Why retirees are fleeing the U.S.

A move to another country may make economic sense, especially for seniors who don't have enough savings to live in retirement without a dramatic cut in lifestyle.

Eventually, word spread that they were somewhere in Mexico. They had sold whatever they owned, packed their car and headed for the border. They were, conflicting reports said, living in small towns, the kind of places seldom featured in travel magazines.

We can only speculate on what happened. I think they were broke, had little or nothing in savings and knew they had to make a major change to survive on their Social Security income and minimal savings. Like millions of other Americans, their ship never came in. They got older. Work became harder to find. Suddenly, they realized their life was entirely unsustainable. They were heading toward a cliff.

They had to do something radical. Like live in an RV. Or leave the country.

Calculate your retirement income
The question is: Can a move to another country offer a cost of living so much lower than the cost of living here that moving is a positive solution?

I believe the answer is yes. I also believe that thousands of older Americans will be crossing the border in the years to come.

To test the economic idea, I decided to use ESPlanner, the powerful financial-planning software I've used in other columns. I wanted to compare, in steps, what a couple could do by moving to Mexico. I wanted to see how much lower the cost of living abroad must be for a desperate idea to become a workable strategy.

So imagine this: You're 57. You're married. You make a reasonable but not glorious income of $75,000 a year. It isn't rising very fast. It may not rise much at all in the future. Indeed, you're wondering if management won't find a way to eliminate your job well before you turn 66. Worse, your entire nest egg is about $100,000 from the sale of your home several years earlier. It earns a safe 5.5%. Your wife doesn't work. The kids are grown.

Day after day, you have a dreadful feeling you are running toward a cliff. In fact, you are -- an income cliff.

Today, you are spending your entire $60,000 a year of after-tax income. You aren't saving. But if you are forced to retire at 62, your income will plummet. It won't be much more than your Social Security benefits -- about $18,000 for you and about $8,400 for your wife, a total of $26,400. (All figures are in dollars of constant purchasing power.)

That's a 56% reduction in your standard of living -- more than you can bear or imagine.

A better standard of living
Can you reduce the shock if you spend less today and save as much as possible, shooting for a level standard of living?

ESPlanner tells us yes. But with only five years to go, it won't help much. By saving about $30,000 a year and creating a bigger nest egg, you can increase your lifetime consumption from $26,400 a year to about $33,700 a year.

That's a hefty increase, but it would still feel like a crash. So, it's time to think about Mexico, Belize, Costa Rica or Panama.

Adventurous American seniors are settling in places such as Costa Rica and Nicaragua. But a life south of the border isn't for all retirees.

Suppose you can find a place where the cost of living is about 75% of the cost in the United States -- some beach town north of Puerto Vallarta or south of Manzanillo. What happens to your standard of living when you move to Mexico? It rises to the equivalent of about $42,400 in the U.S.

That's not bad. But then you notice a problem: You'll be living in Mexico, where you can't get Medicare services, but you'll still be paying for Medicare. If your premiums rise at the historical rate -- 4.6% a year faster than inflation -- the $3,200 a year you'll pay out at 65 will rise to a stunning $9,400 a year by the time you are 90. It would be a big hit on your standard of living.

Maybe it's time to blow off Medicare. What happens to your standard of living if you don't sign up for Medicare at 65? It goes up to the equivalent of $47,200 a year. Of course, you'll still have medical expenses, but perhaps you can make a better, less-expensive arrangement.

Could you do still better? Yes. Just continue searching for a low-cost area. If you can find a place where the cost of living is 60% of the U.S. cost, your lifetime standard of living, without Medicare expenses, will be the equivalent of $55,500 -- very close to the $60,000 you got to spend while working in America.

Questions about personal finance and investments may be e-mailed to scott@scottburns.com. Questions of general interest may be answered in future columns. More columns by Scott Burns can be found here and here.

Here's a Fox News report in 53 seconds on how we're stay in Iraq forever.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eSZ5S3NN-h8

Cut and paste link below
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3kI8LNTqNo

High lights:
Bill O'Reilly tells Americans to "Shut Up."
Former Fox News contributor calls Fox News "Stalin-istic"
Fox News alters new content to persude American to agree on national policies.

Here is link to CBS report of Republican attempt to trick people to have changes in California presidential electoral votes.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exdQ5mWaOLY

How to Find an Angel
Debunking the myth of cherubs, wings and rosy cheeks.


We read in the 37th chapter of Genesis:

When Joseph arrived at Shechem, a man found him wandering around in the fields and asked him, "What are you looking for?" He replied, "I'm looking for my brothers. Can you tell me where they are grazing their flocks?" "They have moved on from here," the man answered. "I heard them say, 'Let's go to Dothan'."

Who was the man that found Joseph in the field? Was he a man or was he an angel? The answer is simple. He was a man and … he was an angel. OK, maybe the answer is not that simple.

All the Abrahamic faiths believe in angels (the Qur'an was, by Muslim belief, dictated to the prophet Muhammad by the angel Gabriel). We first meet angels in Gen. 3:24, when one of them is stationed outside the Garden of Eden with a fiery sword preventing Adam and Eve from sneaking back in. Angels appear to Hagar in the desert, tell Abraham about the birth of Isaac, stop Abraham from sacrificing Isaac, appear to Jacob in a dream ascending and descending a ladder to Heaven, tell Jacob to return to Canaan, wrestle with Jacob when he tries to return, point Joseph in the right direction to find his brothers, speak to Moses out of the burning bush, lead the people out of Egypt—and all this angelology is just from the first two books of the Bible.

In most all of these biblical angel stories, the angels are people (except for the fiery-sword angel and the burning-bush angel and the pillar-of-fire angel). So apparently unless their mission is too hot for people to handle, God uses people to deliver messages to us. It was later Christian angelology that dressed up the angels in their Hallmark card costumes and made them cute cherubic figures with rosy cheeks. I think Jewish angels mostly look like Borat.

The important part of an angel is the message, not the costume. In fact, the Hebrew word for angel is malach, which just means messenger. It does not mean winged messenger or harp-playing messenger. And that messenger can be, and usually is, an ordinary person who has no clue that he or she is on a mission from God. And, like the people, the messages God sends to us through people/angels are often quite ordinary, like the message to Joseph that changed his life: "Your brothers went that-a-way."

It makes sense to me that angels are people, because if angels were sent to us in full feather we could not help but notice them. However, if angels are actually ordinary human beings, the real test is ours. Can we hear God's message for our life being spoken through the people we meet—people who may very well be angels in the service of God? The Buddha called this ability to really listen and really see everything around you ekagrata, "single mind focus." When his disciples asked the Buddha if he was a god or a king he said, "No, I am just awake." Seeing angels just requires that we be awake.

Some of you who are awake know precisely when an angel came to you and what the angel said to you. Maybe the angel said, "You would make a great teacher or healer or athlete or chef or designer or artist or mother or father." And that message from that angel that you truly heard changed your life and gave you your calling, your passion, your work. Maybe the angel said, "I have somebody I would like you to meet." And that somebody is now your husband or wife. My friend Rick Warren has taught millions through his book "The Purpose-Driven Life" that God has a purpose in mind for each and every one of us. I agree with Rick and I believe that the people who nudge us toward God's purpose are the angels of our life.

I think we all ought to periodically remind ourselves to give thanks to God for our angels who find us wandering like Joseph through the fields of our life looking for something that is not there or has moved on, and then point us in the right direction. And after you thank God, I hope you would find time to write a letter to your angels and thank them for changing your life in ways they could never have imagined.

I absolutely think that people who do not believe in God can also thank their angels. Even if they believe that the message and the messenger are all the result of blind luck, it does not matter. They have still been changed by someone who came out of the blue and made everything different for their life, and this calls for some form of thankfulness, because thanks are the only payment real angels ever need.

In the iconic 1946 film "It's a Wonderful Life" by Frank Capra, George Bailey, played by Jimmy Stewart, who was fresh from bomber duty in the Air Force during World War II, is saved from suicide by Clarence the angel. Clarence, played by Henry Travers, finds George freezing and desperate on a bridge and saves him. Then, as a bell rings on George's Christmas tree in the happy-ending scene, we know Clarence has earned his wings at last. Except for the wings and the bells, I wonder, how did Frank Capra know that this is exactly how angels work?

Bless This Bottled Water
Forget Evian or Vitaminwater. The latest beverage trend: 'Holy Water.'

You need only go back to the first chapter of Genesis to see how elemental water is to the observance of faith: "And the Spirit of God," the Bible says, "moved upon the face of the waters." In the Torah, water is used to ordain priests and to purify the sons of Aaron before they enter the temple. In the New Testament, John baptizes Jesus with water from the Jordan River. Observant Muslims wash hands and feet before they pray, orthodox Jewish women take ritual baths once a month—and every Christian denomination still uses water as part of its sacred rites. Mormons, when they take the weekly sacrament, drink water instead of wine.

So it's not surprising that a few savvy marketers would seize on this universal symbol of purity for financial gain. Inspired, perhaps, by vitamin and energy waters, a number of new companies have begun making more explicit claims: their water doesn't just promote good health, it actually makes you good. Holy Drinking Water, produced by a California-based company called Wayne Enterprises, is blessed in the warehouse by an Anglican or Roman Catholic priest (after a thorough background check). Like a crucifix or a rosary, a bottle of Holy Drinking Water is a daily reminder to be kind to others, says Brian Germann, Wayne's CEO. Another company makes Liquid OM, superpurified bottled water containing vibrations that promote a positive outlook. Invented by Kenny Mazursky, a sound therapist in Chicago, the water purportedly possesses an energy field that Mazursky makes by striking a giant gong and Tibetan bowls in its vicinity. He says the good energy can be felt not just after you drink the water but before, when you're holding the bottle.

The most recent entry in this niche is Spiritual Water. It's purified municipal water, sold with 10 different Christian labels. The Virgin Mary bottle, for example, has the Hail Mary prayer printed on the back in English and Spanish. Spiritual Water helps people to "stay focused, believe in yourself and believe in God," says Elicko Taieb, the Florida-based company's founder who was formerly in the pest-control business. All three companies give a portion of their profits to charity.

This small band of feel-good entrepreneurs may face objections from a surprising quarter. Some religious believers, also convinced of the elemental importance of water, are campaigning against its ubiquitous sale and packaging on the grounds that the practice is neither ethical nor good for the environment. "Water is life," says Sister Mary Zirbes, a nun in the Franciscan Sisters of Little Falls, Minn. "It really should not be a commodity to be bought." The Franciscan Sisters, together with a community of Benedictine nuns nearby, have launched a letter-writing campaign against the largest producers of bottled water and they've designed coasters to encourage people to drink glasses, not bottles, of water from the tap. The Vineyard church in Boise, Idaho, sells slim reusable plastic bottles in its bookstore, and it has placed water stations throughout the church. "In a world where a billion people have no reliable source of drinking water, where 3,000 children die every day of waterborne diseases, let's be clear: bottled water is not a sin, but it sure is a choice," says Richard Cizik of the National Association of Evangelicals. "Spending $15 billion a year on bottled water is a testimony to our conspicuous consumption, our culture of indulgence." Taieb calmly refutes the implication that his Spiritual Water is bad for the planet. People put fewer of his bottles in the trash, he says, because they don't want to discard images of Jesus or Mary. Instead, they refill them with other beverages. Obviously, even do-gooders can disagree. Some believe that water is life, while others believe that water is their livelihood.

A man can have a job playing Santa or the Easter Bunny and he believes in them, that's OK, silly but OK.

But having a job that requires you except biology facts but not believe in those facts, that's crazy talk.

Televangelist won't comply with Senate inquiry
AP: Preacher Benny Hinn said Thursday he will not respond until next year
updated 11:13 a.m. ET, Thurs., Dec. 6, 2007
A second Christian ministry is refusing to meet a Thursday deadline for a Senate investigation into preachers' salaries, perks and travel, The Associated Press has learned.

Benny Hinn of World Healing Center Church Inc. and Benny Hinn Ministries of Grapevine, Texas, said in a statement to the AP on Thursday that he will not respond to the inquiry until next year.

A lawyer for preacher Creflo Dollar of World Changers Church International in suburban Atlanta had said Wednesday that the investigation should be referred to the IRS or the Senate panel should get a subpoena for the documents.

Senator not 'impressed'
Sen. Charles Grassley, the ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, sent lengthy questionnaires a month ago to six ministries so he could review whether pastors were complying with IRS rules that bar excessive personal gain through tax-exempt work.

Only Joyce Meyer Ministries of Fenton, Mo., has provided the detailed financial and board oversight information sought by Grassley.

Grassley, an Iowa Republican, said in a Wednesday conference call with reporters that he "can't be impressed" by the argument from some of the preachers that the IRS already monitors them, because his past inquiries have unearthed information that the IRS never knew.

All the ministries preach a form of "Word of Faith" theology, known as prosperity gospel, which teaches that God wants believers to reap material rewards for their faith.

Grassley has insisted his investigation "has nothing to do with church doctrine" and is strictly concerned with making sure nonprofit groups are following the law.

However, several religious liberty watchdogs have said the scope of the inquiry is too broad and warned that it could be unconstitutional.

Televangelists object to inquiry
Ronn Torossian, a spokesman for Hinn, said in a statement that the preacher "plans to facilitate a response to Senator Grassley's inquiry by Jan. 30th, and likewise notified the senator's office of this intent on Nov. 20th." Torossian said Hinn is "in full compliance with government agencies duly authorized to oversee churches and charitable organizations."

Torossian would not elaborate.

The other televangelists have been noncommittal in their public comments, but some have voiced strong objections that echo Dollar's.

The other ministries targeted in the inquiry are Bishop Eddie Long of New Birth Missionary Baptist Church and Bishop Eddie Long Ministries of Lithonia, Ga.; Randy and Paula White of Without Walls International Church and Paula White Ministries of Tampa, Fla.; and Kenneth and Gloria Copeland of Kenneth Copeland Ministries of Newark, Texas.

Refusals to turn over the information could lead to a court fight, giving a judge the authority to decide whether the committee is entitled to all the information it requested.

"Hopefully these organizations will work with us," said Grassley, who has been investigating nonprofit compliance with IRS rules for years. "I don't think I've had to issue a single subpoena in the five years that I've been trying to get cooperation from organizations."

Did Jesus say you can't have two masters? You can't both believe in the religious story of creation as fact and work toward an advancement of evolution theory. That's the oxymoron in the story.

BOSTON - A Christian biologist is suing the prestigious Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts, claiming he was fired for refusing to accept evolution, lawyers involved in the case said on Friday.

Nathaniel Abraham, an Indian national who describes himself as a "Bible-believing Christian," said in the suit filed on Monday in U.S. District Court in Boston that he was fired in 2004 because he would not accept evolution as scientific fact.

The latest U.S. academic spat over science and religion was first reported in The Boston Globe newspaper on Friday. Gibbs Law Firm in Florida, which is representing Abraham, said he was seeking $500,000 in compensation.

The zebrafish specialist said his civil rights were violated when he was dismissed shortly after telling his superior he did not accept evolution because he believed the Bible presented a true account of human creation.

Creationists such as Abraham believe God made the world in six days, as the Bible's Book of Genesis says.

Woods Hole, a federally funded nonprofit research center on Cape Cod, said in a statement it firmly believed its actions and those of its employees in the case were "entirely lawful" and that it does not discriminate.

Abraham, who was dismissed eight months after he was hired, said he was willing to do research using evolutionary concepts but that he had been required to accept Darwin's theory of evolution as scientific fact or lose his job.

The Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination dismissed the case this year, saying Abraham's request not to work on evolutionary aspects of research would be difficult for Woods Hole because its work is based on evolutionary theories.

Abraham said this condition was never spelled out in the advertisement for the job and that his dismissal led to severe economic losses, an injured reputation, emotional pain and suffering and mental anguish.

The case underscores tension between scientists, who see creationist views as anti-science, and evangelical Christians who argue that protections of religious freedom enshrined in the U.S. Constitution extend to scientific settings.

Abraham, 35, is now a biology professor at Liberty University, a Baptist school in Virginia founded by the Rev. Jerry Falwell, a Christian pastor and televangelist.

The church of Human and Animal Equality.

The first quote is compairable to some the christians here. Many here believe in God with faith, some may say blind faith, but to explore or question the beliefs inorder to have a stronger belief in it you lose the some of the spiritural side of religion. The more knowledgible you know about faith, the actual history, the politics the of time, then the old time tradition lose some of their value.

For instance many christians refuse to believe Jesus was Jewish. Not to get into any debate over this but the earliest followers of Jesus considered themselves still Jewish. The true christians were the converted gentiles. They changed was a once a particual Jewish sect that had Jesus a their messiah into their own religion.

It just hard for people to except the true facts because challeges their faith. Personally what I take from facts is a frame of reference of where certain beliefs came about. It actually strenghtens my faith.

Spider wrote: "Homosexuality is a sin. PERIOD. Only sinners go to heaven. PERIOD."

Your mother told you that if you don't have anything nice to say then don't say anything. Why don't you practice one of the ten comandments and honor your mother's wisdom?

Spider wrote: "I am a sinner, but I will be in heaven. Have I told anyone in these forums that they won't go to heaven? NO."

Spider do you know what a Pharisee is and how they act?

Your right Knoxman it not racist topic but it's seen as racist cause. Most of the illegals are not whites from europe but hispanics/ latinos, and Jamacian/ Hatian blacks from south America and the Caribbean. Some could argue that if the illegals were european then there would be less conflict over illegal immigration.

I personally I don't see it as a race issue per se but a class issue. There's the two working class group at odds here: American born here trying to make a living, and illegal workers born else where trying to make a living. Both groups are competting for jobs. The problem is compounded by the wealthy needing the illegals for cheap labor.

It a problem that the Bush adminstration can't solve. Bush wants cheap labor for American industries and services but doesn't want to pay the American working class quality pay. He tried to turn a blind eye to illegals who work under the table and on the cheap.

Of course it doesn't fly at all with working class born here in the states. Out comes the minute men watch the border as well as fence building to "protect our borders from terrorists." That's seen as racist.

Bush still wanted kind of cheap labor so he tried to have have immgration bill that had work visa program install. That bill was stalled and defeated in congress.

Like I said illegal immigration is more complicated than crime statistics.

Noah did not have one of every species onboard the Ark, that's not suggested in the Bible. Noah had one of every kind. For instance: Dog, wolves, coyotes are all one kind. Therefore, Noah would only have needed one mated couple from that kind. Same thing with elephants, bears, great cats, etc, etc. Within a kind, all members can breed with the other members. A Jack Russel and a Timber wolf (ignoring size differences) can produce babies.

Spider you don't believe in evolution so your arugment is null and void. LOL!

Oh by the way why are different version of God's word? There's the catholic Bible, the King James Bible, the Gidon Bible, what about the Mormon Bible?

Bible? Come on that old word of G-O-D... the new thing is the Koran! LOL! And boy, those muslims think that their version of God's inspiration is correct. They're like some of these fanatical Christian on the threads here. Muslims and Christian make strange bedfellows.

Well at least the Bible is a more update version of the Torah.

I'll play devil's advocate here:
If you deport every illegal immigrant will American work force fill the void that the deport illegal immigrant fills currently?

Would Americans take the same low pay as illegals get now?

Would Americans demand more pay for low end, low skill jobs and wouldn't that in turn drive production costs for EVERY industry that illegals have jobs in currently?

Could those production costs raise inflation and then in turn cause a recession?

I know it's a lot of ifs, woulds and coulds but it is obvious that deporting illegals will have a domino effect. But what effect will it cause? Where will the domino pieces fall and in what order?

In other words it more complex that crime rates alone you have to take into account ecomomy of that illegal fill. Illegal immigrants are not all violent criminals most are trying to survive in their present state of affairs. And by working, however illegally, they fill a much needed, yet lowly avoid.

Wishful thinking, IMO. Placing the responsibility entirely on the current Administration (as so many Democrats tend to do). Or the previous Administration (as the republicans tend to do) is pretty short sighted. It leaves out the Senate, House and Congress... who played a significant part in how we got here, both Democrat and Republican. I doubt that a Democrat in the Whitehouse is going to make a hill of beans difference over all, in our foreign policy.



Bush's political advisors pushed for war a couple of weeks before election day. They intentionally did that to avoid debating the war. Democrats fearing losing seats if they went against a then popular president.

All in it was bad choice for the White House to rush to war, a war that is now very unpopular, very costly and lowering national morale as well as troop morale. Costly in 3 way; 1)finanically in fighting and troop wound care and rehabilitation, 2)lives lost civilans both lost and soliders lives, and 3)negative international view of Americans from liberators and protectors of freedom to invaders, impirealists and even racist. (Honestly now some ingorant soliders refer to muslims as "rag heads")

The results turned the majority of Americans to want some drastic changes and they will be default vote overwhemly vote Democratic in the years to come.