Not the Retirement she was looking for

So, given her current condition what do we do for her? She has a place to stay and is apparently eating regularly compliments of the SS system. She is not without creature comforts but they may not come up to her desires. There are a lot of people I'll help before her.

Do we guarantee all the retirement of their dreams without their planning and commitment to achieving them? Do we assure a paid position of their liking to everyone that wants one? Do they get to pick their "compensation?"

Note that I never said that society should go "all in" to bail people out of their mistakes, especially with the number of people suffering it's not something we could really afford even if we were so inclined. I'm just saying that these days I see more people acting like they could never make the same kind of mistakes that others have made, and thus have no empathy whatsoever.

Having empathy doesn't mean draining your own wallet to prop them up. But a little human compassion is still not a bad thing. I don't think "piling on" to the unfortunate fate of others makes us a better society.
 
Last edited:
I do feel sorry for her and what I suspect are insufficiently prepared choices she made. But I do not think that her plight is deserving of rescue or some special tax payer funded assistance. I think she is going to be forced to make hard choices to live within her limited means.
 
I can empathize with the woman in the article as I'm British too and have worked in the US since the age of 25. Thankfully I'm working, but I'm not really enjoying my job and I've been looking for something new for a couple of years.....I'm 50 and have a PhD in physics and lots of experience in program management at NASA and on DOD contracts. The only thing I've been offered in that time is a contract job with zero benefits. The fact that I've received so little interest makes me think that the US economy is really in trouble.....or maybe I need a new deodorant.

But I'm in a pretty good situation as I have savings, own my house and take $1200/month in rent from a downstairs apartment and was sensible enough to pay into the UK social security system as well as the US so i will get SS from two countries at 66. But I'm seriously considering moving back to the UK because my money will go farther and I have contacts with a couple of companies who actually want to employ me.

The woman in the article should consider moving back to the UK. She wouldn't have to worry about paying for health insurance, would get more support and would still get paid her US SS. I also bet that her experience in the US might be attractive to many UK employers.
 
Last edited:
Even now, her budget apparently includes cellphone and satellite TV.
I think we as a society have lost our capacity to be compassionate toward those who have made "bad decisions" (defined as ones we don't agree with all too often). Just because I may think someone made poor decisions doesn't mean I think they "deserve" the fate they have. I sense society coming down more and more on the "they don't deserve our help or sympathy" side of the fence about more and more things.
Having said that, there's something to be said for "fool me twice, shame on me" if they are unable to learn from past mistakes.
Paying $100/month on credit card debt implies a balance of what, $10K? I wonder how much faster that'd be paid down by cancelling the cell phone and the satellite TV.

But maybe the cell phone is her only phone line and part of her job search.

The NYT seems to be more voyeuristic than problem-solving on this one.
 
. . . But a little human compassion is still not a bad thing. I don't think "piling on" to the unfortunate fate of others makes us a better society.

No man is an island,
Entire of itself.
Each is a piece of the continent,
A part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less.
As well as if a promontory were.
As well as if a manor of thine own
Or of thine friend's were.
Each man's death diminishes me,
For I am involved in mankind.
Therefore, send not to know
For whom the bell tolls,
It tolls for thee.

John Donne
Meditation 17, from Devotions Upon Emergent Occasions (1624)
 
ziggy29 said:
I think we as a society have lost our capacity to be compassionate toward those who have made "bad decisions" (defined as ones we don't agree with all too often). Just because I may think someone made poor decisions doesn't mean I think they "deserve" the fate they have. I sense society coming down more and more on the "they don't deserve our help or sympathy" side of the fence about more and more things.

Having said that, there's something to be said for "fool me twice, shame on me" if they are unable to learn from past mistakes.

I kind of split my opinion in 2 ways. I definitely have sympathy for her current plight and it makes me reflect on how fortunate I have been in the jobs I got hired for that someone else may have been just as qualified but fate went with me. However, no sympathy on refusing to slash expenses immediately and assuming the worst when first let go. As people have posted, it seems like people don't make changes in their budgets until its too late. If I was still in at an age where I needed to accumulate assets for retirement, I guard those monies until there was absolutely no option, and I am including working at fast food.
 
I do feel sorry for her and what I suspect are insufficiently prepared choices she made. But I do not think that her plight is deserving of rescue or some special tax payer funded assistance. I think she is going to be forced to make hard choices to live within her limited means.

+1

She made a number of poor choices that contributed to getting herself into this mess.
 
This story and the one about the homeless "divorcee" are really not fair to the people that are featured--I imagine the editor or writer gets this great idea for a story that proves something, and go out to find someone willing or naive enough to be featured in it. There are a lot of unanswered questions that might explain some things or make the subject more or less sympathetic, but if the answers don't align with the story's goal, the questions don't get asked. The stories are probably not very objective, and I wonder how happy the subjects are with how they are portrayed.

I hope there's some payback for this woman (and the homeless "divorcee" in the other thread) that results in a job--that's the only reason I can imagine for them letting their stories be told.

And I agree with the above poster who feel there but for the grace of God go I.
 
It is a recurring spending pattern that I see. It is the result of thinking I could never retire on just XXXX per month and subsequently many will spend their last 100K maintaining a lifestyle that is going to end anyway. 100 thousand dollars with a withdrawal rate of 4% would have given her a 33% increase in her retirement income, equaling a 4 year deferral of social security. Even just 30K is a 10% increase in income.

I don't know how it is possible but people need to wake up to if you don't have much in savings YOU REALLY CANNOT AFFORD TO SPEND IT.
 
No man is an island,
Entire of itself.
Each is a piece of the continent,
A part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less.
As well as if a promontory were.
As well as if a manor of thine own
Or of thine friend's were.
Each man's death diminishes me,
For I am involved in mankind.
Therefore, send not to know
For whom the bell tolls,
It tolls for thee.

John Donne
Meditation 17, from Devotions Upon Emergent Occasions (1624)

I love Donne.

The tenor of this thread reminds me that America has a very Old Testament sort of Christianity, for me I would not hold any of her previous actions against the lady in the article. Surely charity should not be judgmental and should be freely given. Being a methodist and socialist by upbringing I think society should provide for people who are having difficulties just out of concern for our fellow man.
 
Last edited:
Quite a few harsh and judgmental comments here on this thread. I sympathize with this woman. I am in the "compassion" camp, as we don't know much of about her except that she has not made the best financial decisons in the past. Does it mean that she sucks or she is a fool ? No.
 
I admire the women for being brave enough to go public about her plight. She is living in a trailer with a broken window covered with a tarp as she cannot afford the repair. Her story is a warning for others.
Continuing on with an overly optimistic expectation that "things will turn around" and a job similar in pay to the job lost will be offered.
It is just not that kind of economy anymore, and I agree with 2B, take ANYTHING. I would have accepted the 8 hour a week concierge job and looked for available work the other 6 days (waitress, clerk, whatever...I've done both in earlier years). My uncle retired and picked apples with the migrant workers at a local farm. He didn't have to financially, but he was a fit retiree (teacher) and wanted to be productive. He said he enjoyed it.
The reason I would have taken the concierge job is it looks better fills a gap in the resume, and part-time work often becomes full-time, or other opportunities avail themselves once you're employed and networking in a business.
Too often the phrase "can't find a job" is missing the comment "within my criteria". the other jobs available would not be as glamorous as chauffering a movie star, but they would postpone early SS drawdown. The article said the woman gave up her job search after dismissing the concierge opportuniity and now collects SS, that at a reduced amount.
 
Last edited:
Plan A was work into her 70's and hope she gets hit by a bus because she had minimal retirement savings.

Plan B is in effect now - take early SS and live on the margins the rest of her life.

Hopefully the first 62 years of her life were joyful and rewarding!

Funny thing is I work with someone who could be this lady (with respect to age and income and job - admin assistant). However the lady I work with will at least get a swank government pension if/when she gets the axe (which will probably happen in the next 6 months given the political winds that are blowing). Otherwise this lady I work with would never be able to pull down a $6X,XXX salary doing admin assistant work.

There are plenty of people that think so highly of themselves that they won't stoop to jobs that are below their previously elevated status in society. For others, money is money and if you want to have enough to get by in life you have to work for it even if the employment situation isn't ideal.

edited to add: Regarding the age discrimination issue, that may be a problem for her. However I am not sure "age discrimination" is the right term. There is an army of admin assistants dying to be hired for $30000 a year. Maybe $40,000 if that figure were inflated for CA price levels. Yes, most of these are hungry young people looking to make a buck, but if that is the going rate it can be hard to pay double the price for someone who may not be as familiar with the latest in tech and software in an office environment.
 
Last edited:
I imagine the editor or writer gets this great idea for a story that proves something, and go out to find someone willing or naive enough to be featured in it. There are a lot of unanswered questions that might explain some things or make the subject more or less sympathetic, but if the answers don't align with the story's goal, the questions don't get asked.

I don't understand. Are you suggesting that somehow the mainstream media's ultimate motivation is anything other than informing and educating the general public? Are you suggesting that news stories I read in trusted publications are anything other than factual, objective dissertations on relevant news events? That perhaps some (surely it's a microscopic percentage) of the content that makes it onto the pages of these altruistic journals is influenced by emotion, opinion, editorial agenda, human fallability, and possibly even advertising dollars? Wouldn't that constitute a conflict of interest on a massive scale?

Surely such a scandal would be front-page news, wouldn't it?
 
I feel sorry for these people who failed to realize that retirement was on the horizon when they were in their fifties . A woman I know from the gym is 80 and still doing real estate because she thought the housing boom would last forever . I think it is harder for some woman because their plan is to marry for security and it often does not happen.
 
In the tech bubble burst, my then company closed the local office and everyone (tech staff to receptionist) was laid off. It was a bad time to look for work as every opening had many many aspiring applicants. I was the sole support for my family, and while I had savings, I scrambled to find any work I could. I took a huge pay cut, but was employed again in weeks. Other engineers who "held out" for work comparable to what they had been receiving were still looking for a job after 2 years, when we lost touch.

Different people approach this problem differently. But that should also mean that different people get different results, based on their choices. I'm sorry for her current poor situation, but I think it's reasonable that she makes hard choices eventually.
 
I am sympathetic for this woman and know many people in her situation, hard workers who have worked all their lives and are now jobless. They are willing to take almost anything, but the older worker physically can't keep up in many of these lower wage jobs. Not only that, but the competition for those jobs is fierce too.

This woman will bounce back and I'm sure she has many times. Not everyone is so smart or lucky to land a union or government job that will provide security and a comfortable retirement.
 
I am trying to figure out how one can have Old Testament Christianity, since Christ isn't in the Old Testament. Now, I don't want to start a religious flame war; all religions and sects are perfectly wonderful; I am just wondering about the logic.

Cheers,

Amethyst

I love Donne.

The tenor of this thread reminds me that America has a very Old Testament sort of Christianity, .
 
The tenor of this thread reminds me that America has a very Old Testament sort of Christianity, for me I would not hold any of her previous actions against the lady in the article. Surely charity should not be judgmental and should be freely given. Being a methodist and socialist by upbringing I think society should provide for people who are having difficulties just out of concern for our fellow man.

As a taxpayer I find it outrageous that I should have to pay taxes as charity, instead of giving my money to whom ever I chose to. I have tithed before when I was making an salary, but the choice was mine, and where it went was my choice too. It takes a village I believe, and that village is 200 sq miles.
 
I am trying to figure out how one can have Old Testament Christianity, since Christ isn't in the Old Testament. Now, I don't want to start a religious flame war; all religions and sects are perfectly wonderful; I am just wondering about the logic.

Cheers,

Amethyst

Matthew 5:17-18 is generally read as what we lawyers would call an "incorporation clause" through which Jesus incorporates the Old Testament by reference.

"Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled."

The Law and the Prophets referenced in the quote are two of the three traditional divisions of the Hebrew Bible. The Law refers to the Torah, the first five books of the old testament; the Prophets refers to the Nevi'im, which consists of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekial etc. (you know, the prophets). The Third division, Ketuvim or Writings, is everything else.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom