Retirement Security Index Shows U.S. Lagging Behind

[SumDay]

Quote:

The United States ranks 19th worldwide in the retirement security of its citizens, according to an annual index compiled by Natixis Global Asset Management (NGAM). Tracey Flaherty, NGAM’s senior vice president for government relations and retirement strategies, told PLANSPONSOR there were a number of factors for which the U.S. ranked poorly, several in areas of health care. “Given how much we spend on health care, it’s surprising we don’t do a better job. We also need to tie U.S. health care efforts into retirement measures, since health care costs are inextricably linked with retirement,” she said.

I don't like how Plan Sponsor makes you click NEXT to read the entire article. They only put about 3 paragraphs on a page. Guess it forces you to see new ads upon each click.



PLANSPONSOR.com - Retirement Security Index Shows US Lagging Behind

[REWahoo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SumDay I don't like how Plan Sponsor makes you click NEXT to read the entire article. They only put about 3 paragraphs on a page. Guess it forces you to see new ads upon each click.

With Firefox and AdblockPlus, I see no ads...

[Midpack]

It seems the title could just as easily be Retirement Security Index Shows U.S. Pulling Ahead... more self-reliance?

Quote:

Though the U.S. is the world’s biggest pension market, it lags behind less-affluent nations on measures of income and health, according to the index. While the U.S. leads the world in per-capita health spending, individuals are still required to pay a portion of this expense on their own. That leaves many health costs in the hands of retirees and takes resources away from their other needs. In contrast, Western European nations – backed by robust health care and retiree social programs – dominate the top of the rankings, taking the first 10 spots. Norway is first overall, followed by Switzerland, Luxembourg, Sweden and Austria. Australia is the highest-ranked non-European country, followed by Israel and Canada. The U.S. finished ahead of the United Kingdom, but trailed the Czech Republic and Slovakia. "The message is clear: You will be called on to finance more of your retirement," said John Hailer, NGAM’s president and chief executive officer for the Americas and Asia. "Citizens of other industrialized nations can rely on strong social safety nets in old age, at least for now. In the U.S., we encourage workers to plan, save and invest, and promote policies that help them meet their future needs."

[imoldernu]

Your post was very timely, as I had just finished watching a Link TV program from Germany, which was solely focused on older... age 60 to 85, retirees, who had been in the middle class, with pension expectations that should have allowed them to retire in financial safety, if not "comfort". While there is no way to judge the factual basis of this, the tenor of the article indicated that between inflation and the failure of many pension plans, whatever dollars that were left, were inadequate to fund even a poverty level lifestyle.

The human aspect of watching older, frail or unhealthy people working many hours and struggling at the lowest pay scale, is an emotional downer, particularly in view of the personal interviews. In all cases, the people seemed embarrassed and unbelieving, as throughout their working life, they had expected to have a peaceful, monetarily safe retirement. In typical Germanic independence, they refused to be a burden on their children.

The part that was most depressing was that this loss of hope has been evolving over the past ten years.

I suppose that seeing these people as my peers made the emotional impact more intense. At this point, DW and I feel very fortunate to have lived in the best of times.

Current article on the subject:
Retired expats feel pension gap squeeze < German news | Expatica Germany

[mickeyd]

Far too many of my fellow Americans are so far behind in their retirement savings/investment race that they will never catch up. It has been obvious for many years that most boomers have not saved/invested when they (we?) should have.

Fortunately, there are few folks that post here at ER that have been afflicted by this lack of foresight. I am secretly afraid that Congress will eventually pass a bill years from now that requires those with accumulated wealth to take care of those (of the same age) that failed to do so. OK, my secret is out. Hope I'm wrong on that one.

[gerntz]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mickeyd Fortunately, there are few folks that post here at ER that have been afflicted by this lack of foresight. I am secretly afraid that Congress will eventually pass a bill years from now that requires those with accumulated wealth to take care of those (of the same age) that failed to do so. OK, my secret is out. Hope I'm wrong on that one.

Instead of foresight, for some, it could be merely good fortune. Ok by me if Gates & Buffett need to fork over.

[Midpack]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gerntz Instead of foresight, for some, it could be merely good fortune. Ok by me if Gates & Buffett need to fork over.

Both already pledged giving away most of their fortunes, and have already given away billions...admirable IMHO.

The Giving Pledge :: Pledger Profiles

Quote:

Gates established his own foundation in 2000, and has donated 28 billion dollars to charity.

Quote:

In June 2006, Warren Buffett announced a plan to give away his fortune to charity, with 83% of it going to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. He pledged about the equivalent of 10 million Berkshire Hathaway Class B shares to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (worth approximately US$30.7 billion as of June 23, 2006), making it the largest charitable donation in history, and Buffett one of the leaders of philanthrocapitalism.

[mickeyd]

Quote:

Both already pledged giving away most of their fortunes, and have already given away billions...admirable IMHO.

Yeah that's a really nice tax dodge if you can afford it, but it deprives the poor of the taxes (well, use of the taxes) that Buffett/Gates would otherwise be forced to pay.

[Midpack]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mickeyd Yeah that's a really nice tax dodge if you can afford it, but it deprives the poor of the taxes (well, use of the taxes) that Buffett/Gates would otherwise be forced to pay.

Some would argue they will accomplish more on their own than their (otherwise) tax dollars would, in some cases working on the same societal issues our Federal government does/would like to (research, education, diseases, international diplomacy).

NOT a blanket criticism of government spending by any means, there is a place for both...