- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
August 3, 2013 at 4:20 pm #608519
WFMemberIn this months issue of Consumer Reports they conducted an article on savings.
The savings rate is abysmal. In 2/3rds of households with 55 – 64 year olds that are nearing retirement the average saved amount is not even equal to a year’s income. This is pathetic!
Too many people are not saving, taking personal responsibility, for their own retirement. Many of these folks will not have enough money in retirement especially if they end up in assisted care/adult home and then end up on medicaid. This is not fair to those that save or future generations to have to pay for those people that did not take responsibility for their own retirement.
Medicaid eligibility rules need to include a mechanism to deny benefits to folks that were not unlucky, but simply failed to save for their own retirement.
August 3, 2013 at 6:36 pm #795332
SmittyParticipantNot surprised.
Romney got lambasted for mentioning the “47%” because it offended so many people (about 47% of us, go figure).
More and more people are shrugging their shoulders and assuming the government – and more specifically – taxes paid by you and me – will make everything OK.
Personal responsibility and accountability are a thing of the past, sadly.
And to be CLEAR – because this always gets spun – this does NOT mean Republicans don’t believe in a safety net. We just don’t think the safety net should hold 47% of the country!
August 3, 2013 at 7:16 pm #795333
WFMembersmitty agreed
August 3, 2013 at 7:20 pm #795334
elikapekaParticipantI’m sure it has nothing to do with the fact that the peak of wage earnings in the US was in the 1970s and that real wages have been falling since then. Depending on the criteria used, if even the minimum wage had kept up with inflation, it should be at between $10 and $22 an hour.
I’m sure it has nothing to do with the fact that health care costs are so high that it’s the number one cause of bankruptcy, even among those with insurance.
Between running my business where I’m constantly pressured to keep costs down, paying exorbitant insurance premiums, paying my taxes, paying my mortgage, buying food, paying for transportation, paying for college loans, I’m clearly just a lazy entitled bum who can’t take personal responsibility for myself and save a few hundred grand in addition to all of that to fully finance my retirement.
Hey, guys, when your time machine resets out of the 1950s and joins the rest of us in the current century, come talk some more.
August 3, 2013 at 7:43 pm #795335
WFMemberelikapeka why are health care costs so high; one reason too many people getting services that they are not paying for that shifts the burden to everyone else. in all other industries if you do not pay or have insurance you do not get served!
regarding the other items taxes are high because government keeps growing social services. the so called safety net has morphed into a safety mesh.
why should taxpayers provide social services to people who have failed to save for their retirement; i am not talking about an unlucky person, i am discussing the people who have had decent health and simply did not save when they were working?
August 3, 2013 at 8:13 pm #795336
elikapekaParticipantI answered your question above – because wages are stagnant or falling and costs keep increasing. After paying for the necessities of life, few people have anything left to save. You just don’t like that answer.
I’m not complaining about paying taxes. I’m stating that it’s a fact of life, the price we pay for society. We pay them just like we pay for shelter and food.
Health care costs are higher in the US than anywhere in the world for many reasons, but the ACA will hopefully take care of the issue of getting almost everyone insured. I would have preferred Medicare for all but we’ll see how the ACA works.
I’m not going to enter into another circular argument with you. Your obsession with other people’s supposed moral failings clearly blinds you to any discourse or any other view. Again, I’ve answered your question. I know you don’t like it, but that’s my answer.
Peace out.
August 3, 2013 at 8:27 pm #795337
WFMemberyes social security taxes are about 5% higher than during my parents working years. it would have been nice to keep that 5% to invest/save.
i agree health care costs in this country are way too high. ACA is poorly conceived and does not address the costing issue well at all. the mechanism to force all americans to buy insurance is flawed (a miniscule fine). it would have been more effective to simply enforce the mandate with denying services to those that elected not to buy insurance!
and another item is that people with per-existing conditions will no longer have to wait for coverage to kick in (this would be ok as a one time opportunity, say for 1 year); but as written allows people to game the system by not buying insurance until they need it.
August 3, 2013 at 8:52 pm #795338
JoBParticipantWF..
there you go again.. ignoring anything that doesn’t fit into your picture of reality..
like the economy
or the housing market (where a lot of those retirement savings were once invested)
or the fact that an increasing number of profit centers are driving our health care costs
i recently had shoulder surgery. I booked it with a preferred provider surgeon in a preferred provider facility making sure it was pre-approved through my insurance company.
so far, i have received bills for that surgery from 4 profit centers… 3 of which were not disclosed by the surgeon when i was quoted costs for the surgery…
two of those tried to bill me for more than my insurance said it was my responsibility to pay.
one didn’t bill my insurance at all because they said they didn’t have current insurance information .. information which was on file at the facility where their services were tendered.
on top of that, the surgeon’s office underestimated the portion of their bill i am responsible for by 2/3….
for a pre-approved surgery.
I wish i could tell you how many man hours it took to straighten all of that out..
but 3 months down the road it’s still not all straightened out so the tab for those hours is still running. I personally have about 9 hours invested so far.. and that doesn’t count the time the billing offices i spoke with have invested in communicating with both the providers and my insurance company.
All of that costs money which is tabulated as medical expenses Whoop…
how many profit centers does it take to deliver a surgery.. well. there is the one that was contracted to provide the surgery.. the 3 others who were subcontracted, another 4 insurance billing services and my insurance company… 9 at minimum… i am sure there are resolution services tucked in there somewhere and probably clerical services as well.
you can blame rising medical costs on poor people if you want Whoop…
but my experience tells me that there are way too many profit centers feeding off of my single surgery.
August 3, 2013 at 9:07 pm #795339
SmittyParticipant“but as written allows people to game the system by not buying insurance until they need it.”
The worst part of Obamacare without a doubt.
Just pay the fine until you get diagnosed with cancer, then sign up.
That should bring down costs significantly……………(sarcasm)
August 3, 2013 at 9:20 pm #795340
JoBParticipantAugust 3, 2013 at 9:27 pm #795341
SmittyParticipantAgreed.
What does that have to do with gaming the system until you have a life threatening illness?
August 3, 2013 at 10:54 pm #795342
WFMemberjob i never said that the current system is any good, it is way too expensive. but ACA has flaws, in particular no real leverage to force compliance. in other businesses if you cannot pay or have insurance you do not get service.
like i said creating a 1 year open enrollment system that preempts insurers from not covering pre-existing conditions is pragmatic. but if a person chooses not to take advantage of the open enrollment opportunity then they are in essence gaming the systems. gamers should be forced to pay full freight or denied services for trying to game the system.
getting back to the initial post topic – there are way too many people that are failing to save for retirement. medicaid eligibility needs to take into account this fact and deny benefits to people that could have saved but chose not to for whatever reason. this issue is a fairness equity item that has not been fully vetted.
August 3, 2013 at 11:04 pm #795343
EscondidoMemberWF:
Fact: not enough saving for retirement.
This is all I have to say…. from the urban dictionary:
1.)A way of making ones self feel better, by hurting others. Usually caused by closed mindedness, and a lack of manners.
August 3, 2013 at 11:42 pm #795344
SmittyParticipant“Fact: not enough saving for retirement.”
“1.)A way of making ones self feel better, by hurting others. Usually caused by closed mindedness, and a lack of manners.”
That is exactly why I don’t watch Suze Orman. That lady is tough as nails.
Caller: I am 35, have 1 million in 401K. Own my house outright, and the kids college is completely funded. I want to know if I can buy a $2,000 diamond ring?
DENIED!
August 3, 2013 at 11:43 pm #795345
JustSarahParticipantOf course pay rates aren’t where they should be for lower socioeconomic levels. But for the remaining middle/upper-middle classes, there’s not much of a excuse for not saving for retirement. I’ve contributed 15% of my salary to a 401(k) since the moment I was eligible, at age 23. My salary at the time, in 2007, was not impressive–$27k–but I budgeted to account for retirement contributions. Six years later, my husband and I still contribute that much and we have healthy retirement accounts. Sure, it would be great to have an additional $1000 a month in take-home pay, but we’ve decided to sacrifice some luxuries in exchange for security later in life.
Note: I know this is not possible for people with low incomes. I will not claim that *everyone* can afford to fund retirement accounts.
August 3, 2013 at 11:55 pm #795346
WFMembersarahscoot – agreed and my last paragraph in post #12 is targeted at those who could have saved but elected not too for whatever reason.
August 4, 2013 at 12:01 am #795347
Genesee HillParticipantI bet if this data was broken down by state, the worst rate of retirement savings would be in the GOP ‘bagger states. You know, Alabama, Mississippi, Kansas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, South Carolina, etc.
August 4, 2013 at 12:12 am #795348
WFMemberGH it would interesting to see the data.
The CR’s data is for the entire country and is very concerning. the next group of folks getting ready to retire (55 to 64) have not saved sufficiently and this is likely to cause some serious challenges in the near future that need to addressed.
August 4, 2013 at 12:19 am #795349
SmittyParticipant“I bet if this data was broken down by state, the worst rate of retirement savings would be in the GOP ‘bagger states. You know, Alabama, Mississippi, Kansas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, South Carolina, etc.”
Please do. But don’t stop at the State level, which can be deceiving. Drill down to party affiliation within each State. You might be surprised………..
Sarah – good for you. Wish I would have taken that advice when I was in my 20’s. The magic of compound interest cannot be understated….
August 4, 2013 at 12:26 am #795350
JoBParticipanthere’s a fun little map/toy
when you click on the link it will give you information on where poverty rates have become a problem
if you slide the toggle back you can see the change from 1980 till present.
One could say that this little interactive toy explains why savings rates are down. I know it’s hard to understand.. but when poverty rates go up.. savings go down.
August 4, 2013 at 12:29 am #795351
JoBParticipantthen there is this little piece from the Huff Post
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/28/poverty-unemployment-rates_n_3666594.html?ir=Business
i know the Huff Post is a suspect liberal source
but the numbers …..
the numbers still tell a story
August 4, 2013 at 12:35 am #795352
Genesee HillParticipantJust like the Eastern Washington GOP ‘bagger counties leech off King County taxpayers, the GOP ‘bagger states, with a few exceptions, leech off the coastal “BLUE” states.
‘baggerville. You gotta love it. ROF puking…
August 4, 2013 at 4:06 am #795353
WFMemberGH, Escondido and JOB the point of the thread is the fact too many people who should and could are not saving for retirement.
In particular those in the middle and up. Many middle class people need to be saving and aren’t. Is it fair or appropriate in the future that these folks be allowed to be bailed out by the government (aka taxpayer) in the event they run out of money. Instead of buying a new car every 3 years maybe drive a car for 10 to 12 years, instead of eating out all the time dine inn.
The fact is that there are many many people who could be saving that aren’t. And these folks should not be allowed to be bailed out in the future if the need should arise. They made a choice not to save and should be forced to live with the consequences of that choice.
August 4, 2013 at 5:04 am #795354
JoBParticipantAugust 4, 2013 at 5:13 am #795355
SmittyParticipant” the GOP ‘bagger states, with a few exceptions, leech off the coastal “BLUE” states.”
Again please, do not make judgements based on State lines(that is for simple folk). Dig deeper, my friend. Demographics are important……sorry if that offends…..
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.