34% of Americans Have No Retirement Savings

[Independent]

Which is worse 34% of all, or 25% of some or 22% of others? Any way you scope it there are way too many folks depending on SS (I guess) to get them thru the final third of their life. It's a sad situation that does not appear to me to be getting any better.

Why should I care? If those guys are all broke at 70 or 80, who do you suppose they (or the gumment) will come after to pick up the tab?

This isn't just some future concern. In 2006, about 28% of the single people over age 70 said that SS is their only source of income. Married couples do much better, only 13% of them said they had just SS.*

As you suggested, the taxpayers pick up some of their costs beyond just SS. My MIL lived in a HUD subsidized apartment where her rent was capped at 30% of her income. Elderly people are also one of the groups that can qualify for Medicaid.

On the other side, both my MIL and my mother had very low expenses as they aged. If you're poor you make do with no car or a minimal car. You don't travel, eat in restaurants, buy electronic gizmos, or buy entertainment.

Put the additional gov't benefits and the lower spending together, and I think we cover the necessities for elderly people who couldn't or didn't save. They aren't starving or homeless.

Looking forward, the increasing percent of the elderly will add to our bill for HUD subsidies and elderly Medicaid. I'll guess those will be small additions to the bill for normal SS and Medicare.


* From table A2 here Income of the Population 55 or Older, 2006 - Importance of Social Security Relative to Total Income (Beneficiary Aged Units and Persons in Beneficiary Families Only)