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 partially disagree. Those stuck in minimum wage will never be able to save. Eventually health problems occur, housing in many places is overpriced and so is transit because in most situations a car is necessary. Not to mention unemployed periods of time, etc.
Those in the lower class are forced to work until their bodies fail them, then they might as well be sent over to the "hall of the useless" as Ayn Rand put it in Anthem. (funny that capitalism can produce the same things that she feared communism would)
Those in the middle and upper classes have no one to blame but themselves.
See my last post. ANYONE can do this. Have a budget first, then stick to it.
Health issues? There are options for that, but in today's world, hardly anyone will need serious health care until they are of age. That is, assuming the job won't affect your health long-term.
Like I say, people demand entitlement, and that means entitlement in every aspect. It's sickening. Make YOUR situation better for yourself, not demand a handout just because you were stupid.
If one has the economic wherewithal, they can retire whenever they want.
In a perfect world that may be correct. With the economic downfall we are experiencing it is a double whammy! You should count your lucky blessings if you haven't been adversely affected with your 401K's and other benefits, or job loss, or some other issue like a MAJOR health issue, etc.
I don't live beyond my means and yet...I am suffering. Not YOUR fault...NOT MINE...**** happens. I still shouldn't be punished for living up to my bargain. That is not ENTITLEMENT...that is what I was promised when I entered the system years ago. I haven't gone out and SPENT my money needlessly...how dare anyone to presume that I have.
AND...YES...there has been an increase in age over the years, that however is exactly my point! No, granny shouldn't suffer either. With each increase there should have been an acceptance level for those who have "EARNED" (not been given) what they were promised YEARS ago. It should be staggered. I agree it needs an overhaul, but some form of staggered employment compensation needs to be factored in.
There is a difference between what one has EARNED and ENTITLEMENT...
Those today believe they should be GIVEN something for nothing...that is NOT what I am saying. I don't want any more than what I EARNED. Thank you very much.
A nation of spenders that have, on average, less than $50K saved for retirement is what we have turned into.
The "gotta have it now" mentality threw savings to the wayside. SS was never meant to be the sole source of retirement..never.
Now the boomers are nearing retirement and have mountains of debt and very little savings.
It's their fault they didn't save..not "the rich" that took it from them. They willingly gave it away to have the latest gadget, biggest and newest house, enroll their kids in the best camps and generally live above their means. Every interest payment they made went to the bankers and other holders of their debt.
The problem today is that there are fewer and fewer people that have the ability to retire on their own dime. That is an inherent problem with transferring wealth to the upper "class".
Bob, I agree to a point, but don't see that as the only issue.
I see people spending a lot of money on things that they don't need. For example, 46" tvs, several cars, mcmansions, etc. They have kids that they can't afford. Why are we buying 8 year olds $70 tennis shoes?
We all need to live within our means.
I just turned down a job that would be a 20k increase because to move to the area and have to come up with rent, furnishings, etc. would not be cost effective to me. I would be able to retire 2 years earlier, but so what... All in all, I have enough. I'll still be retiring at 63 when full SS kicks in for my age group at 65. The SS is icing on the cake of my life. I've been planning and saving since I could afford to do so.
<on edit> Those who live on minimum wage will not be able to retire easily. But then I'm going to have to ask a question, do you have kids? If so, you make your own additional problems.
- keep raising the age every few years
- allow people to opt out and not have to pay the SS tax
- abolish Social Security entirely
I personally prefer the 2nd option. Allow those who don't want to pay for other people's retirement to opt out ... but don't force them to continue paying the SS tax.
I am 22 years old. I lose over $1,500/year for something that WILL be GONE by the time I am 50 much less 70. Let me opt out and keep MY money. If you can't save for yourself then that's your problem, not mine.
- keep raising the age every few years
- allow people to opt out and not have to pay the SS tax
- abolish Social Security entirely
I personally prefer the 2nd option. Allow those who don't want to pay for other people's retirement to opt out ... but don't force them to continue paying the SS tax.
I am 22 years old. I lose over $1,500/year for something that WILL be GONE by the time I am 50 much less 70. Let me opt out and keep MY money. If you can't save for yourself then that's your problem, not mine.
Good point and I'm with you for those of you starting out. Believe me...you will be dead before you ever see any of that money back unless your lineage tends to live to 100 and by then, with the increasing alzheimer's you won't even know you received it, if you DO live long enough to get it. You should be able to opt out and save THAT money for retirement in some other way.
- keep raising the age every few years
- allow people to opt out and not have to pay the SS tax
- abolish Social Security entirely
I personally prefer the 2nd option. Allow those who don't want to pay for other people's retirement to opt out ... but don't force them to continue paying the SS tax.
I am 22 years old. I lose over $1,500/year for something that WILL be GONE by the time I am 50 much less 70. Let me opt out and keep MY money. If you can't save for yourself then that's your problem, not mine.
- keep raising the age every few years
- allow people to opt out and not have to pay the SS tax
- abolish Social Security entirely
I personally prefer the 2nd option. Allow those who don't want to pay for other people's retirement to opt out ... but don't force them to continue paying the SS tax.
I am 22 years old. I lose over $1,500/year for something that WILL be GONE by the time I am 50 much less 70. Let me opt out and keep MY money. If you can't save for yourself then that's your problem, not mine.
So when it's time to retire and you have no money and are forced to live on the streets, we'll be paying your care. We being taxpayers.
You want to see people living on the streets, saving that $50 or so a month is not going to happen on their own.
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.
