F. George McDuffee wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 15:27:13 -0600, Ignoramus12856
wrote:
snip
Wes, I agree that saving money is essential for anyone, and people who
do not save, fully deserve a fair amount of trouble. I do personally
save a fair amount of my income.
snip
=======
This appears to be a correct statement.

It is also an area where I think the FRB has some sort of hidden
agenda. [see other thread on this] By setting the interest rates
so low, the interest rates paid on most forms of liquid savings
[gold not included] are now and have been *NEGATIVE* for several
years, when inflation and tax effect are considered.

What is rational about saving so the banks and or government can
use your money and charge you for the "service?"

The other problem is how much savings are "enough?"

Consider that the median U.S. family income is now about 50k$/yr.
When inflation, and especially loss of benefits such as defined
benefit pension plans, fully paid employer medical and job
security are considered, the median income has been *FALLING* [at
an increasing rate] for the last 30 years. Some of the less
perceptive insurance companies were publishing studies showing
that to be on the safe side, the typical couple should have about
1,000,000$ in savings when they retired. Just how is it possible
that the typical couple could accumulate 20 years of pre tax
income over even a 50 year working life? [20-70] especially with
*NEGATIVE* savings interest?



In that situation you have to do what they guy in the TV show Breaking
Bad does. You go into the meth business in your spare time. Other than
that there is no way to save yourself into financial security on 50K a year.

Hawke