Unfortunately, you'll need both SS and Medicare, in addition to your 401(k), to ensure a truly golden retirement -- even if you're squirreling away as much as 15 percent of your pay now into your 401(k). You also better hope the economy doesn't tank when you retire (as it did in '08). And if you have kids going to college, plan to put all your savings plans on hold as long as a decade.

 

Fortunately, you couldn't be more wrong. If you have any clue how to invest your money, the economic conditions won't have an impact when retirement time approaches, and they have things called scholarships and student loans. Kids that don't want things handed to them utilize those options, not mommy and daddy's money.

Unfortunately, you'll need both SS and Medicare, in addition to your 401(k), to ensure a truly golden retirement -- even if you're squirreling away as much as 15 percent of your pay now into your 401(k). You also better hope the economy doesn't tank when you retire (as it did in '08). And if you have kids going to college, you may need to reduce your 401(k) contributions for several years.

 

I disagree. Let's assume that at age 25 you make $35,000 per year and your start putting 15% of that into a 401k. Let's also assume that their is no employer match and that you get a salary increase of 2% per year. Even at a modest return of 8% per year by age 65 you will have just under $2 million in the account. Who couldn't live off of that?

I disagree. Let's assume that at age 25 you make $35,000 per year and your start putting 15% of that into a 401k. Let's also assume that their is no employer match and that you get a salary increase of 2% per year. Even at a modest return of 8% per year by age 65 you will have just under $2 million in the account. Who couldn't live off of that?

I would have agreed with your math a few years ago ... but an 8 percent rate of return going forward? That's way too optimistic, in my opinion. A raise of 2 percent a year is also highly questionable. Just ask any public school teacher who posts here.

I would have agreed with your math a few years ago ... but an 8 percent rate of return going forward? That's way too optimistic, in my opinion. A raise of 2 percent a year is also highly questionable. Just ask any public school teacher who posts here.

 

I've been with my current employeer for 8 years and have exceeded both benchmarks every year running.

I would have agreed with your math a few years ago ... but an 8 percent rate of return going forward? That's way too optimistic, in my opinion. A raise of 2 percent a year is also highly questionable. Just ask any public school teacher who posts here.

 

An 8% return is an extremely conservative estimate IMO. My 401k has had returns of nearly 15% a year since I started it 4 years ago, and my invesetment options are fairly limited compared to most plans. It's all about having just a bit of intelligence and investment savvy.

I'm assuming you're calling for the elimination of SS and Medicare. When you near retirement age, you'll start singing a different song.

 

I'm within 15 years of the current SS retirement age and I'm in total agreement with the sentiment to do away with SS and Medicare. I have made regular contributions to a 401K my entire working career and that's what I'm depending on. I have little or no faith that SS will be available when I qualify for it.

I'm within 15 years of the current SS retirement age and I'm in total agreement with the sentiment to do away with SS and Medicare. I have made regular contributions to a 401K my entire working career and that's what I'm depending on. I have little or no faith that SS will be available when I qualify for it.

 

That's because you're intelligent and not relying on the government to provide for you.

I don't think the auto insurance analogy is the right one. The right one is medicare and social security. Everyone pays for those and they paid for them before Obamacare. For those who are against the requirement to get health insurance, what are your thoughts on the requirement to pay social security and medicare taxes?

 

There is no analogy for this bill. Neither of those forces someone to buy a product in the private sector. Still doesn't work.

An 8% return is an extremely conservative estimate IMO. My 401k has had returns of nearly 15% a year since I started it 4 years ago, and my invesetment options are fairly limited compared to most plans. It's all about having just a bit of intelligence and investment savvy.

 

YTD my 401k is at a 18.79%

YTD my 401k is at a 18.79%

 

Just looked up mine, and it's 16.97%.

BTW I heard an intriguing idea. The House should pass a CR that fully funds Obamacare and mandates that all of the special carve outs and exemptions that the Dems and Obama gave to their base should be eliminated as well and scrapping the delay of the business mandate that Obama gave.

 

Let's see Harry and the boys justify not voting for that.

Yes, it is very different.

 

1. Car insurance is controlled by the individual states, not the federal government.

 

2. To add to #1, states only require liability insurance (insurance that covers other peoples' injuries, not yours). The Federal Health Insurance mandate requires you to buy insurance to protect yourself.

 

3. Using a public road is a privilege, whereas your right to life is a basic fundamental right. Requiring insurance to exercise a privilege is understandable whereas requiring someone to purchase health insurance for their life is debatable.

 

4. You can choose to avoid automobile insurance if you rely exclusively on public transportation, don't own a car, or don't use your vehicle on the roads. You cannot avoid the Federal Mandate for health insurance.

 

 

Well stated, especially #3. The state provides the roads and the license. It is a "privilege"! Forcing health insurance goes to the crux of individual liberty and choice. That's why Justice Roberts called the fees a "tax" because the government can't force you to buy something you don't want. You could argue that we all need to exercise. You would be correct. Does that mean the government can force us to buy a gym membership? A treadmill? Wake up folks. Obamacare has a lot of pitfalls. The president changed the law to exempt businesses and unions, without going through Congress. Why can't Congress give a one year delay to exempt individuals who don't have the same deep pockets and lobbyists as the special interests!

An 8% return is an extremely conservative estimate IMO. My 401k has had returns of nearly 15% a year since I started it 4 years ago, and my invesetment options are fairly limited compared to most plans. It's all about having just a bit of intelligence and investment savvy.

You haven't experienced a major market downturn yet. You will. Then we'll see how confident you are being fully invested in stocks.

I'm within 15 years of the current SS retirement age and I'm in total agreement with the sentiment to do away with SS and Medicare. I have made regular contributions to a 401K my entire working career and that's what I'm depending on. I have little or no faith that SS will be available when I qualify for it.

 

I'm ten years away and I'm ok with doing away with it in it's current form. I was talking to a client last night who is almost 67 and he would be ok with it also if it meant saving something for his children who are in their mid twenties. They are the ones who will pay the bills. I can't imagine what it will be like in 50 years. I hope someone, someday soon, finds the courage to address the needs.

I would have agreed with your math a few years ago ... but an 8 percent rate of return going forward? That's way too optimistic, in my opinion. A raise of 2 percent a year is also highly questionable. Just ask any public school teacher who posts here.

 

8% over a long period of time is very reasonable.