[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by CoachKandSportsguy

there are other means to raise money other than to cut costs. .
One of the issues with increasing the age is that there is real age discrimination in the workforce, even though it's illogical. Hiring after the age of 55 is spotty and lucky at best. . which makes raising the age a nightmare for many people, due to no fault of their own.

Raise the tax on the remaining people who are the ones making the decisions on who should be laid off or fired. . and if the AI hopes and dreams come true, raising the retirement age will be fruitless as there will be no jobs other than commodity labor jobs.

good luck to us. .

I do not think that AI would destroy the jobs market as you think it will. Believe new jobs will be created in areas we have no clue where they will come from.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by CoachKandSportsguy

there are other means to raise money other than to cut costs. .
One of the issues with increasing the age is that there is real age discrimination in the workforce, even though it's illogical. Hiring after the age of 55 is spotty and lucky at best. . which makes raising the age a nightmare for many people, due to no fault of their own.

Raise the tax on the remaining people who are the ones making the decisions on who should be laid off or fired. . and if the AI hopes and dreams come true, raising the retirement age will be fruitless as there will be no jobs other than commodity labor jobs.

good luck to us. .

Exactly. Another case in point: the skilled laborer. The kind that, once upon a time, required apprenticeship and could promote to journeyman, and then master. Such as a mason, carpenter, printer.

They start out in the 1970's and work their way up, eventually earning their right to top pay in companies that provide top benefits. Earning $1200-2000/week, not including overtime, with company-paid fully comprehensive medical benefits for themselves and their spouses, paid time off, paid accruable sick time.

Fast forward to the 2000's, and the company realizes that no one uses that system of apprenticeship/journeyman/master anymore, they can pay new hires MUCH less, and require them to learn more, faster than their predecessors did. So they shut down the workshop and fire EVERYONE. Most of them are at, near, or even over 50 and were planning on taking their full retirement in a few years.

But now, they can't. They're unemployed, with only the pension they've earned and no other benefits, no paid COBRA for 18 months, they've lost all the sick time they've accumulated, it's all gone.

They can't afford to not work - they can't even get social security checks for almost another decade. But companies that are hiring now, in the 2000's, are hiring at lower wages. Former employees got their mortgages based on the pay they were earning in the 1990's. That's all been cut off. They can't afford to take a 50% cut in pay to start over at a new company, which is the MOST they can hope for in a world where their particular skill is no longer valued. They're in their 50's - and their trade is all they know, it's all they've done all their lives, since they started out as an apprentice in high school.

If you're a "professional" - someone with an MBA, or a doctor, or a lawyer, or seasoned politician - those kinds of jobs aren't too hard to get at excellent salaries and benefits, when you're 50 or older.

But skilled tradesmen, they're not a thing anymore. Everyone and their brother is learning to weld in "shop" in high school, or getting vouchers for trade schools now. Employers are hiring young kids, not people who plan on retiring in 5 years.

[Pballer]

Originally Posted by Rainger99

I asked AI to use the average income (about $66,000) and to invest it for 43 years (age 22 to 65) at various rates of return.

According to AI, investing 15% of the average income annually at a 7% return for 43 years could grow to approximately $2.81 million.

A more conservative return (e.g., 6%) would yield around $2.2 million, while a higher return (e.g., 10%) could push it toward $4.5 million.

If the worker made $33,000 a year, a 7% return for 43 years could grow to approximately $1.39 million.

A more conservative return (e.g., 6%) would yield around $1.09 million, while a higher return (e.g., 10%) could reach about $2.23 million.

In 43 years, a million dollars is not going to be worth much.

[Rainger99]

Originally Posted by Pballer

In 43 years, a million dollars is not going to be worth much.

I agree. But I don’t think the numbers were adjusted for inflation. I think salaries will be higher 10, 20, 30, and 40 years from now so the 15% yearly contribution will continue to grow over the 40 years.

If he just gets a 3% raise every year (inflation is usually 3-4 % a year) he will be making $212,000 in 40 years. If he gets a raise above inflation, he would be making more.

This is based on past performance. If our $36 trillion debt crashes the market by 90% and we have hyperinflation, we are all in trouble.

[mraines]

Originally Posted by MandoMan

Young people and everyone else working should be putting 15% of their income into Index Funds with minimum fees that go up as the market goes up. Yes, FIFTEEN %. This is IN ADDITION to what they pay into Social Security. Then they well probably be able to retire to The Villages someday. Meanwhile, workers and employers should each pay an additional 1% in Social Security taxes. This is such an easy fix, and it should have been done long ago. 1%! (It hasn’t been done because so many legislators don’t count on Social Security to get by when they retire, and they listen to businesses who say that 1% comes out of their profit.

I realize that investing 15% with every paycheck means young people and families may not be able to afford that new SUV or that big house or those restaurant dinners or those fancy vacations or a lot of things. But we’ve all read complaints here from people who live only on the Social Security payments they get. I feel bad for them. But if they had done what I recommend, they wouldn’t be in this situation today. My ex-wife and I scrimped and saved, and now we don’t have to worry. I see young people driving $50,000 to $90,000 trucks and SUVs and buying 3,000 sq ft houses and spending $100,000 on remodeling their kitchens and bathrooms, and I wonder how much they are saving for retirement. And putting it into CDs or savings accounts like my parents did won’t do it. My parents saved for decades but put the money into CDs and savings accounts, so the money they have in the accounts has grown, but always less than the inflation rate. Meanwhile, the money I put into mutual funds has quintupled. (But we still need mandatory social Security contributions.)

Have you ever tried to survive on minimum wage? Some people live paycheck to paycheck and cannot afford to put anything aside. Just sayin. Been there done that.