Posted on 08/16/2010 7:18:41 AM PDT by Publius804
America's baby boomersthose born between 1946 and 1964face a problem that could weigh on the economy for years to come: The longer it takes for the economy to recover, the less money they'll have to spend in retirement.
Policy makers have long worried that Americans aren't saving enough for old age. And lately, current and prospective retirees have been hit on many fronts at once: They have less money, they earn less on what they have, their houses aren't rising in value and the prospect of working longer to make up the shortfall has dimmed significantly in a lousy job market.
"We will have to learn to make do with a lot less in material things," says Gary Snodgrass, a 63-year-old health-care consultant in Placerville, Calif. The financial crisis, he says, slashed his retirement savings 40% and the value of his house by about half.
Banks, home buyers and bond issuers are all benefiting as the U.S. Federal Reserve holds short-term interest rates near zero to support a recovery. But for many of the 36 million Americans who will turn 65 over the next decadeand even for the 45 million who have another decade to go the resulting low bond yields, combined with a volatile stock market, are making a dire retirement picture look even worse.
Low yields present retirees with a difficult choice: Accept the lower income offered by safer bonds, or take the risk of staying in the stock market. Either way, their predicament could put a long-term damper on the consumer spending that typically drives U.S. growth.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Today’s younger people don’t really understand what you are saying. The idea that some today are paying a monthly payment equal to what people in the early fifties paid for a house does not compute, even though you and I know it is true. I was born during WWII and I can well remember reading real estate ads offering many listings for five thousand dollars or less. Even after I reached adulthood there were houses available in this area for less than ten thousand dollars. A person earning a monthly sum equal to what my father earned in a year back in the fifties will have a hard time supporting himself now and Dad was a master carpenter supporting four sons and a wife.
$3,000-5,000 "new" homes....My folks bought a brand new home for about 4k---On a *single* income... People nowadays pay that much every couple of months just in mortgage payments alone...lol..
Mom never had to work....Dad had the same secure job for 25 plus years with a great retirement package and full family medical benefits...
I remember Dad saying, "Gimme a bucks worth of regular" for the massive V8 station wagon....lol..
Life was really good in the late 40s, 50s and most of the 1960s...
America today isn't the same place.
“My mother always told me that social security was meant to supplement ones savings, not replace them. Didnt anyone else receive this message?”
That is lie the left likes to tell. To downplay the importance of Social Security and minimize the impact that potential benefit reductions will have, the left scolds the public that Social Security is really not important in their retirement plans. Surprisingly, many in the public have bought this ridiculous assertion. The left will not tell you that Social Security taxes are the largest component of retirement savings for many individuals. Social Security taxes exceed most combined employer/employee retirement contributions. Social Security unlike 401K plans, is not tax deferred. You are taxed immediately. You are also taxed when you receive benefits if you have been careful to save beyond Social Security. Social Security is a total scam, a generational Ponzi scheme with liars, thieves, and charlatans touting its benefits.
Just a couple of years back that same post would have been greeted by howls of derisive laughter from the Blue Sky contingent on FR who would have called you insane for saying that their grandparents didn’t really work 100 hours a week to put gruel on the table and live in a 500 square foot shack. I don’t notice so much of that now.
“
Another Threat to Economy: Boomers Cutting Back
“
Well, for at least a decade financial experts have been saying that
once The Boomers start to retire...look for vast outflows from the
stock market/mutual funds.
Looks like Obama just wanted to accelerate the trend!!!
You’re very observant and 100 percent correct.
I understand ... sometimes things go badly even when you’ve done what you’re supposed to do. The welfare state will fail because of the people who assume there will always be “someone” to cover for them, not because of people like you.
Thx!
What we all need is support, encouragement, and the belief that we are not alone in the struggle. Good for you! Keep posting! Thx!
Yeah, people like us always get handed the bill. Sometimes you feel like a real chump.
I’d rather end up with nothing than go through life knowing I was a worthless parasitic loser.
The generation that foolishly kept voting for politicians that flat-out told them that the above was *EXACTLY* what they were going to do...
While their parents may have been the greatest generation, the boomers were the 'stupid' generation... that only *NOW* seems to finally be figuring out the cost of their foolishness.
While I agree in principal, it’s easier to say when you haven’t had the rug pulled out from underneath you. However, we also raised 3 good boys, so if worse came to worse we could go and annoy them in our golden years!
Having lived in one of those $3,000-5,000 homes... it is most definitely *NOT* the type of home that families now spend $3-5,000/month to live in.
They were 2-3 bedrooms, 1 bath... no A/C (window units only), no dishwasher/washing machine/dryer/microwave standard, only 1 phone jack for the entire house, 1-2 power outlets per room, no cable line, and maybe 1,500-2,500 square feet.
Maybe in New York City you’d pay $3-5,000/month for that... but in some places like Florida, you’d get it for $300-500/month. And if it’s inland, you’d probably get it for $20-50,000.
Why don’t you go do yourself. I don’t know one baby boomer except for a few pothead hippies who voted for any of this bullshit. Go take your crap the DU or Huffpo.
You are sickening! What I’d like to tell you on this forum would get me banned. If we ever meet in person I’d tear into you like a maddened dog. You’d deserve every stick of severe pain.
Sweet dreams @sshole!
Oh, I know, it’s easy to talk ... my husband works for a very successful ultra-low-end retail chain, so we’re doing well right now. I’d feel bad about it, but we’ve got eight kids to feed, and most people don’t.
If your children have turned out well, you’ll be okay one way or another.
Let me know when you find one. Ping me.
BTW, I agree with other posters....you’re full of sheeeet.
Tell me again who voted for the Clintoon and Carter?
Oh, wait... it was the boomers.
And after Carter, *ANYONE* would have voted for Reagan. Actually, everyone *DID* vote for Reagan after the boomer-induced mess of Carter.
Just like the Obamanation will be tarred on the current generation in power.
And the ‘oh, I don’t know anyone...’ claim has no bearing here. You probably don’t know any rapists or murderers either, right? So are you going to claim they don’t exist, too?
Wait until the Congress takes, yes takes, their 401K and IRA's. There was talk of that already floating in pre-election times of 2008. That talk didn't just go away, it has been bubbling on the back burner for sometime now.
Why did the government invent Social Security?
"SECURITY was attained in the earlier days through the interdependence of members of families upon each other and of the families within a small community upon each other. The complexities of great communities and of organized industry make less real these simple means of security. Therefore, we are compelled to employ the active interest of the Nation as a whole through government in order to encourage a greater security for each individual who composes it.... This seeking for a greater measure of welfare and happiness does not indicate a change in values. It is rather a return to values lost in the course of our economic development and expansion."
Franklin D. Roosevelt: Message of the President to Congress, June 8, 1934.
What will be the reason they confiscate your 401K?
Obama Admin Continues to Push Mandatory Savings Accounts
This is not going to go away. Note it is not just the democrats on this either.
"Democrat" 401K Confiscation Proposal is "Republican" Mandatory Savings Plan
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.