• Alenalda@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 months ago

        Soon as the depression really kicks off and the ai bubble bursts, all those savings people do have are going to be wiped out too.

        • Triasha@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          That’s deeply unfortunate if you were planning to retire next year, but you might just have to live simply for a few years while the market recovers.

          Otherwise, no big deal unless we reach Russian or Argentinian levels of collapse.

          That’s possible. The East Asian demographic cliff, a US debt crisis, global soil collapse, there are plenty of imaginable scenarios.

          But none of them have happened yet, unless you live in Argentina or were a Soviet citizen. The west could continue to get lucky.

        • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Unless everyone has YOLO’d their entire retirement into NVIDA the AI bubble burst isn’t going to wipe out retirement savings to zero. Even the worst drop in the US stock market in history (which triggered the great depression) eventually dropping 90% at its worst recovered nearly half loss in 2 years. Even that drop wasn’t in one day, it happened over months.

  • how_we_burned@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Don’t you all pay into Social Security?

    Isn’t that the mandatory retirement savings system in the US?

    • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Social Security is a joke and a pittance.

      Assuming no other retirement funds: if you earned $200,000/yr you’ll get ~$4000/mo (+/- a good bit depending on the age you retire), if you earn $50,000/yr you’ll get less than half that. $4000/mo isn’t awful, but rent will soak up half that unless you live someplace crappy and/or in the middle of nowhere.

      $1500 month is poverty. Period.

      Social programs in the US suck, if they even exist at all, due to decades of demonization by the right and budget cuts thanks to reduced tax revenue because we have to let the rich hoard more of everything.

      • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        if you earned $200,000/yr

        Note, the max you need to earn to receive the top SS benefit is $176,100 in 2025 (it increases a bit in 2026). So the person earning $176,100 and the person receiving $200,000 get the same social security benefit.

        you’ll get ~$4000/mo

        That’s true if you retire at Full Retirement age (which is 67 years old for nearly all of us on Lemmy). If you delay taking your SS benefit until 70 years old the benefit would be $5100/month. If you take the SS benefit before Full Retirement age at 62 you would only get about $2800/month. To your point, all of these numbers are for that top earner of $176,100. Benefits are reduced for lower working year incomes.

        $1500 month is poverty. Period.

        $1500/month doesn’t meet the federal definition of poverty for an individual, but I agree with you in spirit. However, for a married couple thats $3k/month, thats $36,000/year. Social Security benefits are taxed, but that income would have them in the low 12% tax bracket. Rent/mortgage (largest portion of spending) doesn’t double for two people. That could provide an okay modest retirement in a LCOL area.

        Social Security was never designed to be the only income in retirement. It was one of the legs of the “3 legged stool” meaning Social Security, pension, and savings. Few jobs these days have a traditional pension, but that leg is replace with the 401k/403b/IRA/TSP. Those going into retirement with just Social Security won’t die from exposure to the elements, but it will be a very basic and minimal lifestyle.

        • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          I used the social security ssa.gov calculator.

          I used ”~” to denote approximations, the approximations were due to differences in age of retirement and income.

          I noted there were age ranges.

          I specifically stated “assuming no other retirement funds.”

          $1,500 a month is poverty, federal definitions be damned.

          I appreciate the tuneup, but in no way was anything I said incorrect and pedantry was unwarranted.

      • poVoq@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        That… actually sounds a lot better than I expected. Not too far off other retirement systems in Europe money wise 🤷

        • zod000@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          I imagine the big difference is that most Europeans that retire don’t have to then figure out how to pay for medical care and medication that they require to keep living.

          • Triasha@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            US you get comparatively low cost food and housing, but you have to pay for medical care.

            You win some you lose some.

            Also, in the US you have to eat US food.

            • HubertManne@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              yeah in europe you eat a bit less food. in the us you just alternate taking your daily medications and skip the occasional surgery. its all kinda the same.