Tell us something we don’t know.

[scootr]

I read somewhere that if the govt. gave every newborn a $7k treasury bond that could not be touched until 65 yrs old, that everybody would have $1m at retirement age.

 

[steve tym]

I read somewhere that if the govt. gave every newborn a $7k treasury bond that could not be touched until 65 yrs old, that everybody would have $1m at retirement age.

How about if the parents did that instead of the govt.?

 

[neverfailyou]

How about if the parents did that instead of the govt.?

I’d add “also family members aunts, uncles and relatives could contribute to the bond purchase”

 

[sixdogs]

How about if the parents did that instead of the govt.?

I’d add “also family members aunts, uncles and relatives could contribute to the bond purchase”

A lot of people do this for the kids but along the way some "emergency" pops up and poof, the $$ gets spent figuring they'll make it up later. It never happens.

Those emergencies would be for a cruise, tires for the car, an insurance premium or large screen TV. Lots of lessons being taught here.

Always pay yourself first and the rest will figure itself out.

 

[WinterDeere]

Interesting bits on how new tech changes perspective and daily life:

 

[WinterDeere]

I read somewhere that if the govt. gave every newborn a $7k treasury bond that could not be touched until 65 yrs old, that everybody would have $1m at retirement age.

… and then surely the savings required for realistically comfortable retirement would increase by about $1m. Capitalism doesn’t just generate a pyramid of wealth distribution, it fundamentally depends on it. We can only live comfortably when we have peons available to do the labor of society.

This is the fundamental difference between left and right political thinking. “Everyone” vs “anyone”. Put simply, anyone can thrive in a capitalist system, but not everyone. “Everyone” requires socialism.

 

[scootr]

… and then surely the savings required for realistically comfortable retirement would increase by about $1m. Capitalism doesn’t just generate a pyramid of wealth distribution, it fundamentally depends on it. We can only live comfortably when we have peons available to do the labor of society.

This is the fundamental difference between left and right political thinking. “Everyone” vs “anyone”. Put simply, anyone can thrive in a capitalist system, but not everyone. “Everyone” requires socialism.

Yes, but. Assuming that same newborn worked and saved at a reasonable rate they would have their own retirement savings to add to the $1m. Maybe even match it if we could teach money management and investment in grade school

 

[Rockbadchild]

… and then surely the savings required for realistically comfortable retirement would increase by about $1m. Capitalism doesn’t just generate a pyramid of wealth distribution, it fundamentally depends on it. We can only live comfortably when we have peons available to do the labor of society.

This is the fundamental difference between left and right political thinking. “Everyone” vs “anyone”. Put simply, anyone can thrive in a capitalist system, but not everyone. “Everyone” requires socialism.

Therefore no one.

 

[WinterDeere]

Yes, but. Assuming that same newborn worked and saved at a reasonable rate they would have their own retirement savings to add to the $1m. Maybe even match it if we could teach money management and investment in grade school

True, but then wouldn’t their earned savings be worth less, as a fractional portion of average savings and/or anticipated expenses? If the dollar is worth less, due to everyone having more of them, that affects your earned dollars the same as this granted investment. Scarcity is the only thing creating value, whether we’re talking about Hemi Cudas or dollar bills.

I like the idea of a match, but would prefer even more to just not have my invested income taxed in the first place, rather than taxed and then given back as match.

 

[DarkBlack]

IPA’s….Because its very substantially easier to brew this highly-acidic concoction, it has become the most popular style of basement- and garage-born microbreweries, and the American public has now developed a taste for it, somehow equating it with "good".

I’m not sure if your post is all your thoughts or if you copied it from somewhere.
I’ve got a couple disagreeing points to make. First regarding IPA’s.
IPA’s are not a very popular starter garage/basement beers. They are by far, the most costly to produce, have the highest raw ingredient count, require the most sugars to produce the high alcohol content, and require far more expensive hops. Brewers progress to making IPA’s after learning from simpler, and much cheaper styles

The other point is regarding the switch to inexpensive filler ingredients like rice and corn in the 20th century US. It’s been my understanding, that a large driver behind this was not only the scarcity of the wheat, but from the majority of male drinkers being overseas fighting in the wars. The remaining women population who weren’t really beer drinkers were swayed over to being consumers, by the marketing image thought up by the big brewing companies to attract them, with the taste of a much lighter beer resulting from using rice and corn