PBS Frontline : The Retirement Gamble, sorta Must See (1 Viewer)

[NutterButter]

It is not going to matter when people want to retire.  They simply will not be able.  There is not going to be a choice. 

You'd have to show me some numbers to convince me that a lot can't retire when they're 75.   Its always been the case that people worked until they died.  We're just moving the finish line.   

 

[wilked]

You'd have to show me some numbers to convince me that a lot can't retire when they're 75.   Its always been the case that people worked until they died.  We're just moving the finish line.   

you're misguided if you don't think those in their 60s don't have significant job risks.  Basically they don't have the technical skills of many in their 30s, they are significantly more expensive, and they often are much less driven (committed) to the job.  And should they find themselves without work, they have significant challenges to find new work.

I hear what you're saying, and you have a good point on paper.  I have seen the reality of it as well and don't think it is that simple.

 

[wilked]

Just ran across this article and wanted to comment on how screwed the younger generations are.  Baby boomers had easily one of the most benign run of market conditions to build wealth ever.  Huge tailwinds - and they're dramatically undersaved.  It drives me to the conclusion that the vast majority of people simply don't have the capacity to save for a future date and that there will be a big push for a nationalized retirement system in the not too distant future.  (A system that will be setup by financial companies to extract all the returns, not to mention the political imperatives that will distort it).

I read these things and just shake my head.  If that generation couldn't do it then no generation will ever save properly.  

Any article that speaks to boomers retirement that ignores pensions is off, wouldn't you say?  Did I read the article correctly that it is focused on 401K wealth?

the boomers I know retiring, majority of them are retiring with their main income source being pension, and later (or immediately in some cases) supplemented by SS.  401K becomes a less sturdy 'third leg' of their retirement stool.  And beyond all of that, most of the boomers became homeowners somewhere in late 70s / 80s, ie the magic point to become a homeowner in the US

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-RHk84Mq9_48/Te2EJsaePsI/AAAAAAAABE8/ELksE6qfhrc/s1600/U.S.%2BHousing%2BPrice%2BIndex%2BSince%2B1900.jpg

Again, most of these boomers I know are either currently downsizing or prepping to downsize their housing and pocketing some decent cheddar in the process.  

The core of your argument holds I think (millennials are screwed as a generation) 

 

[NutterButter]

you're misguided if you don't think those in their 60s don't have significant job risks.  Basically they don't have the technical skills of many in their 30s, they are significantly more expensive, and they often are much less driven (committed) to the job.  And should they find themselves without work, they have significant challenges to find new work.

I hear what you're saying, and you have a good point on paper.  I have seen the reality of it as well and don't think it is that simple.

oh, i'm not saying that's not the case for their existing white collar jobs.  but there's plenty of low paying fallback jobs which they're better suited for than their teenage counterparts who aren't nearly as reliable.   so you take SS at 65 and a job paying $8/hr and that's a solid living.  you're on medicare at that point so you're medical expenses aren't more than $5k/yr when you factor in secondary insurance.  you don't need much of a house since you're empty nesting it at that point.   is it some glorious lifestyle.  absolutely not, but when has it ever been for the vast majority of the population.   

 

[Sand]

you're misguided if you don't think those in their 60s don't have significant job risks.  Basically they don't have the technical skills of many in their 30s, they are significantly more expensive, and they often are much less driven (committed) to the job.  And should they find themselves without work, they have significant challenges to find new work.

Most of these folks are forced to retire due to health reasons.  So they're never going to come back.

 

[Judge Smails]

It's hard enough to stay relevant in the workforce into your early 60's.  Would hate to depend on staying relevant and healthy to work beyond 70. 

 

[Steve Tasker]

Any article that speaks to boomers retirement that ignores pensions is off, wouldn't you say?  Did I read the article correctly that it is focused on 401K wealth?

the boomers I know retiring, majority of them are retiring with their main income source being pension, and later (or immediately in some cases) supplemented by SS.  401K becomes a less sturdy 'third leg' of their retirement stool.  And beyond all of that, most of the boomers became homeowners somewhere in late 70s / 80s, ie the magic point to become a homeowner in the US

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-RHk84Mq9_48/Te2EJsaePsI/AAAAAAAABE8/ELksE6qfhrc/s1600/U.S.%2BHousing%2BPrice%2BIndex%2BSince%2B1900.jpg

Again, most of these boomers I know are either currently downsizing or prepping to downsize their housing and pocketing some decent cheddar in the process.  

The core of your argument holds I think (millennials are screwed as a generation) 

What I'm starting to see among boomers vs. millennials is that millennials are, in general, trying to contribute to their retirement generally as much as their boomer / Gen X parents have, but without the pension safety net.  I have plenty of friends in my age range (30) who have little-to-nothing in savings.  Maybe a few thousand at most.....not living paycheck-to-paycheck but not socking away huge chunks of money for the future.  These people are not frivolous spenders, but the money just isn't there.

I can't help but envision an even-bigger crisis in 10-15 years when the millennial generation starts taking retirement planning more seriously and really realizes how royally ####ed most people are.  At least in the pension era, if you were woefully clueless about retirement planning you could at least count on something coming in every month.  Most millennials won't have that luxury, and won't be able to start fighting it until it's far too late to do much about it.

 

[James Daulton]

Work until my 70's?  F that!  I'm getting out as close to 60 as possible.  I'll happily sacrifice a vacation a year when I'm retired so that I can at least enjoy a few years of not having to answer to anyone and doing whatever the F I want.

You never know when the Grim Reaper's gonna come calling.  And if I'm one of those "worked for 50 years and dies 1 year into retirement" guys I'm going to be F'ing pissed in whatever afterlife there is. 

 

[IC FBGCav]

Aren't the rich people just waiting for viable robots so they can off all us pee ons and have the world to themselves?

 

[KCitons]

Work until my 70's?  F that!  I'm getting out as close to 60 as possible.  I'll happily sacrifice a vacation a year when I'm retired so that I can at least enjoy a few years of not having to answer to anyone and doing whatever the F I want.

You never know when the Grim Reaper's gonna come calling.  And if I'm one of those "worked for 50 years and dies 1 year into retirement" guys I'm going to be F'ing pissed in whatever afterlife there is. 

Afterlife is just more work. 

 

[Chadstroma]

you're misguided if you don't think those in their 60s don't have significant job risks.  Basically they don't have the technical skills of many in their 30s, they are significantly more expensive, and they often are much less driven (committed) to the job.  And should they find themselves without work, they have significant challenges to find new work.

I hear what you're saying, and you have a good point on paper.  I have seen the reality of it as well and don't think it is that simple.

Think about it... you think being a Wal-Mart greeter was their master plan all along? Sure, you can find some that do it to do something but most do it because they don't have a choice of not working and it is the only job that they can get. 

 

[wilked]

Think about it... you think being a Wal-Mart greeter was their master plan all along? Sure, you can find some that do it to do something but most do it because they don't have a choice of not working and it is the only job that they can get. 

Here's how easy it is to get that job as a WalMart greeter

http://www.businessinsider.com/wal-mart-receives-23000-applications-2013-11

A new Wal-Mart store in Washington D.C. has been inundated with applications for associates. 

The store is currently combing through more than 23,000 applications for 600 available positions, reports NBC Washington. 

That means that Wal-Mart will be able to hire one person for every 38 applications it receives — i.e., just 2.6% of applicants will walk out with a job. 

 

[Sand]

Aren't the rich people just waiting for viable robots so they can off all us pee ons and have the world to themselves?

Yes,  yes we are. 

 

[Statorama]

Reading this thread makes me think about investing in Ramen noodle companies.  Seems like that's what a lot of older folks are going to be having 3 meals a day at some point.

 

[NutterButter]

Here's how easy it is to get that job as a WalMart greeter

http://www.businessinsider.com/wal-mart-receives-23000-applications-2013-11

Wow, a 4 year old article.  Things will probably look even worse if pick an article from 8 years ago.

 

[NewlyRetired]

If people require full time, high pay when they are retired then yes life is going to get harder and harder.

I am hopeful that we can find some sort of middle ground between being flush with cash at 60 and needing to still grind out 40 hours a week.

One thing I have found in my retirement is the abundance of small part time jobs.  There are a bunch of these around and they are very hard to fill because most people are looking for 40+ hours.

If you can manage your finances in a space where an 8-15 hour a week job can help make ends meet in retirement, I think that would be a nice sweet spot to shoot for.

 

[KCitons]

If people require full time, high pay when they are retired then yes life is going to get harder and harder.

I am hopeful that we can find some sort of middle ground between being flush with cash at 60 and needing to still grind out 40 hours a week.

One thing I have found in my retirement is the abundance of small part time jobs.  There are a bunch of these around and they are very hard to fill because most people are looking for 40+ hours.

If you can manage your finances in a space where an 8-15 hour a week job can help make ends meet in retirement, I think that would be a nice sweet spot to shoot for.

Yep, they can have Tues, Weds and Thurs AM as far as I'm concerned. Just don't get in the way of football season. 

 

[Johnnymac]

It continues to amaze me how we americans  are so focused on working and money.  I hear people who actually brag about working 80 hours a week.  That should be embarrassing to admit imo.  The retirement age needs to be lowered.  I think 55 sounds good to me.  Thats roughly a 30 year career after college, etc.  Thats plenty.

 

[NutterButter]

It continues to amaze me how we americans  are so focused on working and money.  I hear people who actually brag about working 80 hours a week.  That should be embarrassing to admit imo.  The retirement age needs to be lowered.  I think 55 sounds good to me.  Thats roughly a 30 year career after college, etc.  Thats plenty.

If you plan accordingly, thats certainly doable.  

 

[Sand]

Reading this thread makes me think about investing in Ramen noodle companies.  Seems like that's what a lot of older folks are going to be having 3 meals a day at some point.

True, though to a very reasonable extent many people make their situations much worse - even the poor spend a large amount of their wealth on luxuries.  I know it's anecdotal, but I see a ton of new model F-150s in front of double wides in my part of the world.  People will, by and large, ignore tomorrow and spend for now.

 

[DocHolliday]

True, though to a very reasonable extent many people make their situations much worse - even the poor spend a large amount of their wealth on luxuries.  I know it's anecdotal, but I see a ton of new model F-150s in front of double wides in my part of the world.  People will, by and large, ignore tomorrow and spend for now.

People are expected to buy what they want.  The TV tells them to.  Is this the result of focused and extremely effective advertising or something psychological.  Do we need instant gratification so much that we avoid thinking about retirement or the money struggles that the new car is going to create?  Too many people buy new cars to replace the car they almost paid off, new phones simply because it is the latest model, smokes to slowly kill themselves and rid them of their paycheck, and on and on.   

 

[Chadstroma]

Here's how easy it is to get that job as a WalMart greeter

http://www.businessinsider.com/wal-mart-receives-23000-applications-2013-11

Not sure how that is relevant. I have seen three types of people acting as greeters. Elderly, developmentally challenged individuals and disabled individuals. As for the elderly, do you think that the old man saying welcome to Wal-Mart planned on that being part of his retirement package or do you think that he is doing what he needs to because he didn't plan? Like I said, I am sure you can find a few who do it because they want to kill some time or like it etc. But for the most part, the ones that do it need to work and there is not a lot of work available for people at that age- however, saying "welcome to Wal-Mart" doesn't take any special skills and thus there you go. Most of the Wal-Mart greeters you see are elderly. 

 

[Chadstroma]

It continues to amaze me how we americans  are so focused on working and money.  I hear people who actually brag about working 80 hours a week.  That should be embarrassing to admit imo.  The retirement age needs to be lowered.  I think 55 sounds good to me.  Thats roughly a 30 year career after college, etc.  Thats plenty.

Retirement age can be whatever it is you wish. In fact, I know of people that work those 80 hour weeks in their 20's and 30's so that they can retire starting in their 40's. 

Now, if you are saying the Social Security system age should be lowered. You are insane. The system is already a ponzi scheme with the clock ticking on it. Lowering it would just speed the complete failure of the system. 

Like most Americans, I don't think you have thought this through. 

 

[NutterButter]

Not sure how that is relevant. I have seen three types of people acting as greeters. Elderly, developmentally challenged individuals and disabled individuals. As for the elderly, do you think that the old man saying welcome to Wal-Mart planned on that being part of his retirement package or do you think that he is doing what he needs to because he didn't plan? Like I said, I am sure you can find a few who do it because they want to kill some time or like it etc. But for the most part, the ones that do it need to work and there is not a lot of work available for people at that age- however, saying "welcome to Wal-Mart" doesn't take any special skills and thus there you go. Most of the Wal-Mart greeters you see are elderly. 

What age are you referring to?

 

[Chadstroma]

True, though to a very reasonable extent many people make their situations much worse - even the poor spend a large amount of their wealth on luxuries.  I know it's anecdotal, but I see a ton of new model F-150s in front of double wides in my part of the world.  People will, by and large, ignore tomorrow and spend for now.

True. Absolutely true. 

But then again, sometimes people value things differently than you do. Sometimes people may not care for a house but really like to spend money on that truck. 

My FIL values things much differently than most people I know. He is a doctor. I don't know the full picture but he has a lot of money in the bank(s). They have a decent house in an upper middle class neighborhood that was built in '81. Paid off of course. The siding needed to be re-done a couple of years back... he did it himself. He will fix things, and fix them and fix them until essentially they don't make the parts for them anymore. None of the appliances have been bought in the last decade. I am sure some are 30 years old. I only know of two things he has been willing to spend a little money on. 1) Education. 2) Cars. He does like his cars. Now, he doesn't go and get a Ferrari and he doesn't cycle through them but he has a couple of Caddy's and a couple of Lexus. They are getting a bit older now but again, same mindset, he fixes them rather than getting a new one. 

Point being... though it is not quite the double wide and F-150, it has echoes of it in a different scale. He could have got a much larger house. But doesn't. He keeps the one he bought and keeps it up. He did splurge a bit on the cars though because he likes those. 

However, this is kind of the exception that proves the point. More so I would venture to say Americans spend right at their means. Some more and some less. But income does not change things. More money- more spending. Less money- less spending but they still spend.  

 

[Chadstroma]

What age are you referring to?

Retirement age. 

 

[NutterButter]

Retirement age. 

Plenty of retail jobs for people age 65.  I see them all the time working the register at the super market or in the aisles helping customers at home depot.   

 

[Sand]

True. Absolutely true. 

But then again, sometimes people value things differently than you do. Sometimes people may not care for a house but really like to spend money on that truck. 

My FIL values things much differently than most people I know. He is a doctor. I don't know the full picture but he has a lot of money in the bank(s). They have a decent house in an upper middle class neighborhood that was built in '81. Paid off of course. The siding needed to be re-done a couple of years back... he did it himself. He will fix things, and fix them and fix them until essentially they don't make the parts for them anymore. None of the appliances have been bought in the last decade. I am sure some are 30 years old. I only know of two things he has been willing to spend a little money on. 1) Education. 2) Cars. He does like his cars. Now, he doesn't go and get a Ferrari and he doesn't cycle through them but he has a couple of Caddy's and a couple of Lexus. They are getting a bit older now but again, same mindset, he fixes them rather than getting a new one. 

Point being... though it is not quite the double wide and F-150, it has echoes of it in a different scale. He could have got a much larger house. But doesn't. He keeps the one he bought and keeps it up. He did splurge a bit on the cars though because he likes those. 

However, this is kind of the exception that proves the point. More so I would venture to say Americans spend right at their means. Some more and some less. But income does not change things. More money- more spending. Less money- less spending but they still spend.  

The difference really is that your FIL has the means to afford those vehicles and lots besides.  I would venture to say a significant portion of Americans live beyond their means - leasing expensive cars (75% of luxury cars are leased) because they can't afford them, awash in auto/consumer/student loan debt, etc.

I fully get spending on what you love, though.  People ask me how much I spent on my bike and then are astonished I'd pay that, despite the fact that my bike+car cost half of their truck.  

 

[KCitons]

The siding needed to be re-done a couple of years back... he did it himself. He will fix things, and fix them and fix them until essentially they don't make the parts for them anymore. None of the appliances have been bought in the last decade. I am sure some are 30 years old.

This is something that is being lost with each new generation. My Dad has repaired things that I thought could never be fixed. I have some of the same qualities, but less ability. Add in the fact that things made today are not of the same quality as in years past and you have a disposable world. Which is exactly what manufacturers want. 

 

[Sand]

This is something that is being lost with each new generation. My Dad has repaired things that I thought could never be fixed. I have some of the same qualities, but less ability. Add in the fact that things made today are not of the same quality as in years past and you have a disposable world. Which is exactly what manufacturers want. 

Most things built today cost way, way less than their predecessors, so the non-repairability as a side effect is very tolerable.

 

[KCitons]

Most things built today cost way, way less than their predecessors, so the non-repairability as a side effect is very tolerable.

Fair point. But some of your largest expenses are not easily fixed and require special skills. Cars, HVAC, Appliances.

 

[Buckna]

Most things built today cost way, way less than their predecessors, so the non-repairability as a side effect is very tolerable.

For certain types of things, such as electronics and computers this has been very true, but this does not seem to be the case with many manufactured goods anymore. While taking into account inflation, prices have declined, however, build quality and average useful life has also declined significantly for things like appliances for example. Its hard to find much in the way of statistical data, but one article I read talked mainly about power tools. Costs were about 10% lower with inflation taken into account than 50 years ago, but now most power tools will fail in less than a few years, whereas tools built just 10 or 20 years ago or even longer back are still going strong.

Anecdotally, look at any thread on here asking for advice on things like snowblowers, lawn mowers, etc. Almost all of them have comments talking about how you should look for a model that used to be made, not the newer ones because they changed something that made the build quality total ####.

 

[wilked]

Not sure how that is relevant. I have seen three types of people acting as greeters. Elderly, developmentally challenged individuals and disabled individuals. As for the elderly, do you think that the old man saying welcome to Wal-Mart planned on that being part of his retirement package or do you think that he is doing what he needs to because he didn't plan? Like I said, I am sure you can find a few who do it because they want to kill some time or like it etc. But for the most part, the ones that do it need to work and there is not a lot of work available for people at that age- however, saying "welcome to Wal-Mart" doesn't take any special skills and thus there you go. Most of the Wal-Mart greeters you see are elderly. 

I can't tell if you guys are being willingly obtuse or if there is some big obvious thing I am missing.

Let's just take the job of 'greeter'.  How many greeter jobs do you think there are available in the average city?  You can ignore restaurants (hostess) as they hire cute young women.  Let's be generous and say there are 10 such jobs.  How many people want those jobs?  The link I posted was to give an example of that.  If there are 10 jobs and each came open at once, there would be over 1000 applicants.  Likely more.  Jobs like that aren't plentiful, so using those jobs as an example isn't helpful.

The point others have made, as well as I, is that there are often not a lot of options for those in their 60s looking for employment.  Nice people, but people who's health starts to present a challenge, who can't reliably lift heavy things, people for whom computers are not intuitive, and on and on.  I don't see this as very controversial - to get a job at that age, even a low-skilled job (sometimes especially a low-skilled job) is not easy.  Per AARP 26% of people 60-64 yrs old are disabled.  It just seems weird to ignore these things and insist that anyone who wants to earn a day's wage can just go out and do it

 

[NutterButter]

I can't tell if you guys are being willingly obtuse or if there is some big obvious thing I am missing.

Let's just take the job of 'greeter'.  How many greeter jobs do you think there are available in the average city?  You can ignore restaurants (hostess) as they hire cute young women.  Let's be generous and say there are 10 such jobs.  How many people want those jobs?  The link I posted was to give an example of that.  If there are 10 jobs and each came open at once, there would be over 1000 applicants.  Likely more.  Jobs like that aren't plentiful, so using those jobs as an example isn't helpful.

The point others have made, as well as I, is that there are often not a lot of options for those in their 60s looking for employment.  Nice people, but people who's health starts to present a challenge, who can't reliably lift heavy things, people for whom computers are not intuitive, and on and on.  I don't see this as very controversial - to get a job at that age, even a low-skilled job (sometimes especially a low-skilled job) is not easy.  Per AARP 26% of people 60-64 yrs old are disabled.  It just seems weird to ignore these things and insist that anyone who wants to earn a day's wage can just go out and do it

The unemployment rate is 3.2% for those 55 and older.   The lowest rate of any age group.  Now maybe there's some huge increase when you get into your 60's that isn't reflected in that grouping.    Or maybe those in that age group have given up looking so that rate doesn't accurately reflect the true state of employability for them.   

 

[Statorama]

True, though to a very reasonable extent many people make their situations much worse - even the poor spend a large amount of their wealth on luxuries.  I know it's anecdotal, but I see a ton of new model F-150s in front of double wides in my part of the world.  People will, by and large, ignore tomorrow and spend for now.

The government does have a recent history of ignoring bad money management risks and providing a bailout, so their gamble might end up working out.

 

[Statorama]

The point others have made, as well as I, is that there are often not a lot of options for those in their 60s looking for employment.  Nice people, but people who's health starts to present a challenge, who can't reliably lift heavy things, people for whom computers are not intuitive, and on and on.  I don't see this as very controversial - to get a job at that age, even a low-skilled job (sometimes especially a low-skilled job) is not easy.  Per AARP 26% of people 60-64 yrs old are disabled.  It just seems weird to ignore these things and insist that anyone who wants to earn a day's wage can just go out and do it

I'm going to make my wife read this because the degrees I pursue are all based on jobs I can do sitting down (and while she loves that I'm pursuing degrees, she laughs at that logic).  I just walked the stage to get my accounting degree.  An IT - Technical Support Specialist degree is next.  I plan on being able to have multiple avenues to pursue if I have to work into my 80s.

 

[Chadstroma]

I can't tell if you guys are being willingly obtuse or if there is some big obvious thing I am missing.

Let's just take the job of 'greeter'.  How many greeter jobs do you think there are available in the average city?  You can ignore restaurants (hostess) as they hire cute young women.  Let's be generous and say there are 10 such jobs.  How many people want those jobs?  The link I posted was to give an example of that.  If there are 10 jobs and each came open at once, there would be over 1000 applicants.  Likely more.  Jobs like that aren't plentiful, so using those jobs as an example isn't helpful.

The point others have made, as well as I, is that there are often not a lot of options for those in their 60s looking for employment.  Nice people, but people who's health starts to present a challenge, who can't reliably lift heavy things, people for whom computers are not intuitive, and on and on.  I don't see this as very controversial - to get a job at that age, even a low-skilled job (sometimes especially a low-skilled job) is not easy.  Per AARP 26% of people 60-64 yrs old are disabled.  It just seems weird to ignore these things and insist that anyone who wants to earn a day's wage can just go out and do it

My point was never about elderly being able to just get a job if they want. My point is that these people do not often choose to work as a greeter but they have no choice because they did not plan for their retirement sufficiently. 

You are focusing on one thing (the number of those who did not plan) and I am focusing on the core issue (the failure of solid retirement planning) and we are not opposed in position- in fact, we are looking at the same elephant from different angles. 

 

[Chadstroma]

This is something that is being lost with each new generation. My Dad has repaired things that I thought could never be fixed. I have some of the same qualities, but less ability. Add in the fact that things made today are not of the same quality as in years past and you have a disposable world. Which is exactly what manufacturers want. 

I suck at doing things myself for lack of skillset and knowledge. I have been able to add to it by doing a little here and there around the house (often spending time on youtube or another source found from Google to help guide me). 

There are a number of factors on this. It is the natural progression for a couple of reasons. First, let's look at vehicles. If you had general experience and knowledge in working on cars in the 70's (for example) then you could pretty much work on any car made in the 70's and the only specialized thing you might need would be the car manual perhaps. Now, with the cars these days the technology is far more advanced and a general experience and knowledge of working on cars often will be not be sufficient. My FIL, for example, will not buy German cars specifically because he can not work on them. Secondly, and very close in nature to the first point, is that as things get more complicated it increasingly becomes less efficient for you to spend your time and energy trying to fix it because it requires a significant amount for you to spend in order to be able to do it. Cars are a great example but what about fixing your cell phone if it broke? Taking care of your sick dog? Doing your own taxes without hiring someone or using some software (assuming you do not do the most basic filing)? You pay others to do it because the time and energy to learn it yourself is cost prohibitive and/or time prohibitive but you could learn how to fix phones, take care of your sick dog and do your tax filing with forms and a pen but we don't. Beyond that there is quality and just not wanting to do it. There are things that I pay others to do that I could do myself but want it done better than I can do it or I just don't want to do it (like the $100 I spent a couple of weeks ago to seal my drive way and put a patch down. I am guessing it would have cost me $30 in sealer to do but then I would have had to get the tools to do it as well and then actually get down on my hands and knees and do it. For the difference in cost, I would rather pay someone else to do it. 

 

[Chadstroma]

The unemployment rate is 3.2% for those 55 and older.   The lowest rate of any age group.  Now maybe there's some huge increase when you get into your 60's that isn't reflected in that grouping.    Or maybe those in that age group have given up looking so that rate doesn't accurately reflect the true state of employability for them.   

My guess on a couple of things about that unemployment rate. First, they take out people who quite looking or just are not looking for work. Second, 55 and say 65 is a big difference in age and expectations of capability. I wouldn't expect too much discrimination of a 55 year old but would expect a significant amount for a 65+. Finally, I think many of the elderly that need to work end up doing so in part time jobs- whether they want full time or not, does not matter, they are not part of the unemployment rate. 

What is that line? There are lies, damn lies and statistics. 

 

[KCitons]

I suck at doing things myself for lack of skillset and knowledge. I have been able to add to it by doing a little here and there around the house (often spending time on youtube or another source found from Google to help guide me). 

There are a number of factors on this. It is the natural progression for a couple of reasons. First, let's look at vehicles. If you had general experience and knowledge in working on cars in the 70's (for example) then you could pretty much work on any car made in the 70's and the only specialized thing you might need would be the car manual perhaps. Now, with the cars these days the technology is far more advanced and a general experience and knowledge of working on cars often will be not be sufficient. My FIL, for example, will not buy German cars specifically because he can not work on them. Secondly, and very close in nature to the first point, is that as things get more complicated it increasingly becomes less efficient for you to spend your time and energy trying to fix it because it requires a significant amount for you to spend in order to be able to do it. Cars are a great example but what about fixing your cell phone if it broke? Taking care of your sick dog? Doing your own taxes without hiring someone or using some software (assuming you do not do the most basic filing)? You pay others to do it because the time and energy to learn it yourself is cost prohibitive and/or time prohibitive but you could learn how to fix phones, take care of your sick dog and do your tax filing with forms and a pen but we don't. Beyond that there is quality and just not wanting to do it. There are things that I pay others to do that I could do myself but want it done better than I can do it or I just don't want to do it (like the $100 I spent a couple of weeks ago to seal my drive way and put a patch down. I am guessing it would have cost me $30 in sealer to do but then I would have had to get the tools to do it as well and then actually get down on my hands and knees and do it. For the difference in cost, I would rather pay someone else to do it. 

I agree about working on cars. When I was in high school my Dad showed me tons of things that I could do myself on my small block Chevy. I was able to replace water pump, heads, manifold, brakes, etc, etc. After I tore up the 3 speed transmission, I crawled under their and replaced it with a 4 speed. By this point, my Dad was there (actually in his workshop) for guidance. But, for the most part I did it myself. The engineering of it made sense. Today, I change oil and that's about it. I have a code reader for when the check engine light goes on. But, I usually get as far as googling the problem and then I realize it's above my pay grade. 

I can do a lot of things around the house. Maybe not as well as a professional, but I get by. If I get into a pickle, I can still reach out to my Dad or brother for assistance. I think with each generation we are losing the knowledge being passed down. Either through them not knowing how to fix new stuff or just a general disconnect. 

 

[Chadstroma]

I agree about working on cars. When I was in high school my Dad showed me tons of things that I could do myself on my small block Chevy. I was able to replace water pump, heads, manifold, brakes, etc, etc. After I tore up the 3 speed transmission, I crawled under their and replaced it with a 4 speed. By this point, my Dad was there (actually in his workshop) for guidance. But, for the most part I did it myself. The engineering of it made sense. Today, I change oil and that's about it. I have a code reader for when the check engine light goes on. But, I usually get as far as googling the problem and then I realize it's above my pay grade. 

I can do a lot of things around the house. Maybe not as well as a professional, but I get by. If I get into a pickle, I can still reach out to my Dad or brother for assistance. I think with each generation we are losing the knowledge being passed down. Either through them not knowing how to fix new stuff or just a general disconnect. 

Houses are still for the most part still 'mechanical' but even that is going away... I mean, who would have ever thought 20 years ago that you would have a doorbell that would notify you via your phone and allow you to see them and converse whether you were home or not.... and record when it senses movement? Or the kind of thermostats that are available now. 

 

[NutterButter]

My guess on a couple of things about that unemployment rate. First, they take out people who quite looking or just are not looking for work. Second, 55 and say 65 is a big difference in age and expectations of capability. I wouldn't expect too much discrimination of a 55 year old but would expect a significant amount for a 65+. Finally, I think many of the elderly that need to work end up doing so in part time jobs- whether they want full time or not, does not matter, they are not part of the unemployment rate. 

What is that line? There are lies, damn lies and statistics. 

Well quit looking and not looking are two different things.   I wouldn't expect a lot of seniors to be looking b/c they don't need the money.  No way to measure that I'm aware of who quit looking.  I'm just pointing out what we know and that is that age group has an incredibly low unemployment rate.  Does it even matter if they can get full time?    Come 65, they no longer need benefits as what they're going to get through medicare will be cheaper.   

 

[-OZ-]

Reading this thread makes me think about investing in Ramen noodle companies.  Seems like that's what a lot of older folks are going to be having 3 meals a day at some point.

Alpo or tuna fish.

Yep, they can have Tues, Weds and Thurs AM as far as I'm concerned. Just don't get in the way of football season. 

I was just talking with a senior attorney today about the English as a second language gigs. They want teaching experience but it's not required for many of these. Get on the phone and Converse with someone for 30 minutes to an hour, make twenty bucks or so. Not a bad deal if you can get it.

It continues to amaze me how we americans  are so focused on working and money.  I hear people who actually brag about working 80 hours a week.  That should be embarrassing to admit imo.  The retirement age needs to be lowered.  I think 55 sounds good to me.  Thats roughly a 30 year career after college, etc.  Thats plenty.

I could have retired fully this year. But we had kids.

 

[Chadstroma]

Well quit looking and not looking are two different things.   I wouldn't expect a lot of seniors to be looking b/c they don't need the money.  No way to measure that I'm aware of who quit looking.  I'm just pointing out what we know and that is that age group has an incredibly low unemployment rate.  Does it even matter if they can get full time?    Come 65, they no longer need benefits as what they're going to get through medicare will be cheaper.   

Government does it in all their unemployment data. Essentially it comes down to being a guess. 

 

[Grace Under Pressure]

Decent day in the markets yesterday. Hope everyone is doing well with their planning and execution. 

 

[shady inc]

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/house-republicans-white-house-reportedly-compromise-on-reducing-401k-cap-2017-11-01

A draft tax bill will reduce the cap on 401(k) contributions but not to $2,400 as House Republicans had wanted, ABC News reports.

The bill will lower it to a point halfway between the current limit, which is $18,000 for most people, and the preferred $2,400 that lawmakers wanted.

If I annually contribute $15k to my 401k plan, but they decrease the cap on 401k contributions to $10,200, does that mean I would just put $4,800 in a regular taxable investment account next year?

 

[wilked]

If I annually contribute $15k to my 401k plan, but they decrease the cap on 401k contributions to $10,200, does that mean I would just put $4,800 in a regular taxable investment account next year?

401k is pretax and taxable would be post tax. That might throw your math off

real answer tho - that bill has about 0% chance of passing, spend your time worrying about something else 

 

[Grace Under Pressure]

He would have to have an average yearly growth of ~2% to accomplish that $1mm. I agree that is a low expectation.

If you want to be a little conservative, using a 4% growth rate will probably give a better indication of where you could end up.

4% growth would see him around $1.5 million using the same parameters.

Question for those familiar with running Firecalc projections.

When running projections with taking Social Security at 62 for both self and spouse, it's difficult to come up with any scenarios that produce any cycle failures. If I take SS out, I can start to get some actual failure cycles, with parameters like if we live until 100, or spend $80K+ per year. Now, I don't like to count on SS any more than the next guy, but with 29 non-zero years for me, and 26 non-zero years for spouse, it's difficult to envision a scenario without any SS benefits actually coming to fruition. I use conservative estimates based on the SS Retirement Calculator on ssa.gov.

Updated Actuals for Firecalc:

• Self age: 46, Spouse Age: 42
  
• Joint Brokerage & Savings accounts: $315K
  
• Self 401k: $275K
  
• Spouse 401k: $235K
  
• Estimated Home Equity: $160K. No debt outside of mortgage
  
• A one time $400-$500K lump in roughly 25 years (conservative estimate)
  
• Dual income, $205K combined (roughly split 50/50)
  
• Annual Spend: $42K or $45K, I run it several ways
  

So, for Firecalc users, are you running Firecalc projections with or without SS? It winds up making a big difference in the projections with the above actuals, in terms of getting any failure cycles. Thanks for all the advice and conversation in here.

(P.S.My updated goal: Find a low stress job until 59 1/2. Allow for spouse to retire at 49 (pre-50), keep her job until then. She may not want to leave it.)

 

[NewlyRetired]

Question for those familiar with running Firecalc projections.

When running projections with taking Social Security at 62 for both self and spouse, it's difficult to come up with any scenarios that produce any cycle failures. If I take SS out, I can start to get some actual failure cycles, with parameters like if we live until 100, or spend $80K+ per year. Now, I don't like to count on SS any more than the next guy, but with 29 non-zero years for me, and 26 non-zero years for spouse, it's difficult to envision a scenario without any SS benefits actually coming to fruition. I use conservative estimates based on the SS Retirement Calculator on ssa.gov.

Updated Actuals for Firecalc:

• Self age: 46, Spouse Age: 42
  
• Joint Brokerage & Savings accounts: $315K
  
• Self 401k: $275K
  
• Spouse 401k: $235K
  
• Estimated Home Equity: $160K. No debt outside of mortgage
  
• A one time $400-$500K lump in roughly 25 years (conservative estimate)
  
• Dual income, $205K combined (roughly split 50/50)
  
• Annual Spend: $42K or $45K, I run it several ways
  

So, for Firecalc users, are you running Firecalc projections with or without SS? It winds up making a big difference in the projections with the above actuals, in terms of getting any failure cycles. Thanks for all the advice and conversation in here.

(P.S.My updated goal: Find a low stress job until 59 1/2. Allow for spouse to retire at 49 (pre-50), keep her job until then. She may not want to leave it.)

I run it 3 ways when I do it.  Full SS, half SS, no SS.

As a side note, I find the choice of PPI, CPI or flat inflation to have the biggest affect on the failure outcomes.  Play with that variable if you are interested in seeing different results.  The variable is under Spending Models tab.

As an aside, when looking at expected expenses in retirement, don't forget to add in health care and a travel budget (if you require it for either).

 

[Binky The Doormat]

I run it 3 ways when I do it.  Full SS, half SS, no SS.

As a side note, I find the choice of PPI, CPI or flat inflation to have the biggest affect on the failure outcomes.  Play with that variable if you are interested in seeing different results.  The variable is under Spending Models tab.

As an aside, when looking at expected expenses in retirement, don't forget to add in health care and a travel budget (if you require it for either).

Love the Firecalc - best planning tool I have ever used.