The answer breakdown of those surveyed was "you alone" 36%, "company by way of a pension plan" 3%, "Federal government through Social Security" 3%, "all three equally" 58%. While I realize the manner in which the question was asked and the choices given could have skewed the result but if the question really is who is responsible then the 36% number is disappointingly low.
While we may be entitled to Social Security, the payout (assuming benefits don't get cut) simply is not large enough for "retire comfortably." It is arguable whether it is enough for the basics. By the way I do believe benefits will be cut one way or another which is all the less reason why social security can't allow for comfortable.
But it is quite clear that Social Security is not enough for the basics and the various types of one-off financial events that cannot be precisely budgeted for (this includes vet bills, new tires, burst water pipes and many others).
Another question was shorter and simpler about whether the administration should make it a national priority to encourage savings and I think it should. While I think I am far from a big government guy I do like the idea of promoting education and maybe ramping up the incentives for more saving. To me this is providing the opportunity for people to do for themselves.
As a matter of philosophy I am very motivated to be financially self-sufficient. My definition of this is high savings rate, low expenses, little or no debt and the ability to financially withstand a reasonable financial shock. This does not have to mean being rich, my wife and I meet no definition of being rich, not even Obama's first definition but we save a lot, have low expenses and could last for a while in the face of a financial shock.
It seems as though there is not enough sense of financial self-stewardship among Americans, maybe due to a lack of financial education, which will either prevent us from doing the difficult things that many people believe need to be done (financial NIMBY) or will create a horrible shock to many Americans if we actually do the difficult things.
7 comments:
...think about it, savers and investors depend on most of the population doing stupid things with their money. Savers need to be in a better position relative to everyone else or there would be no ability to withstand financial hardship.
6:57 could be on to something here. I was preached at as a youngster to work toward "getting ahead". Obviously that meant doing better than others. Put another way, there is little value to being a "have" in a world void of "have nots". Clearly the conclusion should be you and you alone or your family providing the guidance to successfully have enough to retire comfortably. As an aside, what kind of an economy would we have if everyone conducted their lives like Roger? It likely would be a no growth non-growth economy, wouldn't it?
Roger,
Exactly how naive are you?
Social security has NEVER been enough. It was just a little to help.
The left wing has been trying to increase SS to be enough for many decades and screw the savers who will be forced to pay for SS increases.
Actually $4k per month for some married savers with a paid for house in Florida gets close to enough, which is the high end of SS.
This ponzi scheme is on plan for many on the left. Unfortunately it will blow up before it is enough as it is a ponzi scheme after all.
3:03,
Reread the third paragraph.
Anon 6:57 hits the nail on the head: It is not possible for everyone to "get ahead" in a non-expanding economic world; unlike Lake Wobegon, not everyone can be above average.
But traditional conceptions of the economy the kind of economic growth necessary requires not only productivity gains but increases in consumption and it is not clear that can be sustained in terms of resources and environment.
Interestingly enough, John Quiggin offers a follow-up to the Utopian article linked to by Roger and describes a world at http://tinyurl.com/asbfkn8 where, in fact, that could be possible ...if we have the vision ...and the will.
RW, thanks for the link
1:57 aNON: No, Social Security is not a Ponzi scheme, and no, "the left" has not been trying to make it "enough." Social Security is a well-financed plan of income support that is useful as a life support for the non-indigent poor and a good supplement for middle class investors like us here in blog-land. Please cut the crap with "the left" and try to see some reality beyond all the rhetoric tossed about. Social Security is one of the few government services that works and raises us up from a more vicious level.
Post a Comment