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.
In the abstract... I and most others will consider it a noble goal.
Such is why we have SS and Medicare and Sec8 and all the other help programs for the needy
both tax based by way of government or charity based.
So if I understand you correctly, you are saying that perspectives that seek to undercut, curtail or otherwise discount those measures are things you oppose.
I agree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRational
The sanctimonious tone used is probably your least appealing trait...
and the one that keeps the larger message from getting through.
We'll have to agree to disagree about that. And given that you don't attack self-centered tone of the opposing viewpoint with double the vigor, I have to question the veracity of your appraisal.
they don't have to be the same people statistically. only the way they dilute the efforts of those who save counts.
it is like a life expectancy stat, life insurers can tell you how many people will die but they can't tell you who and each year it is different people..
I think she is differentiating those who have never saved from those who have saved at some point. Some would consider that differentiation important when discussing the fact that 31% have no retirement savings. Some tried and loss what they had saved and others perhaps never did. We have many stories of folks losing their retirement nest egg in their fifties for many reasons. One group would probably bring on more support from others. Some had a nest egg retired and out lived their savings which is a point you always stress.
Your particular notion of "morality" aside...
Is this intention meant to be taken in the abstract or in the specific?
In the abstract... I and most others will consider it a noble goal.
Such is why we have SS and Medicare and Sec8 and all the other help programs for the needy
both tax based by way of government or charity based.
In the specific... it's absurd and probably counterproductive to the basic goal to expect
anyone to consider the needs of another ahead of let alone a higher priority than their own needs.
That's even before considering the situations where their need is self inflicted.
.
Your above point is perhaps core to why there is a growing movement that we need to change our economic system from one that is self centered and personal interest based to one that is collective. Those folks believe corporations should exist to serve what they consider to be the greater good and not shareholders. I am not agreeing or disagreeing with the notion just putting it on the table as it has considerable retirement readiness implications. As a side to this it has been noted in the media the absence of negative comments by public pension funds about Corporate Tax Inversions. Hmmm don't our pension funds have heavy investments in the private sector and count on corporate returns to support their investment returns? Wow what should I prioritize? Government tax receipts to support government spending including the social net or corporate profits to support pension funds return so they don't have a shortfall and impact my cash flow? Me or Us?
Your above point is perhaps core to why there is a growing movement
that we need to change our economic system from one that is self centered
and personal interest based to one that is collective.
In the broadest of terms... they would be correct to look for such. They need it.
Even a "baby with the bathwater" sort of solution is better for them than the current situation.
The irony for EVERYONE is that the underlying system isn't bad or the problem.
The problem is the effect of the secondary level of rules and policies on the lives
of the lower economic portion. They're schizophrenic, absurd, and counterproductive.
Almost entirely.
Most are based in good intention but most are clearly counterproductive
and worse too many are based in something other than political/economic reasoning.
---
We bich and moan about illegals but we don't prosecute being illegal or hiring illegals.
Let alone prosecute at the FELONY level.
We bich and moan about unemployment and the poor sucking down public services...
but what have we done over the last 40 years about reducing their birth rates?
I could go on.
The bottom line and common theme?
You can't have it both ways.
In the broadest of terms... they would be correct to look for such. They need it.
Even a "baby with the bathwater" sort of solution is better for them than the current situation.
The irony for EVERYONE is that the underlying system isn't bad or the problem.
The problem is the effect of the secondary level of rules and policies on the lives
of the lower economic portion. They're schizophrenic, absurd, and counterproductive.
Almost entirely.
Most are based in good intention but most are clearly counterproductive
and worse too many are based in something other than political/economic reasoning.
---
We bich and moan about illegals but we don't prosecute being illegal or hiring illegals.
Let alone prosecute at the FELONY level.
We bich and moan about unemployment and the poor sucking down public services...
but what have we done over the last 40 years about reducing their birth rates?
I could go on.
The bottom line and common theme?
You can't have it both ways.
Great post. Every time you make something easier in which de-incentives the motivation and reward for one's self, you will have a very large portion try to take advantage of that--expecting others to foot the bill for them. At some point, you'll have too many people in the cart with not enough horses to pull it.
Humanity is about respect and caring, and giving each other a hand here and there when needed, but it's not about rewarding those who decide to make poor choices for an extended period of time. Humanity is about taking responsibility and not relying on others to take care of you...otherwise you're just as selfish and thoughtless as the people you (not "you," MrRational, specifically) complain about it. As you said...you can''t have it both ways. This for me, is the biggest problem with our country. We moved from having a system and culture of providing a safety net to help you get back on your feet to a system and culture of entitlement.
And at some point, and we've already reach this point, you can't financially afford such a system. Then what happens when the well runs completely dry?
When we give up on the humanity of those who behave inhumane, then we're essentially ratifying their corruption.
I don't. There have been dozens of childish remarks, a number of them aimed directly at me personally, which I have ignored, and will continue to ignore. You are correct that some posters are so juvenile that dignifying their comments with even the slightest consideration is silly, but evidently you and I have a different threshold for who's comments we'll afford respect and who's comments we'll not. And that's okay.
I learned a long time ago that there is no point in trying to get someone you're having an argument with to admit that you've won the argument. The point of arguing on the Internet (if there could be such a thing) is to make clear to those who aren't sure just how morally corrupt or otherwise perverse are excessively self-motivated perspectives.
To be fair, there are a number of comments posted by folks who fundamentally disagree with Lenora, which are irrelevant because the comments are either so incredibly childish or so incredibly beholden to abject self-centeredness that the only people who would give such comments credence are two who are afflicted by that malady themselves. Lenora and I may disagree about where that line of irrelevancy gets drawn, but there is surely a line.
Perhaps I should post that quote of yours in response to every inane reply posted to a comment I post. Many people do indeed have much to learn about caring about the needs of others and about how the needs of others is, on a moral basis, higher in priority in society than their own personal comfort and luxury.
Great post. Every time you make something easier in which de-incentives the motivation and reward for one's self, you will have a very large portion try to take advantage of that--expecting others to foot the bill for them. At some point, you'll have too many people in the cart with not enough horses to pull it.
Humanity is about respect and caring, and giving each other a hand here and there when needed, but it's not about rewarding those who decide to make poor choices for an extended period of time. Humanity is about taking responsibility and not relying on others to take care of you...otherwise you're just as selfish and thoughtless as the people you (not "you," MrRational, specifically) complain about it. As you said...you can''t have it both ways. This for me, is the biggest problem with our country. We moved from having a system and culture of providing a safety net to help you get back on your feet to a system and culture of entitlement.
AKA: a generational way of life. It needs to stop!
However, in keeping with the subject matter of the OP, they do have a retirement system and It-Я-Us.
Last edited by Curmudgeon; 09-06-2014 at 11:03 AM..
as life teaches us ,folks find a way to live no matter what their situation.
a study by t.rowe of recent retirees who have accounts there showed that 52% are only able to draw 41-80% of their pre-retirement income with the middle ground being only 66% yet these retirees say wih some adusting they are doing fine.
of course if you have no savings there are no answers and you should have zero expectaions that because you reached some age in life that there is a god given right to stop having to work. eventually you will reach that stage where you can't work and public assistance may be your only potential resource other than family.
social security was never designed to be one's sole support. it is only insurance that covers what was supposed to be a portion of your income.
retirement is a point in life where instead of worrking for your money your money works for you so you can stop working for it. kind of like being an owner of a company vs a worker .
but if you fail to achieve the point of having your money work for you then you have to continue to find a way to still work for your money.
Last edited by mathjak107; 09-28-2014 at 04:06 AM..
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.
