Ha! Excellent life you have there. Your freedom is an asset few can even comprehend.
Sociologically, I read an interesting argument about the internals of the book that makes sense to me. Generally, men marry women 1-2 years younger than they. Generally, as a man you're better off when there are more choices and women compete for you. So, since the boom peak birth year was 1957, men born two years before experienced a different dating market than those born at the tail end of the boom. As the boom tailed off there were more men than the cohort of women born two years later, so the advantage of the earlier boomer men was lost. It's not surprising that the three Boomer Presidents were all born in 1946, riding the swelling waves behind them to position and wealth.
Private General Pensions become impossible with a fiat dollar, unless you can soak the taxpayers for them. They're still useful for individuals, however: I'm at the point where I can live off my assets so I don't need a salary. I can thus take pay in the form of a VERY generous personal defined benefit pension with the money deducted from corporate revenue before any taxes (corporate, federal, state, SS, Medicare) are taken from it. When I eventually take it, I'll pay only Federal tax on the money.
The idea of saving 15.3% of income is a good one, and I think this is ultimately WHY SS was put in place (but, really: $60 was the maximum annual tax for YEARS on the wages of the Silents): if the poor really did save that 15% every year they'd either not be poor in retirement or they'd pile up enough cash before spending it that the next generation would rise out of poverty. And a population of poor and working class and middle class that has enough money to avoid predation by the grifter class does not serve the grifter class's interests.
I wonder if there's a case study of a person who did exactly this (saved 14.3% as a member of the MA optional retirement plan in an account in his own name) and how he made out? The pension pays more benefits but it's dependent on the state's solvency.
Ha! Excellent life you have there. Your freedom is an asset few can even comprehend.
Sociologically, I read an interesting argument about the internals of the book that makes sense to me. Generally, men marry women 1-2 years younger than they. Generally, as a man you're better off when there are more choices and women compete for you. So, since the boom peak birth year was 1957, men born two years before experienced a different dating market than those born at the tail end of the boom. As the boom tailed off there were more men than the cohort of women born two years later, so the advantage of the earlier boomer men was lost. It's not surprising that the three Boomer Presidents were all born in 1946, riding the swelling waves behind them to position and wealth.
Private General Pensions become impossible with a fiat dollar, unless you can soak the taxpayers for them. They're still useful for individuals, however: I'm at the point where I can live off my assets so I don't need a salary. I can thus take pay in the form of a VERY generous personal defined benefit pension with the money deducted from corporate revenue before any taxes (corporate, federal, state, SS, Medicare) are taken from it. When I eventually take it, I'll pay only Federal tax on the money.
The idea of saving 15.3% of income is a good one, and I think this is ultimately WHY SS was put in place (but, really: $60 was the maximum annual tax for YEARS on the wages of the Silents): if the poor really did save that 15% every year they'd either not be poor in retirement or they'd pile up enough cash before spending it that the next generation would rise out of poverty. And a population of poor and working class and middle class that has enough money to avoid predation by the grifter class does not serve the grifter class's interests.
I wonder if there's a case study of a person who did exactly this (saved 14.3% as a member of the MA optional retirement plan in an account in his own name) and how he made out? The pension pays more benefits but it's dependent on the state's solvency.