The Number One Obstacle to Retirement

US News lists the number one obstacle to retirement. Want to guess what it is? I'll tell you in a minute, but do you want to take a shot before the answer is revealed?

Before reading this (and even after reading it) I would have said "not having enough money" would have been the biggest obstacle to retirement. Yes, this could have many different meanings -- not enough saved, too much debt, too many expenses (health care), etc. -- but the result is the same, the person can't retire because he/she doesn't have enough money to retire.

It's one of these sub-points that US News lists as their biggest obstacle. Their words:

At first it would seem that the biggest obstacle to retirement is not having enough money. Most people simply don't have enough in the bank to retire comfortably. While that is certainly a big part of the equation, it's just the tip of the iceberg. Why don't many people have enough money to retire? They didn't save enough, of course. But why didn't they save enough? And that brings us to what is, for many, the biggest obstacle to retirement--debt. And the problem isn't just any debt. The problem is non-mortgage debt.

Non-mortgage debt creates a triple-whammy when it comes to retirement. First, during your working years you have less to save toward retirement because you must make payments on your debt. Second, unlike a mortgage payment that goes toward a home that over the long term goes up in value, consumer debt usually goes to pay for things that have no lasting monetary value. And third, in retirement you need more income because, in addition to your regular monthly expenses, you must keep making payments on the non-mortgage debt you've racked up. As a result, many save less during their working years and need more during retirement.

You might disagree, but my opinion is that the average American is not a great manager of his/her money. As such, they ignore the basics that are required to do well financially (and thus retire). And to add more fuel to the fire, many then compound their problems by making horrible money mistakes. Poor money management + bad financial mistakes = you're not retiring anytime soon.

Sure, debt is a major problem (and especially "bad debt" like credit card debt). But it's really just an indication of the main issue -- people can't control their spending.

What's your take on the issue? What do you thin the #1 obstacle to retirement is?

Comments

[DIY Investor]

I guess non-mortgage debt is as good a candidate as other things. I think you have to take student loans out of that because they go producing human capital that increases income.
It is probably worthwhile to mention that there is a trade off involved and we need to be aware that value judgements are being made. Maybe an individual rationally wants to give up years of retirement to gain a wide screen tv and skis etc. today. That's a choice they obviously can make. Everybody's goal is not to retire early and lead a life of leisure. I'm just playing the devil's advocate not saying I understand it!

[PMT]

I think apathy is way up there. A lot of people just don't care. They think about today and continually push off saving for retirement until it's too late. My mom is a perfect example. She is almost 60 and little to no retirement. I think she expects her kids and SS to take care of her but has no desire to do the things she needs to do.

[Paul]

I have another spin on the situation - blame it on the boob tube. Although advertising has always been with us, I think the television age ushered in a new "keep up with the Joneses" and "I want it now" mentality in society that is wrecks prudent living. Those of us born after 1950 or so have been bombarded with TV advertising from birth. Remember all those Saturday morning cartoons with commercials hawking our favorite toys? They continued into adulthood, although now they are big screen TVs, BMWs, and Caribbean vacations. And TV programs give the subliminal messages of what the middle class standard of living is supposed to be (but really isn't). Have you ever noticed how nice all the TV characters' homes are, even though they may have ordinary or even low paying jobs? The net result is a society hypnotized into consuming far more than we can afford. Maybe our depression era grandparents did a better job of staying out of debt because they grew up without the hypnotic effect of TV?

[Leigh]

Maybe a portion of the equation is that we are supposed to be financial experts, not only putting away money, but investing it in the proper places to build wealth.

I know of a few folks who saved money along the way, but didn't understand the importance of where they put their money. They were so fearful of any risk (putting long term investments into stock mutual funds, for example) and instead opted for principle-preserving options like bonds.

This resulted in their money not growing in the way it needs to over decades.

That's not to say good information isn't out there, but rather that there is so much conflicting information that people opted for ultra-conservative investments.

[KH]

All good points.

Another critical thing in my opinion is fear & uncertainty about what the future might bring.

So many people these days have been hammered by certain media sources that are all the time confidently predicting ridiculously unlikely disasters--such as everyone in the government is a crook, all banks are run by crooks, the US and the world economic system will collapse and it will be every man for himself etc (like Master Po's post!).

People used to have common sense trust in the system, trust that if they saved they would be able to draw on that value later, but many people these days have been pursuaded that the end is near etc.

I think the fear causes people to try to ignore the future and try not to even think about it. So some people think, why not enjoy my money now & get the big screen TV? Or they buy precious metals and hide them around their house--which is also not a great way to prepare for retirement.

Fear is the enemy of rational thinking and action...anyone trying to stoke your fear is just trying to control you.

[kt- lifedividend]

it has to be debt because this blows away savings and investments, It goes without saying that if you do not have debt, you are at a better position to build a retirement portfolio, Also being without debt means that you have discipline in your spending which works out into earlier retirement

[Diane J Standiford]

I saved and saved, but major illness sucked my funds and working days. (MS and cancer), now at 53, I can't get the 5% I'd hoped for on my savings...I'm screwed.

[Carol]

The main obstacle to retirement is the finicial planning insdustry that scares people by saying that they need 70-85% of their final income to retire. Truth is that we should be looking at our projected expenses rather than a percentage of income.

[Rob]

I'm with FMF that most Americans do not manage their money well. I work for a company processes reimbursement checks. You would be amazed at how many people will call in annoyed that did not receive their check when they were expecting it and they have a payment of one type or another due. That of course is a result of not managing their money well as FMF already said.

If a person cannot even manage their money well enough so that they have enough cash to make their next car or mortgage payment, saving for retirement is probably the last thing they are thinking of.

[Old Limey]

On my own time, at work, since my home computer was a tiny Commodore 64 from Toys'R'Us, before I retired I constructed a computer model that included such things as:
1) Fixed expenses - Food - utilities - property taxes - home & auto insurance - income taxes - car expenses - home maintenance - entertainment - vacations - healthcare etc.
2) Income - Retirement pensions - social security income at age 62
3) Capital - Stock/Bond market investments
4) Debt - in our case there was none

I then set up limits with a range from expected low to expected high for all the variables such as inflation, stockmarket return etc..
I then did a Monte Carlo analysis using a random number generator to select random values of the parameters that were between the high and low limits.
I ran a large number of combinations and summarized the results.

The results, even under the worst combinations told me that we could safely retire.
Under the best combinations it showed me that our net worth would continue to grow throughout our retirement, so we retired with confidence.

Now after 17.5 years of retirement the actual results far exceeded my most optimistic expectations.
The reason - the growth of our investments during the incredible first 7 years.
12/28/1992 - 3/6/2000 --- 38.30% annual compound rate of return - the first 7+ years ---------- Hi-tech Bubble - very aggressive growth funds
03/06/2000 - 7/15/2010 --- 6.53% annual compound rate of return - the next 10+ years -------- Out of stocks by 3/13/2000 then gradually shifted into high yield bond funds etc.
12/28/1992 - 7/15/2010 - 18.59% annual compound rate of return - total period of 17.5 years - Currently in CDs, Municipal bonds, and 17% in two bond funds SXFIX and PGNDX

One other thing that helped was that prior to retirement my wonderful company, Lockheed Missiles & Space Co., brought in a team of retirement experts to teach a two day, weekend course, that involved every possible aspect of retirement. Wives were also invited and the course included a thick binder of all the printed and graphical information provided.

[Jenny]

Sometimes I cannot blame the people who seemingly "don't care" about saving. We are a total marketing culture and cultures are very hard to change. I think we will spend ourselves into poverty first. Day-to-day finances and the super speed of how transactions are done today are kind of overwhelming. Spending is made very easy for us. For us, the costs we have amassed on healthcare is what is making our future seem scary.

[Old Limey]

On the subject of non-mortgage debt, I received my Costco/AMEX statement yesterday.
I had put the remaining cost of our forthcoming vacation on it in order to get the 2% cash reward, so the balance was a hefty $17,327.24.

The minimum payment due is $347 and it then goes on to say that if I make no further charges and continue to make the minimum payment I will pay it off in 32 years (when I'm 107) at an APR of 13.24% for an estimated total of $36,128.

I guess that's the trap that this article is talking about.
It goes without saying that if I didn't intend to pay it off in full with Bill-Pay the day before it's due we wouldn't be going on the vacation.

[chynalemay]

The vacation that last forever.....

[Stephan]

im with you, i think it all comes down to spending. if we would stop consuming at the rate we do and actually take a step back and look at where our money is going, im sure alot of people could easily slice 20% off of their expenses really quickly with no real drop in living standard
Preferred Financial Services

[Old Limey]

Jenny:
I have a beautiful 21 year old granddaughter that is a spend-all. Hair, cosmetics, clothing, accessories, a nice car, and trips to Hawaii will eat up a young person's paycheck in a hurry.

Now with reference to the country as a whole, we have the enormous unfunded liabilities of healthcare, medicare and social security and lack the backbone to take the bad medicine which is higher taxes. The two ongoing undeclared wars against an undefinable enemy is also costing us precious lives, adding greatly to the costs of taking care of our Vets and adding greatly to the deficit. Current estimates are that in the next 5 or 6 years the interest on the national debt will exceed the defense budget. Just as the Hi-Tech Bubble was in an unsustainable uptrend until it burst in March/2000, our deficits and debt are also in an unsustainable uptrend until something really bad happens. What form it will take I have no idea - maybe foreign countries will stop buying our treasury bonds.

[BillV]

Call me Pollyana-ish, or naive(I 've been called worse).But;
Don't bet against the US. Things are not rosy now to be sure. But most of our debt, we owe to ourselves, not foreign countries. (US bonds and treasuries)

When have times been always rosy an flush? Wars, rumours of wars, calmaties, diasasters--these are the norm. We've been through a lot worse. Even the name calling in the political realm and blogs has been worse in our history.

Of course I can't prove it, but. On the other hand, it was just a few years ago that it seemed also that the debt and deficit were uncontrollable. Yet it was contained, We were on out way to paying off/down. And then bad things happened. Two wars(regardless of whether one supports or despises them) are a strain. The market/housing/financial crisis.

The future is not an extrapolation of the past. Current trends are current trends until they are not. Meet the new trend, same as the old trend.

I now get off my soap box. Back to FMF's perspective: Spend less, earn more, give generously, live well.

[Budgeting in the Fun Stuff]

I would have guessed debt, but that's just because it's been on my mind. We just paid off our car loan today, our last grad school payment yesterday, and have no more than 6 1/2 years left on our mortgage. Just having the extra $625 a month from what we were saving for grad school and the $330 a month from the car loan gives us nearly $1000 extra in cash a month to save, invest, etc. That's 20% of all our monthly take home pay! The difference is astounding!

[Mark]

@BillV: You can say don't bet against the US, but there are some parallels to the British Empire 100 years ago, the Dutch empire not long before that, and the Roman Empire a long time before that.

The British is the most recent (and to Old Limey maybe the most relevant too!). Think about how quickly they went from controlling the globe (1900/1910?) to losing it all (1950/1960?). In 1900 no-one would have predicted the rise of America, and in 2000/2010 we hear rumblings about "Emerging Asia", but it could equally easily be some other power that dominates in 2050.

That doesn't mean the US will collapse and become a third-world country (although Russia pretty much managed to do exactly that). But it may very well not be the economic power it is today. Since this is a financial blog, the relevant question to me is how to make the most of the situation financially. Buy or rent? Invest in the US or China? Stocks or bonds? etc.

It is very easy to place all your bets on your home country - it's like investing all your money in the company you work for, be it Enron, BP or some other apparently invincible power.

On the other hand ... I hope you're right!

[Old Limey]

BillV
The US government holds 52% of our treasury bills
Foreign governments hold 25% of our treasury bills.
Presumable the American people and American companies hold the other 23%.
The government's unfunded liabilities are $109 Trillion arising from Social Security, Medicare and the Prescription drug plan.

In 2000 Clinton left office with a budget surplus of $230B for fiscal 2000, after a surplus of $123B for fiscal 1999. In Gore's election campaign he claimed that by 2008 the nation debt would be retired. Two wars and the greatest ever recession ended that dream.

[BillV]

old limey:
Sorry, I'm not clear on your point.
BillV

[JeEffinwesternwwa]

Clintons CONGRESS was the good reason the reason, beginning w/ `1994: they never bought to his budgets, kept "paygo" and covered any increases with spending cuts. Of course an overheated economy and resulting tax income to the fed govt caused a larger than realistic surplus by 2000~. Then come the just past decade: throw in Part D (the unfunded drug benefit of medicare), the result of 9/11 - a big recession, another recession beginning late this last decade, unfettered RECORD spending by the passt several congresses, AND two LONG unfended wars and here we are, almost to late to tighten the belt. Folks don't realize how MUCH the debt and deficit really are and the EXTREMELY drastic changes (mnuch like Greece, Britan etc., are attempting) it will take to change it...

[Old Limey]

BillV
Foreign governments hold 25% of our government's debt. They are content to hold it as long as they have faith in our currency.
As our national debt grows it means that our currency is worth less, i.e. it's backed by faith in our government and not by gold and was being managed very well up until 1970.
Year.. Debt (Billions)
1950... 256.8
1960... 290.5
1970... 380.9
1980... 909.0
1990. 3,206.3
2000. 5,628.7
2001. 5,769.9
2002. 6,198.4
2003. 6,760.0
2004. 7,354.7
2005. 7,905.3
2006. 8,451.4
2007. 8,950.7
2008. 9,985.8
2009 12,311.4
2010 13,203.1 (30 june)
2010 14,456.3
2011 15,673.9
2012 16,565.7
2013 17,440.2
2014 18,350.0

The unfunded liabilities are future debts and costs that are not budgeted for. In other words, we're looking ahead to a train wreck as the percentage of the population drawing from social security, medicare, and the prescription drug plan, increase due to the demographics of our population. In 2011 the first of the baby boomers reach the age of 65 and the baby boomer bulge will then start having a very significant effect upon the costs of healthcare and social security. At some time, not too far ahead unless huge financial changes are made the total current income of the government will all go to paying the interest on the national debt. What then?

[Old Limey]

Mark:
We're witnessing what you describe in the European Union. You have a super strong country like Germany using the exact same currency as a very weak country like Greece. Neither of them can arbitrarily devalue their currency which is controlled by the European Central Bank. This has really hurt the economies of the weaker nations, particularly Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece and Spain (known as PIIGS).
Some countries like the UK are glad they joined the economic union but not also the monetary union.

I was in England and witnessed the dissolution of the Empire on TV, as one country after another was given their independance. Basically England was broke at the end of WWII and could no longer afford to administer all of their colonies. The downside as seen today is that many members of former colonies have gone to the UK to live since the welfare, health, and education benefits are so much better. The consequences today are that some of the largest industrial cities now have more Mosques than they do Churches and the whole fabric of the country has undergone a complete change with whole sections where you never hear a word of English spoken.
By the way, the French, Spanish, and Belgians also had large empires in recent times and one of the world's greatest and earliest was that of Alexander the Great of Macedonia back in 330BC. Julius Caesar invaded Britain in 55BC and left many roads, bridges, viaducts, and roman baths, but was called back to Rome after a few years.

As for investing abroad I'm not ready to do that. I did buy my wife a necklace with a mounted 1oz. Gold Krugerrand, that she never wears, decades ago for about $350 - I should have bought a lot more.

[BillV]

Old Limey:
You and I have shared many posts and thoughts. I respect what you have achieved. You have done well. So. You of all people ( Yes, Iknow your story and I like it) should be the last to sell this country short.

I still remain a fan of yours. I think you are too dark about our future.

all the best, billv

[Eddie]

The very nature of future itself is the biggest obstacle. Taxes, medical costs,investment returns.....the list of unknowns is staggering. Ask any Baby Boomer if this is the world he envisioned when he showed up for his first day of work.

I don't mean to encourage pessimism. Intelligent choices and reasonable guesses will be more then sufficient to take many- perhaps even most of us- to a happy and comfortable retirement. But it would do well for a persons sense of reality(and, I think, their attitude to people who may not make such intelligent choices) to keep in mind that a certain amount of world politics, human nature, and simple good or bad luck will have just as much of an impact.

[CJ]

It all comes down to...immediate gratification

[Ed]

It all comes down to bad money management. Nothing more. There is no reason that people could not live very confortablly thoughtout there life if they just made the approriate decisions.... It all comes down to an impatient society. You want a sweet tv...... Save! When you have enough cash... Buy it.... Just don't neglect the number one rule..... Save first! Silly Americans.

We all get it and most here work that way... It is ashame others do not.

[Concojones]

@Old Limey: if you're so pessimistic about the US debt, how come you're invested in bonds? If interest rates go up (see PIIGS), bonds go down.

As for FMF's blog post: debt is a result of something else: excessive spending.

[Concojones]

@Ed: I don't know what country you're from, but this is not about silly Americans. This is about advertising leading an entire country astray. Right now Europe is being "worked", but wait a few decades and it will be your country's turn - wherever you are.

[My Personal Finance Journey]

I totally agree with the root cause being that people cannot control their spending. This is due to the fact that excess, unneeded spending causes this type of non-mortgage debt.

For example, I recently talked to a friend that racked up $20,000 in credit card debt in being new furniture for her apartment. Was this really needed? Probably not. In addition, instead of buying a cheaper used car, she opted for leasing (that's right, as in not gaining equity at all) a brand new SUV.

[Old Limey]

@Concojones
I am not a pessimist, I am a realist. My logical engineering training makes me examine the facts of the situation. I also have never stayed very long in investments that are trending downwards. There is only one goal in investing and that is growing your own investments all the time. Did you forget - I hung on to my money by selling everything I had during the 4 market days after the Tech Bubble burst in March 2000. In that particular instance, because the drop was so severe and incredibly fast I was not following a market timing signal, I was following my gut (my backup system) - I have an incredibly low pain threshold when it comes to losing my hard earned money and if I want to sleep comfortably I have to get out. I also sold all three of my children's accounts at that time, and they are glad I did. How many professional financial advisors did the same for their clients? My 51 year old daughter has worked for an attorney as a paralegal since 1990, he adds money into a SEP-IRA for her every April, she has never invested one cent of her own money and it is now worth $1.497M.

One excellent market letter that I have received daily since 1995 has been in a MMF for many months now but yesterday's letter, for the first time, talks about being prepared to use Inverse funds. I won't use Inverse funds because of the way they can turn on a dime when investors cover their "Shorts". I will still stay in the most conservative in come investments I can find.
Even if we go into a double dip recession, as things look, there will always be a lot of people doing the right thing with their money, but the majority will be paralyzed and do what they have always done, which is nothing.

The Greatest Generation of Americans - the men and women that served in WWII, were thrifty, hard working people that didn't run up mountains of debt to buy things that they couldn't afford. The governments of that period and right through until 1970 acted very responsibly and kept the national debt down to $0.38 Trillion. It's the later generations and their governments that have spent recklessly and allowed it to reach a staggering $13.2 Trillion. The two most recent egregious examples were the Bush Prescription Drug plan that was unfunded and added $720 Billion to the debt and now the Obama Universal Healthcare plan that added another $1 Billion. Now after the huge costs of bailing out AIG, GM, Chrysler, Fannie and Freddy, BofA, CitiGroup and all of the other giveaways such as Cash for Clunkers, Housing Tax Credits, extension of unemployment benefits up to two years etc. that are part of the Stimulus package we are facing the addition of over $1 Trillion per year to the debt for many years to come, and many are calling for another Stimulus. If we ran our finances the way the government runs their's we woul be in the Poorhouse. I call that Realism.

President .... Change in National Debt
Roosevelt...... -24.4%
Truman......... -21.7%
Eisenhower... -11.0%
Eisenhower.... -5.2%
Kennedy....... -8.3%
Johnson....... -8.3%
Nixon............ -3.0%
Ford............. +0.2%
Carter........... -3.3%
Reagan....... +11.3% <--
Reagan........ +9.3% <--
Bush 1........ +15.0% <--
Clinton.......... -0.7%
Clinton.......... -9.0%
Bush 2......... +7.1% <--
Bush 2........ +20.0% <--
Obama.......... +7.2% <--

[Concojones]

@Old Limey: for what it's worth, I actually agree with your pessimism/realism about national debts. If I'm reading you correctly, you're in bonds for now but prepared to go all cash when rates rise?

[BillV]

@Old Limey
I want to ask you about your last post, seeking clairification. BTW, by asking this I am making no value judgement on either plan--not that I don't have one, I just prefer to stay non -political here. Here is your comment:

"...Bush Prescription Drug plan that was unfunded and added $720 Billion to the debt and now the Obama Universal Healthcare plan that added another $1 Billion..."

Are those numbers accurrate or is there a typo? 720 billion and 1 billion
Again I'm not quibbling just asking.

Once upon a time an American Senator (Everett Dirksen) said something to the effect: a million here, a million there, and soon you're talking about real money. Now we are in the billions.

[Concojones]

@BillV: I suppose that was meant to be 720 billion and 1 TRILLION. As you see, we're now talking trillions. Government debt is realistically expected to grow by about 1.5 trillion a year in the coming decade.

[Old Limey]

@BillV and Concojones
You are right of course, the new healthcare plan adds $1 Trillion or close to it.
My wife & I voted for Obama but unfortunately all new Presidents don't start off with clean slates. He inherited the worst recession since the Great Depression, two wars, an escalated national debt, and a huge budget deficit from the prior administration. He also promised more than I believe he will be able to deliver and may not get a second term.

Clinton inherited a huge budget deficit but instead of inheriting a recession, a boom had just started - remember the Goldilocks economy - not too hot - not too cold - but just right.
The data clearly show that Reagan started the big deficit spending and Bush 1 and Bush 2 continued the pattern. Their theory being that by cutting taxes for large corporations and the wealthiest individuals the benefits trickle down to all of us. Unfortunately the pipeline through which the benefits are supposed to trickle gets siphoned off to company officers and stockholders.

It's amazing to me that by 1950 this country only had a national debt of $256.8 Billion, that says a lot about the fiscal responsibility of all the earlier Presidents.
The other looming problem is that when interest rates finally start to rise, as they have to, the interest the government will have to pay on all newly issued treasury bonds will be so much higher and eat up even more of the government's income. The way an individual gets out of a mess like this is to declare bankruptcy but that ruins your credit for a long time. That's not an option for our government. Devaluing their currency has been the way countries in South America and elsewhere went about reducing the size of their debt and I suppose it may ultimately come to that though with the dollar being the world's major currency that many commodities, such as oil, trade in that could result in other problems.

[BillV]

I promise all readers here that by the end of seven(7) years,
all will be better.

I hope so anyway.

I am old enough to remember many other scarey situations:
The Germans were going to out produce us(pre WWII)
The Soviets were going to bury us;
the Germans were going to out sell us;
the Japanese were going to outmanaged us;
the EU was going to displace usalong with the euro;
the Chinese are going to own us;(remember when Europe had a cow cause they thought we were going to own them)
the earth was entering a new ice age, a new hot age, a new ice age, and now climate change.

As bad as it is now, and it is bad; it is no how, no way, no shape, no where near what conditions/mood/sentiment /anxiety level/danger level of the 30's.

Our scariest people now are Glenn Beck and E Schultz.(Just to keep it non-partisan)--But Glenn is really the scarier of the two.

BTW, if the situation isn't better in 7 then I'll by you a beverage of your choice. Of course you'll have to come join me on your own.

[JimL]

The focus always seems to be the President(s), but the big generator of deficit spending is Congress and both parties have contributed equally to the problem. Both sides have their pet projects/programs and, in the end, the compromise is to give in to both sides and we have huge spending. We are now in a situation in which everyone talks about the out of control debt and instead of looking at what to do, our congress goes out and spends even more. We have yet to solve huge problems in covering the long term funding of both social security and medicare, yet we then go and add the Prescription drug benefit program and the new national healthcare plan that will just makes things worse in the long run.

[Old Limey]

BillV
You are quite right, conditions now are nothing like the 1930's. We have too many protections built into our system these days, thanks largely to FDR. I was glad to see that the Finance Reform bill just cleared the senate, that will help prevent repeats of 2008.

Forty percent of all the banks failed, unemployment was over 25%, Gold was $20/ounce, no welfare, no unemployment insurance, no food stamps, no FDIC insurance of deposits.

The Dow Jones market peaked at 381 on September 3, 1929, and bottomed out at 42 in 1932, which is an amazing 89% decline. It did not reach 381 again until 23 years later in 1955 (that doesn’t include inflation losses). The children of those Depression age parents became the Greatest Generation, it's not hard to understand why after what they went through and the lessons they learned.

My wife and I take an ongoing American History class run by our Adult Education Center, it was a big eye opener when we covered the Great Depression and the Dust Bowl. Next semester we start at the beginning again and cover the Revolutionary war for the 2nd. time, where we Brits deservedly got our asses kicked.

[BillV]

I enjoy your posts OL, and here I 've actully been thinking (regarding your last comment) the colonials were wrong and unjustified in the choice of action. Second, you'd think we'd learn something from our own history. Nobody like a foreign power telling them what to do.

Our country was much closer to a brink thna most of us know.

Someone back then said to the affect: Better to be ruled badly by ourselves than ruled well by someone else.

Enjhoy your class.

[Old Limey]

BillV
I am not sure of the meaning of your last comment.
If I had been in the USA back then I would have been one of the revolutionaries myself, not a loyalist. Actually the "Brits" I was referring to were the British officers, maybe you also didn't realize it but a large portion of the British soldiers were actually mercenaries and were Hessians, see below.

During the American Revolutionary War, Landgrave Frederick II of Hesse-Kassel (a principality in northern Hesse or Hessia) and other German leaders hired out thousands of conscripted subjects as auxiliaries to Great Britain to fight against the American revolutionaries. About 30,000 of these soldiers were sold into service. They were called Hessians, because 12,992 of the total 30,067 men came from Hesse-Kassel.
Some were direct subjects of King George III; he ruled them as the Elector of Hanover. Other soldiers were sent by Count William of Hesse-Hanau; Duke Charles I of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel; Prince Frederick of Waldeck; Margrave Karl Alexander of Ansbach-Bayreuth; and Prince Frederick Augustus of Anhalt-Zerbst. Other Hessian soldiers were Russian mercenaries who fought for pay. The "Hessian" troops included more than 16,000 Russian soldiers.
The troops were not mercenaries in the modern sense of military professionals who voluntarily hire out their own services for money. As in most armies of the eighteenth century, the men were mainly conscripts, debtors, or the victims of impressment; some were also petty criminals. Pay was low; some soldiers received nothing but their daily food. The officer corps usually consisted of career officers who had served in earlier European wars. The revenues paid for the men's service went back to the German royalty. Nevertheless, some Hessian units were respected for their discipline and excellent military skills.

[BillV]

Old Limey
Sorry abour the typo and miscommunication on my part. You mentioned that you and your wife were going to take another American History class. That is what my last comment was referencing. I hope enjoy the latest history class you are taking.

While I did know about the Hessians, I was unaware that some 16,000 were Russian.