Are americans going to have to work into their old age like the Japanese?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ Jun 8 2007, 03:15 PM) [snapback]458257[/snapback]</div>

IMO Americans, on average, are going to have to work until they die. Those who have not saved and are saddled with debt can't afford to stop working. Others continue to work (or start working again) as a hobby. In my office there are people who were forced out or retired and returned as temps partly to fill the day and partly for the friends left behind.

 

Most people....like a virgin on prom night...are F*&ked!

The key is to be ahead of the game and not be like them. Learn from others mistakes.

 

it's really going to be a 2 class sysytem- haves and havenots at retirement age-
one of my friends is talking of returning to the ukraine because it is too expensive to stay in the big apple.
other folks have obscenely big pension checks.......(I live in NJ where we have double dipping...)

I am working like a slave now in hope of landing in the middle, but will probably have to work til 66 !!!!

let's write our congressmen and senators that they need to join the system!!!! their current pension system is on the obscene side. If they had to live on ss like common folk... the system would be changed!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ Jun 8 2007, 03:15 PM) [snapback]458257[/snapback]</div>

The Japanese have three problems. First, they have very low birth rates so they have a decreasing population. Second, they are a very homogeneous and ethnocentric culture and therefore find it unacceptable in allow immigrants into the country to fill the labor gap. Third, they are a very sexist society that still believes that a woman's place in the the home. Once a women is married, typically she quits the workforce. It is considered shameful for the husband and his family for the wife to work because it implies that he cannot care for his family. Since a Japanese women is an old maid by the time she's 25, most women work less than 10 years.

BTW, I worked for a Japanese company for the last 5 years so these are first hand accounts that a readily admitted by my Japanese co-workers.

 

I'm hoping I won't have to work until I die as we are long lived in my family and I don't think anyone is going to want a 90 year old employed in any capacity.

I'll probably retire at 58. I have a pension. I've also been contributing to my TSA since I was 30.

So I've been saving.

But I also have debt. I have a mortgage that won't be paid off until I'm 80. My Prius won't be paid off until April 2009. And I'll probalby buy the next gen Prius that has LiIon or better batteries and is a plug in when that becomes available. I'd also like to redo my driveway with a grid that allows me to plant grass, put solar panels on the roof and put in an ondemand water heater. That will require a home equity loan.

I have plenty of debt due to my second masters that I won't complete until Dec. of 2007.

But if I complete my National Board Certification this year that will pay $20,000.

Hopefully the second masters will allow me to get another job after I retire. I'll probably work that for 10-15 years. So after I retire from *that* job I'll have two pensions and still have my TSA. (And why not have two pensions? If I have two careers?)

Now my pensions and TSA will have to provide me with income for 25-30 years. There is no predicting what inflation, Global Warming and the lack of oil is going to do to the future economy over 30 years. So....yes, I may be working for the rest of my life just to avoid having to live in a cardboard box and eat from dumpsters. But I'm lucky. San Diego is pretty temperate year round.

Of course the alternative is to run for public office. Then I'm sure to be able to retire on my pension and not have to work. And I'll have great medical also!

 

I plan to retire by 60, same thing for my husband. We both have state retirement plans, plus have been contributing to IRA/403b as long as we've been working. Our house should be paid off by the time we retire, probably a bit earlier than that.

And then if we're lucky, add social security into the mix. If not, oh well - we're not relying on it.

We are both teachers, and I have a photography business on the side. The photo business allows us to put a lot into savings each month plus pay down our car loans in about 10 months rather than the 5 years we finance them for.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(pyccku @ Jun 10 2007, 09:32 AM) [snapback]459117[/snapback]</div>

You hit the nail on the head. It is really up to what type of person you are. A realist would never ever depend on social security for their retirement needs - it should be looked upon as an added bonus if its still solvent when we retire not if we retire.

More importantly, in its current form it is absolutely useless - the return on investment is dismal and I am of the belief that a part of it should be privatized like they do in lots of other industrialized countries. Here, its like a ponzi scheme - paying for current liabilities - not being socked away for tomorrow's - and the number of actively working people that need to pay in to support those who are retired is moving more and more away from the safe number of 5 or 6 workers towards 2-3 workers per retire - a looooming disaster. And we keep increasing the benefits and those who are eligable ---- a needs test is going to arrive any year now --- me personally - i would be happy to get out every penny i put in WITHOUT interest - doesn't it suck that the govt keeps every dollar you put in if you dont use them all up - say you die after collecting social security for only one month - the balance of what you put in stays with uncle sam and does not go to your heirs -- funny in a sick way - and then they have their additional death taxes, and estate taxes --

For those that want the socialist bend to life and want to depend on the govt for their well being and retirement - this is what you get. And the question i ask - do you still want them to be in charge of your health care?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(barbaram @ Jun 9 2007, 08:33 PM) [snapback]458990[/snapback]</div>

A few misconceptions here
1. Congress has been paying into Social Security since the 80's
2. Their pension system, while quite generous, is separate from Social Security, just like most people.
3. Social Security was never designed to be a sole source of income, just a supplement. You are supposed to save for your retirement.

And I'd add the following:
4. If you want a great pension, work for the government (teacher, cop, firefighter, etc). They somehow get a great deal.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Spoid @ Jun 11 2007, 03:27 PM) [snapback]459703[/snapback]</div>

Just don't expect to get paid much. My mother is a teacher, I have 2 uncles and a cousin that are cops. The retirement may be OK but you aren't doing the job for the money.

For example, in TN, teachers in my county start at $28K per year. That's for a job that requires a 4 year college education. That compares to about $35K per year for an assembly line worker in the factory I work in, a job that takes 1 day of training. Like I said, they're not doing it for the money!




<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Jun 11 2007, 02:27 PM) [snapback]459667[/snapback]</div>

You may have forgotten but the estate tax has been repealed for a few years.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Jun 11 2007, 02:27 PM) [snapback]459667[/snapback]</div>

Yes, then we would have better health care like in those "other industrialized countries".

 

The happiest people I know don't retire because they love their work.

They seem to live a long time, too.

In fact, one is dying of cancer. His work is keeping him alive. He has one project he is living to finish. He just turned 85. It's inspiring and humbling.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jhinton @ Jun 11 2007, 05:23 PM) [snapback]459722[/snapback]</div>

Better health care :lol:

An article on England trying to get the AVERAGE waiting time for a referral DOWN to 18 weeks:
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2007/0...es_toll_in.html
How long do currently wait for an MRI or cancer treatment or a stress test.


And an article from Scotland on their national health care that showed 462,000 (READ IT AND WEEP) scots have died as a RESULT of their national health care over the past 29 years. That would translate into 27 MILLION Americans being offed by the governmentove the same time period!
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2007/0..._death_tol.html

JEEEEZZZZZ - the govt can even deliver the mail, handle our retirement accounts, and now you want them to handle your health care - brilliant! and tell me - you think your medical records are going to be safe and secure in Wash DC?

Show me ONE nationalized system in a country that even comes close to approximating our diverse, hetergenious population that works.......... waiting............. still waiting..................... and then tell me if you make it available to just citizens or everyone living here no matter how long- one day or decades? And then who will decide who gets the organ transplants - citizens or non citizens - and the other expensive medical technologies.... and then tell me how you are going to pay for it all, and then tell me how you are going to decide R&D allocations for medical technologies and medications - who and where and when - and medical malpractice - what is going to become of that - going to make it go away - cant sue the State or can you? And procedures for med mal - the same or different.

I do not think most people including hillary and b. hussein obama have any clue of the enormity of the health care system here. you here about 45 million uninsured - they still get health care - i know i give it to them -- what of the 255 million insured americans?

the system aint perfect, but its a whole lot better than it will be if the ding dongs in DC run it. Again, when they can deliver the mail close to perfectly then if you want, let people opt into a system where if they want the govt can control their health care decisions. Me - i will control my own decisions as to my health care and my families.

 

We need hybrid healthcare!
Expand Medicare to provide basic care and preventative care to all citizens. Then use the existing insurance to provide additional insurance to those who can afford it for things like cancer treatment. This should cut insurance rates in half (and double medicare taxes). Which effectively forces everyone to have at least minimal coverage. Sort of like car insurance. Have low income and a crappy car? Just get basic insurance. Have a nice car? Get full comprehensive insurance.
We have to do something about the rising cost of medical insurance, as it is killing the competitiveness of US companies. My company of 6 employees has to pay $6500 a month for medical insurance alone!

This coverage could also then provide malpractice coverage and minimize the need for the horribly expensive medical malpractice insurance, reducing the pay needed for doctors (to pay for that), and reducing medical costs. It could eliminate a substantial amount of administration. Basic coverage for all leaves little room for denying claims, which insurance companies do all the time, causing huge legal costs, anger, etc. Paper trails on records would be a lot shorter. There are many reasons this is a good idea, as well as some bad ones. but the US has been in cost cutting mode for 5 years in every industry except the medical industry. There time has come too.

The people opposed to doing this are the same people profiting hugely from the bloated system (or the politicians they support to keep it this way).