607
After $700 Million U.S. Bailout, Trucking Firm Is Shutting Down
(www.nytimes.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 30 Jul 2023
607 points (99.0% liked)
News
23275 readers
1356 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
401ks are still related to the person's place of employment, so they don't actually solve that problem. I'd rather see us ditch them in favor of higher contribution limits to IRAs.
Defined-contribution retirement plans (401ks and IRAs) in general are not an adequate replacement for defined-benefit ones (pensions and Social Security) because, frankly, people are too stupid on average to plan properly for their future. And even if you think stupid people deserve what they get, it's still a problem that affects you because of the collective burden massive numbers of indigent elderly would put on society.
401ks never should've been created, and the replacement for private employer pensions should've been an expansion of Social Security.
(I say all this as someone with much larger than average retirement savings who's aiming for FIRE, by the way. This is a critique of the system from someone who has benefited from it, not sour grapes from a stereotypical poor millennial.)
Related, yes, but if I leave my job I don't lose my 401K. I like my employer matching funds in it.
Don't understand, could you elaborate? FIRE?
"Financial Independence; Retire Early." See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIRE_movement
TL;DR: I keep my household expenses very low (roughly $30k/year) and save a very high percentage of my income so that I can retire very early. The pandemic changed my plans a bit, but I'm expecting to be done by age 45. (By the way, to address a common criticism of the idea: "retire"means doing whatever I want without being beholden to working for a wage, not necessarily vegging out in front of the TV and stagnating as certain workaholics assume. The important distinction is that I could choose to work if I wanted, but wouldn't need to.)
I might agree with you if I had the option of opting out of Social Security. It's an absolute disaster and it'll never be fixed. You can say it should be, but if we're debating impractical solutions we may as well just include "everyone lives forever and always has everything they ever need".