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 04-18-2015, 09:35 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles area
14,018 posts, read 17,732,288 times
Reputation: 32304

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fran66 View Post
Well, then Linda_D and Escort Rider -- you're right, of course. I take it back. We should never teach the kids anything about money, employment and retirement. Let's just keep things the way they are. Because, after all, there are too many kids from dysfunctional families who will probably (not definitely, but just probably) not benefit from this kind of education.

Plus, I admit -- the government bears no responsibility for its older citizens, who don't need a livable income in old age. (Elizabeth Warren deemed a livable minimum wage at $22.50/hr.)

And then the next generation will be on C-D complaining about how it's absolutely none of their fault that they are living in poverty in old age.

And the next generation.

And the next generation.



What I wrote has nothing to do with discussion of what should be included in the curriculum for secondary schools. Personally I am in favor of teaching financial literacy. MOST kids will profit from it.

My point was a totally different one, namely that a certain subset of students come from severely dysfunctional homes, and of those, a certain further subset will not be able to properly absorb or profit from ANY education to which they are exposed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-18-2015, 11:36 PM
 
2,421 posts, read 3,723,073 times
Reputation: 3455
Well goolllllly. LIfe is unfair. Here we are again arguing on who all are undeserving. I wish we could send some bean counters out there and survey all the underfunded seniors and tell us how many of them are irresponsible, alcoholics and druggies vs. low income earners.

The problem with any government program is the cut off number. If you are unfortunate to be just slightly above it, there is no question those with just a little less are going to be much better off than you will be.

Problem is, we have cut offs, and sometimes that creates a very unfair situation. What can be done about this? Some might say "let them eat cake", and feel better that life is fairer for them. Others would just say, "life is sometimes not fair and sometimes there are no good answers."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2015, 11:42 PM
 
33,046 posts, read 22,048,755 times
Reputation: 8970
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post
All answered many times before, ad infinitum, ad nauseum in all too many threads.

As always, excuses. Nothing but "poor pitiful me" excuses for the passive dependents, lazy and uninspired.

One answer fits all. Get a freaking job!

??? I have a (crappy) job and I have a (non-crappy) skill. Unfortunately, the skill works only in the context of self-employment, which isn't feasible in the context of the resident volatile angry drunk. HE is the one who should get a freaking job.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2015, 11:51 PM
 
33,046 posts, read 22,048,755 times
Reputation: 8970
Quote:
Originally Posted by modhatter View Post
Well goolllllly. LIfe is unfair. Here we are again arguing on who all are undeserving. I wish we could send some bean counters out there and survey all the underfunded seniors and tell us how many of them are irresponsible, alcoholics and druggies vs. low income earners.

The problem with any government program is the cut off number. If you are unfortunate to be just slightly above it, there is no question those with just a little less are going to be much better off than you will be.

Problem is, we have cut offs, and sometimes that creates a very unfair situation. What can be done about this? Some might say "let them eat cake", and feel better that life is fairer for them. Others would just say, "life is sometimes not fair and sometimes there are no good answers."

The obvious and reasonable solution is that assistance programs should have phaseouts rather than cliffs.

Off the top of my head, the only program I can think of with an unavoidable cliff is Medicaid. Even so, a person who reaches the income cliff where they lose Medicaid does become eligible for substantial Obamacare subsidies, so that cliff usually is not catastrophic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2015, 01:37 AM
 
71,516 posts, read 71,694,121 times
Reputation: 49088
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt View Post
??? I have a (crappy) job and I have a (non-crappy) skill. Unfortunately, the skill works only in the context of self-employment, which isn't feasible in the context of the resident volatile angry drunk. HE is the one who should get a freaking job.
always someone elses fault.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2015, 07:46 AM
 
2,158 posts, read 1,264,158 times
Reputation: 2480
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loveswater_outdoors View Post
I think what everyone is missing is that those of us under 40, and really under 30 are not going to have much if any assistance when we turn 65. The SS will be depleted due to it being bankrupted in 2033 as has been shown by several economists Why is Social Security running out of money?, and I for one haven't been able to save due to student loan costs and scarcity of jobs combined with low wages and inflation and cost of living being out of control. The baby boomers are going to consume it all, and there will be nothing left.
Does the government "borrow," from Social Security? If so, that is a REAL problem........................
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2015, 08:34 AM
 
5,227 posts, read 2,314,071 times
Reputation: 3667
This is good info from the OP about options people engage to make in their retirement years. Some of the comments sound like baby boomers still with the anguish about what others get and "who" gets something. Rather than focusing on their own thing.

A more Interestingly reasonable response
Quote:
Well goolllllly. LIfe is unfair. Here we are again arguing on who all are undeserving.
As one poster said, by 2033 there may be nothing for those who are young today.

It might be wise instead of boomers tripping on each other, to push their congressional people to promote the building of more full function facilities for the retired and aged, by giving incentives to builder to focus on this type of construction designs. The aged population is expanding every day, the wait list are longer and the need is greater.
If the congressional people think in broader terms, rather than trying to "cut everything" and focus on how to make things more functionally efficient and cost effective for the retired and aged, it might find means and methods to be a better over-all system. Its amazing what can be devised and developed for the retired and aged and what power the retired and aged can have when they focus on a consensus for progress in this category, rather than bickering about what the next person gets. There are agencies which can help support the advocacy, if people seek them out and their participating help guide them to develop better efficiency.

Baby Boomers have to learn better to think progressively and let go of the anguish they have come to embrace about so many things and so many people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2015, 09:28 AM
 
8,838 posts, read 5,126,299 times
Reputation: 10096
SS going bankrupt does not mean "there will be nothing left". I don't understand why this myth continues to be repeated as truth. Benefits will be reduced, but will continue to be paid from current payroll taxes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2015, 09:33 AM
 
71,516 posts, read 71,694,121 times
Reputation: 49088
with only a shortfall of 30% 20 years out you can be sure that will be filled one way or another.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2015, 09:38 AM
 
12,705 posts, read 9,967,478 times
Reputation: 9515
Quote:
Originally Posted by yellowsnow View Post

There are some drawbacks. He can never have more than X dollars in the bank so if he wants to save for something, he has to save cash.
This is fraudulent hiding of assets.
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
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

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