My local paper would be happy to print such stories--people suffering because they didn't save enough make for good press. Only it'll leave out the part about not saving enough and portray the people as victims of forces beyond their control. - flegHow many people even have a 401(k), or work for an employer who offers a 401(k)? (I have the data somewhere, but I'm trying to dash off a response, so the links will have to wait...I've gotta a bunch of data).There are other inconvenient facts to consider. A full 28% of our countrymen earn less than $25,000/year (per household). Another 26% earn between $25K and $50K/year (per household). The average household consists of 2.5 individuals. It ain't easy saving for retirement at those levels of earnings (particularly in a major metropolitan area). We can berate the workers who earn such paltry wages for their "bad choices" yet, we want to reduce labor costs to the bare minimum. Therein lies the problem. If we drive labor costs to the bare minimum, then how are these individual supposed to save for their retirement? Heck, they can't even afford health insurance.We're a productive Nation, no doubt about that. We've squeezed a heck of a lot of productivity out of our labor force by driving wages down, and reducing or eliminating benefits (most notably, health insurance). We can't have it both ways: low wages, few benefits, yet self-sufficient retirees. You can't squeeze blood from a stone. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_...
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar. Earnings Estimates, Analyst Ra