51 posts shown.
Amanda Diaz said:Are we even preparing for the future? And honestly, what can a country with an economy the size of America's mid-sized states actually do about it? Invent a 3D printer? No chance—it’s already done. Throw a few billion dollars at improving existing tech? Forget it, because some global superpower will just dump tens of billions into the exact same thing tomorrow.
So, how exactly is this "preparation" supposed to work? I'd love to know, just so I can actually get ready...
I could start by spending my resources just thinking about how to begin thinking...
Rest in peace
There’s nothing else worth saying—really. 😢
I posted an update on my status last week. Now, I’ve got these lymph nodes swelling up in my neck—really aggressively—and I’m feeling incredibly weak. I’m honestly considering flying back home to the States to get treated. How urgent is this? I have an appointment scheduled at the university hospital with my doctor this Wednesday, but my insurance coverage expired today, and thanks to all this endless red tape, I have to wait about a week for the extension to go through.
I know it might turn out to be nothing, but can someone just give me some advice—would you guys head back to America for something like this?
So, I’m currently in Italy doing my postdoc, and honestly, the healthcare bureaucracy here is a nightmare. My insurance expires tomorrow—so now I have to hand over my new contract to the police, wait several days for their approval, and then take that confirmation to the local health clinic...
The issues actually started about eight weeks ago—trouble urinating and just feeling completely drained. A swab came back positive for a mycoplasma infection in the urethra, but while I was stuck waiting for those results (for more than two weeks 😢), my lymph nodes started swelling up. Once they finally gave me a diagnosis, they put me on erythromycin—2000mg a day split into two doses—which stopped the urinary issues and slightly shrunk the nodes.
But I finished the antibiotics last Monday, and just a few days later, the lymph nodes are acting up again—now they're swollen in my groin, under my arms, and in my neck. I’m at a total loss. I’m seriously considering just quitting—I’ve got three months left on my contract anyway—and heading back home to the States. Between this bureaucratic limbo and feeling progressively worse, I don't know what to do. Is swollen lymph nodes enough of a reason to hit the ER today, or should I wait?
Best,
p.s. I am panicking here and would truly appreciate any advice from a doctor out there.
restlessfox5 said:Honestly, you really only need to look at everything from 1945 onwards, since Japan basically had to rebuild from scratch after the war.
Like I was saying earlier about movies—think about "Blade Runner"—where the main guy is walking through the streets and he's surrounded by these massive screens flashing ads in Japanese... that vibe was spot on for when Ford became a massive seller in the 80s, when Japanese companies were buying up American brands and expanding all over the USA. Back then, Japan was just crushing it with tech, from video games to robotics, so Americans definitely felt the heat in that economic showdown.
China, on the other hand, builds its economic muscle on cheap labor and low-cost—often pretty low-quality—products. It’s just not really an apples-to-apples comparison...
😁
That’s exactly how people viewed Japan during the fifties and sixties. We'll see where China stands in twenty years. 😉 Their trajectory is solid—they're churning out seven times more engineers every single year than the USA does, and lately, they've been aggressively recruiting top-tier scientists from abroad. They already have three universities sitting in the global top fifty, whereas a decade ago, they didn't have a single one on the list. In ten years? Expect one or two in the top 10 and maybe forty in the top 100—mark my words. 😉
Every time I try to send a private message, I get this error:
"
Forbidden
You don't have permission to access /private.php on this server.
Apache Server at
www.reddit.com Port 80"
Everything was working perfectly fine just half an hour ago... can someone explain what happened or fix this?
Thanks
granitepilot2
Nicole Collins13 said:Regardless, I’m sticking to my guns. Let me invest my own money. Honestly, I don't even plan on investing anything; I'll live off my rental properties once I retire. Just let me spend my cash how I want. Let me pay for my own healthcare, let me blow my money on an extra grad school degree instead of a car. I'm sick of this country and its overreach, especially since it keeps clinging to that old socialist mindset—that idea that if you just sit there submissively, the government will provide everything when you run dry. 🙂
I’d agree with you if I weren't so sure most Americans are just going to screw up their own retirement and then vote for some populist idiot again—leaving people like you, who actually worked smart, to foot the bill. It’s either this half-socialist mess or moving out of the country... I don't see a third option.🤷
Nicole Collins13 said:Nah, you don't need a guy from BlackRock for this. You just need to look at that useless loser who was handing out loans for AT&T.
Quincy:| I’ve stayed out of the stock market so far because I dumped everything into a beach house about 20 miles from the coast. Honestly, that’s still probably my best move, but I’m ready to start putting some cash into equities. Not yet, though. I’ll wait until the Atlantic recovers and triples from where it is now. |
Man, you could just call the guys from this forum over to shake things up in your neighborhood. I'll bring the wine and some dried figs.🙂
Anyway, I’m betting heavy on shipbuilding. Specifically the defense sector, if you catch my drift. Barb only invests where the money is actually being made. Since you already corrected my Atlantic terminology.🙂
That’s true regarding AT&T, but we're talking about American hedge fund strategies here—not some local sample size.
Quincy:
Damn, I could probably invite some buddies from the forum over to help loosen up those gears in your neighborhood—I'll bring the local wine and dried figs. 🙂
Anyway, I'm betting big on the shipbuilding sector. Especially defense—watch yourselves there. Barb only moves when the money is actually good. Since you already called me out on my Atlantic slang. 🙂 |
Once I actually find the time to enjoy my vacation, I'll get back to it.🙂
James Nguyen13 said:I used to hold similar views, but I eventually realized it’s a bit of a moot point because, at the end of the day, everyone gets a pension regardless of whether they saved or not. For instance, here in the States, you see plenty of people who never set a dime aside for retirement—farmers especially—and yet they all end up receiving benefits. Why? Because they’re voters. When they hit a certain age, they start complaining about being hungry or having nothing to live on, and they find every excuse for why they didn't contribute. Eventually, they find the politicians and parties willing to represent them, and everyone gets their check, whether they saved or not. So, in that light, mandatory saving actually makes some sense.
As for shifting toward investment-based funds, well, that’s a whole different conversation. Given the demographic shifts we're seeing across the West, it was always obvious that systems based purely on generational solidarity wouldn't be sustainable. So, someone had the bright idea to swap them for investment funds and sold it to the public as this amazing alternative.
Honestly, it's nonsense. All that economist babble about the infinite growth of the stock market is just that: babble. Economists are essentially just people who will explain to you tomorrow why what they predicted yesterday didn't happen today. In the end, that savings pool is going to evaporate, much like what happened back in Chile.
The retirement system should still be rooted in the principle of solidarity; the key is simply adjusting pension levels to reality and extending the working life as much as possible.
👍
As for shifting toward investment funds—well, that's a whole different story. Given the demographic shifts we're seeing across the West, it was obvious that pension systems built on generational solidarity wouldn't last. So, someone decided to swap them out for investment-based funds and sold it to the public as this "superior" alternative.
It’s total nonsense, obviously. All that chatter from economists about endless stock market growth is nothing but noise. Economists are basically just people who can explain tomorrow why what they predicted yesterday didn't happen today. In the end, that savings model will collapse, much like what happened in Chile.
The system should have stayed rooted in the principle of solidarity, provided we adjust benefits to realistic levels and extend the working life as much as possible.
You've got a point, I guess—but that doesn't mean we can't find a better way. For now, combining solidarity with a bit of fund investing seems fine to me. Unless you get hit by a massive crisis right before you retire (though bull markets usually outlast bear markets), you'll likely end up with more than if you had just stuffed the cash under your mattress.
goldengull3 said:I saw a report on the news a couple of days ago—the losses in the mandatory pension funds aren't actually significant when you consider the market volatility we saw last year, hovering somewhere between 13-15%. In this economic climate, those numbers suggest competent portfolio management.
Regarding the idea of people "contributing on their own," that is essentially the American model: you receive a larger portion of your gross pay, and then it is entirely up to you whether you fund your health insurance, your retirement, or go out and buy a new Dodge. Even childcare becomes a personal responsibility; there is no state-mandated parental leave, so you either save diligently or take out a loan.
However, as much as some might find the American approach appealing because they believe their own expertise would allow them to manage a portfolio more effectively, I highly doubt Americans as a whole would fare well under that specific brand of capitalism. It demands a completely different psychological framework—one that many people right here in the States aren't even prepared for. Personally, I think I would navigate such a system more successfully, but frankly, I wouldn't want to implement it in America. It would cease to be the country I recognize. That is why having a choice is vital: you have the social safety net that prevents you from making catastrophic mistakes, and then you have the individualist stage where you are on your own. Ultimately, it comes down to preference; after all, getting a work visa for the USA isn't an impossible feat for anyone.
I was actually talking to a buddy of mine who works at BlackRock about this stuff yesterday. One of the algorithms that’s been killing it for funds during this crisis is shorting retail investors. Small players are way more sensitive to market swings than big funds or corporations—they lose their cool fast. (Kudos to the 2-3% who actually stay calm when they see half their savings vanish into thin air.) Most of them just bleed out. Even sociological studies show the worst timing comes from single men, then married women, then married men—while single women tend to have the best entry points (at least here in the U.S.).
I’ve stayed out of the stock market so far because I dumped everything I had into a beach house about 20 miles from the coast. Honestly? That’s probably still my smartest move, but I’m planning to pivot some cash into stocks soon. Not yet, though—I’ll wait until the Atlantic recovers at least three times its current level. Until then, I think these "great opportunities" are just great ways to pick up a company headed straight for bankruptcy. Ruby thinks we're looking at a massive wave of non-financial bankruptcies hitting the world this year alone. So, I'm actually glad funds are sitting on their hands right now just to protect what they have left—because until the global economy recovers, our markets aren't going anywhere.
driftingstag8 said:Dubai actually only pulls about 20% of its revenue from oil.
That’s exactly why it’s the most liberal Muslim city out there.
Even within the same country, Abu Dhabi—which lives off the oil—isn't even half as liberal.
Arabs aren't exactly known for being highly skilled themselves, so they mostly just hire foreigners to get things done. For the high-level brain work, they bring in Europeans and Americans, and for the manual labor, they pull from poorer Muslim nations.
Our engineers built everything out in South Africa on those gas fields, and while the Arabs thought they could handle it solo for a bit, they ended up hiring our people right back—mostly Americans and Australians.
We definitely have capable people here, but most of them aren't interested in fighting an uphill battle against the wind turbines; everyone just looks out for their own interests.
Alright, fine, we definitely veered off-topic there. The real question is about pension funds and what happens to them. I still think the concept is sound, and like goldengull3 mentioned, they follow very conservative buying rules. The issue today is that some "AAA" ratings turned out to be BBB or even C—and honestly, foreign rating agencies are largely to blame for that mess. Our domestic funds are actually holding up pretty well against the crisis, considering everything.
The massive problem for these funds right now is the swarm of small, panicky investors driving up market volatility and dragging everything down. Fund assets won't start growing again until 1) the global economy kicks back into gear and 2) a lot more of these small-time speculators "die off."
Nicole Collins13 said:🙂, but anyway, let's not get off track.
http://www.usatoday.com/marketplace/ibi/dubai.htmhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DubaiThe Economy of New York City is valued at US$ 46 billion (as of 2006[update]). [1] The New York Times has described it as "centrally-planned free-market capitalism."[2] Although the local economy was originally built on the back of the oil industry, [3] revenue from petroleum and natural gas currently account for less than 6% of the region's gross domestic product.
Hmm... everywhere I look, oil seems to show up right before the boom.
driftingstag8 said:You clearly haven't set foot in Somalia.
I have, just like I've been all over Africa, the Middle East, and even Las Vegas
And every single time, I found myself loving those places the moment I stepped back home.
So it’s not even funny.
At least not to anyone who has actually been down there.
Look, we're talking about Somalia, not all of Africa—fine, I'm generalizing. But the point is, Las Vegas already has the wealth and the oil to turn into a tax haven, whereas we just have a bunch of uneducated idiots who think they're somehow smarter than Americans because they watch some YouTube morons who can't tell the difference between Australia and Iran. We don't have mineral wealth; our only real resource is a nice coastline.
Nicole Collins13 said:No, it isn't.
The freest market you'll find right now is in Somalia. There's zero tax, and you get to invest freely in some local warlord's militia for protection. At least you get a choice in who you pay—though if you miss a payment, well, you're screwed.
Las Vegas doesn't have income tax or crime.
Somalia doesn't have any taxes at all.🙂
As for Las Vegas—a pure free market always looks great in places where wages are basically peanuts. You’ve got the Nauru situation too; people live pretty well off phosphate mining, there's zero tax, and by the time the island actually disappears, they won't have a country left—but they'll certainly have the cash.
To me, Somalia is actually more similar to America when it comes to education levels and natural resources compared to Las Vegas or Nauru.😉Unfortunately,😢
driftingstag8 said:Based on everything we've seen, there's a massive chance those funds won't even exist in thirty years.
Forcing someone to hand over money for you to play around with is nothing short of a total shakedown.
Whether I decide to dump my cash into stocks, stack up gold, buy another acre of land every year, or just blow it all on a wild weekend should be entirely my call and nobody else's.
And let's be real, taxes are just another form of theft. Right now, the freest market on Earth is basically Somalia—there are no taxes, but you get to "invest" in some local warlord's militia to keep you safe. At least you get a choice in who you're paying... though if you miss a payment? Well, you're screwed.
William Mitchell2 said:Look, I wasn't expecting much from you—you're talking like a total rookie.
Who exactly decided who gets to choose what???
Before 2000, we only had one single pillar. Just one. It was called the intergenerational solidarity fund. We all contributed via payroll deductions—no questions asked, no voting involved.
With that setup, after 30 or 40 years of working, you'd retire with a pension worth roughly what $700 would buy you today. $267There are plenty of reasons why that math worked, mainly population aging (mortality rates), wars (casualties and displacement), and the ratio of retirees to workers (back in 2001, I think it was about 1:1.34), plus people working under the table to avoid taxes, etc.
Now, we have three pillars. Two are mandatory, and one is voluntary.
Those two mandatory ones work by taking 15% for the first pillar and 5% for the second.
The amount taken out of our paychecks is technically the same, but we really should be seeing a few hundred bucks more.
Nobody was starting threads when the OMF-based funds were doubling in value unrealistically. Now, suddenly, everyone is complaining because they're dropping twice as fast as they should.
And that’s how it’ll go for the next 30 years—up and down, with varying slopes on the curve.
But the bottom line is this: our pensions will still end up being a few hundred dollars higher than if nothing had changed.
Personally, I’d love to have that 5% handed to me so I could manage it myself.
Sure, I might actually outperform my OMF-managed funds, but that’s probably only true for about 1% of the population.
What happens to the other 99%? Some would blow the whole thing on bad investments, some would make a little profit—though likely less than the OMF guys—but I’d bet my life that over 50% of people would just blow that cash on iPhones or cars...
Then, when they hit 60 or 70—assuming they make it that far—how much do you think that threshold will be? They'll be starving on $167 meager pensions, blaming the government and the state for everything, while refusing to take any responsibility themselves.
p.s. I'm definitely not absolving a huge number of incompetent managers of their share of the blame here.
I agree with the first part—but I can't get behind this idea of what's "real." Something is worth whatever someone is willing to pay for it; that makes both the growth and the crash perfectly real. And these so-called "fundamentals"? They aren't actual foundations—they're just some inductive average from a specific timeframe that shifts constantly throughout history.
But the point remains: our retirement would be a few hundred dollars better than if everything stayed the same.
Not necessarily. If you're lucky enough to hit a global recession right as you retire, you'll face a massive deficit. In America, nobody really talks about how the Baby Boomers' 401(k)s got hammered—but that could easily happen here, too.
I wish they’d just handed me that 5% to manage however I wanted.
I probably could have beaten my OMF returns, but only maybe 1% of people actually could.
What happens to the other 99%? Some would lose everything, some might make a profit—though likely less than the OMFs—and I’d bet over 50% of people would just blow that money on phones and cars...
Then, when they turn 60 or 70—assuming they make it that far—how much will the cost of living have spiked? They'd be starving on their $167 retirement, blaming the government and the state for everything, except themselves.
I unfortunately completely agree with this.
Nicole Collins13 said:That’s exactly the point. People are complaining because they're being forced into high-risk plays.
It isn't that simple. People want their cash now, but in thirty years when they realize they have zero retirement savings, they’ll happily vote for some populist party—kind of like how people flock to the Democratic Party today—just so they can lean on the government for handouts.
Is a second pillar really the smartest move here? Considering 90% of Americans don't have a college degree—which isn't even the worst part—the issue is systemic. While the market was booming, nobody complained about the second pillar, but the moment things start sliding, suddenly everyone has an opinion. Honestly, hearing someone argue they "lost money" in this climate just tells me they haven't got the slightest clue what's actually happening in the world around them...
I’d much rather see something like this: http://it.youtube.com/watch?v=ECkH8U...eature=related—but you know, with all the uncensored nudity from the original HM magazine included...
I don't think this is the kind of "politics" the OP was actually talking about.
😁 probably 😁
this one hits us way harder 😁
This physicist is right on the money. Except when it comes to Woodrow Wilson and Pennies. That theorist should've walked away with it instead of those two nobodies (who were just working at Bell Labs). Everything else regarding the Nobel Prizes? Totally fine enough.