Author Topic: "A world without retirement?"  (Read 4934 times)

neo von retorch

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3410
  • Location: SE PA
    • Fi@retorch - personal finance tracking
"A world without retirement?"
« on: April 02, 2017, 08:33:08 PM »
A world without retirement?

Saw this on https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14016469, where one of the comments was:

Quote
Opposite viewpoint: http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/

checkedoutat39

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 74
  • Location: The mountains
Re: "A world without retirement?"
« Reply #1 on: April 02, 2017, 11:35:12 PM »
Just skimmed it; I mean it's Britain, but this line stuck out:

Quote
Those who can happily work into their 70s and beyond are likely to be the privileged few

TheAnonOne

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1529
Re: "A world without retirement?"
« Reply #2 on: April 03, 2017, 06:53:38 AM »
Even if everyone wanted to work to 80, few actually COULD. Raising the retirement age further is going to be hard.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk


Just Joe

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3223
Re: "A world without retirement?"
« Reply #3 on: April 03, 2017, 11:22:34 AM »
Be a coal miner at 80 yrs old? Run a machine in a factory at age 80? Yeah - not everyone has the skills to have a job that is compatible with an aged body.

fattest_foot

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 723
Re: "A world without retirement?"
« Reply #4 on: April 03, 2017, 11:47:13 AM »
Quote
By the early 2060s, people will still be working in their 70s, but according to research, we will all need to keep working into our 80s if we want to enjoy the same standard of retirement as our parents.

Eh? What standard of retirement, or retirement in general, is someone who had to work until 80 going to have?

Hell, what was this person doing from ages 60-80? That's 20 years of saving, long after they should have known better.

kayvent

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 637
  • Location: Canada
Re: "A world without retirement?"
« Reply #5 on: April 03, 2017, 01:04:15 PM »
The stat that shocked me was that "in a little over a decade, the average age in Britain will be 50." Come on guys and gals, for fucks sake have sex once in awhile.

Prairie Stash

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1809
Re: "A world without retirement?"
« Reply #6 on: April 03, 2017, 01:25:40 PM »
Rachael Ingram sums it up. At 19, working full-time and studying for an Open University degree, she is already putting 10% of her income aside for her pension. I shouldnt be worrying about saving for my pension at my age, she told me. Im saving money that could go towards a deposit for my first house Im currently renting a flat in Liverpool or out socialising. But I have no faith in government or the state pension. There will be no one to look after me when Im old.

How is this seen as a bad thing? The final point was that Rachael shouldn't be saving at 19...what a sad way to end an article by trying to insinuate that savings shouldn't be expected from a 19 year old. If not then, when should people start?

Just Joe

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3223
Re: "A world without retirement?"
« Reply #7 on: April 05, 2017, 07:49:57 AM »
Especially if she has no faith in the government retirement mechanism. I have little faith in the American system so we're saving more than maybe we need to.

Paul der Krake

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4647
  • Age: 11
  • Location: USA
Re: "A world without retirement?"
« Reply #8 on: April 05, 2017, 09:15:42 AM »
The Guardian was once great. It was my favorite newspaper when I lived in the UK a decade ago.

Then they decided to vastly expand and gain readers in North America, and adopted that whiny tone that brings everything back to income inequality so they can get shares on Facebook by well-meaning folks. The Scott Trust was also spectacularly mismanaged and they are now hurting for revenue.

I can't read anything they write anymore.

TheGrimSqueaker

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2189
  • Location: A desert wasteland, where none but the weird survive
  • www.theliveinlandlord.com
Re: "A world without retirement?"
« Reply #9 on: April 05, 2017, 09:37:06 AM »
Working right up until death-- frequently preceded by a fast terminal illness-- was the norm throughout most of human history. Many families had a couple elders who were no longer able to work due to blindness or other things they couldn't treat at the time, but they were supported by their children or grandchildren and frequently if they had no families they relied on religious institutions or the kindness of strangers.

Having years, or even decades, of leisure time to be enjoyed in a relatively able-bodied fashion didn't become the norm until very recently. Our modern post-industrial society is so affluent it's almost otherworldly compared to how human beings got by throughout history. An average family lives better than many of the medieval nobility. We perform less physical work, have more living space, enjoy more luxuries and have a longer lifespan.

There's a chance that the near-universality of retirement could be an economic flash in the pan much like the way it was briefly possible to support an entire family at a comfortable standard of living on just one income without requiring credentials beyond high school. Mustachians and other statistical outliers can still pull it off, of course-- and there will always be statistical outliers who can-- but the economic circumstances that allowed such conditions as the viable single-income nuclear family to exist in such large numbers as to become the norm turned out to be temporary.

frugledoc

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 708
Re: "A world without retirement?"
« Reply #10 on: April 05, 2017, 12:09:21 PM »
Must be depressing to be one of the herd reading this article and thinking "yeah, this applies to me".

In the current climate, FIREd mustachians are likely to become a target of hate crime.

fattest_foot

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 723
Re: "A world without retirement?"
« Reply #11 on: April 05, 2017, 02:09:49 PM »
Having years, or even decades, of leisure time to be enjoyed in a relatively able-bodied fashion didn't become the norm until very recently. Our modern post-industrial society is so affluent it's almost otherworldly compared to how human beings got by throughout history. An average family lives better than many of the medieval nobility. We perform less physical work, have more living space, enjoy more luxuries and have a longer lifespan.

I actually brought this up elsewhere when the discussion turned to how unfair it was that pensions were going away. Except pensions were basically a "thing" for not quite 2 generations, and even among them, not all employers offered one.

"Retirement" wasn't even really a thing a century ago.

A common citizen being able to afford to stop working is an outlier in human history. It'll be interesting to see if it's a trend that continues. I can see it disappearing completely, or going the opposite direction with a universal living wage.

TheAnonOne

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1529
Re: "A world without retirement?"
« Reply #12 on: April 05, 2017, 02:22:43 PM »
Having years, or even decades, of leisure time to be enjoyed in a relatively able-bodied fashion didn't become the norm until very recently. Our modern post-industrial society is so affluent it's almost otherworldly compared to how human beings got by throughout history. An average family lives better than many of the medieval nobility. We perform less physical work, have more living space, enjoy more luxuries and have a longer lifespan.

I actually brought this up elsewhere when the discussion turned to how unfair it was that pensions were going away. Except pensions were basically a "thing" for not quite 2 generations, and even among them, not all employers offered one.

"Retirement" wasn't even really a thing a century ago.

A common citizen being able to afford to stop working is an outlier in human history. It'll be interesting to see if it's a trend that continues. I can see it disappearing completely, or going the opposite direction with a universal living wage.
IIRC only 30% of the workforce had a pension. It is basically a scapegoat for the "things suck today" camp. Keeping in mind the "workforce" is/was only 50 to 60% of the population.

So maybe 10 to 20 percent of people had one. Why it gets SO MUCH press is beyond me.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk


kayvent

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 637
  • Location: Canada
Re: "A world without retirement?"
« Reply #13 on: April 05, 2017, 02:23:57 PM »
Must be depressing to be one of the herd reading this article and thinking "yeah, this applies to me".

In the current climate, FIREd mustachians are likely to become a target of hate crime.

I worry more about means testing than hate crimes tbh. I would be surprised if, over the next sixty years, North American governments didn't change the rules on tax advantaged accounts (TFSA, RRSP, 401k, and IRA) in a way that older people aren't grandfathered in. For example, adding a surcharge tax or higher income tax on withdrawals from large accounts. Or, as was recently attempted in my home province, means testing old-age care costs.

You know, deciding without notice that people with large assets should feel fine with a split second government decision to change the rules decades after you made all your choices. That is what worries me.

Drifterrider

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1119
Re: "A world without retirement?"
« Reply #14 on: April 06, 2017, 06:57:09 AM »
Just skimmed it; I mean it's Britain, but this line stuck out:

Quote
Those who can happily work into their 70s and beyond are likely to be the privileged few

Are they "privileged" because they are happy or because they are in their 70s or because they "get" to go to work.

I consider the "privileged few" to be those who never have to work. 

slugline

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
  • Location: Houston, TX USA
Re: "A world without retirement?"
« Reply #15 on: April 06, 2017, 09:43:49 AM »
I actually brought this up elsewhere when the discussion turned to how unfair it was that pensions were going away. Except pensions were basically a "thing" for not quite 2 generations, and even among them, not all employers offered one.

"Retirement" wasn't even really a thing a century ago.

A common citizen being able to afford to stop working is an outlier in human history. It'll be interesting to see if it's a trend that continues. I can see it disappearing completely, or going the opposite direction with a universal living wage.
IIRC only 30% of the workforce had a pension. It is basically a scapegoat for the "things suck today" camp. Keeping in mind the "workforce" is/was only 50 to 60% of the population.

So maybe 10 to 20 percent of people had one. Why it gets SO MUCH press is beyond me.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

I entered the workforce in the 1990s. The big deal then was dangling stock options in front of prospective hires; even now I know literally no one who has a pension from a private employer. Too bad that the strategy of getting rich off your employer's ever-inflating stock didn't work out for a lot of people. . . .

Just Joe

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3223
Re: "A world without retirement?"
« Reply #16 on: April 06, 2017, 10:50:29 AM »
Financial promises! Show me the cash...

MrsPete

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3519
Re: "A world without retirement?"
« Reply #17 on: April 09, 2017, 07:58:25 PM »
Well, for starters, the article is very poorly researched.  They begin by saying that today's 40-50 year olds will be the first generation who will be unable to retire.  False.  Retirement as we know it today has only existed 100 years or so.  Prior to that, pretty much everyone worked until he died ... the most fortunate people had children who took over the hard work, but essentially everyone worked all his life.

Playing with Fire UK

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2615
Re: "A world without retirement?"
« Reply #18 on: April 10, 2017, 07:17:36 AM »
Just skimmed it; I mean it's Britain, but this line stuck out:

Quote
Those who can happily work into their 70s and beyond are likely to be the privileged few

Are they "privileged" because they are happy or because they are in their 70s or because they "get" to go to work.

I consider the "privileged few" to be those who never have to work.

I thought the highlight was working happily. Like many people will be unable to work, some will be forced to work but it will be a miserable existence, and the privileged few have both work they enjoy and health to do it happily.