Gaius
1
The (US) S&P is down 23% year to date (a little more than France’s CAC)
and it is likely to fall further because (among other reasons) a record 30% of all listed companies have never turned a profit even during the recent boom.
Inflation is 8.3%.
23% + 8.3% = 31.3%
One way to make up a 31.3% deficit in your retirement fund is to shorten your retirement 31.3% (retire at age 72??)
Anyway, French officials are now proposing raising the reitrement age there should be one part of a pln to deal with the overall problem.
Who’s next?
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-25/france-likely-to-raise-pension-eligibility-age-minister-says
Work till you drop. Got to keep those Globalist Elite living in luxury.
2 Likes
Gaius
4
Well I don’t know about any elites (maybe I am one of them)
but interest rates at or below zero tend to create bubbles,
and bubbles tend to burst.
1 Like
DougBH
5
I guess next the EU will be threatening France.
2 Likes
Auto129
6
Working more or longer is a solution that should always be rejected immediately. Everything should be considered an option before raising the retirement age.
There is no greater goal of society than less human work.
Gaius
7
Well in France if you meet certain conditions you can retire at age 62, and that is different than here.
That said a typical retiree spends almost over 40% of their life in retirement.
If your medical expenses stay the same, (they don’t they go up) ,
and
you want to have the same standard-of-living in retirement,
you are going to have to SAVE something roughly equivalent to 40% of your income, (SS, plus house paid off, plus 401k etc).
I think I am pretty safe in saying “most of us don’t do that.”
The irony is, when the economy is good we tend to kick the can down the road and then deal with it when the economy is not so good. Human nature is pretty stupid that way.
Why?
Jobs today tend to involve more automation, making them less labor intensive.
Why shouldn’t workers be able to work longer if they’re able bodied and reasonably healthy?
Auto129
9
It’s wasting their limited stock of time. Humans should do their hobbies unless there’s absolutely no choice.
I’m sure if the elites had a gun to their heads, they could come up with an alternative to asking old folks to hustle for a few more years. They should address the issue with that much urgency.
Gaius
10
Q. How do you give someone a day off
everyday
for 40% of his adult life?
A. That adult must save, (or someone must save on his behalf) an amount roughly equivalent to 40% of is income, every week from the day he graduates high school.
Economics is called “the dismal science” for a reason.
Auto129
11
It’s a matter of priorities. There’s no real scarcity of resources keeping them from retiring at the expected age.
Gaius
12
How much is FICA tax? (Both portions) about 16% right?
Personal savings rate is about 6%.
That’s 22% plus home equity.
We have a generation of people who saved 22% plus home equity,
and they want to live as if they had saved 40%. If they don’t get their way it’s always some unfair conspiracy of people being bad to them.
Tsk tsk.
I have to admit that retirement is the best “job” i have ever had. 
2 Likes
e7alr
14
Remember that when social security cuts benefits 20%, by law, when the notional trust fund is depleted. It costs money to have food, clothing and shelter. It costs additional money for health care. And more additional money for discretionary (life style) spending. Math is a cruel and unforgiving master.
1 Like
Gaius
15
That is one heck of a quote. LOL
Safiel
16
The United States has ALREADY raised the retirement.
Absolutely nothing unreasonable about Macron’s proposal.
And it becomes more of an issue in countries where you have a declining workforce supporting an increasing aged class.
Many retirement numbers were drawn back when you had a large workforce, but relatively small aged class and the aged class died much sooner on average.
Given that people both live longer and are healthy and capable of working longer, it is reasonable to tweak the retirement age.
2 Likes
Gaius
17
Yes,
when social security was created, and more importantly
when our savings and investing habits were created,
a typical American spent as little as 10% of his adult life in retirement. (Think roughly: 40 years work 4 years retirement)
Today that is nearly 40%. (Think roughly: 40 years work 16 years retirement.)
If you want to spend something like 40% of your life not working
you’re going to need to save something like 40% of your pay.
“There is no greater goal of society than less human work.”
Again, why?
How would you explain physicians and surgeons practicing in their 70s, even 80s? Nurses continuing to practice into these age groups?
Here’s one:
Tampa’s Vincent Tedone, another example. He was an orthopedic surgeon to some NFL players and fixed my open fracture. He founded an ALS research to research treatment for his 40+ year old daughter diagnosed.
Why does age necessarily mean not working?
Safiel
19
I believe Rush Limbaugh’s father worked until age 102, the oldest practicing attorney at that time.
Wesley Brown actively heard cases as a United States District Judge until about a month before his death at age 104.
United States District Judge Jack Weinstein famously carried a full load of cases until age 98.
Work is NOT a burden to all.
Financially, I am well past the point where I could retire comfortably, but have absolutely no intention of doing so.
I have seen plenty of people in their 80’s coming into work, having absolutely no need for the money, but just wanting to be out and active.
1 Like
Gaius
20
Cyrus Mccormick worked very hard to create his labor saving device.
He perfected the mechanical harvester his father had worked on most of his life.
As result, the farmers who bought one worked the same number of hours, (or more) and instead chose to enjoy the increased wealth and income they could gain from it.
It is an unusual statement to declare not working “the highest goal of human accomplishment” or whatever the earlier statement was. Most people don’t think that way.
1 Like
