For me here are the ‘money’ paragraphs:
“It would be nice to think employers are motivated by altruistic concern about the retirement security of their workers. No doubt, some are - but there’s also a human resources issue here straight out of Adam Smith. Companies are worried that older workers will overstay their welcome. Transamerica even came up with a name for it: Aging Worker Syndrome.
The federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) of 1967 made it illegal to have a mandatory retirement age younger than 65, and the law was amended in 1986 to rule out any mandatory age for most occupations. And in the wake of the last recession, rising numbers of older workers are staying on the job longer - either for the money and the benefits or because they like working. That EBRI report found that 36 percent of workers expect to stay on the job past age 65, up from 11 percent in 1991. Meanwhile, 25 percent of workers expect to retire before age 65 - half as many as in 1991.
Clearly, working longer is one of the best ways to boost long-range retirement security. Every year of additional work can help you delay filing for Social Security (thereby increasing annual benefits when you do file) while allowing you to contribute to your retirement accounts longer and spend fewer years drawing those accounts down for living expenses.
But for employers it raises the prospect of workers staying on the job past the point where they are productive, not to mention higher health care costs. “We don’t want people to have to work longer if they don’t want to,” says Grace Basile, assistant director of market research at Transamerica.”
It’s get out of here before you start costing us to much money in salary and compensation let enough ‘healthcare bennies’.
On a different side of the retirement equation is the constant question - - When are the Feds going to ‘nationalize’ the 401(k)’s? And what can I do to keep from losing all of my money to them?
Yes, and older workers who have been on the job longer have higher salaries than those just starting out. In tech fields younger workers often (though not always) exploit new technologies better, too.
When we are on the edge of national default and no way out...
You know for the "good of the people" and future generations they stole from.../ S
One of the things you don’t hear about these days is that a fear of “age discrimination” lawsuits is driving up health care costs for employers. What you have today is a bizarre, unsustainable employment situation where many companies have a disproportionate number of older workers that are harder to lay off (because of a fear of these lawsuits), and fewer young employees (because the company doesn’t have the need for them). This means the cost of medical coverage gets astronomical as the work force of any given employer ages, because they simply don’t have the premiums of the younger, healthier employees to help support the insurance pool.
In my particular field, companies may likely encourage us older engineers to stay on due to the lack of new engineers and technicians (instrumentation, controls, and process automation). When I do decide to retire, I may wind up teaching at one of the tech schools here in the Houston area. Not so much the money, it would be something to keep me busy. Add to that the canard that older engineers are not current on new technologies, which has been proven untrue.
That's what MyIRA is for, a vehicle that has the potential to make all privately held retirement saving into worthless Treasury Bonds. Voluntary now but given a T-Bill crisis, Congress could mandate the purchase. And another thank you to Justice Roberts who ruled, that as part of being a US citizen the government has the right to make you purchase a product (i.e. obamacare). Like you I am also trying to figure outwhat can I do to keep from losing all of my money to them.