Baby Boomers - Greatest Victims

[imoldernu]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/03/business/americans-closest-to-retirement-were-hardest-hit-by-recession.html?ref=business

These Americans in their 50s and early 60s — those near retirement age who do not yet have access to Medicare and Social Security — have lost the most earnings power of any age group, with their household incomes 10 percent below what they made when the recovery began three years ago, according to Sentier Research, a data analysis company.

New research suggests that they may die sooner, because their health, income security and mental well-being were battered by recession at a crucial time in their lives.

Agree?

Is the danger a result of not LBYM? or a loss of income in the peak earning years? Since the beginning of time, the economy has always been subject to ups and downs, but it seems that the current uncertainty is causing more stress than usual, with less surety of a solid recovery.

... or something else?

 

[ziggy29]

The good news for Boomers is that most of them are old enough that they will probably be spared the brunt of SS and Medicare reform.

The bad news is that many of them had the plug pulled on them in terms of pensions, a lousy job market and rampant age discrimination -- at an age where it's too late to really recover from those things. And that SS and Medicare, even if they still get grandfathered into the current deal, won't be enough.

 

[dmpi]

Bloomers had good opportunities growing up. Dirt cheap college tuition, low housing prices and booming domestic economy in the 80s and 90s. Yes there is rampant age discrimination but I'm not so sure that it's any different than in the early 80s when I got hired in. And this talk about ones 401K getting hit by the stock market crash is simply an excuse to hide the fact that one failed to fund their 401k and/or kept taking out loans. The simple truth is that the average 401K was small even before the crash and most folks didn't have all their money in stocks. That said I do have sympathy for those laid off and unable to find another job. There are not too many good options if you're in that situation.

 

[W2R]

Makes me realize how bad things could have been. Rather than resenting what anyone may or may not have, I feel so bad for all, no matter what their age, whose hopes and dreams are dashed. I know, that is so corny but that is how I feel about the article.

 

[donheff]

I have a couple of friends who got laid off and couldn't get comparable jobs for years. Pair that with kids in college and you are facing a major setback, LBYM or not. DW and I view ourselves as fortunate to have missed blows like that. Preparations and approach count heavily but sh** happens.

 

[jon-nyc]

It's been said that the boomers spent their parents retirement and their children's inheritance.

I think that's a bit harsh, but not without some truth to it. Expanding on Ziggy's point, its the generation(s) after them that will bear the brunt of the fiscal excesses for which the boomers were/are the primary beneficiary.

 

[REWahoo]

Looks like this is turning into another 'generational warfare' thread.

I smell bacon.

 

[Walt34]

So much depends on luck. Anyone sidelined by severe health issues at a young age isn't going to be able to save enough no matter how frugal their lifestyle.

Granted many have squandered their opportunities (some relatives come to mind) but (thinking of other relatives) many didn't have those opportunities in the first place.

 

[Tadpole]

One thing is for sure - As long as the stressed populations in our society are willing to point fingers at each other or resent each other or ..., the winners in this society can rest peacefully at night in the knowledge that they will remain the winners.

[Mod Edit]

 

[EveryLady]

Timely article. Good, good friend, a single mom, just got caught in a company-wide layoff at age 61 1/2. Kid about to go to college. New (refinanced to 30 year) mortgage. Planned to work until age 66 or, at most, 65. Will try to find a needed job.

As for me, I have "the pension" but no longer feel secure about future earning power of my kid. So today's project is to rethink allocations under the "new" scenario that will be to maximize kid inheritance. No longer plan any draw-down of assets to fund fun stuff in years ahead.

Kind of think of it as the "duty" (well mine, given our circumstances) to the next generation of a baby-boomer fortunate enough through simple plain almost random luck to have ended up with a decent pension just enough to maintain pre-retirement, but not extravagant post-retirement lots-of-free-time lifestyle.

 

[jon-nyc]

Looks like this is turning into another 'generational warfare' thread.

I smell bacon.

Mmmmmm.... bacon!

 

[NotMyFault]

IBTL

 

[ziggy29]

Looks like this is turning into another 'generational warfare' thread.

I smell bacon.

I hope you're going to share.

The bottom line is that probably every generation can point to *something* in terms of demographics, the economy and government programs that will feel like they are getting the worst of it. Doesn't matter whether we are talking about Boomers, Gen X or the Millennial generation -- in some ways, depending on the issue and the outlook, each of them is getting a pretty raw deal somewhere.

In reality, addressing the problems effectively and fairly requires that we resist the urge to adopt an "us versus them" mindset. That mindset has been polarizing and paralyzing inside the Beltway for years now.

 

[youbet]

The bottom line is that probably every generation can point to *something* in terms of demographics, the economy and government programs that will feel like they are getting the worst of it. Doesn't matter whether we are talking about Boomers, Gen X or the Millennial generation -- in some ways, depending on the issue and the outlook, each of them is getting a pretty raw deal somewhere.

In reality, addressing the problems effectively and fairly requires that we resist the urge to adopt an "us versus them" mindset. That mindset has been polarizing and paralyzing inside the Beltway for years now.

I agree completely Zig. And I'd like to additionally point out the analytical mistake involved with characterizing the population into distinct groups. For example, I'm at the leading edge of the so-called "boomers." When I look at economic and social conditions over my life, they seem very different than for folks born at the trailing end of the so-called "boomer" generation. Yet we're all slapped with the same label.

 

[REWahoo]

I hope you're going to share.

The bottom line is that probably every generation can point to *something* in terms of demographics, the economy and government programs that will feel like they are getting the worst of it. Doesn't matter whether we are talking about Boomers, Gen X or the Millennial generation -- in some ways, depending on the issue and the outlook, each of them is getting a pretty raw deal somewhere.

In reality, addressing the problems effectively and fairly requires that we resist the urge to adopt an "us versus them" mindset. That mindset has been polarizing and paralyzing inside the Beltway for years now.

Agreed.

But with posts like this, none of us are going to get any bacon...

 

[bld999]

Generalizing about the behavior of a group ~ 76 million people always seemed absurd to me, but scapegoating sets a low bar.

Next up are millenials, just because again, the population is so large, it's like a high tide.

 

[jon-nyc]

Generalizing about groups is very useful, its difficult to imagine social sciences without some sort of generalization about groups.

Of course trying to infer anything about specific individuals based on group generalizations would be absurd, but I don't think that is what the article is doing, nor any poster in this thread.

 

[ziggy29]

Of course trying to infer anything about specific individuals based on group generalizations would be absurd, but I don't think that is what the article is doing, nor any poster in this thread.

Yet at the same time, these generalizations can be -- and often are -- used as ammunition in "generational warfare" over public policy.

We as a society are increasingly used to "us versus them" and looking at all public policy debates as zero-sum games, where there have to be clear winners and losers. I don't think that bodes well for actually addressing the fiscal and demographic issues we face in a way that is respectful and reasonably fair across generations (and other demographic groups).

Generalizations can be useful when they are used to foster problem-solving and seeking solutions, not scapegoating or engaging in "us versus them" rhetoric.

 

[jon-nyc]

Sure, but I didn't sense anything of the kind in the Times piece. In fact, very little in the piece is really specific to any named generation.

 

[martyp]

Timely article. Good, good friend, a single mom, just got caught in a company-wide layoff at age 61 1/2. Kid about to go to college. New (refinanced to 30 year) mortgage. Planned to work until age 66 or, at most, 65. Will try to find a needed job.

I obviously don't know the specific circumstances of your friend but it seems to me that taking out a 30 yr loan when you are over 60 is not good planning for the future retirement. Who wants a mortgage during retirement?

 

[ziggy29]

Sure, but I didn't sense anything of the kind in the Times piece. In fact, very little in the piece is really specific to any named generation.

The article doesn't need to. Like many things, even if the article's observations are measured, the reactions it gets will fan the flames.

 

[jclarksnakes]

I feel extremely fortunate to have been born in the early 50s and grown older is such interesting times.

 

[jon-nyc]

The article doesn't need to. Like many things, even if the article's observations are measured, the reactions it gets will fan the flames.

Only if individuals infer some sort of insult or personal attack from a group generalization, and we've already established such a concept to be absurd.

 

[ziggy29]

Only if individuals infer some sort of insult or personal attack from a group generalization, and we've already established such a concept to be absurd.

1. Who is "we"?

2. A LOT of people do it. Read the insipid and venomous comments under a news article some time and you'll see it's not just an isolated thing.

 

[foxfirev5]

At age 57 I have no complaints. You play the hand you are dealt, sometimes you win sometimes you lose. When the kids were small and we were broke (net worth 1982 -$88)
we all put up with an unbelievable amount of crap at work just to keep a job. That really helped cement the LBYM lifestyle around my house. Combined with a good stretch of luck and the economy we feel very fortunate.
Hopefully these opportunities will exist for our children and grandchildren.