Europe has fallen behind America and the gap is growing

[billt460]

It is a fine line on which plan would be better. If your money is being controlled by someone else then you will have to follow their rules. Managing it yourself means that you are the boss.

It’s sad that many people in today’s society do not have the financial aptitude that they should.

As bad as the government is, it pains me to say that most people are better off having them forcefully take it from them through payroll deductions. Because if they don't, most will just spend it.

As is the saying. It's not what you make, but rather what you do with it after you make it. And Americans for the most part, aren't doing much.

https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna11098797

 

[alarmguy]

As bad as the government is, it pains me to say that most people are better off having them forcefully take it from them through payroll deductions. Because if they don't, most will just spend it.

As is the saying. It's not what you make, but rather what you do with it after you make it. And Americans for the most part, aren't doing much.

https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna11098797

You are correct. The problem lies as with any social program. It's starts out as a Supplement and like your post says, people start to count on it as income and cut back what they save.
Humans REALLY are no different than many rodents. Actually some rodents maybe more smart in surviving.
IF given something we will become dependent on it if it means we have to work less hard for food and shelter. It then gets to the point that we truly loose our independence and become dependents of the "state"(never works out well, no politics intended)

 

[PimTac]

As bad as the government is, it pains me to say that most people are better off having them forcefully take it from them through payroll deductions. Because if they don't, most will just spend it.

As is the saying. It's not what you make, but rather what you do with it after you make it. And Americans for the most part, aren't doing much.

https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna11098797

That could work if the government mandated that 10% of your pay woukd go into your own retirement account that would be portable wherever you work. The other 2.4% could go to a general fund to help those who cannot work due to physical disability.

This would be in addition to your own 401/403/IRA.

 

[buster]

As bad as the government is, it pains me to say that most people are better off having them forcefully take it from them through payroll deductions. Because if they don't, most will just spend it.

Right. And that's why we have it. Privatizing everything isn't always the answer.

 

[Bjornviken]

What is happening there right now is failed state 101. Anyone wondering what is failed state, should tune in. They will get quick tutorial.
The problem are 5,400 nuclear warheads.

They have been that many times, but still they seem to survive

 

[edyvw]

They have been that many times, but still they seem to survive

The question is: how does that survival looks like?

 

[fdcg27]

The question is: how does that survival looks like?

Maybe premature.
It now looks like Prigozhin has backed down and is leading his troops back to Ukraine.
OTOH, maybe he's proved his point and the Russian fans of regime change are now emboldened.

 

[Ahausheer]

This first line is a statement that the youth are not properly taught about our country, and I dont blame you. I say this sincerely, honest.

We are on a dangerous course. High School requirements should be the workings of the government, living in a free country and personal finance courses.

YOU are not supposed to be paid from the Social Security System to retire on, NEVER was and never will be. The average person in 1960 and 1970 lived to about 70 years old and only could collect full benefits at 66.6 years old. You now are expected to live to 80 years old with virtually no change of when you can collect. IN reality the new full retirement age using past history should be closer to 75. (but Im getting off subject)

You WERE and ARE supposed to save your own money to live out a life of not working.
The Social Security system was to supplement your savings and nothing more, life with Security that you would have some ADDITIONAL income to your savings and maybe help you not starve if you messed up. That is all, nothing more.

You are calling the kettle black and you don't even realize it. I would say the fact that 40% of older Americans' rely exclusively on SS, is an even more telling statement that it is in fact the older generation that was not taught properly about the country, and I actually do blame them. Not only were they not properly taught, they are not properly prepared, and quite frankly, it was easier to save 30-50 years ago. Me, I am 40 and live in Sweden and don't care all that much exactly how it works anymore, plus when I was younger and in the US I was always taught to never plan to expect anything from it. My comment was in reply to others on here who seemed to think they were going to be able to retire on it, so please don't take my comments as a representation of an entire younger generation of Americans'. That level is extrapolation is just inappropriate. Plus for someone who is concerned about education, you should know that the word ''don't'' is spelled with an apostrophe. Although, we do agree that the level of education in the US is appling, and is one reason why the US, in general, shows such poor results when it comes to test scores/education ranking when compared to just about all EU countries.

 

[brianl703]

Although, we do agree that the level of education in the US is appling, and is one reason why the US, in general, shows such poor results when it comes to test scores/education ranking when compared to just about all EU countries.

My dad's US education allowed him to retire with a retirement income of $120K a year.

My mother's German education (yes, she's German) allowed her to retire with...Social Security of $800 a month. (At least her house is paid for).

They divorced nearly 30 years ago, mother got half of my dad's 401K, and it magically "disappeared". She won't say what happened to it, but the divorce paperwork I found after dad passed away clearly shows what she got. (My suspicion is that she sold it all in 2008 when the market was down..an idiotic move).

When my dad passed away, she got survivor's benefits from him so now she gets $3000 a month in SS..which she still complains is not enough.

I really do wonder how well my mother would have fared had she never left Germany.

 

[Bjornviken]

The question is: how does that survival looks like?

can't predict future, but if we look at history, its not looking good

 

[edyvw]

can't predict future, but if we look at history, its not looking good

There is a saying: "Russians are always good at suffering."

 

[billt460]

Right. And that's why we have it. Privatizing everything isn't always the answer.

It's not a question of privatization. When you have a financially incompetent government "saving" for a populus that is in fact even more financially foolish than they are, that is not a healthy combination..... Except of course for them.

People are either good with money, or they're not. Most today aren't, because they simply spend too much of their income on foolish things that depreciate to nothing.

Today people have things to waste money on that were not available, "back in the day". Cell phones, computers, cars with as much expensive crap built into them as some airplanes. And on and on. Most could purchase much cheaper, but they all want, "the best of the best". So forget the $100.00 Motorola. They all want the $1,200.00 I-Phone 27.

They also move far more. Decades ago people bought a home and stayed put. And raised their families after they bought their home. Today they're moving all but constantly. Taking equity from one house, and buying a bigger, more expensive one.

The result is not only bigger mortgage payments and higher property taxes, but they also end up in their 60's starring at 20 years left on a 30 year mortgage. Had they stayed put, their home would have been be paid off. (Assuming they didn't borrow against it to buy more crap).

It's pretty hard to retire with a mortgage, car payments, and a slew of credit card debt....... And little to no savings. And yet that is where the bulk of the population is at financially today..... And it's getting worse, not better.

And the government LOVES people who are financially dependant on them. The more, the better. They are far easier to control. Having money gives people independence and power they wouldn't otherwise have.

So of course the government hates personal wealth, and wants nothing more than to tax it out of existence... "Paying their fair share", they like to call it. While giving handouts to, "those less fortunate". It's no different than the actual reason they love gun control so much.

Naturally all of this has nothing to do with money or guns. It's ALL about control..... Under the never ending disguise of, "for the common good". And the bulk of the people fall for it everytime, all the time.

 

[fdcg27]

WRT personal finance and retirement, it's really very simple.
Maintain employment throughout your working life and spend less than you make and you'll always have money. Retirment can then be at the time of your choosing and you'll have the resources to make all of those trips that you didn't have time for during your working life.
Leverage your lifestyle with debt on an ongoing basis and you'll never have any money and can look forward to the day that your health forces you to retire to a lifestyle of poverty, where your travels will extend no farther that the local grocery.

 

[PimTac]

It's not a question of privatization. When you have a financially incompetent government "saving" for a populus that is in fact even more financially foolish than they are, that is not a healthy combination..... Except of course for them.

People are either good with money, or they're not. Most today aren't, because they simply spend too much of their income on foolish things that depreciate to nothing.

Today people have things to waste money on that were not available, "back in the day". Cell phones, computers, cars with as much expensive crap built into them as some airplanes. And on and on. Most could purchase much cheaper, but they all want, "the best of the best". So forget the $100.00 Motorola. They all want the $1,200.00 I-Phone 27.

They also move far more. Decades ago people bought a home and stayed put. And raised their families after they bought their home. Today they're moving all but constantly. Taking equity from one house, and buying a bigger, more expensive one.

The result is not only bigger mortgage payments and higher property taxes, but they also end up in their 60's starring at 20 years left on a 30 year mortgage. Had they stayed put, their home would have been be paid off. (Assuming they didn't borrow against it to buy more crap).

It's pretty hard to retire with a mortgage, car payments, and a slew of credit card debt....... And little to no savings. And yet that is where the bulk of the population is at financially today..... And it's getting worse, not better.

And the government LOVES people who are financially dependant on them. The more, the better. They are far easier to control. Having money gives people independence and power they wouldn't otherwise have.

So of course the government hates personal wealth, and wants nothing more than to tax it out of existence... "Paying their fair share", they like to call it. While giving handouts to, "those less fortunate". It's no different than the actual reason they love gun control so much.

Naturally all of this has nothing to do with money or guns. It's ALL about control..... Under the never ending disguise of, "for the common good". And the bulk of the people fall for it everytime, all the time.

It’s all impulse buying. Buying a new 70” television even though your 60” works just fine because it’s bigger is not prudent. Impulse buying usually fills up the garage with junk and then comes the yard sale.


Comparing a $100 Motorola phone to a smartphone is not the same though. iPhones are way more than a phone.

The key is to not follow the footsteps of everyone else that buys stuff on impulse. Buy what you truly need. Save for the future.

 

[billt460]

..... Comparing a $100 Motorola phone to a smartphone is not the same though. iPhones are way more than a phone.

Perhaps. But for 90% of the buying public, a hundred dollar phone is just fine. You can call. You can text. You can navigate. And you can take photos and video.

 

[brianl703]

The result is not only bigger mortgage payments and higher property taxes, but they also end up in their 60's starring at 20 years left on a 30 year mortgage. Had they stayed put, their home would have been be paid off. (Assuming they didn't borrow against it to buy more crap).

I had a house that I paid off. About the time I paid it off, the neighborhood turned to crap.

 

[CanAmAndMore]

My belief is that the region people live in makes a lot of difference to.
The larger the city someone lives in, the more debt they have, and stupid stuff they buy. Get away from the cities, and people stay in their homes longer, save more money, depend on credit less, and waste money less.
Sure they may still buy that $1000 cellphone, but then they keep it for 7 years. They don't lease a new car all the time, they buy a good car, and drive it for 20 years.
I'll admit to splurging on a new Porsche, no I didn't need it.
Paid cash for it, and will keep it till I die, then my daughter will get it.
I don't buy cars to keep just a couple of years.
Spent 31 years in my last house, recently sold it and moved, already plan to die of old age where I am now.

 

[billt460]

And possibly increase the min retirement age from 62 to 63 (or more) and/or both including a larger penalty for retiring early as well as increasing to 68 for full benefits. There will be some of what I just typed above.

I think France just tried this. (Raising the retirement age to just 64, because they can't afford what they are currently giving away). And they're in the process of rioting and burning the country down because of it. The people think, "it's just too cruel".

This is always the problem with these type of socialized entitlement programs. People get an attitude that the government not only"owes" them everything. But should also be the main provider for most of life's basic necessities.

Then, when they can no longer fork up, all hell breaks loose. We're fast approaching that attitude here. Forgiving hundreds of BILLIONS in college loan debt. "Free" government housing en masse. Fully socialized medicine for everybody who can run, jump, or swim here. The list keeps growing, as the attitudes keep getting worse.

https://apnews.com/article/france-p...cron-strikes-1abb098b104f2b7094e51e650218771d

 

[CanAmAndMore]

People should be planning for, and saving towards their own retirement plan by age 25.
Only a fool relies on government.

 

[alarmguy]

That is what they will do. Cut benefits. The other alternative is to raise the SS tax from the current 12.4% rate.


The popular opinion now is to allow people to save on their own rather than giving $$ to the government so it can be returned to you later.

Yes, the problem now is the voting majority pay no income tax and even more have no savings.
Decades ago as you know certain people wanted to privatize, that didn’t go far.
We can’t go further as some might turn this political but safe to say I think even more so today a nation with so much of the population that has no savings, well they aren’t going to look for change