There is no security - What he said: “If you're under 40 years old and you're counting on Social Security for your retirement, you're a fool.”
Do you know those “retirement worksheets” that are published regularly in Fortune or Money magazine? There’s typically a line for “expected Social Security benefits” which I always fill in as “zero.” The reason is that I’ve persistently saved a somewhat large percentage of my salary into a 401(k) account and I expect to have a nice nest egg when I retire. Furthermore, I am absolutely certain that the government will look at that accumulated savings and say: “You don’t need Social Security.” That is, I fully expect that the government will punish me for saving responsibly for my golden years.
Hey, I’ll be pleasantly surprised if I’m wrong. Heck, I’ll be happy just to receive the 72% level of my originally-promised benefits (once the Trust Fund is exhausted). But for now I’m anticipating the reverse “Ant and the Grasshopper” scenario complete with me sitting on a park bench, lamenting my failure to spend recklessly on Harley-Davidsons and big-screen TVs.
4 comments:
At the sugggestion of my accountant, I always fill those in at "-5%" because he says it's likely that no only will I get nothing, future tax raises will take away funds from my other savings.
--Toren
And let me add a crass link to a past rant of mine on the subject:
Here
--Toren
Toren, why don't you just re-start Safety Valve? Geez.
Because it's easier to go to other blogs and leave spur-of-the moment rants than spend hours crafting a well-researched and hyperlinked blog entry.
In other words...I'm lazy.
Besides, the blogosphere needs commenters, too!
--Toren
Post a Comment