SkinsHokieFan Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 I'm more amazed at the number of people that actually believe in the deferred life system to begin with. Let's all spend every second of our productive lives working and hoarding acorns for the day that wonderful day when we can retire at 65 or 70 or god knows. What a scam. I have money for retirement but if I need it so much of what I've tried to do will have failed. The enjoy life when you're old as hell idea is garbage IMO.Having said that I don't know how many people in percentage are young people that haven't started saving yet. Hard to tell what those numbers mean without really knowing the population we are looking at. Hopefully they get their act together so they can enjoy paying their medical bills with the stuff they spent all their lives working for. Agree. The whole "work 40 years to save up 1 million dollars and then enjoy another 13 or so years " is a bunch of BS. Terrible mind set to have to defer enjoyment in your life for 40 years But hell, I don't plan on working 40 more years and having only 2 weeks off per year in each of those years (thats about 80 weeks total of vacation over 40 years. Lets say you get real lucky and start getting 3-4 weeks off. You are still looking at 160 weeks of vacation at most over 40 years, which is a little over 3 years worth) I didn't get a "real job" until 2 full years out of college. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipwhich Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 I didn't get a "real job" until 2 full years out of college. You have 2 real options. Get a "real job" or start your own business. If you are in option 1, you get what you describe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 You have 2 real options.Get a "real job" or start your own business. If you are in option 1, you get what you describe. How about both? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCSaints_fan Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 Agree.The whole "work 40 years to save up 1 million dollars and then enjoy another 13 or so years " is a bunch of BS. Terrible mind set to have to defer enjoyment in your life for 40 years But hell, I don't plan on working 40 more years and having only 2 weeks off per year in each of those years (thats about 80 weeks total of vacation over 40 years. Lets say you get real lucky and start getting 3-4 weeks off. You are still looking at 160 weeks of vacation at most over 40 years, which is a little over 3 years worth) I didn't get a "real job" until 2 full years out of college. Took me longer than that. Until I was 30, actually. Stupid me for majoring in a worthless major like CS from a third rate institution like VT :pfft:. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCSaints_fan Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 Agree.The whole "work 40 years to save up 1 million dollars and then enjoy another 13 or so years " is a bunch of BS. Terrible mind set to have to defer enjoyment in your life for 40 years But hell, I don't plan on working 40 more years and having only 2 weeks off per year in each of those years (thats about 80 weeks total of vacation over 40 years. Lets say you get real lucky and st bv art getting 3-4 weeks off. You are still looking at 160 weeks of vacation at most over 40 years, which is a little over 3 years worth) I didn't get a "real job" until 2 full years out of college. Took me longer than that. Until I was 30, actually. Stupid me for majoring in a worthless major like CS from a third rate institution like VT :pfft:. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veretax Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 I know this news shocks some people, but if your like me, a guy who it took a year after 9/11 to find reasonable work with a company with no real 401K option, only to have them cut your pay twice no wait three times for nothing you did wrong, just their opinion that you were never worth what they first paid out (nevermind that their business decisions is what was screwing up the company) and only just now seven years later getting back to the salary you started with said company at (granted you had to leave and take a different job five years ago to begin that crawl back up.) If you were in that kind of situation, and were making less than 100K a year, you'd probably realize that sometimes the here and now is more important than savings down the road. I hate that its worked out this way, but I'm just now getting to a point where I can start to explore my retirement options. It sucks frankly. Oh and for those arguing about personal finance. Was I the only one who saw the few classes at the University level that might cover that sort of thing were basically teaching the false idea of money now is better than money later? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeanCollins Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 I'm more amazed at the number of people that actually believe in the deferred life system to begin with. Let's all spend every second of our productive lives working and hoarding acorns for the day that wonderful day when we can retire at 65 or 70 or god knows. What a scam. I have money for retirement but if I need it so much of what I've tried to do will have failed. The enjoy life when you're old as hell idea is garbage IMO. Sounds like you're not too far along in your savings plan. What makes you think that people who successful save a planned amount for retirement don't also enjoy a great quality of life? And with that said, folks that are saving several million dollars, in income generating assets, are also planning on living longer to enjoy those assets by living healthier, and most will because it's a goal. Many of those that don't "buy into" the savings mentality also plan on dying earlier, and that's fine with me, someone has to make up that lower end of the percentage scale so that I can live longer. :pfft: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veretax Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 Sounds like you're not too far along in your savings plan. What makes you think that people who successful save a planned amount for retirement don't also enjoy a great quality of life? And with that said, folks that are saving several million dollars, in income generating assets, are also planning on living longer to enjoy those assets by living healthier, and most will because it's a goal. Many of those that don't "buy into" the savings mentality also plan on dying earlier, and that's fine with me, someone has to make up that lower end of the percentage scale so that I can live longer. :pfft: It all depends on income. I live in West Virginia where the Median Income is like around 35K or 36K If memory serves. Standard of living may be much lower, but it still gives you little extra cash to really invest properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goskinz0721 Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 It all depends on income. I live in West Virginia where the Median Income is like around 35K or 36K If memory serves. Standard of living may be much lower, but it still gives you little extra cash to really invest properly. Agreed, to a point. Saving $0+x is better than saving $0. For every dollar you put into a tax free account, you're only losing the ability to spend 65-80% of that dollar, depending on your tax bracket. It's a mindset: figure that your salary, less 10-12%, is what you will live on. Invest that 10-12%, regardless of how little it seems, and in a few years you'll have a good chunk of change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaxBuddy21 Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 I'm more amazed at the number of people that actually believe in the deferred life system to begin with. Let's all spend every second of our productive lives working and hoarding acorns for the day that wonderful day when we can retire at 65 or 70 or god knows. What a scam. I have money for retirement but if I need it so much of what I've tried to do will have failed. The enjoy life when you're old as hell idea is garbage IMO. You are missing the point. Its not forgo life now so you can live later. Its live now but put something back so you can also live later. I have not forgone anything in my life. I have fun and enjoy life. I spend money on my toys (tv's car, soon a motorcycle). I go out and do fun things on the weekends and have nice vacations. But I also have 20% of my income going into my retirement plan so I can continue to enjoy life when I retire. Plus, at the rate I am going, I could probably retire quite a bit earlier than most because I started saving so early. I am trying to live a healthy lifestyle as well so I can enjoy life after retirement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elessar78 Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 On one hand we are told to save for retirement, and on the other we are told to spend without a conscience. I am confused. Who's telling you this? Media? Gov't? The reality is everyone needs to save for retirement because a point will come when one can no longer work to support himself. That point also doesn't have to come until after a person is 65 or older. The fact is people are living longer and healthcare costs will continue to rise. Having $1 million in your retirement account, and assuming you live another 20 years, only gives you about $50K (pre or post tax depends on your investment vehicle) annually. It's not an either/or proposition either (wow, that's a bad sentence). 10% (pretax especially) should not affect your lifestyle too much so you can save for retirement AND still essentially have the same lifestyle. Plus, you can be potentially reducing your taxable income. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 Sounds like you're not too far along in your savings plan. What makes you think that people who successful save a planned amount for retirement don't also enjoy a great quality of life? And with that said, folks that are saving several million dollars, in income generating assets, are also planning on living longer to enjoy those assets by living healthier, and most will because it's a goal. Many of those that don't "buy into" the savings mentality also plan on dying earlier, and that's fine with me, someone has to make up that lower end of the percentage scale so that I can live longer. :pfft: I think thats the whole point You can put money away, but the mentality of "I am going to work 40 years and then retire" as opposed to taking some nice long 6 months to year breaks along the way is what Destino is talking about. I'm sure the guy has a decent amount of cash, but he isn't looking to retire at age 65. Why not spread a few smaller retirements around your life? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mursilis Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 The government should do something about this. Oh, it will. In a few years, those who blew all their money on rims, bling, and the latest cell phone will simply vote themselves the money of the savers. :mad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 Oh, it will. In a few years, those who blew all their money on rims, bling, and the latest cell phone will simply vote themselves the money of the savers. :mad: I thought they already did, except it was overpriced housing and union benefits. Rims and bling are low rent in comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 I'm more amazed at the number of people that actually believe in the deferred life system to begin with. Let's all spend every second of our productive lives working and hoarding acorns for the day that wonderful day when we can retire at 65 or 70 or god knows. What a scam. I have money for retirement but if I need it so much of what I've tried to do will have failed. The enjoy life when you're old as hell idea is garbage IMO. Agree.The whole "work 40 years to save up 1 million dollars and then enjoy another 13 or so years " is a bunch of BS. Terrible mind set to have to defer enjoyment in your life for 40 years It all depends on income. I live in West Virginia where the Median Income is like around 35K or 36K If memory serves. Standard of living may be much lower, but it still gives you little extra cash to really invest properly. Try this guys. Go to this site: http://www.moneychimp.com/calculator/compound_interest_calculator.htm Enter in $0 principal Enter $1200 annual addition 10 years to grow set the interest rate at 10% Compound it one time annually These are very conservative numbers. Most likely the interest will compound far more often and even conservative investments can give you higher interest in return. But let's just go with this. You should come up with somewhere around $21,000. $100 a month for ten years with nothing down and you've already doubled the amount 43% of the country apparently can't save. Now enter 40 years. You should come up with somewhere around $580,000. Are you guys seriously telling me that saving $100 a month is going to SO cramp your style that you can't live life to the fullest? Sorry, that's crap. No one is suggesting people should tithe half their money to the stock market. That $1200 represents a whopping 3% of the income of someone in West Virginia making $36K a year (which is more than I made last year, btw.) Now imagine your company matched what you put into your 401k, all of which is not taxed. That number over 40 years jumps to over 1.2 million dollars. For $100 a month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 Good post Henry. When you think about it objectively, there really is no excuse not to contribute at least a small amount of your income to a retirement plan of some sort. It certainly would not lead to suffering for 40 years to enjoy a 10-year period of your life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 Again, I wonder what percentage of the "lower class" puts savings behind entertainment when it comes to budgeting. Sociologists will be the first to tell you that the lower classes have a 'easy come easy go' attitude towards money. entertainment is priority number 1. Most in the lower class probably dont know better as their folks probably didnt have good personal finances either. that's exactly right, so all the blustering in the world about how so many people are irresponsible or non-disciplined does nothing to address the actual issue. (Won't stop the talking heads though) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 In other news, 57% of the US population appear to be disciplined retirement investors. That's pretty impressive if you ask me. wonder what it was 50 years ago? 15% or so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boobiemiles Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 Who's telling you this? Media? Gov't? The reality is everyone needs to save for retirement because a point will come when one can no longer work to support himself. That point also doesn't have to come until after a person is 65 or older. The fact is people are living longer and healthcare costs will continue to rise. Having $1 million in your retirement account, and assuming you live another 20 years, only gives you about $50K (pre or post tax depends on your investment vehicle) annually. It's not an either/or proposition either (wow, that's a bad sentence). 10% (pretax especially) should not affect your lifestyle too much so you can save for retirement AND still essentially have the same lifestyle. Plus, you can be potentially reducing your taxable income. As a society there are a lot of measures in place so we can spend and spur the economy. Cash for clunkers, sales, etc. Look at the holidays we celebrate. Shoot mother's day was a holiday conjured up by card companies, that took off. If you think about, the average Americans probably spend $2-$3000 a year on gifts. Then we are told to save for retirement. I seems like mixed signals to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forehead Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 As a society there are a lot of measures in place so we can spend and spur the economy. Cash for clunkers, sales, etc. Look at the holidays we celebrate. Shoot mother's day was a holiday conjured up by card companies, that took off. If you think about, the average Americans probably spend $2-$3000 a year on gifts. Then we are told to save for retirement. I seems like mixed signals to me. Never thought I'd say this, but I actually agree with you. Well put...though mother's day is a nice enough thing. Could probably do without Valentine's Day, even more so now that I'm married. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 As a society there are a lot of measures in place so we can spend and spur the economy. Cash for clunkers, sales, etc. Look at the holidays we celebrate. Shoot mother's day was a holiday conjured up by card companies, that took off. If you think about, the average Americans probably spend $2-$3000 a year on gifts. Then we are told to save for retirement. I seems like mixed signals to me. The point is though, different "people" are sending those different signals. Of course businesses that can profit want you to spend money. But I don't think Hallmark is the one harping on you to max out your 401k... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 Businesses profit when you save money as well...it is kinda their mission in life :party: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boobiemiles Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 Again, I wonder what percentage of the "lower class" puts savings behind entertainment when it comes to budgeting.Most in the lower class probably dont know better as their folks probably didnt have good personal finances either. Easy my friend, tread easy. You know I wasn't going to let you get away with that one. Savings is a general problem. It is not specific for one class of people. I know what you are saying though. There is a live for today, forget tomorrow mentality in lower income areas. It's hard making ends meet. However, people still save. They save to buy things. However the idea of saving for retirement can be a stretch for most. Especially if you think about the reality of their condition. If you are talking about the male population, 1 out of 4 will be incarcerated, 1out of 3 will be dead before the age of 25. Women live longer, but struggle with the absence of men in their community, so they struggle. The idea to save for the future may not ring true for most, until they reach a ceratin age, and point in their life....but isn't that true for most people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boobiemiles Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 The point is though, different "people" are sending those different signals. Of course businesses that can profit want you to spend money. But I don't think Hallmark is the one harping on you to max out your 401k... No, but you have to admit that, as a country, we are being urged to spend. Now I did the math. If I saved 6% of my base salary, it's 3200 a year. That is a lot of money. And that is before taxes. At my job, we do not have a 401K. I have to put my money in a Roth IRA. That is fine with me. But to achieve the ideal, which is 6% of my annual salary a year, it's tough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 No, but you have to admit that, as a country, we are being urged to spend. Now I did the math. If I saved 6% of my base salary, it's 3200 a year. That is a lot of money. And that is before taxes. At my job, we do not have a 401K. I have to put my money in a Roth IRA. That is fine with me. But to achieve the ideal, which is 6% of my annual salary a year, it's tough. Sure...I suppose certain organizations/companies are urging us to spend while others are urging us to save. Really, you have to do what's best for you. I mean, you can't just spend all your money because certain parties in your country is urging you to. As for the amount, again, it's a choice. Saving is never easy. Nobody (even the people making hundreds of thousands of dollars) ever feels like they have enough money to spend/save. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.