Americans’ outsize lifestyles cause a lot of cognitive dissonance: We should save – and we know it – but we’re not about to start cutting back when there’s stuff to be bought.
Well, now we don’t have to …
Aptly titled “Spend Til’ The End,” author and economist Laurence Kotlikoff examines what he says is wrong with the way we go about our finances.
We save too much and spend too little, so he says, and yes, you read that right. No typo.
Kotlikoff’s book is described as “revolutionary” in its approach to money, and it certainly is – but not in the way it’s intended.
While it definitely won’t improve anyone’s finances, it does illuminate everything that’s wrong with government entitlements.
In the chapter titled “Fire Your Job,” Kotlikoff explains how it’s often more profitable to quit working, outlining all the free government money that’s available to those who meet means-based standards. What he’s encouraging is unemployment, a decidedly un-American notion that many Americans have nevertheless begun to embrace.
The thing is, Kotlikoff is right.
Numerically-speaking, he’s absolutely correct that a lot of dual-income families would fare better if one – or both – quit working. But work is about more than the paycheck, isn’t it?
Productivity and contribution have value, too, separate from the check they bring in, right?
Sure they do, but it’s becoming increasingly difficult to ask families to ignore cold, hard numbers – and cold, hard cash – for subtle philosophical themes like productivity.
While entitlements were developed ostensibly to help those truly struggling – offering a hand-up, so to speak – these programs have devolved to the point that they discourage responsibility, accountability, and work.
This nation was built on the basis of work, the incentive of which has now been displaced by entitlements which make it pointless to do anything other than walk to the mailbox to collect government checks.
And half the country – more if you count all the RINO’s – want even more entitlements!
If these socialists get their way – as they have for decades – eventually work will be a relic of a bygone era, one of those “we walked five miles to school in the snow” stories we’ll tell our grandkids about in wistful nostalgia for the good ol’ days.
Speaking of getting old, Kotlikoff also addresses retirement in his book, his main point being that we should all stop saving for retirement now – we never should have even started – because there are government programs that will pay for nursing homes and such.
Again, this is a downright un-American concept, and again it unfortunately makes some sense.
The story here is not that an economist thinks we save too much and spend too little … the story is that he’s right.
Ironically, Kotlikoff won’t be able to take his own advice. His book is sure to become a phenomenal bestseller – as would any book which provides a reasoned rationalization for readers to keep making the bad decisions they’re going to keep making anyway.
And therein lies the true revolutionary value of the book. The author has created something that sets out to show why there is no value in creating.
And we’re just desperately dissonant enough to buy the book and make him rich – and too clueless to notice the irony.
By Jacob Hawkins September 8, 2008 at 10:18 am
this stroy is true because i know some people that will quit there job because they dont make enough money or something stupid i think people should find a job they like and stay with it thats why they picked something they wanted to major in high school
By Ann Coulter has no redeeming qualities September 8, 2008 at 12:36 pm
This guy is on to something. Notice how Obama and McCain never talk about ending federal programs – to the contrary – it is all about giving more money and programs to the people to buy their votes.
Of course, the reality will be that our national debt will be so huge by the time we retire – our dollars will not buy anything of value. You know the inflation story in Germany after they tried their take on world dominance- one guy had to fill up a wheel barrow with money to go down the street to carry all the money it took to buy his necessities. He realized things had gone from bad to worse when someone stole his wheelbarrow and left all the paper money behind.
By Jess September 8, 2008 at 9:12 pm
I just don’t see why it’s so hard to work for money and earn it the proper way. There is no excuse for laziness and the money spent on sending checks to someone who could have saved the money before or just simply worked could have been sent to save someone else’s life for research on diseases or incredibly high medical expenses or whatever. Point being that the government shouldn’t just give handouts to people who are capable of earning money at the present time.
By Katelyn September 8, 2008 at 11:00 pm
I agree with Jess. As Americans and simply human beings, there will always be competition in the work force, just like every other aspect of our lives. The govenment knows this and will begin to heavily encourage people to work and save if they do not and depend on the government moeny to cover thire retirement funds. We need to show that we are better than sitting around all day waiting for money in years to come to pay for bread and tiolet paper. People need to learn life leasons in earning and spending and that will not be achieved on dependency. The author of the article is correct in saying that the book will become a bestseller- because it is a different, fresh idea. However, he is also riht that it will change nothing, as it shouldn’t. People need to work, not sit. Where would we be today if ten years ago, or five, or even two years ago mass populations became unemployed to wait for govenmetn retirements. Our society would be lost.
By Negatron September 9, 2008 at 11:21 am
“Numerically-speaking, he’s absolutely correct that a lot of dual-income families would fare better if one – or both – quit working….[w]hile entitlements were developed ostensibly to help those truly struggling – offering a hand-up, so to speak – these programs have devolved to the point that they discourage responsibility, accountability, and work.”
Lame, lame, lame. No examples, no numbers, no substance, this is just a waste of space. It does illustrate the vapidity of “young conservatives,” though.
By sid September 9, 2008 at 12:05 pm
Negatron,
Did you read the book? Are you calling the author a “young conservative”? Do you know anything about him? The piece is based on the book. Read the book, then point out errors in the piece/book.