Financial News

[mr_genius]

This is just incredibly scary. It ought to send some shock waves through the Euro and the markets.

 

Sounds like something the Democrat party in the US would do

[StrangeSox]

This is just incredibly scary. It ought to send some shock waves through the Euro and the markets.

 

They've modified the proposal to exempt smaller accounts, but Cyprus still seems set to reject the deal. Good. The ECB has been making dumb move after dumb move.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/20/business...p&_r=1&

[bmags]

They've modified the proposal to exempt smaller accounts, but Cyprus still seems set to reject the deal. Good. Germany has been making dumb move after dumb move.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/20/business...p&_r=1&

 

[southsider2k5]

They've modified the proposal to exempt smaller accounts, but Cyprus still seems set to reject the deal. Good. The ECB has been making dumb move after dumb move.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/20/business...p&_r=1&

 

The ruling party is going to abstain from the vote. Stocks and the Euro just got b**** smacked.

[StrangeSox]

Cyprus rejected that awful ECB proposal.

 

UK's project growth downgraded to 0.6%.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/mar/20/b...owth-downgraded

[southsider2k5]

Cyprus rejected that awful ECB proposal.

 

UK's project growth downgraded to 0.6%.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/mar/20/b...owth-downgraded

 

Talk now is that they may get kicked out of the EC.

[StrangeSox]

The Greatest Retirement Crisis In American History

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/edwardsiedle/2...erican-history/

 

We are on the precipice of the greatest retirement crisis in the history of the world. In the decades to come, we will witness millions of elderly Americans, the Baby Boomers and others, slipping into poverty. Too frail to work, too poor to retire will become the “new normal” for many elderly Americans.

 

That dire prediction, which I wrote two years ago, is already coming true. Our national demographics, coupled with indisputable glaringly insufficient retirement savings and human physiology, suggest that a catastrophic outcome for at least a significant percentage of our elderly population is inevitable. With the average 401(k) balance for 65 year olds estimated at $25,000 by independent experts – $100,000 if you believe the retirement planning industry - the decades many elders will spend in forced or elected “retirement” will be grim.

[Jenksismyhero]

LOL the history of the world. 100 years ago we had nothing and society continued on.

[southsider2k5]

Damned rich people not saving enough for me to retire on!

[StrangeSox]

Damned rich people not saving enough for me to retire on!

wealth distribution, how does it work??

[StrangeSox]

Moral indifference to the likely reality of widespread elderly poverty in the wealthiest country in the world noted, though.

[southsider2k5]

Moral indifference to the likely reality of widespread elderly poverty in the wealthiest country in the world noted, though.

 

So is the lack of personal responsibility for anything, ever.

[StrangeSox]

Lousy workers, personally responsible for decades of stagnant wages, disappearance of pensions and the ever-growing income gap!!!

 

Either way, whether you want to blame it on individuals who didn't save enough and invest 'properly' in financial products or you want to look at the huge amounts of wealth our financial sector has sucked off along with various other structural problems, we're still left with a coming wave of widespread elderly poverty. For whatever the cause, this 401k/IRA experience we've tried is complete s*** and doesn't work for the vast majority of people. Your response appears to be "f*** 'em I've got mine"

Edited March 22, 2013 by StrangeSox

[southsider2k5]

Lousy workers, personally responsible for decades of stagnant wages, disappearance of pensions and the ever-growing income gap!!!

 

Either way, whether you want to blame it on individuals who didn't save enough and invest 'properly' in financial products or you want to look at the huge amounts of wealth our financial sector has sucked off along with various other structural problems, we're still left with a coming wave of widespread elderly poverty. For whatever the cause, this 401k/IRA experience we've tried is complete s*** and doesn't work for the vast majority of people.

 

What is America's savings rate?

[StrangeSox]

How does a consumer-driven economy with stagnant wages and ever-rising living expenses function with significantly high savings rates?

 

Again, either way, the system isn't working. Is your answer just "oh well, f*** you, shoulda invested better 30 years ago, enjoy elderly poverty?"

[StrangeSox]

Personal anecdote: my wife's uncle worked as a retail manager for decades. In 2009, at the age of 60, he lost his job. When unemployment ran out, he had to start drawing from his 401k to cover his mortgage (on his small house). He's been unable to find steady, full-time employment anywhere since 2009 because no one's hiring someone in their 60's for that type of management. His 401k is mostly gone and it's possible that he's eventually going to lose his house.

 

His situation is far from unique, yet your response appears to be even more callous than "let them eat cake."

[Jenksismyhero]

Moral indifference to the likely reality of widespread elderly poverty in the wealthiest country in the world noted, though.

 

Or, calling out a fear-mongering doomsday prophecy.

 

Tell me, will this end up being as bad as the government cutting spending by 2%? If so, I might change my mind. I mean, the result of the sequester has REALLY changed things in this country. Oh man. Dead people are piling up on the streets and it's starting to get annoying.

[Jenksismyhero]

Personal anecdote: my wife's uncle worked as a retail manager for decades. In 2009, at the age of 60, he lost his job. When unemployment ran out, he had to start drawing from his 401k to cover his mortgage (on his small house). He's been unable to find steady, full-time employment anywhere since 2009 because no one's hiring someone in their 60's for that type of management. His 401k is mostly gone and it's possible that he's eventually going to lose his house.

 

His situation is far from unique, yet your response appears to be even more callous than "let them eat cake."

 

It's a sad story, and it sucks, and it's a good thing we have programs like Medicare and Social Security to help people like this, but at some point you have to draw a line in the sand and admit that the government literally cannot just pay for everyone to live what you believe to be a good life.

 

Will this retirement problem suck for some people? Absolutely. What do you propose is the solution? Increase taxes to fund higher levels of social security? How much would we have to do that to give someone a "living wage" that would pay for someone living in retirement for 20 years?

Edited March 22, 2013 by Jenksismybitch

[StrangeSox]

Not sure what part of that is "fear-mongering doomsday prophecy." It's attainable data and it's from a guy who writes a bunch of retirement advice for Forbes, not some Marxist sociologist writing for Jacobin.

 

Aside from being only about a month into the cuts so lol@u if you think it'd show up instantly, it's also not the same thing at all as a CBO GDP and employment hit projection. It's simply looking at data of exactly where things are now and seeing "oh s***, people don't have any money for retirement, this is going to be very bad."

 

[StrangeSox]

It's a sad story, and it sucks, and it's a good thing we have programs like Medicare and Social Security to help people like this,

 

Sure, when that kicks in a few a more years, maybe he can finally get the chronic cough and asthma looked at. Oh, and he'll get a modest SS check, which will help, but it'll still be pretty marginal.

 

but at some point you have to draw a line in the sand and admit that the government literally cannot just pay for everyone to live what you believe to be a good life.

 

Well, potentially, it could, but I could point out that we have more than enough wealth in this country to afford a modest retirement. You may have no problem with the wealth distribution in this country, but I do, especially when this is what it results in. A tiny few horde an obscene amount of wealth, more than could be spent in a dozen lifetimes, while millions struggle to just get by. For a while, after WWII, we had a society that was growing rapidly, rewarding those at the top nicely and growing a robust middle class and bringing up wages across the board. In the early 80's, that stopped. It's not surprising that people have not been able to save up much in the intervening decades, especially when you throw in that lost decade+ we're mired in right now.

 

Will this retirement problem suck for some people? Absolutely.

 

This retirement problem will suck for most people.

 

What do you propose society do should do? Increase taxes to fund higher levels of social security? How much would we have to do that to give someone a "living wage" that would pay for someone living in retirement for 20 years?

 

Eliminating the regressive SS cap and doubling benefits would be a huge start.

 

edit: instead our whole media/political class discussion is centered on just how much we should cut these programs because, again, we're ruled by the stupidest f***ing people on the planet

Edited March 22, 2013 by StrangeSox

[StrangeSox]

Apropos, new study finds inequality has become more permanent, not transitory

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkbl...=rss_ezra-klein

 

“Permanent,” here, is a technical term. The other option would be “transitory.” If the inequality we were seeing was merely transitory, it would mean that in any given year, sure, inequality is really high, but five years down the line, the families at the bottom of the income distribution might have moved to the top, or vice versa.

 

The takeaway here is rough. The reason the permanent/transitory distinction matters is that lifetime earnings are much more important than a single year’s earnings. It’s lifetime earnings that decide how you live in general, what sort of house you can afford, whether you can send a kid to college, whether you can retire comfortably.

 

If we were seeing a lot of transient inequality, that would mean the households at the bottom in any given year still have a good shot at improving their lifetime earnings. The fact that the inequality is of the permanent sort shuts the window on that optimistic interpretation: The earners at the bottom are stuck at the bottom, and their lifetime earnings are about as low as one would think.

 

hard to save for retirement when you're not making much money in the first place

[Cknolls]

wealth distribution, how does it work??

 

 

Go to school get a degree or not, get a job, support yourself and/or your family. Spare me the charts and graphs that I know you are going to google for me showing wealth disparity...Don 't care....

Edited March 22, 2013 by Cknolls

[Cknolls]

It's a sad story, and it sucks, and it's a good thing we have programs like Medicare and Social Security to help people like this, but at some point you have to draw a line in the sand and admit that the government literally cannot just pay for everyone to live what you believe to be a good life.

 

Will this retirement problem suck for some people? Absolutely. What do you propose is the solution? Increase taxes to fund higher levels of social security? How much would we have to do that to give someone a "living wage" that would pay for someone living in retirement for 20 years?

 

Well Jabba the hut was on TV yesterday saying the CME and CBOT should be paying for kids in Chicago to go to school. scary that she is a teacher and has the ability to impart " wisdom " on those poor kids.

[StrangeSox]

Go to school get a degree or not, get a job, support yourself and/or your family. Spare me the charts and graphs that I know you are going to google for me showing wealth disparity...Don 't care....

I know you said that your ideology was impervious to facts, but I thought this study was interesting and decided to post it anyway!

 

http://www.taxanalysts.com/www/features.ns...FC?OpenDocument

 

The average increase in real income reported by the bottom 90 percent of earners in 2011, compared with 1966, if measured at one inch, would extend almost five miles for the top 1 percent of the top 1 percent.

 

"Go to school and get a job" doesn't really work as a long-term retirement plan when wages stagnate for decades as costs of living keep on climbing.

[StrangeSox]

I know you said that your ideology was impervious to facts, but I thought this study was interesting and decided to post it anyway!

 

http://www.taxanalysts.com/www/features.ns...FC?OpenDocument

 

 

 

"Go to school and get a job" doesn't really work as a long-term retirement plan when wages stagnate for decades as costs of living keep on climbing.

 

e.g.

 

Meet the CEO Who Cut Worker Pay in Half While Pulling in $21 Million Last Year