Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Study: Many Boomers Lack Retirement Fund
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070730/boomers_savings.html?.v=2 ^

Posted on 07/30/2007 7:31:07 PM PDT by traumer

Study Says Nearly One-Third of Older Baby Boomers Haven't Saved Enough for Retirement

NEW YORK (AP) -- Nearly one-third of baby boomers ages 51 to 61 are at risk of not having enough in savings to finance a comfortable retirement, according to a study being released Tuesday by the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College.

With its analysis, the center has joined the national debate over how much savings is enough -- and has done so on the side that says there's a shortfall.

"We just don't believe people are saving too much," Alicia H. Munnell, a professor of management sciences at Boston College and director of the retirement research center, told The Associated Press.

A recently published academic study looked at the retirement preparedness of Americans who were in their 50s in 1992 and concluded that at least 80 percent had more than enough assets for retirement. Other scientists have argued that Americans may be saving too much.

The new Boston College study evaluated the same 51-61 age group, but looked at their finances in 2004, and found 32 percent to be "at risk" for not being able to maintain their preretirement standing of living in retirement.

The difference between the results, the center said, has to do with changes in the financial environment. For one thing, Americans now must wait until they're older than 65 to collect full Social Security benefits; meanwhile, lower interest rates mean they'll probably collect less on annuities and other investments. And many of today's workers do not have pensions like the earlier generation but must rely on worker-funded 401(k) retirement accounts, the center said.

Munnell said Americans have two choices -- to save more or to work longer.

For older people, "working just two years more ... can make a substantial difference" to retirement preparedness, she said.

"Working longer has a powerful effect because it shortens the period over which you have to support yourself and ... lets you put off tapping your 401(k) and collect higher Social Security benefits," she said.

The study was done using the center's National Retirement Risk Index, developed with funding from Nationwide Financial, the long-term savings and retirement product division of the Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co.

Keith Millner, senior vice president and head of Nationwide Financial's in-retirement division, said "there is a retirement crisis" because people are living longer, health care costs are escalating and workers aren't saving enough.

"The No. 1 issue is inertia -- people aren't doing anything," he said. "They need to get educated, get engaged."

Young workers especially can benefit from saving more because of the impact of compounding, he said.

Center for Retirement Research: http://www.bc.edu/crr

Nationwide Financial: http://www.nationwidefinancial.com


TOPICS: Business/Economy; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: babyboomers; genx; retirement
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-177 last
To: traumer
Well, of course they don't have any retirement! Don't you remember? The world owes them a living! Silly.
151 posted on 07/31/2007 7:23:31 AM PDT by TChris (The Republican Party is merely the Democrat Party's "away" jersey - Vox Day)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wtc911

Oh, working hard is bad? How about working smart and hard?.... are you a boomer?... I’m sorry.


152 posted on 07/31/2007 7:31:25 AM PDT by Porterville (I'm an American. If you hate Americans, I hope our enemies destroy you. I will pray for my soul.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: confederatetrappedinmidwest

It was the boomers who brought us a Republican congress, while their parents (the so-called greatest generation) brought us the welfare state and liberalized immigration laws.


153 posted on 07/31/2007 7:39:24 AM PDT by Clemenza (Rudy Giuliani, like Pesto and Seattle, belongs in the scrap heap of '90s Culture)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: traumer

It’s another boomer bashing thread. The bashing started in the third post.


154 posted on 07/31/2007 7:42:50 AM PDT by caver (Yes, I did crawl out of a hole in the ground.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chuckles
It can be done, but you can't always buy that new truck,( mine's a '91 GMC), you can't always go on vacations to exotic places( a hunting trip to Colorado every other year or so and maybe a weekend here and there), and you certainly can't buy a Mc Mansion and feed the AC,( I have a 2700 sq ft house on 1.16 acres with a 3 car garage and my house note is $515 for about 7 more years.)

Your saving habits are commendable. The best kind of mental discipline needed to save is not "No, you can't have an exotic vacation." Rather, "Why do you need one?"

I know I'm being preachy, but if people focus on what they can truly do without, it makes savings not only easier but more rewarding psychologically. Basically, buy what you need.

Me? I travel if I have to. If I want a new dress for the holidays, I'll buy it, without guilt. There's nothing wrong with occasionally shopping -- within a budget. But the rampant consumerism among younger people is frightening.

155 posted on 07/31/2007 8:43:38 AM PDT by MoochPooch (I'm a compassionate cynic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: Porterville
They've come at the boomers with every tax imaginable in the past 30 years. Ironic, they call the boomers lazy, stupid, greedy, spoiled etc, yet my non-boomer parents bought their first home in about 1951, it was brand new for like $4,000. It was just no big deal in the 1950s. Mom never had to work, and good ol Dad and Mom raised our entire family on one income.. It was no big deal in the 1950s. We had two cars, TV, campers, vacations, great affordable health insurance etc. I remember Dad going to the gas station and saying, "gimmie a bucks worth or regular".

My folks first home is still there, and I'd bet if purchased today, the first 3 months of mortgage payments would equal what they paid for the home in 1951.

Remember LBJs Great Society, all his socialist programs? LBJ was born in the early 1900s.

LBJ was certainly no baby boomer. Fact is when LBJ was elected president, most boomers were about 10 years old.

And what about FDR, the guy who signed SS into law, among other socialist programs? FDR was no boomer. Wasn't he born in the late 1800s?

156 posted on 07/31/2007 8:56:52 AM PDT by dragnet2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: Obie Wan
"we the Boomers are the most taxed generation in the history of this country !!!"

Agreed. And I don't feel the least bit guilty when I say that I want it all back, every cent that was extorted from my payroll and my husband's payroll all these years.

Carolyn

157 posted on 07/31/2007 9:04:04 AM PDT by CDHart ("It's too late to work within the system and too early to shoot the b@#$%^&s."--Claire Wolfe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Maelstrom

Yup


158 posted on 07/31/2007 9:04:58 AM PDT by B4Ranch ( "Freedom is not free, but don't worry the U.S. Marine Corps will pay most of your share.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: confederatetrappedinmidwest
You cannot deny that most of the modern problems today have their root in the boomer dominated 60s and early 70s.

Actually, the root was earlier. The commies got into the gov't starting in the 1930's. Then they did a mass move with corrupting the youth in the 60's and 70's.

The boomers' parents corrupted their kids. They are mostly at fault for swallowing FDR and commie lies.

Actually, some of the boomers' got wise finally and started voting in people like Reagan and the '94 republicans.

Boomers are still learning the truth about their parents today.

159 posted on 07/31/2007 9:20:52 AM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: AD from SpringBay

But the $ave and $ave doesn’t work !

The inflation of food and gas prices... not to mention the currency exchange rate !


160 posted on 07/31/2007 11:55:02 AM PDT by traumer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: Porterville
Yep, I'm a boomer who retired at 50 from working smart (after a few years of working 'hard' for somebody else) and spent the past six years doing exactly what I want. We've put three through college with the fourth halfway there.

I expect to live a long time and I am delighted that there are youngsters like you spending your time working hard. When my first SS check shows up I'll toast to you with a glass DP.

Thanking you in advance, I remain....etc...

161 posted on 07/31/2007 11:59:59 AM PDT by wtc911 ("How you gonna get back down that hill?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: MoochPooch
....."But the rampant consumerism among younger people is frightening."....

I have a theory about that. Remember when I said I wasn't happy with the social changes boomers brought. One of them was women working. I'm not a knee jerk, "jerk", but I thought long and hard about it. My wife did work some during our 36 year marriage, but decided to stay home when my daughter was born. We even ended up home schooling her. The problems I observed with surrounding families was usually because the children were brought up by Day Care. I found very quickly you can't pay someone to "love" your child, just like you can't pay someone to "love" your money for you. Most financial advisor's made money whether you did or not. Your children grow up believing that work and money are more important than they are, and then the trouble begins. Many divorces are a blatant example to the children that they can be "bought", but even in tact families end up telling their children they can't be with them or take them somewhere, or whatever, because mom's working or dad's out of town or working overtime. Then, to make up for it, the parents buy John or Jenny an IPOD or an XBOX 360 with all the bells and whistles, just to prove how important they are to the parents. They go through life wishing dad would have seen them making the touchdown or teaching them to bait a hook, but end up with a $3000 carbon fiber bike.

As they move on themselves, if they aren't living the high life, they turn to drugs, crime, and even suicide, because they can no longer afford what mom and dad gave them out of guilt.

Now people say I am just trying to "hold women down" or some such thing, but when both parents have to work, the fact is, you are most likely spending too much, and paying too many taxes. The government loves working women. Instead of one blue collar male making $60k a year, they get an extra $30k-$60k from the spouse. That puts them in a higher bracket. I showed my wife on paper that she would have to make $18 an hour to make up for the extra car, the day care, the extra taxes, new clothes, ect, that her $12 an hour job would require. We did just fine by her SAVING ME MONEY, and me as breadwinner. I wasn't that highly paid, but we did just fine. If your new car has to be a Hummer rather than a Toyota Corrola, it's pretty tough on 1 salary. I found that after 15-20 years of saving however, I was making thousands, not hundreds, but thousands per month in interest and capital gains. I was able to live pretty good and have a home life. It's always better to get your money to work for you than your wife. I just believe God made it work that way. Working women are a big cause, IMHO, for the confusion kids have today. I understand divorce, and disabled husbands, and many other reasons a woman must work. I'm just saying it's not ideal. I have seen divorces before BECAUSE the woman wanted to stay home with the kids and the man said she was a deadbeat. Most of the time when the man was finally sent to college by the wife, or he got his new Harley, or he was finally able to buy his business, the woman was discarded like a soiled napkin anyway.

162 posted on 07/31/2007 2:03:28 PM PDT by chuckles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: qam1

Thanks for the ping.


163 posted on 07/31/2007 2:58:13 PM PDT by GOPJ (Iranian designers held a fashion show - Surprise! For the 5,000th time, burqas were "in"...- Conan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: traumer
For one thing, Americans now must wait until they're older than 65 to collect full Social Security benefits...

Yeah, and that's because the "new welfare" is social security disability. Nothing's going to be left for the truely disabled, and nothing's going to be left for those who contributed a lifetime.

164 posted on 07/31/2007 3:17:49 PM PDT by GOPJ (Social Security Disability-the NEW WELFARE. They get "on" at 20- YOU work til you drop.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Obie Wan

“What you are is a socialist idiot. You think everybody’s got a big house nestegg? you can shove it where your nestegg don’t shine !!!”

don’t get nasty, Obie! The solution is quite simple, don’t you see?

You dip into the capital portion of your trust-fund, and make up for it over time by purchasing the cheaper brand of golf-balls and drinking blended instead of single-malt scotch.

You can even keep your country club membership.


165 posted on 07/31/2007 3:40:18 PM PDT by RFEngineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: gbs
Anti Oxidants


166 posted on 07/31/2007 6:17:48 PM PDT by Libloather (That's just what I need - some two-bit, washed up, loser politician giving me weather forecasts...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

Comment #167 Removed by Moderator

To: wtc911
You are forgetting the employer "match" which is part of your salary also. The tax is closer to 7.5% on each side and in any case the Congress has been raising the limit or cap for several years now.

Throw in your medicaid tax and start from there.

168 posted on 08/01/2007 3:10:01 AM PDT by Jimmy Valentine (DemocRATS - when they speak, they lie; when they are silent, they are stealing the American Dream)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: Jimmy Valentine

Employer match is not part of your salary, if it were it would appear as gross wages on your W2. Only your share is taken from your money.


169 posted on 08/01/2007 6:08:15 AM PDT by wtc911 ("How you gonna get back down that hill?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: traumer

I don’t lack a retirement fund now. However, if this market meltdown continues...


170 posted on 08/01/2007 6:09:25 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur (Save Fredericksburg. Support CVBT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traumer

Our popcorn fart economy has to float on something, and it ain’t people saving their money.


171 posted on 08/01/2007 6:13:55 AM PDT by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: confederatetrappedinmidwest
just stop bragging about all the degenerate things they did back in the 60s I would be happy.

Very few are bragging anymore: only the Jane Fonda's who are, indeed, degenerate.

However, many are now talking about how they screwed up. It's largely the boomer generation who has worked extremely hard to give us a couple decades of a roaring economy to support all those who have been raking in social security...plus, as I said they voted in RR and George Bush. More than a slim minority are now doing the right thing.

The so-called "greatest generation" wasn't so great in my opinion. Tom Brokaw is wrong. They initiated, Medicare, Medicaid, Welfare, etc. I don't know that they had true "christian values"; I think they were only talking the talk, not walking it. Proof is...they didn't raise their kids right IMO.

172 posted on 08/01/2007 10:11:11 AM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: confederatetrappedinmidwest

My brother (love Southerners!):

I am a boomer and I am feeding my retirement account as much as I can. I live like a Spartan now in the hope that I will be able to bank all of my Social Security money and leave it for the next generation (my 3 children). But if I am unable to save every cent of that money, please try to remember that the government stole it from me for years and years and years like they are stealing it from you.

Which brings me to my next point. Boomers should be taking care of their parents and our children should take care of us. That’s the way it used to be in our country. There’s plenty of room in those McMansions for 3 generations. How much money will be wasted by splitting up families and generations?


173 posted on 08/01/2007 10:48:45 AM PDT by Wage Slave (Good fences make good neighbors. -- Robert Frost)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie

The economy is floating on the chinese money....


174 posted on 08/01/2007 10:50:28 AM PDT by traumer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: traumer
But the $ave and $ave doesn’t work !

The inflation of food and gas prices... not to mention the currency exchange rate !

Nobody ever saved their way to true prosperity. It's incorrect thinking. Avoid wasteful spending, sure, but you have to create value for others on the front end or you just won't get anywhere.

175 posted on 08/01/2007 10:51:10 AM PDT by Mr. Jeeves ("Wise men don't need to debate; men who need to debate are not wise." -- Tao Te Ching)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: confederatetrappedinmidwest
would you like all of your generation to be known by the likes of Anna Nicole Smith and Brittany Spears, rap crap, the NBA ilk, etc.....????

I was a young person during the 60's and I can tell you......MOST young people were NOT involved in the drug/anti-war/free love scene( although, which generation of men wouldn't want free love?...LOL)

a small elitist group of boomers somehow got a hold of our generational vision and it is bad, I agree....

but most of us are hard working,child raising, church going and parent appreciating type people....oh, and did I mention TAX-PAYING as well......

176 posted on 08/01/2007 11:06:14 AM PDT by cherry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: wtc911
You have brought in to the fraud. Consider please; the employers direct contribution is the same as that which you see in your paycheck. If you were not employed there, that money would not have to be paid at all.

When someone is "self employed" this part of the SS contribution is called "the self employment tax".

It's part of your pay all right; if people had to pay it directly, both parts and it were not deducted at source the revolution would start tomorrow.

177 posted on 08/02/2007 3:57:48 AM PDT by Jimmy Valentine (DemocRATS - when they speak, they lie; when they are silent, they are stealing the American Dream)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-177 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson