Useful Links

Bob_Smith · 10-26-2003, 11:54 AM

I found this to be a particularly well done analysis of demographic trends, savings rates, and government spending trends that will likely have an impact upon ER for most of us:

http://www.403bwise.com/pdf/retirementcrisis_tiaa.pdf

bow-tie · 05-27-2004, 11:10 AM

Very good read.

Being under 30, and still far enough away from FI, I find this very disconcerting. *

Its not known how the pending boomer retirement will affect our economy and the corresponding tax burden, but I'm sure it goes without saying that it will not be for the better. Not when there is such a large proportion of the population dependent on our Social Insurance (SS, Medicare, Medicaid)

I fear the tax burden on the working will become onerous.

wabmester · 05-27-2004, 11:19 AM

We already found the solution to this problem in another thread. Go make more babies. Lots of babies. In 20 years, your worries will be gone.

bow-tie · 05-27-2004, 11:35 AM

Rats... I'm already behind. We don't have any yet. Maybe I can talk some buddies and siblings into having twice as many to pick up my slack.

05-28-2004, 04:31 AM

Hey bow-tie, you are off the hook baby-wise. My oldest
daughter is covering your lack of production

John Galt

05-31-2004, 07:01 PM

Actually, avoiding the whole babyboomer retirement burden problem is one of the biggest incentives I can think of to save every penny you can for the forseeable future.

The first of the babyboomer generation is scheduled to retire in 2010, so it's up to you how long you want to work in order to support them. With lifespans reaching the mid-80's these days, expect that many babyboomers are going to draw social security for 20-25 years after retiring from the workforce -- possibly even 30 years based on the pace of current medical advances.

At the same time, many babyboomers have minimal retirement savings, and expect to rely heavily on social security for funding their retirement.

Do what you need to do to take care of yourself and your family in the future. Don't depend on anyone else, including the government or future generations, to take care of you. They won't.

05-31-2004, 07:10 PM

Re. the "government" or "future generations" taking care of you, I wouldn't say "they won't". In fact, they might. However, you would be well advised to have a
back up plan just in case. One thing that is overlooked
is that we are headed for a "cradle to grave" welfare
state. It may well be that people smart enough to ER
will figure out how to take full advantage of the
plethora of government programs coming their way,
even if SS is not what it once was. And I wouldn't
worry too much about the deficit either. It's like the weather.
Everyone talks about it but no one does anything.

John Galt

unclemick · 05-31-2004, 07:27 PM

When they jump ship - leave the Navy then the women make more than the men. Oldest nephew(Navy hilo pilot) now civilian wife and middle now civilian niece(Marine husband) make more than hubby - but when the kids arrive?

My nephew and I just finished a long discussion of Bogle vs Bernstein. He's been adding TIP's as defense to counterbalance TSM index. TIPS and military retirement are his bets against us old pharts selling all our stock. He liked 'Four Pllars'.

And yes I did quote De Gaul.

Nords · 05-31-2004, 09:59 PM

Heard during a flag officer briefing junior officers on why they should "Stay Navy, baby":

Flag: "... after all, you can't just expect to leave the service and get a $125K/year job!"

JO: "No sir, but my wife already has one and she can help me find another."

Whoever makes less money gets to raise the kids. Talk about motivation!

06-01-2004, 09:49 AM

Quote:

The first of the babyboomer generation is scheduled to retire in 2010, so it's up to you how long you want to work in order to support them.

The key word here is scheduled. My guess is that it won't happen. Because they don't have enough money to.

Almost every poll taken indicates this also. Most all plan on working! - Which is good! - And they probably will be able to also. With fewer younger workers coming in behind them, the jobs will probably still be there for them to work until they die at their desks.

I am a boomer, have always been in the minority in that I was saving for retirement and probably will continue to be in the minority in that I am retired.

sgeeeee · 06-01-2004, 03:16 PM

Quote:

. . . I am a boomer, have always been in the minority in that I was saving for retirement and probably will continue to be in the minority in that I am retired.

It seems like there ought to be a good catch phrase in there somewhere. Refer to them as the "wage slave majority" or the "overextended majority" or . . . One of you funny guys ought to be able to come up with something that sounds catchy.

Or maybe we need to think of ourselves as the "frugal minority" or . . .

Martha · 06-01-2004, 04:26 PM

I know a good number of boomers, doctors and lawyers, who work too hard and I have a tough time seeing them lasting until age 65 at their current pace. One of the reasons I want to retire soon is that I feel like I crammed 40 years of work into 20. Last week I billed 10 to 14 hours a day. Despite what you say about lawyers, it takes me 12 to 13 of hours of working to bill 10.

I keep hearing about how productive baby boomers are in the work place. Can they keep it up? The next generation doesn't seem to me as interested in giving their life to work. (Though they seem to want to make as much money). How will that effect our economy? My guess is that everyone is going to be giving up a little in their standard of living. But in return, maybe they will be able to live a reasonable life at a reasonable pace and their goal won't have to be early retirement.

06-01-2004, 04:56 PM

Hi Martha! You're generalizing. Always dangerous.

John Galt

Martha · 06-02-2004, 05:04 AM

John Galt, you are probably right. I think it was probably too many hours at work for too many days with too many other people doing the same thing. At least the generalization applies to me. Though I do still wonder if the current generation is as interested in working as hard as the baby boomers.

Martha

brewer12345 · 06-02-2004, 07:32 AM

Quote:

John Galt, you are probably right. *I think it was probably too many hours at work for too many days with too many other people doing the same thing. *At least the generalization applies to me. *Though I do still wonder if the current generation is as interested in working as hard as the baby boomers.

Martha

At least in my case (age 30), hell no! The boomers have been fools, IMO. Working like the company is your family, sacrificing what really matters in life (family, friends, community, etc.) for a promotion and some shiny consumer crap, then expecting to be taken care of by the rest of us? You guys are out of your minds. How about realistic lifestyles and a re-ordering of priorities?