Only 20% of men are working past age 65

The Seattle Times ^ | Friday, March 10, 2006 | Gene Balk

[presidio9]

Senior citizens are leaving the labor force sooner than they did 50 years ago, even though they are living longer, healthier lives, according to a landmark analysis of census data released Thursday.

This is one of several surprising findings in the report on aging, which comes as the first baby boomers are nearing retirement age. The oldest baby boomers turn 60 this year, and the new report suggests that many of them already have left the labor force.

The report attributes the declining work rate among older Americans to the growth in private pensions and Social Security and Medicare benefits. As benefits for older Americans grew in the last half of the 20th century, fewer saw the need to work beyond age 65, said Mitra Toossi, an economist at the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

That may change as more companies turn away from guaranteed pensions and Social Security and Medicare face substantial deficits in coming decades.

While almost half of men 65 and older worked or looked for work in 1950, fewer than 20 percent were in the labor force by 2003.

Women are working in much larger numbers earlier in life, but among those 65 and older, their participation in the labor force has remained steady at around 10 percent since 1950.

Older Americans are wealthier and better educated than ever, but the expected doubling of the elderly population by 2030 will create profound social and economic challenges, according to the report commissioned by the National Institute on Aging (NIA) and compiled by the U.S. Census Bureau.

The report offers no new research but assembles information from a variety of census surveys and federal statistical sources, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Medicare claims.

There were 662,148 people over 65 (11.2 percent of the population) in Washington state in 2000. According to American Demographics, the Seattle/Tacoma/Bellevue metro area had 335,414 (10.5 percent of the population) people age 65 or over in 2005. This number is projected to rise to 390,775 (11.7 percent of the population) by 2010. That translates to a 16.5 percent projected increase in five years.

Overall, there are about 35 million Americans age 65 and over, a number that is projected to more than double by 2030, the report said. About 59 percent of seniors are women.

The oldest portion of the population — those 85 and older — will also double during that period, reaching 9.6 million. Likewise, the number who have celebrated their 100th birthday increased from 37,000 in 1990 to more than 50,000 a decade later. It will grow further in years to come.

These changes coincide with a steady rise in life expectancy, which reached an all-time high of 77 years in 2000, compared with 70.8 years in 1970 and just 47.3 years in 1900.

Officials attribute much of this to far lower mortality rates for heart disease. But they warn that as the population ages, more people will suffer the mental debilitation of Alzheimer's disease, which today costs society $100 billion a year.

"This report tells us that we have made a lot of progress in improving the health and well-being of older Americans, but there is much left to do," NIA Director Richard Hodes said in a statement.

Among men 65 and older, the percentage still in the labor force bottomed out in the 1980s and increased slightly since then. The Bureau of Labor Statistics expects the percentage to rise only slightly in the future, never again reaching the levels of 50 years ago.

"Not too long ago, people, particularly men, worked until they were physically unable to work," said Robert Friedland, director of the Center on an Aging Society at Georgetown University. "Now, people have a period of time to which they are looking forward."

But they can look forward to retirement only if they are financially prepared, said Friedland, who noted that $1 million in a retirement account isn't that much to live on if you'll be around another 20 or 30 years.

Improved benefits played a bigger role in retirement plans than the fact that workers were living longer, Toossi said.

But the biggest benefit programs face problems. Private pension systems have been defaulting at an alarming rate. Many companies are abandoning pension plans that guarantee benefits based on years of service and age at retirement.

Medicare, which just added a prescription-drug benefit, faces insolvency in 2020, according to the trust fund that runs it. Social Security, if left alone, is projected to go broke in 2041.

People over 65 live with fewer disabilities than in years past, but that often means taking multiple medications and depending on pacemakers and other devices.

And despite the unprecedented wealth of today's 65-and-older population, in 2003 the poverty rate among seniors was 10 percent. But that's lower than the 12.5 percent rate for the general population, and it's a big change from 1959, when more than a third of seniors lived below the poverty level, according to the report.

One troubling finding: 40 percent of older black and Hispanic women who live alone also live in poverty.

Dr. Richard M. Suzman, associate director of behavioral research at the aging institute, also warned that rising obesity among the young could reverse health gains.

"There's a dark cloud out there," he said. "Some have estimated that the increase in obesity could neutralize the positive trends in the future. It's likely to have more of an impact on disability than on life expectancy."

In a separate study, researchers at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health found that half of all people 65 and older have three or more chronic illnesses, and 20 percent have five or more. These include diabetes, hypertension, clogged arteries and arthritis — each of which can require medications.

"Many of these aren't things that are going to kill you dead, at least not for a while," said Dr. Albert Wu, a senior author and a professor of health policy and management. "But you may need a pacemaker, you may need a defibrillator and some stents in your vessels. These are ... better than the alternative — but all these things come at a price."

[.cnI redruM]

It's not a question of whether I'm generous. It's a question of whether there will be enough money for anyone to get the benefits. There are probably people all over the former Soviet Union right now gripping about how they worked hard for the Rodina their entire careers and now aren't getting their state sponsored pensions.

[jjm2111]

My dad is 67 and he works twice a week designing websites of all things. He is by far the oldest guy at his company. He was bored to tears in retirement.

[L98Fiero]

Yeah, I've seen them all. Enjoyed them all. I saw "Guffman" jus the other night. Christopher Guest's character, "Corky" cracks me up!

[presidio9]

Christopher Guest's character, "Corky" cracks me up!

That woud be Lord Christopher Haden-Guest

[Night Hides Not]

It's a question of whether there will be enough money for anyone to get the benefits.

Another good preview of the train wreck to come is in Europe. Declining birth rates, unsustainable increases in government programs, and crushing tax burdens on the productive...sounds like a recipe for disaster.

[ol' hoghead]

But I wonder how many of these men saved for their own retirement

I did. That's why I retired at 60.

[El Gato]

You have to wonder how much of this is due to the downsizing of a few years ago. Many people in that "senior boomer" age group got offered what amounted to a modest version of a "golden parachute", to leave voluntarily, before each round of layoffs. Plus many were laid off. If you are past 50, and laid or retired from working in the same field, for which demand was already soft, it's not going to be that easy to find another job, at comparable pay. Many may have decided "to heck with it", took menial work to get over the hump of getting kids through college,etc, and then retired to a more modest lifestyle. Sold the big house, bought a smaller one (or a bigger one if they moved from a high housing cost area to a lower cost one).

I know several of the people I work with that are my age, or even a bit younger, (I'm 56) are planing on retiring in the next two or three years, because they've planned and are financially able to do so, but are sick and tired of their jobs too. Many of them have been since major upheavals in their jobs, including location changes, etc, starting in the early Clinton years.

[.cnI redruM]

>>>>Declining birth rates, unsustainable increases in government programs, and crushing tax burdens on the productive...sounds like a recipe for disaster.


Yeah, but these people all worked hard for these programs and deserve them. Never mind if there's no way in h--- we can possibly pay for them.

[Wisconsin]

sodpoodle,

This is a little different. You keep working past retirment, forego 50% of your social security, pay no taxes.

You can reverse it and look at it the other way. We benefit if people keep working and don't draw social security. Why should we create a disincentive to do that by taxing their earnings?

[Ursus arctos horribilis]

Uh, take a look out an open window, this ain't the Soviet Union. But, if you are suggesting we go the commie way on no pay pension thingy, perhaps we soon will be.

[Ursus arctos horribilis]

The point is, the young ones whining the loudest, have been on the public dole their entire young life. Paid for by a great many with no kids getting a free education and school meals for free.

What is society's cost benefit return for the public school system, it has failed in almost all respects.

[old gringo]

i hope you live long enough to get on this gravey train.i can't decide what to buy with my 600 dollars a month.maybe i could send it to the arabs.i know they are short on bombs.

[.cnI redruM]

That's exactly where we soon will be. Our current entitlements are demographically impossible to support. Our current administration and congress have made this problem demonstrably worse in two ways.

a) They've done nothing to check the growth of future liabilities in existing entitlements.
b) They've enacted new boondoggles such as Leave No Child Alone and The Prescription Drug Panderation Act.

We won't have the guts to budget in an intelligent and proactive manner, so yes, we will eventually go the way of all other failed socialist countries.

[.cnI redruM]

I agree 100%. The more we pay public edumakashiun, the moor gradueights we gett that arn't no gude at spellink

[.cnI redruM]

I won't get anything close to $600. Consider yourself a very fortunate man.

[oceanview]

current seniors can do this.

but private sector pensions are quickly becoming a thing of the past. people working now in their 30s and 40s, who won't get corporate pensions, and getting near negative rates of return for every new dollar they send to SS - will be working into their 70s.

[dalereed]

I'm only 68 and I plan to work construction until i'm at least 80, if i'm still able I sure won't quit then.

I wouldn't quit no matter how much money I had.

[sodpoodle]

excellent point

there should be a survey taken of intelligent citizens, like yourself soliciting good ideas to improve the program.,

thanks wis

sp

[old gringo]

and by the way i could use the leg i left in nam.but according to you i probaly don't neen it.

[Billthedrill]

Before we get to enthusiastic about seniors working longer we'd better make sure the job market can handle it. If anyone thinks the X'ers are whining brats now think of what happens when they don't get their promotions because some old git is hanging on, because he's been told he's a slacker if he doesn't hang on by those same whining brats.

Color me unimpressed. When I retire it'll be on my dime and the X'ers or anyone else with well-meant advice about how I ought to live my life can kiss my royal rump.