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.
I was thinking it, you had the nerve to say it. There's an indisputable link between income, health, healthcare and longevity.
The other point is the progressive schedule of SS. A larger percentage of income is replaced for low income earners. I believe a low income earner would receive 90% of the first $9200 in annual income and 32% of income over that as payment. Not suggesting that's enough to live on comfortably but with a part time job it can be done.
Many are doing it
Quote:
Originally Posted by Q44
School taxes are hardly the major expense involved with raising kids. There's a few other costs involved.
Personally, even in retirement I won't be too put off by school taxes. I look at good school systems as a component of a good community.
School taxes I have paid were always a fraction of property taxes, if you can not afford your property taxes, then your not living within your means.
Quote:
Originally Posted by slyfox2
But you have to know where you are going. You need a good expat community or you will feel very lonely, and you need to make arrangement for health care. Its not a great as it sounds because life is really not just about money.
I have known a few expats, and when I was working I knew a lot more who planned to expat.
I can see where it could be an issue if you did not speak the local language. Those I have known who did it, seemed to fit right in nicely.
I have 3 Facebook friends that retired in Napoli. When I worked with them, they loved living there, and now they still sound as if they love living there.
How sad all the subsequent posts are sob stories and explanation of failure
Stop it grow up stand up and fight for your future
What a bunch of Just World Fallacy B.S. Lots of people who grow up, stand up, and fight don't make it. It's a post-hoc fallacy to assume that everyone who tries makes it, that everyone who is deserving receives their reward. There is no karma, no fairness, no empathy in our economic system.
As it stands, the long-term unemployment rate for workers in their 50s and 60s is very high. These are the same people that, 10 or 20 years ago, you would have praised for their hard work... because they were employed. Well, the number of job openings is much lower, and our U6 unemployment rate is well over 12%. Workers who become unemployed after the age of 55 tend to stay permanently unemployed, which is also creating another job crisis: people who DO have jobs and are over 55 are staying in the workforce (and in their current job) for fear of not being able to work again if they needed to. Retirement ages are rising faster than post-65 life expectancy, which is hurting younger workers.
For those who DID lose their job during the recession and ARE older, things are awful. I have two uncles who were never unemployed their whole lives who, after applying for hundreds of jobs, can't even get a job at Wal-Mart. One moved across the country; still no job. For workers like them, if they had savings, they are drawing them down to nothing with only SS and Medicare as buoys in the long-run.
What a bunch of Just World Fallacy B.S. Lots of people who grow up, stand up, and fight don't make it. It's a post-hoc fallacy to assume that everyone who tries makes it, that everyone who is deserving receives their reward. There is no karma, no fairness, no empathy in our economic system.
As it stands, the long-term unemployment rate for workers in their 50s and 60s is very high. These are the same people that, 10 or 20 years ago, you would have praised for their hard work... because they were employed. Well, the number of job openings is much lower, and our U6 unemployment rate is well over 12%. Workers who become unemployed after the age of 55 tend to stay permanently unemployed, which is also creating another job crisis: people who DO have jobs and are over 55 are staying in the workforce (and in their current job) for fear of not being able to work again if they needed to. Retirement ages are rising faster than post-65 life expectancy, which is hurting younger workers.
For those who DID lose their job during the recession and ARE older, things are awful. I have two uncles who were never unemployed their whole lives who, after applying for hundreds of jobs, can't even get a job at Wal-Mart. One moved across the country; still no job. For workers like them, if they had savings, they are drawing them down to nothing with only SS and Medicare as buoys in the long-run.
not very good music friend. if i had allowed myself to think or talk like you do when i was in trouble i would have perished long ago.
Last edited by Huckleberry3911948; 04-20-2014 at 07:05 PM..
Low wage workers will actually have it better. Their expenses are lower to begin with, and Social Security replaces a higher percentage of their income. And for most, their benefits will not be subject to Federal, State, and even Social Security taxes. Say their benefit is 70% of their working wages. That's about equal when you figure it is tax free and there are no more commuting expenses to pay. The ones who have it worse are middle income who had no 401k option at work or could not find employment for several years before hitting the "magic" age of 62.
As mentioned previously here, I do think everybody should save at least 10% of their income, no matter how much or how little they earn.
I agree. 10% is actually more of a bare minimum, though. Saving at that rate, even if you invest pretty aggressively (100% stocks) means you're working into your mid to late 60s (if you can).
Bumping that percentage up to 15% shaves 8 years off the length of time you're required to work:
not very good music friend. if i had allowed myself to think or talk like you do when i was in trouble i would have perished long ago.
Pretending that the world is other than it is just ignores the plight of those who fail. Whether it makes "very good music" or not changes nothing. If it is true, it is true. It is our social responsibility to realize not everyone can make it even if they all try. To let those who fall through the cracks fall forever... would be monstrous.
What a bunch of Just World Fallacy B.S. Lots of people who grow up, stand up, and fight don't make it. It's a post-hoc fallacy to assume that everyone who tries makes it, that everyone who is deserving receives their reward. There is no karma, no fairness, no empathy in our economic system.
As it stands, the long-term unemployment rate for workers in their 50s and 60s is very high...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huckleberry3911948
not very good music friend. if i had allowed myself to think or talk like you do when i was in trouble i would have perished long ago.
Two seemingly opposite points of view, and yet I agree with both.
kwhitegocubs is correct: good hardworking people lost their jobs and were thrust into a lower economic status due to no fault of their own. They do not deserve the poorly hidden ridicule and contempt expressed by more successful people.
There are many legitimate reasons why some people are not "successful" despite having a good education, an exemplary work ethic, ambition and talent. Sometimes it is bad luck, being in the wrong place, a family crisis, health issues, and so on.
On the other hand Huckleberry could point to me as an example as one who had no choice but to fight, re-invent myself, and use every ounce of my creative imagination to get back into the job market (after being laid off in 2008) and save my properties. It may sound corny, but a role model for me was Scarlett O'Hara, who was determined to save Tara no matter what, and despite extraordinary set-backs.
I have a friend named Jerry who was laid off a decent paying position he had for something like 18 years. He was 59 at the time. After 3 years he couldn't find employment and had to collect SS much earlier than he wanted to. He had no choice, his Unemployment ran out and he was raiding his life savings. Honestly - I know this because we are very good buddies for many years - the guy was only prepared to go so far when it came to re-employment - literally and figuratively - he steadfastly refused to commute more than 15 miles from his home, and wouldn't cast a very wide net when it came to occupations much different than what he was accustomed to. I begged him to take a job he was offered but was 25 miles away. Myself, I am doing something completely different than what I did for the first 36 years of my career, and it is something that has nothing to do with my college degree ... yet I love it and I'm in one of best jobs I ever had!
Rather than judge folks for the economic class they belong to, I think we should get back on topic and share ideas to help people retire comfortably regardless of their incomes.
As mentioned previously here, I do think everybody should save at least 10% of their income, no matter how much or how little they earn.
I wish this could be reality. But, for someone very low income, not realistic.
Let's take an example. I'll use the town of Redding, where I live, as an example.
Let's say someone is living minimum wage. In CA that's $8.00/hour. x 40 hours = $320/week x 52 weeks = $16,640/year gross, or $1387/mo. gross.
I don't know how to figure out what their fed and state income taxes would be. I know there would probably be the earned income credit, so I'll just use the gross income for purposes of this little exercise.
So, Income per mo: $1387.00
I took an average of 5 - 1 bdrm apts and the average rent is $620.
So, $1387 - $620 = $767.
Let's say they have no car payment and own the same car I do: 1992 Toyota Corolla, that's paid for. I have liability only on the car and my monthly car insurance is roughly $60.
So, $767 - $60 = $707.
Now, where do they work? Right here in Redding? I don't drive very many miles, and usually just around Redding, and I budget one tank of gas per month. But, I bet someone working would need at least 2 tanks.
One tank for me is $35, so figure $70/month for gas.
$707 - $70 = $637.
Renter's Insurance for me is $25.
$637 - $25 = $612.
AT&T Internet for me is $28.
$612 - $28 = $584.
My electric bill has been averaging about $35/month for a very tiny studio. Let's figure this guy's one bedroom is at least 1/3 higher than mine. That would be $47.
$584 - $47 = $537.
How about Netflix? $8/month
$537 - $8 = $529.
He gets the Redding Searchlight newspaper with online edition and weekend paper (to get the coupons) for $10/month.
$529 - $10 = $519.
Groceries? At least $200.
$519 - $200 = $319.
Cell phone bill = $50 at least.
$319 - $50 = $269.
Even if we stop here and look at trying to save 10% of wages = $139.00
$269 - $139 savings = $130 left for...
Other utility costs (if pay for more than just electricity)? Medical insurance and co-pays? Entertainment (ha ha)? Pet costs? Pet insurance (I pay about $48/month pet insurance because I wouldn't have savings for major vet bill)? Car maintenance (my car battery is dying and will need to buy one next month, myself - probably $100)? AAA roadside membership? DMV registration (mine will be due next month, about $100)? Computer dies? Printer dies (this happened to me last month. Bought used one on Ebay, but still cost $80 with extended warranty - which means no more printer cost for 2 years)? Clothing? Shoes? Does the guy get cable TV (doubtful)?
And this is assuming there is no child or other dependent.
And assuming there are no loan payments.
And this is based on gross wages.
I can promise you that this person will always have something come up that will take away that savings. The car will need a new alternator, there will be a root canal with a 20% co-pay, the DMV registration bill will arrive, the AAA membership bill will arrive. He'll get a ticket for running that yellow light. It will always be something.
No matter how frugal this person is, saving 10% and keeping it in the bank, would be next to impossible.
Your example actually sounds like he might be able to make it. Cut the newspaper and the internet and reduce on groceries (a single person should be able to live on 100/ month for groceries), and you've got a good example of a frugal saver.
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.
