Skip to comments.The Real Reason People Don't Save Enough for Retirement
Posted on 10/02/2015 6:30:09 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Aesop would have had a straightforward explanation for why some people just cant manage to save up for retirement: Some people are born antsindustrious and in possession of great willpowerwhile others are grasshoppers, living only for today.
Millennia later, sorting workers into personality-specific boxes is still the preferred way of thinking about how to get people to put more money into savings. An otherwise thoughtful survey of over 1,000 individuals and interviews with 50 people by the MetLife Mature Markets Institute identifies no fewer than 10 different variations on the grasshopper: There are Snoozers, Oversleepers, Stewers, Brewers. And then there are Preemptive Planners, whose radar screens are populated with future risks. If people fit into these neat buckets, the conventional savings wisdom goes, then the solution is to educate the grasshoppers to start behaving more like ants.
MetLife isnt wrong to dwell on personality types. Researchers such as Angela Duckworth, a professor of psychology at the University of Pennsylvania, have found convincing links between personality traits and savings. Duckworth doesnt talk about oversleepers, but about the Big Five personality traits: conscientiousness, agreeableness, neuroticism, openness, and extroversion. Conscientious types, shes found, tend to save more money.
But while MetLife and Duckworth may have identified some traits associated with inadequate saving, telling people to buckle down is unlikely to do very much, because, by adulthood, personality traits are more or less fixed. A lack of discipline or joie de vivre are hardly the main reasons some people dont put enough into their 401(k)s or IRAs; the blame lies not with individuals but with the nations savings institutions.
Even if someone has access to an IRA or a 401(k), its difficult to stash away moneythere are always bills to pay or relatives in need of financial assistance.
(Excerpt) Read more at theatlantic.com ...
Seriously. Posting anything written by this socialist b!tch should be considered a crime. Go Google here and see what she proposed as a mucky muck in the Clinton Administration.
She was one of the early “takers”. Take/assess your 401Ks 20% to redistribute. Tax the hell out of you because you save.
Frankly, I’m astonished anyone takes here for an “economist” any more.
Just another Clinton GHOUL hiding out in Obama’s America of struggle trying to sell the same old tired socialist sh!t.
People are free to do whatever they want and handle their finances however they choose.
What really, really chaps my *ss is that then the government turns around, puts a gun to MY head, sticks its big mitt into MY pocket, and robs ME to pay for THEIR refusal to plan ahead.
Uh....because they’re tapped out? That plus they can’t get any interest on their savings these days anyway.
I long ago came to the conclusion that the Government does not want us to save. It wants us to spend, spend, spend. Why?
1. To stimulate the Economy
2. So we will be totally dependent on Government programs in our dottage
here = her.....
And there always will be ants that live and grasshoppers that starve to death.
Thanks for posting. Excellent read.
They have already been laying the groundwork for years to do just that.
You will be issued worthless bonds instead, and your Social Security, taxes, Medicare, and access to any other healthcare will be tied to your "cooperation."
You misspelled a word. It should say “her.”
You could be right. My point was that recounting anything this GHOUL has to say is a form of useless masochism. Frankly, it is an insult to even see her name here.
Yes. I was pissed. See post 5
Oh, absolutely. That’s the way it is with Marxists. What’s yours is mine.
The Bible describes most of the Patriarchs working until they died.
Not sure where this idea that people are entitled to a period of leasure on this earth came from, but it absolutely wasn’t the God of the bible.
Principles for stewardship yes.
And there are the commands to be fruitful and multiply, to love one another, and for parents not to vex their children. Do all three of those and your kids will probably look after you if you become incapacitated.
But a life of ease? That’s not promised or deserved.
it also sounds unfulfilling.
Nothing this bitch writes is anything but socialist, tax the hell our of you claptrap.
She wants to nationalize retirement savings. Her idea is to pay you 2 to 3% on your money... that is no retirement at all. It is slow death by a thousand cuts.
Yeah, like that worked out well with social security.
That said, a positive 2 t 3% looks good by comparison to now.
. . .and then there are us ants who get placed in untenable positions: extended illness, unexpected layoffs, emergencies. . .
OH, NOT the TSPs. That’s THEIR PEOPLE’S MONEY. But OURS ? There for the taking. . .
Honestly...if I work much beyond 70, I WILL die. Hoping to retire sooner rather than later...and then work at what I WANT to work at! Whatever that may be.
Oh, perfect. The gov't has done such a great job managing SS, let's reward them with another chunk of money from which they can steal. Personally, Bush's attempt to let the individual manage their SS account was a great idea, but people are so damn stupid and lazy they let the opportunity slide by. My Mom worked 48 years, with both she and her employer paying into SS all that time. She retired at age 66 and died 8 months later. Guess who gets to keep her money? Most people have the economic IQ of dust.
When the government tales 12.4% of your lifetime earnings for Social Security, it's harder to save on your own.
When the government *takes*
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.