Posted on 10/13/2015 12:44:27 PM PDT by 100American
The Insured Retirement Institute has concluded, baby boomers "face a dangerous combination of being under-saved and long-lived." The IRI found four in 10 baby boomers have nothing saved for retirement, and 37% of those who do have savings have less than $100,000 put away. This spells trouble for the average 65-year old male and female who have a 50% chance of living until at least 87 and 89, respectively. The IRI says someone who retires at the age of 65 today will need more than $1 million for retirement while someone who waits until age 70 to retire will need $720,00.
(Excerpt) Read more at myirionline.org ...
Right On!!
I’ve been advocating a similar approach for years. It’s simple: limit social security benefits to what you’ve paid in, your employer contributions and whatever’s been earned with that whopping 1% rate of return. That’s it. At retirement age, you can collect your benefit in an annuity, or lump sum. Disability benefits would be limited to only those with the most serious—and verifiable—medical conditions. For those below retirement age, disability payments would be even more restricted.
Using my own benefits as an example, I would collect about one third of what I’m projected to receive. Too many people believe that Uncle Sugar has actually created an account for them and when they retire, the lockbox will magically open and pay them a king’s ransom for 30 years or longer.
Tell people in their 30s and 40s that social security will be limited to what they pay in, and you’ll see a rapid rise in the savings and investing rates.
Unfortunately, the politicians (from both parties) have made too many promises and kicked the can down the road for far too long. No one is willing to make the tough choices until the nation is in fiscal ruins. Too many baby boomers retired or reaching retirement. Can’t antagonize that many voters.
Interestingly, the feds are willing to make tougher choices if you’re part of a voting bloc deemed insignificant (at least by electoral standards). Case-in-point: Obama and Congress are in the process of “reforming” military retirement. The 50% of base pay pension after 20 years of honorable service is being replaced by a 401K-style plan. Under the new system, “everyone gets something,” even if you only serve four years.
However, the payouts will be smaller, and the mandatory contributions will place an undue burden on junior enlisted members. There’s also talk of delaying payout of military pensions until the retiree reaches age 60—almost 20 years after most service members leave the ranks. If Obama’s actuaries are correct, this plan will save about $1 billion a year, chickenfeed in the federal budget lexicon.
Sorry they are not my comments, I am a Boomer and refuse to be typed or boxed...
I only provided the link for discussion of what is circulating as “information” to justify their plans...
That is all
Carry on
2,709,918 Americans served in Vietnam, this number represents 9.7% of my generation. Less than 10% of my generation served with me in Vietnam, and the remaining 90% were long haired, pot smoking hippies who went on to be Democrats and other assorted ne’er do wells.
No, I feel no compassion for 90% of my Baby-Boomer generation.
Your statement, quoted above, is contrary to observed and documented fact.
No it doesn't. You've got Medicare for $100 a month and when you can't afford the retirement home Medicaid kicks in. If you want to leave something for your children that's a different story.
Great post, CARTOUCHE.
I doubt I’ll ever retire unless my health gets too bad. I like what I do. What would be nice is to pick and choose the jobs I want so I can take off for a few months at a time.
“Your statement, quoted above, is contrary to observed and documented fact.”
Enlighten yourself:
http://www.nationalvietnamveteransfoundation.org/statistics.htm
Bingo!
I converted my in-laws from life long Rats to Reaganites. The GOPe hated him and unfortunately Bush gave away most of the momentum with his tax increases. But it was beautiful to watch the evil empire destroyed and an end to the threat of Global Thermal Nuclear war.
I worked for Worldcom when Bernie Ebbers drove it into bankruptcy and our savings went to nothing. I have managed to build up a little since then but was laid off at the end of this past year. Without the fraud that put Bernie in Federal Prison for 25 years, I should have had a few million by now, but I will have to survive with barely a tenth of that.
I feel that is kind of true. Unless the values in this country do a 180, retirement will be a word stricken from the textbooks as the two class system will have the serfs and their masters.
This boomer never planned to retire-like most everyone else in my family, I will work until I die-and I’m perfectly happy to do so-I can’t imagine I’d be happy or fit lolling around at leisure pursuits...
Part of the problem has been the low-to-near-zero rates paid on savings.
In the late 1990s money market accounts were paying around 8% and CDs more than that. By the mid 2000s those rates had dried up to near nothing.
Those who thought they could have a nice income from interest on savings have been hit hard. Instead of having a nice income from the interest, they have been using up the principle thanks to GW and Obama.
I know one such person you described, he is retired and has a negative get worth of about 200 grand.
Our financial adviser told us when we retired that the typical baby boomer blows right through whatever they have for an IRA in 3 or 4 years, thinking they deserve whatever garbage they are buying. And then back to work because they cannot live on SS.
Actually I don’t think that I will ever fully retire.
I watch my father since he retired and have concluded it would drive me insane.
If your spouse dies before you are eligible for SS, you get survivor’s benefits, like I do. However, it also means that you will not be able to collect your own SS benefits-ever-unless you quit getting theirs. So not only do I pay into SS when I have steady work, but I’m basically financing most of those supposed “survivor’s benefits” that I get-what a great deal...
The IRI found four in 10 baby boomers have nothing saved for retirement, and 37% of those who do have savings have less than $100,000 put away....
And when those 4 in 10 burn through what little they have along with the other 37% it’s “THEIR problem not mine. No handouts, no entitlements no nothing. Piss poor planning on their part is not my problem.
That being said, the IRI is way off on what folks need to retire and national averages are BS when you look at what people need. It’s all about planning and what you need not what you want and you have to make those decisions as to where you want to be.
Agree, I have learned first hand just how wonderful and peaceful a simpler existence provides...
I’m with you on that-I was brought up on a small, working family ranch where the word retire was unknown-my grandfather was on his horse bringing in cows about to drop calves the day before he died in his sleep-he was 87. My grandmother ran a produce stand until her death some years later...
Self employed, no matching 401K's, no pensions coming our way, and very little amount in our SS checks which one of us just got our first check. Our apartments are grossing $100K a year consistently, net much less, but soon will be paid for and then it is not just savings we are living off of, but ongoing passive income till we die and leave them to our children.
My advice, buy income producing real estate on a 15 year mortgage and enjoy it paid for when you retire.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.