Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Global Retirement Crisis?
Old 06-13-2019, 05:37 PM   #1
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 4,120
Global Retirement Crisis?

So the World Economic Forum sees a looming shortfall of retirement savings for people around the world.

In 2015, this shortfall is estimated to be $70 trillion but by 2050, it could balloon to $400 trillion.

It appears their definition for sufficient retirement savings to fund a full retirement is 70% of pre-retirement income not counting Social Security or similar govt. programs.

One of the reasons is that there's an overall trend towards pushing workers towards defined contribution plans, or shifting the burden from companies/govt. to workers to save enough.

And then they compare that against average life expectancy resulting in most people falling short of having enough by around 10 years -- 8.3 for men, 10.9 for women, 9.7 combined, for 65 year olds.

And the highest shortfall are Japanese women, around 20 years, because they have the highest life expectancy at 87.1 years but even more interestingly, they invest to conservatively:

Quote:
While Japanese workers save no less than others, they tend to invest in very safe assets that produce few gains over time, Yik said. As a result, average savings in Japan are only enough to cover 4.5 years of retirement.

Meanwhile, life expectancy at birth for Japanese women is 87.1 years -- the highest in the world, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development -- and 81 years for men.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...e-before-death


Unfortunately, people in the last 10 years of their lives may not be able to command enough political help. They may vote but already there's intergenerational hostility -- some people in their 20s and 30s believe Social Security and Medicare won't be available for them and blame Boomers for the situation.

If older people continue to work past 65 years of age, that will probably alienate the younger people even more.
__________________

explanade is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 06-13-2019, 05:56 PM   #2
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
NW-Bound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 24,223
Japanese people invest too conservatively? Their Nikkei is going nowhere for the last 30 years. Are they allowed to invest in foreign stocks?
__________________

__________________
"Old age is the most unexpected of all things that can happen to a man" -- Leon Trotsky
NW-Bound is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2019, 06:55 PM   #3
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
HNL Bill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 1,276
So, mankind is generally myopic, and would rather spend today than save for tomorrow. Nothing to see here, move on.
__________________
Balance in everything.
HNL Bill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2019, 07:01 PM   #4
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,690
We should have a forum thread dedicated to the "Crisis of the Week".

(Trying to be light here. No offence intended to the OPs past or current)
__________________
Living well is the best revenge!
Retired @ 52 in 2005
marko is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2019, 07:09 PM   #5
Moderator
samclem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 13,932
From the article:
Quote:
The forum assumed retirees would need enough income to cover 70% of their pre-retirement pay, and didn’t include Social Security or other government welfare payments in the total.
1) I think most Americans would be surprised to find that Bloomberg believes SS is welfare

2) Why disregard SS or the other government old-age programs available in other countries? For some Americans, SS is all they have and all they ever planned on having for retirement income. And they get by okay.

3) As we've noted here frequently, why is XX% (70% in this case) of pre-retirement pay the baseline for retirement spending? Many folks on this forum and elsewhere didn't spend 70% of their income even during their earning years (due to savings, charitable giving, etc. And if 'pay' means "before taxes", then the situation is even crazier).

Nothing to see here, IMO. Clickbait.
samclem is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2019, 07:16 PM   #6
Full time employment: Posting here.
USGrant1962's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: DC area
Posts: 915
Quote:
Originally Posted by explanade View Post
...

It appears their definition for sufficient retirement savings to fund a full retirement is 70% of pre-retirement income not counting Social Security or similar govt. programs.

...
So the whole article is innumerate, meaningless propaganda. Got ya.

When studies ignore/discount major sources of income (usually for retirees and "the poor") they are clearly pushing an agenda.

And I checked, your summary is accurate.
__________________
Semi-ER March 24, 2017
USGrant1962
USGrant1962 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2019, 08:38 PM   #7
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Just_Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Dutchess County
Posts: 1,277
Quote:
Originally Posted by explanade View Post

If older people continue to work past 65 years of age, that will probably alienate the younger people even more.
On a scale of 1-10 that rates about a negative 100.
Just_Steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2019, 08:58 PM   #8
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,153
Quote:
Originally Posted by samclem View Post
From the article:
1) I think most Americans would be surprised to find that Bloomberg believes SS is welfare

2) Why disregard SS or the other government old-age programs available in other countries? For some Americans, SS is all they have and all they ever planned on having for retirement income. And they get by okay.

3) As we've noted here frequently, why is XX% (70% in this case) of pre-retirement pay the baseline for retirement spending? Many folks on this forum and elsewhere didn't spend 70% of their income even during their earning years (due to savings, charitable giving, etc. And if 'pay' means "before taxes", then the situation is even crazier).

Nothing to see here, IMO. Clickbait.
Total agreement with this post, it is very possible for a married couple to have 60-70K in SS income and pay no federal tax
Running_Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2019, 10:21 PM   #9
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Tampa
Posts: 3,800
Needing 70% of pre retirement is a passe concept. Members here know it is your expenses and net WR% that counts.
If I needed 70% of pre retirement income I could never retire.
__________________
TGIM
Dtail is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2019, 10:32 PM   #10
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Wheaton IL
Posts: 202
for a good portion of my adult life i had been hearing about the 3-legged stool of financial retirement planning:

- social security
- pension
- and, lo and behold, savings and investments about equal to 70% of pre-retirement income.

the more things change the more things stay the same.
rk911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2019, 10:47 PM   #11
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 4,120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dtail View Post
Needing 70% of pre retirement is a passe concept. Members here know it is your expenses and net WR% that counts.
If I needed 70% of pre retirement income I could never retire.

Is that true for ER people?

Did they only target just having enough and high probability that "just enough" will last decades?

Or do they aspire to have at least the same spending power as before retirement, when many of them were at their peak earning period?
explanade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2019, 05:19 AM   #12
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Amethyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 7,492
Well it varies, of course. Recall what earlier posters have said about being used to living on 50% or less vof their working income. They trade low spending for early freedom.
Quote:
Originally Posted by explanade View Post
Is that true for ER people?

Did they only target just having enough and high probability that "just enough" will last decades?

Or do they aspire to have at least the same spending power as before retirement, when many of them were at their peak earning period?
__________________
If you understood everything I say, you'd be me ~ Miles Davis
'There is only one success Ė to be able to spend your life in your own way.í Christopher Morley.
Amethyst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2019, 06:22 AM   #13
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Tampa
Posts: 3,800
Quote:
Originally Posted by explanade View Post
Is that true for ER people?

Did they only target just having enough and high probability that "just enough" will last decades?

Or do they aspire to have at least the same spending power as before retirement, when many of them were at their peak earning period?
Depends to some extent.
2 scenarios.
1 - The person earns let's say 50-75k heavy LBYM savings and investing. That person will probably wish to have a lifestyle at least equal to pre retirement and has the extra monies not being saved anymore.
2 - Person is earning in the low to middle 6 figure range, also LBYM. That person probably does not have to necessarily live on 70% of pre retirement income. This is my personal example.
__________________
TGIM
Dtail is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2019, 08:02 AM   #14
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Teacher Terry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 3,741
We live on 35% of our gross now. When working our HI was cheap and now it’s expensive. The article is out of touch with reality.
Teacher Terry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2019, 08:09 AM   #15
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,690
Quote:
Originally Posted by explanade View Post
They may vote but already there's intergenerational hostility -- some people in their 20s and 30s believe Social Security and Medicare won't be available for them .
Forty five years ago when I was 20 I believed the same thing.
__________________
Living well is the best revenge!
Retired @ 52 in 2005
marko is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2019, 08:18 AM   #16
Moderator
FIREd's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 11,582
Based on their definition, I am facing a retirement shortfall. However, it takes much less than 70% of my pre-retirement income to maintain my working years’ lifestyle (more than half of my income was either saved or sent to the IRS back then).
__________________
45 years old. Exited the job market in 2010 (age 36). Have lived solely off my investments since 2015 (age 41).
Current AA: real estate 30% / cash 70%
Current WR: < 2%
FIREd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2019, 08:19 AM   #17
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Teacher Terry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 3,741
I noticed on Facebook people complain that the boomers are the reason young people have it hard. I don’t remember our generation picking on our parent’s generation.
Teacher Terry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2019, 08:26 AM   #18
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 715
A lot of the less sophisticated retirement calculators require the "70% of current income" as the minimum income in retirement. We lived well on 25% of my gross income. So I constantly had to adjust my current income downward in the calculators until my annual retirement spend = todays budget (plus "stuff" like healthcare).

So... make a flawed assumption (70% of pre-retirement income required), come to a flawed conclusion.
Spock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2019, 08:28 AM   #19
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Wheaton IL
Posts: 202
we’ve been FI for quite some time now but the ”plan” was always to consider the investments as gravy snd not for everyday living. we both retired at 55 which was the the soonest we could pull our pensions (mine came with a 2.5% “penalty” for being 5-yrs “early). we’ve had no debt for a long tine so our lifestyle in retirement is more or less the same as it was in the decade before retirement.
rk911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2019, 08:54 AM   #20
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Wheaton IL
Posts: 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teacher Terry View Post
I noticed on Facebook people complain that the boomers are the reason young people have it hard. I donít remember our generation picking on our parentís generation.
yet another reason to avoid FB.
__________________

rk911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Vanguard to add Global Wellington and Global Wellesley Income Funds flintnational FIRE and Money 13 01-02-2018 07:31 PM
Housing crisis is global free4now FIRE and Money 14 09-10-2008 07:36 AM
Campaign will raise awareness on Global Warming & Global Health Wags Other topics 13 04-03-2008 06:33 AM
Citigroup Paper: The Global Retirement Crisis - Threat to World Stability chinaco FIRE and Money 1 03-20-2007 02:18 PM
"Retirement Crisis"? What retirement crisis? Nords FIRE and Money 8 01-16-2007 12:41 PM

» Quick Links

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:06 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.