Originally Posted by cwjohm
Sorry, but I did not mean to take it off topic.
My point was very much related to the cruising budget and this thread.
Contrary to your stated "socialisation" point most economies are deflating retirement
benefits over time. This is a brutal reality.
My point was how can you state a cruising budget of X without consideration of the day when you can no longer cruise, or no longer wish to cruise or live on a boat and making some financial consideration for such. This must consider depreciation and other factors. This is not only fiscally reckless but also socially irresponsible it seems to me.
However, I will take it as read that the cruising budget as it is referred to here makes no reference to these factors and simply refers to general expenses.
I agree. The general public takes little interest in fiscal responsibility. This is public politics in play. The maintenance
of a disinterested, misinformed, and compliant public works to the public benefit.
The reality is that they they neither know nor care what will happen at that time - they merely presume that it will somehow take care of itself - and for the most part, it does.
I have a lady living in one of my buildings who gets everything for free. Apartment, utilities, a telephone, food
, healthcare, entertainment (if you can call television that), and a small monthly income to cover any further incidentals.
No matter what happens, there has always been and I guess always will be a program of some sort to take care of it. Old and sick people in the United States are never simply put out into the streets to fend for themselves like animals
, except it appears in the case of mental illness. Still trying to sort out exactly how that happens.