|
1 members (1 invisible),
2
guests, and
1
robot. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums59
Topics17,089
Posts313,784
Members6,305
| |
Most Online294
Dec 6th, 2017
|
|
|
There are no members with birthdays on this day. |
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 11,991 Likes: 128
veteran
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 11,991 Likes: 128 |
Another thought on the UBI... how would it have shaped your financial and career planning if you knew that you'd have enough for basic living after retirement, no matter how long you manage to survive? That's one of the big concerns - how much money do I need to sock away for the unknown remainder of my existence?
You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
To change something, build a new model that makes the old model obsolete.
R. Buckminster Fuller
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 21,134
Administrator Bionic Scribe
|
|
Administrator Bionic Scribe
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 21,134 |
Another thought on the UBI... how would it have shaped your financial and career planning if you knew that you'd have enough for basic living after retirement, no matter how long you manage to survive? That's one of the big concerns - how much money do I need to sock away for the unknown remainder of my existence? It would change us dramatically., but that is the point.
Life is a banquet -- and most poor suckers are starving to death -- Auntie Mame
You are born naked and everything else is drag - RuPaul
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,388
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,388 |
A majority of people pay taxes for most of their working lives and beyond. SS benefits obviously cannot cover even a meager subsistence when they retire. Getting something back for their contributions doesn't sound particularly dangerous or subversive. I think it would make a nation of people proud to be part of their country. And certainly more able to contribute to its progress.
And, a positive byproduct would be their lack of willingness to spend trillions on bombing other countries.
Last edited by Ezekiel; 08/19/16 10:58 AM.
"The liberals can understand everything but people who don't understand them."
Lenny Bruce
"The cleverest of all, in my opinion, is the man who calls himself a fool at least once a month."
Dostoevsky
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 12,129 Likes: 257
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 12,129 Likes: 257 |
At the extremes, it IS possible to live on Social Security alone. I've worked for decades as a software engineer so my Social Security report says at age 70 I would collect $3428 per month. Could I live on $41K per year? Sure if I downsized, moved to a cheaper part of the country, and lived a somewhat frugal lifestyle.
In fact I have a wife, so we can actually collect 50% more. We will get $61,704 per year. Well above the poverty line for a couple.
People very consistently underestimate what Social Security is worth. I would need over $1.2 million dollars invested at 5% to make that much money every month. Social Security is the most conservative part of my portfolio.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,388
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,388 |
At the extremes, it IS possible to live on Social Security alone. I've worked for decades as a software engineer so my Social Security report says at age 70 I would collect $3428 per month. Could I live on $41K per year? Sure if I downsized, moved to a cheaper part of the country, and lived a somewhat frugal lifestyle.
In fact I have a wife, so we can actually collect 50% more. We will get $61,704 per year. Well above the poverty line for a couple.
People very consistently underestimate what Social Security is worth. I would need over $1.2 million dollars invested at 5% to make that much money every month. Social Security is the most conservative part of my portfolio. You're talking max, not what most people get. You had to have had a much higher than average income to get that much from SS- probably near the top 5 or 10%. And your SS calc we already discussed in a previous thread. Doesn't really work that way. It is an aggregate actuarial calc. It accumulates over time.
"The liberals can understand everything but people who don't understand them."
Lenny Bruce
"The cleverest of all, in my opinion, is the man who calls himself a fool at least once a month."
Dostoevsky
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,010
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,010 |
Well, as an unapologetic commiehippieetc I still say it doesn't matter if someone makes bad choices, good choices or no choices. With the wealth we collectively have, everyone should have the resources for a decent living, including free health care.
The notion of punishing bad choices is so arrogant and unnecessary. It implies that your judgment is superior and everyone should live up to your standards.
not? Choices have consequences. No matter how we feel about it. What is the decent living to which every one is entitled? I think there is much dispute about that And i disagree that it is workable to put our. Collective wealth in a big pot and just split it up to achieve the goal you seem to propose. "Punishing bad choices is arrogant and unecessary?" Please cite which such punishment i proposed "Impliies thAt every one should live up go my standards" Imo you have drawn an unfounded implication There is no judgement in accurately noting that some people make poor choices Unless you somehow wish to deny this reality "Who made me mother superior..." This bit of unwarranted snark is uncharacteristic of the person i know And, fwiw, thx for your suggestion to improve my attitude I will work on it Besf Ardy
"It's not a lie if you believe it." -- George Costanza
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves. --Bertrand Russel
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 12,129 Likes: 257
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 12,129 Likes: 257 |
I agree. I am all for people being able to make a VERY wide number of choices. From concentrating on making lots of money, to being itinerant poets, to making a military career, etc. Just don't complain and act as if it my fault if you make a lot of choices that lock you into permanent resentful poverty. (But if poverty is what you want, then go for it!)
In fact, a big part of my love of a basic minimum program is that people could chose to live on that while they pursue whatever they like, even if it has no marketability and could not support them. Some of those things may be absolutely useless, but some may be very valuable for the future. We don't (and can't) know, so we should try everything. Think of it as introducing variation so natural selection has something to work with.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,388
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,388 |
Inner (or outer) fascist much? Distribution of wealth - is that Greek? Inclusion a foreign word? Humanity - not in your dictionary? 1) First you must prove that you are all-knowing so that you can decide what is a good choice and what is a bad choice. 2) Then you must further prove your superiority by deciding what/how much those you say have made bad choices deserve (if anything at all). 3) Then - after all is said and done - you must tell us how much you have allotted for yourself.  Just a note: it is not any one individual that produces wealth. It is society as a whole that produces it. Get the Rand out of your heads, boys.
Last edited by Ezekiel; 08/20/16 10:41 AM.
"The liberals can understand everything but people who don't understand them."
Lenny Bruce
"The cleverest of all, in my opinion, is the man who calls himself a fool at least once a month."
Dostoevsky
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 47,285 Likes: 351
Member CHB-OG
|
|
Member CHB-OG
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 47,285 Likes: 351 |
The future business model is all about eliminating the friction - which is why we need ""inefficient government jobs" like rebuilding our infrastructure for balance. Friction creates middle-class jobs, and cutting it out means automating or completely bypassing those jobs. Books provide a simple example of how today’s technology nukes friction-generating jobs. Physical books generate a lot of friction between publisher and reader—think of the portion of a book’s price that goes to employees at printers, truck companies, warehouses and book retailers. An e-book erases much of that. A book zips from Amazon’s data center to your iPad. The technology brings benefits to the publisher as costs fall, and it makes books cheaper and easier for consumers to get. But it kills all those jobs in the middle.
Contrarian, extraordinaire
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 12,129 Likes: 257
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 12,129 Likes: 257 |
Good luck on that. From the time workers in Holland were throwing their shoes into the first factory machines, that has not worked. Even if you made those high-friction jobs mandatory in the US, the rest of the world would simply out-compete us.
Take a clue from simple physics, friction is wasted energy. About the only good friction is in your car's brake system, and that friction doesn't make the car go! (My Prius slows down by recapturing energy by regenerative braking, which is why it gets 45 MPG.)
I also don't think "inefficient government jobs" like rebuilding our infrastructure need to be inefficient at all. When a bridge falls down from lack of maintenance, it is a huge waste of time, energy, people, etc. Better to keep up with the needed maintenance even if it requires guys with shovels, welders, riveters, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
