Kitces: An interesting exploration of the increase in life expectancy

[walkinwood]

.... but not absolute life-spans. The article explains the difference and also the possible ramifications. I found it to be a very compelling read. It probably does not affect our ER planning much since most of us are very conservative (optimistic) about our life spans.

https://www.kitces.com/blog/squaring-the-survival-curve-and-what-it-means-for-retirement-planning/

 

[W2R]

Interesting article, thanks.


I have a hunch that the very early baby boomers (of which I am one) will not experience so much of this increased longevity. My hunch is that later baby boomers will, though, as will later generations. Maybe I'm just being pessimistic about those of us born in the late 1940's.

If I should survive for 30 years more, I'll be 98 years old. I'm withdrawing around 2% from my 12/31 balance each year. So yeah, I am already thinking of extreme old age.

But also I do not have LTC insurance so it's possible that I may have some end of life expenses to deal with.

 

[DrRoy]

Yes, quite interesting. I would like to see the statistics for people of retirement age also. I have done life expectancy calculators, but that only gives you one number, not the statistical range.

 

[nun]

In the UK the increase in lifespan was a big driver behind the recent changes to their version of social security for that it's now independent of earnings and just a flat rate based on number of years of contributions.

FYI here is the official UK government mortality/how long will my pension have to last calculator. The numbers are quite a few years larger than the usual US SS estimator gives. It says the average life expectancy for a 55 year old male is 86 and there's a a 9.2% chance of living to 100.

How long will my pension need to last? | Visual.ONS

 

[Totoro]

If anything this trend makes it easier to plan - less variability. It also points to a potential underlying cause: basic wear and tear taking its toll on all fronts, not specific diseases.

In other words, aging itself is becoming the primary cause of death, and thus target of research.

I wouldn't be too surprised that if breakthroughs happen we'll suddenly start making big jumps, entering https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longevity_escape_velocity

Whether we can crack that nut soon or in time for anyone here .. who knows.

 

[Totoro]

FYI here is the official UK government mortality/how long will my pension have to last calculator. The numbers are quite a few years larger than the usual US SS estimator gives. It says the average life expectancy for a 55 year old male is 86 and there's a a 9.2% chance of living to 100.

The US has indeed worse life expectancy than many other countries. Mostly because the very poor have much lower prognosis. The rich are better off, not enough to compensate though.

For us here it probably doesn't make much of a difference.

 

[samclem]

Mostly because the very poor have much lower prognosis.

Because they are poor? Or is it just as likely that being poor and being unhealthy are both the result of a common factor (e.g poor decision-making, etc)? We know that smoking is more common among the poor, and it ain't great for longevity. Likewise, obesity. Of course, being unhealthy can cause a reduction in earning ability, so it seems just as likely that being sick causes low incomes as the reverse causation.

 

[NW-Bound]

.... but not absolute life-spans. The article explains the difference and also the possible ramifications. I found it to be a very compelling read. It probably does not affect our ER planning much since most of us are very conservative (optimistic) about our life spans.

https://www.kitces.com/blog/squaring-the-survival-curve-and-what-it-means-for-retirement-planning/

Yes. The author explains that life expectancy goes up not because the really old people could get even older, but because there are fewer people dying young due to diseases.

I have seen this with my father-in-law who died in his 90s not because of any disease but truly because of old age deterioration. He was doing well into his late 80s, then going downhill fast. There was no disease, so no medicine that any doctor could give him. His muscles deteriorated, his joints stiffened, his mobility was lost. In the end, he could not even lift his hand to scratch his nose.

Higher life expectancy simply means more of us get to live to a ripe old age like that, instead of succumbing to a disease in our 60s or 70s, which is getting more curable. It is not something to look forward to, for me. I would rather leave this world cleanly in a stroke or a heart attack. Alas, we do not really have a choice of how to go.

 

[Totoro]

Because they are poor? Or is it just as likely that being poor and being unhealthy are both the result of a common factor (e.g poor decision-making, etc)? We know that smoking is more common among the poor, and it ain't great for longevity. Likewise, obesity. Of course, being unhealthy can cause a reduction in earning ability, so it seems just as likely that being sick causes low incomes as the reverse causation.

No. The attributes of poor people are presumably the same in both continents.

What is different is that in the US the poor simply cannot afford decent healthcare. That's my point, and it shows in the statistics.

 

[Totoro]

Alas, we do not really have a choice of how to go.

I do hope 'right-to-die' options will become more acceptable in the future.

My grandfather, 94, is in a similar situation right now as you describe for your FIL. Has been getting weaker in the past year, and was used to being fiercely independent (as well as a doctor).

He's now in a hospital because of a minor illness, yet seems to take the 'opportunity' for lack of a better word to push his body over the edge.

 

[NW-Bound]

I do hope 'right-to-die' options will become more acceptable in the future.

My grandfather, 94, is in a similar situation right now as you describe for your FIL. Has been getting weaker in the past year, and was used to being fiercely independent (as well as a doctor).

He's now in a hospital because of a minor illness, yet seems to take the 'opportunity' for lack of a better word to push his body over the edge.

My FIL eventually died of pneumonia. Everyone in the family agreed not to pursue aggressive treatments which most likely would not help anyway, and he passed away peacefully.

I have been telling myself that I will always have enough to book a flight to the Netherlands when I feel my time is up and am tired of fighting. Now, it looks like I can go to Oregon instead, and come back in an urn.

About your grandfather being a doctor, a while back we had a thread discussing an article titled "How doctors die differently" or something like that. The gist of it is that doctors know the limitations of medicine and recognize when a situation is hopeless, while the laymen still dream of miracles.

Even so, in the book "Cancer: The emperor of all maladies", the author describes how a medical doctor was yelling at the hospital staff treating her mother for terminal cancer. She said "I cannot believe nobody could do anything". Huh? She wanted God, not doctors.

 

[samclem]

What is different is that in the US the poor simply cannot afford decent healthcare. That's my point, and it shows in the statistics.

This is obviously a very complex topic. Disposable income among America's "poor" is quite high compared to the poor in many OECD countries. Also, I think there may be some inaccuracies in perceptions of the availability of health care to America's poor under our present system. Now, it is true that the poor in America have a great deal of latitude in deciding whether they want to use their money to buy health insurance and health services, but that is a much different thing than saying that these services cannot be afforded by the poor.

 

[NW-Bound]

... there may be some inaccuracies in perceptions of the availability of health care to America's poor under our present system...

A close friend of mine has two nephews in the 30s who had cancer, one with skin cancer, the other colon cancer. Neither had health insurance, and I did not know and did not ask for details. However, my friend said that they applied for state assistance, and both were successfully cured.

I believe that if one is really penniless, the state will provide help. But if you have some assets, you have to be broke before you can get help. And the latter is something that the country is trying to address.

 

[kcowan]

.... but not absolute life-spans. The article explains the difference and also the possible ramifications. I found it to be a very compelling read. It probably does not affect our ER planning much since most of us are very conservative (optimistic) about our life spans.

https://www.kitces.com/blog/squaring-the-survival-curve-and-what-it-means-for-retirement-planning/

I think the lesson is that as long as you plan your stash for the 90th percentile, the likelihood of you being wrong financially is pretty low.

If you are still using median, mean or modal for life expectancy then you are planning for the wrong outcome. Modal is probably the least worse if you do not choose the 90th percentile.

All the detailed calculations with Firecalc and other planner software is hopeless if you choose the wrong life expectancy! GIGO...

 

[haha]

No. The attributes of poor people are presumably the same in both continents.

What is different is that in the US the poor simply cannot afford decent healthcare. That's my point, and it shows in the statistics.

There is a lot of evidence that points to a different interpretation. For example, in the UK most people other than the very rich content themselves with the NHS. Nevertheless, well educated higher earners live longer. Some think it is just culture, and the idea that it feels better to be higher than lower on the totem pole.

Ha