Government Shutdown Averted?

[Harry Bosch]

Doesn't change the fact that standard financial advice for ages has been to not have money you'll need (which includes mandatory withdrawals) in the next say 5 years in equities.

Do you comprehend that many many people live paycheck to paycheck?

That many many people have maxed out their credit and live precariously within a hostile system?

That many many people have absolutely nothing saved.

Do you comprehend the fact that wages have stagnated for decades and the cost of living has risen non-stop?

Do you comprehend how many single parents live on the edge?

Do you comprehend how many children go hungry?

Many people cannot afford to miss a paycheck.

It is the sickest inhumanity to not comprehend these things and live in a dream where everybody has to figure our which retirement account to loot in times of trouble. Trouble like when a sick asshole shuts down the government because he uses a stupid wall to gain the admiration of bigots and racists and xenophobes.

So you're saying that people who live paycheck to paycheck should invest all their extra money in equities?

 

[untermensche]

Doesn't change the fact that standard financial advice for ages has been to not have money you'll need (which includes mandatory withdrawals) in the next say 5 years in equities.

Do you comprehend that many many people live paycheck to paycheck?

That many many people have maxed out their credit and live precariously within a hostile system?

That many many people have absolutely nothing saved.

Do you comprehend the fact that wages have stagnated for decades and the cost of living has risen non-stop?

Do you comprehend how many single parents live on the edge?

Do you comprehend how many children go hungry?

Many people cannot afford to miss a paycheck.

It is the sickest inhumanity to not comprehend these things and live in a dream where everybody has to figure our which retirement account to loot in times of trouble. Trouble like when a sick asshole shuts down the government because he uses a stupid wall to gain the admiration of bigots and racists and xenophobes.

So you're saying that people who live paycheck to paycheck should invest all their extra money in equities?

They should diversify.

Dream about having food one day then dream of being able to pay the rent the next.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Doesn't change the fact that standard financial advice for ages has been to not have money you'll need (which includes mandatory withdrawals) in the next say 5 years in equities.

That rule has always seemed logically contradictory to me.

So I start with 5 years' withdrawals in safe investments.

In year 1, I withdraw 20% of my safe investments but to keep to the rule I have to switch enough from risky to safe investments to cover year 6. This is almost exactly the same as withdrawing the money I need in year 1 from the risky investments (probably a little worse since to cover inflation the year 6 amount is a bit more than the year 1 amount...)

No, you generally don't replenish the short term pool when equities are down. Let it get out of balance until times are greener.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Doesn't change the fact that standard financial advice for ages has been to not have money you'll need (which includes mandatory withdrawals) in the next say 5 years in equities.

Do you comprehend that many many people live paycheck to paycheck?

Do you comprehend that we are talking about retirement savings, something that people who live paycheck to paycheck don't have??

(Never mind that most people who live paycheck to paycheck have a spending problem more than an income problem.)

Do you comprehend how many children go hungry?

Do you comprehend that the vast majority of children who go hungry either have mentally ill parents or parents who are more interested in spending money on their object of addiction than on food for their kids?

 

[bleubird]

Do you comprehend that we are talking about retirement savings, something that people who live paycheck to paycheck don't have??

(Never mind that most people who live paycheck to paycheck have a spending problem more than an income problem.)

Do you comprehend how many children go hungry?

Do you comprehend that the vast majority of children who go hungry either have mentally ill parents or parents who are more interested in spending money on their object of addiction than on food for their kids?

A sad sick view of the real world!

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Do you comprehend that we are talking about retirement savings, something that people who live paycheck to paycheck don't have??

(Never mind that most people who live paycheck to paycheck have a spending problem more than an income problem.)

Do you comprehend how many children go hungry?

Do you comprehend that the vast majority of children who go hungry either have mentally ill parents or parents who are more interested in spending money on their object of addiction than on food for their kids?

A sad sick view of the real world!

Calling it sad and sick doesn't change the fact that it's reality.

Look how many hungry kids have parents with money for booze, cigarettes or drugs. The addiction comes first.

 

[lpetrich]

(Never mind that most people who live paycheck to paycheck have a spending problem more than an income problem.)

Do you comprehend how many children go hungry?

Do you comprehend that the vast majority of children who go hungry either have mentally ill parents or parents who are more interested in spending money on their object of addiction than on food for their kids?

Seems to me that many right-wingers seem to think that everybody has an upper-middle-class income or even an upper-class income. Yes, everybody, including those that they claim are not really poor.

 

[jonatha]

Doesn't change the fact that standard financial advice for ages has been to not have money you'll need (which includes mandatory withdrawals) in the next say 5 years in equities.

That rule has always seemed logically contradictory to me.

So I start with 5 years' withdrawals in safe investments.

In year 1, I withdraw 20% of my safe investments but to keep to the rule I have to switch enough from risky to safe investments to cover year 6. This is almost exactly the same as withdrawing the money I need in year 1 from the risky investments (probably a little worse since to cover inflation the year 6 amount is a bit more than the year 1 amount...)

No, you generally don't replenish the short term pool when equities are down. Let it get out of balance until times are greener.

Ah.

So ignore the rule then...

 

[laughing dog]

Do you comprehend that the vast majority of children who go hungry either have mentally ill parents or parents who are more interested in spending money on their object of addiction than on food for their kids?

I assume you refer only to the US because otherwise, your claim appears ludicrous. Do you have a link to actual data to substantiate this claim or is this another example of truthiness?

 

[untermensche]

Do you comprehend that the vast majority of children who go hungry either have mentally ill parents or parents who are more interested in spending money on their object of addiction than on food for their kids?

I assume you refer only to the US because otherwise, your claim appears ludicrous. Do you have a link to actual data to substantiate this claim or is this another example of truthiness?

You will not find any reference for that "fact" he pulled from his ass.

But the issue is the harm caused by suddenly and for no good reason just telling people to not come to work and also not paying them in the time frame the worker had planned to be paid.

The diligent worker who plays the game as it is set out. They submit and trade their labor for money. The new slavery.

But in this game the pay for workers has stagnated for decades while the cost of all things has risen and risen.

A losing game for most.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

A sad sick view of the real world!

Calling it sad and sick doesn't change the fact that it's reality.

Look how many hungry kids have parents with money for booze, cigarettes or drugs. The addiction comes first.

Well according to you, almost all of the hungry kids have parents that are addicts. Therefore fact.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

(Never mind that most people who live paycheck to paycheck have a spending problem more than an income problem.)

Do you comprehend how many children go hungry?

Do you comprehend that the vast majority of children who go hungry either have mentally ill parents or parents who are more interested in spending money on their object of addiction than on food for their kids?

Seems to me that many right-wingers seem to think that everybody has an upper-middle-class income or even an upper-class income. Yes, everybody, including those that they claim are not really poor.

The problem here is that you assume being poor means not feeding your children. If you're poor but spend your money wisely there almost certainly will be enough to feed them, although perhaps not very interesting food. The welfare system provides this level of support even if they have no income.

 

[Elixir]

Seems to me that many right-wingers seem to think that everybody has an upper-middle-class income or even an upper-class income. Yes, everybody, including those that they claim are not really poor.

The problem here is that you assume being poor means not feeding your children. If you're poor but spend your money wisely there almost certainly will be enough to feed them, although perhaps not very interesting food. The welfare system provides this level of support even if they have no income.

Hmmm ... sounds a little like "If people are really starving, then why are there empty tables in restaurants?"

No income often means no transportation, y'know? No transportation might mean difficulty in accessing all those "free" goods that conservatives fear draining their pockets.
One example...