U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-10-2014, 07:55 PM
 
Location: In my mind
288 posts, read 167,542 times
Reputation: 797

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP View Post
---覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧
Everything in life is a balance. While i didn't do everything in life i wanted i balanced it out with the future.

Now that i am semiretired at 61 with some bucks saved i am sooooo glad i planned it this way. We will actually be living a better lifestyle now that we are not raising a family.

Being relatively healthy and in good shape we have some fabulous trips coming up..
We also saved enough to have relatively stress free retirement and not have to sweat every unexpected expense.

Life can be pretty miserable in retirement when you have no money and no choices in life
Bada Bing[/quote]

YEAH FOR YOU!!!!

I have to admit for a single person with no children left @ home I am doing much better than my siblings. I was the ant to their grasshopper (as my sister says). If I have money problems now it is for not staying w/in budget or overspending for something I probably don't need.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-10-2014, 09:43 PM
 
4,456 posts, read 3,708,653 times
Reputation: 3109
Re:...'ant to their grasshopper'....

A great Disney production btw on a 'Silly Symphonies' dvd. Not sure it is still available though. I'd say it should be in er every financial planning forum ...entertaining, simple and makes the point!...nobody ever needs to spend thousands for a financial guru if they have those insects on the financial case...;-)...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-10-2014, 11:04 PM
 
1 posts, read 790 times
Reputation: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Never2L8 View Post
True, and if on top of that your retirement vehicles were gutted by the recession, you are toast.

My retirement investments got a double whammy: First by the Gulf oil spill (the majority of it was in BP, which before Deepwater was $106/share and paying a handsome dividend four times a year; it bottomed out at $29/share and they suspended dividends entirely for almost 3 years afterward -- the highest it's ever crawled back up to has been about $54/share just this year and now with the Russian sanctions it's down in the mid-40s) and then by the recession in 08. Which just goes to show that no matter how much you have, it might not be enough if the 'right' combination of wrong things happen.

Maybe that's the whole point of the $1Mil articles: In order to save "enough", one has to save many times MORE than what would be "enough".
When was BP ever $106?

$77.99 on 10/31/07 is the highest I can see on the 10 year chart.

Reality check.....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-10-2014, 11:47 PM
 
2,000 posts, read 1,190,936 times
Reputation: 2280
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevek64 View Post
It's obvious we live in a victim mentality society today where personal responsibility somehow got lost in the weeds somewhere for many. Long term planning ahead for many seems to end at what will I make for dinner 2 hours from now.



It's a choice people. Make minimum wage/not enough money? Better yourself. Go to college. Learn a trade. Even if it's a class or 2 in the evening while your working.

The river of De-nial is long as they say. And if one wants to save nothing/work their entire life as their goal, more power to them. But many of us don't feel sorry for you or really care for that matter when they complain about the situation they find themselves in when they had every opportunity to take a different path. We make our own bed/our own choices in life and must live with what arises from them.

And please, above all else, don't ask other responsible people to make up for your poor life decisions.
How does someone plan for the future and save money when they don't even earn enough money to pay for their basic living expenses?
How does someone 'better themselves' via college or trade school without money?
Even if they get the money, what do they do when the college or trade school does not produce a higher paying job (don't forget to account for the debt service if the money is borrowed)?

How does failure to do improbable or impossible translate into accusations of poor life decisions?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-10-2014, 11:53 PM
 
2,000 posts, read 1,190,936 times
Reputation: 2280
This idea that only the well to do should have children is really twisted. Hypothetically, if this policy were to somehow be put into action it would be disastrous. It would create a nightmare scenario where a tiny majority (the new young) would be forced to support and produce for the vast majority (the aging population). In a sense we already have seen the fruits of such a plan in modern day Japan and to a lesser extent, the USA. Imagine if the population demographic was, let's say, 75% worse in terms of young vs. old. Epic disaster.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-11-2014, 02:30 AM
 
71,737 posts, read 71,853,273 times
Reputation: 49294
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysgenic View Post
How does someone plan for the future and save money when they don't even earn enough money to pay for their basic living expenses?
How does someone 'better themselves' via college or trade school without money?
Even if they get the money, what do they do when the college or trade school does not produce a higher paying job (don't forget to account for the debt service if the money is borrowed)?

How does failure to do improbable or impossible translate into accusations of poor life decisions?
there is no answer other then take a group of people and throw them into identical situations. there will always be those who find a way while the rest just find an excuse.

some will use their creativity to find ways of earning more , others will make sure they get those better jobs instead of drifting like a cork in water to wherever life pulls them.

Last edited by mathjak107; 08-11-2014 at 02:41 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-11-2014, 03:16 AM
bUU
 
Location: Georgia
11,887 posts, read 8,670,935 times
Reputation: 8415
Quote:
Originally Posted by s1alker View Post
It don't help that pensions are becoming a thing of the past. 401ks are only good for those who make 100k+ a year or more and can funnel a lot of money into it. The biggest issue is that people are living longer than ever and could easily have a 30+ year retirement.
You've hit on several elements. In the same way that "401ks are only good for those who make 100k+ a year or more", pensions are only good for - well - no businesses whatsoever. So essentially there's a gap between what's good for people and what's good for businesses, precisely the type of gap that government is supposed to bridge. The other thing you mention is another example of this: People becoming no longer valuable to businesses as employees, due to the advancing infirmity of age. The solutions - the bridges - are not easy, but people who think that the job of government is supposed to be easy (or non-existent) are forgetting or ignoring basic principles of legitimate regard for workers and for the aged.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWillys View Post
Is this an attempt at a credible argument about the thread topic? Please expound on why people shouldn't have a family? Are you saying people that work at Walmart shouldn't have kids?
This goes back to the rationalizations I alluded to above, i.e., a general lack of for other people as human beings, equally deserving of worth and dignity. That kind of argument falls apart when the foundation for consideration is expanded past petty concerns, like money, to more substantive concerns, like human beings.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP View Post
There are many affluent folks who purposefully only had two kids who resent being taxed to support those who had six they can't afford.
We are not affluent, but have no children, and yet don't "resent" being taxed to address society's obligation to show basic human decency toward children of parents who had more than two. For folks with such resentments, it would be appropriate to live in a different society from ours, one where contraception is a fundamental ethic of society, taught in schools and churches from a young age in the way our society's institutions teach our society's ethics regarding family, capitalism and patriotism. If folks really believe that our nation's ethics should parallel what you're saying here, that poor people shouldn't have children that the poor's declining economic prospects may indicate that they cannot "afford", why aren't the supporters of such perspectives standing up and presenting that as a solution, with honor and integrity, instead of only voicing such attitudes from the anonymity of the fringe or hidden behind online forum handles? Probably because they recognize that such perspectives would be considered thoroughly disreputable due to the callous and condescending nature.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-11-2014, 06:07 AM
 
29,789 posts, read 34,889,516 times
Reputation: 11715
bUU, you can moralize all you want but reality is reality and there is a large chunk of people who don't want to pay for other peoples decisions. They can and do flee high tax states with good social programs for low tax states with not so good social programs. For what ever reason many in this forum have fled higher taxes for lower taxes. It is reality and one that plays out in the voting booth with resulting fiscal policy at the local, state and federal level. We could agree as much as we want or disagree as much as we want but I am staking my well being on a read of the tea leaves and not what I might want to see happen. Heck I admit it I transplanted from a Democratic Liberal State with great social programs to a conservative now Republican state that didn't expand Medicaid and taxes were a reason. I am guilty as are many others in this forum. Regardless of intent we have taken our taxable income from one state to another and one needy population to another not being as well served. So enjoy your willingness to pay taxes but understand and observe many others don't and that's my point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-11-2014, 06:13 AM
 
29,789 posts, read 34,889,516 times
Reputation: 11715
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysgenic View Post
This idea that only the well to do should have children is really twisted. Hypothetically, if this policy were to somehow be put into action it would be disastrous. It would create a nightmare scenario where a tiny majority (the new young) would be forced to support and produce for the vast majority (the aging population). In a sense we already have seen the fruits of such a plan in modern day Japan and to a lesser extent, the USA. Imagine if the population demographic was, let's say, 75% worse in terms of young vs. old. Epic disaster.
It is not a twisted idea, but an unfortunate reality that things cost money and kids are expensive over the long haul and if you can't afford to adequately provide for them what will the quality of their life be. Note a large number of states have lousy social service programs (including not expanding Medicaid) and being poor in them is a path down a dead end street in many cases. So what would you tell the poor in those states about having kids? Unfortunately we are witnessing more folks becoming poor and your scenario of future tax payers is not playing out so well as the needy are growing at a faster pace.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-11-2014, 06:41 AM
mlb
 
Location: North Monterey County
3,194 posts, read 2,861,612 times
Reputation: 4891
We are not affluent either - nor do we have children..... but if you are not paying for their education (public schools) you will pay for their incarceration (jail).

Which do you prefer?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

ゥ 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top