Retirement

Status
Not open for further replies.
Checkout_my_Six said:
well....anyone who had stats 101 should know the answer to that. :D
Click to expand...

Should, but sadly....

I worked with some kids... really smart kids... ~2 years out of some University in Illinois that had some of those words in it's name. It was in some urbane place with some association with champagne, which EVERYONE knows only comes from France, right?

Anyway, corporate meeting. Director says the goal is to keep our salaries in the 80th percentile of the market for similar services.

They all complained, half of them quit, because the company only wanted to pay 80% of the average salary.
 
Sundancer said:
I gotta disagree, amicably - quite a few local (and state) gov'ts do, in fact, divert significant tax dollars to charity. I worked in local gov't for some time, and that was a routine expense - "hiring" the orchestra for a July 4 celebration at a price quadruple the actual cost; supplementing non-profits that also benefited from CFC., etc. It's one reason my wife and I stopped making donations to charity.

I'm middle-middle income, no dog in the fight - I do know that the bulk (90%+) of the income tax revenue collected is paid by the top 10% of earners. Been that way a long time. Leave it you your own sensibilities to decide if that's fair or not. Those numbers are approximate, by the way, for the literal minded. I think just under 1/2 the population pays no Fed income tax, though I'm sure in most states they still pay state and local taxes.

Funny story - rented a car at LAX recently, two days, at $16.00 a day. The taxes and "fees" doubled the cost. I know, that's CA, where the gov't is dysfunctional, but though extreme, not atypical. My state (MD) and local counties sell alcohol, have interests in casinos, and will be participating in selling dope soon - I imagine they'll gradually phase in prostitution, after a multi-year campaign to make it palatable.

I'd be OK with some of it, if they got the basics right, and kept gov't out of arenas I think the don't belong in. The last local gov't I worked with ran a golf course, day care, swimming pools, sponsored an "incubator" for womens business, and the common thread was all the program's real cosst exceeded the private endeavors doing the same thing. . .
Click to expand...

So the only thing I disagree with you on is that paying taxes counts as charity, it doesn't. Charity is freely given to the place of your choice. Of course it is up to you to choose wisely where your charity dollars go, there are hucksters everywhere. But back to my original statement, taxes are not freely given. Freely given means that if you decide not to give, no harm no foul. Try not "giving" taxes owed and you will find out relatively quickly that you are not freely giving them. Once again, paying your taxes is not the same is charitable giving, many people feel it is and it replaces charitable giving, it doesn't.
 
Tom-D said:
Probably. but hoping you realize the farm bill was the largest give away in history. Including welfare, and subsidies
Click to expand...

Lol, just giving you one of your to the point answers. I figured that was what you were getting at, but that isn't charity, some of it is criminal, the rest is welfare. Big difference in my mind.
 
PaulS said:
So the only thing I disagree with you on is that paying taxes counts as charity, it doesn't. Charity is freely given to the place of your choice. Of course it is up to you to choose wisely where your charity dollars go, there are hucksters everywhere.
Click to expand...

No-spin alert! Tax policy is political. Be careful.
 
I don't if this will be as funny without the actual symbol for Mu.

When I was in college, my friend told me Statistics was an easy course because "It's all about Mu." I said, "**** Mu"

but yah, with the symbol it's a bit funnier.

Kind of like there being 10 kinds of people in the world....
 
PaulS said:
Are you f'n kidding me???? We have people talking about liberals, Reagan, commies, apartheid and whatever else and you pick out my post, screw you.
Click to expand...

Point taken. Sorry. I won't do it again this year.
 
PaulS said:
Are you f'n kidding me???? We have people talking about liberals, Reagan, commies, apartheid and whatever else and you pick out my post, screw you.
Click to expand...
that's over the top even for you.
 
PaulS said:
Are you f'n kidding me???? We have people talking about liberals, Reagan, commies, apartheid and whatever else and you pick out my post, screw you.
Click to expand...
when we talk nice about any topic we don't get flagged.
 
Sundancer said:
I'm middle-middle income, no dog in the fight - I do know that the bulk (90%+) of the income tax revenue collected is paid by the top 10% of earners. Been that way a long time. Leave it you your own sensibilities to decide if that's fair or not. Those numbers are approximate, by the way, for the literal minded. I think just under 1/2 the population pays no Fed income tax, though I'm sure in most states they still pay state and local taxes.
Click to expand...

Largely the bottom half pays sales tax and FICA tax. Oh, and property tax, either directly through their own home or it is baked into their rent.
 
JoseCuervo said:
Just as I thought. Median income was less than $56k for 39/40 years.
Click to expand...

What's that got to do with retirement planning today? Cost of living was also lower throughout most of that timeline.

Bill Jennings said:
So, the top 25% has done exceedingly well, the second 25 ok, and the rest of the nation has gone nowhere.
Click to expand...

Pretty much. You can graph that as a bell curve also, which shows it's all pretty "normal" for most of history.

JoseCuervo said:
Just a question. Do you feel an obligation to help others? To leave the world better than you found it?

Or, is it ok for your kids and your grandkids to have to deal with what you left behind?

There is no "liberal" or "conservative" answer. It is personal to each person.
Click to expand...

Again, if you haven't figured these questions out about four decades before retirement, retirement has little to do with them.

JoseCuervo said:
Reagan (I believe) passed tax laws that put IRAs into being (may have been earlier) and, the thing that stood out more to me, was that there were lots of companies with overfunded pensions that weren't adding to shareholder value.
Click to expand...

Carter in 1974. Been around so long 40 year olds weren't even born at their creation. Severely ancient history in timeline terms of people discussing retirement planning today.

JoseCuervo said:
I worked for a company in the 90's that was late to do away with pensions, so I still get a statement each year letting me know what I can have now as a lump sum, or at some future date as a monthly pension. Eventually, At age 60, it will easily cover all my flying expenses.....
Click to expand...

If it remains solvent. My grandfather's didn't. It just stopped paying one day about 20 years after he retired from the job that offered it. That can happen to anyone, it's just a fiscal investment vehicle that's run by people you don't have any say in how they run it, nothing materially different than handing money to an mutual fund manager. If they screw up or know the end is coming and can't find new money to find losses, it disappears. But they're definitely nice to have if you have them as long as they remain solvent.
 
when have I ever told someone to get screwed?
 
Tom-D said:
when have I ever told someone to get screwed?
Click to expand...

I think i recall you telling someone to put their cowling back on like maybe ten years ago.

Someone baby butt sensitive may have misunderstood the use of of "turn the screws" in this regard. ;)
 
How you guys feel about b-funds in lieu of pensions? I used to feel the A fund was the way to go but knowing how unloyal employers are I'm much more encouraged by the B fund construct as of late.
 
JoseCuervo said:
Median income has not been $56k for 40 years.

Rest of your "analysis" crumbles.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Not really. Prices were also lower. Income - Expenses is a relative number.

It's a rare scenario where consistently saving 10% of household income doesn't result in a retirement that is roughly lifestyle equivalent to the rest of that person's life.

You have to get down into numbers approaching the "official" poverty line to make it not work/impossible.

And that's without SS, or any other sort of societal assistance, which we do have.

You can show math you like better if you don't believe saving 10% leads to a reasonable retirement. Post it up. Only takes about two minutes.

The concept that I was responding to that the "majority" can't self-fund retirement obviously isn't accurate.

They can. Doesn't mean they will.
 
Tom-D said:
I did once, once was enough. You can't delete what I quoted.

Post 250.
Click to expand...

That wasn't me. I don't post stuff that needs deleted.

That was PaulS with the poor social skills.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
JoseCuervo said:
That wasn't me. I don't post stuff that needs deleted.

That was PaulS with the poor social skills.
Click to expand...

Matter of opinion, but all your rants should be deleted. Poor social skills? Gawd but look at how you're doing on POA with your socials skills. :rolleyes:
 
mscard88 said:
Matter of opinion, but all your rants should be deleted. Poor social skills? Gawd but look at how you're doing on POA with your socials skills. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Uhhhh. You are the one using F-bombs. You should not judge other people's social skills.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Matthew said:
Forgetting for the moment that South Africa is a sovereign nation, free to decide how to deal with it's own citizens:

"We" as in I feel a moral or religious obligation towards helping my fellow man? Or "we" as in, "Because I feel I have an obligation, I must force you to oblige, too"?

Financing, saving, planning for our own retirement means we are attempting to become self sufficient and not relying or pressuring others to support us. Isn't that a moral obligation, too?
Click to expand...
Self sufficiency is anathema to big government types like Jose.
 
JoseCuervo said:
Just a question. Do you feel an obligation to help others? To leave the world better than you found it?

Or, is it ok for your kids and your grandkids to have to deal with what you left behind?

There is no "liberal" or "conservative" answer. It is personal to each person.
Click to expand...
My kids and grandkids have to deal with the crap the Left has created.
 
Closed per MC vote.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top