Can't afford to retire in the US? There's...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
8,576
Location
Ohio
...Always Panama. http://redtape.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/...s-always-panama. This story is just ridiculous or I mean the couple in this story is. They retired in their 50's and the wife receives a generous $3000/month pension and most likely health insurance from being a civilian employee in the Navy (plus in about 5 years she'll receive probably over $1500 in Social Security) and her husband does have some 401K retirement and he'll must likely receive over $1100 in social security in 3 years.

So add it all up, pensions, Social Security, some 401K and they could well be bringing in over $6000/month in retirement at least eventually over the next few years. And they say they can't retire anywhere in America. Plus they have been working their whole life and should own a house by now. But forget all that and still they can't afford to retire on $3000/month? Really? So they leave their 4 grown children and grandchildren to live in Panama. Which by the way isn't all that much cheaper since they charge gringos more for everything than natives. And they're going to spend all their money they draw from the US economy in Panama. It's selfish, spoiled people like that who are partly responsible for the way the economy is.

This story reminded me of the Baby Boomer thread. This couple just seems like selfish idiots that just wanted to move to a tropical setting and rationalized it by saying it's all they can afford.
 
Wow. A post dripping with so much jealousy.

Plain and simple-it's their money that they've earned and they're entitled to spend it as they see fit, and in any country they see fit. Unless comrade, you plan to put up a wall to keep your fellow countrymen from escaping.

And just as an FYI-I wouldn't want to try to live on just $3000/month either-that's a scant $36,000 before taxes. And another FYI-at one time my wife and I seriously considered buying a home in Italy for our eventual retirement (but decided on our lake house instead).
 
I think both you guys are missing the point.

While there are plenty of cheap places in the United States (in Tonopah Nevada, you can get a nice apartment for $250.00 a month), this is basically an infomercial advertisement.

In the past three years I have noticed a surge of these trying to get Baby Boomers to retire in foreign countries. There even have been hints for people to ship their relatives to nursing homes in places as far away as India.

I have also seen ads suggesting that people can retire full time as a passenger on a cruise ship (personally, I would rather jump into a wood chipper).

This is all about making money.
 
Originally Posted By: mechanicx
...Always Panama. http://redtape.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/...s-always-panama. This story is just ridiculous or I mean the couple in this story is. They retired in their 50's and the wife receives a generous $3000/month pension and most likely health insurance from being a civilian employee in the Navy (plus in about 5 years she'll receive probably over $1500 in Social Security) and her husband does have some 401K retirement and he'll must likely receive over $1100 in social security in 3 years.

So add it all up, pensions, Social Security, some 401K and they could well be bringing in over $6000/month in retirement at least eventually over the next few years. And they say they can't retire anywhere in America. Plus they have been working their whole life and should own a house by now.


Wow. You must be an angry person to go after the couple in this story. Where does it say that their pension will be $6,000 a month? As far as Social Security goes, they paid into the fund, and are entitled to receive their social security because they worked long enough, and contributed enough, to receive a benefit.

As far as their pension goes, if you had started working 30 years ago in the same job, you would also be able to retire. Looks to me like they earned their pension. Retirement benefits are usually spelled out when you start working at a particular company, so it looks like they fullfilled their end of the bargain.

So why is it you are upset? You had the same opportunities in life but maybe had several excuses why you just couldn't do the same work, like you didn't want to go to college, didn't want to sacrifice early in your life to study hard and get ahead, didn't want to save your money for a 401K or work for a company that provided a pension.

Life is about choices. Being jealous about what others have will eat you up inside. I feel sorry for you...
 
Cristobal good point and I didn't miss it at all. I realized it was a thinly-veiled promotional piece. I'm just saying the couple as an example-the crowd they are pandering to young retirees who have genrous pensions-is just ridiculous. Retirees receiving only $700/month SS need low cost of living retirement location not people with $3000-$6000/month pensions. Ironically the elder living on $700/month, and I know of some, couldn't afford to live in Panama.
 
I'm jealous? Really? The guy who defends Unions, pensions and SS. Are some people that dense to not get what I've said or do they just want to create a strawman just because?

I'm not saying it is wrong or unreasonable to want to retire to a tropical location like Panama and to take advantage of a potentially lower cost of living. But for this couple to claim no way could they retire anywhere in the US on at least a $3000/month government pension plus probably over $2500/month SS coming soon is ridiculous.

If you want to move to Panama then move there, but don't insinuate a $3000/month pension is inadeguate. And is it really jealousy to think someone receiving a $3000/month government pension could have a little loyalty to stay in the country that pays for it? I would say the same thing to a UAW retiree on their much more modest than $3000/month pension that they should show some loyalty to their company.

Social Security sends hundreds of billions to people living outside the US, then you have pension money on top of that. That's not very sustainable for the future.
 
Originally Posted By: Cristobal
I think both you guys are missing the point.

While there are plenty of cheap places in the United States (in Tonopah Nevada, you can get a nice apartment for $250.00 a month), this is basically an infomercial advertisement.

In the past three years I have noticed a surge of these trying to get Baby Boomers to retire in foreign countries. There even have been hints for people to ship their relatives to nursing homes in places as far away as India.

I have also seen ads suggesting that people can retire full time as a passenger on a cruise ship (personally, I would rather jump into a wood chipper).

This is all about making money.


Actually I should add to this. I'm more against the whole idea because it is just to dupe relatively well-to-do retirees. It plays on their desires of living extravangantly or beyond their means in a huge (empty) house with a maid, eating fancy dinners every night etc. under the promise of lower cost of living. But these retirees are spending typically $3K-$4k/ month so they're not realizing the lower cost of living there that they should. There is a lot of hidden cost to Americans moving and living in place like central America. It's just a money boom for the developers there. Like you said, there are plenty of affordable places in America to live. And if you own a home the major expense of housing is covered.
 
I think the OP has missed a few things... The pension is $3,000/month gross. The 401k is gone. They are both unemployed in their 50-s and I agree, chances of finding employment for them are close to nil at that age. The SS for the husband will not kick in for another 8 years. $36,000 a year before tax is difficult to live off of for two people. It's too much income for Medicaid but too little to afford health insurance.

I think they have made a prudent choice going somewhere where their dollars can afford them an apartment rather than living under a bridge.
 
The wife most likely gets health insurance benefits for them both. It was never really disclosed what was in his 401K or what they have spent of it. And if $3000/month gov pension is so paltry, then what in the world are many people doing with little or no pension living in America? Maybe the Navy should've given her a $5k/month civilian pension, right? And as far as them being unemployed or can't find employment because of their age, well that was just filler pandering to the promotional story's audience.

And why doesn't everyone just retire in central America, move their resources out the US economy and just see how long their pensons and SS will be sustainable, let alone their children's. If you can't find a place to retire comfortably enough in America on $3000+/month then you are a poor budgeter or trying to live somewhat extravangantly. Besides it's part fallacy that gringos can move to latin American and not incur substantial costs. I'm not missing the point you are. They're avoiding "living under a bridge" by living in Panama, really? You can buy houses many places now for what they are paying to rent a house in Panama. And why don't they have a house payed for? That's right they are poor or irresponsible planners maybe.

I don't get this forum. When I supports unions, SS and anything the gov does, an American automakers I get attacked. When I call a $3000/month pension generous enough and the person could and should retire in America on it, I get attacked. I guess that's when you know you are right when you get attacked from both ends of the extreme lol.
 
Why do you care what these AMERICANS do with their money ????
21.gif


If they can live a more comfortable in another country... good for them.

Off Topic: I was in Panama for 2 months and I would hate to live in that country (and I'm half hispanic).
 
You get attacked because Labor Unions are bad for America.

You have to stop your 1955 'Good Ole Boy' Union way of thinking and understand thats its almost 2012.
 
You're funny. So sending money out of America isn't bad for the economy but hard working people trying to get more than minimum wage and no benefits is bad for America.
 
mechanicx,

They worked and put into the 'system' for many years and now they decided to spend what is 'owed' to them and spend it in another country. Nothing wrong with that.

Please don't get mad at me for saying this, cause I'm not trying to be rude, disrespectful or a wise-#####.....

but you seem very bitter and unhappy to criticize those folks for trying to keep their head above water and stretch their dollar and avoid living under a highway overpass here in the USA with such a dismal economy and tough times ahead.
 
Originally Posted By: Cristobal
I think both you guys are missing the point.

While there are plenty of cheap places in the United States (in Tonopah Nevada, you can get a nice apartment for $250.00 a month), this is basically an infomercial advertisement.

In the past three years I have noticed a surge of these trying to get Baby Boomers to retire in foreign countries. There even have been hints for people to ship their relatives to nursing homes in places as far away as India.

I have also seen ads suggesting that people can retire full time as a passenger on a cruise ship (personally, I would rather jump into a wood chipper).

This is all about making money.


No it's not. The point being (I made it clearly) is that it is not the original posters money, nor is it yours. It is retirement savings earned by the couple, and it is theirs to do with as they please. In no way shape or form is it any business of yours or the original poster how they choose to spend their retirement. If someone wants to retire to Tonopah, Nevada, it's their right to do so. If someone chooses to retire to Panama (or any other country), it's their right to do so without you or anyone else sticking their collective noses in where they don't belong.

If they choose to move to another country sans adult children and grandchildren, it is their business. It's telling that other countries often welcome them with low taxes, low costs of living, and fewer nosy nannies who want to tell people where and how to spend their retirement savings.

And my questions still stands-what do you propose to do to stop people from retiring to other countries? Put up a concrete wall topped with razor wire? It hasn't exactly worked well in other countries where it's been tried, comrade.

Originally Posted By: mechanicx
Besides it's part fallacy that gringos can move to latin American and not incur substantial costs.


As someone who has traveled extensively in Central America, I can tell you that you don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about. My guess is you've never been out of the country.
 
Yet you attack UAW as being excessive who's members do something as productive as building cars for 30 years and get pension of typically $900-$2000 month (until their SS kicks in). And I'm saying $3000/month is perfectly adequate to retire on. I'm attacking this article suggesting that they or anyone with similar resources have to move to Panama to retire. It's bogus on several levels. For someone like you who constantly and erroneously rants about union wages (or what they think they know about it) to call me "very bitter and unhappy" to criticise this story is pretty funny and ironic.
 
Originally Posted By: Pop_Rivit
Originally Posted By: Cristobal
I think both you guys are missing the point.

While there are plenty of cheap places in the United States (in Tonopah Nevada, you can get a nice apartment for $250.00 a month), this is basically an infomercial advertisement.

In the past three years I have noticed a surge of these trying to get Baby Boomers to retire in foreign countries. There even have been hints for people to ship their relatives to nursing homes in places as far away as India.

I have also seen ads suggesting that people can retire full time as a passenger on a cruise ship (personally, I would rather jump into a wood chipper).

This is all about making money.


No it's not. The point being (I made it clearly) is that it is not the original posters money, nor is it yours. It is retirement savings earned by the couple, and it is theirs to do with as they please. In no way shape or form is it any business of yours or the original poster how they choose to spend their retirement. If someone wants to retire to Tonopah, Nevada, it's their right to do so. If someone chooses to retire to Panama (or any other country), it's their right to do so without you or anyone else sticking their collective noses in where they don't belong.

If they choose to move to another country sans adult children and grandchildren, it is their business. It's telling that other countries often welcome them with low taxes, low costs of living, and fewer nosy nannies who want to tell people where and how to spend their retirement savings.

And my questions still stands-what do you propose to do to stop people from retiring to other countries? Put up a concrete wall topped with razor wire? It hasn't exactly worked well in other countries where it's been tried, comrade.

Originally Posted By: mechanicx
Besides it's part fallacy that gringos can move to latin American and not incur substantial costs.


As someone who has traveled extensively in Central America, I can tell you that you don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about. My guess is you've never been out of the country.



LOL Strawman much. They interviewed with a reporter knowing it would be published and said "It's not possible for them retire anywhere in the US with a $3000/month pension." plus some 401k and SS coming around the corner. So no one should disagree with that? I've never claimed that a taxpayer supported gov working doesn't earn their pension or that no one shouldn't be allowed to leave the country with their pension and SS. I'm just saying people like that seem to be takers who only think of themselves and poor budgeters and that this couple and this story is a bunch of baloney. My guess is they will probably get tired of Panama and paying for flights to visit their relatives and move back to the US.
 
Well, this thread is on the way out quickly.....
smirk.gif




Bottom line here is that it is there money to do what they want with.


Last I checked it was a free country.....
 
Originally Posted By: dwendt44
Anyone who thinks unions are bad for America has their heads in a very dark place.


After seeing what went went on in Wisc. at the State House that is a debateable statement, but not here!
 
The problem in the USA is that so much manufacturing has been lost here. We now have capital leaving America in greater quantity than entering our economic system. This trend needs to be reversed for America to prosper again.

People can retire where they want to, I know. But If they want to go to another country, why not some place known for very long term stability? That is another way of saying it might not be good to have one's possessions and funds confiscated prior to being banished, if some nationalization frenzy takes place.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top