They just gotta kind the current system going. It is so bad that now they are trying to minimize ruthless defaulters' credit scores from being impacted and preaching how credit scores still matter. This farce is actually getting amusing to me. They want to minimize impacted credit scores and keep it going would've made me , but now, I'm finally starting to get it.
You just won't let us get our blow off, will you ? You have to be the world's biggest blue baller in the history of blue balling.
.
High school teases would be more humane to their agonizing prey than the mighty
Gotta love a 70% GDP consumer economy is going to survive with its citizens saving 10% of their post-tax USDs. 7% plunge in GDP expected ex gov't debt?
Social Sec is suposed to be only a safety net, in addition to retirement savings.
401k are suposed to be an additional savings to regular retirement savings.
What is this main retirement savings thing they are taliking about?
Fewer and fewer have a company pension. Gov jobs, techers, firement, cops, have pensions, although those may be a thing of the past as well. What happens when those pensions default and the Fed ends up paying out for all of it? Do they decrease benifits at some point?
Most boomers haven't saved $300K. They saved maybe $50K, borrowed a few $ hundred K and bought houses and stocks, and watched as asset price inflation lifted the "value" of those houses and stocks by $250K above the amount borrowed.
Asset price inflation is not the same as savings. Saving $100 means earning $100 more than you spend. Watching your home or stocks appreciate above inflation isn't "earning" anything in real economic terms - it just represents a redistribution of wealth from younger people buying the assets at inflated prices to the older people selling them.
Maybe, but what is 15% of 30k/yr? 4.5k? * 30 years? 135k? You are also missing the fact that inflation will eat it because the people you are paying are also devaluing your currency.
On average, these pre-retirees expected they would need $800,000 to fund their retirement. However, most had only saved about $300,000.
Love the lead 'on average'... bet the median is even worse especially if the non-response cohort is estimated & included.
Meaning the nice folks at WF obviously didn't talk to many wage slaves... I doubt there is anyone on my block that will have let alone has ever had $300K at one time including the equity in their home. I'd guess the median is somewhere near $50K even with equity included.
Oh - and they know they are screwed - make no mistake about it - no denial there. Most everyone I know [except a couple teachers w/ pensions] think they'll work until they are too weak to work - then die.
Did I miss the /snark tag? I don't see how SS can be considered savings since it does not belong to you. At 40 yrs of age I don't expect to see more than 10 cents on the dollar for what I've put in. Nevermind any employer contributions.
So if you "save" 15% with SS, and say 10% with the 401k, how much more do you need to save on top of the 25%? Maybe 50% of pretax income, then you have 25% of your gross wage to live on.
they'll work until they are too weak to work - then die.
It will make life interesting for the broken families and their future. If the parents are gone and grandparents are raising grandchildren, it throws a nice wrench in that process. Or "too weak to work" will equal 40, not 75.
You need to read the informative 12 step program for financial literacy by Ben Shalom Bernanke .
Stop doing CR, take your meds have a beer and watch family guy and everything will be OK.
my point exactly. I came close in 2006 to buying a house, and would be 30 or 40k underwater if I had. We are a bit underwater now, maybe 20k, but it's still cheaper than renting, and we need a roof.
Mike, they take it out the pay check, without consent. It belonged to someone before they took it. So yes, it is mine. And if the agreement is that the employer matches it, that is mine too.
So if you "save" 15% with SS, and say 10% with the 401k, how much more do you need to save on top of the 25%? Maybe 50% of pretax income, then you have 25% of your gross wage to live on.
Oh, I don't want you to think that I'm voting in favor of this flavor of delusion. All I'm saying is the numbers could be there, but you won't be able to retire on it. You probably won't even be able to "semi-retire" on it. You probably won't even be able to not have to live with your siblings and/or children on it. The 45-60 crowd should have the resources to drive Change that this country needs, but they realize that rocking their nest will risk breaking their nest eggs. "Screw Change; Just Get Me To Death" will probably be their motto in the next election cycle.
.
Edit: IS the motto of every graying generation. I just want to keep things as they are 'til I die.
I personally recommend the Suze Orman method for funding retirement. Get spectacularly wealthy off book royalties and speaking engagements; invest in treasuries and conservative bonds; wait for death. See other books for help on step 1.
again... Government of the , by the and for the shall not perish from the earth.
The quality of life for the masses who will work until they die is inconsequential in comparison to the standard of living enjoyed by the oligarchs and their spawn, the true Masters of the Universe and the rightful rulers of the global plantation they and their ancestors worked so hard to create.
"A recent patent lawsuit in federal circuit court has the intellectual property world taking note and offers important lessons for businesses. The Solo Cup Co. is being sued by a patent attorney claiming the company is misleading consumers by marking its products with expired patent numbers. Patent law provides for a fine up to $500 for each offense of false patent marking. Solo Cup Co. has produced an estimated 20 to 50 billion products since the patents expired. While courts have broad latitude in defining what constitutes an “offense,” and are unlikely to consider each marked product a separate offense, Solo could still face significant fines for patent mismarking."
We should be trolling for litigation opportunities...that'll pay for retirement.
Why exclude debt spending? That kind of policy could hurt
I'm talking about GDP as far as we are concerned. You know: Services for Services and Labor for Labor? Sure, GDP for could go up 12%/yr, but for us poor plebes, we'd be happy to not slide 12%/yr.
It will make life interesting for the broken families and their future. If the parents are gone and grandparents are raising grandchildren, it throws a nice wrench in that process. Or "too weak to work" will equal 40, not 75.
I know folks in that boat now - blended families almost living like a giant primitive village or commune. I expect there to be a lot more like them too.
Oh - and it isn't always a happy village either - imagine sharing close quarters with some of your most disagreeable family members and ask yourself... "Do I want to do this the rest of my life?" When the answer comes back "You have no choice"... stress mounts.
Mike, they take it out the pay check, without consent. It belonged to someone before they took it. So yes, it is mine. And if the agreement is that the employer matches it, that is mine too
Don't see how you can count it as "savings" since you have no control over it. Wanna bet next year CPI says no COLA for you to SS recipients? If it truly was your savings - you could spend it on hookers and blow and you'd have no one to blame but yourself when you woke up the next day broke and hungover. Somehow I don't think showing up with a fist full of of SS IOU's is going to get you wasted and laid...
I read in the local news how a 30 something law firm owner was found dead from OD'ing on meds. Of course, no one thought she was suffering from anything, and she was still young, attractive, and "successful". Now people are wondering how her finances and book of business is/was really doing.
.
"Stress mounts" is a CR-esque understatement.
Oh it ends. It doesn't end like the 50s & 60s culture lead their generation to believe how it ends.
.
Queue pictures of grandfathers getting their grandchildren to smoke opium in Afghanistan because there isn't anything else to offer the poor boy
Since cash is a medium of exchange, there is no such thing as savings except in assets. >Sends secret code to gold bugs< Stocks are savings for these purposes. People shouldn't get distracted by the national savings rate.
Actually SS FICA tax contribution WOULD be savings IF the gubbmint ran surpluses [real ones not just pseudo-lock box 'surpluses']. But the SS surpluses are savings in the same way a guy making $100K and spending $120K via VISA cards still thinks his 5% IRA contribution is 'saving'.
How does it work if the kids and grand kids live at home with the Boomers?
I guess they take turns not paying the mortgage.
LOL. Think of the opportunities. You have at least 3 or 4 individuals at any one time eligible for the FTHB credit. With a super duper 3.5% down FHA (with a little DPA) they can live rent free for 2 years. Rinse, repeat.
km4 (profile) wrote on Thu, 11/5/2009 - 8:12 pm replyIgnore userDaily Kos: Wall Street At Front Of The Line For H1N1 Vaccine
as the diarist said words fail
Wall Street is in the front of the line for everything else.
Would we expect anything different?
To be clearer, stocks aren't savings as far as savings rate is concerned, but as far as evaluating retirement prospects, they are pretty relevant.
Actually they can be 'saving' as is 'gold'... Saving is an identity equal to the difference of 'Income minus Consumption'... so unless you 'consume' the gold [use if for plating electronics or something]... then it qualifies as not consumption.
What these activities don't do is support lending to produce investment in processes that actually produce goods [consumed later]. Even buying/selling the secondary stock market doesn't do that - only the initial public offerings go into that [directly].
The actual article isn't near as nefarious. High risk employees at NY's largest employers (after they already hit some employers that had high risk populations) are now getting vaccinated. NY's largest employers are in finance. GS had only 17 employees eligible or something like that.
Daily Kos: Wall Street At Front Of The Line For H1N1 Vaccine
as the diarist said words fail
Probably inaccurate - most of WS NOT at the front of the line - only the gets it first. The rest are useless eaters [also known as ' counter parties' or 'suckers']... why waste vaccine on them?
This is not really a huge deal. I bet my old employer SLB has a bunch of vaccine. It's a huge, huge, huge deal if a key employee is sick, or heaven forfend, seriously ill.
You can bet they don't want key folks dying of swine flu.
This is not really a huge deal. I bet my old employer SLB has a bunch of vaccine. It's a huge, huge, huge deal if a key employee is sick, or heaven forfend, seriously ill.
You can bet they don't want key folks dying of swine flu.
If the dude ran a milling machine though - hey there are more of them.
I have a hard time believing that the average person has over 100k saved for retirement by the time they are 50.
My guess is that most couples have around 100K but most single individuals have considerably less.
As macro indicator overall, I think the savings rate is like is to a company's cash flow what GDP is to a company's profit. In perfect equilibrium generationally, there would be no variation in savings rate as generations retired. If our savings rate goes up, I think it is reasonable to attribute it some to boomer retirement. Historically, a high savings rate corresponds to a society believing there is significant risk in keeping more of their money in play. This is just as likely at this point to be a cause behind a higher savings rate. I know you probably already know all of this, but I figure this explains where I'm coming from better.
Among the biggest mistakes people are making is over-estimating their investment returns and the amount of money that can safely be withdrawn each year in retirement.
In the survey, both those who were about to retire and those who already had said they expected their savings to grow by 8.7 percent each year, on average.
Reality is that we've spent the last 60 years in a delightful bubble totally divorced from historic reality. But Americans have no sense of history - national or family - and don't see that the mean reversion pertains to a great deal. Life? It can really suck, but you have to deal with it.
Maternal great, great, great, great-grandfather fought through Civil War as a corporal with a PA volunteer regiment without injury. Even fought at Gettysburg (I know the location his regiment fought at on second day). Went home and ten or so years later lost an arm in a farming accident helping a friend. He went back and continued with his tobacco store, also working as a notary and other jobs to bring in money.
Paternal great-grandfather died after falling from a horse at turn of 20th century. Remember my great uncle telling stories of the final hours and the physician applying leeches to the wound on the head to draw out blood. His wife went on to raise four kids, one of whom - my grandfather - returned with his family to live with her during the Great Depression after he lost his job due to a heart attack. Per my father, an extremely tough woman.
Would it be too basic to say "Your net worth is your savings".?
Yes, it would. You save $100 when you earn $100 more than you spend. Asset price inflation doesn't count as earnings, at least not if you want to measure sustainable economic activity.
Would it be too basic to say "Your net worth is your savings".?
That makes more sense to me.
Even though that amount of "savings" can increase or decrese even with the same base amount ''saved" monthly.
That was the justification for consuming 'MEW'... people considered their income to be 'income plus increase in RE & other assets'... what they discovered is that train can run in reverse too and the MEW might already be spent.
I think you can count your 'net worth' as income but ONLY after you have monetized the long term & rather illiquid assets.
GS gets the turd polishing award and MS spins the bad PR FTW.
"Morgan Stanley received 1,000 doses of the vaccine for its New York and suburban offices, but the company turned over its entire supply to local hospitals when it learned it received shipments before some area hospitals" The article requested is no longer available.
Savings will hurt a lot of people. What will really hurt most of them though is becoming unable to work sooner than anticipated, be it layoff, stress, or disability.
Social Security is mainly a pay-as-you-go social insurance system, not a savings system.
Everybody doesn't get the same benefit from whatever amount is "saved." It's a progressive social insurance system, so lower income people get relatively more per dollar of contribution than higher income people.
How much you get back per dollar put in also depends on: 1) when you start benefits between age 62 and 70; and 2) what part of your benefit gets taxed (between zero and 85%) and given back into the system at your tax rate.
I truly see means testing on the horizon. Pisses my 80+ year old mother no end. After all, her poor dear departed husband worked hard for the money that she now enjoys and she shouldn't have to share with the lowly.
Is it considered noteworthy that Congress has apparently extended the $729,000 Jumbo Conforming limit?
Not really. There was never any doubt. It looks like an average of one new program a week to boost home prices and otherwise subsidize homeowners. Why let an old program lapse when your purpose is to shovel ever-larger amounts of money into homeowners' pockets?
On cusp of today's news that they're going to let underwater homeowners rent them back, it sounds as though the government is hoping to capture the upscale market as well as the lower end. Market stratification, baby.
They will. But they might do it by creating a new program, or expanding another existing one. For example, they might tell the FHLBs that they will support them if they buy lots of high-end mortgages that are not being purchased by FNM/FRE. There are many options. They will find and use several.
homedad43 (homepage, profile) wrote on Thu, 11/5/2009 - 10:26 pm
This is really just reversion to the mean.
Exactly. That's the long view of it, and the law of averages rules the long run. Now there's hell to pay. No amount of chicanery is going to change that, just shift around who takes the brunt of it.
If you read the story, it isn't high-value employees, but high-risk employees. The companies had to be large enough to have their own medical departments to administer the vaccine and follow CDC guidelines.
Maybe the free market should determine the price of the vaccine. Then the manufacturers would make enough of it.
One egg per one vaccination. Has to be a fertile egg. Some of the incubation doesn't work. That is allot of happy chickens and roosters, but it takes a long dang time.
I seriously doubt that they got that far. Now, there'll probably be some scrambling to pick up some gubbmint business, but they're bailing as fast as they possibly can.
Sometimes things happen in a serendipitous way. I've been involved in multiple independent conversations regarding suffering in one manner or another, none started by me. Hell, my youngest's baseball coach (Fall ball) was talking to the little guys about not getting upset when a play goes wrong...that's the game and that's life. Pick it up and move on.
OT, but I saw briefly that Progresso apparently was noted for having higher chemical content in some of their soup flavors. Those must be ones for the NJ Democratic Senator.
The ones in "denial" will turn out to be the smart ones: Buy lots of nice things and nice times when you're young and middle-aged, and then show up at retirement age looking for a handout. Will they get a nice handout? Well, did the people who signed up to pay more than they could afford for a home get nice handouts? Duh. Best of both worlds.
What most people don't realize is that TPTB slyly put the mechanism for means-testing Social Security benefits in place in 2004, when they started means-testing Medicare B premiums, which they euphemistically called "income-relating."
To means-test Social Security, they can't pay out the benefits and expect to get them back voluntarily. They have to withhold them based on your reported 1040 income. To do that, the IRS has to have authority to report your tax data to Social Security, and the reporting has to be done two years prior. Think about it. You file taxes for 2009 on April 15 2010. That information will then determine what net Social Security benefit you get (after "income-relating") starting on January 1, 2011.
Guess what? That's exactly what they did with Medicare B premiums. The law gave IRS authority to share data files with Social Security, which administers Medicare and takes B premiums right outta your Social Security. The income you report on your 2009 taxes will determine your B premiums in 2011. It's hell on CPAs to plan around. But it's automatic. You don't ever see the Social Security benefits from those higher B premiums withheld.
Income-relating Social Security benefits could be done, will be done, with the stroke of a pen. It's just a question of time.
The law already includes tax-exempt income in the income-relating formula but to be effective it will have to include a lot more, or else sophisticated high-income seniors and their CPAs will just plan around it. At minimum, it will have to include tax-deferred income in annuities and life insurance, unrealized appreciation on some securities, and untaxed income stashed in several types of trusts.
'Globalization and Offshore Resourcing'
IT outsourcing from the U.S....
Conclusion - 'The strains of this strategy are beginning to tell on the social costs we will incur as more and more sectors of the economy become susceptable to outsourcing and the middle class gets increasingly destabilized. The next five years will be crucial in determing how public policy leaders will respond to this challenge and create a new level of equilibrium...that will sustain and nourish the creative capacity of the American middle class.'
Sridhar Sourirajan, 2004, Duke University Well the five years have gone by...and the American middle class are in deep trouble. It's a result of U.S. economic policy that allowed the equilibrium to grow out of balance... http://www.soc.duke.edu/outsourcing/documents/sridhar.pdf Invalid URL
Also, the easiest way to income-relate Social Security benefits is just to make them 100% federally taxable for all but the poorest people. That will happen. States vary in how they tax Social Security. Some states tax the same portion as the feds, but apparently California does not currently tax any. How long do you think that lasts?
I actively look for ways to teach the kids about money and risk. Because I keep tabs on the foreclosure notices, I've been able to quietly tell my older kids which of their friends are losing their houses in foreclosure. It's led to some truly interesting conversations as we've talked about choices and what they've seen when they've been around those kids.
That said, one case is truly a tragedy and has nothing to do with spending patterns but instead loss of the family due to father and prison.
Lots of those people lost thier homes or will lose them in the next few years. Some may get a deal, most won't.
I drive through mile after mile of homes that are still 'valued' at $500K - $3 mill each. They are nice but very ordinary places. Most of the people living there are saving tiny amounts of $10k - $50K per year, at best. They couldn't afford to buy their own homes (you know, the old-fashioned way, using just their own money). Most of them will get to stay in these homes. They clearly are winners of giant bets.
This device was invented in 1926 and used on a combine built in 1979. Says something about American "technology," or the lack of it.
Most things automotive aren't new, whether they appear to be or not. Go look up the first turbocharger, supercharger, SOHC, DOHC, series hybrid, parallel hybrid, etc.
The U.S. stock market has been hyped and juiced for a long time, and over the last 10 years it has returned exactly zero on a total return basis, per S&P 500 Index. But bonds returned 6% or so, so a balanced stock bond portfolio just about matched inflation.
Over the next 10 years, I figure stocks are probably good for 3-4%. But bond returns will be lower, maybe 1-3%. And inflation will probably be higher. So the balanced portfolio will not match inflation. To make any progress long-term, you will need to diversify out of financial assets and into real assets. Most investors won't make that shift until it's too late. Financial assets have been sold too long, too hard.
Here down under we're many years ahead of you on that one.
The Australian age pension is subject to both an income test and an assets test. Note that this pension is NOT paid for out of a specific tax like your SS, and is defined as a welfare payment rather than a bought pension.
The assets test was introduced specifically because of wealthy people gaming the system. One particularly egregious example was a retired politician who converted the entire income stream from his (ridiculously generous, but that's another rant ) superannuation pension into cash, bought a multi-million dollar mansion for cash along with some carefully tax-structured investments, then trotted down to the local DSS office to claim the age pension for some spending money when on holiday (using his Gold Pass for unlimited free first-class air travel).
And they wonder why they see coming.
The howls in the media when the assets test was introduced were something to behold (with most of the letters to newspaper editors identifying the writers as coming from VERY high-priced areas).
Earlier barfly, I challenged anyone to find some (or any) macroeconomic studies and models that hypothesize that massive unsustainable government (and consumer) over-spending and borrowing (debt), massive unemployment (and outsourcing), rapid 'expected' devaluation of the national currency, structural imbalances, systemic risk, international 'contagion' of these conditions, etc. will have a productive outcome for any national economies (and the global economy)...
Now you can call these recurring and repeated conditions of serial 'financial/currency' crisis and deflationary credit destruction cycles what you want...but how about calling them 'U.S. economic public policy'...doesn't have quite the ring of other more flashy internet terms, huh?
But what's going to happen when FNMA decides to sell these properties after they're pressed for cash and the owners are still strapped for cash themselves? FNMA will have to sell sooner than later and the new owners are liable to raise the rent significantly.
I'm trying to picture Mr. Potter of "Wonderful Life" having a whopping great orgasm.
I have a hard time believing that the average person has over 100k saved for retirement by the time they are 50.
One great thing about the 401k is that it's hard to bust open the piggy bank, you have to pay back loans.
Doesn't stop those laid off from cashing it out. though.
Making comparisons to dollar amounts doesn't make as much sense as comparing to those peoples yearly wages. A guy living on 12k a year could probably never save 100k, but a guy making $100k+ a year should be ashamed if he can't.
"Work and save" actually works.
FWIW, I am above average for my age and salary, but I am really cheap and thankful that had a dad who taught me fiscal responsibility on top of that.
Anecdotal, based on the boomers I know, they will be selling houses to fund retirement, or working and never retiring. I also now peers my age who haven't taken advantage of company matching in 401k, not one dime. If company's continue eliminating them, I got mine while I could. If 100% returns were easy I wouldn't go to work, but 100% matching is free money.
Guess I need to get used to the concept of getting a peach for Xmas and farming the hardened mud of rural SE US if my future is going to be where my grandparents, great-grandparents, etc were. A return to where garbage fish were a blessing if you could afford to spend the time to catch them. If not, it is back to dropping out of school at 6th grade to work in the fields and "summer vacation" will take on a new (return to old) meaning again
One thing is for sure. Joe 6P's money is just flying out of U.S. stock mutual funds and into bond funds.
Over the last five weeks, domestic equity funds have lost net cash flow every week and $17 billion cumulatively. That's just stunning when you consider all the automatic positive cashflow generated by reinvestment and retirement plan contributions.
In the same five weeks, assets of bond funds increased by $55 billion. Millions of Americans are stupid with the limited amount of money they've managed to save? I don't think so. This shows they are scared and running away from whatever their advisors and fund groups are saying, due to lost trust.
It's the institutional leveraged dice-rolling traders and hedge funds that aren't scared and are pumping up the market.
Personally, I think that my master plan is to look for a necessary product that doesn't have an expiration date and hoard it. When the dollar tanks and folks are hard up, I'll sell this for hard assets or other tradable goods a la Thunderdome.
While I can work, I pay off the house and I send my 6 kids to good schools and universities. In 15 years when I retire, I figure I can mooch off of two or three of them and live reasonably comfortably. I might have to babysit their kids, but that's a small price to pay.
Its a b^tch to farm if it is your only "real" way to provide for your family whatever you want to call it.
.
Edit: You can grow good things in it don't get me wrong, but if we find ourselves without much to keep the slugs and pests away and don't have time to get a year or so of good compost material going, it will be a hard first season or two.
Speaking of tired legs, when I had a third arm growing out of my back, people made fun of me. So, I had it cut off and it is in a jar next to my bed. There are also tonsils and my appendix in that jar.
I don't know if you've heard it yet, but retirement is un-American. Only "freeloaders" would even consider retiring.
That's the new message. Watch for it.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Hadn't considered it, but interesting proposition. Think that the whole Dennis Hopper thing on "dreams" is the cusp perhaps. Now the dreams will change to some other moneymaking endeavour.
That Dennis Hopper thing should've been a sign that things were going to get worse... much worse. When people are trying to plant dreams of things you've never done into a head that cannot really grasp what those dreams took, they should've been staring at their funds with trepidation and protected it. Preparing for the current moment where not moving backwards is automatically moving you forwards.
Why does everyone want to retire so badly. The right work is fun. Like giving up sex. I guess most people have the wrong work and unattractive partners. Guess I am happy for what I've got.
If it isn't clear from the picture, that's a paper tub of fries topped with giardiniera, chopped raw onions, barbecue sauce, cheddar cheese and clear beef gravy. Calorie count unknown.
From my experiences, unattractive partners doesn't automatically translate to "bad sex".
.
I think Billy Bob put it best:
Although he stopped short of mentioning Jolie by name, he told Esquire magazine: 'Sometimes with the model, the actress or the sexiest person in the world, it may literally be like ****ing the couch.'
The mandatory fast food worker from 65-80 yrs. old solves that problem.
It is the eeriest thing to see that your service folks at a fast food joint are easily 2x your age when it has historically been youth and poor folks doing the work...
"Yeah, but it would be nice to be able to be financially secure enough to quit a job you hate, but pays $$$, and take a job you love, that only pays $."
You should have made that decision a long time ago. You can enjoy a job and make a lot of money, too. Problem is too many people rush in.
For Family Law folks, we like those kind of people... if they have enough $$$ to get out of "rushed" decisions
.
Also, where is NaRM to lampoon the rest of your comment when you need him?
I used to post as ajh (which with magnificent unoriginality are my intials). A couple of years back, on another blog, someone else turned up with the same handle.
So they agreed to become anotherajh, and I changed to ozajh because I live in Australia (which is often contracted to oz by the locals).
sporkfed said, "I have a hard time believing that the average person has over 100k saved for retirement by the time they are 50.
My guess is that most couples have around 100K but most single individuals have considerably less."
I'm 51, wife 48. While I'm at the tail end of the boomers and she's an in-betweener, I'm having some difficulty connecting the generalizations (and some spleen) about boomers, their savings, and chances of retirement. It's true, we're not big on conspicuous consumption and over the last 5-7 years with both working and promotions, we're undoubtedly near peak income (balanced by two kids in college). But if what you're saying about retirement savings is correct, then we're doing a lot better--comparatively--than one could ever expect. So I'm wondering how correct all these generalizations about boomers could be. Admittedly, we're in the same house we bought when we came to Houston 19 years ago and started careers, so not being in a housing boom area (Houston was trying to emerge from its own slump when we moved) and located in a comparatively booming economy explains at least 1/2. Roubini, CR, and similar sites also get considerable credit, although I never threw mutual funds overboard, despite expecting a severe blowup in 2007. At the bottom in March our portfolio was down 40% but now we've peeked (or peaked) back to where we were in October '07, although that includes considerable contributions to 401k/403b (and also considerable withdrawals for college).
I suppose I'm suffering cognitive disconnect and must bend down to kiss the earth and bless the stars. But all boomers can't be as bad off as you all are claiming. Or did we win the lottery? I don't talk money to neighbors, so I suppose I'm a bit of a bubble boy.
In my experience, beautiful women are much more fun and stimulating to have sex more than once with than unattractive women. Good technique only goes so far when they look like a sack of potatoes with a dog head.
Large prospective deficits associated with implicit bailout guarantees...
'Prospective Deficits and the Asian Currency Crisis'
-Burnside, Eichenbaum, & Rebelo, 1998
'This paper argues that the recent Asian currency crisis was caused by large prospective deficits associated with implicit bailout guarantees to failing bank systems...a speculative attack is inevitable once the present value of future government deficits rises.'
Good technique only goes so far when they look like a sack of potatoes with a dog head.
False dichotomy alert! There is a lot of range between beautiful women and "sack of potatoes with a dog head". You shall be reported to the Forum Nazi Patrol!
But all boomers can't be as bad off as you all are claiming. Or did we win the lottery?
You may have won the lottery. Ignoring capital gains, how much have you saved over the last 20 years? Most of those capital gains were not due to clever or wise investments, but were in fact caused by asset price inflation that lifted even the leakiest boats - until the tide starts to go out again, over the next 20-30 years.
and is defined as a welfare payment rather than a bought pension.
U.S. Social Security is a social insurance system, which has more in common with a welfare payment than a bought pension. Most people don't get this. It's a collective system with individual contributions and records.
So all this currency devaluation/economic decline stuff happening called 'the GLOBAL conspiracy' by some blog commenters commenting on economics research links or maybe called locally 'the national Squid' is really just...drum roll...U.S. Economic Policy and U.S. Monetary Policy and...so mysterious and conspiratorial...yeah...
Patientrenter:
"You may have won the lottery. Ignoring capital gains, how much have you saved over the last 20 years? Most of those capital gains were not due to clever or wise investments, but were in fact caused by asset price inflation that lifted even the leakiest boats - until the tide starts to go out again, over the next 20-30 year"
Well, we both pretty much maxed the match for 16 years. I don't have data for my wife's first 5 years, because her 401 didn't really provide the data (Tenneco) but from '95 on at least, we're up 7.4%/year, although I don't completely trust the figure. That's figuring the 401k as a contribution, not a match. So we apparently are way up, if 100K is the figure.
I have no doubt that asset price inflation is a key element here. While I respect Mish and the deflationists here, since we are clearly in deflationary stasis and will be for while, I think betting on continued asset price inflation longterm as Ben primes the pump is probably the most likely outcome. I'm keeping an eye on energy and industrial metals, after the asset price correction I suspect is around the bend, but I've learned diversification and keeping some cash available during/after run-ups is a very wise policy.
Blackhalo,
Not sure about the making money part...but yes...it appears if certain economic conditions occur...some listed above in link...and there are 'expectations' of currency devaluation...it is 'inevitable'...according to some economic research...based on a line of national currency collapses since early 1990's and even before...
Beauty is in the eye of the lover. Fortunately, or unfortunately, my vision is 20/20. You Mr. Magoos apparently couldn't give a rat's ass ala Bill Clinton.
You Mr. Magoos apparently couldn't give a rat's ass ala Bill Clinton.
ugh Again with the false dichotomies! You don't have to pull out trailer park cuties like Billy Boy! You can at least start at low rent apartment complexes and work up from there! Honest!
Once you find a keeper who puts out almost daily, you really don't worry about whether or not she's a 9 or higher, you enjoy having a lot of good sex almost daily.
Once you find a keeper who puts out almost daily, you really don't worry about whether or not she's a 9 or higher, you enjoy having a lot of good sex almost daily.
I define a 'keeper' as a spouse who reduces the stress level in my life. Sexuality is a relatively small component of that.
~ 'Of course market participants could have believed that governments would fund their obligations by raising taxes or lowering expenditures. But is this credible? In our view it is not.' (p.4)
-Burnside, Eichenbaum, & Rebelo ~ 1998 research link above
So is it credible that the U.S. government will be able to fund their massive obligations by raising taxes or lowering expenditures?
Rational and irrational thoughts are subjective. Anyone arguing that someone doing a subjective thing has flawed reasoning. Often I have flawed reasoning.
Anyway barfly I tried to change the subject to 'outsourcing' but stumbled into another interesting & revealing research paper...ON how large govt. deficits AND bailout guarantees of failing banking systems bring an inevitable speculative attack on national currency...this is just what's happening in the U.S.A. after I thought 'It Can't Happen Here!'
Here's how much Congress cares. I was curious regarding any speech's on the floor done re: Federal Reserve monetizing.
Over the past 3 months there were a total of zero speeches from either Congress referencing the "TALF".
I guess they have no idea the Fed is monetizing the debt; or they don't want people to know.
And on this point, someone who claims to have "high standards" is in denial about who they are as a person and use "standards" as an out for why their sex life isn't fulfilling (or as fulfilling as they think it should be). If your sex life was fulfilling you wouldn't have to tout your standards as holding you back from more satisfying and frequent experiences. Even more revealing is that you can't imagine there is anything but high or low standard and that anyone who has more sex than you obviously has lower standards than you.
It's okay, you'll mature one day. And if you're over 35 right now, then you'll have many glorious years trying to imitate the life of Charlie Sheen.
(I have a few good friends who are smart, narcissistic, and not very attractive or mature who tout their standards)
Rational and irrational thoughts are subjective. Anyone arguing that someone doing a subjective thing has flawed reasoning. Often I have flawed reasoning.
But is staying or walking away subjective? It is only subjective on the emotional points and things like reptational risk. There is an economic cost to staying and to walking away, at what point does walking away make more sense that keep paying. I don't think that part of the equation is as subjective.
"Over the past 3 months there were a total of zero speeches from either Congress referencing the "TALF".
I guess they have no idea the Fed is monetizing the debt; or they don't want people to know."
They just care that homebuilding creates jobs. Run with the herd and you die when it falls over the cliff.
You left out quite a number of others...
* All the leeches -- AIG, GSEs, FHA, GNMA, GM, etc.
* FDIC & FHLB
* Pensions (government & private)
* Foreign wars
There are way too many places sucking ever greater sums of money just as revenue continues to decline.
"But is staying or walking away subjective? It is only subjective on the emotional points and things like reptational risk. There is an economic cost to staying and to walking away, at what point does walking away make more sense that keep paying. I don't think that part of the equation is as subjective. "
Emotion is a key part in everything, so, everything is subjective to a point. That is the problem with many economists. They ignore the subjective and only focus on the rational. The fatal flaw.
Yes. The narrative of that paper makes sense. Once a country's financial guarantees exceed what can reasonably paid for out of future taxes, its currency can't be maintained at a pegged level. Unless capital controls are put in place...
What exactly do you retire from? Something you don't like or cannot do anymore. Is there a imaginary line you cross at 65 that says you cannot work or you do not like work anymore? Retiring is for the defeated. I refuse to be defeated.
"Yes. The narrative of that paper makes sense. Once a country's financial guarantees exceed what can reasonably paid for out of future taxes, its currency can't be maintained at a pegged level. Unless capital controls are put in place... "
Reminds me of things I've read on people unwilling to realize losses... they want to hold on in hopes that it'll all turn around some day.
One thing I can't stress enough is how prescient John Talbott's book was when it came out (and I read it in) 2003. Among the topics he covered was the danger of the higher leverage afforded by extremely low mortgage rates.
Realistically, anyone underwater an amount higher than their gross annual income should be running away. Personally I believe RRE hasn't even come close to bottom and won't until rates normalize, so I'm not the kind that would recommend staying put for anyone that either (a) isn't rich, (b) comfortably retiring in place, or (c) has a place that would cash flow if converted to a rental.
yeah, the congress critters know exactly whats goin down and they aint gonna say shit about it
Unless they sit on one of the relevant committees, I'd be shocked if they were any better informed than most of us here.
But put yourself in their shoes for a moment: if you were in a public position of power and received information that indicated the economy was swirling a giant crapper and there was little hope of stopping it, how would you respond? Remember, you're a politician.
There are five choices:
1) You predict danger, no one believes you, and the event doesn't occur (or occurs in a different way) = you're chicken little and lose political power
2) You predict danger, no one believes you, something happens, and it doesn't matter because no one believed you and the economy collapsed anyway
3) You predict danger, everyone believes you, they start looting and rioting, and you're labelled "the cause" and villified for all of history
4) You predict danger, tell only other influential congressmen and keep it secret from the general public, and try to fix it behind the scenes, which doesn't matter because even if you're successful you'll never be able to score political points with it
5) You keep your mouth shut and hope the information you saw was incorrect.
There's no win in being the spokesperson for this, so no politician is going to champion it.
You should always run away when prices are depreciating and you are already underwater unless you are so lazy that moving scares you and you are afraid of what people say. Sprint away.
"Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling agreed to pay $2.73 million this week to settle a federal case alleging he discriminated in the rental of apartments he owns with his wife in Southern California.
The settlement is “the largest monetary payment ever obtained” in this kind of case by the U.S. Justice Department, according to a news release from the organization.
It stems from allegations Sterling’s company targeted and discriminated against blacks, Hispanics and families with children in renting apartments in greater Los Angeles. The settlement must still be approved by a federal judge but should also resolve two additional tenant-filed suits alleging racial discrimination."
You should always run away when prices are depreciating and you are already underwater
"Normal" RE cycles put people underwater and depreciating for up to 6 years but usually recovered in 10. Unfortunately this is not a normal cycle, thus I agree. Hell, I still wouldn't touch 99% of what's out there with your...
Savoring it all is subjective and why weren't those your priorities (substitute kids for grandkids) pre-retirement? People's excuses always baffle and annoy me. You made your bed. You should have done a better job.
Noob,
Follow the 'references' at the end of the relevant economic research 'papers'...even a Cavemen can do it...so any politician can...or blog commenter...or concerned citizen...the 'internet' is your friend if you avoid the bogus sites that misinform and distract...
Follow the 'references' at the end of the relevant economic research 'papers'...even a Cavemen can do it...so any politician can...or blog commenter...or concerned citizen...the 'internet' is your friend if you avoid the bogus sites that misinform and distract...
Don't get me wrong, mof, I don't disagree with you. I'm just saying why politicians would treat this topic like leprosy, which means the only way this gets addressed in the political arena is if it's championed by citizens and demanded by voters. But no one in Washington is going to stick their neck out, in part because of the reasons I loosely set out above.
As long as they are 100% invested in the S&P 500, they will be well above $800k real soon.
They just gotta kind the current system going. It is so bad that now they are trying to minimize ruthless defaulters' credit scores from being impacted and preaching how credit scores still matter. This farce is actually getting amusing to me. They want to minimize impacted credit scores and keep it going would've made me
, but now, I'm finally starting to get it.
Besides, who needs retirement savings when you have Social Security and Medicare?
Better to spend it all now when you can enjoy it.
Nemo wrote:
You just won't let us get our blow off, will you
? You have to be the world's biggest blue baller in the history of blue balling.
.
High school teases would be more humane to their agonizing prey than the mighty
My retirement plan is simple - just hit those numbers in the Powerball drawing and I am set.
Terry - My retirement plan came into sudden focus when I realized water has an LD50 level
"I expect the saving rate to increase to 8% or so over the next couple of years"
and 'hope' the savings rate beats dollar decline.
Terry wrote:
What will you do when they give you IOUs on your winnings?
I'm in the pre-denial stage...
The few 50-59 year olds that I know have no where near 300K saved for retirement.
Although a few of them do have substantially more than 300K saved.
REBear wrote:
Gotta love a 70% GDP consumer economy is going to survive with its citizens saving 10% of their post-tax USDs. 7% plunge in GDP expected ex gov't debt?
Social Sec is suposed to be only a safety net, in addition to retirement savings.
401k are suposed to be an additional savings to regular retirement savings.
What is this main retirement savings thing they are taliking about?
Fewer and fewer have a company pension. Gov jobs, techers, firement, cops, have pensions, although those may be a thing of the past as well. What happens when those pensions default and the Fed ends up paying out for all of it? Do they decrease benifits at some point?
ResistanceIsFeudal wrote:
Cuts down on the need to save.
Juvenal Delinquent wrote:
I'm in the pre-denial stage in regards to your pre-denial.
yagij wrote:
Terry wrote:
And so the cycle continues unending... :tao:
I deny your denial and I drink your
!
I'm just one of the fortunate ones that had Publisher's Clearing House letter me that I will win that $1,000,000.00 next week.
Everything's cool here.
Blackwaterwannabe wrote:
That means you will be able to pre-qualify for a pre-owned house down in Rancho Coucamunga. Go you...
Most boomers haven't saved $300K. They saved maybe $50K, borrowed a few $ hundred K and bought houses and stocks, and watched as asset price inflation lifted the "value" of those houses and stocks by $250K above the amount borrowed.
Asset price inflation is not the same as savings. Saving $100 means earning $100 more than you spend. Watching your home or stocks appreciate above inflation isn't "earning" anything in real economic terms - it just represents a redistribution of wealth from younger people buying the assets at inflated prices to the older people selling them.
Social Security is 7.5% of gross, matched by 7.5% from the employer.
Is that not 15% in retirement savings?
What am I missing here?
patientrenter wrote:
It's not??? Damn!!!!
patientrenter wrote:
Not now it's not!
Terry (profile) wrote (in reply to...) on Thu, 11/5/2009 - 9:39 pm
ResistanceIsFeudal wrote:
My retirement plan came into sudden focus when I realized water has an LD50 level
Cuts down on the need to save.
A bit, yeah.
Here was the problem that caused the neighbor's combine to fail. The device is integral to the carburetor.
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/1641485.pdf
This device was invented in 1926 and used on a combine built in 1979. Says something about American "technology," or the lack of it.
We are bypassing this device and installing a generic inline fuel filter between the fuel tank and the carburetor.
He'll be back in business by 0900 tomorrow morning, so he will be able to get his harvest in before the rains.
josap wrote:
Maybe, but what is 15% of 30k/yr? 4.5k? * 30 years? 135k? You are also missing the fact that inflation will eat it because the people you are paying are also devaluing your currency.
Gallery View - StockCharts.com
there's something happening here.
what it is, aint exactly clear.
there's a man with a....
Jonathan wrote:
3 years ago it was. Lots of people put self directed IRA money into real estate. All gone now.
I read an article somewhere that people in that age range have on average $50k saved. not good
If you've got your money managed by a professional then he's got a fool for a client.
From CR's linkie...
Love the lead 'on average'... bet the median is even worse especially if the non-response cohort is estimated & included.
Meaning the nice folks at WF obviously didn't talk to many wage slaves... I doubt there is anyone on my block that will have let alone has ever had $300K at one time including the equity in their home. I'd guess the median is somewhere near $50K even with equity included.
Oh - and they know they are screwed - make no mistake about it - no denial there. Most everyone I know [except a couple teachers w/ pensions] think they'll work until they are too weak to work - then die.
Don't worry - Harry, Nancy and BHO will make it all better
josap wrote:
Did I miss the /snark tag? I don't see how SS can be considered savings since it does not belong to you. At 40 yrs of age I don't expect to see more than 10 cents on the dollar for what I've put in. Nevermind any employer contributions.
I read this somewhere too, digalert.
Am trying to find it now.
yagji
So if you "save" 15% with SS, and say 10% with the 401k, how much more do you need to save on top of the 25%? Maybe 50% of pretax income, then you have 25% of your gross wage to live on.
Not going to happen.
dryfly wrote:
It will make life interesting for the broken families and their future. If the parents are gone and grandparents are raising grandchildren, it throws a nice wrench in that process. Or "too weak to work" will equal 40, not 75.
JD & yagij,
You need to read the informative 12 step program for financial literacy by Ben Shalom Bernanke .
Stop doing CR, take your meds have a beer and watch family guy and everything will be OK.
Blackwaterwannabe wrote:
Actually, I can simplify your process into a single step: Watch porn.
josap,
my point exactly. I came close in 2006 to buying a house, and would be 30 or 40k underwater if I had. We are a bit underwater now, maybe 20k, but it's still cheaper than renting, and we need a roof.
big dollar rally will crush the hopes of the gold bugs, peak oil theorist, and decoupling charlatans once again..
HomeG posting the steel imports tarrif seals the deal.
oh yeah, UST note holders continue to get paid.
Yu has been warned.
Gotta pack - heading to Tampa to visit the son and his GF - kick his butt in golf and watch the Packers beat the Bucs. Next week all!
Nemo wrote:
Yes.
Looking these numbers and working out the likely future, I can't believe I ever took any of it seriously.
it's a more sophisticated lotto.
Mike, they take it out the pay check, without consent. It belonged to someone before they took it. So yes, it is mine. And if the agreement is that the employer matches it, that is mine too.
Not a snark.
josap wrote:
Oh, I don't want you to think that I'm voting in favor of this flavor of delusion. All I'm saying is the numbers could be there, but you won't be able to retire on it. You probably won't even be able to "semi-retire" on it. You probably won't even be able to not have to live with your siblings and/or children on it. The 45-60 crowd should have the resources to drive Change that this country needs, but they realize that rocking their nest will risk breaking their nest eggs. "Screw Change; Just Get Me To Death" will probably be their motto in the next election cycle.
.
Edit: IS the motto of every graying generation. I just want to keep things as they are 'til I die.
I need to call up Suze Orman and ask her if I can afford retirement...
Basel Too wrote:
I'm sure she will be glad to refer you to her series of books or speaking engagement. Remember if you can't afford retire, it is your fault.
I'm planning to buy a boat, and live off the bounty of the sea.
Hey, at least I have a clam err plan.
I personally recommend the Suze Orman method for funding retirement. Get spectacularly wealthy off book royalties and speaking engagements; invest in treasuries and conservative bonds; wait for death. See other books for help on step 1.
Here is a
for your boat.
again... Government of the
, by the 
and for the 
shall not perish from the earth.
The quality of life for the masses who will work until they die is inconsequential in comparison to the standard of living enjoyed by the oligarchs and their spawn, the true Masters of the Universe and the rightful rulers of the global plantation they and their ancestors worked so hard to create.
Let's see how many ages 50 to 59 now actually do retire by 65 or retire then go back to work for all the reasons discussed here on CR
josap wrote:
Edible, non-radiated seafood is optional. See the A la Carte menu for pricing.
Reality, what a concept! You mean I need to have money besides SS?
yagij wrote:
Why exclude debt spending? That kind of policy could hurt
I know I'm working until 70 yrs because I'm a solo consultant and like to keep in the game although I'll slow down a bit in late 60's
Speaking of patents:
Patent Lawsuit Could Cost Billions | Machine Design
"A recent patent lawsuit in federal circuit court has the intellectual property world taking note and offers important lessons for businesses. The Solo Cup Co. is being sued by a patent attorney claiming the company is misleading consumers by marking its products with expired patent numbers. Patent law provides for a fine up to $500 for each offense of false patent marking. Solo Cup Co. has produced an estimated 20 to 50 billion products since the patents expired. While courts have broad latitude in defining what constitutes an “offense,” and are unlikely to consider each marked product a separate offense, Solo could still face significant fines for patent mismarking."
We should be trolling for litigation opportunities...that'll pay for retirement.
Boomers could always move in with their children.
Lord knows they've saved up the social capital for that.
REBear wrote:
I'm talking about GDP as far as we are concerned. You know: Services for Services and Labor for Labor? Sure, GDP for
could go up 12%/yr, but for us poor plebes, we'd be happy to not slide 12%/yr.
yagij wrote:
I know folks in that boat now - blended families almost living like a giant primitive village or commune. I expect there to be a lot more like them too.
Oh - and it isn't always a happy village either - imagine sharing close quarters with some of your most disagreeable family members and ask yourself... "Do I want to do this the rest of my life?" When the answer comes back "You have no choice"... stress mounts.
josap wrote:
Don't see how you can count it as "savings" since you have no control over it. Wanna bet next year CPI says no COLA for you to SS recipients? If it truly was your savings - you could spend it on hookers and blow and you'd have no one to blame but yourself when you woke up the next day broke and hungover. Somehow I don't think showing up with a fist full of of SS IOU's is going to get you wasted and laid...
Badger,
How does it work if the kids and grand kids live at home with the Boomers?
badger wrote:
If the children had jobs & money.
Ye gawds dryfly.
It would be like some bad holiday that never ends!
Mike in Long Island wrote:
I agree. The government doesn't even save it. Just spends it and throws another io(hu) in the filing cabinet...
Check this out...
How Are Consumers Spending So Much? - The Atlantic Business Channel
More evidence that we have a lot further to fall.
Lobbyist Ben Dover wrote:
Beat me to it. Welcome to Commune 2025.
I don't think showing up with a fist full of of SS IOU's is going to get you wasted and laid...
---That is a real BuzzKill, Mike.
dryfly wrote:
I read in the local news how a 30 something law firm owner was found dead from OD'ing on meds. Of course, no one thought she was suffering from anything, and she was still young, attractive, and "successful". Now people are wondering how her finances and book of business is/was really doing.
.
"Stress mounts" is a CR-esque understatement.
Income solves a lot of problems, or at least gives options. As for the boomers, disability will take many of them before they are ready or able.
Lobbyist Ben Dover wrote:
I guess they take turns not paying the mortgage.
josap wrote:
In that case, you need to develop a really good sense of humor, and pretty quickly.
Spunkmeyer wrote:
+1!!!!
+10!
Spunkmeyer wrote:
Extend & pretend -- the "extended" family addition.
HomeGnome wrote:
Oh it ends. It doesn't end like the 50s & 60s culture lead their generation to believe how it ends.
.
Queue pictures of grandfathers getting their grandchildren to smoke opium in Afghanistan because there isn't anything else to offer the poor boy
That's a good one. Very good.
dryfly wrote:
Guess it must suck for the "Don't trust anyone over 30" generation...
Spunkmeyer wrote:
LoL! Good humor contains truth....
Spunkmeyer wrote:
We just got Spunk'd!
.
It does paint an interesting picture if no one can come home and proudly claim how they put food on the table today.
Dryfly,
I think I am going to get lots more section 8 renters in the future. They better start printing more food stamps also.
Since cash is a medium of exchange, there is no such thing as savings except in assets. >Sends secret code to gold bugs< Stocks are savings for these purposes. People shouldn't get distracted by the national savings rate.
Actually SS FICA tax contribution WOULD be savings IF the gubbmint ran surpluses [real ones not just pseudo-lock box 'surpluses']. But the SS surpluses are savings in the same way a guy making $100K and spending $120K via VISA cards still thinks his 5% IRA contribution is 'saving'.
Need to consider the 'net'...
Thank god that the only one of us who had kids was the millionaire.
Spunkmeyer wrote:
LOL. Think of the opportunities. You have at least 3 or 4 individuals at any one time eligible for the FTHB credit. With a super duper 3.5% down FHA (with a little DPA) they can live rent free for 2 years. Rinse, repeat.
yagij wrote:
Seriously.My kid's friends kinda look @ me funny when I mention things..
To be clearer, stocks aren't savings as far as savings rate is concerned, but as far as evaluating retirement prospects, they are pretty relevant.
Young, attractive, and dead. Got an address?
Daily Kos: State of the Nation
as the diarist said words fail
yagij wrote:
GDP is calculated for the
by the 
while we talk about 
on blogs.
km4 (profile) wrote on Thu, 11/5/2009 - 8:12 pm replyIgnore userDaily Kos: Wall Street At Front Of The Line For H1N1 Vaccine
as the diarist said words fail
Wall Street is in the front of the line for everything else.
Would we expect anything different?
badger wrote:
Actually they can be 'saving' as is 'gold'... Saving is an identity equal to the difference of 'Income minus Consumption'... so unless you 'consume' the gold [use if for plating electronics or something]... then it qualifies as not consumption.
What these activities don't do is support lending to produce investment in processes that actually produce goods [consumed later]. Even buying/selling the secondary stock market doesn't do that - only the initial public offerings go into that [directly].
The actual article isn't near as nefarious. High risk employees at NY's largest employers (after they already hit some employers that had high risk populations) are now getting vaccinated. NY's largest employers are in finance. GS had only 17 employees eligible or something like that.
on 2nd thought there's plenty of swine
on Wall St
km4 wrote:
Probably inaccurate - most of WS NOT at the front of the line - only the
gets it first. The rest are useless eaters [also known as '
counter parties' or 'suckers']... why waste vaccine on them?
This is not really a huge deal. I bet my old employer SLB has a bunch of vaccine. It's a huge, huge, huge deal if a key employee is sick, or heaven forfend, seriously ill.
You can bet they don't want key folks dying of swine flu.
Would it be too basic to say "Your net worth is your savings".?
That makes more sense to me.
Even though that amount of "savings" can increase or decrese even with the same base amount ''saved" monthly.
Jonathan wrote:
If the dude ran a milling machine though - hey there are more of them.
Key employees "are" more valued than pregnant unemployed women. Unless you're driving in Boston and keeping score.
I have a hard time believing that the average person has over 100k saved for retirement by the time they are 50.
My guess is that most couples have around 100K but most single individuals have considerably less.
Jonathan wrote:
Only an elite in stealth mode would say this!
As macro indicator overall, I think the savings rate is like is to a company's cash flow what GDP is to a company's profit. In perfect equilibrium generationally, there would be no variation in savings rate as generations retired. If our savings rate goes up, I think it is reasonable to attribute it some to boomer retirement. Historically, a high savings rate corresponds to a society believing there is significant risk in keeping more of their money in play. This is just as likely at this point to be a cause behind a higher savings rate. I know you probably already know all of this, but I figure this explains where I'm coming from better.
digalert wrote:
And how much debt?
Yeah, that's going to happen...
Reality is that we've spent the last 60 years in a delightful bubble totally divorced from historic reality. But Americans have no sense of history - national or family - and don't see that the mean reversion pertains to a great deal. Life? It can really suck, but you have to deal with it.
Maternal great, great, great, great-grandfather fought through Civil War as a corporal with a PA volunteer regiment without injury. Even fought at Gettysburg (I know the location his regiment fought at on second day). Went home and ten or so years later lost an arm in a farming accident helping a friend. He went back and continued with his tobacco store, also working as a notary and other jobs to bring in money.
Paternal great-grandfather died after falling from a horse at turn of 20th century. Remember my great uncle telling stories of the final hours and the physician applying leeches to the wound on the head to draw out blood. His wife went on to raise four kids, one of whom - my grandfather - returned with his family to live with her during the Great Depression after he lost his job due to a heart attack. Per my father, an extremely tough woman.
This is really just reversion to the mean.
dryfly wrote:
That's my plan . . . unless I just die first.
Judging "savings" denominated in dollars is a fool's game, is it not?
josap wrote:
Yes, it would. You save $100 when you earn $100 more than you spend. Asset price inflation doesn't count as earnings, at least not if you want to measure sustainable economic activity.
josap wrote:
That was the justification for consuming 'MEW'... people considered their income to be 'income plus increase in RE & other assets'... what they discovered is that train can run in reverse too and the MEW might already be spent.
I think you can count your 'net worth' as income but ONLY after you have monetized the long term & rather illiquid assets.
GS gets the turd polishing award and MS spins the bad PR FTW.
"Morgan Stanley received 1,000 doses of the vaccine for its New York and suburban offices, but the company turned over its entire supply to local hospitals when it learned it received shipments before some area hospitals"
The article requested is no longer available.
And the old lady despised my grandmother intensely. That household was hell on earth.
And when I got old enough to understand some things, I completely understood why.
And I'm gonna have to show this thread to my wife, who's worried about our savings level. It'll be a reality check.
I planned work until I got weak...but recharge on soup made from my Senator's bone marrow.
Savings will hurt a lot of people. What will really hurt most of them though is becoming unable to work sooner than anticipated, be it layoff, stress, or disability.
Is it considered noteworthy that Congress has apparently extended the $729,000 Jumbo Conforming limit?
broward wrote:
I plan to stay on UE until my SS kicks in? Well at least as long as my senator keep extending benefits.
josap wrote:
You're missing two things.
Social Security is mainly a pay-as-you-go social insurance system, not a savings system.
Everybody doesn't get the same benefit from whatever amount is "saved." It's a progressive social insurance system, so lower income people get relatively more per dollar of contribution than higher income people.
How much you get back per dollar put in also depends on: 1) when you start benefits between age 62 and 70; and 2) what part of your benefit gets taxed (between zero and 85%) and given back into the system at your tax rate.
Especially love the bottom ad talking about contacting to obtain Ken Fisher's investment advice for those with a portfolio above $500K.
Nice comments, Rich.
I truly see means testing on the horizon. Pisses my 80+ year old mother no end. After all, her poor dear departed husband worked hard for the money that she now enjoys and she shouldn't have to share with the lowly.
Yeah, you should hear some of our conversations.
Anonym wrote:
Not really. There was never any doubt. It looks like an average of one new program a week to boost home prices and otherwise subsidize homeowners. Why let an old program lapse when your purpose is to shovel ever-larger amounts of money into homeowners' pockets?
Re $729K Jumbo conforming limit.
On cusp of today's news that they're going to let underwater homeowners rent them back, it sounds as though the government is hoping to capture the upscale market as well as the lower end. Market stratification, baby.
Maybe they should increase it?
Broward:
Does political affiliation affect the flavor of the soup?
I'm an equal-opportunity epicurean.
Anonym wrote:
They will. But they might do it by creating a new program, or expanding another existing one. For example, they might tell the FHLBs that they will support them if they buy lots of high-end mortgages that are not being purchased by FNM/FRE. There are many options. They will find and use several.
homedad43 (homepage, profile) wrote on Thu, 11/5/2009 - 10:26 pm
This is really just reversion to the mean.
Exactly. That's the long view of it, and the law of averages rules the long run. Now there's hell to pay. No amount of chicanery is going to change that, just shift around who takes the brunt of it.
homedad
It was interesting that they refused to say who would be managing the properties. Who collects the rent, handles maint calls and vendors etc.
Who is getting paid and how much?
My father was working in the ER in the 90s in Ontario Canada when the governer at the time David Peterson showed up expecting prompt service.
The head ER doctor told him to go to go to the back of the line and wait his turn.
For a company to get access to a medical vaccine thar is in short supply and decide in a non medical manner who gets access to it is criminal.
All I can say is fck that sht!!!!!
I could care less how "important" an employee is. Medical personnel should be deciding who gets access to h1n1 vaccine.
Maybe the free market should determine the price of the vaccine. Then the manufacturers would make enough of it.
If you read the story, it isn't high-value employees, but high-risk employees. The companies had to be large enough to have their own medical departments to administer the vaccine and follow CDC guidelines.
Maybe the free market should determine the price of the vaccine. Then the manufacturers would make enough of it.
One egg per one vaccination. Has to be a fertile egg. Some of the incubation doesn't work. That is allot of happy chickens and roosters, but it takes a long dang time.
I seriously doubt that they got that far. Now, there'll probably be some scrambling to pick up some gubbmint business, but they're bailing as fast as they possibly can.
Check out Jesse's Café Américain and look at the motto on top. Pertains to suffering.
Sometimes things happen in a serendipitous way. I've been involved in multiple independent conversations regarding suffering in one manner or another, none started by me. Hell, my youngest's baseball coach (Fall ball) was talking to the little guys about not getting upset when a play goes wrong...that's the game and that's life. Pick it up and move on.
OT, but I saw briefly that Progresso apparently was noted for having higher chemical content in some of their soup flavors. Those must be ones for the NJ Democratic Senator.
That was tried. In 2001, the vaccine market was down to one or two suppliers. Sec. Thompson nationalized it at that time.
"Report: Pre-Retirees in Denial on Savings"
The ones in "denial" will turn out to be the smart ones: Buy lots of nice things and nice times when you're young and middle-aged, and then show up at retirement age looking for a handout. Will they get a nice handout? Well, did the people who signed up to pay more than they could afford for a home get nice handouts? Duh. Best of both worlds.
Patientrenter:
That thought has crossed my mind.
homedad,
What most people don't realize is that TPTB slyly put the mechanism for means-testing Social Security benefits in place in 2004, when they started means-testing Medicare B premiums, which they euphemistically called "income-relating."
To means-test Social Security, they can't pay out the benefits and expect to get them back voluntarily. They have to withhold them based on your reported 1040 income. To do that, the IRS has to have authority to report your tax data to Social Security, and the reporting has to be done two years prior. Think about it. You file taxes for 2009 on April 15 2010. That information will then determine what net Social Security benefit you get (after "income-relating") starting on January 1, 2011.
Guess what? That's exactly what they did with Medicare B premiums. The law gave IRS authority to share data files with Social Security, which administers Medicare and takes B premiums right outta your Social Security. The income you report on your 2009 taxes will determine your B premiums in 2011. It's hell on CPAs to plan around. But it's automatic. You don't ever see the Social Security benefits from those higher B premiums withheld.
Income-relating Social Security benefits could be done, will be done, with the stroke of a pen. It's just a question of time.
The law already includes tax-exempt income in the income-relating formula but to be effective it will have to include a lot more, or else sophisticated high-income seniors and their CPAs will just plan around it. At minimum, it will have to include tax-deferred income in annuities and life insurance, unrealized appreciation on some securities, and untaxed income stashed in several types of trusts.
One for barfly...on a different issue...
'Globalization and Offshore Resourcing'
IT outsourcing from the U.S....
Conclusion - 'The strains of this strategy are beginning to tell on the social costs we will incur as more and more sectors of the economy become susceptable to outsourcing and the middle class gets increasingly destabilized. The next five years will be crucial in determing how public policy leaders will respond to this challenge and create a new level of equilibrium...that will sustain and nourish the creative capacity of the American middle class.'
Sridhar Sourirajan, 2004, Duke University
Well the five years have gone by...and the American middle class are in deep trouble. It's a result of U.S. economic policy that allowed the equilibrium to grow out of balance...
http://www.soc.duke.edu/outsourcing/documents/sridhar.pdf
Invalid URL
patientrenter wrote:
Lots of those people lost thier homes or will lose them in the next few years. Some may get a deal, most won't.
"Sir, welcome to Carl's Jr. Would you like the 5000 calorie deep fried fettucine alfredo bacon burger with a cup of hot fat on the side?"
"Why, yes, I would, Mr. Stallone. I'm glad this 65 to 80 year old mandatory fast food job is putting you back to work."
"If only Burgess Meredith had this opportunity, he would not have died a destitute man turning tricks at the bus station."
"Yo to that, Sly."
Also, the easiest way to income-relate Social Security benefits is just to make them 100% federally taxable for all but the poorest people. That will happen. States vary in how they tax Social Security. Some states tax the same portion as the feds, but apparently California does not currently tax any. How long do you think that lasts?
I actively look for ways to teach the kids about money and risk. Because I keep tabs on the foreclosure notices, I've been able to quietly tell my older kids which of their friends are losing their houses in foreclosure. It's led to some truly interesting conversations as we've talked about choices and what they've seen when they've been around those kids.
That said, one case is truly a tragedy and has nothing to do with spending patterns but instead loss of the family due to father and prison.
Allstate Sells Municipals as Governments Run Deficits
Bloomberg Printer-Friendly Page
mp
It's a gascolator! I have one on the firewall of my Cessna......
Nobody goes to prison anymore. Only Martha Stewart.
josap wrote:
I drive through mile after mile of homes that are still 'valued' at $500K - $3 mill each. They are nice but very ordinary places. Most of the people living there are saving tiny amounts of $10k - $50K per year, at best. They couldn't afford to buy their own homes (you know, the old-fashioned way, using just their own money). Most of them will get to stay in these homes. They clearly are winners of giant bets.
Rich:
So noted. Guess I have to work that small Costa Rica property into the equation.
It is impressive how some of this happens years in advance while most people can't think a year ahead.
rich wrote:
About three more days now that you've let the cat out of the bag.
Execute him!
Most things automotive aren't new, whether they appear to be or not. Go look up the first turbocharger, supercharger, SOHC, DOHC, series hybrid, parallel hybrid, etc.
Old is new at some point in time.
Elvis wrote:
free housing, free food, free sex.
what's not to like?
I expect many "non-retiring seniors" to see the light in years to come.
I didn't like the free sex from hairy men.
The U.S. stock market has been hyped and juiced for a long time, and over the last 10 years it has returned exactly zero on a total return basis, per S&P 500 Index. But bonds returned 6% or so, so a balanced stock bond portfolio just about matched inflation.
Over the next 10 years, I figure stocks are probably good for 3-4%. But bond returns will be lower, maybe 1-3%. And inflation will probably be higher. So the balanced portfolio will not match inflation. To make any progress long-term, you will need to diversify out of financial assets and into real assets. Most investors won't make that shift until it's too late. Financial assets have been sold too long, too hard.
Here down under we're many years ahead of you on that one.
The Australian age pension is subject to both an income test and an assets test. Note that this pension is NOT paid for out of a specific tax like your SS, and is defined as a welfare payment rather than a bought pension.
The assets test was introduced specifically because of wealthy people gaming the system. One particularly egregious example was a retired politician who converted the entire income stream from his (ridiculously generous, but that's another rant
) superannuation pension into cash, bought a multi-million dollar mansion for cash along with some carefully tax-structured investments, then trotted down to the local DSS office to claim the age pension for some spending money when on holiday (using his Gold Pass for unlimited free first-class air travel).
And they wonder why they see
coming.
The howls in the media when the assets test was introduced were something to behold (with most of the letters to newspaper editors identifying the writers as coming from VERY high-priced areas).
And I was only visiting my convicted friend.
patientrenter wrote:
Your neighborhood is very different from my neighborhood.
But then Phx RE prices are down 53% so far.
Earlier barfly, I challenged anyone to find some (or any) macroeconomic studies and models that hypothesize that massive unsustainable government (and consumer) over-spending and borrowing (debt), massive unemployment (and outsourcing), rapid 'expected' devaluation of the national currency, structural imbalances, systemic risk, international 'contagion' of these conditions, etc. will have a productive outcome for any national economies (and the global economy)...
Now you can call these recurring and repeated conditions of serial 'financial/currency' crisis and deflationary credit destruction cycles what you want...but how about calling them 'U.S. economic public policy'...doesn't have quite the ring of other more flashy internet terms, huh?
Patientrenter re winners of giant bets:
But what's going to happen when FNMA decides to sell these properties after they're pressed for cash and the owners are still strapped for cash themselves? FNMA will have to sell sooner than later and the new owners are liable to raise the rent significantly.
I'm trying to picture Mr. Potter of "Wonderful Life" having a whopping great orgasm.
On second thought, mebbe not.
They won't sell. They will bulldoze and say that there are too many houses, so they are doing the nation a great favor.
One great thing about the 401k is that it's hard to bust open the piggy bank, you have to pay back loans.
Doesn't stop those laid off from cashing it out. though.
Making comparisons to dollar amounts doesn't make as much sense as comparing to those peoples yearly wages. A guy living on 12k a year could probably never save 100k, but a guy making $100k+ a year should be ashamed if he can't.
"Work and save" actually works.
FWIW, I am above average for my age and salary, but I am really cheap and thankful that had a dad who taught me fiscal responsibility on top of that.
Anecdotal, based on the boomers I know, they will be selling houses to fund retirement, or working and never retiring. I also now peers my age who haven't taken advantage of company matching in 401k, not one dime. If company's continue eliminating them, I got mine while I could. If 100% returns were easy I wouldn't go to work, but 100% matching is free money.
Damn, Ozajh (I can't even imagine how to pronounce it).
you sure that this guy didn't serve in the US Congress?
poic wrote:
But
is essential to our way of life... Well, at least to congress' way of life.
homedad43 wrote:
Guess I need to get used to the concept of getting a peach for Xmas and farming the hardened mud of rural SE US if my future is going to be where my grandparents, great-grandparents, etc were. A return to where garbage fish were a blessing if you could afford to spend the time to catch them. If not, it is back to dropping out of school at 6th grade to work in the fields and "summer vacation" will take on a new (return to old) meaning again
100% matching is free money until those matching moneys are invested in CDOs.
Captain Morgan:
yeah, we grab the matching contribution. But we no longer max out the 401K since the choices available suck.
BTW, doesn't your leg get tired?
Yagij:
Yup. It's gonna be eye-opening for a lot of folks.
that isn't mud; that is red clay, son.
One thing is for sure. Joe 6P's money is just flying out of U.S. stock mutual funds and into bond funds.
Over the last five weeks, domestic equity funds have lost net cash flow every week and $17 billion cumulatively. That's just stunning when you consider all the automatic positive cashflow generated by reinvestment and retirement plan contributions.
In the same five weeks, assets of bond funds increased by $55 billion. Millions of Americans are stupid with the limited amount of money they've managed to save? I don't think so. This shows they are scared and running away from whatever their advisors and fund groups are saying, due to lost trust.
It's the institutional leveraged dice-rolling traders and hedge funds that aren't scared and are pumping up the market.
ICI -
Long-Term Mutual Fund Flows, November 4, 2009
Personally, I think that my master plan is to look for a necessary product that doesn't have an expiration date and hoard it. When the dollar tanks and folks are hard up, I'll sell this for hard assets or other tradable goods a la Thunderdome.
I'm thinking tampons.
My retirement plan is very simple.
While I can work, I pay off the house and I send my 6 kids to good schools and universities. In 15 years when I retire, I figure I can mooch off of two or three of them and live reasonably comfortably. I might have to babysit their kids, but that's a small price to pay.
Write a letter to try and get a brokerage account added to your 401k. I don't know why every 401k isn't ran this way. Fiduciary duty and all.
We have to pay yearly and quarterly for ours, but the fees aren't that bad, and beats having the crap choices.
Leg? With enough rum you won't feel or remember you have legs...
I don't know if you've heard it yet, but retirement is un-American. Only "freeloaders" would even consider retiring.
That's the new message. Watch for it.
HomeGnome wrote:
Its a b^tch to farm if it is your only "real" way to provide for your family whatever you want to call it.
.
Edit: You can grow good things in it don't get me wrong, but if we find ourselves without much to keep the slugs and pests away and don't have time to get a year or so of good compost material going, it will be a hard first season or two.
Speaking of tired legs, when I had a third arm growing out of my back, people made fun of me. So, I had it cut off and it is in a jar next to my bed. There are also tonsils and my appendix in that jar.
homedad43 wrote:
xanax stores better.
Elvis wrote:
What does that do to the Fed's MBS?
I don't know if you've heard it yet, but retirement is un-American. Only "freeloaders" would even consider retiring.
That's the new message. Watch for it.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Hadn't considered it, but interesting proposition. Think that the whole Dennis Hopper thing on "dreams" is the cusp perhaps. Now the dreams will change to some other moneymaking endeavour.
I'm originally from the midwest (where there is nice, fertile, black soil) but now I live in South Carolina.
The soil here is shit; to put it mildly.
Speed wrote:
Remember at the peak of the Tech bubble, when we would all be able to retire at 50?
The Fed MBS is a total writeoff. We all know that. They know that.
rich wrote:
Are they trying to hide it from the
? Cause I doubt that will end up being the best place for that money.
homedad43 wrote:
That Dennis Hopper thing should've been a sign that things were going to get worse... much worse. When people are trying to plant dreams of things you've never done into a head that cannot really grasp what those dreams took, they should've been staring at their funds with trepidation and protected it. Preparing for the current moment where not moving backwards is automatically moving you forwards.
Why does everyone want to retire so badly. The right work is fun. Like giving up sex. I guess most people have the wrong work and unattractive partners. Guess I am happy for what I've got.
Elvis wrote:
Needs an illustration...
Max's Ghetto Fries
If it isn't clear from the picture, that's a paper tub of fries topped with giardiniera, chopped raw onions, barbecue sauce, cheddar cheese and clear beef gravy. Calorie count unknown.
Speed wrote:
Easier to retire than find that new job at 69.
I'm only 25 and I've already made peace with the fact that I'll die working.
Elvis wrote:
Yeah, but it would be nice to be able to be financially secure enough to quit a job you hate, but pays $$$, and take a job you love, that only pays $.
Easier to retire than find that new job at 69.
The mandatory fast food worker from 65-80 yrs. old solves that problem.
Elvis wrote:
From my experiences, unattractive partners doesn't automatically translate to "bad sex".
.
I think Billy Bob put it best:
Blackhalo wrote:
I could have, too, if those fuckers at the SEC had let me cash out all my stock options.
Ride a Harley Lately?
Guess the question will be "how many greeter / night watchmen jobs are there in the future.
Elvis wrote:
It is the eeriest thing to see that your service folks at a fast food joint are easily 2x your age when it has historically been youth and poor folks doing the work...
Elvis wrote:
Exactly right.
I don't plan for retirement, I plan for the next ten years so I don't goof with marginal women or unpleasant jobs if possible.
"Yeah, but it would be nice to be able to be financially secure enough to quit a job you hate, but pays $$$, and take a job you love, that only pays $."
You should have made that decision a long time ago. You can enjoy a job and make a lot of money, too. Problem is too many people rush in.
CaptainMorgan wrote:
Sure is going to suck to be the last boomer to do that.
Elvis wrote:
For Family Law folks, we like those kind of people... if they have enough $$$ to get out of "rushed" decisions
.
Also, where is NaRM to lampoon the rest of your comment when you need him?
@homedad43,
(* snicker *)
I used to post as ajh (which with magnificent unoriginality are my intials). A couple of years back, on another blog, someone else turned up with the same handle.
So they agreed to become anotherajh, and I changed to ozajh because I live in Australia (which is often contracted to oz by the locals).
sporkfed said, "I have a hard time believing that the average person has over 100k saved for retirement by the time they are 50.
My guess is that most couples have around 100K but most single individuals have considerably less."
I'm 51, wife 48. While I'm at the tail end of the boomers and she's an in-betweener, I'm having some difficulty connecting the generalizations (and some spleen) about boomers, their savings, and chances of retirement. It's true, we're not big on conspicuous consumption and over the last 5-7 years with both working and promotions, we're undoubtedly near peak income (balanced by two kids in college). But if what you're saying about retirement savings is correct, then we're doing a lot better--comparatively--than one could ever expect. So I'm wondering how correct all these generalizations about boomers could be. Admittedly, we're in the same house we bought when we came to Houston 19 years ago and started careers, so not being in a housing boom area (Houston was trying to emerge from its own slump when we moved) and located in a comparatively booming economy explains at least 1/2. Roubini, CR, and similar sites also get considerable credit, although I never threw mutual funds overboard, despite expecting a severe blowup in 2007. At the bottom in March our portfolio was down 40% but now we've peeked (or peaked) back to where we were in October '07, although that includes considerable contributions to 401k/403b (and also considerable withdrawals for college).
I suppose I'm suffering cognitive disconnect and must bend down to kiss the earth and bless the stars. But all boomers can't be as bad off as you all are claiming. Or did we win the lottery? I don't talk money to neighbors, so I suppose I'm a bit of a bubble boy.
In my experience, beautiful women are much more fun and stimulating to have sex more than once with than unattractive women. Good technique only goes so far when they look like a sack of potatoes with a dog head.
Tom Stone wrote:
Only Fags ride Harleys.
Large prospective deficits associated with implicit bailout guarantees...
'Prospective Deficits and the Asian Currency Crisis'
-Burnside, Eichenbaum, & Rebelo, 1998
'This paper argues that the recent Asian currency crisis was caused by large prospective deficits associated with implicit bailout guarantees to failing bank systems...a speculative attack is inevitable once the present value of future government deficits rises.'
http://www.chicagofed.org/publications/workingpapers/papers/wp98_5.pdf
What's with this false dichotomy?
Fake? Mom feeds family of 6 on $4 a week •
VideoSift: Online Video *Quality Control
Elvis wrote:
False dichotomy alert! There is a lot of range between beautiful women and "sack of potatoes with a dog head". You shall be reported to the Forum Nazi Patrol!
Blackhalo wrote:
+1 SP
Ok, but I guess my expectations are high.
And I'm not desperate.
Elvis wrote:
...
...
...Fag.
merchants of fear wrote:
So the arguement is that once the currency becomes vulnerable to a speculative attack, and there is money to made from it, it will happen?
A sack of potatoes has a lot of potential.
and dogs are loyal.
robj wrote:
You may have won the lottery. Ignoring capital gains, how much have you saved over the last 20 years? Most of those capital gains were not due to clever or wise investments, but were in fact caused by asset price inflation that lifted even the leakiest boats - until the tide starts to go out again, over the next 20-30 years.
Loyal sex with your dog is criminal/
U.S. Social Security is a social insurance system, which has more in common with a welfare payment than a bought pension. Most people don't get this. It's a collective system with individual contributions and records.
patientrenter wrote:
Exactly right.
Many people believe themselves to be brilliant when they were merely lucky.
There are people who just enjoy the taste of food despite its presentation and smell. I prefer the whole package. To each his own.
Elvis wrote:
That's what the potatoes are for.
Potato gun to fend off the cops?
So then you're holding your dick and complain that girls aren't hot enough for you? Isn't that convenient?
E Thomas St. wrote:
If that is what you call "having standards", then yes, it is convenient!
Best line of the night:
They can all live together and take turns not paying the mortgage.
So then you're holding your dick and complain that girls aren't hot enough for you? Isn't that convenient?
I don't get myself in that situation to begin with. Kind of like not finding myself in the crack district...
So all this currency devaluation/economic decline stuff happening called 'the GLOBAL conspiracy' by some blog commenters commenting on economics research links or maybe called locally 'the national Squid' is really just...drum roll...U.S. Economic Policy and U.S. Monetary Policy and...so mysterious and conspiratorial...yeah...
Many people believe themselves to be brilliant when they were merely lucky.
Some people are lucky. However, the key to investment success is contrarian timing. If you have this, you are brilliant and successful.
Patientrenter:
"You may have won the lottery. Ignoring capital gains, how much have you saved over the last 20 years? Most of those capital gains were not due to clever or wise investments, but were in fact caused by asset price inflation that lifted even the leakiest boats - until the tide starts to go out again, over the next 20-30 year"
Well, we both pretty much maxed the match for 16 years. I don't have data for my wife's first 5 years, because her 401 didn't really provide the data (Tenneco) but from '95 on at least, we're up 7.4%/year, although I don't completely trust the figure. That's figuring the 401k as a contribution, not a match. So we apparently are way up, if 100K is the figure.
I have no doubt that asset price inflation is a key element here. While I respect Mish and the deflationists here, since we are clearly in deflationary stasis and will be for while, I think betting on continued asset price inflation longterm as Ben primes the pump is probably the most likely outcome. I'm keeping an eye on energy and industrial metals, after the asset price correction I suspect is around the bend, but I've learned diversification and keeping some cash available during/after run-ups is a very wise policy.
when dad gets home youre all gonna get a spankin for talkin dirty
The best illustration I can give to contrarian timing is going to lady's night during the Super Bowl.
Blackhalo,
Not sure about the making money part...but yes...it appears if certain economic conditions occur...some listed above in link...and there are 'expectations' of currency devaluation...it is 'inevitable'...according to some economic research...based on a line of national currency collapses since early 1990's and even before...
merchants of fear wrote:
Well, if you look at who gets to set U.S. Economic Policy and U.S. Monetary Policy, and who has benefited to an astounding degree...
Blackhalo,
Yeah...bingo...apparently
Who has a ladies' night on a Sunday? Bitch best be bring bread back.
Work 'til you die? Hahahaha....that presumes the existence of jobs...........
Yield curve hit 2.65.
No, the dog and the potatoes are not mutually exclusive.
presumes jobs yes that was what i was thinkin
Skittles, jobs are created by the Magic Wand of Employment, in a process not unlike that which you rely upon for your own unique "outputs".
Beauty is in the eye of the lover. Fortunately, or unfortunately, my vision is 20/20. You Mr. Magoos apparently couldn't give a rat's ass ala Bill Clinton.
Elvis wrote:
ugh Again with the false dichotomies! You don't have to pull out trailer park cuties like Billy Boy! You can at least start at low rent apartment complexes and work up from there! Honest!
boomers are gonna find out that ya can retire on a lot less money than they ever thought
just gotta spend less
instead of an 18 foot run-a-bout with twin 80 horse outboards...theres a canoe
instead of club med...a weekend on long beach and camp in the quinault rain forest
instead of a trip to vail, go x-country skiing around mt rainier
pay off your house
garden
snip the visa mastercard and use the costco membership only for food
buy used dvd s at "half priced books" and clothes at "value village"
no problem
price of freedom
False dictotomy must be code for people who have "low standards."
Once you find a keeper who puts out almost daily, you really don't worry about whether or not she's a 9 or higher, you enjoy having a lot of good sex almost daily.
If everyone buys used, who buys new to make used?
Elvis wrote:
Public/private sector is the supreme false dichotomy of post-war capitalism.
the affluent, the younger gen and the un free buy new
I have more sex than I want sometimes, but I cannot get aroused for someone who is not physically attractive at my standards. My loss I guess.
Elvis wrote:
I have heard complaints that the thrift shops are raising prices and selection is less because of demand.
E Thomas St. wrote:
I define a 'keeper' as a spouse who reduces the stress level in my life. Sexuality is a relatively small component of that.
Prospective deficits & currency crisis...
~ 'Of course market participants could have believed that governments would fund their obligations by raising taxes or lowering expenditures. But is this credible? In our view it is not.' (p.4)
-Burnside, Eichenbaum, & Rebelo ~ 1998 research link above
So is it credible that the U.S. government will be able to fund their massive obligations by raising taxes or lowering expenditures?
Skittles the Unicorn wrote:
Yea where they coming from.
Elvis wrote:
I have found that in the dark, all cats are black.
Sex reduces my stress level. And I don't have to stress over whether she's hot or not when I'm boning her.
Sex isn't important if you make it that way? Best friends should just get married, and they should rotate the dirty work?
If we don't retire, our kids will never move out because they can't find a job.
I can't bone her if she is not hot. I guess we all have our weaknesses.
Elvis wrote:
They say that's the best day to go to Disneyland.
If you retire, the kids will turn on the gas in your house and inherit the egg.
Not sure how many saw the report by the Arizona Law professor claiming homeowners aren't acting rationally but I blogged on it last night and that prompted a little discussion that I invite others to join but only if you are exceedingly bored :
Original article:
Professor: Fear, Shame Keep Homeowners From Defaulting | UANews.org
My initial post:
Effective Demand: Professor: Underwater homeowners acting irrationally
Bill watkins response:
It is Probably Not Irrational to Pay for an Under-Water Home | The CERF Blog
More thoughts from me tonight:
Effective Demand: Expanding some thoughts on homeowners acting irrationally
merchants of fear wrote:
Let me take this one. Umm... NO!!!
"So is it credible that the U.S. government will be able to fund their massive obligations by raising taxes or lowering expenditures?"
there is a cross road up ahead...social security, the interest on the national debt, the cost of empire, and medicare (caid and tricare)
are going to have a four way head on collision
and one of those 4 are going to get slashed
guess which is
Elvis wrote:
When I was single I couldn't even entertain the idea if they were stupid, no matter what they looked like. Silly me.
Rational and irrational thoughts are subjective. Anyone arguing that someone doing a subjective thing has flawed reasoning. Often I have flawed reasoning.
Guess which one?
Ooh, ooh. SS, Medicare and the cost of empire, cause Hu's Yer Daddy.
Anyway barfly I tried to change the subject to 'outsourcing' but stumbled into another interesting & revealing research paper...ON how large govt. deficits AND bailout guarantees of failing banking systems bring an inevitable speculative attack on national currency...this is just what's happening in the U.S.A. after I thought 'It Can't Happen Here!'
Here's how much Congress cares. I was curious regarding any speech's on the floor done re: Federal Reserve monetizing.
Over the past 3 months there were a total of zero speeches from either Congress referencing the "TALF".
I guess they have no idea the Fed is monetizing the debt; or they don't want people to know.
yagij wrote:
I think it's some sort of automated douchebag generator.
And on this point, someone who claims to have "high standards" is in denial about who they are as a person and use "standards" as an out for why their sex life isn't fulfilling (or as fulfilling as they think it should be). If your sex life was fulfilling you wouldn't have to tout your standards as holding you back from more satisfying and frequent experiences. Even more revealing is that you can't imagine there is anything but high or low standard and that anyone who has more sex than you obviously has lower standards than you.
It's okay, you'll mature one day. And if you're over 35 right now, then you'll have many glorious years trying to imitate the life of Charlie Sheen.
(I have a few good friends who are smart, narcissistic, and not very attractive or mature who tout their standards)
Elvis wrote:
But is staying or walking away subjective? It is only subjective on the emotional points and things like reptational risk. There is an economic cost to staying and to walking away, at what point does walking away make more sense that keep paying. I don't think that part of the equation is as subjective.
"Over the past 3 months there were a total of zero speeches from either Congress referencing the "TALF".
I guess they have no idea the Fed is monetizing the debt; or they don't want people to know."
They just care that homebuilding creates jobs. Run with the herd and you die when it falls over the cliff.
homedad43
i agree plus one...all four are gonna get hammered
and there is nothing hu or me or anyone else is gonna do about it
mock turtle wrote:
You left out quite a number of others...
* All the leeches -- AIG, GSEs, FHA, GNMA, GM, etc.
* FDIC & FHLB
* Pensions (government & private)
* Foreign wars
There are way too many places sucking ever greater sums of money just as revenue continues to decline.
"(I have a few good friends who are smart, narcissistic, and not very attractive or mature who tout their standards) "
Your friends reflect you. I'm just tell it like it is.
TJ,
You get a 'A' (just kidding)...now back to 'sex ed' with the nerdy types...
YLSP
yeah, the congress critters know exactly whats goin down and they aint gonna say shit about it
a dirty little open secret that QE is destroying the dollar
and in fact that is part of the great plan
"But is staying or walking away subjective? It is only subjective on the emotional points and things like reptational risk. There is an economic cost to staying and to walking away, at what point does walking away make more sense that keep paying. I don't think that part of the equation is as subjective. "
Emotion is a key part in everything, so, everything is subjective to a point. That is the problem with many economists. They ignore the subjective and only focus on the rational. The fatal flaw.
YLSP - 'or they (Congress) don't want people to know (about monetizing)...
Interesting? But don't call it a conspiracy...call it damage control...
that will all be taken care of with the printing press...file under QE and the fed buys USTs
as for the wars...part of "cost of empire" one of the four cars at the cross roads
in short our fearless leaders are going to solve this problem just like any mafioso or crip or hells angel would "solve" a "problem"
they are going to liquidate the problem
"Interesting? But don't call it a conspiracy...call it damage control..."
I call it fear and impotence.
The same thing I say to unattractive women.
Yes. The narrative of that paper makes sense. Once a country's financial guarantees exceed what can reasonably paid for out of future taxes, its currency can't be maintained at a pegged level. Unless capital controls are put in place...
What exactly do you retire from? Something you don't like or cannot do anymore. Is there a imaginary line you cross at 65 that says you cannot work or you do not like work anymore? Retiring is for the defeated. I refuse to be defeated.
"Yes. The narrative of that paper makes sense. Once a country's financial guarantees exceed what can reasonably paid for out of future taxes, its currency can't be maintained at a pegged level. Unless capital controls are put in place... "
Or their military is dominant AND has nukes.
Effective Demand,
Great debate you have going on over there!
Reminds me of things I've read on people unwilling to realize losses... they want to hold on in hopes that it'll all turn around some day.
One thing I can't stress enough is how prescient John Talbott's book was when it came out (and I read it in) 2003. Among the topics he covered was the danger of the higher leverage afforded by extremely low mortgage rates.
Realistically, anyone underwater an amount higher than their gross annual income should be running away. Personally I believe RRE hasn't even come close to bottom and won't until rates normalize, so I'm not the kind that would recommend staying put for anyone that either (a) isn't rich, (b) comfortably retiring in place, or (c) has a place that would cash flow if converted to a rental.
campy. funny. but, campy.
mock turtle wrote:
My point exactly -- they have no choice but to monetize, and do so at such a rate to foment a currency crisis within the next 3 years.
p.s.: That's my "best case" conservative guess. IMHO it all comes apart next year.
mock turtle wrote:
Unless they sit on one of the relevant committees, I'd be shocked if they were any better informed than most of us here.
But put yourself in their shoes for a moment: if you were in a public position of power and received information that indicated the economy was swirling a giant crapper and there was little hope of stopping it, how would you respond? Remember, you're a politician.
There are five choices:
1) You predict danger, no one believes you, and the event doesn't occur (or occurs in a different way) = you're chicken little and lose political power
2) You predict danger, no one believes you, something happens, and it doesn't matter because no one believed you and the economy collapsed anyway
3) You predict danger, everyone believes you, they start looting and rioting, and you're labelled "the cause" and villified for all of history
4) You predict danger, tell only other influential congressmen and keep it secret from the general public, and try to fix it behind the scenes, which doesn't matter because even if you're successful you'll never be able to score political points with it
5) You keep your mouth shut and hope the information you saw was incorrect.
There's no win in being the spokesperson for this, so no politician is going to champion it.
TJ,
You should always run away when prices are depreciating and you are already underwater unless you are so lazy that moving scares you and you are afraid of what people say. Sprint away.
Retiring is for traveling, playing with the grandkids, having more time for the garden, reading more books, taking time to savor it all.
I like what I do, otherwise I wouldn't own the company.
"There's no win in being the spokesperson for this, so no politician is going to champion it."
If life was always reduced to five choices only, it would be so easy. Narrowing the choices is a lawyerly way of arguing but not a rightful view.
Maybe interesting: Sterling suit seems to fit NBA just fine - NBA - Yahoo! Sports
"Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling agreed to pay $2.73 million this week to settle a federal case alleging he discriminated in the rental of apartments he owns with his wife in Southern California.
The settlement is “the largest monetary payment ever obtained” in this kind of case by the U.S. Justice Department, according to a news release from the organization.
It stems from allegations Sterling’s company targeted and discriminated against blacks, Hispanics and families with children in renting apartments in greater Los Angeles. The settlement must still be approved by a federal judge but should also resolve two additional tenant-filed suits alleging racial discrimination."
Apparently David Stern has done nothing.
Elvis wrote:
I'm not someone who falls in love with my words. I eagerly await your contribution of some additional choices.
Elvis wrote:
"Normal" RE cycles put people underwater and depreciating for up to 6 years but usually recovered in 10. Unfortunately this is not a normal cycle, thus I agree. Hell, I still wouldn't touch 99% of what's out there with your...
Savoring it all is subjective and why weren't those your priorities (substitute kids for grandkids) pre-retirement? People's excuses always baffle and annoy me. You made your bed. You should have done a better job.
My mother used to tell me how lucky I was to be using commercially-prepared pads when my older sisters got by on cotton rags.
I can see I'll be using rags, shortly, and so might my daughter. Rags to rags in three generations.
(IOW, homedad43, tampons will be a luxury product, not a necessity. You might find them hard to shift when there are cheaper alternatives.)
My point exactly -- they have no choice but to monetize, and do so at such a rate to foment a currency crisis within the next 3 years.
p.s.: That's my "best case" conservative guess. IMHO it all comes apart next year.
Great, now I have a year to restock on the Campbell's Soup and stuff.
And that's gonna end the deflation/inflation argument.
Yes. I mean underwater by today's standards. Point taken.
Geek culture perhaps?
Noob,
Follow the 'references' at the end of the relevant economic research 'papers'...even a Cavemen can do it...so any politician can...or blog commenter...or concerned citizen...the 'internet' is your friend if you avoid the bogus sites that misinform and distract...
Otepoti:
Or for that matter, dollar bills?
never considered that there was an inferior alternative to tampons. Hm.
G'night.
that's gross
merchants of fear wrote:
Don't get me wrong, mof, I don't disagree with you. I'm just saying why politicians would treat this topic like leprosy, which means the only way this gets addressed in the political arena is if it's championed by citizens and demanded by voters. But no one in Washington is going to stick their neck out, in part because of the reasons I loosely set out above.
Otepoti,
Reminds me of the Seinfeld "sponge-worthy" episode.