The Money Mustache Community
Around the Internet => Antimustachian Wall of Shame and Comedy => Topic started by: trashmanz on March 20, 2016, 08:32:26 PM
-
http://www.wsj.com/articles/how-to-get-people-to-delay-retirement-1458525863
-
What's funny is that this article doesn't really have a premise to stand on:
economists and policy experts say leaving the workforce at such ages is a luxury most people can no longer afford.
If that's really true, then why are they retiring? The whole basis of the article seems to be "retirees are too stupid to know whether they have enough money to retire."
-
What's funny is that this article doesn't really have a premise to stand on:
economists and policy experts say leaving the workforce at such ages is a luxury most people can no longer afford.
If that's really true, then why are they retiring? The whole basis of the article seems to be "retirees are too stupid to know whether they have enough money to retire."
Sometimes retirement isn't a choice and it's forced upon them (e.g. ill-health, injury, they get redundancy then nobody will employ them, etc).
I think the "can't afford" retirement is qualified by a silent "in the manner to which they are accustomed". They can't afford to retire and maintain the same standard of living, but with social security / pensions / downsizing they can live just fine. Of course, it's far better to correct the course when you're 35, 45 or even 55, but at 65 there's not many choices left aside keep working or accept a massive downshift in standard of living.
-
Why exactly is this writer thinking of ways to have people work longer? Is it just assumed that trying to exploit the maximum potential of your human resource pool is the ideal?
And this hilarious quote: “If you go back to 1900, most men worked until they couldn’t work anymore and died a few years later.” The writer seems to be presenting this with a touch of "it was better in the good ol' days" nostalgia!
-
It's natural for people to work longer. People are living longer than ever, health care is better than ever, etc.
65 Was the standard retirement age for decades. Not unusual to see people wanting to work now at 70-75 years old, and they are still quite able and competent.
Love this forum and plan to retire a few years early myself, but I also see quite a few postings on here about people planning to exit the workforce in their 30's & 40's with a pretty small nest egg. Some will be fine, but I think many are in for a rude awakening, will be near broke and forced to go back to work in their 50's and 60's just to get by.
You also have to consider that many people really love their jobs and enjoy going to work every day. Why shouldn't they stay in the workforce longer, if they want to?
-
You also have to consider that many people really love their jobs and enjoy going to work every day. Why shouldn't they stay in the workforce longer, if they want to?
You're right, but that's not what the article is about. The byline of the article is "Longer working lives are crucial to a secure financial retirement." That's a pretty one-size-fits-all statement, and one that is rather absolute. It ignores the many people who *have* planned properly for retirement.
-
It's natural for people to work longer. People are living longer than ever, health care is better than ever, etc.
65 Was the standard retirement age for decades. Not unusual to see people wanting to work now at 70-75 years old, and they are still quite able and competent.
Love this forum and plan to retire a few years early myself, but I also see quite a few postings on here about people planning to exit the workforce in their 30's & 40's with a pretty small nest egg. Some will be fine, but I think many are in for a rude awakening, will be near broke and forced to go back to work in their 50's and 60's just to get by.
You also have to consider that many people really love their jobs and enjoy going to work every day. Why shouldn't they stay in the workforce longer, if they want to?
The math disagrees with you.
Also, if someone who is good with numbers and investing, sees that their portfolio is falling due to lack of growth. You think they will just ride it out until they go broke? Most would go back to work WAY before that becomes an issue. I know I would.
-
A fair number of people die in their 50's and 60's so if these people put off retirement they will never get to experience it. We semi-retired at 53 & 58 and 4 years later are still loving it. Working p.t. for ourselves is perfect. No one knows what life has in store for you. I do agree that some of the younger folks are retiring too young on too little but if their $ runs low they will have to go back to work. Many people that retire in their early 60's either can't find a job or their health is not good. So it is not really by choice. It also depends on the type of work the person does. It is much easier to sit at a desk then to do physically demanding work.
-
Why exactly is this writer thinking of ways to have people work longer? Is it just assumed that trying to exploit the maximum potential of your human resource pool is the ideal?
The sub-line is Longer working lives are crucial to a secure financial retirement. Here’s how to encourage older workers to stay on the job, and companies to hire them
.
Yeah, WSJ, the mouth-piece of Wall Street. Those old folks better keep on working if they want SS. And hey, don't drain it completely, continue working to fund SS for those in line. Don't be Greedy!
Instead of advocating LBYM... do the above. I'll be a contrarian, thank you!