# a very good retirement pension



## Brett (Feb 4, 2018)

Past threads here indicated California retirement pensions are exceedingly generous.

some firefighting couples get a 1/2 million a year in pensions and "disability" payments  ........ a nice retirement package

in today's LA Times
http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-drop-20180203-htmlstory.html


----------



## WinniWoman (Feb 4, 2018)

Not just in California. NY is the same.

These are the people I always see when traveling on vacations who have retired earlier than the SS full retirement age. Firemen, policemen and teachers. And, of course, some private sector folks who have worked for big companies, maybe in executive positions, or those who worked in hospitals also. Some having actually 2 pensions because they retire early and get another job somehow with a pension as a second career.

Then you have married couples who are both collecting pensions. Very lucky.

We have a friend- he and his wife both have been retired like 15-20 years already and only in their late 60's. (We are in our early 60's). She was a teacher and he was a teacher and an IBM exec. I think they even have paid health insurance. He says they have more money than they know what to do with.

They recently sold their home here and moved to southern Florida to a really nice, big home. They are living the dream.

When we speak to him when he calls to say hello, and we talk about various matters, it is evident he doesn't remember that my husband and I do not have pensions and need health insurance which is why we are still working.


----------



## Eric B (Feb 4, 2018)

I had a friend whose wife retired from the California Department of Corrections and wound up getting a raise with her pensions.  Didn’t really make me feel bad, though; she got shot four times over her career and had a few instances where they implanted bones from cadavers to repair her injuries.  With systems like these it’s inevitable that you’ll see bad actors taking advantage of them; people respond to incentives.  On the other hand, that’s how they set up the system to reduce current costs for hazardous duty in a profession that prevents them from suing people that create the hazards they have to deal with.  It strikes me that there’s a great need for intelligent compensation design and you can’t always count on politics getting you there because they, too, respond to incentives and voters don’t want to pay now.


----------



## SmithOp (Feb 4, 2018)

Well written and researched article.  

These are Public Safety Officer retirement pensions, not all public worker pensions are this inflated or have these special early retirement programs.  They do give all public workers a bad rep, I would like to see them prosecuted for disability fraud, obviously the evidence is easy to obtain.

My wife and I have a combined total of 48 years state worker service and our pension combined is a tiny fraction of the ones discussed in this article.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## bogey21 (Feb 4, 2018)

I have a great pension but earned it the hard way.  About 10 years prior to retirement I and 11 other LT employees of our Bank went to our Board of Directors and suggested a deal.  The deal was that we would take essentially zero raises until retirement if the Board would improve our Pension Plan.  They did.  One of the big changes was to add a cumulative annual 3% cost of living payment every year.  I have been retired 16 years now which means this year's COLA was almost 50% of my annual pension.  The deal worked out for everyone.  Sure we lost current income but we paid taxes on lower income.  The Company reduced current expenses.  The loser, if there is one, is the company running the Pension Plan as I and many of the others impacted have out lived their actuarial assumptions.

George


----------



## Passepartout (Feb 4, 2018)

It's pretty hard to fault people who saw early in their lives that a career in public service, while frequently paying less than 'civilian', or free market employment usually has a pension benefit that the private sector doesn't. I'd like a nickel for every time my parents told me to get a 'gov't job' instead of being a wage slave. I went to my 50th reunion a couple years ago, and it was painfully apparent who had made the right financial decision after school, and who hadn't.

Jim


----------



## vacationhopeful (Feb 4, 2018)

Those faulting the private sector market ... I worked 9 years for an oil company. Until the "Great Recession of Nov 1982".  The oil company (NYSE traded and founded in 1886) ... not exactly bankrupt ... downsized its employees base by 20% +/- .. due to the economy. Almost everyone not YET vested in the pension and OVER 4 years of employment got ZAPPED .. laid  off .. terminated .. _due to the ECONOMY_. *The real issue, was the company would be REQUIRED to FUND/VEST 5 additional PENSION CLASSES (not including the one that would come due normally) on Jan 1, 1983*.

The politicians figured most YOUNG people did not want to be enslaved to a job for 10 years .. just change the law to 5 years for vesting and GET MORE VOTES or MORE CORPORATE DONATIONS.

Oil company paid me for 1 year ... 50% of my old salary, medical benefits and 90% tuition during that year to attend graduate college. I got an MBA during that year and my next job was a per diem contract computer consultant at a BIG CHEMICAL company for 3.5 years .. blue oval, corporate headquarters. I brought real estate ... which has been my income stream since 1987.

So look at where the jobs with pensions are ... it is NOT Corporate America.


----------



## WinniWoman (Feb 4, 2018)

vacationhopeful said:


> Those faulting the private sector market ... I worked 9 years for an oil company. Until the "Great Recession of Nov 1982".  The oil company (NYSE traded and founded in 1886) ... not exactly bankrupt ... downsized its employees base by 20% +/- .. due to the economy. Almost everyone not YET vested in the pension and OVER 4 years of employment got ZAPPED .. laid  off .. terminated .. _due to the ECONOMY_. *The real issue, was the company would be REQUIRED to FUND/VEST 5 additional PENSION CLASSES (not including the one that would come due normally) on Jan 1, 1983*.
> 
> The politicians figured most YOUNG people did not want to be enslaved to a job for 10 years .. just change the law to 5 years for vesting and GET MORE VOTES or MORE CORPORATE DONATIONS.
> 
> ...




My husband has worked over 20 years for a giant national insurance company and they cut his pension off at the knees. Something we never expected to happen. He thought he was doing the right thing by working there. After they announced it, he was not in a position to leave as he was already older. Best laid plans.......

Me- my mom told me to be a nurse or a teacher. I wanted to be a homemaker and a freelance writer. We know how that worked out... LOL!


----------



## vacationhopeful (Feb 4, 2018)

Jim,
The private sector companies did have pensions ... until the 5 year vesting change. Factories moved OFF SHORE to new plants and lower wages ,, but it was the US labor and PENSION rules. Why were we shipping crude overseas and importing light refined oil? I lived growing up with oil refineries and manufacturing industries.

The local Texaco refinery ... built when I was in high school, got sold to Sunoco, dis-assembled and the 'plant' was transported to South America (Eagle Point refinery in NJ). The tank farm is still there and operational as is the pipeline connections. Sunoco was BOUGHT by a pipeline company (ETP) who still MAYBE operates the Marcus Hook refinery, one in TX (Corpus Christi), OH (Toledo) and OK (Tulsa).

ETP is Energy Transfers Partnership. *And the real incentive to BUY Sunoco, was for it's 8600 MILES of their pipeline network* and right of ways. Sun Oil was an OLD company and SOME of its network pipelines had diameters of under 4" on "right of ways" thru all of PA and most of OH, into Michigan, down the east coast into the Gulf Coast.


----------



## lizap (Feb 4, 2018)

Passepartout said:


> It's pretty hard to fault people who saw early in their lives that a career in public service, while frequently paying less than 'civilian', or free market employment usually has a pension benefit that the private sector doesn't. I'd like a nickel for every time my parents told me to get a 'gov't job' instead of being a wage slave. I went to my 50th reunion a couple years ago, and it was painfully apparent who had made the right financial decision after school, and who hadn't.
> 
> Jim



This used to be true, but no more. Public sector salaries are often as much or more than similar ones in the private sector, plus lucrative retirement benefits.


----------



## DeniseM (Feb 4, 2018)

Friendly suggestion:  When I announced on TUG that I retired, there were people who responded critically to my happy announcement, because I was going to get a teacher's retirement pension.  Remember that there are TUGGERS here who worked in government/public service/education and are receiving a pension.  Let's not blame them for their good fortune, good planning and years of hard work.


----------



## lizap (Feb 4, 2018)

vacationhopeful said:


> Those faulting the private sector market ... I worked 9 years for an oil company. Until the "Great Recession of Nov 1982".  The oil company (NYSE traded and founded in 1886) ... not exactly bankrupt ... downsized its employees base by 20% +/- .. due to the economy. Almost everyone not YET vested in the pension and OVER 4 years of employment got ZAPPED .. laid  off .. terminated .. _due to the ECONOMY_. *The real issue, was the company would be REQUIRED to FUND/VEST 5 additional PENSION CLASSES (not including the one that would come due normally) on Jan 1, 1983*.
> 
> The politicians figured most YOUNG people did not want to be enslaved to a job for 10 years .. just change the law to 5 years for vesting and GET MORE VOTES or MORE CORPORATE DONATIONS.
> 
> ...



The public sector is also cutting back on pensions. I have relatives who work for the federal government. Their retirement plan was converted to a hybrid plan (pension and 401k) several years ago. The public sector is being forced to operate more like the private sector every day, including things like merit pay and 401ks. I believe this trend will continue.


----------



## Eric B (Feb 4, 2018)

Bear in mind that the several years ago for that conversion was in the late 80s; the old federal system was quite generous (~80% after 40+ years) and not under social security.  It changed to a lower pension (1% per year served), plus a contribution match up to 5% in the TSP (401K equivalent), plus social security.  Lately congress has been messing with the employee cost to participate in the pension and talking about reducing the fixed pension by changing its basis to 5 years of salary instead of 3 and reducing the COLA.

What they just did recently was change the military pension system to be similar to the federal system, albeit with a slightly more generous pension.


----------



## "Roger" (Feb 4, 2018)

I worked my entire life in Wisconsin and receive a very good pension from the state. (Not a six figure pension by any means.) Occasionally, I get a raise depending on how investments are doing. (My pension could also go down if the stock market crashes.) Now some other factors ...

The Wisconsin pension system is 99% funded. I can not say that for my wife who worked for in the private factor where her pension system is in danger of falling below the minimum allowable. It easy could have been 100% funded but upper management chose to pass out profits in good years to bonuses for executives (and not line workers). I can name lots of other private industries that have failed to adequately fund their pensions (as well as many other states). While working, I earned decidedly less than comparable private industry jobs. Some years when the private sector was getting good raises, I got none. The state legislature always said that they tried to make up for this by creating a good pension system for us plus a very good health insurance plan. In essence, we were trading lower salaries for more long run security (plus a dedication to public service).


----------



## wilma (Feb 4, 2018)

lizap said:


> This used to be true, but no more. Public sector salaries are often as much or more than similar ones in the private sector, plus lucrative retirement benefits.


Not true for highly skilled positions- engineers, scientists, physicians, etc. you would make 30-40% more in the privaye sector compared to the federal.


----------



## Wyominguy (Feb 4, 2018)

There was a time in the 1990's when my years in the public retirement system looked to be a stupid choice compared to the private sector and 401K's. That turned around after 2008. Please note that not all public employees have defined benefit pensions, some opted for TIAA-Cref 4001K type of retirements when they were hired because they did not plan to stay in that state. After many years all of my colleagues who took that option wished they had not because they did not leave for other positions. Still, it is a choice. The state I worked in (I have since moved) has not given a cost of living increase in 5-6 years. The only increase I have seen is the one this month due to the decrease in withholding as a result of the tax cut legislation.


----------



## lizap (Feb 4, 2018)

wilma said:


> Not true for highly skilled positions- engineers, scientists, physicians, etc. you would make 30-40% more in the privaye sector compared to the federal.



There are many professional positions where it does hold true.. For example, there are engineering, business, etc.. professors making 200k+ at large research universities who would be unlikely to make this in the private sector.


----------



## wilma (Feb 4, 2018)

lizap said:


> There are many professional positions where it does hold true..


Not the types of positions i mentioned, and you are debating it...


----------



## rapmarks (Feb 4, 2018)

My father took half pension so my mother would continue after he died.  It meant 100 a month total, and fifty a month for my mother after he passed.  And he worked til he was 72.  
  My husband and I are fortunate to have good pensions but I started at $5500 a year, my first eight years total was $64,000 and that was what I made the year I retired 35 years later, minus 12 percent which we put in toward our pension. The reason I made that much was I earned over one hundred graduate hours in courses that had to be pre approved and was also a department chairmen.    Plus we faithfully contributed to ira and 403 b, and we lived on very little.   So now we have a decent life, but I bet not many would have traded income with me, or spent evenings and weekends with take home work. Plus taking classes all summer for years and many weekends .we also don't receive any social security, we certainly never expected a big pension, but are thankful for it.


----------



## pedro47 (Feb 4, 2018)

Wow. California & New York State fire and police employees must be unionized . In the Commonwealth of Virginia and I believe  fire departments , police departments and state troopers can receive between 70% to 80% in salary at retirement. This would be based upon the number of years in service and their age at retirement. They must have 25 years in service and be Fifty (50) years old. This formula would change if that employee was force to retire if he or she was disable. Also, in  Virginia, state employees are non union.


----------



## pedro47 (Feb 4, 2018)

Can a retired police or a retired fire personnel received social security benefits in those states at age 62 or later at age 66?


----------



## WinniWoman (Feb 4, 2018)

Wyominguy said:


> There was a time in the 1990's when my years in the public retirement system looked to be a stupid choice compared to the private sector and 401K's. That turned around after 2008. Please note that not all public employees have defined benefit pensions, some opted for TIAA-Cref 4001K type of retirements when they were hired because they did not plan to stay in that state. After many years all of my colleagues who took that option wished they had not because they did not leave for other positions. Still, it is a choice. The state I worked in (I have since moved) has not given a cost of living increase in 5-6 years. The only increase I have seen is the one this month due to the decrease in withholding as a result of the tax cut legislation.




I haven't had a raise in many, many years, except for last year they gave me a 2% raise after a supervisor- not my direct one-did me a favor and prompted it. The only one I have had.

My husband was getting like 2% raises (woopie!) and now they say he is capped. And he doesn't make no 6 figure income. 

Believe me, the private sector is no bargain. Throw in the cost of health insurance with the high deductible plan, forgetaboutit.

Sigh... the state of things today....


----------



## WinniWoman (Feb 4, 2018)

pedro47 said:


> Wow. California & New York State fire and police employees must be unionized . In the Commonwealth of Virginia and I believe  fire departments , police departments and state troopers can receive between 70% to 80% in salary at retirement. This would be based upon the number of years in service and their age at retirement. They must have 25 years in service and be Fifty (50) years old. This formula would change if that employee was force to retire if he or she was disable. Also, in  Virginia, state employees are non union.




Yup. That's it. The unions.


----------



## WinniWoman (Feb 4, 2018)

rapmarks said:


> My father took half pension so my mother would continue after he died.  It meant 100 a month total, and fifty a month for my mother after he passed.  And he worked til he was 72.
> My husband and I are fortunate to have good pensions but I started at $5500 a year, my first eight years total was $64,000 and that was what I made the year I retired 35 years later, minus 12 percent which we put in toward our pension.  Plus we faithfully contributed to ira and 403 b, and we lived on very little.   So now we have a decent life, but I bet not many would have traded income with me, or spent evenings and weekends with take home work. Plus taking classes all summer for years and many weekends .we also don't receive any social security, we certainly never expected a big pension, but are thankful for it.



Guess what? It's the same in the private sector. I was on call nights and weekends for years and my husband to this day has to bring work home. It's just the way it is no matter if public or private. Employers demand more and more. Do it or goodbye.


----------



## VacationForever (Feb 4, 2018)

I can only say that many of the reports that I have read are regarding California state employees vs. the private sector.  If you google it, you can find the data as well, in that public sector employees earn more than 30% over private sector employees for the same jobs, that is after adding in health and retirement benefits.   

Here is one of the reports that I just found on google: https://www.heritage.org/jobs-and-labor/report/are-california-public-employees-overpaid

I have also read many more in-depth reports over the years, and even in liberal papers and they all point towards the same conclusion.

All I can say is that if I were to start all over again, I would have gone to work in the public sector.  But wishful thinking would not be productive.


----------



## LurkerBee (Feb 4, 2018)

lizap said:


> *I have relatives who work for the federal government. Their retirement plan was converted to a hybrid plan (pension and 401k) several years ago*.



Several = 30. 

Congress created the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) in 1986, and it became effective on January 1, 1987. So anyone hired since 1987 has the "three legged stool" retirement, of small pension + TSP (essentially a 401k) + SS.  The older system (pre-1987) did not have SS.


----------



## rapmarks (Feb 4, 2018)

My son works as a public school teacher, my daughter has one masters as a school counselor but they offered one fourth the pay the insurance companies offered, so she never did it.   But she won't have a pension.   You can't think that far ahead when you are a single mom with three children.   She even turned doewn major university, half the pay as insurance company.


----------



## rapmarks (Feb 4, 2018)

Mary ann I know what it is like to not get raises, and my daughter does too.   Apparently what you get to start is it!


----------



## pedro47 (Feb 5, 2018)

My spouse retired from a city in Virginia about seventeen (17) years ago. They have not received a pay raised in over ten(10) years. There is no money in the city budget for retirees pay raises.
However, that same city will give them a one time bonus check sometimes at the end of the year in December.
Folks ! There is a huge difference between a bonus check and a permanent cost of living  pay raise.


----------



## PigsDad (Feb 5, 2018)

lizap said:


> There are many professional positions where it does hold true.. For example, there are engineering, business, etc.. professors making 200k+ at large research universities who would be unlikely to make this in the private sector.


The equivalent job in the private sector would be closer to a corporate technical trainer / consultant.  These positions make in the same range and can go even higher.

Kurt


----------



## WinniWoman (Feb 5, 2018)

You know, I do have a pension!

Many years ago I was working for a private national home health care company going through takeovers and the opportunity to work for a hospital appeared. I was excited because hospitals had and still do have great benefits, including a defined benefit pension.

I applied and got the job as a director for their off-site weight loss program (Optifast) they were opening in my neck of the woods and I worked there for 3 years until they closed it. This was the diet program Oprah Winfrey was on at the time. When she gained her weight back, they closed most of the centers and we were all laid off. We were hoping we could be placed somewhere else within the hospital, but we were not.

Occasionally I get communications from the administrator of the pension. Evidently I am entitled to $29.24 per month beginning at 65 years old! I look at it as my monthly wine money! LOL!


----------



## jackio (Feb 5, 2018)

I am a school nurse.  Our starting salary is approximately half of what hospital nurses make on Long Island, even new grads.   After 24 years, I make almost what a new grad in the private sector makes, but I went into it for the hours when my children were young.  My full retirement pension (if I stay long enough to retire without penalty) will be approx. 55% of my salary.  I did not work in this sector for less pay for the pension, but it will be a welcome source of income to me in my retirement.

My husband retired from the US Postal Service after 34 years.  He took a 6% pension penalty when they offered an early-out.  He did not pay into social security, but he has worked in the private sector post-retirement for long enough that he qualifies for social security.  Unfortunately, there is a federal offset penalty for postal workers, and he will only be able to collect half of his scheduled benefit, even though he pays full social security contributions.  Plus, he cannot collect half of mine, nor will he be able to collect my social security survivor benefits upon my death.

I believe there are other public sector workers who are affected by this offset penalty, particularly in the midwest and in Texas.


----------



## Icc5 (Feb 5, 2018)

We did it in the private sector in a Union job.  We made less money but knew we would get a pension when retiring.  We voted several times for raises to go into the pension funding instead of our pay checks.  Luckily those were locked in because later pensions were reduced for future years.  We lost out on what should have gone into a higher pension for the last 10-15 years and wages stayed flat (timing is everything).  I retired about 5 years ago with 43 years in and my wife last year with 42 years.
Luckily I make more in retirement then when I worked by combing my pension with early SS.  We will hold off on my wife's SS until she hits 70.


----------



## rapmarks (Feb 5, 2018)

jackio said:


> I am a school nurse.  Our starting salary is approximately half of what hospital nurses make on Long Island, even new grads.   After 24 years, I make almost what a new grad in the private sector makes, but I went into it for the hours when my children were young.  My full retirement pension (if I stay long enough to retire without penalty) will be approx. 55% of my salary.  I did not work in this sector for less pay for the pension, but it will be a welcome source of income to me in my retirement.
> 
> My husband retired from the US Postal Service after 34 years.  He took a 6% pension penalty when they offered an early-out.  He did not pay into social security, but he has worked in the private sector post-retirement for long enough that he qualifies for social security.  Unfortunately, there is a federal offset penalty for postal workers, and he will only be able to collect half of his scheduled benefit, even though he pays full social security contributions.  Plus, he cannot collect half of mine, nor will he be able to collect my social security survivor benefits upon my death.
> 
> I believe there are other public sector workers who are affected by this offset penalty, particularly in the midwest and in Texas.


Yes, Illinois teachers are afffected also


----------



## VacationForever (Feb 5, 2018)

jackio said:


> I am a school nurse.  Our starting salary is approximately half of what hospital nurses make on Long Island, even new grads.   After 24 years, I make almost what a new grad in the private sector makes, but I went into it for the hours when my children were young.  My full retirement pension (if I stay long enough to retire without penalty) will be approx. 55% of my salary.  I did not work in this sector for less pay for the pension, but it will be a welcome source of income to me in my retirement.
> 
> My husband retired from the US Postal Service after 34 years.  He took a 6% pension penalty when they offered an early-out.  He did not pay into social security, but he has worked in the private sector post-retirement for long enough that he qualifies for social security.  Unfortunately, there is a federal offset penalty for postal workers, and he will only be able to collect half of his scheduled benefit, even though he pays full social security contributions.  Plus, he cannot collect half of mine, nor will he be able to collect my social security survivor benefits upon my death.
> 
> I believe there are other public sector workers who are affected by this offset penalty, particularly in the midwest and in Texas.


It is called WEP (Windfall Elimination Provision) which applies to government pension recipients.  Because of the regressive nature of payout of Social Security, i.e. it pays more for lower contributions and less for higher contributions, WEP's formula accounts for pension being received to reduce the amount of Social Security payout.


----------



## x3 skier (Feb 5, 2018)

Retired as an Engineer from civilian service with the USAF after 32.5 years and went to work as a part time consultant for another 15. Between the consultant job, part time teaching at a university and co-op as an undergrad, I got in all the required quarters for SS. I never have understood the WEP and it’s effect on me, whatever it is or is not but since I can’t do anything about it, I don’t really care

Between the pension, SS and RMD, life is good for working almost 50 years.

Cheers


----------



## lizap (Feb 5, 2018)

LurkerBee said:


> Several = 30.
> 
> Congress created the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) in 1986, and it became effective on January 1, 1987. So anyone hired since 1987 has the "three legged stool" retirement, of small pension + TSP (essentially a 401k) + SS.  The older system (pre-1987) did not have SS.



I have relatives who are government attorneys in Washington and based on something they said, I didn't think it had been that long.


----------



## lizap (Feb 5, 2018)

pedro47 said:


> My spouse retired from a city in Virginia about seventeen (17) years ago. They have not received a pay raised in over ten(10) years. There is no money in the city budget for retirees pay raises.
> However, that same city will give them a one time bonus check sometimes at the end of the year in December.
> Folks ! There is a huge difference between a bonus check and a permanen cost of living  pay raise.



That's a huge problem with city and state pensions. Louisiana has a very lucrative pension for state employees, but they rarely receive a raise.


----------



## lizap (Feb 5, 2018)

PigsDad said:


> The equivalent job in the private sector would be closer to a corporate technical trainer / consultant.  These positions make in the same range and can go even higher.
> 
> Kurt



Corporate training is in my area, and I can say with a large amount of certainty, unless you are in business for yourself, it would be rare to make 250k in the private sector.


----------



## pedro47 (Feb 5, 2018)

X3 skier, 
RMD is totally another topics in my opinion.

RMD + a Pension + Social Security = peace of mind in your retirement years.

All I can advise for this young generation is to start saving early and do not wait until you are forty (40) years old.


----------



## lizap (Feb 5, 2018)

pedro47 said:


> X3 skier,
> RMD is totally another topics in my opinion.
> 
> RMD + a Pension + Social Security = peace of mind in your retirement years.
> ...



I agree. Also, unless a single earner makes very good $, couples where both work are more likely to have larger retirement savings.


----------



## VacationForever (Feb 5, 2018)

pedro47 said:


> All I can advise for this young generation is to start saving early and do not wait until you are forty (40) years old.



It is hard for someone who makes very little to save, after paying for housing, transportation, food and healthcare.  Many of us on TUG are fortunate to have had good careers which allow for savings after paying for necessities.


----------



## pedro47 (Feb 5, 2018)

I agree many of us on TUG are very fortunate to have had very good careers, with very good pension plans. This allow many of us to invest into IRA’s & ROTH retirement plans. Plus, by working with some outstanding employers in the 1950’s, 1960’s, 1970’s, 1980,s and 1990’s many of us were able to purchase stocks, very cheap company stocks,  and very low costs mutual funds.


----------



## rapmarks (Feb 5, 2018)

lizap said:


> I agree. Also, unless a single earner makes very good $, couples where both work are more likely to have larger retirement savings.


Please send to my daughter in law


----------



## klpca (Feb 5, 2018)

VacationForever said:


> It is hard for someone who makes very little to save, after paying for housing, transportation, food and healthcare.  Many of us on TUG are fortunate to have had good careers which allow for savings after paying for necessities.


While I absolutely agree with you that some of us had it easier than our kids do now, these young people can start small and bump their contribution up a little at a time to get to a max contribution. Anyone can afford one percent. Then you just bump it up a little at a time over 3 - 5 years and before you know it, you are contributing the maximum. I suggest bumping it up whenever you get any kind of raise. These young people need to live a little leaner. No Starbucks, eat out less, cut back on the $10 craft beers, shop around for a less expensive cell phone plan, shop at Goodwill. There are so many ways to save. We did it - for years we lived paycheck to paycheck, but always contributed the maximum to our retirement plans. I have three adult daughters in their mid 20's - mid 30's. One of them works a very low paying job and she still saves 12% of her salary to get her company match. In fact she is the most thrifty of the three - she lives on site (in a terrible place) but it's free. She has substantial savings, both in her savings account and her 401k. Most people wouldn't want to live the way that she does, but it allows her to work in a field that she is passionate about. To tell the truth, even I am surprised at how much she saves.


----------



## pedro47 (Feb 5, 2018)

When we were both  young, we both brown bag for lunch for work, we could not afford to eat out, we did not own a timeshare or an expensive automobile, we only stay at the Holiday Inn hotel / motel; Friday and Saturday nights and on Sunday morning  we went to church and there was no retail shopping on Sunday’s. We owned two push buttons telephones , no call waiting or forwarding features. We did not own ten (10) pairs of sneakers or ten (10) pairs of shoes. We did not own three (3) automobiles.

We had only one color television in our home and it was in the family room. But we both saved $50.00 each month. $100 per month went into a high yield saving account or a high yield bank certificate.  All of our pay raises went too savings.
Today’s generation I would try to save $50.00 per month. Limit my eating out, stop buying that high cost brew beer, make your own coffee at home and take it to work, do you really need a large screen television in every room. I could add many more items to save $100.00 per month.
Remember this “one day you are going to retire.”


----------



## Jan M. (Feb 5, 2018)

When my husband moved to Florida in December of 2010 to take a job with the State of Florida he started at 50% of what he had been making at his job up North in the same field. The State had no 401K that they made matching contributions to up to certain limits nor could he use the State vehicle that came with the job for personal use. At that time the State of Florida employees hadn't seen a pay raise in over 4 years. The big trade off for my husband was with the State of Florida he had a territory to cover that was much smaller than the private sector, a lighter workload and we had a little better health insurance at a little lower cost to us.

A little over a year after the started with the State, Governor Scott decided the State of Florida employees didn't deserve a pension plan they didn't contribute to so the free pension plan ended. He said the companies he ran in the private sector didn't get free pensions so the State of Florida employees shouldn't either. Of course there was outrage because the vast majority of the State of Florida employees are so underpaid to start with and the percentage they were now forced to pay was truly a hardship for many of them. The courts even got involved so to avoid legal action everyone got just enough of a pay raise to cover the mandatory contribution. With my husband's previous companies he had always had a free pension plan. We are aware that many pension plans aren't what they used to be and with some employers aren't even offered now. However what Governor Snot did, as my husband refers to him, and his callous attitude towards the vast majority of State employees who are so underpaid, just ticked my husband off royally.

The next time he was approached by the private sector he let them woo him back. He started at twice what he was making for the State of Florida, got a 401K with the matching contributions, a company car that we had personal use of and regular pay raises.

Because of the excellent work he did and the expertise he brought to his department with the State, two years ago my husband was contacted by his old boss from the State of Florida because was leaving and wanted my husband to take his position as department head. My husband said not even if you doubled my current salary. His current salary was more than his old boss with the State was making so there was no chance of that ever happening!


----------



## geekette (Feb 5, 2018)

...It is hard for someone who makes very little to save, after paying for housing, transportation, food and healthcare. Many of us on TUG are fortunate to have had good careers which allow for savings after paying for necessities....

I didn't start out with a good career!!!!!   Recessions that land people in whack jobs are not new, underemployment has occurred for many decades.  Setbacks happen to everyone.  Hard work doesn't = financial success automatically else I would have been a millionaire before graduating high school.   

"Pay yourself first" is not something you hold off on until you are established.  Pick a %, siphon it off of income every time and put it somewhere safe.  It may not be able to stay there, crap happens, but save every time and only use it for actual emergency.  The habit matters more than the amount set aside.  The worst thing a person can do is quit saving because they seem to keep having financial disasters.  "Save up for the next disaster" is what I would tell them. 

Everyone has housing, transportation, food and healthcare costs and limited $.  Everyone must set their own priorities as to how to handle their money and sort wants from needs to spend in accordance with income realities now and future.  No generation gets a pass on "oh, life is expensive! It's not my fault!" because decreasing expenses is within the control of every person.  

I like having 2 vehicles, because I can afford them now.  Bought used.  But back in the day, I was on foot or bike, often picking my living quarters to decrease transport cost.   Eventually used cars with frequent unexpected high used car costs.  No one ever said that I was entitled to quality transportation to float my princess butt.   I dealt with my economic reality and eventually worked my way up to having more choices in life.   There is no path to experience but to march right through life.

Food costs are to me the single easiest place to cut back, but I also buy sensible used cars within budget and maintain them, pay for necessary insurances like everyone else, and don't live in places I can't afford.   I could get a roommate, grow more of my own food, make my own clothes, etc.   

People make choices.   My choices reflect my plan to avoid becoming old and poor, and I started that plan while young.  I was in deep debt with a crappy job at recession and it sucked rocks.  I happened to think how much worse it would be to be elderly, unable to work one job, let alone 3, in order to improve circumstances.   Sacrificing wants and luxuries while young should allow my old age to be more comfortable and maybe even plush.   I didn't plan for public or private service one way or another, I aimed for finding something I liked well enough to keep doing, and saved a portion of income each and every time.   Employer benefits will be employer benefits, I have never chosen a job based on that, but the age of "this is the employer you will have for 20+ years" was gone by the time I graduated.  Picked a place for a pension and made a go of it over entire career?  Good for you, lucky few.   I'm lucky to have had a near constant 401k since my mid 20s, and it matched for most of that time and some employers threw in more than match.  I'm not unhappy to have had multiple employers, I have had an interesting career (to me).

I don't live as frugally as I could, but I don't mind having had the struggle early on because it is easy for me to separate wants from needs and identify exactly where I can cut expenses to adapt to decreased or stoppage of income, or how to increase my income.   Having saved, I also have multiple places from which I could extract money if I need it, and a good credit rating providing more credit limit than I ever intend to exercise.   Young people should not be sitting around making excuses, and no one should be making excuses for them.  I would instead hope that they are making some kind of plan on how to navigate life and float their butts in retirement like every other generation has had to do.   

There won't be a pension for me (401k instead, fine with me), but I can absolutely be happy for people that did get their promised pension because a lot of people didn't get theirs and usually thru no fault of their own.


----------



## lizap (Feb 5, 2018)

rapmarks said:


> Please send to my daughter in law



Our daughter, who has a masters degree in the health care field and could make very good $, refuses to work. They will pay a big price for this in about 35-40 years. We plan to spend everything before we die...we have already given and given and given...


----------



## PigsDad (Feb 5, 2018)

pedro47 said:


> All I can advise for this young generation is to start saving early and do not wait until you are forty (40) years old.


That is good advice, but it is not _just _for the younger generation.  I am 30 years into my career, and I knew from the beginning to start saving for my own retirement (which I did!) and not to rely on a company pension or Social Security.  I know it may sound harsh, but I don't have much sympathy for those who cry "Woa is me" when they find themselves 50 years old and no retirement savings.  They were most likely living it up while us savers were busy living on a budget.  And this happens at all income levels.

Kurt


----------



## rapmarks (Feb 5, 2018)

PigsDad said:


> That is good advice, but it is not _just _for the younger generation.  I am 30 years into my career, and I knew from the beginning to start saving for my own retirement (which I did!) and not to rely on a company pension or Social Security.  I know it may sound harsh, but I don't have much sympathy for those who cry "Woa is me" when they find themselves 50 years old and no retirement savings.  They were most likely living it up while us savers were busy living on a budget.  And this happens at all income levels.
> 
> Kurt


I agree with you Kurt, what gets me is the resentment of the non savers because we have savings.   Two people worked full time, one child, did not take maternity leave, and we are at fault because we saved money and they didn't. Whiners.


----------



## VacationForever (Feb 5, 2018)

Sorry folks, while it is true that there are people who make enough money who should be saving but they are not, but there are many more people who make a few dollars per hour above minimum wage their whole lives and are always behind on making payments on bare necessities like shelter and food.  Surely it cannot be so hard to understand why there are many people who have no savings and it is not because they spend on frivolous things.


----------



## geekette (Feb 5, 2018)

lizap said:


> Our daughter, who has a masters degree in the health care field and could make very good $, refuses to work. They will pay a big price for this in about 35-40 years. We plan to spend everything before we die...we have already given and given and given...


Refuses to work?   Why get a masters and throw it in the garbage?  

Good on  you, it's not your responsibility to float your kids once they are not kids.  Live your life as you planned and daughter will live whatever reality she earns for herself.


----------



## lizap (Feb 5, 2018)

geekette said:


> Refuses to work?   Why get a masters and throw it in the garbage?
> 
> Good on  you, it's not your responsibility to float your kids once they are not kids.  Live your life as you planned and daughter will live whatever reality she earns for herself.



Good question.  She has 2 kids under 2 and wants another by Christmas.  Needless to say, we aren't on the same page..


----------



## geekette (Feb 5, 2018)

lizap said:


> Good question.  She has 2 kids under 2 and wants another by Christmas.  Needless to say, we aren't on the same page..


holy moly.  Good luck to her.  I hope she is an outstanding mother with a superhuman reserve of patience and energy.   Good luck also to whomever is providing for all those mouths.   Hope she isn't expecting them to provide for her when she's elderly because that's not a retirement plan, either.  

I have zero maternal instinct, but if I did and it was strong, I would not have put myself thru so much school that I didn't need, I would have been working my butt off in whatever best job available to stack cash instead and checked out library books to learn whatever I needed.    No degree requirements for motherhood.


----------



## rapmarks (Feb 5, 2018)

geekette said:


> Refuses to work?   Why get a masters and throw it in the garbage?
> 
> Good on  you, it's not your responsibility to float your kids once they are not kids.  Live your life as you planned and daughter will live whatever reality she earns for herself.


My daughter in law  has earned two masters degrees since they married, her excuse was the one child, but he is full time school now, next year she starts on her phd, now she wants to work in a museum.     So since this century three years full time work, the rest school or home for various reasons.


----------



## LurkerBee (Feb 5, 2018)

lizap said:


> I have relatives who are government attorneys in Washington and based on something they said, I didn't think it had been that long.


Yup, its been since the 80s. People who started before that had had the option to keep the old system (CSRS), and there are still a few of those around. But for the most part, they have all retired. https://www.benefits.gov/benefits/benefit-details/4583

Although most agencies have attorneys (and would be under FERS), I did double check DoJ, and yes, that is FERS. https://www.justice.gov/usao-edmi/jobs/employee-benefits

There is a possibility they are at some agency that does something somewhat different. For example, the Treasure Department has a different pay scale, but it looks like they have the same three-part retirement system https://www.treasury.gov/careers/Pages/benefits.aspx


----------



## Patri (Feb 5, 2018)

The master's degrees are not wasted. If these gals go to work later on, they have that out of the way. No one can be a better parent to the kiddos than their moms and dads. Obviously for now they are putting family before money. But no one should have to subsidize that decision.


----------



## geekette (Feb 5, 2018)

rapmarks said:


> My daughter in law  has earned two masters degrees since they married, her excuse was the one child, but he is full time school now, next year she starts on her phd, now she wants to work in a museum.     So since this century three years full time work, the rest school or home for various reasons.


Wow, holy crap.  Why get a phd to work in a museum?  I did it with much less schooling!!!  

No wonder I am so ready for retirement, I've been working since I was 15!!


----------



## lizap (Feb 5, 2018)

Patri said:


> The master's degrees are not wasted. If these gals go to work later on, they have that out of the way. No one can be a better parent to the kiddos than their moms and dads. Obviously for now they are putting family before money. But no one should have to subsidize that decision.



I think its possible to be good parents and both parents work.. This is a personal choice, but we can no longer subsidize our daughter's choice.


----------



## geekette (Feb 5, 2018)

Patri said:


> The master's degrees are not wasted. If these gals go to work later on, they have that out of the way. No one can be a better parent to the kiddos than their moms and dads. Obviously for now they are putting family before money. But no one should have to subsidize that decision.


Degrees get old, the world advances past state of the art (or science).  Old degrees with zero work experience are not going to open any doors.  "Great, what have you done since you were 25 that can help my company?"   Academic achievements demonstrate nothing about ability to work for a boss, and the farther in the past those achievements were, the less valuable they become.     

I am good with people making choices in life to be happy, and agree that actual parents are best parents for kids.   Agree also that people should subsidize their own decisions.  Want a degree for the sake of having a degree?  Rock on, ok by me.


----------



## Luanne (Feb 5, 2018)

geekette said:


> Wow, holy crap.  Why get a phd to work in a museum?  I did it with much less schooling!!!
> 
> No wonder I am so ready for retirement, I've been working since I was 15!!


Unfortunately many jobs that we were able to get with much less schooling require those advanced degrees now.


----------



## WinniWoman (Feb 5, 2018)

lizap said:


> Our daughter, who has a masters degree in the health care field and could make very good $, refuses to work. They will pay a big price for this in about 35-40 years. We plan to spend everything before we die...we have already given and given and given...



My sisterinlaw has a degree, but because my brother makes a lot of money, she chose to stay home with their daughter after working just a couple of years, and she never went back. She lives the life I wish I could have.

To her credit also, she did a lot of cat rescue work and also did a lot of work on the HOA board for their vacation condo they used to own, flying back and forth to Fla. sometimes (poor thing. LOL!)

So- if your daughter doesn't have to work and I assume she is married, and she stays married, she is one lucky woman! Many of these jobs today stink to high heaven. I can't even begin to tell you what goes on at my company and I am in health care.


----------



## lizap (Feb 5, 2018)

mpumilia said:


> My sisterinlaw has a degree, but because my brother makes a lot of money, she chose to stay home with their daughter after working just a couple of years, and she never went back. She lives the life I wish I could have.
> 
> To her credit also, she did a lot of cat rescue work and also did a lot of work on the HOA board for their vacation condo they used to own, flying back and forth to Fla. sometimes (poor thing. LOL!)
> 
> So- if your daughter doesn't have to work and I assume she is married, and she stays married, she is one lucky woman! Many of these jobs today stink to high heaven. I can't even begin to tell you what goes on at my company and I am in health care.



The problem is she needs to work.  Her husband was out of work for a while and now has a job, but not nearly enough to support a growing family and save for retirement. I've lost count of how many times we've bailed them out. The amount we've spent (mainly because our daughter doesn't 'want' to work) has been substantial.  We may end up being estranged from our grandchildren, but this is the last time.


----------



## VacationForever (Feb 5, 2018)

My son who has a communication disability but intelligent has been unable to get a job as he interviews poorly.  There is no way he can save for retirement when he is not having an income.  Yes, I still support him partially and will probably do so for the rest of my life.  I am still thinking how to structure his inheritance when I pass away so that he will not run out of money.  He was a hardworker when he worked for us for 5 years.  He wants to work but cannot find work.  It is worrisome.  He has a Bachelor's Degree and has applied everywhere, including Home Depot, grocery store, even fast food.  ARGH.


----------



## bogey21 (Feb 5, 2018)

Regardless of the reason there are a lot of people out there between say 35 and 50 years old who don't have a pension or anything saved for retirement and don't seem to be concerned about it.  If nothing changes, there is going to be a crisis in this Country when these people are unable to work and don't have money to live on.

George


----------



## rapmarks (Feb 5, 2018)

For all my complaints, my daughters former in laws lost their 31 year old son Sunday, he passed away of heart failure during the night.  First met him at age 21, and for many years as he prolonged college.   feeling so terrible for that poor family.  So count your blessings, I know that griping on here saves us from griping to the ones we are thinking about.


----------



## geekette (Feb 5, 2018)

Luanne said:


> Unfortunately many jobs that we were able to get with much less schooling require those advanced degrees now.


I am still in the workforce and have to say that this is far from universally true.  

Professions vary, no doubt about that.  The focus is generally on what interviewee can do right now for interviewer.   It's all about marketable skills, who needs em and who has em.   Some degrees age slower than others, this is quite true.  Some will open doors, some won't.   Mine is biz, not much has changed, same core things still happen in all businesses, finance, production and marketing.    

I worked at a major museum for about 7 years and in most every case where a "required" degree was listed, it almost always said "or relevant experience".   We'd take a person that had been around the world on paleo digs over the much-degreed person that only knew from books.   Education portions are different, academics like to see academic accomplishment.  In many work arenas, depending on the market you're in, experience can outweigh a degree.   

Each situation is different, and I would generally agree that a college degree of some sort has replaced high school diploma as new minimum, but I will always believe that a hard working person wanting to learn can do so without having to stack up pricey degrees.  The cost vs benefit equation has changed and too many people paid way too much on pricey degrees with loans that have ruined their lives.   I got my degree for me.   If the employer wants me to have more, they can pay for it.   There is a limit to how much debt I will take on for the illusion of a promise of lucrative employment.


----------



## geekette (Feb 5, 2018)

rapmarks said:


> For all my complaints, my daughters former in laws lost their 31 year old son Sunday, he passed away of heart failure during the night.  First met him at age 21, and for many years as he prolonged college.   feeling so terrible for that poor family.  So count your blessings, I know that griping on here saves us from griping to the ones we are thinking about.


Oh my, I am so terribly sorry to hear this.  That is far too young.


----------



## lizap (Feb 5, 2018)

bogey21 said:


> Regardless of the reason there are a lot of people out there between say 35 and 50 years old who don't have a pension or anything saved for retirement and don't seem to be concerned about it.  If nothing changes, there is going to be a crisis in this Country when these people are unable to work and don't have money to live on.
> 
> George



I agree with you completely.  There is a looming retirement crisis in this country. Eventually those of us who have been successful will end up getting less in SS and having to pay more for medicare (if we get any benefits at all). It will be means-tested..


----------



## Egret1986 (Feb 5, 2018)

lizap said:


> The problem is she needs to work.  Her husband was out of work for a while and now has a job, but not nearly enough to support a growing family and save for retirement. I've lost count of how many times we've bailed them out. The amount we've spent (mainly because our daughter doesn't 'want' to work) has been substantial.  Every penney we spend is a penney that takes away from our retirement.  We may end up being estranged from our grandchildren, but this is the last time.



I wish you much strength.   I have been witness to this with some of my co-workers.  I feel blessed that I haven't had to walk in yours or their shoes with my children.  It's easy to say, "I would never allow that."  I'm sure it's gut-wrenching to draw the line and say "no more."

But as I have seen with my co-workers, it won't matter how much money you throw at them, it won't change their situation.  It will be never-ending.  The money cripples them to do anything differently.  I know it must be heart-breaking, especially with children involved.  As we all know, you shouldn't be estranged from your grandchildren simply because you choose to protect yourselves and stop "bleeding" cash.  You must protect your future.  You've seen that "assisting" hasn't improved their situation.  They will have to want more for themselves and their family, and do what it takes to make it happen.  Stay strong.


----------



## lizap (Feb 5, 2018)

Egret1986 said:


> I wish you much strength.   I have been witness to this with some of my co-workers.  I feel blessed that I haven't had to walk in yours or their shoes with my children.  It's easy to say, "I would never allow that."  I'm sure it's gut-wrenching to draw the line and say "no more."
> 
> But as I have seen with my co-workers, it won't matter how much money you throw at them, it won't change their situation.  It will be never-ending.  The money cripples them to do anything differently.  I know it must be heart-breaking, especially with children involved.  As we all know, you shouldn't be estranged from your grandchildren simply because you choose to protect yourselves and stop "bleeding" cash.  You must protect your future.  You've seen that "assisting" hasn't improved their situation.  They will have to want more for themselves and their family, and do what it takes to make it happen.  Stay strong.



Thanks for your kind words and support.  Most of our assistance has been because of our grandchildren.  Our SIL recently got a good job, but I doubt it will be enough, if they don't do some serious budgeting and watching what they spend.


----------



## Jan M. (Feb 6, 2018)

lizap said:


> The problem is she needs to work. Her husband was out of work for a while and now has a job, but not nearly enough to support a growing family and save for retirement. I've lost count of how many times we've bailed them out. The amount we've spent (mainly because our daughter doesn't 'want' to work) has been substantial. We may end up being estranged from our grandchildren, but this is the last time.



My husband would use the phrase "want in one hand, .... in the other and see which one fills up first" about wanting another child. You are certainly under no obligation to support them especially in lieu of her wanting another child when she already has two that they haven't been able to support without your help. I have to agree with you that this is very irresponsible given their circumstances.

I strongly support one parent staying at home with their children for the first couple of years if at all possible. We are currently subsidizing our son, who is our only child, so he can work part time on a different shift than his wife. She doesn't have that option. During the day he is Mr. Mom to their 20 month old daughter and six year old daughter who is in kindergarten. He does the shopping, most of the cooking and some of the laundry and cleaning. By him working part time on a different shift they don't have to pay for childcare for their younger one, infant care is more expensive, nor before or after school care for their older one. That is such a huge savings that all they needed us to do is pay their $100 a month cell phone bill. Without him asking I've paid his $150 a month school loan, before Christmas to help them have some extra money for Christmas, and twice when they had a big auto care expense. Our DIL is a teacher so when the school year ends our son plans to go back to full time. By later August when our DIL starts back to school our younger granddaughter will be over two years old and I have no problem with her going to a sitter or daycare as at that point she will be old enough to talk and tell them if something bad happens to her.

Last September I went up to help our son and DIL out for almost a month while he trained full time on days for a new position. I saw how complicated their lives were with both of them working full time. I would gladly continue to pay their $100 a month cellphone bill and the school loan a couple of times a year to have our son stay part time another year until the younger one is three years old. By then she will benefit from the socialization of being around other children her age on a regular basis. But that is their decision.

The jobs and schedules our son and DIL worked when their first child was born meant that they didn't need child care her first year. After that their schedules changed and they had to find a sitter three days a week. A couple of months later the sitter, who was wonderful, was offered a full time job by a previous employer. The new sitter was someone their neighbor had known when the sitter was growing up and had known her whole family for years. The sitter was now 25 or 26 and married.

The job my son had at that time meant he had to work killer hours from Thanksgiving through New Years. Our DIL is a music teacher and at that time was working at two Catholic schools, both of which had Christmas programs that were her responsibility. She also taught private lessons and was the music director for a Church so had extra responsibilities during the Christmas season with their Praise band and choir. I flew up to help the day the flights dropped after Thanksgiving, staying 3 weeks until the flights went up in price just before Christmas. Our son warned me before I got there that his daughter might not want to go to me as she was belatedly going through the strange stage with other people. I thought this was odd as she had never shown any signs of this before and was one of the happiest, least fussy babies I have ever seen. When I got there she was thrilled to see me. Over the next few days I was shocked about the changes I saw in our granddaughter that had developed in just the six weeks she had been going to this sitter. During this time my husband was able to spend a couple of days with us. He too noticed and was upset by the changes in our granddaughter.

I told our son that I had a very bad feeling about this sitter and how upset and worried I was about the changes in their daughter. By this point I'm having a come to Jesus talk with him and I'm in my take no prisoners state of mind. When I get to that point it has never once in his life gone well for him and he had finally learned that he better pay close attention to what I'm telling him. I had been telling our son when we talked on the phone that the things he was telling me about their daughter since she started with that sitter weren't normal. He reminded me that they had asked other people, including my DIL's Mother and older sister about the changes in a child when they get to the toddler stage. They had been chalking up what they were seeing to that. I only had the one child but my DIL's mother and sister both had 3 each so they were seen as being a more reliable source than I was even though they were rarely around the child and not in frequent communication with his wife like he is with his Father and me. I restrained myself from verbally ripping him a new one because I could see that he knew he deserved it and asked him please, please, please find someone else.

Our son was still working killer hours so asked our DIL to take care of finding a new sitter since she was free for the rest of her break once Christmas was past. Our DIL only picked their daughter up from the sitter so just thought the crying for Mommy when she got there was normal at that age. I could have just kicked her in the behind because I had picked their daughter up from the first sitter just a few months before and she was all smiles and waving bye-bye to that sitter. Our DIL didn't do what our son asked her to do. When our DIL started back after break our son had to take their daughter back to the same sitter, she started crying as soon as he turned on the sitter's street. He figured since she hadn't been there since before Thanksgiving, over 7 weeks ago and she only went to that sitter for about 6 six weeks, that at 17 months she couldn't possibly know where she was. The second day she started sobbing so uncontrollably that our son was really scared. He called me on his way to work half in tears saying she absolutely did know where she was, that he was sure that I was right in saying there was something wrong and they shouldn't take her back to this sitter. He ended up leaving work early to go get her and he had a new sitter by the end of the day. Which by the way was someone a co-worker of his raved about and said her kids loved and he had told his wife to contact. Our DIL wasn't entirely convinced about what our son and I suspected until the new sitter commented about the change in their daughter within the first two weeks of being there. They had never said anything about the previous sitter. Then our DIL felt really guilty and I'm happy to say our son wasn't at all sympathetic and came down on her hard.  We will never know what went on but it became very clear to both our son and DIL that something certainly had.

The first four years of a child's life are the most important years of their lives developmentally. If you can truly say that your daughter is a wonderful and loving mother to your grandchildren and you won't go broke helping them out then it is so worth doing so. However adding another child to already strained finances is not a wise decision. That would make three children under the age of four, then add money problems to that. Too many marriages don't survive. I've observed that many of the younger generation simply have no concept of how expensive it will be when their kids get involved in sports, become teenagers, start driving, go to college, etc. Your daughter and SIL are already behind financially and she really needs to go back to work in another year to eighteen months. But maybe they will win the lottery or have someone in one of their families die and leave them a nice chunk of money to get their heads above water before their kids can be self supporting.

BTW our son and DIL never intended to have a second child. They've struggled financially their entire marriage and with their first ready to start school weren't going to have to pay for daycare anymore so would finally start seeing the light at the end of the tunnel. This was their second oops and they are making very sure there are no more oops! Their plan when they got married was to wait five years before they started a family. Two months into their marriage and they were expecting. Life doesn't always go as planned! I do give my son credit as he contributes as much to his 401K as his company matches and has never touched it. Unlike his wife who will get a State teacher's pension, he knows the chances aren't good that he will ever have a pension from an employer.

We lived frugally for the first nine years we were married so that I would be able to stay at home with any children we might have. This was very important to both of us and a goal we worked hard and sacrificed to make happen. My Father was diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis when I was 11 years old and only had social security to live on but he would have been glad to help both my sister and I if he had been able to work. Neither of my parents had parents who were in any position to help them monetarily. However when my Mother went back to work when I was 18 months old my Father took me every day to his parents house for his Mother to take care of me. This continued until I was about 4.5 and my sister was born. Those grandparents always had a big garden that supplied them, us and my aunt's family. My paternal grandfather paid me for my A's and B's from the 4th grade when we started getting letter grades until he died when I was 16. Of course like any kid I liked the money but that he cared so much about my grades that he paid me and was proud of me was what was really important to me. My father was having health problems by then and my parents were not in any position to reward me for my grades like many other parents did so my grandfather stepped up. He would ask about those B's, not making me feel bad about them, but in a way that made me feel like he cared whether or not I liked a subject or it wasn't as easy for me as other subjects. Not all help comes in the form of money. My widowed MIL was 92 when she passed a few years ago and she clung to her money with the excuse that no one ever helped them. Which was absolutely not true as both sets of parents had helped them quite a bit and she inherited a nice amount from her Father. My husband's two older brothers still talk about when their Father's Mother showed up with a grocery bag full of money so their parents could pay off their house and other things both sets of grandparents did for their family. And I'm sure there were other things they didn't know about when they were little or weren't aware of when they were older. So instead of helping all five of her children when they had young families and could have used the help, money or otherwise, they inherited the money when they were old enough to no longer need the help. Yet during all of their younger years when they struggled to get the bills paid each month their Mother was always quick to criticize that none of them were saving or saving enough. All five of her children are smart, hardworking, none of them into drinking or drugs, or the type to sponge off her. All four of her boys have been good husbands and fathers too. She wasn't interested in her grandchildren and I don't remember her ever praising or rewarding them for anything they accomplished. Although she was thrilled to brag to her friends about anything they did she considered worthwhile. She was very fortunate that my husband's Father thought the world of his Mother and drilled into his children that they should love and be good to their Mother. I would rather die a pauper than be remembered like my husband and his siblings remember their Mother, that money was more important to her than they were.


----------



## WinniWoman (Feb 6, 2018)

lizap said:


> The problem is she needs to work.  Her husband was out of work for a while and now has a job, but not nearly enough to support a growing family and save for retirement. I've lost count of how many times we've bailed them out. The amount we've spent (mainly because our daughter doesn't 'want' to work) has been substantial.  We may end up being estranged from our grandchildren, but this is the last time.




Oh, wow. Well, that is certainly a different story from my sisterinlaws'.

Tough love is the only way. No more enabling. Tell them you now have to take care of your own retirement and needs as you get older. You have done everything you can to help them.

If they need more money they will have to increase their income one way or another- meaning her husband gets a second job or she gets a job or both. They will have to figure it all out. Good luck to them!


----------



## bogey21 (Feb 6, 2018)

lizap said:


> Eventually those of us who have been successful will end up getting less in SS and having to pay more for *Medicare* (if we get any benefits at all). *It will be means-tested..*



Actually it already is.  I pay a lot more for Medicare Part B and Part D than most due to my earnings.  It will be simple enough to apply a similar formula to Basic Medicare.  Both my Part B and Part D contributions are deducted from my monthly Social Security payment.  Because they have been increasing every year my Social Security payment has been getting smaller and smaller year by year.

Let me hasten to add that this doesn't particularly bother me as I feel fortunate to be in this position.

George


----------



## Icc5 (Feb 6, 2018)

I always felt working hard and smart you should be able to save for the future and be able to retire in your 60's.  Maybe still true some places but not in California.  We know some great people that are early 30's that are friends of my son.  They are married and she has a degree.  She worked her way up in a Pet Food Company to become a Store Manager and make what my wife and I made combined.
Her husband (no degree) fell into a Service Manager job at a Car Dealership and makes about $10,000 more then her.  The two of them make almost $160,000 combined.  Between rent,food,utilities,transportation, and insurance they struggle to make ends meet.  
I see where their money goes and basically they are on a tight budget.  They have little left to save, no pension offered and do have 401ks that they aren't able to put much money into.
No matter what they do they are going to be playing catch up all their life's.  Hard for me to imagine considering my wife and I are early retirees with pensions,paid off houses,savings, good 401k's good insurance and topped out at $42,000 each.
ONLY IN CALIFORNIA.


----------



## lizap (Feb 6, 2018)

bogey21 said:


> Actually it already is.  I pay a lot more for Medicare Part B and Part D than most due to my earnings.  It will be simple enough to apply a similar formula to Basic Medicare.  Both my Part B and Part D contributions are deducted from my monthly Social Security payment.  Because they have been increasing every year my Social Security payment has been getting smaller and smaller year by year.
> 
> Let me hasten to add that this doesn't particularly bother me as I feel fortunate to be in this position.
> 
> George



Meant to say we will be paying more, and I agree about helping those who are less fortunate. My point was that we need to take this into account in our retirement financial planning.


----------



## lizap (Feb 6, 2018)

Jan M. said:


> My husband would use the phrase "want in one hand, .... in the other and see which one fills up first" about wanting another child. You are certainly under no obligation to support them especially in lieu of her wanting another child when she already has two that they haven't been able to support without your help. I have to agree with you that this is very irresponsible given their circumstances.
> 
> I strongly support one parent staying at home with their children for the first couple of years if at all possible. We are currently subsidizing our son, who is our only child, so he can work part time on a different shift than his wife. She doesn't have that option. During the day he is Mr. Mom to their 20 month old daughter and six year old daughter who is in kindergarten. He does the shopping, most of the cooking and some of the laundry and cleaning. By him working part time on a different shift they don't have to pay for childcare for their younger one, infant care is more expensive, nor before or after school care for their older one. That is such a huge savings that all they needed us to do is pay their $100 a month cell phone bill. Without him asking I've paid his $150 a month school loan, before Christmas to help them have some extra money for Christmas, and twice when they had a big auto care expense. Our DIL is a teacher so when the school year ends our son plans to go back to full time. By later August when our DIL starts back to school our younger granddaughter will be over two years old and I have no problem with her going to a sitter or daycare as at that point she will be old enough to talk and tell them if something bad happens to her.
> 
> ...



Trust me, given the amount of staggering financial support we have provided (despite the fact they have been financially reckless with what we gave them) over the last four years, we will have no regrets.


----------



## geekette (Feb 6, 2018)

lizap said:


> The problem is she needs to work.  Her husband was out of work for a while and now has a job, but not nearly enough to support a growing family and save for retirement. I've lost count of how many times we've bailed them out. The amount we've spent (mainly because our daughter doesn't 'want' to work) has been substantial.  We may end up being estranged from our grandchildren, but this is the last time.


Oh my!  It was very clear that I was on my own, with limited assistance available while I was getting myself thru first degree only.  We were told to make our decisions carefully because we would live with all consequences of those decisions.  I would never have been bailed out for not wanting to work, what a dream come true.  Wow, you are much more generous than I would ever be.  No one owes me a living, and I owe no one a living.  Get back to YOUR life plans.  The daughter is a full grown woman with degrees I assume you also paid for.  Practice Tough Love and believe that it will benefit your grandchildren.  If nothing else, they will learn that choices have consequences and that is not a bad thing to learn as young as possible.  

I'm sorry that you have felt obligated to finance her life choices.  You are way past off the hook for that.  You and spouse owe a comfortable retirement to yourselves.


----------



## lizap (Feb 6, 2018)

geekette said:


> Oh my!  It was very clear that I was on my own, with limited assistance available while I was getting myself thru first degree only.  We were told to make our decisions carefully because we would live with all consequences of those decisions.  I would never have been bailed out for not wanting to work, what a dream come true.  Wow, you are much more generous than I would ever be.  No one owes me a living, and I owe no one a living.  Get back to YOUR life plans.  The daughter is a full grown woman with degrees I assume you also paid for.  Practice Tough Love and believe that it will benefit your grandchildren.  If nothing else, they will learn that choices have consequences and that is not a bad thing to learn as young as possible.
> 
> I'm sorry that you have felt obligated to finance her life choices.  You are way past off the hook for that.  You and spouse owe a comfortable retirement to yourselves.



Thanks. I needed to hear this..


----------



## WinniWoman (Feb 6, 2018)

Icc5 said:


> I always felt working hard and smart you should be able to save for the future and be able to retire in your 60's.  Maybe still true some places but not in California.  We know some great people that are early 30's that are friends of my son.  They are married and she has a degree.  She worked her way up in a Pet Food Company to become a Store Manager and make what my wife and I made combined.
> Her husband (no degree) fell into a Service Manager job at a Car Dealership and makes about $10,000 more then her.  The two of them make almost $160,000 combined.  Between rent,food,utilities,transportation, and insurance they struggle to make ends meet.
> I see where their money goes and basically they are on a tight budget.  They have little left to save, no pension offered and do have 401ks that they aren't able to put much money into.
> No matter what they do they are going to be playing catch up all their life's.  Hard for me to imagine considering my wife and I are early retirees with pensions,paid off houses,savings, good 401k's good insurance and topped out at $42,000 each.
> ONLY IN CALIFORNIA.




Well- throw New York in there. We do fine right now with both working but when we retire we will be in deep poop mainly due to school and property taxes, and insurances.


----------



## lizap (Feb 6, 2018)

mpumilia said:


> Well- throw New York in there. We do fine right now with both working but when we retire we will be in deep poop mainly due to school and property taxes, and insurances.



Mary Ann, is moving to another state a possibility?


----------



## WinniWoman (Feb 6, 2018)

lizap said:


> Mary Ann, is moving to another state a possibility?



That's the plan. New Hampshire where our son lives. Though property taxes are high there- just not as high as here. No income tax and or sales tax which is good.

And the real estate market is not good where we live and who knows what the mortgage rates will be for buyers when it comes time to sell. We have to hope we can sell our home and get enough for it to buy something else. So far it has not appreciated like it should have, even though it is totally updated and on a lot of land. Even after 30 years! Not going to be easy to get something decent for the money in NH compared to what we have now. I have a lot of anxiety over it. Plus we will be pushing 70 by then almost. The logistics of moving. UGH! But we HAVE to move one way or another....We can not stay here with no support system and alone and in seclusion.

Sigh.....


----------



## geekette (Feb 6, 2018)

lizap said:


> Thanks. I needed to hear this..


I also sent you a cyber hug.  Pass some on to your husband as you say to each other "we are good parents, we are good people, we have done our best."   You are both hereby off the hook for life choices made by others and encouraged to attend to the future you both want for yourselves.   You are entitled to happiness together.


----------



## Elan (Feb 6, 2018)

mpumilia said:


> That's the plan. New Hampshire where our son lives. Though property taxes are high there- just not as high as here. No income tax and or sales tax which is good.
> 
> And the real estate market is not good where we live and who knows what the mortgage rates will be for buyers when it comes time to sell. We have to hope we can sell our home and get enough for it to buy something else. So far it has not appreciated like it should have, even though it is totally updated and on a lot of land. Even after 30 years! Not going to be easy to get something decent for the money in NH compared to what we have now. I have a lot of anxiety over it. Plus we will be pushing 70 by then almost. The logistics of moving. UGH! But we HAVE to move one way or another....We can not stay here with no support system and alone and in seclusion.
> 
> Sigh.....



  You've posted about your situation numerous times, and it makes me feel bad every time.  So, my input is:  Why don't you do something NOW, instead of later?  If I were you, I wouldn't want to be caught in a situation where I had to act immediately (sell house in down market) because something unplanned occurs.  My personal opinion is that you'd be better off to address this situation while you're both still healthy and employed, than later, when that might not be true.  Have you considered perhaps selling your property now and renting something closer to work until you retire?  Or something along those lines?  

  Like I said, it's just my opinion, and I'm only trying to be helpful since you seem to be a very nice person.  Please disregard if it's not helpful.


----------



## turkel (Feb 6, 2018)

Icc5 said:


> I always felt working hard and smart you should be able to save for the future and be able to retire in your 60's.  Maybe still true some places but not in California.  We know some great people that are early 30's that are friends of my son.  They are married and she has a degree.  She worked her way up in a Pet Food Company to become a Store Manager and make what my wife and I made combined.
> Her husband (no degree) fell into a Service Manager job at a Car Dealership and makes about $10,000 more then her.  The two of them make almost $160,000 combined.  Between rent,food,utilities,transportation, and insurance they struggle to make ends meet.
> I see where their money goes and basically they are on a tight budget.  They have little left to save, no pension offered and do have 401ks that they aren't able to put much money into.
> No matter what they do they are going to be playing catch up all their life's.  Hard for me to imagine considering my wife and I are early retirees with pensions,paid off houses,savings, good 401k's good insurance and topped out at $42,000 each.
> ONLY IN CALIFORNIA.



I have to say, yes California is expensive, but with an income of 160k I cry bulls... I make 20% less, pay 3k in housing costs and live just fine as a single parent (prior to recent marriage) and max out my 401k at 24k a year. They are doing something wrong. I always tell co workers if you put in your 401k you lower your tax burden. They just need to stop buying stuff they don't need. 

There are wants and needs. I want a fancy car but I don't need 1, haven't had a car payment in 11 years I have co workers who make less than half what I make and they all drive newer fancier more expensive cars and complain how they live paycheck to paycheck. People have to make choices in life.

My son has brains and ability but 4 years out of high school he has less than a year of college and just informed me he is not going back. I love him but I will never support him. I offered to pay 100% of his college costs and he has chosen to not go. His choice. I am praying his sister takes a different path. I am not sure how he will support himself but he will have to figure it out.


----------



## Egret1986 (Feb 6, 2018)

turkel said:


> I have to say, yes California is expensive, but with an income of 160k I cry bulls... I make 20% less, pay 3k in housing costs and live just fine as a single parent (prior to recent marriage) and max out my 401k at 24k a year. They are doing something wrong. I always tell co workers if you put in your 401k you lower your tax burden. They just need to stop buying stuff they don't need.
> 
> There are wants and needs. I want a fancy car but I don't need 1, haven't had a car payment in 11 years I have co workers who make less than half what I make and they all drive newer fancier more expensive cars and complain how they live paycheck to paycheck. People have to make choices in life.
> 
> My son has brains and ability but 4 years out of high school he has less than a year of college and just informed me he is not going back. I love him but I will never support him. I offered to pay 100% of his college costs and he has chosen to not go. His choice. I am praying his sister takes a different path. I am not sure how he will support himself but he will have to figure it out.



Agreed.  Wants vs needs, and making choices.

You give the kids a foundation, but to enable them in their poor choices is to cripple them.


----------



## klpca (Feb 6, 2018)

Totally agree on making 160k in CA and not having enough  $$ for a 401k contribution. I know the the Bay Area is ridiculously expensive,  but these folks are not making the hard choice to forgo some nice things now in order to save for retirement. Baby steps - small contributions with small incremental increases along the way - and it can be done.


----------



## Luanne (Feb 6, 2018)

Icc5 said:


> I always felt working hard and smart you should be able to save for the future and be able to retire in your 60's.  Maybe still true some places but not in California.  We know some great people that are early 30's that are friends of my son.  They are married and she has a degree.  She worked her way up in a Pet Food Company to become a Store Manager and make what my wife and I made combined.
> Her husband (no degree) fell into a Service Manager job at a Car Dealership and makes about $10,000 more then her.  The two of them make almost $160,000 combined.  Between rent,food,utilities,transportation, and insurance they struggle to make ends meet.
> I see where their money goes and basically they are on a tight budget.  They have little left to save, no pension offered and do have 401ks that they aren't able to put much money into.
> No matter what they do they are going to be playing catch up all their life's.  Hard for me to imagine considering my wife and I are early retirees with pensions,paid off houses,savings, good 401k's good insurance and topped out at $42,000 each.
> ONLY IN CALIFORNIA.


We were in California. I retired at 62 with a pension and Social Security.  I spent just about 30 years with the "phone company".  My pension would have been larger but I retried twice.  Dh jumped around jobs and although he made more than I did he left with NO pension, just his Social Security.  We do have savings, a good portion of it was matching 401K through work.

So, it can be done in California, depending on where you worked, how long you worked there, etc., etc., etc.


----------



## geekette (Feb 6, 2018)

klpca said:


> Totally agree on making 160k in CA and not having enough  $$ for a 401k contribution. I know the the Bay Area is ridiculously expensive,  but these folks are not making the hard choice to forgo some nice things now in order to save for retirement. Baby steps - small contributions with small incremental increases along the way - and it can be done.


Every little bit helps over time.  Deciding that life is too expensive, and we'll save later...  will not work.  I began by putting away $25/month, a pittance, but all I could afford "back then".   Those early small dollars make a huge difference all these years later.

Some costs in life one can control, and some are beyond control.   If a couple can't make it on 160k, they might want to take another look at controllable costs.  Food, housing, transport, and, of course, entertainment.


----------



## rapmarks (Feb 6, 2018)

I still have some small investments we made in the late seventies, with two children and one income, and boy have they grown


----------



## am1 (Feb 6, 2018)

Elan said:


> You've posted about your situation numerous times, and it makes me feel bad every time.  So, my input is:  Why don't you do something NOW, instead of later?  If I were you, I wouldn't want to be caught in a situation where I had to act immediately (sell house in down market) because something unplanned occurs.  My personal opinion is that you'd be better off to address this situation while you're both still healthy and employed, than later, when that might not be true.  Have you considered perhaps selling your property now and renting something closer to work until you retire?  Or something along those lines?
> 
> Like I said, it's just my opinion, and I'm only trying to be helpful since you seem to be a very nice person.  Please disregard if it's not helpful.



I always think the same thing.  Delaying is not usually the way to address things that need to be done.


----------



## WinniWoman (Feb 6, 2018)

Elan said:


> You've posted about your situation numerous times, and it makes me feel bad every time.  So, my input is:  Why don't you do something NOW, instead of later?  If I were you, I wouldn't want to be caught in a situation where I had to act immediately (sell house in down market) because something unplanned occurs.  My personal opinion is that you'd be better off to address this situation while you're both still healthy and employed, than later, when that might not be true.  Have you considered perhaps selling your property now and renting something closer to work until you retire?  Or something along those lines?
> 
> Like I said, it's just my opinion, and I'm only trying to be helpful since you seem to be a very nice person.  Please disregard if it's not helpful.




Thank you. I do appreciate your input.

Yes- I am actually a super proactive type and we have considered all of that quite a while ago. We even had a few real estate agents at our home for quotes. The real estate market is down here and has been for years. The rents are so outrageous compared to our property and school tax payments (unless we want to live in a dump) so we decided selling and renting something was not a good option. In fact, I have a coworker (in her 50's) who did just that and shortly thereafter her husband was let go and out of work for a year while they were paying exorbitant rent. He finally got another job- though a lot less pay - and they decided to buy a small home locally with the proceeds from the sale of their first house because they said the rent was killing them and it was a big mistake.

We have the issue of health insurance and SS- we need those to retire. We are so close yet so far away. Meanwhile, today we just had a meeting at work and a new company just bought us over. Who the heck knows what is going to happen now...Can't win to lose...We are stuck for now...But hey- I am thankful we have it better than a lot of other people.


----------



## Egret1986 (Feb 7, 2018)

mpumilia said:


> We have the issue of health insurance and SS- we need those to retire. We are so close yet so far away. Meanwhile, today we just had a meeting at work and a new company just bought us over. Who the heck knows what is going to happen now...Can't win to lose...We are stuck for now...But hey- I am thankful we have it better than a lot of other people.



Yes, so close yet so far away.  That's what we're both feeling as well.  My husband works for a major TV shopping channel.  There's rumblings about being swallowed up by Amazon.  Lots of older folks like us wondering what this will all mean.  He wants to make it 5 more years and I want to make it 3 more years.  When I made the decision to retire at 62, it seems like it will never get here.

Like you, we are thankful!  Like you, we're ready to retire!


----------



## WinniWoman (Feb 7, 2018)

Egret1986 said:


> Yes, so close yet so far away.  That's what we're both feeling as well.  My husband works for a major TV shopping channel.  There's rumblings about being swallowed up by Amazon.  Lots of older folks like us wondering what this will all mean.  He wants to make it 5 more years and I want to make it 3 more years.  When I made the decision to retire at 62, it seems like it will never get here.
> 
> Like you, we are thankful!  Like you, we're ready to retire!



Yes. People keep telling me it will go fast. LOL! Are you kidding me? I don't think so! Every day feels like a week! As far as I am concerned, my past 46 working years (starting at age 16) didn't even go fast!

My husband is going to be 64 in April and I will be 62 in June. He plans on retiring at 66. Just in case we might need to have him take SS then depending on economics. Then again, there have been a lot of changes at his job this year and a lot of people have gotten laid off. Who knows what will even happen with his job? He's hanging in there.

The problem with me-when he retires at 66 I will still need to be working full time for health insurance until I qualify for Medicare at 65.  I don't think I can make it 3 more years, but I don't have the heart to ask him to work until age 67.

Meanwhile, the third big snow storm of the season is upon us this morning and having to battle driving in dangerous conditions to get to and from work has gotten old fast....


----------



## WinniWoman (Feb 7, 2018)

am1 said:


> I always think the same thing.  Delaying is not usually the way to address things that need to be done.




And the other thing is - even if we could pay the high rents here or near our jobs, I don't think we could deal with working full time and simultaneously doing all that is involved with selling our home and moving- all the logistics- and then having to do it all over again when we retire. This as well as keeping things running and maintained during the whole process. As it is, my husband gets home from work and is sleeping on his recliner by 7pm. We both have very long days. At least when we are retired we will have the time and energy to deal with it all- just about! IF we are still healthy! In fact, we are thinking of attempting to sell our home ourselves to save on the realtor commission since the market value is not where it should be. Then, if the house sells, if necessary we can rent in NH maybe until we can get a permanent place there.

In the past 6 years we have gone through my mother's passing (dad died in 2005), with the burden mostly falling on me  to deal with her when she was sick- placing her in assisted living, then after she passed- getting my parents' house sold and their finances and getting rid of my parents lifetime of stuff- all while working and living over an hour away. Multi tasking to the max and major stress which affected me physically as well as emotionally.

Then we went right from that into getting our home upgraded one room at a time over a 5 year period. It really needed it. Again, a lot of multitasking while working full time through the upheaval. My husband kept asking, "if we are going to move eventually, why do it?" I told him," because we are living in it and by the time we sell it is will be old again anyway! At least we will get to enjoy it for awhile since we can't move!"

I am at a point now of "Let go, and let God"....a hard thing for me...


----------



## geekette (Feb 7, 2018)

rapmarks said:


> I still have some small investments we made in the late seventies, with two children and one income, and boy have they grown


Outstanding!  Few people hold anything that long.   A little bit a long time ago can turn out to be a lot.


----------



## geekette (Feb 7, 2018)

mpumilia said:


> The problem with me-when he retires at 66 I will still need to be working full time for health insurance until I qualify for Medicare at 65.  I don't think I can make it 3 more years, but I don't have the heart to ask him to work until age 67.


You might not have to work full time for benefits.  I cannot say as to your area, but I have scoped it out for myself and I can work PT at Starbucks and get benefits.  I also would say to not assume crazy high med ins going it alone, shop around.  I mean, I assume I'd find sticker shock, but I'd rather find it than not look.

I'm 52 and want out of the rat race badly.  I'm leaning towards semi-retirement, ditch stressful career and replace with low stress low pay.  Like you, I don't think it's going to be possible to find affordable health insurance, but I will dig until I know it's true.


----------



## vacationhopeful (Feb 7, 2018)

Just because TODAY you found health insurance at an "okay, I can live with that ... barely ... " DO NOT ASSUME that rate/policy will be there NEXT YEAR or the year after. And another round of changing doctors begins.

I am selfemployed and ever since the world change ... every policy gets cancelled the NEXT YEAR. Been on Medicare since May of last year. I would have worked P/T at Starbucks if it saved me from an $1600 monthly ACA policy ... and been happy. Groups Med Ins ... esp where the employees are YOUNG and active ... are a good target for decent rates. Been a $500 per week savings on the cash flow ... $400 each week left in my bank account from health premuims plus $120 wages is $520 weekly times 52 weeks is $27,040 yearly in effective yearly benefit.

And might have qualify for ACA credits back on my income taxes, too ...


----------



## rapmarks (Feb 7, 2018)

geekette said:


> Outstanding!  Few people hold anything that long.   A little bit a long time ago can turn out to be a lot.


One has appreciated tremendously, another has done very well


----------



## Jan M. (Feb 7, 2018)

lizap said:


> Trust me, given the amount of staggering financial support we have provided (despite the fact they have been financially reckless with what we gave them) over the last four years, we will have no regrets.



You said in a previous post that she had two children under the age of two. So you've been subsidizing them even before they had children! Upon getting her degrees did she at some point work in her field? Did she pay for her own education or did you?

I've heard people tell about the tens of thousands of dollars and even more they've poured into their adult children's lives. In most cases it was to help them keep their houses when they lost a job or both lost jobs. The saddest part was that most of the time those adult children eventually lost the house anyways and all that money was wasted. The one thing we have not done for our son that many people chose to do is help them get a house. If they cannot afford to buy a house without our help then they have no business being in a house. I've explained to our son that there is far more to owning a house than making the mortgage and tax payments. Upkeep isn't cheap and repair or replacement of broken or worn out things rarely happens when it is convenient. The furnace/ac you were sure was good for a few more years, now needs replaced immediately. That tax return you were counting on to pay for your vacation or pay down a credit card? Guess what ain't happening and your tax return may not even be enough to cover the expense.

When you say a staggering amount I'm guessing it is much, much more than the $100 a month cell phone bill and occasional $150 school loan that we pay to enable our son to work part time and be home with their 17 month old. My husband and I remember having conversations when we were young and struggling that when you take money from your family you open the door for them to say how you should live your life/spend their money. We didn't have a lot of sympathy for the people we knew who were complaining about their parents criticizing their spending habits and lifestyle. It didn't hurt us to live on a strict budget with very, very few extras. We still feel that living like we did those years was a good experience for anyone. It has made us truly appreciate what we have now. It also provides a certain measure of security to know that we know how and could live like that again if it became necessary and that we would be just fine.

My husband tends to be more critical than I am when it comes to how our son and DIL spend their money. But they really are pretty good. I find it quite amusing because my husband has never been the one who paid the bills or did the budgeting. He was the one I used to have to ride herd on! Back in our early years I got tired of being stressed every month when it came time to pay the bills and had enough of his "it's only a buck or five dollars" attitude. I insisted he write down every cent he spent for the next two weeks and told him he didn't even have to show it to me as long as he did it. He was shocked at how much that buck/five here and there added up to. He started taking a cup of coffee with him when he walked out the door instead of stopping to buy one, packed a lunch instead of eating out and a couple other little things too. Last year I overheard him telling our son how I had insisted he do that and recommended our son do it. Our son reminded him that for one of the Boy Scout badges I made our son a spreadsheet to track how he spent his allowance and paper route money. When we sat down at the end to look over his expenditures I explained that I wasn't criticizing his choices but wanted him to understand that every time you spend money on non essentials you are making a choice and asked him to evaluate the choices he had made. I asked him if he enjoyed the $1 bottle of pop each week at youth group and a couple of other things as much as being able to have a video game he wanted which that money would have bought. He knew if he wanted that video game he had to buy it himself. I told him if he truly enjoyed being able to do things like spend the money to buy pop when he could have grabbed a can out of the frig at home to take with him more than being able to buy the video game he wanted then that was his choice and his business. I told him about someone I knew who truly detested ironing her husband's dress shirts for work and gladly paid $5 a week to send them to the cleaners. To her it was well worth it and she would rather cut back on or do without something else to be able to give herself that treat.

I remember a former neighbor from years ago saying she had no sympathy in regards to someone else's situation. She said we all have 24 hours in our day and choices about how we use our time and spend our money. She told me no one should never feel an obligation to support someone else's choices. That everyone needs to learn that you don't have to have that or have to do that and life will go on just fine. If you want something then you need to figure out how to work or save for it instead of looking to other people.


----------



## geekette (Feb 7, 2018)

vacationhopeful said:


> Just because TODAY you found health insurance at an "okay, I can live with that ... barely ... " DO NOT ASSUME that rate/policy will be there NEXT YEAR or the year after. And another round of changing doctors begins.


yeah, I know, it's crazy.  Revolving crapshoot.  It's fair to say that I have been spoiled by employer-offered insurance, and I've always had to pay a premium and pay the docs, no Cadillac plan for me, ever, but, I never needed it.   I have selected high deductible plans when they have been offered to hopefully squirrel enough away into HSA to save for later.  So far so good, putting in and not taking out.  We'll see how 2018 goes; I might need to tap one of them.  

Probably I can retire at 59.5 and meet projectable expenses fine, if not for the health care wild card.  

For those who are receiving now or will be receiving a pension, does it have a healthcare component?  Dad was a GE man so Mom has his pension and repeated cuts to retiree health benefits.  Since she was spouse vs worker, I'm not sure that employees also had health part cut.


----------



## Luanne (Feb 7, 2018)

geekette said:


> For those who are receiving now or will be receiving a pension, does it have a healthcare component?  Dad was a GE man so Mom has his pension and repeated cuts to retiree health benefits.  Since she was spouse vs worker, I'm not sure that employees also had health part cut.


I was going to say no, my pension doesn't, but in fact it did.

When I retired at age 62 I was able to use the retiree healthcare exchange provided by my company.  I honestly don't remember if the premiums stayed the same or not.  But it did include dental and eyecare.

When I became Medicare eligible I was "cut off".  Meaning I could still use the retiree healthcare exchange, but I'm now paying more for the supplemental Medicare (I didn't go through the exchange for this as I was able to find it elsewhere cheaper).  I do get vision care and prescription though the exchange.  We dropped dental insurance as the price didn't make sense for us.  By purchasing at least the vision care and prescription coverage through the exchange dh and I receive a HSA (Health Spending Account) in the amount of $4200 year.  This is not something we have to put into, it's given to us on a monthly basis. It can be used towards the Medicare supplement, the premiums for other coverage, and any medical expenses during the year.  This amount may change for 2019, it's also possible it could be eliminated at some point.  But right now, it's sure nice.


----------



## vacationhopeful (Feb 7, 2018)

geekette ... 
YOU have no idea what can happen to health care costs. YOUR employer can bargain with the insurance company & plans. You as a solo buyer of health care (or an abandon former employee ... policy or benefit CANCELLED are targets for the insurance companies).

I had a solo health insurance policies for YEARS ... ACA resulted in WORST benefits, triple of more premuins, revolving door medical providers (any office seems to exist for 1 year or less ...) and it is like HIDE & SEEK as to WHERE is your former doctor is now handing his/her coat. Or where your medical records are hiding.

PERSONAL ADVICE: Keep working to keep health insurance you can afford in a group policy. $1500 monthly premuim for a single person is NOT uncommon with a deductible of $5000 or more yearly.... with benefits decreasing, deductible increasing and monthly premuim increases in the hundreds with each yearly renewal. YOU don't qualify for a subside.


----------



## VacationForever (Feb 7, 2018)

geekette said:


> You might not have to work full time for benefits.  I cannot say as to your area, but I have scoped it out for myself and I can work PT at Starbucks and get benefits.





vacationhopeful said:


> I would have worked P/T at Starbucks if it saved me from an $1600 monthly ACA policy ... and been happy.



Look around at the people working in Starbucks. You all do realize that Starbucks only hire the young people as health insurance rates for the young is much lower.  They do not hire old folks like us...


----------



## Sugarcubesea (Feb 7, 2018)

This is why I’m going to keep working till I hit 66, if my company keeps me.  I work for a Japanese company that values the mature worker.  I’m selling my parents house this year and my house next year so I can downsize now, move to a fully paid condo and save that house payment for retirement.   I’m just trying to save as much as possible so I can hopefully retire earlier.


----------



## PigsDad (Feb 7, 2018)

geekette said:


> Dad was a GE man so Mom has his pension and repeated cuts to retiree health benefits.  Since she was spouse vs worker, I'm not sure that employees also had health part cut.


And now GE has reported that their pension is underfunded by $31 billion!  No wonder the modern pension is dead -- companies woefully underestimated the true costs for the very generous pensions they were promising.  If I had a pension coming to me, I would be very nervous as many of them (public _and_ private) just can't continue like they have in the past.

Kurt


----------



## VacationForever (Feb 7, 2018)

vacationhopeful said:


> I had a solo health insurance policies for YEARS ... ACA resulted in WORST benefits, triple of more premuins, revolving door medical providers (any office seems to exist for 1 year or less ...) and it is like HIDE & SEEK as to WHERE is your former doctor is now handing his/her coat. Or where your medical records are hiding.
> 
> PERSONAL ADVICE: Keep working to keep health insurance you can afford in a group policy. $1500 monthly premuim for a single person is NOT uncommon with a deductible of $5000 or more yearly.... with benefits decside.reasing yearly and monthly premuim increases in the hundreds with each yearly renewal. YOU don't qualify for a subside.


Yep.  I am at Feb 7th, and my out of pocket costs is already at more than $700, not including prescriptions and co-pays.  That is on a $930 per month premium. A long way to go before I hit max OOP of $7,350.   I should not whine, at least on this individual private non-ACA insurance, I have access to many of the better doctors.


----------



## vacationhopeful (Feb 7, 2018)

VacationForever said:


> Look around at the people working in Starbucks. You all do realize that Starbucks only hire the young people as health insurance rates for the young is much lower.  They do not hire old folks like us...



Great ... age discrimination will eventually clean out their rich bank accounts. But the real question is ... are their employees mostly parttime and therefore, not receiving paid benefits? Offering health insurance is NOT the same as corporate paid health insurance.... IMHO.


----------



## VacationForever (Feb 7, 2018)

vacationhopeful said:


> Great ... age discrimination will eventually clean out their rich bank accounts. But the real question is ... are their employees mostly parttime and therefore, not receiving paid benefits? Offering health insurance is NOT the same as corporate paid health insurance.... IMHO.


I am just going by what Geekette posted above that Starbucks offer health insurance even for the part-timers.


----------



## geekette (Feb 7, 2018)

VacationForever said:


> Look around at the people working in Starbucks. You all do realize that Starbucks only hire the young people as health insurance rates for the young is much lower.  They do not hire old folks like us...


I see people, ahem, "more mature" than I am working there!


----------



## geekette (Feb 7, 2018)

vacationhopeful said:


> Great ... age discrimination will eventually clean out their rich bank accounts. But the real question is ... are their employees mostly parttime and therefore, not receiving paid benefits? Offering health insurance is NOT the same as corporate paid health insurance.... IMHO.


I have never had corporate paid health insurance but have paid my own share of premiums on insurance offered by my employers.  I doubt there are many companies that fully pay employee insurance, though I congratulate the lucky employees.  It's never been my reality and I don't expect it ever to be my reality.  If I want insurance, I pay for it.  If I use it, I pay for it.  I hit deductible and out of pocket max in 2017 and steeling myself for the January bills to come rolling in for an even more expensive year.  

Starbucks, at least in my area, does offer benefits to part-timers, including health insurance, 401k and stock options.  Pretty juicy for a pt gig a quick bike ride away.  Old farts like me don't need Friday off to spend with boyfriend or extra time off near finals.  I'll work holidays and stinky shifts no one else wants.  If my car breaks down, I can afford to get it fixed and use my other one during fix time.   There is a reason that places like MCD, grocery stores and gas stations want the more mature folks - reliability and usually straight truth on needed time off vs bs.   

Folks can assume that Starbucks practices age discrimination but I have not seen that to be the case.  Not sure what you mean by rich bank accounts or who they allegedly belong to.


----------



## geekette (Feb 8, 2018)

VacationForever said:


> Yep.  I am at Feb 7th, and my out of pocket costs is already at more than $700, not including prescriptions and co-pays.  That is on a $930 per month premium. A long way to go before I hit max OOP of $7,350.   I should not whine, at least on this individual private non-ACA insurance, I have access to many of the better doctors.



My oop is 12k on employer insurance.  But, well, OUCH on what you pay per month premium vs my embarrassingly cheap premium.  Only a bit can be written off to my high deduct plan (no co-pays, I pony up full freight to oop max).   I am in a reasonably competitive market as far as providers go and have kept my PCP for the nearly 30 years I've been in this city, through all the different insurance plans I have had.  Sometimes I pay more to see him, sometimes I pay less, but I won't give him up until he retires and gives me up!


----------



## WinniWoman (Feb 8, 2018)

geekette said:


> I have never had corporate paid health insurance but have paid my own share of premiums on insurance offered by my employers.  I doubt there are many companies that fully pay employee insurance, though I congratulate the lucky employees.  It's never been my reality and I don't expect it ever to be my reality.  If I want insurance, I pay for it.  If I use it, I pay for it.  I hit deductible and out of pocket max in 2017 and steeling myself for the January bills to come rolling in for an even more expensive year.
> 
> Starbucks, at least in my area, does offer benefits to part-timers, including health insurance, 401k and stock options.  Pretty juicy for a pt gig a quick bike ride away.  Old farts like me don't need Friday off to spend with boyfriend or extra time off near finals.  I'll work holidays and stinky shifts no one else wants.  If my car breaks down, I can afford to get it fixed and use my other one during fix time.   There is a reason that places like MCD, grocery stores and gas stations want the more mature folks - reliability and usually straight truth on needed time off vs bs.
> 
> Folks can assume that Starbucks practices age discrimination but I have not seen that to be the case.  Not sure what you mean by rich bank accounts or who they allegedly belong to.



My issue is old farts like me value vacation time. If I go to a new job- full or part time- and tell them I take 5 weeks vacation each year (paid or unpaid- I don't care), plus want some sick days and personal days - forget it. In fact, I might soon be quitting my job on this point. This winter- I have already had to call out once because I could not make it in in a snow storm. First time I have ever done that when the office was not closed. They took a PTO day even though I told them I would take it without pay. They do not give you days without pay unless- THEY close the office. Then you have a choice of a PTO day or an unpaid day. They closed the office early another day so I took the 2 hours without pay- no biggie. But they rarely, if ever, close the office.

This morning- I do not know if I can make it down our nightmare driveway which is a sheet of ice. Believe me, I do not want to waste a day at home because of an icy driveway. One more bad road/weather day and I am short PTO time (and they are again predicting snow on Friday) but have my vacations booked and refuse to give them up as it is the only thing I look forward to. I have no social life and also the vacations are the times we see our son. But the company will not let you take unpaid days if you are short PTO time. That is my big issue. I can put up with a lot of BS but not that. As it is when I took this job we were supposed to be able accrue 32 PTO days per year over a period of so many years. Then they decided to decrease it to 28- just around the time I had hit around 26 and then they capped it at 28 and that was the end of it.By now, I would have had the 32. My husband right now gets 39 I believe. This works good for him allowing him an extra week for his hunting trip plus some extra days for whatever comes up.

And heaven forbid if I did get sick or did need a day to take care of something. I never call out sick or anything like that. I am always there. I also have a non critical type job (no patient care) in marketing. I am prepared to resign if I am denied my time off. I already warned my husband. They say no, I give them my notice. Heck- I might just walk out.

Now with the new company taking over I don't even know what they will do down the line but right now the old company's policies stand. Comes a time in life when you just can't tolerate this bull crap anymore. I am not waiting until I retire- close to 70 years old- to enjoy my life.

Crazy thing is- I drive for a living. When the roads are bad I stay in the office with literally nothing to do. I practically kill myself to get in only to just sit there.  Why the hell I just cant stay home without pay is beyond me.

Mind you- I do not get a company car nor do they pay auto insurance on my car. I have been through 3 cars on this job. They do not pay my commuting miles- fair enough. I do not take health insurance with them. No pensions here. I do get an employer match on the 401k, though now I do not know what will be with the new company. No raises for most years. Incentive bonus plan was stopped after my first 3 years there. (Lunch hour was even decreased from one hour to a half hour for all employees.) Heck- why not have us just work for free?  I am a cheap employee for them. The only benefit I have is vacation time (which I am even willing to take unpaid) and a paycheck, which I work for. SMH....

My mother was right. I should have been a teacher....


----------



## geekette (Feb 8, 2018)

mpumilia said:


> My issue is old farts like me value vacation time....
> ...
> And heaven forbid if I did get sick or did need a day to take care of something. I never call out sick or anything like that. I am always there. I also have a non critical type job (no patient care) in marketing. I am prepared to resign if I am denied my time off. I already warned my husband. They say no, I give them my notice. Heck- I might just walk out.
> ...
> ...


You are A Trooper.  You put up with more crap than I would, but, where I live and what I do, I have a lot of choices.

I have in fact left (been fired from) jobs that said I "couldn't" take time off.  I can do whatever I choose, I just have to be willing to accept the consequences.

I am with you on brace for impact re:  company buyout.  I have left 2 companies when that happened.  The first, I waited for the reality to visit and it was bad and I was outa there.  The second, I was already thinking of leaving when they were about to double in size.  I didn't want to be shoved further down the rabbit hole so I left. 

PT work in retirement?  only if I have to, I sure don't want to.  Won't be a problem for me to plan my life and let the job fill in where it fits.  I will take my trips as I see fit and if that gets me fired, I can't imagine why I would care.  There remain more jobs than people here.  Employees have been treated as disposable for a long time and I reserve the right to treat the job as disposable.  Heck, I might not have a job right now, may have been terminated while out on med leave. Would you want to work for a place that would do that? 

Not everyone has the same options, and I don't believe that there is a perfect job.  I hope many of you tell me that I am wrong, that you have/had a perfect job. 

But you, Mary Ann, you are a gem they don't deserve.


----------



## bogey21 (Feb 8, 2018)

VacationForever said:


> Yep.  I am at Feb 7th, and my out of pocket costs is already at more than $700, not including prescriptions and co-pays.  That is on a $930 per month premium. A long way to go before I hit max OOP of $7,350.   I should not whine, at least on this individual private non-ACA insurance, I have access to many of the better doctors.


If you want to cut cost; if you have no pre-existing condition; if Medicare isn't far in your future; check http://www.uhone.com  It is the old Golden Rule now owned by United Healthcare and using the United Healthcare network.  You can get a lower OOP.  The negatives are that you have to buy a new policy every 90 days; that it doesn't cover pre-existing conditions; and the LT maximum is relatively low.  The pluses are that UHOne is a reputable company and the cost is relatively low.

George


----------



## am1 (Feb 8, 2018)

Seems like the negative attitude (no matter whose fault) cannot be good for your health or productivity at work.


----------



## VacationForever (Feb 8, 2018)

bogey21 said:


> If you want to cut cost; if you have no pre-existing condition; if Medicare isn't far in your future; check http://www.uhone.com  It is the old Golden Rule now owned by United Healthcare and using the United Healthcare network.  You can get a lower OOP.  The negatives are that you have to buy a new policy every 90 days; that it doesn't cover pre-existing conditions; and the LT maximum is relatively low.  The pluses are that UHOne is a reputable company and the cost is relatively low.
> 
> George


I have a ton of pre-existing conditions, none of which will kill me.  I was in the Kaiser system and now that I am out of it, I realize how crappy Kaiser was.  I had a fantastic PCP and OBGYN at Kaiser and that was it.  None of the specialists (Allergist, Dermatologist) who saw me did their job.  I was declined by the Kaiser specialists when my PCP referred me to them... if I was not having cancer or going to die, they did not want to see me.

My first year out of the Kaiser system, I was on Blue Cross Blue Shield, ACA's most expensive plan.  A couple of good specialists were not in their plan.  My PCP found me a couple of crappy specialists who would see me.  I had a fantastic Allergist last year that took BCBS, that took care of one of my major issues - my life is no longer miserable.  I was so miserable that many days I hoped not to wake up in the morning.  Then this year I bought the most expensive plan in the individual private market so that I have access to better specialists for another issue.  I took a couple of CT Scans because one of my nagging issues was not taken care of last year.  I won't die from my issues but I need to fix it.  I am hoping by next year, my OOP will start dropping after I am fully healthy again.


----------



## WinniWoman (Feb 8, 2018)

geekette said:


> You are A Trooper.  You put up with more crap than I would, but, where I live and what I do, I have a lot of choices.
> 
> I have in fact left (been fired from) jobs that said I "couldn't" take time off.  I can do whatever I choose, I just have to be willing to accept the consequences.
> 
> ...




LOL! Some patients at another job I had said I was a "Diamond" and the doctor had better appreciate me!

I have been through plenty of takeovers, layoffs and so forth and always survived. I always was a very good interviewer and was always able to get another job very quickly. I am tired of it all now.

Anyway-The power of Facebook- I was on at 7 am this morning and also did some research on line and managed to get someone to our home to sand and salt in time to leave for work. (We normally never have the driveway sanded and salted- this was really bad).Between the plow guy yesterday and the sand and salt today cost us $175. I guess that is what the cost of keeping a PTO Day is for me this time!

My husband thankfully is able to work from home when the weather is bad. He took a picture of our driveway and sent it to his boss because the roads where he works (and even where I work) are fine and he didn't want him to think he was making it up. I took pics also for the 1/17 storm and my boss's response was- "yeah- the same here"! SMH....

My husband's company allows them to purchase extra PTO Days during open enrollment. He doesn't buy more because he doesn't feel he needs them and the cost is higher than what his daily salary is. Would be great if our company let us because despite the cost- which is high- I would definitely buy as many as I could! Ha! Ha!

I think if one can afford it working per diem is the best because you tell the employer when you can work and he decides whether or not to have you come in. Or maybe being contracted to do a job exclusive of hours and so forth-like a consultant- maybe have some benefits written into the contract.

All other jobs- you are an indentured servant.


----------



## WinniWoman (Feb 8, 2018)

am1 said:


> Seems like the negative attitude (no matter whose fault) cannot be good for your health or productivity at work.




I know how you think- but try to wrap this around your head- sometimes it is the employer experience over a lifetime that changes a persons' attitude. That said- I can run rings around even the most positive employee. People here will tell you I am always full of energy and bubbly actually. So I am a bit cynical- I call it realistic.

In fact, just last week, a nurse who worked here who "loved her job" and was loud and gregarious and always upbeat, and overbearing- one who, when she first started working here a few years ago-I tried to give her the run down of what goes on - told me that I was "negative" - well- she was fired! Wonder how much she loves her job now?! They had to call the police 3 times on her because she kept calling the center and threatening.

She and my immediate boss, who never wrote her up and allowed her to turn him against many of the employees here- *Both* Fired!

I was frankly, shocked. Then it turns out they were also having an affair, which explains why my boss allowed her negligence to go on. In fact, she has had affairs with the facility's doc-owner and a also a tech here, I discovered. (she is married with a child and all the men are married)

Evidently she loved her job so much she either neglected things or overstepped her bounds with her over- inflated ego. And Ms. "Negative" (that would be me) is still here after 12 years. The new guy in charge is depending on me for a lot right now. Call me what you want- I do my job.


----------



## Jan M. (Feb 8, 2018)

bogey21 said:


> If you want to cut cost; if you have no pre-existing condition; if Medicare isn't far in your future; check http://www.uhone.com  It is the old Golden Rule now owned by United Healthcare and using the United Healthcare network.  You can get a lower OOP.  The negatives are that you have to buy a new policy every 90 days; that it doesn't cover pre-existing conditions; and the LT maximum is relatively low.  The pluses are that UHOne is a reputable company and the cost is relatively low.
> 
> George



I don't know if all plans are like the one an acquaintance of ours has but he found out the hard way that his new policy every 90 days meant his several thousand dollar deductible started over every 90 days. He broke his foot and required several surgeries in the following months. Prior to that he hadn't had anything but regular check ups so had no idea that this is how his policy worked until the bills started coming in. His wife is a couple of years older than he is so she is on Medicare. From what I gathered rather than just take his wife off their old policy, changing it from husband and wife coverage to single coverage, they switched him to this type of policy so he was unaware that his coverage had changed.

With some other plans out of pocket expenses incurred in the last couple months of the year will apply towards the deductible for the new year and oop expenses in the first couple months of the New Years can be covered under the deductible from the previous year. With a new policy every 90 days that likely wouldn't apply


----------



## Egret1986 (Feb 8, 2018)

am1 said:


> Seems like the negative attitude (no matter whose fault) cannot be good for your health or productivity at work.



Agreed.  I find myself in that predicament.  The last three years of ongoing turnover in management at my facility has given me a poor attitude.  The current direct  manager arrived in May and my attitude has gotten even worse.  In my 29 years with my employer, I never felt the need to be a part of the union.  I joined for the first time about three months ago because the climate is so negative and continues to deteriorate.  I want to work three more years.  But I know I have to come to grips with my feelings and attitude for my own personal well-being.  I'm trying to convince myself that this three years will accomplish the goals I've made for myself and that continuing to work will also pay for the vacations and good times outside of the job.  I make decent money for unskilled work, have good benefits, the job isn't hard, receive 26 days of time off, plus sick leave and holidays.  Again, I need to "get over it."  As stated, "the negative attitude (no matter whose fault) cannot be good for your health or productivity at work."


----------



## Egret1986 (Feb 8, 2018)

mpumilia said:


> .....sometimes it is the employer experience over a lifetime that changes a persons' attitude.



That's true.  My employer experience isn't going to change.  It's the "new way".  It's been taking this direction for me since 2007.  Yikes, that's 10+ years in this pattern.  I don't believe that it's suddenly going to improve (definitely not in the next three years).  So, I've got to do something to change me.  Right now, I know I've got to do something different (and soon) to improve my situation.  Three more years like the last three will take its toll.  I can't change my employer.  I can only change me.  How's that for being positive?!   Words to live by.  If I don't change, then what will be left of me at the end of three years when I do make it to my long awaited retirement.  I am in the extreme early phase of at least acknowledging I need to do something different and take a stand for myself.  Maybe I will take my employer up on some free EAP (Employee Assistant Program), get some counseling and try to get on a new path.  

"The future's so bright, I've got to wear shades.."


----------



## dsmrp (Feb 8, 2018)

Every generation or so perspectives change.
When I got out of school 35 years ago, the majority of jobs for newbies in my field (health care) were at state public/government hospitals.  Some people got their work experience and left within 5 years or so.  People in my dept thought private industry paid more and they had 401Ks!, much better than the deferred 'pension-like' plans state gov't had .  I was part time when a ruling came down that part timers couldn't be in the retirement plan and I had to take my money out. I lost 6 years credit.  Then 3 years afterwards they changed the rules and allowed part timers back in, but I didn't have the money to put the 6 years back in with required interest.

Fast forward, and I've worked brief stints in private businesses, small and medium sized. I was fortunate to go back to state government.  Now people like these jobs.  There are a few soft apples, but by and large, most people work pretty hard.  I did have one ex co-worker tho' who got hired in at 60, could barely work her job duties, and after about a year and a half was encouraged to retired at 62 to get her out (an easier way than getting documentation together to lay her off for poor performance).  As a retiree she was able to buy into the government medical plans at retiree rates.  Other people I knew who had 20+ years in, were indignant. She didn't have much in the retirement system tho', so no pension for her.

Like others on this thread I have about 4-5 more years to work, and am at maximum vacation benefit (5.5 weeks/year).
So my employer knows they've got us, but there are many 'lifers' here LOL.  I'm vested in my retirement plan, but working in part to support my vacation habits 
My employer's budgets are bad, so I'll keep working until they have to make financial changes.


----------



## WinniWoman (Feb 8, 2018)

Egret1986 said:


> Agreed.  I find myself in that predicament.  The last three years of ongoing turnover in management at my facility has given me a poor attitude.  The current direct  manager arrived in May and my attitude has gotten even worse.  In my 29 years with my employer, I never felt the need to be a part of the union.  I joined for the first time about three months ago because the climate is so negative and continues to deteriorate.  I want to work three more years.  But I know I have to come to grips with my feelings and attitude for my own personal well-being.  I'm trying to convince myself that this three years will accomplish the goals I've made for myself and that continuing to work will also pay for the vacations and good times outside of the job.  I make decent money for unskilled work, have good benefits, the job isn't hard, receive 26 days of time off, plus sick leave and holidays.  Again, I need to "get over it."  As stated, "the negative attitude (no matter whose fault) cannot be good for your health or productivity at work."



Yes- very true. When I am at work at my desk- which isn't a lot because I am mostly in my car- I have pictures of Vermont (where our timeshare is) surrounding me and that keeps me stable and on track. I always tell myself I am not here to be happy I am here to make money to enjoy the other part of my life, however small. In my car I listen to my music and talk radio shows and am happy to be out in the sun and fresh air. At lunch I enjoy talking with some of my coworkers. Thankful for the little things there that are good. I am well liked by our employees and clients alike so my so called attitude can't be all bad. I have a lot of perseverance and I push on.

This said, you would not believe what goes on in our place and how it has been run.

 I am a bit concerned that I am just barely on the edge and something could push me off. I tell myself the worst that could happen is I quit or I get fired. Never been fired in my life ever so quitting would be the better option if push comes to shove. I try to have a sense of humor about the whole thing. Some weekend wine helps me cope with it all. My coworker says we need to get us some magic mushrooms...


----------



## Sugarcubesea (Feb 8, 2018)

mpumilia said:


> LOL! Some patients at another job I had said I was a "Diamond" and the doctor had better appreciate me!
> 
> I have been through plenty of takeovers, layoffs and so forth and always survived. I always was a very good interviewer and was always able to get another job very quickly. I am tired of it all now.
> 
> ...


I feel so blessed reading all of these comments.  We had an employee last year who was diagnosed with Cancer and the president said do whatever she needs and make sure she’s taken care of.  A year ago, I was in a roll over accident and the President insisted that I take a few days off to recover and told me not to use vacation days just work from home. I get 6 weeks of PTO per year and I can carry 5 unused days over to the next year if I need them in the next year. My only negative is the manager I report to is an egotistical jerk who believes that all information or training of new tasks should just be horded by him.  He’s 63, so I’m hoping he will retire soon


----------



## Patri (Feb 8, 2018)

VacationForever said:


> Look around at the people working in Starbucks. You all do realize that Starbucks only hire the young people as health insurance rates for the young is much lower.  They do not hire old folks like us...


My BIL was hired in his 50s.


----------



## geekette (Feb 8, 2018)

<<I am a bit concerned that I am just barely on the edge and something could push me off. I tell myself the worst that could happen is I quit or I get fired. Never been fired in my life ever so quitting would be the better option if push comes to shove. I try to have a sense of humor about the whole thing. Some weekend wine helps me cope with it all. My coworker says we need to get us some magic mushrooms...>>

I have never felt like the worst that could happen is being fired.  I can always find a job, or several.  I don't generally stick around where I don't want to be, or they don't want me.  The issue is having a job I like doing work I find acceptable for pay/benefits that suit me.   I am probably too much of a free spirit, but had I not been, I might not have left so many stress mills or con men nor had so many fun careers before I found one that hit on all cylinders. And now I'm tired of it, but it's eye-opening how many of us are so Over It, annoyed with years of low/no raises while the top does quite well.   I had this discussion with my boss about a year ago and she told me the kind of bonuses directors and above were getting, plus their allowable increase range was larger than the bottom folks, too.  Rarely do the fruits of labors flow to the people that do the real work.   This is partially why I invest, too, for a piece of the pie.


----------



## geekette (Feb 8, 2018)

Patri said:


> My BIL was hired in his 50s.


Is he still there?  Can he confirm benefits for part-timers?  and, ... does he like it??


----------



## Luanne (Feb 8, 2018)

geekette said:


> Is he still there?  Can he confirm benefits for part-timers?  and, ... does he like it??


You can verify what Starbucks offers by checking their website. (I like everything about Starbucks except their coffee)

*Benefits*
At Starbucks, our Total Pay package is called “Your Special Blend.” It’s a benefits package that is tailored to the needs of our partners. And it’s designed just for you.

Benefits-eligible partners (those working 20 or more hours a week) can get a wide range of perks, benefits and assistance. Your Special Blend might include bonuses, 401(k) matching and discounted stock purchase options. We offer adoption assistance and health coverage for you and your dependents, including domestic partners.

Starbucks College Achievement Plan is an opportunity for all benefits eligible U.S. partners (all brands) to complete a bachelor’s degree with full-tuition coverage for every year of college through Arizona State University’s top-ranked degree programs, delivered online. In addition, to show our gratitude for our partners who are military service members and veterans, they may extend an additional SCAP benefit to their spouse or child. Learn more.

Partners also appreciate our recognition programs, career sabbaticals and other time-off programs. Plus, you can take advantage of partner perks such as 30% in-store and online discounts, one free pound of coffee, box of K-Cup® Packs or tea a week.


----------



## am1 (Feb 8, 2018)

Luanne said:


> You can verify what Starbucks offers by checking their website. (I like everything about Starbucks except their coffee)
> 
> *Benefits*
> At Starbucks, our Total Pay package is called “Your Special Blend.” It’s a benefits package that is tailored to the needs of our partners. And it’s designed just for you.
> ...



K cup packs are getting banned all over.  If Starbucks actually cared about us they would stop selling them.  I have never liked starbucks except for the free wifi when that was a thing and their washroom.  

I am not going to support or work for a company who is ruining the planet for my kids.


----------



## WinniWoman (Feb 9, 2018)

geekette said:


> <<I am a bit concerned that I am just barely on the edge and something could push me off. I tell myself the worst that could happen is I quit or I get fired. Never been fired in my life ever so quitting would be the better option if push comes to shove. I try to have a sense of humor about the whole thing. Some weekend wine helps me cope with it all. My coworker says we need to get us some magic mushrooms...>>
> 
> I have never felt like the worst that could happen is being fired.  I can always find a job, or several.  I don't generally stick around where I don't want to be, or they don't want me.  The issue is having a job I like doing work I find acceptable for pay/benefits that suit me.   I am probably too much of a free spirit, but had I not been, I might not have left so many stress mills or con men nor had so many fun careers before I found one that hit on all cylinders. And now I'm tired of it, but it's eye-opening how many of us are so Over It, annoyed with years of low/no raises while the top does quite well.   I had this discussion with my boss about a year ago and she told me the kind of bonuses directors and above were getting, plus their allowable increase range was larger than the bottom folks, too.  Rarely do the fruits of labors flow to the people that do the real work.   This is partially why I invest, too, for a piece of the pie.



When I say the worst that could happen is getting fired from the job I mean it will not be a catastrophe- it will not be so bad- even if I cannot find another job.   I, like you, am also very independent and need to work with freedom. I, too, always was able to get another job very quickly. When younger, I continually looked for jobs/other opportunities while employed. Now I am older and problem is, where we live, jobs are few and far between especially for freedom loving individuals who are not cubicle robots. And, as you said, hard to get the decent salary as well. That is why I have stuck this job out. 

This said, I am the perfect candidate for a work at home job. The work at home jobs (with some field work) I had in the past were my favorite. I love being home and I am very disciplined. Great work/life balance. I would not consider any jobs I had "fun", though.


----------



## geekette (Feb 9, 2018)

<<I am not going to support or work for a company who is ruining the planet for my kids. >>

good luck with that, it's going to be a large boycott list.  Plenty of companies spewing yuck into the air, dumping chemicals into the water, adding disposable diapers, etc., to landfills before Starbucks was ever formed.   I first read about SuperFund eons ago in my parents home, it was in a Reader's Digest.  Ruining the planet isn't new, humans have been doing it for centuries.

Who are the top offenders on your list (aside from SBUX)?


----------



## geekette (Feb 9, 2018)

mpumilia said:


> When I say the worst that could happen is getting fired from the job I mean it will not be a catastrophe- it will not be so bad- even if I cannot find another job.   I, like you, am also very independent and need to work with freedom. I, too, always was able to get another job very quickly. When younger, I continually looked for jobs/other opportunities while employed. Now I am older and problem is, where we live, jobs are few and far between especially for freedom loving individuals who are not cubicle robots. And, as you said, hard to get the decent salary as well. That is why I have stuck this job out.
> 
> This said, I am the perfect candidate for a work at home job. The work at home jobs (with some field work) I had in the past were my favorite. I love being home and I am very disciplined. Great work/life balance. I would not consider any jobs I had "fun", though.


I did hear you about being on the edge, tho.  The job I am on leave from pushed me badly, such a crazy making stress pot.  I was getting quite crispy and not afraid to point out what the problems were and keep trying to make it better, that is who I am, right before I give up and hit the exit.   Stress by itself is bad for us, really bad, but I know how to handle that.  It's the crazy I don't do well with.  I was lucky in that previous mgr encouraged unloading, and the place itself always encouraged feedback, and was starting to carve out some incompetent folks that were part of manufacturing the crazy.  I don't mind not being there while another re-org happens.   You know a place has big problems when the answer, year after year, is to re-org. 

Like you, I am best off staying the course, keeping this seniority (my fingers are crossed for you on that with new owner; I'm not quite to 4 years on this one), and making use of the generous benefits I have.  the 401k is vested, 100% match to 6%, I can work from home a lot, they do some nice things for us, just not for the wallet.   But there are some internal customers that refuse to take responsibility and continue to try to blame others for what they were to manage and I had had enough.  I guess some people monitor their email while on sick leave.  Not me.  I know I can't handle it, I'm saying no to more stress.  it can all go on without me.  My priority is Me, not the job, not ever the job first.


----------



## WinniWoman (Feb 9, 2018)

Saw this article published on line today.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/impactpartners/2018/02/09/where-did-all-the-pensions-go/#3bd2ab03aaba


----------



## Patri (Feb 9, 2018)

geekette said:


> Is he still there?  Can he confirm benefits for part-timers?  and, ... does he like it??


He did like it. He was there for maybe a year. Then he found a FT job in his field. He was on my sister's healthcare plan.


----------



## bogey21 (Feb 9, 2018)

Sugarcubesea said:


> We had an employee last year who was diagnosed with Cancer and the president said do whatever she needs and make sure she’s taken care of.



Some 30+ years ago our Bank had two instances in one year where we handled "tough cases" way above what our Benefit Plans provided.  One was an employee who had bone marrow cancer and had to go out of town weekly for treatment.  We covered all his air fares, hotel rooms, etc. He ultimately recovered. 

In another instance we had an employee with Aids long before decent treatment for it was known.  We accelerated the benefits of his Life Insurance Policy and covered all his expenses (many were not medical) after he exhausted this money.  Unfortunately he died but we did everything we could do.  Today most companies don't exercise this kind of flexibility.

George


----------



## WinniWoman (Feb 10, 2018)

bogey21 said:


> Some 30+ years ago our Bank had two instances in one year where we handled "tough cases" way above what our Benefit Plans provided.  One was an employee who had bone marrow cancer and had to go out of town weekly for treatment.  We covered all his air fares, hotel rooms, etc. He ultimately recovered.
> 
> In another instance we had an employee with Aids long before decent treatment for it was known.  We accelerated the benefits of his Life Insurance Policy and covered all his expenses (many were not medical) after he exhausted this money.  Unfortunately he died but we did everything we could do.  Today most companies don't exercise this kind of flexibility.
> 
> George




Teh companies I worked for would have sent a pink slip and refilled your position as soon as you called out.


----------



## bogey21 (Feb 10, 2018)

mpumilia said:


> The companies I worked for would have sent a pink slip and refilled your position as soon as you called out.



We had an edge here as I was the President of the Bank and was the one who authorized these accommodations.  It was worth every penny it cost as we got it back in spades with increased employee morale, loyalty and productivity.  Bean counters don't understand this.

George


----------



## Suesue1738 (Feb 17, 2018)

mpumilia said:


> My issue is old farts like me value vacation time. If I go to a new job- full or part time- and tell them I take 5 weeks vacation each year (paid or unpaid- I don't care), plus want some sick days and personal days - forget it. In fact, I might soon be quitting my job on this point. This winter- I have already had to call out once because I could not make it in in a snow storm. First time I have ever done that when the office was not closed. They took a PTO day even though I told them I would take it without pay. They do not give you days without pay unless- THEY close the office. Then you have a choice of a PTO day or an unpaid day. They closed the office early another day so I took the 2 hours without pay- no biggie. But they rarely, if ever, close the office.
> 
> This morning- I do not know if I can make it down our nightmare driveway which is a sheet of ice. Believe me, I do not want to waste a day at home because of an icy driveway. One more bad road/weather day and I am short PTO time (and they are again predicting snow on Friday) but have my vacations booked and refuse to give them up as it is the only thing I look forward to. I have no social life and also the vacations are the times we see our son. But the company will not let you take unpaid days if you are short PTO time. That is my big issue. I can put up with a lot of BS but not that. As it is when I took this job we were supposed to be able accrue 32 PTO days per year over a period of so many years. Then they decided to decrease it to 28- just around the time I had hit around 26 and then they capped it at 28 and that was the end of it.By now, I would have had the 32. My husband right now gets 39 I believe. This works good for him allowing him an extra week for his hunting trip plus some extra days for whatever comes up.
> 
> ...



My dad tried for years to get me to go "into computers" (back in the 80's)....nope, I wanted to be a teacher!  And I was a teacher for 31 years.  Loved it!  Now, I'm retired, have been for 2 years, and I'm only 53.  My dad was a teacher and said, on many occasions, that teachers don't make enough to live on.  Well, we lived off of it all during my childhood and all during my adult life too.  Now, I'm enjoying living off of my pension....


----------



## Suesue1738 (Feb 17, 2018)

lizap said:


> I think its possible to be good parents and both parents work.. This is a personal choice, but we can no longer subsidize our daughter's choice.


About 2 years before I was planning to retire, my youngest son was home from college and said that he really didn't think college "was for him" and he was thinking of not returning for the next semester.  I told him that was his choice, but I needed him to make the decision with full knowledge of my choice, as well.  I told him that while I was still working, I was willing to continue paying for his college.  But once I retire, I'm not paying for college anymore.  So, he could choose to quit school, but if he decided to go back later, that would be on his own dime, (actually thousands of dimes!).  I wanted him to know that he indeed had choices, but so did I. 

I bet you know:  he decided to stay in and finish school.  Now he's teaching, with no college debt, and I'm retired!


----------



## pedro47 (Feb 17, 2018)

Sounds liked you have excellent parenting skills. Tough Love is very hard, but a good child will follow, excellent parents advice.

Good for him. He has no college debts.


----------



## Brett (Apr 15, 2018)

back in February I thought Los Angeles firefighters had the best pensions but then I read this in today's NYT

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/14/business/pension-finance-oregon.html
Oregon has the best government retirement pensions - one employee gets $76,000 ..... a *month* !
"Oregon faces a severe self-inflicted crisis"


----------



## pedro47 (Apr 15, 2018)

Brett, the state of Oregon have one outstanding pension plan.  Oregon must have a small number of state employees retired or the life span of an Oregon state employee must be low.
Their retirement board must be doing an awesome job in investment.
Sound liked they are following Warren Buffet retirement strategy.
That is my opinion only.


----------



## Brett (Apr 15, 2018)

pedro47 said:


> Brett, the state of Oregon have one outstanding pension plan.  Oregon must have a small number of state employees retired or the life span of an Oregon state employee must be low.
> Their retirement board must be doing an awesome job in investment.
> Sound liked they are following Warren Buffet retirement strategy.
> That is my opinion only.



yeah,  supposedly Warren Buffet's company Berkshire Hathaway has a good retirement pension plan  (matching 401k ? !)


----------



## bogey21 (Apr 15, 2018)

Sugarcubesea said:


> I feel so blessed reading all of these comments.  We had an employee last year who was diagnosed with Cancer and the president said do whatever she needs and make sure she’s taken care of.



As I mentioned in another post I was President of a large Bank and we handled all such legitimate tough situations the same way.  The dollars we spent in such situations were well in excess of what was provided for by out Benefit Plans.  When challenged on this by my Board of Directors I was able to convince them that the dollars spent were returned many times over with higher morale, higher productivity, better retention and the ability to keep base salaries at the low end of market.  And you know what?  I was right.

George


----------



## pedro47 (Apr 15, 2018)

bogey21 / George,  “Thank” for caring about your employees.


----------



## rosebud5 (Apr 19, 2018)

The old CSRS government retirement system was eliminated in the early 1980's by Reagan, a republican who thought the system was way to generous. Not the late 80's. FERS took it's place; not as generous, but still better than most private sector plans. We did not pay into social security, but we paid 7% (no annual limit like SS) of our salary for retirements benefits. We also paid 1.3% for medicare. We paid for health care, life insurance and dental insurance.

I am under the old system and get a really good retirement, as I retired as an SES (senior executive). You're never going to get rich working for the government. You can get up to 80% retirement pay or so with 42 years and using unused sick leave can go a little higher (I think). For most part though, most federal government workers never made as much as private sector. Our benefits made up for the difference. 26 days of paid vacation after 15 years of service, Ten days of sick leave and a pretty good health insurance program that the government paid about 60-70%. 

I'm also happy to say that I collect social security also (offset/reduction of 40%). Not only do I have 33 years with Uncle Sam, I have 71 social security quarters. I am not one bit sorry for what I'm collecting. I followed the rules and am getting what I earned.


----------



## MOXJO7282 (Apr 19, 2018)

I'm one of the lucky ones with both a 401k and a pension from a major insurance company. I'm trying to hold my job as the company consolidates offices and shifts a lot of jobs to different parts of the country. If I get to 15 years with the company and age 55 which is 2 years away I get an "enhanced severance package of 1 year salary if I'm asked to relocate and don't do it. Now I would get about 30 weeks. It sounds like a lot but after that money runs out it what then? I assume it is harder to get a job after 55 so you need all the money you can get.  I really don't think I'll make 55 before they ask me to move so I'll be faced with a tough spot at some point soon I believe. If I can have 4 more good years like I've been lucky to have then I could take a lower wage, lower stress job but until then I have to deal with a lot of the same corp BS everyone does to some degree or another.  If I lose my job and can't get something similar I start to bleed money with all my expenses and I'd be forced to change my game plan before I would blow through the savings we've worked so hard to accumulate to this point. I have one bird about to fly the coop so some expenses will lower but still have one big expense kid left.  That is a step in the right direction but until I get him through its a battle to pay all the bills and plan for your retirement years properly.


----------



## rapmarks (Apr 19, 2018)

I hear many complaints about teacher pensions.  A friend sent me an article which analyzed our pension system.  If you take a pension after 26 years, you are getting back your own money plus interest. If you taught over 26 years, that extra money is from the pension system, but should be covered by those that gave up the job before vesting in the system.    This analysis was based on the state of Illinois, where teachers pay in, but the state never met their obligation and also borrowed thirty billion.


----------



## turkel (Apr 19, 2018)

Teachers deserve their pensions. They work hard, pay into the system and are under paid during most of their careers.

The only people that complain about someone's pension are the people jealous they don't have one.

I don't have a pension. DH favorite saying is "he chose well". He has a very nice pension. He is one of very few people I imagine who chose his career based on benefits and a pension plan, although it improved greatly while he was on the job. Lucky for him he ended up loving his job. 

DH has to contribute to his pension and the amount goes up each year last year his contribution was something like 12k

18 months and countdown has begun!! I will be riding his coat tails, I guess I chose well


----------



## TravelTime (Jun 21, 2018)

VacationForever said:


> I can only say that many of the reports that I have read are regarding California state employees vs. the private sector.  If you google it, you can find the data as well, in that public sector employees earn more than 30% over private sector employees for the same jobs, that is after adding in health and retirement benefits.
> 
> Here is one of the reports that I just found on google: https://www.heritage.org/jobs-and-labor/report/are-california-public-employees-overpaid
> 
> ...



I believe this. Plus in the private sector, employees are disposable. Layoffs are frequent. There is no job security in the private sector. I do not begrudge anyone lucky enough to receive a pension - my father, father-in-law, mother-in-law and brother all have generous pensions. I am happy for them.

However, I do not like it when pensions and social security are risking a financial disaster for the future generations. There needs to be a massive restructuring of retirement funding. I prefer a national 401K program and having people save for retirement.

The fact that some people "work hard" in a public sector job does not mean they deserve a lucrative pension for not working. Many people work hard and get nothing. I think the pension system causes many people to stay in jobs when they are burnt out. I see it in my family and friends with pensions and at a company I used to work at but left after one year because the employees were just waiting for retirement. It is very demotivating to work with public sector employees who are burnt out. Especially when, as a citizen, I try to get services that my taxes are supposed to be covering and no one helps.

Those of us who have saved all of our lives in 401Ks and have substantial funds do not begrudge people with pensions. I could retire now on my own savings. It just angers me to be paying so much in taxes to fund other people's retirement. By the time we decide to retire, social security will be greatly reduced, not that we have ever counted it into our retirement budget. Not having a pension and not expecting social security encourages us to keep working and to be productive in society, even though I keep telling my DH we should retire, reduce our income and stop paying so much in taxes. At some point, it feels like the more we work, the more we pay in taxes. Not sure the incremental gain is worth it as the progressive state and federal tax rates go up.


----------



## TravelTime (Jun 21, 2018)

PigsDad said:


> That is good advice, but it is not _just _for the younger generation.  I am 30 years into my career, and I knew from the beginning to start saving for my own retirement (which I did!) and not to rely on a company pension or Social Security.  I know it may sound harsh, but I don't have much sympathy for those who cry "Woa is me" when they find themselves 50 years old and no retirement savings.  They were most likely living it up while us savers were busy living on a budget.  And this happens at all income levels.
> 
> Kurt



I agree with this wholeheartedly. We have had to save a lot to fund our own retirement.


----------



## WinniWoman (Jun 21, 2018)

The problem lies in that the young folks - many don't make a lot of money- and will need a ton of dough to really be able to live in retirement. They only can put aside so much as they need to live.

My husband and I worked all our lives for 5 figure salaries and even now, we don't have enough money supposedly to retire. And we have what most would consider a lot and are frugal people.


----------



## Steve Fatula (Jun 21, 2018)

PigsDad said:


> That is good advice, but it is not _just _for the younger generation.  I am 30 years into my career, and I knew from the beginning to start saving for my own retirement (which I did!) and not to rely on a company pension or Social Security.  I know it may sound harsh, but I don't have much sympathy for those who cry "Woa is me" when they find themselves 50 years old and no retirement savings.  They were most likely living it up while us savers were busy living on a budget.  And this happens at all income levels.
> 
> Kurt



I love this. It really does affect all income levels. I know someone who made (15 years ago) 50k a month, and was dirt poor with no savings as they spent it all on frivolous things. On the other side, my DW has a friend who makes very little, and is constantly whining about how they have no money, can you give us this or that, etc. Which if it were true wouldn't bother me at all. However, she goes shopping all the time to buy things she doesn't need. She'll buy something, and decide she doesn't like it, and, buy another one (different brand), decide she doesn't like it and buy another one, she may do this 4-5 times. And she decides she doesn't like it long after any return policy. And this happens all the time! Gee, I wonder why they are so dirt poor!


----------



## TravelTime (Jun 21, 2018)

mpumilia said:


> The problem lies in that the young folks - many don't make a lot of money- and will need a ton of dough to really be able to live in retirement. They only can put aside so much as they need to live.
> 
> My husband and I worked all our lives for 5 figure salaries and even now, we don't have enough money supposedly to retire. And we have what most would consider a lot and are frugal people.



Exactly - the baby boomer generation is robbing the younger generation. By the way, a 5 figure salary used to be - and is still - a great salary. Many people live on 5 figures quite well in low cost areas of the country esp if you have two 5 figure earners. Many people in high cost areas like the SF Bay Area live on 5 figures too. I think the problem is everyone looks up at those more fortunate and that makes people earning good honest middle class incomes feel poor.


----------



## Steve Fatula (Jun 21, 2018)

mpumilia said:


> The problem lies in that the young folks - many don't make a lot of money- and will need a ton of dough to really be able to live in retirement. They only can put aside so much as they need to live.
> 
> My husband and I worked all our lives for 5 figure salaries and even now, we don't have enough money supposedly to retire. And we have what most would consider a lot and are frugal people.



Well, the crux of the matter is defining "as they need to live". That is the whole thing. It may or may not be they make enough just to survive. Is a $100 cable or satellite bill required? Is a $150 cell phone bill required? Is a smart phone really required? Do they really need a brand new $30,000 pickup? etc. Believe me, I live in a very poor county, and many of these folks really barely have enough to live on, I know some of them, and I totally get that. But, I also see (some of) them still buying cigarettes, which are a small fortune. I am not suggesting that they should save that money, don't get me wrong. I would merely suggest my own opinion (not fact) that they could live a little better with that same money. Actually replace a window or front door that is covered with plastic for example seems like a wiser use. But that's just my opinion. 

I have relatives who as recently as 10 years ago were living on 20k, combined. Quite well. I am not aware of their current income so can't say today.


----------



## TravelTime (Jun 21, 2018)

SmithOp said:


> I receive $1100/month Calpers pension.  I pay the same taxes as every other Californian.  I contributed to my pension just like public sector workers with 401k matching.  I left state service before retirement age, so I don’t qualify for any other benefits (no healthcare).
> 
> I agree that these $300k spiked pensions are an issue, but its not the blame for pension underfunding.  The underfunding issue came to light because of changes in financial reporting, healthcare liability has to be shown now.  The cost of retirees healthcare, not pensions, is the problem.  More than half of all Calpers pensioners receive less than $30k.
> 
> ...



These are pretty hefty pensions in my opinion, on top of social security and personal retirement savings (hopefully Calpers people also save the max in their 401K or whatever program they are eligible to save for retirement). This data is so general as to be meaningless, though. It does not break up the data by length of employment, age of retirement, whether the person took early retirement and what kind of job they had.

Why does Calpers provide health care to retirees? Can't they use Medicare like everyone else?


----------



## pedro47 (Jun 21, 2018)

My God Son, just moved from Seattle, Washington to San Deigo, California I thought renting was high in Seattle. But San Deigo for a one bedroom condo in a nice neighborhood is over $1500 per month. I feel he is paying much more.

He left the University of Washington for a position at San Deigo State University. How can this generation saved for their reiterment? My advise to him is to stay single and try to save 3 to 4% of his yearly salary.

I personally loved San Deigo because of the weather, their sports teams, the arts and the people because they are low key.


----------



## TravelTime (Jun 21, 2018)

I just spoke to a 30-something year old today who works for a private healthcare company that has pensions. He said he needs to work there for 5 years to qualify for pension. Then he is quitting. I have another friend in her 40s who will be quitting a government job in 2 years when her pension and healthcare is vested. What kind of message does this send to the private sector when people are staying at jobs just to collect benefits. My one friend criticizes the government employees to no end. I will not repeat what she says for fear of everyone getting mad at me.


----------



## TravelTime (Jun 21, 2018)

pedro47 said:


> My God Son, just moved from Seattle, Washington to San Deigo, California I thought renting was high in Seattle. But San Deigo for a one bedroom condo in a nice neighborhood is over $1500 per month
> 
> He left the University of Washington for a position at San Deigo State University. How can this generation saved for their reiterment? My advise to him is to stay single and try to save 3 to 4% of his yearly salary.
> 
> I personally loved San Deigo because of the weather, their sports teams, the arts and the people because they are low key.



I agree. Young people are in trouble! Their future is not secure, unless their parents leave them a house and inheritance. In California, many young people live at home with the parents for this reason. Or their parents still partially support them until they can get on their feet. This happens well into people's 20s and 30s now. Very sad. I was independent at 18, practically kicked out of my family's house. I worked for minimum wage. Back then, I too wondered how I would ever buy a house and save for retirement. It wasn't until my 40s that I finally could see light at the end of the tunnel.


----------



## bogey21 (Jun 21, 2018)

TravelTime said:


> Young people are in trouble!.....Very sad. I was independent at 18, practically kicked out of my family's house.



I agree that young people are in trouble as Defined Benefit Pension Plans become more and more extinct.  I didn't need to be kicked out of my house.  The day I graduated from High School I left on my own accord.  I wanted to be on my own.  When things got tough I volunteered for the draft in the middle of the Korean War to get a new start and the GI Bill.  One of the best decisions I ever made.

George


----------



## Adventureisoutthere (Jun 21, 2018)

DeniseM said:


> Friendly suggestion:  When I announced on TUG that I retired, there were people who responded critically to my happy announcement, because I was going to get a teacher's retirement pension.  Remember that there are TUGGERS here who worked in government/public service/education and are receiving a pension.  Let's not blame them for their good fortune, good planning and years of hard work.



I’m currently in education and am excited about my pension possibility.  I’m not counting on it and am investing 10% of my salary monthly, but it’s still a bonus for when the time comes around!!  We all get to choose where we work and it’s easy for people to be green with envy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## bizaro86 (Jun 21, 2018)

mpumilia said:


> The problem lies in that the young folks - many don't make a lot of money- and will need a ton of dough to really be able to live in retirement. They only can put aside so much as they need to live.
> 
> My husband and I worked all our lives for 5 figure salaries and even now, we don't have enough money supposedly to retire. And we have what most would consider a lot and are frugal people.



Pensions in some ways are part of the problem here. My wife is a teacher, and pays in for her own pension. In addition, the teachers in our area have extra pay taken off to cover previous undercontributions. So she has to contribute for her pension, plus make the contributions that weren't made by those who are already retired.

That is happening at the Federal level here as well. CPP (the Canadian equivalent of social security) had the contributions raised in the 1990s to cover the fact that previous generations didn't put enough into the fund to cover their own pension.

I figured it out once, and the amount of money my family was paying every year to cover pension payments that were under-contributed by previous generations would buy us a new car every 2-3 years.


----------



## Adventureisoutthere (Jun 21, 2018)

VacationForever said:


> It is hard for someone who makes very little to save, after paying for housing, transportation, food and healthcare.  Many of us on TUG are fortunate to have had good careers which allow for savings after paying for necessities.



Truth...and very little can equal upwards of 80K if childcare is required.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SmithOp (Jun 21, 2018)

TravelTime said:


> These are pretty hefty pensions in my opinion, on top of social security and personal retirement savings (hopefully Calpers people also save the max in their 401K or whatever program they are eligible to save for retirement). This data is so general as to be meaningless, though. It does not break up the data by length of employment, age of retirement, whether the person took early retirement and what kind of job they had.
> 
> Why does Calpers provide health care to retirees? Can't they use Medicare like everyone else?



The data is meaningful to illustrate the point being made, that the very high pensions are a very small pecentage of the total number of retired Calpers members.  This goes back to the original subject from msg #1 that you dug up.

Calpers becomes the supplemental when the retiree reaches 65 and signs up for Medicare parts A/B.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## VacationForever (Jun 21, 2018)

Personally, I am envious of anyone with a good pension - private and public employees.  But I do not get confused between envy and resentment.  I wish I am one of the folks who have a nice pension!  The public pension problem of CA and many states is almost always the result of many years of collective bargaining between a strong armed union and lawmakers who benefit from the union relationship (aka voting bloc) and accede to the unsustainable funding terms.


----------



## Steve Fatula (Jun 21, 2018)

TravelTime said:


> These are pretty hefty pensions in my opinion, on top of social security and personal retirement savings (hopefully Calpers people also save the max in their 401K or whatever program they are eligible to save for retirement). This data is so general as to be meaningless, though. It does not break up the data by length of employment, age of retirement, whether the person took early retirement and what kind of job they had.
> 
> Why does Calpers provide health care to retirees? Can't they use Medicare like everyone else?



Really? I have nothing else to compare to, no idea what a "hefty" pension is. I do know that mine at age 62 (early) is reduced, but I will get $1,262/mo. Is that good then? Seems small to me. I'll definitely take it of course, it's nothing one can live on by itself is what I mean by small.


----------



## Brett (Jun 21, 2018)

Steve Fatula said:


> Really? I have nothing else to compare to, no idea what a "hefty" pension is. I do know that mine at age 62 (early) is reduced, but I will get $1,262/mo. Is that good then? Seems small to me. I'll definitely take it of course, it's nothing one can live on by itself is what I mean by small.



$1,262 seems small to me.  My mother gets a $7,000 / month pension but that's a combination of public and private annuities and my deceased father's pension and social security.  Retirement pensions were a lot better if you started work in the 1950's


----------



## WinniWoman (Jun 21, 2018)

Adventureisoutthere said:


> Truth...and very little can equal upwards of 80K if childcare is required.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



I had only one child and child care cost us like $30,000 and we also had some family help! I was only making $30,000 at the time (and I don't make that much more relatively even now, 30 years later)


----------



## Adventureisoutthere (Jun 21, 2018)

mpumilia said:


> I had only one child and child care cost us like $30,000 and we also had some family help! I was only making $30,000 at the time (and I don't make that much more relatively even now, 30 years later)



Fast forward, daycare costs us $32k a year.  I literally work for the insurance benefits and retirement contribution (I bring no income to the bank), but I enjoy my job and value my time as a professional.  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## WinniWoman (Jun 21, 2018)

My son makes like $30,000 per year- plus occasional bonus's based on overall team effort- if he is lucky and then last year took on a second job on weekends as well- and made it to $40,000. (He has lived on his own since 2010 after graduating college).

He has to pay $900 for rent of a dingy apartment in a college town in NH. He puts enough in hid 401k- just started this year- to get the company match- IF they have one for the year-it's discretionary- and he has been there 6 years but just started this because he was trying to save money for a car first. He managed to put some money away for the car, but my brother ended up giving him a generous gift so he could buy one combined with his own savings. Paying cash for the car enables him to save some money, otherwise if he had a car payment he couldn't save.  He needs a good car because he does a lot of driving- sometimes even having to drive further to an airport for his job. After much nagging, I got him to put $200 per month into his Roth IRA on auto pilot - the Roth which we started for him when he was 16 and working. But he never looks at his accounts and he has no clue about investments and doesn't seem interested. At least he has no debt-puts everything on credit cards as I taught him and pays them in full every month and gets cash back. Hopefully, he stays with it.

But no matter what, at this rate he will not have enough money for retirement unless he inherits ours- and I doubt we will have enough left for him unless we die young- OR he somehow ends up making mega bucks, which is not likely. Maybe he should play lotto- I don't know... Maybe I should start paying lotto - LOL!

Now I am nagging him to take all his bonus money if and when he gets it and put it into the Roth so he can get it maybe funded to the max and I believe he can do it, but he hasn't because he is too lazy and maybe even scared to do it himself. He actually does have an emergency fund from past monetary gifts and his own savings.

He spends a lot on gas as he lives in a rural area and has to commute. How does he do it? Well- NH not having an income or sales tax helps a lot. He lives extremely simply. Has furniture college students have left out after school is done. He has a cell phone through Walmart- straight talk-and a smart watch and a google home and he does have a little bit of a social life here and there- likes beer.

Now he has a girlfriend so I assume he will be spending more money. But I always worry about him because he needs a bigger income but hates change and doesn't look for a better paying job. Because he is the youngest one at his company, my husband and I joke that everyone else will retire or die off and maybe he will become the CEO someday by default. LOL!


----------



## TravelTime (Jun 21, 2018)

Steve Fatula said:


> Really? I have nothing else to compare to, no idea what a "hefty" pension is. I do know that mine at age 62 (early) is reduced, but I will get $1,262/mo. Is that good then? Seems small to me. I'll definitely take it of course, it's nothing one can live on by itself is what I mean by small.



I don’t think people should expect to live on pensions or social security. People need to take responsibility and save for retirement as well as pay off their mortgages so they can afford to live on reduced income in retirement. We will be downsizing in retirement so we can live off our personal retirement savings since we will not get any government assistance. Social security will either be gone or majorly reduced when we retire. If you are getting an extra $1200 from a pension, think of it as icing on the cake that very few people get.


----------



## TravelTime (Jun 21, 2018)

Adventureisoutthere said:


> Fast forward, daycare costs us $32k a year.  I literally work for the insurance benefits and retirement contribution (I bring no income to the bank), but I enjoy my job and value my time as a professional.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



What kind of daycare do you use? That is not the typical cost of day care even in The SF Bay Area. It sounds like day care is more like a prep school.


----------



## TravelTime (Jun 21, 2018)

mpumilia said:


> I had only one child and child care cost us like $30,000 and we also had some family help! I was only making $30,000 at the time (and I don't make that much more relatively even now, 30 years later)



$30,000 per year or over a period of time? You can get quality day care for $1000 per month in the SF Bay Area. I assume it is less in lower cost regions.


----------



## TravelTime (Jun 21, 2018)

Brett said:


> $1,262 seems small to me.  My mother gets a $7,000 / month pension but that's a combination of public and private annuities and my deceased father's pension and social security.  Retirement pensions were a lot better if you started work in the 1950's



Pensions are very unevenly distributed these days.


----------



## TravelTime (Jun 21, 2018)

VacationForever said:


> Personally, I am envious of anyone with a good pension - private and public employees.  But I do not get confused between envy and resentment.  I wish I am one of the folks who have a nice pension!  The public pension problem of CA and many states is almost always the result of many years of collective bargaining between a strong armed union and lawmakers who benefit from the union relationship (aka voting bloc) and accede to the unsustainable funding terms.



I am the opposite. I am not envious at all. We do not need a pension. However I am resentful because we are paying so much in state and federal taxes to support mostly middle class and upper middle class people who do not need a pension. If people would just save for retirement over their lifetime and downsize in retirement with their home equity, pensions would not be needed. In any case, pensions are going out. Many counties in California are getting rid of them. Pensions are dinosaurs. Also, I do not feel sorry for public service workers. These jobs are a lot less stressful than the corporate jobs I any DH have had and the small business I run. I have worked in public service jobs and had to get out because the majority of people just do not care.


----------



## WinniWoman (Jun 21, 2018)

TravelTime said:


> $30,000 per year or over a period of time? You can get quality day care for $1000 per month in the SF Bay Area. I assume it is less in lower cost regions.




LOl! In total! That was a lot for us, though. If it were $30,000 per year I would have just stayed home as that was my salary!


----------



## TravelTime (Jun 21, 2018)

mpumilia said:


> My son makes like $30,000 per year- plus occasional bonus's based on overall team effort- if he is lucky and then last year took on a second job on weekends as well- and made it to $40,000. (He has lived on his own since 2010 after graduating college).
> 
> He has to pay $900 for rent of a dingy apartment in a college town in NH. He puts enough in hid 401k- just started this year- to get the company match- IF they have one for the year-it's discretionary- and he has been there 6 years but just started this because he was trying to save money for a car first. He managed to put some money away for the car, but my brother ended up giving him a generous gift so he could buy one combined with his own savings. Paying cash for the car enables him to save some money, otherwise if he had a car payment he couldn't save.  He needs a good car because he does a lot of driving- sometimes even having to drive further to an airport for his job. After much nagging, I got him to put $200 per month into his Roth IRA on auto pilot - the Roth which we started for him when he was 16 and working. But he never looks at his accounts and he has no clue about investments and doesn't seem interested. At least he has no debt-puts everything on credit cards as I taught him and pays them in full every month and gets cash back. Hopefully, he stays with it.
> 
> ...



$40,000 a year and $900 a month in rent is manageable for a young person in a low cost state. I do not understand why people are complaining about this. He does not pay state income taxes and has a low cost of living. If he lived in the Bay Area, he would need to earn 4 times as much to break even and maintain his standard of living. His rent would be closer to $3000-$4000 per month for a one bedroom. It is crazy to me that people who live in low cost cities/states with no state income tax are complaining.


----------



## TravelTime (Jun 21, 2018)

mpumilia said:


> LOl! In total! That was a lot for us, though. If it were $30,000 per year I would have just stayed home as that was my salary!



Okay over the childhood of your child or children, that is reasonable.


----------



## Adventureisoutthere (Jun 21, 2018)

TravelTime said:


> What kind of daycare do you use? That is not the typical cost of day care even in The SF Bay Area. It sounds like day care is more like a prep school.



We use a daycare center and have 2 kids.  We couldn’t get home daycare for 2 kids for $1000 in my area.  And I couldn’t work full time with a home daycare.  Most home daycares are open for 9 hours; well add in a commute and lunch and there is no way to make that work.  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## TravelTime (Jun 21, 2018)

Adventureisoutthere said:


> We use a daycare center and have 2 kids.  We couldn’t get home daycare for 2 kids for $1000 in my area.  And I couldn’t work full time with a home daycare.  Most home daycares are open for 9 hours; well add in a commute and lunch and there is no way to make that work.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Where do you live? So it is really $17,000 a year each. I am sure if you looked hard enough, you could get these day care costs down. We live in the most expensive city in America and our friends have been able to find reasonable, high quality day care.


----------



## Adventureisoutthere (Jun 21, 2018)

TravelTime said:


> Where do you live? So it is really $17,000 a year each. I am sure if you looked hard enough, you could get these day care costs down. We live in the most expensive city in America and our friends have been able to find reasonable, high quality day care.



We live just outside the metro in Western suburbs of Minneapolis, MN.  We did home daycare for 2 years, then baby #2 came, we found a part time nanny for 3 days per week, husband watched them 2 days per week to save a bit of money and no infant openings within 15 miles.  After 1 of the nanny, we tried 2 preschool settings with my oldest, then 3 years old and he could not transition.  He cried everyday, all day for months at both.  We pulled him, found this center which has smaller class sizes and flexibility and here we are paying over $2600 a month.  Worth it in our eyes because he is preparing for kindergarten.  Could we have found something cheaper? Maybe, but I was tired of trying....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## WinniWoman (Jun 21, 2018)

TravelTime said:


> $40,000 a year and $900 a month in rent is manageable for a young person in a low cost state. I do not understand why people are complaining about this. He does not pay state income taxes and has a low cost of living. If he lived in the Bay Area, he would need to earn 4 times as much to break even and maintain his standard of living. He is rent would be closer to $3000-$4000 per month for a one bedroom. It is crazy to me that people who live in low cost cities/states with no state income tax are complaining.



LOL! He feels NH is very expensive, but I never said he complains.  NH has very high fees for everything, for example. No way could he ever buy a home if all stays the same. Unless he meets a woman who makes a decent amount of money and they marry and then together maybe they could do it. Never mind throw a child into the equation.

Compare that to my husband and I marrying at age 21- big wedding and honeymoon- and buying a handyman special immediately- moved right in after the honeymoon- and fixing it up over 10 years (put like $75,000 into it plus our own sweat and tears) and buying additional land and an investment condo (a flop) and then selling all and moving to our current home by age 31. Going on a few vacations at that time also and investing and saving money and buying a couple of new cars. We commuted and had high gas bills.

Our son is nowhere near this at this stage of his life. Big difference.

Any place is cheaper than the Bay area! His employer actually wanted him to move to CA and I told him- no way- unless they pay you mega bucks and even then- he would have to uproot his life and who knows what could happen down the line. They let him go and there he is by himself so far away from his family and friends.


----------



## bluehende (Jun 21, 2018)

TravelTime said:


> $30,000 per year or over a period of time? You can get quality day care for $1000 per month in the SF Bay Area. I assume it is less in lower cost regions.


My oldest lives in Boston and day care is about 2x that.  I would bet cost of living in Boston and SF are pretty close with SF being slightly higher.  My grand daughter was just excepted into a private school that would have cost 35 k a year.  This is for kindergarten.  Now this is in the higher range but not too far out of line.  My son and dil make a combined income that is close to the top 1% range but was going to receive a small amount of financial aid.  Both have top tier jobs and live well, but rich is not the term I would use. There are a lot of factors that lead to your financial well being.  As a baby boomer I fear for the next generation. I am afraid we had it much easier.

ps edited to say   average daycare in boston is 18000 a year.  So 20 for my grandchild is not much above the average.  She loves it there.


----------



## WinniWoman (Jun 21, 2018)

TravelTime said:


> I am the opposite. I am not envious at all. We do not need a pension. However I am resentful because we are paying so much in state and federal taxes to support mostly middle class and upper middle class people who do not need a pension. If people would just save for retirement over their lifetime and downsize in retirement with their home equity, pensions would not be needed. In any case, pensions are going out. Many counties in Calfifornia are getting rid of them. Pensions are dinosaurs. Also, I do not feel sorry for public service workers. These jobs are a lot less stressful than the corporate jobs I have had and the small business I run. I have worked in public service jobs and had to get out because the majority of people just do not care.




I have no pension (private company) and hubby's has been chopped up to nothing- private company- IF- he even makes it to get it- can't live on it. 

Downsizing is not what it used to be. Even smaller homes cost more than a lot of people can get for their current home. I know. I am one of them. Put a ton of money into our home and market value is barely above what we paid and that was $208,000 in 1987. Unless I want to live in a trailer park and even those are expensive with the leased land and all that.


----------



## WinniWoman (Jun 21, 2018)

You all must have high incomes because paying what you do for day care- it wouldn't be worth it unless you did.

Crazy expensive child care. I can't wrap my head around those numbers.


----------



## bluehende (Jun 21, 2018)

mpumilia said:


> You all must have high incomes because paying what you do for day care- it wouldn't be worth it unless you did.
> 
> Crazy expensive child care. I can't wrap my head around those numbers.



My wife had a daycare in the house for 20 yrs.  She gave it up 10 yrs ago but never made over 20,000 after expenses.  And that was watching up to 6 kids.   She rarely maxed out as it was just too hard.  This was in DE where child care is pretty cheap.  It figures that right after my wife gets out it becomes lucrative.


----------



## am1 (Jun 21, 2018)

Adventureisoutthere said:


> We use a daycare center and have 2 kids.  We couldn’t get home daycare for 2 kids for $1000 in my area.  And I couldn’t work full time with a home daycare.  Most home daycares are open for 9 hours; well add in a commute and lunch and there is no way to make that work.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



More then 9 hours a day?  That seems like a lot.  My sons go to kindergarden from 7:30 - 2:15 and I think that is too long.  Last year was 7:30-11:30/12.


----------



## am1 (Jun 21, 2018)

mpumilia said:


> My son makes like $30,000 per year- plus occasional bonus's based on overall team effort- if he is lucky and then last year took on a second job on weekends as well- and made it to $40,000. (He has lived on his own since 2010 after graduating college).
> 
> He has to pay $900 for rent of a dingy apartment in a college town in NH. He puts enough in hid 401k- just started this year- to get the company match- IF they have one for the year-it's discretionary- and he has been there 6 years but just started this because he was trying to save money for a car first. He managed to put some money away for the car, but my brother ended up giving him a generous gift so he could buy one combined with his own savings. Paying cash for the car enables him to save some money, otherwise if he had a car payment he couldn't save.  He needs a good car because he does a lot of driving- sometimes even having to drive further to an airport for his job. After much nagging, I got him to put $200 per month into his Roth IRA on auto pilot - the Roth which we started for him when he was 16 and working. But he never looks at his accounts and he has no clue about investments and doesn't seem interested. At least he has no debt-puts everything on credit cards as I taught him and pays them in full every month and gets cash back. Hopefully, he stays with it.
> 
> ...



Seems like he is not motivated.  Very hard for someone else to change that.  

The cost of living is a lot more now as everyone wants new stuff, cable/internet, cell phone plans, smart phone, big tvs, netflix, nice vacations and more.  It adds up.  It is good for businesses and keeps people employed but keeps people from getting ahead.  A $10 or $15 minimum wage is not going to make the difference when all the money gets spent on this stuff.  Those jobs should be stepping stones to better higher paying jobs.


----------



## Adventureisoutthere (Jun 21, 2018)

am1 said:


> More then 9 hours a day?  That seems like a lot.  My sons go to kindergarden from 7:30 - 2:15 and I think that is too long.  Last year was 7:30-11:30/12.



It is a long day for the kiddos, but such is the life when momma wants to work . Are you able to work outside of the home with that schedule?  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## am1 (Jun 21, 2018)

Adventureisoutthere said:


> It is a long day for the kiddos, but such is the life when momma wants to work . Are you able to work outside of the home with that schedule?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



I work 24/7 365.  A variety of businesses where I am in charge. Even more now then a year ago before I retired from renting timeshares.  Makes me want to. Evonne a pencil pusher.  Is that pc? 
But my wife or I drop our sons off at school and pick them up.  Thankfully our side of their school hours we can get people to look after them in our own or their grandmas house when needed.

Tie it into this thread no pension, very little cpp and social security. They may both be better to buy me out to save having to process such low payments.  

But it was what I choose after seeing the same miserable people every morning and afternoon on the lirr for the two weeks of my life spent working in manhattan. More than enough time to figure out that's not what I wanted.


----------



## Steve Fatula (Jun 21, 2018)

TravelTime said:


> I don’t think people should expect to live on pensions or social security. People need to take responsibility and save for retirement as well as pay off their mortgages so they can afford to live on reduced income in retirement. We will be downsizing in retirement so we can live off our personal retirement savings since we will not get any government assistance. Social security will either be gone or majorly reduced when we retire. If you are getting an extra $1200 from a pension, think of it as icing on the cake that very few people get.



I was not trying to say I should expect my pension to be able to support me living, it's just one pillar. I was just wondering if that is a decent pension these days out of curiosity. Between that, SS, 401k (each of us), there will be no "reduced" income in our case at least. We always maxed out our contributions, esp. when we had SEP IRAs and we had our own company. But who knows what the future may bring, there are always unexpected things that can majorly change plans! SS almost certainly will have to change before 2030.


----------



## TravelTime (Jun 21, 2018)

Adventureisoutthere said:


> We live just outside the metro in Western suburbs of Minneapolis, MN.  We did home daycare for 2 years, then baby #2 came, we found a part time nanny for 3 days per week, husband watched them 2 days per week to save a bit of money and no infant openings within 15 miles.  After 1 of the nanny, we tried 2 preschool settings with my oldest, then 3 years old and he could not transition.  He cried everyday, all day for months at both.  We pulled him, found this center which has smaller class sizes and flexibility and here we are paying over $2600 a month.  Worth it in our eyes because he is preparing for kindergarten.  Could we have found something cheaper? Maybe, but I was tired of trying....
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



That’s fine. You need to decide where to spend your money and I understand your children are (and should be) your number 1 priority. I am just saying that in Silicon Valley, the most expensive place in the USA outside of Manhattan, my educated and well-off friends are thrifty and have found excellent daycare for a lot less.


----------



## TravelTime (Jun 21, 2018)

Steve Fatula said:


> I was not trying to say I should expect my pension to be able to support me living, it's just one pillar. I was just wondering if that is a decent pension these days out of curiosity. Between that, SS, 401k (each of us), there will be no "reduced" income in our case at least. We always maxed out our contributions, esp. when we had SEP IRAs and we had our own company. But who knows what the future may bring, there are always unexpected things that can majorly change plans! SS almost certainly will have to change before 2030.



Any pension is a fabulous pension these days since so few people get anything. Count yourself among the lucky ones!

I started a 401K with company matching for my employees when it was only me and one employee - now we have about 10 employees but we are still small by business standards and I offer them many other benefits that companies my size do not provide. They love it and I have great retention. I do auto enrollment to encourage them to participate, and they can opt out or reduce their contribution if they want. How else can employees in small business save for retirement. I am one of the few very small business owners in America that voluntarily offers a 401K esp with company matching. My employees are at least 20-30 years younger than me so I feel good helping them save for retirement at a younger age than I started. It is an expensive benefit to offer, not just the matching portion but also the annual cost of the program administration.


----------



## rapmarks (Jun 21, 2018)

TravelTime said:


> That’s fine. You need to decide where to spend your money and I understand your children are (and should be) your number 1 priority. I am just saying that in Silicon Valley, the most expensive place in the USA outside of Manhattan, my educated and well-off friends are thrifty and have found excellent daycare for a lot less.


My daughter lived outside Minneapolis and spent $25000 a year when she had two children.  She had to pay if the kids were sick and stayed home, if the sitter took a vacation etc.  she was in a bind because she started eArlier than most daycares opened.  That was a few years ago.


----------



## TravelTime (Jun 21, 2018)

rapmarks said:


> My daughter lived outside Minneapolis and spent $25000 a year when she had two children.  She had to pay if the kids were sick and stayed home, if the sitter took a vacation etc.  she was in a bind because she started eArlier than most daycares opened.  That was a few years ago.



Wow, child care costs in Minneapolis are very high. Perhaps in California child care costs are slightly lower even though our total cost of living is higher because we have many legal immigrants from Asia and Mexico who work for legal but lower wages than Americans. Many of my friends have hired Vietnamese nannies and sent their children to Chinese day cares. The care and education is excellent and the costs are expensive but still lower than what I am hearing about Minneapolis.


----------



## Icc5 (Jun 21, 2018)

I am one of the lucky ones as is my wife to have a pension.  To earn that pension though we earned low wages compared to other jobs.  We worked for 43 and 42 years for a grocery chain and both bought our first houses before hitting 25 years old.  We bought these well our friends were out partying,buying fancy cars,going on exotic vacations,eating out all the time.  We got married when she was 32 and I was 37.  We socked away as much as we could afford (we have 2 kids) in IRAS and I had investments in the stock market started when I was 21.
Again we were lucky because the in laws were retired and wanted to watch the kids so no childcare costs for us except sending her parents on great vacations.  Oh, and we live in Cupertino,California near the Apple Campus.
Yes, we are making it fine.  Our kids struggle and we try helping them when needed.  Yes, they will have to live elsewhere.  We already helped our daughter,son n law, and grandaughter by them living in our house for 3+1/2 years (drove me nuts).  They have no idea what saving money, cutting expenses, etc. means.
Our kids know when we pass they will be sitting pretty until they spend it all.
Bart


----------



## bluehende (Jun 21, 2018)

rapmarks said:


> My daughter lived outside Minneapolis and spent $25000 a year when she had two children.  She had to pay if the kids were sick and stayed home, if the sitter took a vacation etc.  she was in a bind because she started eArlier than most daycares opened.  That was a few years ago.



My wife who ran a home daycare had a degree, professional development requirements, licensing fees, etc.  She had constant inspections from licensing and food safety.  If you want a qualified professional to watch the kids you need to treat them as such.  Trust me no one gets a child development degree and works in a daycare for the money.  I would be willing to bet your daughter had vacation and sick time.  The norms on these issues vary from state to state and should be spelled out in the contract.  I am sorry for the lecture.  I will warn you that the word sitter is very derogatory to the person who has spent their whole life learning how best to help your child develop both physically and physcologically.


----------



## Krteczech (Jun 21, 2018)

rapmarks said:


> My daughter lived outside Minneapolis and spent $25000 a year when she had two children.  She had to pay if the kids were sick and stayed home, if the sitter took a vacation etc.  she was in a bind because she started eArlier than most daycares opened.  That was a few years ago.


My experience from Minneapolis dates 20 years back. For first two years I spent my entire paycheck on excellent daycare for my only daughter. It was worth it. She received great care, I kept my job and was able to resume 401K contributions in the third year.


----------



## VacationForever (Jun 22, 2018)

TravelTime said:


> I am the opposite. I am not envious at all. We do not need a pension. However I am resentful because we are paying so much in state and federal taxes to support mostly middle class and upper middle class people who do not need a pension. If people would just save for retirement over their lifetime and downsize in retirement with their home equity, pensions would not be needed. In any case, pensions are going out. Many counties in California are getting rid of them. Pensions are dinosaurs. Also, I do not feel sorry for public service workers. These jobs are a lot less stressful than the corporate jobs I any DH have had and the small business I run. I have worked in public service jobs and had to get out because the majority of people just do not care.


The system of high taxes and public pension is put in by the law makers.  Why are you resentful of the employees and the pensioners?  They did not cause the problem.  We were in your shoes not too long ago, paying the highest tax brackets for Federal and California.

There is alot of madness going on, including the new law that is put in place to limit water usage per capita/head.  Californians will resort to using more disposable plates and cups, generating more waste and landfill than before.  Then there is the hygiene issue of where to best use water - shower, flushing toilets, laundry...   Then there is the administrative nightmare or maybe they don't care - how do they determine how many people are living in a household.  Folks like me who visit family in California will surely add to water usage without water allocated to account for the additional transient headcount.  I am already thinking of staying in a hotel come 2022 instead of staying with my son when I visit him.


----------



## Steve Fatula (Jun 22, 2018)

VacationForever said:


> There is alot of madness going on, including the new law that is put in place to limit water usage per capita/head.  Californians will resort to using more disposable plates and cups, generating more waste and landfill than before.  Then there is the hygiene issue of where to best use water - shower, flushing toilets, laundry...   Then there is the administrative nightmare or maybe they don't care - how do they determine how many people live in a household.  Folks like me who visit family in California will surely add to water usage without water allocated to account for the additional transient headcount.  I am already thinking of staying in a hotel come 2022 instead of staying with my son when I visit him.



I wonder how the rice production is going in California? Thats about the highest water usage crop there is. In semi arid? I wouldn't be surprised if it's thriving.


----------



## VacationForever (Jun 22, 2018)

Steve Fatula said:


> I wonder how the rice production is going in California? Thats about the highest water usage crop there is. In semi arid? I wouldn't be surprised if it's thriving.


California loses more water from poor infrastructure than usage by households.  Instead of fixing water retention issue, they go after the folks who consume 10% of the water supply.  Farmers with land have water rights and those are sacred.  A friend of mine owns a rice field in Northern California and in several drought years, he sold his water (rights) to others as it brought him more money than growing rice.  Water rights is another can of worms altogether.


----------



## Steve Fatula (Jun 22, 2018)

VacationForever said:


> California loses more water from poor infrastructure than usage by households.  Instead of fixing water retention issue, they go after the folks who consume 10% of the water supply.  Farmers with land have water rights and those are sacred.  A friend of mine owns a rice field in Northern California and in several drought years, he sold his water (rights) to others as it brought him more money than growing rice.  Water rights is another can of worms altogether.



Yeah, that seems to be the trick there. And apparently there are levels of water rights, at least I think so. Senior water rights!? Really? I guess they have priority. Stuff I've heard from folks in Palm Desert about the state. Kind of off topic though... Pensions! I guess I am just glad I have one, though, I did work for that company due to that, it was one of my requirements. Worked 10 years there to obtain it. And it's fully funded.


----------



## TravelTime (Jun 22, 2018)

VacationForever said:


> The system of high taxes and public pension is put in by the law makers.  Why are you resentful of the employees and the pensioners?  They did not cause the problem.  We were in your shoes not too long ago, paying the highest tax brackets for Federal and California.
> 
> There is alot of madness going on, including the new law that is put in place to limit water usage per capita/head.  Californians will resort to using more disposable plates and cups, generating more waste and landfill than before.  Then there is the hygiene issue of where to best use water - shower, flushing toilets, laundry...   Then there is the administrative nightmare or maybe they don't care - how do they determine how many people are living in a household.  Folks like me who visit family in California will surely add to water usage without water allocated to account for the additional transient headcount.  I am already thinking of staying in a hotel come 2022 instead of staying with my son when I visit him.



I need to clarify. I am not resentful of the employees or pensioners. My father, brother, sister, and many others in my family get state pensions in other states. I am resentful that we work very hard in California to pay the highest taxes in the nation to support a state, local and federal government system that is inefficient and inequitable. We will eventually leave California for a lower cost and lower tax state. There is a huge flight of high income individuals out of California because we are tired of supporting everyone else with our hard work and getting nothing in return. The few things I have asked for in California, like adopting foster children, has been such a hassle and we faced such discrimination that we had to drop out. 70-80% of couples who try it adopt foster children in the Calforinia foster care system drop out within 2 years. Social workers make the lowest salaries in California, much lower than teachers with no job security and few benefits. When I see children suffering because the majority of our state budget is going to pensions for old people, that does bother me. Same problem with social security. Although we are eligible for SS, I think the SS system is going to explode. I am not resentful of the lucky people who get pensions. I am resentful that 60%+ of CA’s state budget goes to pensions and related services and high income earners are overtaxed and being forced out of the state.


----------



## TravelTime (Jun 22, 2018)

mpumilia said:


> LOL! He feels NH is very expensive, but I never said he complains.  NH has very high fees for everything, for example. No way could he ever buy a home if all stays the same. Unless he meets a woman who makes a decent amount of money and they marry and then together maybe they could do it. Never mind throw a child into the equation.
> 
> Compare that to my husband and I marrying at age 21- big wedding and honeymoon- and buying a handyman special immediately- moved right in after the honeymoon- and fixing it up over 10 years (put like $75,000 into it plus our own sweat and tears) and buying additional land and an investment condo (a flop) and then selling all and moving to our current home by age 31. Going on a few vacations at that time also and investing and saving money and buying a couple of new cars. We commuted and had high gas bills.
> 
> ...



I am just a little younger than you but I had many more struggles. I did not own my first home until I got married at 41 and my husband already had a home. I truly doubt that New Hampshire homes are that expensive. I have a client who just bought a Lake home in NH in a very nice upper end neighborhood for under $300K. Compare that to California. A home on a lake like the one he bought would be $1.5 million to $2 million. Our salaries are higher than other states but not proportionate to home costs and cost of living. I suspect if your son keeps working and advancing in his career, he can buy a home much more easily than the young folks in California. It sounds like you and your husband married early and at a time when the USA was a much better place where middle class people could get ahead more easily than now. That was not my experience. I am a cusp Gen Xer who struggled with everything. Now, through our hard work and a lot of luck, we are doing well and beyond our wildest dreams but it took my DH and I until our 40s+ to get comfortable. My DH still worries about money but I keep assuring him we are fine.


----------



## TravelTime (Jun 22, 2018)

Icc5 said:


> I am one of the lucky ones as is my wife to have a pension.  To earn that pension though we earned low wages compared to other jobs.  We worked for 43 and 42 years for a grocery chain and both bought our first houses before hitting 25 years old.  We bought these well our friends were out partying,buying fancy cars,going on exotic vacations,eating out all the time.  We got married when she was 32 and I was 37.  We socked away as much as we could afford (we have 2 kids) in IRAS and I had investments in the stock market started when I was 21.
> Again we were lucky because the in laws were retired and wanted to watch the kids so no childcare costs for us except sending her parents on great vacations.  Oh, and we live in Cupertino,California near the Apple Campus.
> Yes, we are making it fine.  Our kids struggle and we try helping them when needed.  Yes, they will have to live elsewhere.  We already helped our daughter,son n law, and grandaughter by them living in our house for 3+1/2 years (drove me nuts).  They have no idea what saving money, cutting expenses, etc. means.
> Our kids know when we pass they will be sitting pretty until they spend it all.
> Bart



I think you have a well deserved pension and probably understand the pros and cons of California. If you bought a house in Cupertino at age 25, then you are likely multi millionaires now. You guys were lucky to live in California before the housing and tech boom. Sounds like you have worked hard for what you have. But you understand the children of your generation are going to struggle to survive in California. Although I assume unless you need the home equity, they will inherit your house. This is one of the few ways the younger generation in California can survive. Assistance and inheritance from parents.


----------



## TravelTime (Jun 22, 2018)

bluehende said:


> My oldest lives in Boston and day care is about 2x that.  I would bet cost of living in Boston and SF are pretty close with SF being slightly higher.  My grand daughter was just excepted into a private school that would have cost 35 k a year.  This is for kindergarten.  Now this is in the higher range but not too far out of line.  My son and dil make a combined income that is close to the top 1% range but was going to receive a small amount of financial aid.  Both have top tier jobs and live well, but rich is not the term I would use. There are a lot of factors that lead to your financial well being.  As a baby boomer I fear for the next generation. I am afraid we had it much easier.
> 
> ps edited to say   average daycare in boston is 18000 a year.  So 20 for my grandchild is not much above the average.  She loves it there.



I hate to say it but $35K a year is at the upper end. We have private schools in the SF Bay Area charging those tuition rates and even higher for high school but it is not accessible to even upper middle class people. Even the wealthy in CA try to move to a high income school district to avoid private school tuition. It sounds like your kids live in a Boston bubble. I agree that being in the 1% is not rich any more. But we 1 percenters live in a bubble and think we are suffering! We need to wake up to reality! When I leave CA, I realize I live in a bubble too!


----------



## TravelTime (Jun 22, 2018)

am1 said:


> Seems like he is not motivated.  Very hard for someone else to change that.
> 
> The cost of living is a lot more now as everyone wants new stuff, cable/internet, cell phone plans, smart phone, big tvs, netflix, nice vacations and more.  It adds up.  It is good for businesses and keeps people employed but keeps people from getting ahead.  A $10 or $15 minimum wage is not going to make the difference when all the money gets spent on this stuff.  Those jobs should be stepping stones to better higher paying jobs.



This is exactly the problem. People always want more and compare to those doing better. Reality TV and social media has made this much worse. If the minimum wage goes to $15 an hour, then that becomes the new poverty level. I much prefer a capitalistic economy based on hard work than some of the new progressive ideas guanateeing everything for people. Folks lose the incentive to work hard when they get things for free or too easily. Look at Cuba and Venezuela. Some of the far left progressive ideas sound good but will lead us into demise.


----------



## Panina (Jun 22, 2018)

TravelTime said:


> This is exactly the problem. People always want more and compare to those doing better. Reality TV and social media has made this much worse. If the minimum wage goes to $15 an hour, then that becomes the new poverty level. I much prefer a capitalistic economy based on hard work than some of the new progressive ideas guanateeing everything for people. Folks lose the incentive to work hard when they gets things for free or too easily. Look at Cuba and Venezuela. Some of the far left progressive ideas sound good but will lead us into demise.


It is already happening here. I know people who are educated and can get good jobs if they try but they work part time instead to stay below a certain income so they can get medical and other public assistance programs for free and then they complain they don't have money.


----------



## TravelTime (Jun 22, 2018)

Good article but only available to Wall Street Journal Subsribers.

*Growth in Retiring Baby Boomers Strains U.S. Entitlement Programs*
*Census projections see a rapid increase in retiree-age Americans, putting pressure on Social Security*

https://www.wsj.com/articles/retiri...port-the-elderly-1529553660?mod=hp_major_pos4


----------



## WinniWoman (Jun 22, 2018)

Steve Fatula said:


> I was not trying to say I should expect my pension to be able to support me living, it's just one pillar. I was just wondering if that is a decent pension these days out of curiosity. Between that, SS, 401k (each of us), there will be no "reduced" income in our case at least. We always maxed out our contributions, esp. when we had SEP IRAs and we had our own company. But who knows what the future may bring, there are always unexpected things that can majorly change plans! SS almost certainly will have to change before 2030.



I think cops and , for example, and government officials get pensions that are more than most people's salaries- like $50,000+ per year or even over $100,000 for some government officials. Overtime is abused to get even more and then they even somehow get another inside job to rack up a second one. 

And many of these workers do not have low salaries. Not what I consider low salaries. But hey- many private sector workers have low salaries also.

I know a retired couple that has 3 pensions and don't need their SS checks or to tap their savings. Say they have more money then they know what to do with.They have been retired since age 50. 

I have no issue with cops and fireman getting pensions as they risk their lives- but taxpayers shouldn't be on the hook for any other worker's pensions. None. Especially when most people don't have them themselves and struggle to save for their own retirements.


----------



## WinniWoman (Jun 22, 2018)

Panina said:


> It is already happening here. I know people who are educated and can get good jobs if they try but they work part time instead to stay below a certain income so they can get medical and other public assistance programs for free and then they complain they don't have money.



Yes. A lot of people are doing this- educated or not-they are forced to as full time jobs are limited anyway. It doesn't pay for them to work if they have to pay for for health insurance and so on. In some ways I don't blame them. And-many jobs today are not pleasant to work at. People are mean and cut throat and manipulative. Who needs that aggravation and stress? Really- a big difference from the atmosphere of yesterday.


----------



## Eric B (Jun 22, 2018)

It's a bit difficult to weigh in on the pension discussion and avoid getting into politics, but we should all remember that pensions are a form of deferred compensation that the folks that receive them have traded lower up front earnings for in order to receive in their retirement years.  We are fortunate enough to have pensions coming from our military service and I'm currently working for the federal government so will qualify for another pension from that.  My salary is considerably lower working for the government than it would be if I worked in private industry; the pension I am earning makes up for it somewhat, but I recognize that if I didn't have that coming I would need to save more in a 401K to replace that retirement income.  The bottom line for me is that a defined benefit retirement program and a defined contribution one only differ in who bears the risk of performance of the savings; defined benefit ones should be better able to bear it because the risk would be spread over more people.  The problem is that the incentives in the tax and finance area don't really favor companies doing that any more.  As far as taxpayers being on the hook goes, in my opinion the general public, including as their status as taxpayers, shouldn't be treated any different than any other employer/customer whether the employee in question is a cop, a fireman, or any other public servant - if part of the compensation is a defined benefit pension, then that's part of the compensation package.  Since the 1980s the federal employees retirement system has been fully funded up front, so there isn't a hook for taxpayers for that one; there is for the few remaining older federal civil servants and the military.


----------



## WinniWoman (Jun 22, 2018)

Well somehow in the private sector I, as well as many, many others, have unintentionally traded low up front earnings for didlysquat in retirement.

PS Who funded the federally funded retirement system up front? Where did the money come from?

Difference between a private pension (funded by a corporation, and which are pretty much non existent these days) and a public pension, is the latter is funded by who????


----------



## Eric B (Jun 22, 2018)

In FERS, it is funded by deductions from employee pay and contributions from the employing agency.

Can’t speak for any of individual’s earnings, but the folks I know in government that are highly paid are doctors, engineers and lawyers that would be highly paid in the private sector.


----------



## rapmarks (Jun 22, 2018)

bluehende said:


> My wife who ran a home daycare had a degree, professional development requirements, licensing fees, etc.  She had constant inspections from licensing and food safety.  If you want a qualified professional to watch the kids you need to treat them as such.  Trust me no one gets a child development degree and works in a daycare for the money.  I would be willing to bet your daughter had vacation and sick time.  The norms on these issues vary from state to state and should be spelled out in the contract.  I am sorry for the lecture.  I will warn you that the word sitter is very derogatory to the person who has spent their whole life learning how best to help your child develop both physically and physcologically.


I was replying to the person who denied that day care cost that amount, not denigrating day care providers.


----------



## am1 (Jun 22, 2018)

Daycares are more expensive now  because of demand. Wages have not increased as they had been because of more women/men (supply) entering the work force.  Both spouses enter the workforce so combined a good wage can be had.  Kids suffer from having to go to daycare instead of being looked after at home. At least this is how I feel.


----------



## bluehende (Jun 22, 2018)

rapmarks said:


> I was replying to the person who denied that day care cost that amount, not denigrating day care providers.



I knew my lecture was coming off a little strong.  My main point was in using the word sitter.  I can give my wifes lecture by heart if she was called a baby sitter.  So accept my apology if it came off I was singling out you because I used your post to air out a pet peeve.


----------



## SmithOp (Jun 22, 2018)

TravelTime said:


> I am resentful that 60%+ of CA’s state budget goes to pensions and related services and high income earners are overtaxed and being forced out of the state.



60% of the budget is not going to pensions and related services!

60% is going to Education and Health and Human services.  It benefits the younger generation of Californians that you have stated you are concerned for and want to donate your SS to.

I understand you’ve had a bad experience with adoption, and being a small business owner you are acutely aware of how much you pay in taxes.  I hope you can see that it has shaped how you view living in CA.  No different than my own experiences working and living here has shaped my views.

I consider myself lucky that I made a good salary in CA, have saved and lived below means so I can enjoy a comfortable retirement here in CA.  I have no intention of leaving, and I don’t resent having my taxes help people less fortunate in this state.  We all benefit from living here in the state that is in the top ten economies of the world, bigger than many small countries.

http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/budget/2018-19MR/#/BudgetSummary







Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Makai Guy (Jun 22, 2018)

This has gotten vety political. Going back through and trying to cull out the political parts from the barely non-political parts is nearly impossible.  Closing.


----------

