"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 8/13/2014 8:25 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 8/12/14, 2:19 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 12 Aug 2014 11:54:17 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 12 Aug 2014 02:23:59 -0400, wrote:

if you have 30 million boomers liquidating their 401ks

===

I don't think liquidate is the right description. Those who have
made good investment decisions can do well with the just dividend
stream and capital gains, leaving the principal amount mostly
untouched.

The problem, is most of those retirees have little actual money /
income.
So they will have to cash in the retirement accounts for living. I read
somewhere that the average savings of a 50 year is less the $50,000.
They
are not going to get to the amount of savings by 66 to live off of the
dividend stream. In other words, most have made either bad investment
decisions, or saved little, or both. Those people who have driven
around
in leased Bimmers and MB's and living the good life on current income
are
probably a majority. Or they were lower income workers. Janitors, etc.

That is my thinking and to make things worse, these people will be
selling into a bear market, just to pay the rent.
That is a perpetual motion market crash in the making. Every
correction will be pushed down farther than it normally would be by
these subsistence sellers.

OTOH the rich will certainly have the opportunity to get richer since
they can sit on the side lines with a big bag of money and scoop up
the bargains when they think they see a bottom.
You just have to be sure you are invested in a fund with large cash
reserves and hope it is enough to get them over the hard times without
selling off stocks to cover withdrawals.
For me, I am already starting to take my profits on this bubble market
we are looking at right now.
I think this bubble is going to pop.



It won't happen in my lifetime, but this country is headed for a real
revolution. Whether is is peaceful or violent will only be revealed in
the future. Corporationists, greed, banksters and the trend to find the
cheapest labor for everything means the death of the middle class and
the end of the possibility of lower income groups being able to fight
their way into it. No more decent jobs with benefits, eventually no more
Social Security, no more nothing for the vast majority of Americans
beyond bleak subsistence living. Municipal services being privatized,
jails privatized, police forces gearing up with assault vehicles and
weaponry, and ignorant Americans thinking illegal Central and South
American immigrants are the cause of civilization's decline. It's a
perfect scenario for heads on pikes of the Koch Brothers types and a
real restructuring of America.



If history is a guide to the future a global conflict is likely ...
basically WWIII that will completely restructure how businesses operate
in the USA. It's inevitable.

Meanwhile, unskilled jobs will continue to decline. Higher education
will continue to be a prime prerequisite for those jobs that exist even
in small businesses. The days of expecting middle class wages and
enjoying a middle class lifestyle with nothing more than a high school diploma are over.

It isn't just "unskilled" jobs in decline in this country. We are headed
for a massive restructuring. Too much wealth is concentrated in the hands
of too few and it is getting worse.

--
Posted from my iPhone

On 8/13/2014 9:50 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 8/13/2014 8:25 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 8/12/14, 2:19 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 12 Aug 2014 11:54:17 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 12 Aug 2014 02:23:59 -0400, wrote:

if you have 30 million boomers liquidating their 401ks

===

I don't think liquidate is the right description. Those who have
made good investment decisions can do well with the just dividend
stream and capital gains, leaving the principal amount mostly
untouched.

The problem, is most of those retirees have little actual money /
income.
So they will have to cash in the retirement accounts for living. I read
somewhere that the average savings of a 50 year is less the $50,000.
They
are not going to get to the amount of savings by 66 to live off of the
dividend stream. In other words, most have made either bad investment
decisions, or saved little, or both. Those people who have driven
around
in leased Bimmers and MB's and living the good life on current income
are
probably a majority. Or they were lower income workers. Janitors, etc.

That is my thinking and to make things worse, these people will be
selling into a bear market, just to pay the rent.
That is a perpetual motion market crash in the making. Every
correction will be pushed down farther than it normally would be by
these subsistence sellers.

OTOH the rich will certainly have the opportunity to get richer since
they can sit on the side lines with a big bag of money and scoop up
the bargains when they think they see a bottom.
You just have to be sure you are invested in a fund with large cash
reserves and hope it is enough to get them over the hard times without
selling off stocks to cover withdrawals.
For me, I am already starting to take my profits on this bubble market
we are looking at right now.
I think this bubble is going to pop.



It won't happen in my lifetime, but this country is headed for a real
revolution. Whether is is peaceful or violent will only be revealed in
the future. Corporationists, greed, banksters and the trend to find the
cheapest labor for everything means the death of the middle class and
the end of the possibility of lower income groups being able to fight
their way into it. No more decent jobs with benefits, eventually no more
Social Security, no more nothing for the vast majority of Americans
beyond bleak subsistence living. Municipal services being privatized,
jails privatized, police forces gearing up with assault vehicles and
weaponry, and ignorant Americans thinking illegal Central and South
American immigrants are the cause of civilization's decline. It's a
perfect scenario for heads on pikes of the Koch Brothers types and a
real restructuring of America.



If history is a guide to the future a global conflict is likely ...
basically WWIII that will completely restructure how businesses operate
in the USA. It's inevitable.

Meanwhile, unskilled jobs will continue to decline. Higher education
will continue to be a prime prerequisite for those jobs that exist even
in small businesses. The days of expecting middle class wages and
enjoying a middle class lifestyle with nothing more than a high school diploma are over.

It isn't just "unskilled" jobs in decline in this country. We are headed
for a massive restructuring. Too much wealth is concentrated in the hands
of too few and it is getting worse.



There are two ways to respond to your assessment. The first is to cast
the blame on those who have been successful and demand a cut of the
fruits of their labor.

The second is to qualify oneself via training and education for the jobs
that exist in a highly competitive world ... that is only becoming
*more* competitive.

For most, the second route was drilled into us as youngsters. Unlike
today, we were never taught to "expect" it due to some societal right.
The required education may be acquired in many ways. It doesn't
necessarily require daddy's fat checkbook.

I'd also add that it often takes many years of work to rise to the
"middle class" financial category. Some people seem to think it's a
"right" and should start as soon as you become an adult. I didn't
achieve a "middle class" lifestyle until well into my 30's.

wrote:
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 12:37:54 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 8/13/2014 9:50 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:


There are two ways to respond to your assessment. The first is to cast
the blame on those who have been successful and demand a cut of the
fruits of their labor.

The second is to qualify oneself via training and education for the jobs
that exist in a highly competitive world ... that is only becoming
*more* competitive.

For most, the second route was drilled into us as youngsters. Unlike
today, we were never taught to "expect" it due to some societal right.
The required education may be acquired in many ways. It doesn't
necessarily require daddy's fat checkbook.

I'd also add that it often takes many years of work to rise to the
"middle class" financial category. Some people seem to think it's a
"right" and should start as soon as you become an adult. I didn't
achieve a "middle class" lifestyle until well into my 30's.

If you believe the assessment made by millionaire media and author
types, I never have.
There is a story floating around the talk shows now that you need
$150,000 for the basic necessities of life ... what bull****!

10 years ago or so, the media claimed you needed $250k to live in the
Silicon Valley. BS like a lot of today's media.

On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 15:03:13 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 12:37:54 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 8/13/2014 9:50 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:


There are two ways to respond to your assessment. The first is to cast
the blame on those who have been successful and demand a cut of the
fruits of their labor.

The second is to qualify oneself via training and education for the jobs
that exist in a highly competitive world ... that is only becoming
*more* competitive.

For most, the second route was drilled into us as youngsters. Unlike
today, we were never taught to "expect" it due to some societal right.
The required education may be acquired in many ways. It doesn't
necessarily require daddy's fat checkbook.

I'd also add that it often takes many years of work to rise to the
"middle class" financial category. Some people seem to think it's a
"right" and should start as soon as you become an adult. I didn't
achieve a "middle class" lifestyle until well into my 30's.

If you believe the assessment made by millionaire media and author
types, I never have.
There is a story floating around the talk shows now that you need
$150,000 for the basic necessities of life ... what bull****!

===

It depends on your life style and expectations. $150K sounds a bit
short to me but we probably live better than many.

wrote:
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 22:53:34 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 15:03:13 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 12:37:54 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 8/13/2014 9:50 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:


There are two ways to respond to your assessment. The first is to cast
the blame on those who have been successful and demand a cut of the
fruits of their labor.

The second is to qualify oneself via training and education for the jobs
that exist in a highly competitive world ... that is only becoming
*more* competitive.

For most, the second route was drilled into us as youngsters. Unlike
today, we were never taught to "expect" it due to some societal right.
The required education may be acquired in many ways. It doesn't
necessarily require daddy's fat checkbook.

I'd also add that it often takes many years of work to rise to the
"middle class" financial category. Some people seem to think it's a
"right" and should start as soon as you become an adult. I didn't
achieve a "middle class" lifestyle until well into my 30's.

If you believe the assessment made by millionaire media and author
types, I never have.
There is a story floating around the talk shows now that you need
$150,000 for the basic necessities of life ... what bull****!

===

It depends on your life style and expectations. $150K sounds a bit
short to me but we probably live better than many.

We never made over $100k combined until recently and I don't think we
were living badly. We had "paid for" cars, boats and this house. Our
daughter came out of college without debt and we actually never owed
money for anything but the condo in Treasure Island. I paid it off
early and we had that free and clear too.

I am also not sure I know anyone who makes much more than $100k, most
make less, some a lot less.
This is SW Florida tho. I know it costs more to live in other places.

I made more than a 100k and the wife only worked part time for a friend.
And that was 12 years ago when I retired. I make at least that now with SS
a couple small pensions and investment income. Not touching the ira's
until this year. The 70 1/2 rule. For both wife and I. But we paid cash
for just about every thing we bought, except the house. First car we
financed in years was the wife's Venza. Was less than the return on
investments. But we also keep cars 10+ years! and do not need the $500 a
day hotel. In the 1980's we were having layoffs at a company. One
engineer who reported to me was worried about finances. I said worry about
the assembly line ladies who made $20k a year. He made $65k and drove a
POS dodge van, and commented his wife had 4 credit cards maxed out. What
did he waste money on? Sounds like he was following government spending
guidelines. I do live in a higher cost of living area, but did not take
money out of the house for toys when refinancing, and paid the house off.
I see the same thing with a lot of the people around me. I have an
acquaintance who's husband is the $500k a year VP of a high tech company.
Lake house, $80k African safari this year for the family. $2mm house. One
payment from bankruptcy basically. If there was a glitch in the company
and he was laid off, how long could he go on severance and savings?

On 8/14/2014 12:09 PM, Califbill wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 22:53:34 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 15:03:13 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 12:37:54 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 8/13/2014 9:50 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:


There are two ways to respond to your assessment. The first is to cast
the blame on those who have been successful and demand a cut of the
fruits of their labor.

The second is to qualify oneself via training and education for the jobs
that exist in a highly competitive world ... that is only becoming
*more* competitive.

For most, the second route was drilled into us as youngsters. Unlike
today, we were never taught to "expect" it due to some societal right.
The required education may be acquired in many ways. It doesn't
necessarily require daddy's fat checkbook.

I'd also add that it often takes many years of work to rise to the
"middle class" financial category. Some people seem to think it's a
"right" and should start as soon as you become an adult. I didn't
achieve a "middle class" lifestyle until well into my 30's.

If you believe the assessment made by millionaire media and author
types, I never have.
There is a story floating around the talk shows now that you need
$150,000 for the basic necessities of life ... what bull****!

===

It depends on your life style and expectations. $150K sounds a bit
short to me but we probably live better than many.

We never made over $100k combined until recently and I don't think we
were living badly. We had "paid for" cars, boats and this house. Our
daughter came out of college without debt and we actually never owed
money for anything but the condo in Treasure Island. I paid it off
early and we had that free and clear too.

I am also not sure I know anyone who makes much more than $100k, most
make less, some a lot less.
This is SW Florida tho. I know it costs more to live in other places.

I made more than a 100k and the wife only worked part time for a friend.
And that was 12 years ago when I retired. I make at least that now with SS
a couple small pensions and investment income.

At 100k, you're doing very well.
My wife and I have a few years before retirement, 59 and 55, If we us
the 4% withdrawal rule on our saving and add SS in we should be near
$80k. However as we live now, we only spend about $40k a year. We have
no debt and haven't for about 23 years. We still have one child left
with two more in years of college, so that expense will be gone soon.

Recently I ran across this info on net worth, (assets minus
liabilities).


http://web.stanford.edu/group/scspi/...lth-levels.pdf


It is disappointing that 50% of the population has less than $60,000 in
net worth. See the lower right chart on the first page.
If you have $1.4 million in net worth you are in the top 5%.



As they say, “the first millions the hardest� :-)


Not touching the ira's
until this year. The 70 1/2 rule. For both wife and I. But we paid cash
for just about every thing we bought, except the house. First car we
financed in years was the wife's Venza. Was less than the return on
investments. But we also keep cars 10+ years! and do not need the $500 a
day hotel. In the 1980's we were having layoffs at a company. One
engineer who reported to me was worried about finances. I said worry about
the assembly line ladies who made $20k a year. He made $65k and drove a
POS dodge van, and commented his wife had 4 credit cards maxed out. What
did he waste money on?

It is not just people making $65K, there are people making $250k, and
don't save. They could never retire in the lifestyle they have become
accustomed to.

Sounds like he was following government spending
guidelines. I do live in a higher cost of living area, but did not take
money out of the house for toys when refinancing, and paid the house off.
I see the same thing with a lot of the people around me. I have an
acquaintance who's husband is the $500k a year VP of a high tech company.
Lake house, $80k African safari this year for the family. $2mm house. One
payment from bankruptcy basically. If there was a glitch in the company
and he was laid off, how long could he go on severance and savings?

Oh, ya, like I said above.

I just hope my wife's and my lifestyle has rubbed off on our kids.
My daughter is married and we were very disappointed when her hubby
bought a new car. The kid was offered a job, and went and bought the
car before his first day of work.
Bad sign.

My daughter bought a house shortly after that, I have this thought
that she did that just to put them in debt, so he wouldn't spend any
more. She wasn't happy with his poor decision.
She's still only 21 years old and has a good job, already got an
advancement with a pay increase and company vehicle, and a nice home.
Now, if I can just get the son through college! :-)
Mikek


---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

Buying a new car isn't so bad if it's something like a Toyota Corolla.
Payments would wouldn't be too much and you'd have the piece of mind that they are in a reliable vehicle.

True North wrote:
Buying a new car isn't so bad if it's something like a Toyota Corolla.
Payments would wouldn't be too much and you'd have the piece of mind that
they are in a reliable vehicle.

It can be a bad decision, no matter what the price and financing. He was
just offered a job. He did not have a job yet. And did he need a new car?
Forget about payments! I remember a few years ago, where someone here
said they only looked at the monthly payment amount on a boat. Not the
fact that it was a low end Bayliner and the financing was for 5 years. You
have to finance a $19,000 boat for 5 years, you can not afford to run the
boat. Is why my wife and I are very comfortable. We did not waste money.
I bought my boat in 1995, 4 years old, for $20k cash. I have put a new
engine in and 2 reprints on the boat over the years. But a new replacement
for my boat is about $80k. Save at least 10% of your money! and when you
have extra! save that also. When it comes retirement time, you can afford
more than rice and beans.

On 8/16/2014 12:28 PM, True North wrote:
Buying a new car isn't so bad if it's something like a Toyota Corolla.
Payments would wouldn't be too much and you'd have the piece of mind that they are in a reliable vehicle.

How much would be too much?

--
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the
government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of
taking care of them".
Thomas Jefferson

amdx wrote:
On 8/14/2014 12:09 PM, Califbill wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 22:53:34 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 15:03:13 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 12:37:54 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 8/13/2014 9:50 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:


There are two ways to respond to your assessment. The first is to cast
the blame on those who have been successful and demand a cut of the
fruits of their labor.

The second is to qualify oneself via training and education for the jobs
that exist in a highly competitive world ... that is only becoming
*more* competitive.

For most, the second route was drilled into us as youngsters. Unlike
today, we were never taught to "expect" it due to some societal right.
The required education may be acquired in many ways. It doesn't
necessarily require daddy's fat checkbook.

I'd also add that it often takes many years of work to rise to the
"middle class" financial category. Some people seem to think it's a
"right" and should start as soon as you become an adult. I didn't
achieve a "middle class" lifestyle until well into my 30's.

If you believe the assessment made by millionaire media and author
types, I never have.
There is a story floating around the talk shows now that you need
$150,000 for the basic necessities of life ... what bull****!

===

It depends on your life style and expectations. $150K sounds a bit
short to me but we probably live better than many.

We never made over $100k combined until recently and I don't think we
were living badly. We had "paid for" cars, boats and this house. Our
daughter came out of college without debt and we actually never owed
money for anything but the condo in Treasure Island. I paid it off
early and we had that free and clear too.

I am also not sure I know anyone who makes much more than $100k, most
make less, some a lot less.
This is SW Florida tho. I know it costs more to live in other places.

I made more than a 100k and the wife only worked part time for a friend.
And that was 12 years ago when I retired. I make at least that now with SS
a couple small pensions and investment income.

At 100k, you're doing very well.
My wife and I have a few years before retirement, 59 and 55, If we us
the 4% withdrawal rule on our saving and add SS in we should be near
$80k. However as we live now, we only spend about $40k a year. We have no
debt and haven't for about 23 years. We still have one child left with
two more in years of college, so that expense will be gone soon.

Recently I ran across this info on net worth, (assets minus liabilities).


http://web.stanford.edu/group/scspi/...lth-levels.pdf


It is disappointing that 50% of the population has less than $60,000 in
net worth. See the lower right chart on the first page.
If you have $1.4 million in net worth you are in the top 5%.



As they say, “the first millions the hardest� :-)


Not touching the ira's
until this year. The 70 1/2 rule. For both wife and I. But we paid cash
for just about every thing we bought, except the house. First car we
financed in years was the wife's Venza. Was less than the return on
investments. But we also keep cars 10+ years! and do not need the $500 a
day hotel. In the 1980's we were having layoffs at a company. One
engineer who reported to me was worried about finances. I said worry about
the assembly line ladies who made $20k a year. He made $65k and drove a
POS dodge van, and commented his wife had 4 credit cards maxed out. What
did he waste money on?

It is not just people making $65K, there are people making $250k, and
don't save. They could never retire in the lifestyle they have become accustomed to.

Sounds like he was following government spending
guidelines. I do live in a higher cost of living area, but did not take
money out of the house for toys when refinancing, and paid the house off.
I see the same thing with a lot of the people around me. I have an
acquaintance who's husband is the $500k a year VP of a high tech company.
Lake house, $80k African safari this year for the family. $2mm house. One
payment from bankruptcy basically. If there was a glitch in the company
and he was laid off, how long could he go on severance and savings?

Oh, ya, like I said above.

I just hope my wife's and my lifestyle has rubbed off on our kids.
My daughter is married and we were very disappointed when her hubby
bought a new car. The kid was offered a job, and went and bought the car
before his first day of work.
Bad sign.

My daughter bought a house shortly after that, I have this thought that
she did that just to put them in debt, so he wouldn't spend any more. She
wasn't happy with his poor decision.
She's still only 21 years old and has a good job, already got an
advancement with a pay increase and company vehicle, and a nice home.
Now, if I can just get the son through college! :-)
Mikek


---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

The $65k was in the late 1980's. I started working when I was in junior
high school. Making pallets. Piece work. Saved money then. When I went
to work at Western Electric warehouse in 1961, I lived at home, and made
about $65 a week. Saved. $30 in the credit union. Never saw the money,
did not miss the money. Adjusted lifestyle to my take home income. I paid
for college educations for my 2 daughters. Paid via credit card as much as
I could, and never ran a CC balance. Got miles or rebates for the money
spent. I have a friend who runs a donut store. Favorite activity is
shopping. She and her husband have a large CC balance. 18-23% financing
charge! How you going to save for later years? And how many of those CC
bought items will still be in use? Like the advertisements for refinancing
your home, and they guy says he took out $100K. Why? As to your article,
has a radical error in part if it. States the wealth went down 23% or so.
Most of that was in value of the house, and how much had the sales price of
the house inflated in the previous 8 year? I could say I lost $300,000 at
the of the housing bubble. My hose I paid $139k for 1979, went from $1.2mm
to $900k. I really lost nothing. Paper profits, and if I had sold at
$1.2mm, I would have had to shell out more for the same amount of house,
unless I moved to a lower cost area.