Posted on 04/04/2006 8:13:53 AM PDT by libertarianPA
Most investment counselors tell you not to put kids through college at the expense of your own retirement funding. Suze Orman likens it to the oxygen masks in airplanes - you make sure yours is in place before you help anyone else.
Unlike us folks out here in the private sector. My check is dinged for $200 every check ... my money, not the taxpayers ... and then, my employer matches it.
After that it goes into the SS lockbox and is consumed by maggots.
Nonsense. If you'd done the arithmetic and written "there are 72,000,000 fed or state workers in the US", you would have realized the silliness of this assertion.
Well part of it comes from student tuition.
In 2002, state and federal workers' compensation laws covered about 125.6 million employees. Covered payroll in 2002--that is, total wages paid to covered workers--was $4.62 trillion.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m6524/is_2004_Annual/ai_n15861008
Below is the link to this organization and this story can be accessed via this link:
http://www.ebri.org/publications/ib/index.cfm?fa=ibDisp&content_id=3630
"• Modest savings: More than half of workers saving for retirement report total savings and investments (not including the value of their primary residence or any defined benefit plans) of less than $50,000 (52 percent). However, the large majority of workers who have not put money aside for retirement have little in savings at all: Three-quarters of these workers say their assets total less than $10,000 (75 percent)."
The way this reads to me is this so called non profit doesn't include the value of the home and any deferred plan like an IRA or 401k.
So if a couple's combined deferred savings from a 401k is 500,000 and the value of their home is $500,000 and they only have $2,500 in a savings account. They only have $2500 saved for retirement
Sounds like more liberal BS from the lying spinning AP.
"which presumably then provides an income you will not outlive.""
While your addendum is accurate, you must have missed this part above.
Annuities are the probably the preferred way to "spend it all". The only problem with annuities is that they are only as good as the companies issuing them.
The method of annuity usage I learned was to use 60% of the lump to buy a 20 year annuity, then use the remaining 30% compounded for 20 years to buy a second if needed. Finally, the remaining 10% compounded for 40 years to buy a third if needed.
Only if they work for the DMV. ;>)
"Saving and investing or even charity would do the exact same thing. Why does the government need to be involved?"
Because it did not work which is why the government got involved in the first place.
You lost me again. Are you saying 25% of 125.6 million workers are Federal or State employees? Still don't see a source for you assertion.
Look at post #45. Silly me.
I did the calculator mentioned in the article, and it seems at age 40 we already have enough saved to replace $123% of our income. That doesn't smell right!
I assumed an 8% return on investment now and later. I also assumed 3% inflation rate and 2% income growth. Am I way off here?
Hard choices have to be made and we preferred to go with the most appropriate school not the cheapest one. I don't prefer to do things that way, I'm a saver and intend to be saving hard afterward but right now its counterproductive.
That is because you live in Texas, where the leaders are a little smarter. Up here in Wisconsin, some government workers get a lump sum payment upon retirement, and a monthly check afterwords.
Almost. They didn't include defined benefit, like a company pension. They probably did include IRA and 401K plans.
You got that right. My husband and I have saved faithfully the entire time we have been together. We are in great shape if what they say in this article is true.
I don't know about the state, but the feds are not outrageous.
You have someone who has put in 30 years of service. At the highest point in their salary (high three) they make 50,000 per year. That is what my husband makes now as a GS-9 Battalion Chief. The retirement calculation is 1% of the high three salary times years of service, which adds up to $15,000 per year or $1250 per month in direct pension funds. The rest of the retirement is funded through Social Security (yeah right) and through the thrift savings plan where the employee can invest up to 15% of pretax income. By the time taxes, retirement, health insurance, etc are taken out of his monthly paycheck, we have about $2600 per month left of his base salary. We invest our 15% religiously and are working on getting our mortgage paid off in the next ten years, because I don't see SS lasting through our lifetimes. We also have three kids to put through college.
The French Riveria is not in our future, but that's ok because my husband loves his job.
They don't pay into SS.....Oh, yes, they do. Plus their Retirement accounts.
What we all pay into SS comes pretty close to what they say is necessary.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.