I was wandering through Madam X's Blog, My Open Wallet this morning, which led me to this article: 401(k)s Are For suckers .
Please tell me this 26 year old writer is not an idiot and that she is writing satire!
Unfortunately, it appears she might be serious.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Did you read her 2nd paragraph?
She's crazy.
Sad. Self-destructive attitudes and misinformation.
I have a sister a bit like that - spend today and not save for retirement, because I might get hit by a bus tomorrow...
I don't really care if people like this choose to spend on current consumption rather than save anything for retirement, EXCEPT that when they get to impoverished retirement age they WILL expect a hand-out from the government. Which will come from higher taxes on my self-funded retirement income and my kids income from employment and investments...
The big lie in her article is where she writes "So if I’m on the dole at 65, eating cat food out of a rusty hubcap, I’ll be content..." -- as if!
she's kidding. sarcasm is a hard transfer over the web...
Grace, I understand how you could make this mistake/have the wrong idea, if you didn't finish reading or don't know her blog well. She was only commenting on an article titled "401ks Are For Suckers", she did not write that article -- and she was very much kidding and even stated so in her 2nd paragraph.
I've been a loyal reader of Madame X for quite a while now (and I read your blog every week, too) - she is one of the smartest and most responsible young financial bloggers out there - she gives me hope that my kids will have her financial brains (instead of mine when I was younger, lol).
Richard? Mia? Thanks for stopping by. Of course, Madame X was kidding, but my comments were directed to the author of the Time Out article. PLEASE tell me SHE was being satirical!
I guess she thinks 401Ks are bad because the govt. should take care of us? Very weird, since we live in a democracy. I think I'd rather take care of myself than rely on other people.
BTW, I really enjoy your blog (and have been a visitor since long before JW tagged us).
I thought it was a bit absurd. I am 27 and am always worried (not necessarily a good trait) about how little I have saved (for emergencies, retirement, etc). There is also the other factor that I am an introvert and "snorting hard drugs off the backs of go-go boys in Berlin," is not my idea of fun. I'd much rather read a book (from the library). I have friends who live paycheck to paycheck and I am afraid of the day when they will wake up and regret wasting their lives on these short lasting thrills.
Books are good, Beany. Still, while "snorting hard drugs off the backs of go-go boys in Berlin" doesn't appeal to me, hanging out with George Cloony in Italy or Sean Connery in Scotland has its attractions. (I'd probably avoid snorting hard drugs off their backs because I wouldn't want to be high and miss any part of the experience!) It was interesting to me that it didn't seem to occur to the author that one can have fun now and still save for retirement--they aren't necessarily mutually exclusive.
Post a Comment