|
| Thread: No Money for You |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 · «PREV |
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
posted September 25, 2007 11:24 AM |
|
|
Are you going to make me reply when I'm drunk? I had to struggle for that last post and it's 5:00am for me.
Where'd you get the 1% figure from? The total of retirement and medical in the US is about 7.5% each for employee and employer for a total of approx 15% of salary.
Quote:
There's a real push by the Australian gvt to get people to have more babies btw, I thought it was to negate some of the immigration blah, but I guess it really is about not enough young people paying taxes
...wtf...you can't be serious!!!! They want people to have more babies so they can pay more taxes???? You're just being rebellious, right?
OK, after reading your post, I've decided I could best reply to it when I'm sober.
We also have something called an IRA (Individual Retirement Account). It's entirely voluntary and a person can contribute up to, hmmmm the amount keeps changing, about $3000-5000 per year. There are different variations to this. In all variations you control your own money, so you can make money or lose money depending on how well you invest.
The original variation is that the amount you contribute to the IRA is tax free. So if you make $30,000 in a year and contribute $4000 to the IRA, you only pay income tax on $26,000. In addition, any interest or investment income you make within the IRA is also tax free.
If you start this at a young age and get a decent return on your investment, you can accumulate a large sum of money by the time you retire. This is in ADDITION to any SS income you may receive. On the other hand, you can lose it all in the stock market.....not that *I'VE* ever lost any of my IRA money in the stock market. cough cough (hint: people playing the stock market computer game use cheat codes, they are NOT honorable players)
Quote:
I haven't got the volition to find a calculator right now, but the amount of money they are predicting you need to live comfortably in retirement is huge. 100s of thousands of dollars. I can't see how 1% can cover that.
I still don't know where you got the 1% figure from. Yea, there are lots of retirement calculators out there, and "100s of thousands of dollars" sounds about right for someone my age, but too low for someone your age. (US dollars....I'm too drunk to do currency conversions) At your age, I'd think over a million would be needed without a pension plan.
____________
|
|
kookastar
Honorable
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted September 25, 2007 11:32 AM |
|
|
yeah it's about a million or so, I don't know where I came up with the 1% figure either
hmmm 15%, then why do you guys have to have medical insurance as well?
I don't know where all that money is going?????
don't say the illegal immigrants lol.
Yeah the baby thing It's supposed to be to negate the aging population I guess...
Our Prime Minister has actually put out a call to young people to breed faster btw. You get 1000s of dollars when you give birth as a "baby bonus". Although they've started watching it more closely now because too many people were having babies to buy plasma tvs
{no joke}
____________
uhuh
|
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted September 25, 2007 11:56 AM |
|
|
Quote:
I don't know where all that money is going?????
It's hard to compare the US to Australia. The US is much bigger and therefore exponentially more bureaucratic. Things that work elsewhere don't work here because such a large portion of any government program is sucked up by the bureaucracy. Government agencies here are notoriously wasteful of the funds they are in charge of. It's not corruption, it's just multiple layers of bureaucracy and regulation.
Also keep in mind what I said about a small population funding the retirement of a large population.
Quote:
You get 1000s of dollars when you give birth as a "baby bonus".
wow, that sounds like some sci-fi movie. It's been a long time, but I always heard that Australia was very difficult to get a work visa for. I checked into going there several years ago, but assumed I didn't have skills that were "in demand".
____________
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted September 25, 2007 02:06 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Our Prime Minister has actually put out a call to young people to breed faster btw. You get 1000s of dollars when you give birth as a "baby bonus". Although they've started watching it more closely now because too many people were having babies to buy plasma tvs
{no joke}
that's fine for me. In my country, there is a similiar bonus, only that it's 1/3 of yours and some poeple have babies to buy more booze. ^_^
|
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted September 26, 2007 09:10 AM |
|
|
So why do they want people to have more kids? I've never heard of anything like this before. Do they just want to increase the population in general? Grow the economy? Make up for losses due to emigration? Or do they just really like babies.
____________
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted September 26, 2007 09:27 AM |
|
|
aging country is really bad economical-wise. More and more retirements needs to be paid, but there is less and less people working.
I'm still against such things tho; people aren't rabbits. If some fat bureaucrat wants to see bigger natural growth, he can try himself instead of ridiculous sermons about how people should live.
|
|
roy-algriffin
Supreme Hero
Chocolate ice cream zealot
|
|
posted September 26, 2007 09:37 AM |
|
|
Yes but if youve ever, and i mean ever read a science fiction novel series youll hear about overpopulation, honestly i wouldnt mind if the next generation had a hundred thousand or so less children, the only country thats actually having a negative population growth is france i believe(or in the near vicinity)
____________
"Am i a demon? No im a priest of the light! THE BLOODY RED LIGHT"
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted September 26, 2007 09:41 AM |
|
|
It won't help against poor countries with incredible birth rates. Unless the "world" is "europe, us and australia", that is >_>
But we should care for more than just our noses I think.
|
|
kookastar
Honorable
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted September 26, 2007 09:53 AM |
|
|
The aging population is the main issue uhuh. And people having kids later in life. I think too they want to increase our "australian born" population to meld with the massive numbers of immigrants here.
but yeah,it's all been said 
If people live forever though, then I'd expect them to work forever, not be retired for a million years
____________
uhuh
|
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted September 26, 2007 10:40 AM |
|
|
Well, the question is for Australia, are there jobs for all the new immigrants and future plans for the new children. It doesn't do a whole lot of good increasing the population unless there's something for them to do.
Quote:
aging country is really bad economical-wise. More and more retirements needs to be paid, but there is less and less people working.
That's exactly what this thread is about for the US. Huge amounts of people are rapidly approaching retirement age, with not enough people to pay for it. And same thing as Australia, there needs to be a plan for what to do with all the babies.
They might begin to help pay for the retired people 20 years from now, but in the mean time children are leaches on the system. That may sounds crude, but children really are leaches who are wholly dependent on others for a long time. Financially, children are expensive as hell. Any incentive payment from the government is probably insignificant compared to the cost of raising a child. And since all money from the government is gained through taxation, the overall economics of it is a loss. Money is taken from the people and paid back to the people, but some percentage is lost as it filters through the bureaucracy.
Quote:
If people live forever though, then I'd expect them to work forever
Nah, I'm tired of working. I'm ready for full retirement.
____________
|
|
|
|
