• Hello, this board in now turned off and no new posting.
    Please REGISTER at Anabolic Steroid Forums, and become a member of our NEW community!
  • Check Out IronMag Labs® KSM-66 Max - Recovery and Anabolic Growth Complex

I work 4 jobs and I'm still struggling

Muscle Gelz Transdermals
IronMag Labs Prohormones
Why a higher minimum wage beats welfare payments | SmartBrief

Why a higher minimum wage beats welfare payments

12/17/2013 | Bloomberg

A study of welfare payments to the employed shows that fast-food workers are the biggest recipients of government handouts, with well over 4 in 10 workers receiving welfare payments. That's effectively a subsidy for the fast-food industry, and an argument in favor of higher minimum wages, writes Barry Ritholtz. "Raising the minimum wage to $11.33, the poverty level, effectively shifts the cost of eating greasy French fries and overcooked burgers from taxpayers to fast food consumers -- where they belong," Ritholtz writes.

The Minimum Wage and McDonald's Welfare - Bloomberg
 
it has a huge impact.

And Obama's new federal reserve chairwoman loves inflation and will keep the same destructive policies in place creating even more inflation, at the same time, destroying the poor and middle class. And you said you voted for Obama because of his economic policies? LOL you must hate the middle class and poor to support a policy like that. shame on you.

since when does the executive branch control the FED? since never maybe..doesn't matter who the POTUS appoints they are going to do what's best for the FED, it's not like we don't have 100 years of empirical data showing that or anything.

check with any leading economist in the world or Nobel prize winning economists or the most highly functioning economies in the world and compare their policy between the left and the right in the U.S, and there's a clear winner of the two.

It's not even debatable, the right was against every single policy that built the middle class in the U.S. They were against progressive taxation, against pension plans, against subsidized housing, anti-education, against affordable healthcare, against wages that increase with productivity and earnings.
 
Costco employees are an upgrade from walmarts. you need prior experience to work there and make a good wage. Walmart will hire anyone no matter how inexperienced they are ect . the type of people Costco won't hire. look at the customer service you get at costco compared to Walmart. there's no comparison. Also look at the total bill at costco compared to Walmart. a bill at Walmart is nothing compared to Costco. At Costco people spend way more money than they do at Walmart. no comparison there either. there's no real comparison between the two companies. completely different business models.

No shit.... it is, after all, essentially a comparison of business models that is going on here. Did you not notice that? There wouldn't be much need for debate in a comparison of two completely similar business model, now would there?
 
it has a huge impact.

And Obama's new federal reserve chairwoman loves inflation and will keep the same destructive policies in place creating even more inflation, at the same time, destroying the poor and middle class. And you said you voted for Obama because of his economic policies? LOL you must hate the middle class and poor to support a policy like that. shame on you.

Of Course she does, inflation isn't a product of the system going bad, it is one of the actual foundations of the system. Something that the system needs to operate how we know it. Wright or wrong, the system needs inflation like a car needs a battery (or whatever). If we want no a system without inflation we want another system.
 
and what does the cumulative effect of inflation have on wages again?

your daft you still haven't figured out the scam that the capitalist at the top play. they pay poverty wages, then lend their excess monies back to the middle in bottom in the form of credit where they receive interest payments and on top of that their firms receive massive tax subsidies.

if you think paying poverty wages is the only obligation that these larges firms have to help maintain our society then your utterly clueless on how to achieve economic sustainability.

The part in bold is the model.

I'll add those who think they are "middle-class" who take out 30 year mortgages. A Baby Boomer could pay off a thirty-year mortgage and come out ahead in most cases, sometimes get a good amount of appreciation in your home as the "largest asset."

But for Gen X, Y, and in particular the Millenials, it is mostly 'paying for a place to live.'
 
13 states raising pay for minimum-wage workers

13 states raising pay for minimum-wage workers



The retail-worker strikes that swept the nation in 2013 did not move Congress to raise the minimum wage, but a growing number of states are taking action.

The minimum wage will rise in 13 states this week, and as many as 11 states and Washington, D.C., are expected to consider increases in 2014, according to the National Employment Law Project. Approval is likely in more than half of the 11, says NELP policy analyst Jack Temple.

The trend reflects growing concerns about the disproportionate spread of low-wage jobs in the U.S. economy, creating millions of financially strained workers and putting too little money in consumers' pockets to spur faster economic growth.

On Jan. 1, state minimum wages will be higher than the federal requirement of $7.25 an hour in 21 states, up from 18 two years ago. Temple expects another nine states to drift above the federal minimum by the end of 2014, marking the first time minimum pay in most states will be above the federal level.

"2014 is poised to be a turning point," Temple says. "States are seeing the unemployment rate is going down but job growth is disproportionately concentrated in low-wage industries. (They're) frustrated that Congress is dragging its feet."

Connecticut, New York, New Jersey and Rhode Island legislatures voted to raise the minimum hourly wage by as much as $1, to $8 to $8.70, by Wednesday. In California, a $1 increase to $9 is scheduled July 1. Smaller automatic increases tied to inflation will take effect in nine other states: Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Missouri, Montana, Ohio, Oregon, Vermont and Washington.

Meanwhile, states such as Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Maryland, Minnesota and South Dakota plan to weigh minimum-wage hikes next year through legislation or ballot initiatives.

In Minnesota, the state House and Senate have each passed bills to raise the minimum wage and plan to iron out their differences early next year after failing to approve similar measures the past two decades.

"You're coming out of a deep recession, and people are landing jobs, but they're low-paid," says state Rep. Ryan Winkler, sponsor of the House bill.

The legislative movement has been partly fueled by walkouts this year in at least 100 cities by fast-food workers who are calling for $15-an-hour pay and the right to form unions. Wal-Mart workers have staged similar protests.

While the demonstrations were not explicitly intended to prompt minimum pay increases, they've made the issue" more urgent," Temple says.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that 3.6 million hourly paid workers received wages at or below the federal minimum in 2012?almost 5 percent of all employees on hourly pay schedules.

President Obama recently said he supports legislation in Congress that would lift the federal minimum wage to $10.10 an hour in three steps over two years and then index it to inflation. But the measure faces an uphill climb in Congress.

Proponents of minimum-wage hikes note that low-wage jobs have dominated payroll growth in the 4-year-old recovery, and increases over the past four decades have not kept pace with inflation.

Opponents say the increases raise employer expenses and will lead to layoffs. "If your costs are going up and you can't raise prices, you have to find a way to produce the same product at a lower cost," says Michael Saltsman, a research fellow at the Employment Policies Institute.

Where minimum wage is going up

On Jan. 1, the minimum wage in 13 states will increase to these amounts.

minimum%20wage.png
 
Lol Bowden, you're a joke. You probably have no idea what 'hard work' is. Now you're telling me you can't retire off of a 6 digit income after 30 years :lol:

It depends on how much of your income you can save for retirement and what standard of living you want in retirement.
Most people have no clue as to how much money it takes to retire on and live at the same standard of living they had prior to retirement.

In example someone starting a career at 25 that is making 100k a year and that saves 25% of their income for 30 years would not have saved enough for retirement at 55.
If they live to 92, they would be around 1.8 million dollars short of having enough saved for retirement to maintain their standard of living.
Go here and plug the numbers into this calculator.

Retirement Calculator | CNNMoney

This calculator estimates how much you'll need to save for retirement. To make sure you're thinking about the long haul, we assume you'll live to age 92. But you could live to be 100 or incur large medical bills early on in retirement that may raise your costs even further. Social Security is factored into these calculations, but other sources of income, such as pensions and annuities, are not. All calculations are pre-tax.This calculator estimates how much you'll need to save for retirement. To make sure you're thinking about the long haul, we assume you'll live to age 92. But you could live to be 100 or incur large medical bills early on in retirement that may raise your costs even further. Social Security is factored into these calculations, but other sources of income, such as pensions and annuities, are not. All calculations are pre-tax.
 
Last edited:
Based on this thread some of you do not think about the future and are in for a nasty reality shock as to how much you are going to be dependent on government benefits for survival when you retire if you ever can.
Anyone that is not saving and investing to hit a target at least *8 of their pretax gross salary for retirement savings had better pray that uncle sam is always around to take taxes from other people and redistribute their money to you.
 
Or own some land and learn to become self reliant.

easily said when you are in your 40's and 50's but no so easily done when your in your 70's and 80's
 

The unemployment trends cannot be attributed just to increases in minimum wage.
The trend of increases in teenage unemployment illustrated on that graph is associated with the overall trend increase in unemployment that started during the later part of 2007 just before the great recession hit in early 2008
 
Graph: Unemployment rate (seasonally adjusted)

Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Population Survey


[TABLE="width: 610"]
[TR]
[TD]
LNS14000000_300505_1388865310948.gif
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]



Series Id: LNS14000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Unemployment Rate
Labor force status: Unemployment rate
Type of data: Percent or rate
Age: 16 years and over

[TABLE="class: regular-data"]
[TR]
[TH]Year[/TH]
[TH]Jan[/TH]
[TH]Feb[/TH]
[TH]Mar[/TH]
[TH]Apr[/TH]
[TH]May[/TH]
[TH]Jun[/TH]
[TH]Jul[/TH]
[TH]Aug[/TH]
[TH]Sep[/TH]
[TH]Oct[/TH]
[TH]Nov[/TH]
[TH]Dec[/TH]
[TH]Annual[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TH]2003[/TH]
[TD]5.8[/TD]
[TD]5.9[/TD]
[TD]5.9[/TD]
[TD]6.0[/TD]
[TD]6.1[/TD]
[TD]6.3[/TD]
[TD]6.2[/TD]
[TD]6.1[/TD]
[TD]6.1[/TD]
[TD]6.0[/TD]
[TD]5.8[/TD]
[TD]5.7[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: even"]
[TH]2004[/TH]
[TD]5.7[/TD]
[TD]5.6[/TD]
[TD]5.8[/TD]
[TD]5.6[/TD]
[TD]5.6[/TD]
[TD]5.6[/TD]
[TD]5.5[/TD]
[TD]5.4[/TD]
[TD]5.4[/TD]
[TD]5.5[/TD]
[TD]5.4[/TD]
[TD]5.4[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TH]2005[/TH]
[TD]5.3[/TD]
[TD]5.4[/TD]
[TD]5.2[/TD]
[TD]5.2[/TD]
[TD]5.1[/TD]
[TD]5.0[/TD]
[TD]5.0[/TD]
[TD]4.9[/TD]
[TD]5.0[/TD]
[TD]5.0[/TD]
[TD]5.0[/TD]
[TD]4.9[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: even"]
[TH]2006[/TH]
[TD]4.7[/TD]
[TD]4.8[/TD]
[TD]4.7[/TD]
[TD]4.7[/TD]
[TD]4.6[/TD]
[TD]4.6[/TD]
[TD]4.7[/TD]
[TD]4.7[/TD]
[TD]4.5[/TD]
[TD]4.4[/TD]
[TD]4.5[/TD]
[TD]4.4[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TH]2007[/TH]
[TD]4.6[/TD]
[TD]4.5[/TD]
[TD]4.4[/TD]
[TD]4.5[/TD]
[TD]4.4[/TD]
[TD]4.6[/TD]
[TD]4.7[/TD]
[TD]4.6[/TD]
[TD]4.7[/TD]
[TD]4.7[/TD]
[TD]4.7[/TD]
[TD]5.0[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: even"]
[TH]2008[/TH]
[TD]5.0[/TD]
[TD]4.9[/TD]
[TD]5.1[/TD]
[TD]5.0[/TD]
[TD]5.4[/TD]
[TD]5.6[/TD]
[TD]5.8[/TD]
[TD]6.1[/TD]
[TD]6.1[/TD]
[TD]6.5[/TD]
[TD]6.8[/TD]
[TD]7.3[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TH]2009[/TH]
[TD]7.8[/TD]
[TD]8.3[/TD]
[TD]8.7[/TD]
[TD]9.0[/TD]
[TD]9.4[/TD]
[TD]9.5[/TD]
[TD]9.5[/TD]
[TD]9.6[/TD]
[TD]9.8[/TD]
[TD]10.0[/TD]
[TD]9.9[/TD]
[TD]9.9[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: even"]
[TH]2010[/TH]
[TD]9.8[/TD]
[TD]9.8[/TD]
[TD]9.9[/TD]
[TD]9.9[/TD]
[TD]9.6[/TD]
[TD]9.4[/TD]
[TD]9.5[/TD]
[TD]9.5[/TD]
[TD]9.5[/TD]
[TD]9.5[/TD]
[TD]9.8[/TD]
[TD]9.3[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TH]2011[/TH]
[TD]9.1[/TD]
[TD]9.0[/TD]
[TD]8.9[/TD]
[TD]9.0[/TD]
[TD]9.0[/TD]
[TD]9.1[/TD]
[TD]9.0[/TD]
[TD]9.0[/TD]
[TD]9.0[/TD]
[TD]8.9[/TD]
[TD]8.6[/TD]
[TD]8.5[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: even"]
[TH]2012[/TH]
[TD]8.3[/TD]
[TD]8.3[/TD]
[TD]8.2[/TD]
[TD]8.1[/TD]
[TD]8.2[/TD]
[TD]8.2[/TD]
[TD]8.2[/TD]
[TD]8.1[/TD]
[TD]7.8[/TD]
[TD]7.9[/TD]
[TD]7.8[/TD]
[TD]7.8[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TH]2013[/TH]
[TD]7.9[/TD]
[TD]7.7[/TD]
[TD]7.6[/TD]
[TD]7.5[/TD]
[TD]7.6[/TD]
[TD]7.6[/TD]
[TD]7.4[/TD]
[TD]7.3[/TD]
[TD]7.2[/TD]
[TD]7.3[/TD]
[TD]7.0[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
 
Have 10 kids, one of them should take care of you. :lol:

That's exactly why a lot of people in poverty have large families in other country's and generations ago in the US. Childless married couples had nobody to take care of them in old age.
 
The unemployment trends cannot be attributed just to increases in minimum wage.
The trend of increases in teenage unemployment illustrated on that graph is associated with the overall trend increase in unemployment that started during the later part of 2007 just before the great recession hit in early 2008

that's also why it doesn't scale linearly, but it's a good try for the low wagers. Comparative economics across the OECD blows that graph away with empirical data.
 
Minimum Wage, Maximum Stupidity

by Peter Schiff
July 13, 2009


In a free market, demand is always a function of price: the higher the price, the lower the demand. What may surprise most politicians is that these rules apply equally to both prices and wages. When employers evaluate their labor and capital needs, cost is a primary factor. When the cost of hiring low-skilled workers moves higher, jobs are lost. Despite this, minimum wage hikes, like the one set to take effect later this month, are always seen as an act of governmental benevolence. Nothing could be further from the truth.
When confronted with a clogged drain, most of us will call several plumbers and hire the one who quotes us the lowest price. If all the quotes are too high, most of us will grab some Drano and a wrench, and have at it. Labor markets work the same way. Before bringing on another worker, an employer must be convinced that the added productivity will exceed the added cost (this includes not just wages, but all payroll taxes and other benefits.) So if an unskilled worker is capable of delivering only $6 per hour of increased productivity, such an individual is legally unemployable with a minimum wage of $7.25 per hour.
Low-skilled workers must compete for employers' dollars with both skilled workers and capital. For example, if a skilled worker can do a job for $14 per hour that two unskilled workers can do for $6.50 per hour each, then it makes economic sense for the employer to go with the unskilled labor. Increase the minimum wage to $7.25 per hour and the unskilled workers are priced out of their jobs. This dynamic is precisely why labor unions are such big supporters of minimum wage laws. Even though none of their members earns the minimum wage, the law helps protect their members from having to compete with lower-skilled workers.
Employers also have the choice of whether to employ people or machines. For example, an employer can hire a receptionist or invest in an automated answering system. The next time you are screaming obscenities into the phone as you try to have a conversation with a computer, you know what to blame for your frustration.
[TABLE="width: 125, align: left"]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
There are numerous other examples of employers substituting capital for labor simply because the minimum wage has made low-skilled workers uncompetitive. For example, handcarts have replaced skycaps at airports. The main reason fast-food restaurants use paper plates and plastic utensils is to avoid having to hire dishwashers.
As a result, many low-skilled jobs that used to be the first rung on the employment ladder have been priced out of the market. Can you remember the last time an usher showed you to your seat in a dark movie theater? When was the last time someone other than the cashier not only bagged your groceries, but also loaded them into your car? By the way, it won't be long before the cashiers themselves are priced out of the market, replaced by automated scanners, leaving you to bag your purchases with no help whatsoever.
The disappearance of these jobs has broader economic and societal consequences. First jobs are a means to improve skills so that low-skilled workers can offer greater productivity to current or future employers. As their skills grow, so does their ability to earn higher wages. However, remove the bottom rung from the employment ladder and many never have a chance to climb it.
So the next time you are pumping your own gas in the rain, do not just think about the teenager who could have been pumping it for you, think about the auto mechanic he could have become ? had the minimum wage not denied him a job. Many auto mechanics used to learn their trade while working as pump jockeys. Between fill-ups, checking tire pressure, and washing windows, they would spend a lot of time helping ? and learning from ? the mechanics.
[TABLE="width: 125, align: right"]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Because the minimum wage prevents so many young people (including a disproportionate number of minorities) from getting entry-level jobs, they never develop the skills necessary to command higher paying jobs. As a result, many turn to crime, while others subsist on government aid. Supporters of the minimum wage argue that it is impossible to support a family on the minimum wage. While that is true, it is completely irrelevant, as minimum wage jobs are not designed to support families. In fact, many people earning the minimum wage are themselves supported by their parents.
The way it is supposed to work is that people do not choose to start families until they can earn enough to support them. Lower-wage jobs enable workers to eventually acquire the skills necessary to earn wages high enough to support a family. Does anyone really think a kid with a paper route should earn a wage high enough to support a family?
The only way to increase wages is to increase worker productivity. If wages could be raised simply by government mandate, we could set the minimum wage at $100 per hour and solve all problems. It should be clear that, at that level, most of the population would lose their jobs, and the remaining labor would be so expensive that prices for goods and services would skyrocket. That's the exact burden the minimum wage places on our poor and low-skilled workers, and ultimately every American consumer.
Since our leaders cannot even grasp this simple economic concept, how can we expect them to deal with the more complicated problems that currently confront us?
Minimum Wage, Maximum Stupidity by Peter Schiff



*Singapore has no minimum wage, a 2% underemployment rate and the third highest incomes in the world*
 
The unemployment trends cannot be attributed just to increases in minimum wage.
The trend of increases in teenage unemployment illustrated on that graph is associated with the overall trend increase in unemployment that started during the later part of 2007 just before the great recession hit in early 2008

sure it can. the recession didn't start until late 2008.
 
Based on this thread some of you do not think about the future and are in for a nasty reality shock as to how much you are going to be dependent on government benefits for survival when you retire if you ever can.

I think many - including a certain percentage of Baby Boomers will work until they drop. Gen Xers, Yers, and Millenials will work until they are too old to work physically or mentally. The scary part is: what type of jobs will they have?

The few that are investing money in certain areas, that have enough to invest and get sufficient returns will be able to sop working before they are too old to work.

Statistically, that is a small number.

Anyone that is not saving and investing to hit a target at least *8 of their pretax gross salary for retirement savings had better pray that uncle sam is always around to take taxes from other people and redistribute their money to you.

8 percent? I remember that figure. It was the standard target before the Financial downturn.

Now, how many people are getting 8% returns?
 
Muscle Gelz Transdermals
IronMag Labs Prohormones
Minimum Wage, Maximum Stupidity

by Peter Schiff
July 13, 2009


In a free market, demand is always a function of price: the higher the price, the lower the demand. What may surprise most politicians is that these rules apply equally to both prices and wages. When employers evaluate their labor and capital needs, cost is a primary factor. When the cost of hiring low-skilled workers moves higher, jobs are lost. Despite this, minimum wage hikes, like the one set to take effect later this month, are always seen as an act of governmental benevolence. Nothing could be further from the truth.
When confronted with a clogged drain, most of us will call several plumbers and hire the one who quotes us the lowest price. If all the quotes are too high, most of us will grab some Drano and a wrench, and have at it. Labor markets work the same way. Before bringing on another worker, an employer must be convinced that the added productivity will exceed the added cost (this includes not just wages, but all payroll taxes and other benefits.) So if an unskilled worker is capable of delivering only $6 per hour of increased productivity, such an individual is legally unemployable with a minimum wage of $7.25 per hour.
Low-skilled workers must compete for employers' dollars with both skilled workers and capital. For example, if a skilled worker can do a job for $14 per hour that two unskilled workers can do for $6.50 per hour each, then it makes economic sense for the employer to go with the unskilled labor. Increase the minimum wage to $7.25 per hour and the unskilled workers are priced out of their jobs. This dynamic is precisely why labor unions are such big supporters of minimum wage laws. Even though none of their members earns the minimum wage, the law helps protect their members from having to compete with lower-skilled workers.
Employers also have the choice of whether to employ people or machines. For example, an employer can hire a receptionist or invest in an automated answering system. The next time you are screaming obscenities into the phone as you try to have a conversation with a computer, you know what to blame for your frustration.
[TABLE="width: 125, align: left"]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
There are numerous other examples of employers substituting capital for labor simply because the minimum wage has made low-skilled workers uncompetitive. For example, handcarts have replaced skycaps at airports. The main reason fast-food restaurants use paper plates and plastic utensils is to avoid having to hire dishwashers.
As a result, many low-skilled jobs that used to be the first rung on the employment ladder have been priced out of the market. Can you remember the last time an usher showed you to your seat in a dark movie theater? When was the last time someone other than the cashier not only bagged your groceries, but also loaded them into your car? By the way, it won't be long before the cashiers themselves are priced out of the market, replaced by automated scanners, leaving you to bag your purchases with no help whatsoever.
The disappearance of these jobs has broader economic and societal consequences. First jobs are a means to improve skills so that low-skilled workers can offer greater productivity to current or future employers. As their skills grow, so does their ability to earn higher wages. However, remove the bottom rung from the employment ladder and many never have a chance to climb it.
So the next time you are pumping your own gas in the rain, do not just think about the teenager who could have been pumping it for you, think about the auto mechanic he could have become ? had the minimum wage not denied him a job. Many auto mechanics used to learn their trade while working as pump jockeys. Between fill-ups, checking tire pressure, and washing windows, they would spend a lot of time helping ? and learning from ? the mechanics.
[TABLE="width: 125, align: right"]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Because the minimum wage prevents so many young people (including a disproportionate number of minorities) from getting entry-level jobs, they never develop the skills necessary to command higher paying jobs. As a result, many turn to crime, while others subsist on government aid. Supporters of the minimum wage argue that it is impossible to support a family on the minimum wage. While that is true, it is completely irrelevant, as minimum wage jobs are not designed to support families. In fact, many people earning the minimum wage are themselves supported by their parents.
The way it is supposed to work is that people do not choose to start families until they can earn enough to support them. Lower-wage jobs enable workers to eventually acquire the skills necessary to earn wages high enough to support a family. Does anyone really think a kid with a paper route should earn a wage high enough to support a family?
The only way to increase wages is to increase worker productivity. If wages could be raised simply by government mandate, we could set the minimum wage at $100 per hour and solve all problems. It should be clear that, at that level, most of the population would lose their jobs, and the remaining labor would be so expensive that prices for goods and services would skyrocket. That's the exact burden the minimum wage places on our poor and low-skilled workers, and ultimately every American consumer.
Since our leaders cannot even grasp this simple economic concept, how can we expect them to deal with the more complicated problems that currently confront us?
Minimum Wage, Maximum Stupidity by Peter Schiff



*Singapore has no minimum wage, a 2% underemployment rate and the third highest incomes in the world*

Peter Schiff is an investment broker and commentator and not a trained economist.

And in your reference to Singapore you lack to mention that it has a national collective bargaining agreement which is why there is no minimum wage laws. The number of highly functioning economy's in the world that have no minimum wage laws OR national collective bargaining equals ZERO.
 
I think many - including a certain percentage of Baby Boomers will work until they drop. Gen Xers, Yers, and Millenials will work until they are too old to work physically or mentally. The scary part is: what type of jobs will they have?

The few that are investing money in certain areas, that have enough to invest and get sufficient returns will be able to sop working before they are too old to work.

Statistically, that is a small number.



8 percent? I remember that figure. It was the standard target before the Financial downturn.

Now, how many people are getting 8% returns?

The 8 refers to a pretax salary multiplier not a 8% return on investment.
Someone making say pretax 100k a year at a minimum should target to have 800k saved for retirement when they retire.
As to 8% ROI, I have one investment that has increased 49% since I bought it two years ago.

There are opportunities out there, you just have to do in-depth Due Diligence and ignore all of the noise you see on the financial channels.

The people that put money into stocks and then held when it seemed that the financial world was coming to an end are up huge.
In example in 2009 I bought a S&P index mutual fund at under 700 and now it is at 1831
 
Last edited:
The 8 refers to a pretax salary multiplier not a 8% return on investment.
Someone making say pretax 100k a year at a minimum should target to have 800k saved for retirement when they retire.
As to 8% ROI, I have one investment that has increased 49% since I bought it two years ago.

There are opportunities out there, you just have to do in-depth Due Diligence and ignore all of the noise you see on the financial channels.

The people that put money into stocks and then held when it seemed that the financial world was coming to an end are up huge.
In example in 2009 I bought a S&P index mutual fund at under 700 and now it is at 1831

Good on you Bowden.

Yes, it's about being smart. Research.

Cheers.
 
Back
Top