Are You Saving Towards Retirement?

Don't panic. Just take one day at a time and do the best you can like the rest of us middle classers. Govt. does not care about the working class.

 

I never "EXPECTED" the gov't, or anyone, to take care of me. THIS is the problem. When did we un-learn taking care of yourself. Even when SS was conceived, it was a safety net....no one ever thought people would DEPEND on it to support them.

I think BUSH is trying to MAKE us realize that and start to become "private" with our long term finances. He is doomed because too many people now, and in the future, see SS as a pension and the only thing keeping them from the poor house (and for many, that's true) Don't get me started on what party, overe the decades, fostered that opinion.

Ye reap what ye sow.

 

My retirement plan involves prison. Wait until I run out of money, then commit some white-collar crime that gets decent Federal prison time but not breaking rocks or something. Any other plan is useless, since the economy will suck so bad...

 

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I AGREE!!!!

 

You are in LE. You are guaranteed a pension. Unfortunately, many people do not have a pension plan. I've talked to several employers that don't even match an employees 401K plan, and offer no pension. It would be nice if everyone could take care of themselves in old age. The truth is SS for many older people is all they have.

What would a golden spoon guy like Bush know about not having? Anyone who is born into money could never have a clue what it's like not to have. Many women on the island of Palm Beach, FL spend $4-$500/wk. having their nails done.

I do feel that something needs to be done about the sad state of affairs our country is in. Like you said, let's not bother to blame party's.

 

One reason I took the job in Florida was because they had an employee SEPIRA, and they put another 15% of your salary into it at the end of each year! Well, I got it ONE time, and then the tech stocks took a dump, lost half of it, and we've never gotten it since (5 years now). They have NO 401K plan, no pension, no nothing. I have a pension from 17 years with my previous employer which will *hopefully* be there when I need it.

 

My personal opinion is that spending ANY money on a financial advisor is a waste of money. From what I've read, having your investments actively managed usually doesn't get you higher returns, and if they do, your premium is eaten up in commission fees. Frequently, they get paid for trades, not performance.

I'm a fan of Index funds, very low expense ratios and lots of choices to diversify. Excellent long term returns.

 

I currently receive a military pension on top of the full time job I hold. A portion of this pension goes back into IRAs. In addition, my current employer matches my inputs to our 401K.

Like some, I will not rely on anyone else to take care of us in our old age. SS, if still around, will just be a nice little bonus....but not relied on.

 

Well, you answered your own question. My 401(k) is safer (though not completely safe, of course) than Enron because of diversity. The problem for many in that debacle was that they had bet the farm on their own company, Enron.

 

+ 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000

THIS MAN, knows what he's talking!

The ONLY time financial people come into play, IMHO, is when you have so much damn money, you actually don't have (or want) the time to manage it.

 

My employer has a 100% match up to 10%! You can believe I have NEVER contributed less than 10%!!

 

Well, with Enron, the employees were practically required to invest their entire 401ks in the company stock while the weasels at the top were selling their stock like crazy. Stock that they got as compensation. The employees were victims.

 

It is fascinating to see the evolution of AMericans relationship with their govt. At first it was mainly for protection and it has evolved into trying to be everything to everyone:daycare, insurance, income, safety, land use, the list goes on and on.

 

I never saved for retirement. But my dad did. Only, he loved his work too much to retire. So I'm living his retirement (as are 3 others). This is actually how he wanted it. He wanted to work until the end, and he wanted us to enjoy the money. He loved making money, but had no interest in spending it. He did give away a bundle during his lifetime, though. He enjoyed giving away money. Keeping busy is no problem for me. I travel, I sleep, I do volunteer work.

As far as mutual funds and diversification, READ THE PROSPECTUS, and make sure you have funds in diverse sectors, or if your savings are small, find a truely diversified fund. They are out there. Don't put all your eggs in one basket, and don't take anyone else's advice on what fund(s) or stock(s) to buy. Do your own homework and diversify.

 

I didn't say they weren't. I know this and agree with you 100%. I can see why you thought I meant that it was their fault, though. Thankfully, thanks to Enron, I can avoid a similar fate with my company and their stock!

 

A major part of the "problem" with social security is that the government keeps borrowing it and leaving IOUs. That's the only real reason why it's underfunded. If they had left it alone and it was just used for social security benefits that we paid in to and continue to pay in to with every single paycheck, social security funds would be in the trillions. But no, government borrows it all the time while their private pensions are very generous and very well protected. If government people had to depend on social security, there wouldn't be any problems with it.

 

I don't either. What I expect is to get back what I paid in to the system. It's not charity, or the government taking care of me.

Regardless of which one started it, they both perpetuate it. Once they are in agreement over the status quo, they are both at fault.

 

My folks taught me the “old fashioned†way to plan for retirement: never have debt, don’t buy crap you don’t need, set aside at least 25% of your net income, etc. Oh, and *never* trust “get rich quick†schemes, as you’re a schmuck if you do.

My folks skimped and saved for the first half of their lives, investing their income into real property, as they ran their small heavy construction company. They made out quite well, and were semi-retired by their mid 50’s. They officially retired at 65, discovered they had nothing to do, and became very involved with Senior Citizen issues.

My Mom especially was very involved with a few Senior Citizen organizations, volunteering at nursing homes and assisting older folks with tax planning issues. This kept her very busy and happy, right up until she passed away this December.

My Dad was involved with my Mom in the same circles, but he also kept an active interest in new construction techniques. It was his idea for me to build an energy-efficient home in the ‘burbs here around 7 years ago, and more recently to build an Insulated Concrete Form home at my hobby farm. The death of my Mom really hit him hard, but I think he’s bouncing back.

A lot of folks somehow assume that Social Security or CPP here in Canada will be this magic replacement for their work income. That’s a lie, you’re lucky if you get 45% of your work income when you retire.

More disturbing to me is the fact so many folks are getting so deeply in debt. Realistically they will never get out of it, and will be in some form of indentured servitude to a finance company or Visa et al for the rest of their natural lives. That’s insane.

I have seen a very bad attitude among folks younger than about 45: they figure they can goof off, get deeply in debt, and work later. No, you can’t. Your prime working years – for mental and physical activity – is from about 16-50. The whole point of busting your hump while younger is to slow down and goof off when older.

Or end up a Door Greeter at Wally World.

As far as saving towards retirement, in theory I could punch out right now in my early 40’s and not worry about the workforce garbage anymore. I just wouldn’t know what to do with my time, I’d probably go bonkers – worse than I am right now – and probably become Evil, or at least Sinister.

 

I didn't think that you thought that it was their fault, no. I was just clarifying that point. When the company I worked for began offering 401ks in the beginning, they didn't require any major investment in the company's stock, thankfully. The company I work for now, I invest a small percentage of the gross to the company stock because I believe that it's a good investment. I can't say for sure how I would have reacted if I'd worked for Enron and they told me I had to invest it all in company stock but I would have been suspicious.

 

To both agree with the above posts as well as take a different slant on the subject...The topic is a good and worrysome one. However, I view anything the Heritage Foundation puts out with extreme scepticism as they are so one sided. Furthermore, no one ever brings up the elephant in the closet, Social Security should be means tested. That is, one would always get back their contributions, but after some income floor you would no longer be eligable until and if your income dropped below that floor. I have very rich clients now in their 80's whose combined SS contributions were less than $10,000 total, but between husband and wife now collect about $30,000 in SS annually on top of their $90,000 Retirement income. I have other less elderly retirees also whose retirement incomes are around $100,000 and while they collect less social security, I believe it should be means tested as well.

Back to the topic at hand, in the end I believe you can rely on no one but yourself for your quality of living in your retirement years, so either eat beans now or dog food later, but plan ahead. Still, no matter how well you plan ahead, investments can go sour or be pillaged, and given that the age of death keeps rising, it still seems like a crap shoot. Can you say 'rapture'?