Four more years (no, this isn't political...)

[REWahoo]

How 4 Years of Work Might Make or Break Retirement

...for most of today’s workers, the best thing they can do to ensure a secure retirement is to make plans to work four years longer than they had originally planned.

Sure - except for those who don't have a job, can't work due to poor health, and/or would prefer to sell a kidney (where's Khan?) rather than continue working...

 

[W2R]

I'm not Khan, and do like my kidneys being in place, but I admit that I became eligible to retire on a Saturday and retired the following Monday...

Haven't regretted it for one second, either. Four more years? Not hardly.

 

[Dawg52]

I worked 2 years longer than I had planned. That will have to do.

 

[Nords]

Sure - except for those who don't have a job, can't work due to poor health, and/or would prefer to sell a kidney (where's Khan?) rather than continue working...

Looks like she's taking heat in the comments again... which commenter were you?

 

[REWahoo]

... which commenter were you?

All of them.

 

[Alan]

I worked 3 years longer than I wanted or probably needed to.

The retiree health benefits were the driver for hanging on until I was 55. The extra 3 years certainly feathered the retirement nest very nicely by increasing my pension benefits and savings. As it happens I would also have RE'd a few months before the "great recession" so I was incredibly pleased in retrospect that I waited 3 more years.

 

[Independent]

I read all the way to the bottom and found this:

But right now, of course, the prescription to work longer must be tempered by the fact that 9 percent of the labor force is unemployed. And, a significant portion – maybe 25 percent of older Americans – will find continued employment either impossible or very difficult due to health problems or antiquated skills.

I would have been happy to work longer if my employer would have provided a part time option that made economic sense. The new (younger the me) CEO was anxious to bring in as many new people as possible and had no interest in holding on to the "dead wood".

IMO, in addition to the unemployed 9% and the 25% with health problems, there's another XX% whose employers don't want older workers.

 

[W2R]

I read all the way to the bottom and found this:



I would have been happy to work longer if my employer would have provided a part time option that made economic sense. The new (younger the me) CEO was anxious to bring in as many new people as possible and had no interest in holding on to the "dead wood".

IMO, in addition to the unemployed 9% and the 25% with health problems, there's another XX% whose employers don't want older workers.

That's really true. Even those employers who do not think of themselves as implementing age discrimination, may often innocently assume that an older worker will not have the energy, creativity, or ingenuity of a younger worker. Older workers can become pretty discouraged trying to battle such attitudes.

 

[Purron]

How 4 Years of Work Might Make or Break Retirement

Sure - except for those who don't have a job, can't work due to poor health, and/or would prefer to sell a kidney (where's Khan?) rather than continue working...

Wow. People who have lost their jobs and can't find work, have health problems, or prefer to to take extreme measures to avoid a toxic work environment?

Very sad stuff.

So many people hurting.

YouTube - ‪Johnny Cash Hurt‬‏

 

[Katsmeow]

I love a lot of the comments to the article particularly the long comment by anonymous....must be someone from here (or who should be anyway)

 

[Eagle43]

I see that our pal Ernie Zelinski posted a comment to this article containing several plugs for his books and one of his web sites. Is he really retired? He's having too much fun.

My answer. LBYM. No matter what your means are, save 10%, and let the other guys work 4 more years. That combined with several pensions, SSAN and medicare/tricare, heh, heh, heh.

 

[Mudd]

I agree with the article as it pertains to normal Americans. We've all seen people who have $20 to their name saying they deserve to retire at 62 or 65 etc. These people are in denial. You don't deserve anything. You make your choice and live with it. But for those who have LBYM or have the money-Get out ASAP.

 

[skyvue]

Suze Orman is also out there promoting that EVERYONE needs to work until they are at least 67 at a minimum, including people who clearly have enough to pull the plug now. It's like everyone is trying to make me feel guilty about pursuing my dream of checking out at 50!! I would rather learn to live with less than work till 67 to maintain a higher standard of living.

 

[citrine]

No way in hell I am working till 67!! If all goes well, I will be done in another 8 years

 

[ohyes]

DH came home last fall and he announced he was retiring after this year - no if's and's or but's. Burned out. Totally. There was no arguing. Within 2-3 minutes I knew that if he was retiring, so was I. (okay, I wavered a few months, but now I know one more year IS IT.) When you know it's time, it's time. Just wrapped up my 31st school year. There is no excitement in that anymore. That is a huge sign for me.

We will make it work. God willing and the creek don't rise, we will make it.

It is time.