Wednesday, April 18, 2012
We Are Not Doomed
There was a lot of American Way if Life Doom on the interweb yesterday. First was Why the Middle Class is Doomed by Charles Hugh Smith, then Retirement May Be Mission Impossible for Generation X and finally 10 More Years of Low Stock Market Returns.
Some will refer to these types of posts as fear mongering. I think I may have been called a fear monger in a recent post in stating I do not believe my wife and I will get social security. This might be one way to look at it but I think there is a more productive way to come at this.
I stumbled across a good way to articulate why I don't expect to get social security in the comments of a syndicated post at Seeking Alpha. Occam's razor; it is the simplest explanation given the current numbers, the likelihood that analysts will underestimate the problem and that the political cycle is not conducive to long term problem solving.
The above paragraph will either be right or wrong but I think it lays out a base case for what could go wrong with social security. Likewise the arguments in the above three articles also contribute to a base case of what could go wrong or maybe it is better to see these are some of the obstacles that people will face with retirement planning. The three articles address societal problems, unfortunate timing and what could be a lousy market for quite a few more years.
You might read all three draw the same conclusions, draw completely different conclusions or agree with only certain parts but the three combine to spell out the obstacles we are going to face. The articles explain these obstacles such that I think they promote understanding of what could go wrong for people. If you understand what could go wrong then you have a better chance of overcoming those obstacles.
You might believe social security will be there for you with no problems but certainly it cannot be a black swan for anyone if benefits get radically reduced.
From there, going about creating a solution in case the above scenarios do play out becomes at least a little easier. The context of my past posts has been to get out of debt, save more, live below your means, understand that certain foreign markets will offer close to normal returns, monetize a hobby as a post retirement income stream and anything else you want to add to the list.
One of the knocks against using a financial advisor is that no one cares more about your financial situation than you do. And while I think a good advisor will care a lot about his clients' financial situations, in a similar vein no one will care more about your own unique solution more than you.
This has been an ongoing theme on this site from the beginning and will continue to be so. It is an important topic, interesting to write about and will get more important and more interesting.
Unrelated, I created a Facebook page for the Walker Fire Department. If you use Facebook I would be grateful if you would like the page. You can find it at facebook.com/walkerfiredept.
Some will refer to these types of posts as fear mongering. I think I may have been called a fear monger in a recent post in stating I do not believe my wife and I will get social security. This might be one way to look at it but I think there is a more productive way to come at this.
I stumbled across a good way to articulate why I don't expect to get social security in the comments of a syndicated post at Seeking Alpha. Occam's razor; it is the simplest explanation given the current numbers, the likelihood that analysts will underestimate the problem and that the political cycle is not conducive to long term problem solving.
The above paragraph will either be right or wrong but I think it lays out a base case for what could go wrong with social security. Likewise the arguments in the above three articles also contribute to a base case of what could go wrong or maybe it is better to see these are some of the obstacles that people will face with retirement planning. The three articles address societal problems, unfortunate timing and what could be a lousy market for quite a few more years.
You might read all three draw the same conclusions, draw completely different conclusions or agree with only certain parts but the three combine to spell out the obstacles we are going to face. The articles explain these obstacles such that I think they promote understanding of what could go wrong for people. If you understand what could go wrong then you have a better chance of overcoming those obstacles.
You might believe social security will be there for you with no problems but certainly it cannot be a black swan for anyone if benefits get radically reduced.
From there, going about creating a solution in case the above scenarios do play out becomes at least a little easier. The context of my past posts has been to get out of debt, save more, live below your means, understand that certain foreign markets will offer close to normal returns, monetize a hobby as a post retirement income stream and anything else you want to add to the list.
One of the knocks against using a financial advisor is that no one cares more about your financial situation than you do. And while I think a good advisor will care a lot about his clients' financial situations, in a similar vein no one will care more about your own unique solution more than you.
This has been an ongoing theme on this site from the beginning and will continue to be so. It is an important topic, interesting to write about and will get more important and more interesting.
Unrelated, I created a Facebook page for the Walker Fire Department. If you use Facebook I would be grateful if you would like the page. You can find it at facebook.com/walkerfiredept.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)






11 comments:
Doom is in the air all right: As a contrarian that means it's time to go long America.
But Occam's Razor, the rule of parsimony, is the wrong metaphor for what you are saying: The Razor stipulates that of two explanations, both of which explain the facts, the one that requires the fewest unproven or undemonstrated assumptions AKA the "simpler" one, should be chosen.
Stating that you will NOT get SS actually requires a lot more assumptions than simply assuming things will stay more or less the way they are (albeit possibly at a lower level).
So the simpler statement that captures your POV is that financial prudence dictates you will do a much better job of saving if you assume you won't get SS.
If you actually do get it (and you probably will) it's gravy.
...or Roger is committing Stage I thinking vs Stage II thinking
7:08,
If you think I am such an idiot then why are you wasting your time here?
Roger, I believe as you get older your perspective on SS will change. You'll have contributed a lot more $$$, you'll have read the AARP stuff for few years, and you will meet more and more people that depend on SS. I just don't see us as a country willing to return to the conditions in the early part of the 1900's that led to the creation of SS. If we are willing to set the clock back 80 years, it's time to leave. On the other hand, I see Medicare falling apart.
Rich
Rich,
I certainly could change my views. To be clear, I think there will be means testing that comes down into the middle class income and savings levels along with a continuing increase in the benefits age.
It is always gratifying hearing about folks in a position to do so giving back to their community.
My wife and I have foregone many golf outings and drinking,oops, SOCIAL engagements to volunteer with our county school system, community music groups and at church. I suspect more than a few others commenting on this site have a similar story to tell.
Hats off to Roger. There is more to life than checking your 100 shares of McDonalds every ten minutes.
T
T, thank you for the very kind word
"To be clear, I think there will be means testing that comes down into the middle class income and savings levels along with a continuing increase in the benefits age."
That's a lot more optimistic than I thought you meant, and I for one have no problem with either/both of those playing out. I thought you were saying SS simply would cease to exist, now I understand you will simply be well-off enough to not receive it due to means testing (at least i think that's what you're saying).
3:13, your comment captures my sentiment; means testing although i doubt the folks at the bottom end of well-off enough to not receive it will be too happy.
For the record, I approach this basically from a MMT/MMR (or whatever it's called now) perspective, rather than from a math/taxes/spending approach, which is how I believe you are looking at it. If SS is a good idea for our society, and I believe it is, we can print money to fund it with mostly positive consequences. Taking the math side, I think 25% cuts +/- will more or less fix SS, so I'm not too worried either way.
I am not nearly so optimistic about medical care. I see the entire system patched and patched for the next 25 years, finally blowing up, and then completely rebuilt.
Rich
Im 27, I look at my SS deduction as another portion of taxes that will go to serve the greater public good but will not provide me with direct benefits when its my time to retire. Hopefully I can maintain a job that allows me to fund $5K to my Roth every year. Thats my retirement, Unfortunately I see a slim chance SS will be around to do much for me in 30-40 years. That being said, im thankful to live at time when when the individual investor is empowered with information and tools to maximize their chances of having enough money when they need it.
Post a Comment