that minimum wage earners would have to work 50-60 hours a week just to afford average rents.
Part of the problem for many is 44% of those receiving social security opted to start taking it at age 62 which, with a couple exceptions, his a huge mistake.
1) If you have a terminal illness take whatever you can, you deserve it and
2) Some people, especially in this economic downturn, lost jobs at age 58, went through all their retirement savings barely making it to age 62 when they felt they had to take it or live on nothing.
But to just take it when you really don't need it, because it is there, is a real stupid mistake in my opinion.
Taking it early is one of the biggest reasons some recipients have low amounts.
Looking at the chart on the bottom if someone can simply (easier said than done for some) work to age 70 they can dearly double their monthly check from $1,500 to to $2,640 by simply working eight more years.
Excellent points.
I decided to work until FRA just for this reason even though so many of my friends and co-workers bolted out the door at 62. I did the math, and retiring at 66 rather than 62 would put between $10-12k extra in my pocket between SS and pension.
This is an especially important consideration for women who may be in good paying jobs now but who perhaps worked part-time or in low paying jobs early in their working lives, and it's especially important for single women facing retirement. SS takes your best 35 years. By working 4 extra years, my considerably higher salary will cancel out 4 much lower earning years, so my SS will increase 40-45% rather than simply 25% by my FRA.
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.
