Jeff Stahler for February 23, 2013

  1. Queru 2
    lisapaloma13  over 11 years ago

    But, at our age, they fly by.

     •  Reply
  2. Snapshot 20121028
    baldhedjer  over 11 years ago

    I retired….for a month. Just found a less physical job to do. I’m going to be working till I can’t anymore.

     •  Reply
  3. Coloradofiedcalifornia
    californicated1  over 11 years ago

    What people seem to forget is that the reason why there was a mandatory retirement age in the first place was so that younger workers could replace older workers in their jobs.…The older workers, with the lure of an easy and comfortable retirement with benefits, were expected to just step aside once they reached that magic age.…Unfortunately, it was predicated on the belief that the job itself would not evolve to the point where different skills were needed, or the job be phased out in its entirety as the needs of an employer change over that time.…What may have been a quick fix out there in 1934 to stave off revolution is now another problem as what jobs are out there have a shorter lifespan than the person working them and once the job ends for that person, the problem then becomes finding that next job, which puts all people looking for that job, regardless of their age, experience or qualifications, on the same playing field.…And because you have people out there, regardless of their age, experience or qualifications, now competing for the jobs that are left, giving the new employer a choice of what they want to hire, which in tough times usually means they want the cheapest worker possible and if you have a position out there that requires little or no experience, you are going to want the person out there who will do the job for the least amount of money and benefits, which in turn will set aside the job-seeker with more experience and even better qualifications, which is usually the older job-seeker.…And in most jobs these days, any worker over 40 years of age is probably going to be the worker that will have the toughest time finding their next job if and when they lose this one, because once again, the business cycle these days has shortened the life-span of a job and even a career to the point that one has to continually learn new skills and even take one several different career paths over their life to work different jobs.…And the situation where one has to continue learning new skills and taking on multiple career paths over their working life also feeds another vicious cycle these days—education and that a lot of companies out there have also capitalized on that to the point that they see the one learning new skills to meet an ever-changing job market as a money-making strategy and if their student has no money, then the educators embark to seek out financing for them and that in turn puts those seeking those new skills and educations in debt, to the point where that student is going to need a job to pay off that debt.…And while looking for that job to pay off that debt, the worker/student will be seeking out a job out there with other workers/students looking for that job, too and repeating the process over several times in their life as the lifespan of a job and even a career is much shorter than the lifespan of the person working that job and in that career.…If Camus were alive today, “Le Mythe de Sisyphe” would be based on these vicious cycles that one has to go through much of their entire life from the time they start school to the time they end the last job of their life.

     •  Reply
  4. Missing large
    ARodney  over 11 years ago

    Good to see you supporting the president’s reasonable call for a rise in the minimum wage.

     •  Reply
  5. Missing large
    ARodney  over 11 years ago

    You really give conservatism a bad name. (Hint: everyone knows that there are no Obama death panels. You look like an idiot citing them.)

     •  Reply
  6. Missing large
    ARodney  over 11 years ago

    Anyone thinking of profiting by having more kids is doing tea-party math. The benefit is less than a couple hundred dollars a month. The cost is hugely more.

     •  Reply
  7. St655
    Stormrider2112  over 11 years ago

    Smart fund shifting has gotten me $100k in my TSP (IRA for federal workers) after just over 7 years, and I’m a lowly WG-11 machinist/machined parts inspector (if it’s made in the machine shop and goes on a nuclear submarine, I’m the one doing all the certification on it) making $26/hour. Assuming rates stay at similar levels over time for another 28 years (when I can collect my TSP at 59½), I’ll make more money retired than I would if I were to continue working.

     •  Reply
  8. 100 2451
    RonBerg13 Premium Member over 11 years ago

    That’s me! 70 and still rolling!

     •  Reply
  9. Missing large
    genemascho  over 11 years ago

    quit whinning and get on the pols to do thier job quit blameing any pres congress uses him as an excuse not to do thier job

     •  Reply
  10. U joes mint logo rs 192x204
    Uncle Joe Premium Member over 11 years ago

    “Why not get paid big bucks for working? Social security is a broke ponzi scheme. . I’ll work as long as possible.. "It’s easy to do if you’re a white collar worker, not so easy if you work a trade.

     •  Reply
  11. Missing large
    Ironhold  over 11 years ago

    There you go – you didn’t have any of the added expenses that come with a family, and so could save whatever money you made for your own personal use.[]For those who do have families, there are dozens of extra expenses that must be paid on a daily basis, expenses that seriously limit what a person can maintain in the way of savings.

     •  Reply
Sign in to comment

More From Jeff Stahler