Seniors stealing from the young

[PatsFan2003]

If we would stop taking money out of SS for things other than VALID retirement the system would be fine.

I agree 1000%. Almost criminal.

I am also fine with give me my money back and let me make my own investments..

Yeah maybe you but it's easy to lose money investing.

[TheSeyMonsta]

Yeah maybe you but it's easy to lose money investing.

Stock market ALWAYS goes up over time.

I made a BOAT LOAD last year on my 401k and stock investments....

[ctc]

It's like I'm talking to a stone wall. I never once said the current system is fiscally sound. Of course things have to change due to the bulge the Baby Boomers have created.

Why can't you understand my point, a point I have made in every post I've put up in your thread? Seniors are not stealing anythigng, they are receving from a system they paid into for a lifetime.

I understand your point. But when i see the people of which you speak refer to the fact that they have paid into the system and thus entitled to receive everything, to receive far in excess to what they have paid in and completely reject the notion that they ought to receive less (perhaps something more in line with their contribution) or pay more,then yes i will characterize it as stealing.

[PatsFan2003]

I don't characterize it as stealing. Those were the promises that were made at the time, the contract so to speak with the government In many cases these are people who've worked all their lives and probably put a lot into the system when they were productive. Whether that balances out is probably a moot point.

Like SeyMonsta claimed. If most of the money put into the system at the time was used to fund and maintain the system we'd probably be a hell of lot better off then we are now.

Unfortunately at this time I think some more realistic expectatons might need to be set.

[Darrell Green Fan]

I've always wondered how the SSA decides what the benefit amount is. I mean I get it, the more you paid in the more you get up to the max. But how did they decide on those numbers? And are we absolutely sure that when compound interest is factored in those people are really getting way more back then they put in? How are we so sure?

[Darrell Green Fan]

As for some of the other posts here about needing millions I posted in another thread how shocked I was to read that only 1 in 5 people in their 50's have $250,000 or more saved for retirement. 1 in 5. So don't tell me a million is the number for most because it is not even close.

[PatsFan2003]

As for some of the other posts here about needing millions I posted in another thread how shocked I was to read that only 1 in 5 people in their 50's have $250,000 or more saved for retirement. 1 in 5. So don't tell me a million is the number for most because it is not even close.

You can definitely get by on far less but you'll have to live a lot differently as a result. If you want to live close to what you were used to before you retired you'll probably need more money.

[ForWhoForWhat?]

I'm not blaming anyone,

thread title says otherwise

[ForWhoForWhat?]

With 2 spouses doing it? Yes, you're almost there.

If you invested 5k per year of your salary from ages 22-27 and averaged a 12% ROI over that time until retirement you'd have over $2 million. Which would be more money than if you started at age 29 and put in 5k per year until age 65. You'd actually have more money at retirement under the first plan.

I don't think it's that easy even for people investing earlier then that. Many people aren't making that much in their 20's and 30's.

Pats fan is right. I got hooked up with an investor at age 22, and opened a Roth IRA. At least i have something, but i wasn't able to contribute then what it would take to make that big pay day Q speaks of. I tried. i made less than 20k my first job, in 2001.

[The Q]

Pats fan is right. I got hooked up with an investor at age 22, and opened a Roth IRA. At least i have something, but i wasn't able to contribute then what it would take to make that big pay day Q speaks of. I tried. i made less than 20k my first job, in 2001.

It's not a payday. It's simple finance.

The rules of money are finite. They really don't change over time.

But at least you had someone do that for you.

[Ruzious]

Three words for ya: Invest in property.

And a few years later find a good bankruptcy lawyer.

[lechrus2]

As for some of the other posts here about needing millions I posted in another thread how shocked I was to read that only 1 in 5 people in their 50's have $250,000 or more saved for retirement. 1 in 5. So don't tell me a million is the number for most because it is not even close.

You're surprised by only 1 in 5? I'm not at all surprised. In fact, I was surprised even 1 in 5 had achieved that. I'd have guessed 1 in 20 perhaps, upside at 1 in 10.

By 50's are you including people 59? Well, perhaps 1 in 5 if you consider their home investment.

[Darrell Green Fan]

It's not a payday. It's simple finance.

The rules of money are finite. They really don't change over time.

But at least you had someone do that for you.

We have all seen the figures showing how much further you are ahead if you begin earlier. And maybe your example was just for shock effect or whatever. We are just pointing out that $5,000 a year for someone that young just isn't going to happen. Especially if they are thinking about owning a home, which is probably a better use of their money at that age.


lech: Others, possibly you were one of them, posted that they were surprised that I was surprised at the figure. I guess it's just been drummed into my head that you need close to a million or you simply can not retire. Now I know that is simply not true but to read that less than 20% have less than 25% of that figure so late in life was surprising to me. Maybe it should not have been.

The point is people are retiring every day with far far less than a million dollars. So it obviously can be done.

[PatsFan2003]

It's not a payday. It's simple finance.

The rules of money are finite. They really don't change over time.

But at least you had someone do that for you.

The key is that the earlier you start the better off you'll be in the long run. That's very true. But my point that sometimes life gets in the way and, no, it wasn't all on beer. It was a longer time ago but it was a while before I made 20k a year.

[trev]

The truth is that the senior generations went out for a huge dinner and basically just left the tip and walked out on the bill.

They elected government after government (of both stripes) that basically promised everything and paid for nothing. They paid a lot of taxes but it was for the Cold War and everything else. They didn't pay anything for the actual cost of the programs the Govt. initiated. The money was spent on roads, schools, the Military and every other government program that has ever been. The money was never allocated to pay for entitlements. If it had been you would have been paying 50% income taxes for the last 40 years. It's a classic Ponzi scheme that will collapse like they all do. It is an absolute mathematical certainty.