Retirement......pensions?

[crisi]

About 15% of our gross income is retirement savings in various retirement vehicles. 401ks, deferred comp, earmarked savings. No pensions, so we have to do all our savings on our own.

 

[LovableGluttons]

We have a mix. DH is retired Air Force and we signed up for Survivor Benefit Plan should I outlive him.

We both have IRAs, he also has a 401K with employer matching currently, and I have a 403b that my employer stopped contributing to in January.

Since all of the is conceivably dependent on businesses staying in business, the military pension subject to changes from congress, we saved and fully funded our retirement over a period of about 15 years by living on less than one income and saving like mad. We still live on one income and save the other.

Initially we conservative figured on an income of 5% off our savings to sustain us if we could no longer generate an income. Be continuing to save, we could live well on 3% if the return continues to drop and our other retirement plans (in the first paragraph) fall through.

I'd love to travel to exotic places and only work part time when I'm older, so I don't want to be forced to pinch pennies when I'm elderly. I want to have fun!

 

[Judique]

You are keeping 97% and have a fully funded retirement. And you sound angry about that? I bet you don't pay much for your health coverage either. Why should the tax payers pay ours and yours too?

Because that is what was negotiated when they were hired?

I love all this self righteous tax payer garbage.

 

[Marionnette]

*duplicate post*

 

[nowellsl]

Seriously, you're upset about 3%? Welcome to what the majority of us have always had to do....contribute to our retirement. But wait oh yea DH and I don't even have pensions and we have to contribute a whole lot more.

First off, some of you must be reading a lot into my post. I've never said I was angry or upset, just merely stating the facts. Personally, I'm very happy I have a job and I could retire today with 31 years and not pay a dime if I was upset about it. I guess I should have put a little happy face on my post

 

[Marionnette]

Because that is what was negotiated when they were hired?

I love all this self righteous tax payer garbage.

I love it too, but not in the same sense that you do. There is nothing wrong with being upset when the people that you employ (public servants) earn more and receive more in benefits than their private sector counterparts.

And to answer the OP's question. We own our own business. We pay 100% of our own social security (12.4%) and 6.2% for our employees. We also pay into medicare for them. We have no pension. No 401k matching funds. Our retirement is completely on us.

 

[crisi]

Because that is what was negotiated when they were hired?

I love all this self righteous tax payer garbage.

I worked for a company that part of what I negotiated when I was hired was a pension. After three years they gave me a check for around $800 and told me I could transfer it to a 401k. I worked for a company that when I joined they told me they were going to pay me $X. After a few years and a few raises I made $Y. Then the economy tanked. I suddenly made 10% less. Things change. And everyone - individuals, businesses, and the government, need to have flexibility to respond to changes.

I have no issue paying taxes. I think I should pay more taxes. But taxes alone won't be enough. We will need increased taxes and cuts in order to get through our change in circumstances.

 

[nowellsl]

There is nothing wrong with being upset when the people that you employ (public servants) earn more and receive more in benefits than their private sector counterparts.

Earn more????? What state do you live in?

 

[Marionnette]

Earn more????? What state do you live in?

http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/income/2010-08-10-1Afedpay10_ST_N.htm

 

[Judique]

I love it too, but not in the same sense that you do. There is nothing wrong with being upset when the people that you employ (public servants) earn more and receive more in benefits than their private sector counterparts.

And to answer the OP's question. We own our own business. We pay 100% of our own social security (12.4%) and 6.2% for our employees. We also pay into medicare for them. We have no pension. No 401k matching funds. Our retirement is completely on us.

I understand that people may be upset. But attacking an individual, whether it be here or when they are doing their job, is out of line.

If you disagree with the pay and benefits structure of a public servant, and want a change, there are more positive ways to accomplish such change. Stop sitting in front of the computer *****ing on disboards - get out and make the changes.

Many teachers are public servants. In my state they are part of the Maryland State Retirement System. DisneyCrazedMom's idea would be to make a public school job be less attractive to them - ie - you should be satisfied with your (supposed) low health premiums and only 3 per cent contribution. She in effect says they are being paid too much - cash and benefits - for what they do.
In Md they are paid pretty well. But - too attract the best candidates you have to have a good package - hence my 'that is what was negotiated' statement. Taxpayers pay for teachers (and other public servants). Which public servant does DCM want to get rid of? Stop paying so much to? Which services is she willing to do without to keep her tax money?

Where I am many money saving ideas are being put into practice. The same tax payers who gripe about costs are also griping about the 'changes'. Not only reduction in service - but new ways of doing business. The public wants the same old same old, but can't afford it or don't want to pay for it, so they gripe and make nasty comments to public servants - that they hired.

 

[Marionnette]

Umm...I didn't attack any individual in my post.



And you don't know what I am involved with in my private life. Let's just say that I don't just kvetch on an internet message board.

 

[dvcgirl]

I worked for a company that part of what I negotiated when I was hired was a pension. After three years they gave me a check for around $800 and told me I could transfer it to a 401k. I worked for a company that when I joined they told me they were going to pay me $X. After a few years and a few raises I made $Y. Then the economy tanked. I suddenly made 10% less. Things change. And everyone - individuals, businesses, and the government, need to have flexibility to respond to changes.

I have no issue paying taxes. I think I should pay more taxes. But taxes alone won't be enough. We will need increased taxes and cuts in order to get through our change in circumstances.

Absolutely correct. We're "in this" funk for quite a few more years according to the reading I'm doing, because this recession was a straight up "over leveraged" recession. And we have a *long* way to go. Businesses are in decent shape, but the American Consumer is not. Still a ton of debt to pay down.

And while the consumer is in bad shape, most of the States are in horrific shape.

 

[Judique]

I worked for a company that part of what I negotiated when I was hired was a pension. After three years they gave me a check for around $800 and told me I could transfer it to a 401k. I worked for a company that when I joined they told me they were going to pay me $X. After a few years and a few raises I made $Y. Then the economy tanked. I suddenly made 10% less. Things change. And everyone - individuals, businesses, and the government, need to have flexibility to respond to changes.

I have no issue paying taxes. I think I should pay more taxes. But taxes alone won't be enough. We will need increased taxes and cuts in order to get through our change in circumstances.

I had the same thing happen - I changed jobs several times, and always expect changes. That's what contracts and negotiations are for, and why one should save and plan. There is no guarantee in life.

Definitely cuts must come.

 

[Judique]

Umm...I didn't attack any individual in my post.



And you don't know what I am involved with in my private life. Let's just say that I don't just kvetch on an internet message board.

No you did not attack. I copied your post but did not mean that you attacked.

 

[SunnyP4Disney]

DH will retire from the Coast Guard with a pension. He has almost 19 years in now, so 1 more until he's eligible. We also contribute a big percentage of his base pay into the Thrift Savings Plan. I, unfortunately do not have anything retirement wise for myself due to my transitory career, but I plan on going to law school, so I hope to be able to provide for myself in the near future.

DH will also have another career after the military which, hopefully, will provide another way to contribute toward retirement.

 

[candykisses]

I am in a defined pension plan. Our company will match 2% in our 401K and I also have a Roth IRA.

 

[disneyfreakk]

We have no pensions.

DH and I both contribute 15%, with a dollar for dollar 4% match from out company into our 401k.

 

[Pakey]

No pensions for either my husband or myself. I max my 401k every January out of my bonus; during the rest of the year I direct deposit into regular savings. My husband is self employed, I do semi monthly contributions to his SEP IRA; we max that out too.

We have saved a decent amount but I fear it will still not be enough. I don't know if there's a magic number that would make me feel comfortable. Whatever the amount is, it will definitely be less than what my current income is.

 

[Mrs.Reese]

We are both teachers so upon our retirement we will receive 48% of our five highest years averaged which will probably come to around 15K each. As I highly doubt that will be enough we also have IRA's.

 

[Colleen27]

http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/income/2010-08-10-1Afedpay10_ST_N.htm

Teachers aren't federal, though, which is where the big gap exists and besides, those stats fail to control for level of education. Teachers generally earn less than private sector employees with the same level of education (bachelors or masters), and for many the reason they signed on for the lower pay was specifically because of the better fringe benefits. How many other professions expect a masters degree for $40K/year?