I suggest people go to the original link in hosts post and read it for themselves.
He cherry picked the hell out of it since the article was about how people are making more money but not properly saving and expecting the federal government to do it for them, even though, due to the CURRENT social programs each of them will need to pay 16k a year into said programs by the year 2025.
Yes the article if anything is anti-socialist. I was going to break it down and started to but frankly its a waste of time. The gist is that people need to manage their money better, not get hand outs.
One of the more interesting points is that today you spend over 8k just to pay for social programs a year, and by 2025 you will be paying 16+k a year due to less workers in the work force and more retired people. Its estimated that a worker today will pay 220k for social programs in their working time. Just think if they invested that properly instead.
Another one that made me chuckle was like I said in a thread in general it does NOT take 2 incomes these days, and the 'need' for it is a farce.
Quote:
The many anecdotes about declines in living standards and the need for two incomes to keep up in a modern America simply do not represent reality. Quite the opposite; with all the investment in human capital, information infrastructure, and advances in technology, the average household income for Americans has risen faster over the past decade
than at anytime since the early 1960s.
|
I don't know if its misinterpretation, misrepresentation, or not reading the whole thing himself, but this is another one, off the mark and in this case 180 degrees off the mark.