Monday, June 16, 2025
Contact    |    RSS icon Twitter icon Facebook icon  
Unexplained Mysteries Support Us
You are viewing: Home > Columns > Phillip Tilley > Column article
Welcome Guest ( Login or Register )  
Phillip Tilley

You can’t retire, and that’s a good thing

May 29, 2008 | Comment icon 14 comments
Image Credit: sxc.hu
At least that is what the Government is saying. Good for whom you ask? Good for you because most people can’t afford to stop working. There are 78 million baby boomers, those born between 1946 to 1964, that are only now reaching retirement age. There are 37 million Americans over age 65 and 23.2% of them are still working according to the 2007 U.S. Census Bureau. The Government says that is their choice. Yes, if you choose to eat and sleep in a warm bed you better choose to keep working.

My friend Chuck retired and his funds ran out after only three years. Now he is back working again. He said health costs ate his retirement and he is right. Fewer companies offer health insurance to retirees and some can’t afford it anyway. The average retiree only gets one third the income they made while working and spend 13% of that on health care, according to the 2005 Consumer Expenditure Survey. The elderly in the work force is an economic necessity on many levels.

It’s not just an old people problem, it’s every ones problem. A majority of Americans aren’t saving anything for retirement, or they just aren’t saving anything at all. It takes everything they earn to live day to day, and why save worthless Federal Reserve Notes anyway with inflation making them worth less and less. Rising prices, layoffs and divorces have sent a record number of middle-aged people back home to live with their parents. These people are 40 to 50 years old and back living in the bedrooms they grew up in. 25% of Generation Xers, those people age 28 to 39 get financial help from family and friends according to a survey by AARP. This causes hardships for their parents, delaying their retirement.

Congress blames Social Security for its shortfall, and half of all employers in the U.S. don’t offer a retirement plan or 401K, and for those that do, few participate. Congress wants to cut social security benefits and increase taxes to keep it from running out of money. It helps if older people keep working because they keep contributing which helps fund the shortfall. Of course a cut in benefits means the young people pay more and will receive less. This means they won’t be able to retire either.
Some economists think the best way to motivate Americans to save for retirement is by using a carrot while others suggest using a stick and others yet suggest a combination of both.

I suggest using real money which would be worthy of saving. Let’s face the facts, the problem with Social Security isn’t that it’s running out of money, the problem is it never had any money in the first place.

President Roosevelt confiscated the Americans gold in 1933. The Social Security Act was signed into law in 1935. This means the money was gone before Social Security even started. With worthless Federal Reserve Note currency to start with it never really had any real money. Nobody can enjoy their golden years without the gold.

You can’t retire and that’s a good thing. Wake up people, the money matrix has you!

Phillip Tilley is author of The Money Matrix of the New World Order and other articles. Comments (14)


<< Previous story
UFO's in the news
Recent comments on this story
Comment icon #5 Posted by Nile_Shaman 17 years ago
You know, Mr, Tilley, we really don't need your articles to tell us what we already know. We don't have governments anymore, we have CORE-POOR-ATIONs, they get the core and we get all the poor :angry2: What we need to know is if there is anything we can do about it.... on no money, no time, and if the liberals had their way, not even guns when they come to take our homes as well. I am REALLY REALLY angry with the way things are going right now and how the government is more worried about running for prez and stupid little pork barrel bills getting passed, none of which help me. They will not d... [More]
Comment icon #6 Posted by Oen Anderson 17 years ago
You know, Mr, Tilley, we really don't need your articles to tell us what we already know. We don't have governments anymore, we have CORE-POOR-ATIONs, they get the core and we get all the poor :angry2: What we need to know is if there is anything we can do about it.... on no money, no time, and if the liberals had their way, not even guns when they come to take our homes as well. I am REALLY REALLY angry with the way things are going right now and how the government is more worried about running for prez and stupid little pork barrel bills getting passed, none of which help me. They will not d... [More]
Comment icon #7 Posted by Nile_Shaman 17 years ago
In one of Tilleys early articles "Money vs Currency", he stated that it is good to be angry, but not at him as he did not create the money matrix and is only a messenger. In his book he pointed out that most of us are only three paychecks away from living on the streets. Oh, I'm not mad at him, I am angry with the situation and the obliviousness of the powers that be. As for the three paycheck thing, that is about right, and I hope more people reading will figure it out and realize how much of an illusion security is. I hope they check and find out before the fact what I have - there is no hel... [More]
Comment icon #8 Posted by Expatriate 17 years ago
Phillip Tilley: At least that is what the Government is saying. Good for whom you ask? Good for you because most people can’t afford to stop working. There are 78 million baby boomers, those born between 1946 to 1964, that are only now reaching retirement age. There are 37 million Americans over age 65 and 23.2% of them are still working according to the 2007 U.S. Census Bureau. The Government says that is their choice. Yes, if you choose to eat and sleep in a warm bed you better choose to keep working. My friend Chuck retired and his funds ran out after only three years. Now he is back work... [More]
Comment icon #9 Posted by brothers 17 years ago
And there are still people on this board who appear to be offended because I chose to retire in Mexico. Here I can have everything I had in the U.S. at a fraction of the cost. I have a more peaceful lifestyle combined with a beautiful countryside, wonderful people and a couple of businesses on the side. Now tell me it wasn't the smart thing to do. You did good to move to Mexico. A lot if not most people just cannot do that. Just imagine tho if the Americans moved to Mexico and the Mexicans moved to the US. Will it still be the same???. Just wondering thats all.
Comment icon #10 Posted by Expatriate 17 years ago
You did good to move to Mexico. A lot if not most people just cannot do that. Just imagine tho if the Americans moved to Mexico and the Mexicans moved to the US. Will it still be the same???. Just wondering thats all. You say that a lot of people can`t do that . . . retire in Mexico . . . . and I am curious about why?
Comment icon #11 Posted by Pavot 17 years ago
o
Comment icon #12 Posted by Wreck7 17 years ago
Retiring to Mexico is an option. I don't think you are allowed to own property there unless you are a citizen or have lived there for 20 years or something like that. I was considering Costa Rica myself.
Comment icon #13 Posted by Purplos 17 years ago
Utilities = 700+/month Utilities in Canada cost that much? Yikes! And what are you leasing that costs 500/1000 per month? Just curious. -------- My Mom is 65 and can't afford to retire. Of course, she spent most of her life as a housewife and only started working again about 12 years ago. I'm self-employed so there is no such thing as 401ks and employee-match retirement plans, but I'll be fine because I'm heading to self-sustainability. As long as the internet doesn't disappear I'll be fine.
Comment icon #14 Posted by Expatriate 17 years ago
Retiring to Mexico is an option. I don't think you are allowed to own property there unless you are a citizen or have lived there for 20 years or something like that. I was considering Costa Rica myself. Non-citizens are permitted to own property in the interior of Mexico. There is no time limit on the amount of time you have lived here. I have been to Costa Rica and between it and Mexico, I would overwhelmingly choose Mexico. The stronger and more diverse economy (Costa Rica depends heavily on tourism), different tax structures and the restrictive land options in Costa Rica makes Mexico the m... [More]


Please Login or Register to post a comment.


 Total Posts: 7,768,356    Topics: 325,021    Members: 203,768

 Not a member yet ? Click here to join - registration is free and only takes a moment!
Recent news and articles