<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Helaine Olen</title>
	<atom:link href="http://helaineolen.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://helaineolen.com</link>
	<description>an occasional blog about parenting, finance, culture, love, politics and other ephemera</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 19:37:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Bringing Up the Kindele by joe harkins</title>
		<link>http://helaineolen.com/2012/02/07/bringing-up-the-kindele/comment-page-1/#comment-46</link>
		<dc:creator>joe harkins</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 19:37:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://helaineolen.com/?p=246#comment-46</guid>
		<description>love the title. looking forward to the book!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>love the title. looking forward to the book!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on On Early Retirement by anthrosciguy</title>
		<link>http://helaineolen.com/2011/07/14/on-early-retirement/comment-page-1/#comment-40</link>
		<dc:creator>anthrosciguy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Jul 2011 18:20:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://helaineolen.com/?p=197#comment-40</guid>
		<description>Some of those factors spelled out:

First, the calculator they have doesn&#039;t fit me, or for that matter anyone who has a job paying far more or less than most of their work life.  The numbers you get from social security, even the estimated ones on their site, are more accurate.

Then there&#039;s the matter of how long you live.  You wait to 65 and get more, but have the misfortune to live only to your mid-70s, and you&#039;ve lost money.  You have to determine your breakeven age (when your total dollars gotten will be greater with the greater money) to make any determination based on money alone.

They also assume you don&#039;t need money, that you&#039;re comfy and have a nice secure job.  Come on.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Some of those factors spelled out:</p>
<p>First, the calculator they have doesn&#8217;t fit me, or for that matter anyone who has a job paying far more or less than most of their work life.  The numbers you get from social security, even the estimated ones on their site, are more accurate.</p>
<p>Then there&#8217;s the matter of how long you live.  You wait to 65 and get more, but have the misfortune to live only to your mid-70s, and you&#8217;ve lost money.  You have to determine your breakeven age (when your total dollars gotten will be greater with the greater money) to make any determination based on money alone.</p>
<p>They also assume you don&#8217;t need money, that you&#8217;re comfy and have a nice secure job.  Come on.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on On Early Retirement by Helaine Olen</title>
		<link>http://helaineolen.com/2011/07/14/on-early-retirement/comment-page-1/#comment-39</link>
		<dc:creator>Helaine Olen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Jul 2011 22:56:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://helaineolen.com/?p=197#comment-39</guid>
		<description>Bill, thanks for posting in. In the 1990s, it was pretty standard for financial planning types to tell people to take SS benefits at age 62 in order to maximize thier lifetime benefits, based on reason number one alone. My take now is that it is a very individual decision, based on numerous  factors that a calculator cannot compute. What I do resent, however, is the implication that people taking SS at age 62 are just looking to exit the workforce. There is no evidence to support that belief.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bill, thanks for posting in. In the 1990s, it was pretty standard for financial planning types to tell people to take SS benefits at age 62 in order to maximize thier lifetime benefits, based on reason number one alone. My take now is that it is a very individual decision, based on numerous  factors that a calculator cannot compute. What I do resent, however, is the implication that people taking SS at age 62 are just looking to exit the workforce. There is no evidence to support that belief.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on On Early Retirement by bill.clay</title>
		<link>http://helaineolen.com/2011/07/14/on-early-retirement/comment-page-1/#comment-38</link>
		<dc:creator>bill.clay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Jul 2011 12:56:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://helaineolen.com/?p=197#comment-38</guid>
		<description>The AARP site looks only at the monthly benefit.  A more rational decision criterion (though much less certain to calculate) is total lifetime benefit.  Before opting to take Social Security at the earliest age possible, I ran the numbers for my case and found I&#039;d have to live to about 85 years old to receive a greater lifetime benefit by delaying my retirement until full retirement age (65).  I think it&#039;s unrealistic to expect the following three essential factors for a secure retired life will still obtain by 2035:

1. I will still be alive and kicking (50% chance, I reckon).

2. US social security benefits will continue at current levels (adjusted for inflation and without means-tested reductions).

3. The global environment will continue to sustain something resembling the current western lifestyle and economic regime.

Only takes losing one of the three to invalidate the AARP&#039;s focus on monthly benefits.  I&#039;m taking what I can get while I can get it.

Bill</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The AARP site looks only at the monthly benefit.  A more rational decision criterion (though much less certain to calculate) is total lifetime benefit.  Before opting to take Social Security at the earliest age possible, I ran the numbers for my case and found I&#8217;d have to live to about 85 years old to receive a greater lifetime benefit by delaying my retirement until full retirement age (65).  I think it&#8217;s unrealistic to expect the following three essential factors for a secure retired life will still obtain by 2035:</p>
<p>1. I will still be alive and kicking (50% chance, I reckon).</p>
<p>2. US social security benefits will continue at current levels (adjusted for inflation and without means-tested reductions).</p>
<p>3. The global environment will continue to sustain something resembling the current western lifestyle and economic regime.</p>
<p>Only takes losing one of the three to invalidate the AARP&#8217;s focus on monthly benefits.  I&#8217;m taking what I can get while I can get it.</p>
<p>Bill</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Lasts by Helaine Olen</title>
		<link>http://helaineolen.com/2008/06/09/lasts/comment-page-1/#comment-13</link>
		<dc:creator>Helaine Olen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jun 2008 03:21:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://helaineolen.com/blog/?p=59#comment-13</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve heard people express concern about the role of sonograms in the Aspergers/Autism epidemic too. I think all of these things really need to be looked at. I think the age/fertility issue is particularly hard to discuss, because it really calls into question the way we live now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve heard people express concern about the role of sonograms in the Aspergers/Autism epidemic too. I think all of these things really need to be looked at. I think the age/fertility issue is particularly hard to discuss, because it really calls into question the way we live now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Lasts by jennifer grossman-pazmino</title>
		<link>http://helaineolen.com/2008/06/09/lasts/comment-page-1/#comment-12</link>
		<dc:creator>jennifer grossman-pazmino</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jun 2008 22:42:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://helaineolen.com/blog/?p=59#comment-12</guid>
		<description>My son (has aspergers) had was nearly 9 lbs.  I was 37 my husband was 40. BUT I was diabetic and high risk and had 2-3 songrams a month, it makes me wonder what role sonograms play in autism.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My son (has aspergers) had was nearly 9 lbs.  I was 37 my husband was 40. BUT I was diabetic and high risk and had 2-3 songrams a month, it makes me wonder what role sonograms play in autism.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on But Can They Bring Gene, Gene The Dancing Machine Out of Retirement? by gray matter</title>
		<link>http://helaineolen.com/2008/05/09/but-can-they-bring-gene-gene-the-dancing-machine-out-of-retirement/comment-page-1/#comment-10</link>
		<dc:creator>gray matter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2008 19:48:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://helaineolen.com/blog/?p=56#comment-10</guid>
		<description>Oh God-- Jaye P. Morgan, Arte Johnson, Rip Taylor, Jamie Farr, Anson Williams. and Rex Reed will be thrilled...or dead. Well, those who aren&#039;t dead will be thrilled!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh God&#8211; Jaye P. Morgan, Arte Johnson, Rip Taylor, Jamie Farr, Anson Williams. and Rex Reed will be thrilled&#8230;or dead. Well, those who aren&#8217;t dead will be thrilled!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Practical Numbers for Parents by &#187; Practical Numbers for Parents</title>
		<link>http://helaineolen.com/2008/05/06/practical-numbers-for-parents/comment-page-1/#comment-9</link>
		<dc:creator>&#187; Practical Numbers for Parents</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 May 2008 03:07:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://helaineolen.com/blog/?p=55#comment-9</guid>
		<description>[...] money news blog - Just another WordPress weblog wrote an interesting post today onHere&#8217;s a quick excerpt I received a reviewers copy of Practical Wisdom For Parents this morning, the guide to raising preschool-aged children penned by the directors of the 92nd Street Y Nursery School. While it certainly looks informative, I suspect there is only one bit of practical information most parents want from these women: How to get a child admitted to the 92nd Street Y’s Nursery School. And, alas, the amount one has to donate to the institution to achieve that result is not enumerated anywhere in the book. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] money news blog &#8211; Just another WordPress weblog wrote an interesting post today onHere&#8217;s a quick excerpt I received a reviewers copy of Practical Wisdom For Parents this morning, the guide to raising preschool-aged children penned by the directors of the 92nd Street Y Nursery School. While it certainly looks informative, I suspect there is only one bit of practical information most parents want from these women: How to get a child admitted to the 92nd Street Y’s Nursery School. And, alas, the amount one has to donate to the institution to achieve that result is not enumerated anywhere in the book. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Quick! The Retired Will Work Cheap Too by &#187; Worse Than I Originally Thought</title>
		<link>http://helaineolen.com/2008/05/02/worse-than-i-originally-thought/comment-page-1/#comment-8</link>
		<dc:creator>&#187; Worse Than I Originally Thought</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 May 2008 01:14:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://helaineolen.com/blog/?p=53#comment-8</guid>
		<description>[...] Credit Cards knowledge wrote an interesting post today onHere&#8217;s a quick excerpt I decided to not write about Sue Shellenbarger’s Tuesday column when I first read it this week. I was sure I was overreacting, my fury was so great. So I waited till today and, guess what? It’s even worse than I thought: Lots of employers would like to be able to hire cheap, temporary teams of seasoned pros with experience managing $2 billion investment portfolios, running ad campaigns or earning Ph.D.s in neuroscience. But few know the secret to finding temps of that caliber: Look on playgr [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Credit Cards knowledge wrote an interesting post today onHere&#8217;s a quick excerpt I decided to not write about Sue Shellenbarger’s Tuesday column when I first read it this week. I was sure I was overreacting, my fury was so great. So I waited till today and, guess what? It’s even worse than I thought: Lots of employers would like to be able to hire cheap, temporary teams of seasoned pros with experience managing $2 billion investment portfolios, running ad campaigns or earning Ph.D.s in neuroscience. But few know the secret to finding temps of that caliber: Look on playgr [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on We Survived Birthdaypalooza by Katie Holmes Celebrity Gossip &#124; We Survived Birthdaypalooza</title>
		<link>http://helaineolen.com/2008/04/27/we-survived-birthdaypalooza/comment-page-1/#comment-7</link>
		<dc:creator>Katie Holmes Celebrity Gossip &#124; We Survived Birthdaypalooza</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Apr 2008 04:39:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://helaineolen.com/blog/?p=52#comment-7</guid>
		<description>[...] And we didn’t spend $100,000 like Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes&#8230;. Source: We Survived Birthdaypalooza [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] And we didn’t spend $100,000 like Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes&#8230;. Source: We Survived Birthdaypalooza [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

