Too poor to retire; too young to die

Speaking of thread drift, we really enjoy buying food here in Mexico because it is mostly local and not subjected to hormones and pesticides (except for Costco/Sams) and is very cheap.

When we eat out, some of the restaurants try to adjust their prices to USD, but most do not. The USD restaurants cost about 1100 pesos per couple with a bottle of wine, whereas the others charge 600-700 pesos per couple.
 
kcowan said:
Speaking of thread drift, we really enjoy buying food here in Mexico because it is mostly local and not subjected to hormones and pesticides (except for Costco/Sams) and is very cheap.

When we eat out, some of the restaurants try to adjust their prices to USD, but most do not. The USD restaurants cost about 1100 pesos per couple with a bottle of wine, whereas the others charge 600-700 pesos per couple.
Click to expand...

Is it that much more expensive than Lake Chapala:confused: We're used to spending $200MX for a meal and wine, music and dancing incluye. We could spend more, but we're too damned cheap. :)
 
dixonge said:
Is it that much more expensive than Lake Chapala:confused: We're used to spending $200MX for a meal and wine, music and dancing incluye. We could spend more, but we're too damned cheap. :)
Click to expand...
Yes. PV is probably the most expensive tourist destination in Mexico. Sadly we like it!

We have visited Chapala and find the costs amazing. We were disappointed that we had to eat before 8PM. Reminded us of Florida. But the weather is great year round and 2 couples have recently sold here and moved there.

We had the benefit of a trail blazer who moved fulltime to Ajijic in 1997 and stayed there for 5 years before moving to the coast. They tried Manzanillo, PV and Mazatlan and chose Maz. We did not like the industrial nature of Maz and especially don't like the new bridge to Durango. But the coast of the Sea of Cortez is beautiful!
 
kcowan said:
Yes. PV is probably the most expensive tourist destination in Mexico. Sadly we like it!

We have visited Chapala and find the costs amazing. We were disappointed that we had to eat before 8PM. Reminded us of Florida. But the weather is great year round and 2 couples have recently sold here and moved there.
Click to expand...

Yes, not a lot of nightlife around Ajijic. Unless you count cohetes. jaja

I saw two different couples we know posting photos from PV a couple of weeks ago. It's on our list to visit :)
 
Danmar said:
As far as subsidizing someone else's retirement. This is a bit of a hornets nest. Everyone who gets SS or Medicaid is being subsidized to some degree, no? Not being American I should probably pass on this part.
Click to expand...

I agree that SS is a hornet's nest. I would restrict my definition of "subsidized" to programs that are provided to people who qualify based on low income and/or few assets. Medicaid is in that category. Medicare, which does not cover nursing homes except in very restricted circumstances such as "rehabilitation" does not. I once met a bank VP who goes on frequent scuba vacations to the Caribbean with her husband (we're in the Midwest) and they were methodically divesting themselves of assets by deeding their home to their adult kids and other means so that they'd qualify for Medicaid when they needed long-term care. I wanted to smack her.
 
kcowan said:
We have visited Chapala and find the costs amazing. We were disappointed that we had to eat before 8PM. Reminded us of Florida.
Click to expand...

Hey! Let's not dis Florida. I went out to get some dinner last night at 9:30, and was able to choose between McDonald's OR Taco Bell. So there!
 
athena53 said:
I once met a bank VP who goes on frequent scuba vacations to the Caribbean with her husband (we're in the Midwest) and they were methodically divesting themselves of assets by deeding their home to their adult kids and other means so that they'd qualify for Medicaid when they needed long-term care. I wanted to smack her.
Click to expand...

Karma may get them for that. Very few of the nicer nursing homes will take Medicaid only, most require the ability to private pay for at least a year, usually two or three years before they agree to not throw you you out when assets are depleted. In the ones that will take Medicaid only, you get the legally mandated level of care and nothing else, not what most people want.

Admittedly there may be exceptions to that but we didn't find any when looking around for FIL.
 
Walt34 said:
Very few of the nicer nursing homes will take Medicaid only, most require the ability to private pay for at least a year, usually two or three years before they agree to not throw you you out when assets are depleted. In the ones that will take Medicaid only, you get the legally mandated level of care and nothing else, not what most people want.
Click to expand...

+1.

My brother's mother in law was in a private nursing home that would not accept medicaid only residents but after her assets were depleted in about two years they kept her in the same room with the same amenities and services as a private resident.
 
Last edited:
Walt34 said:
Karma may get them for that. Very few of the nicer nursing homes will take Medicaid only, most require the ability to private pay for at least a year, usually two or three years before they agree to not throw you you out when assets are depleted. In the ones that will take Medicaid only, you get the legally mandated level of care and nothing else, not what most people want.

Admittedly there may be exceptions to that but we didn't find any when looking around for FIL.
Click to expand...

Its pretty much SOP 'round here with elder care lawyers advertising on radio and TV "don't let a nursing home take all your assets!!!".

I've often mentioned a relative who wanted to self-pay and the nursing home had no idea how to bill him.

All the billing was through Medicaid. They told me that in 20 years, they never had anyone self-pay and suggested that we/he was being 'very foolish' in not better planning his assets.
 
Wow...just read the article and comments.

Like others here I often think, "There but by the grace of God go I". DH and I have worked extremely hard, LBOM, saved diligently for ER, and followed our plan (with some unexpected sidetracks along the way).
I have friends and family that have chosen different routes and thus have learned that we all chose to live and spend differently.
At some point the 80YO woman's health will fail - then what? She will never pay off the $50k CC debt (and I doubt she has plans to).
For the others in the article (younger with a bit more income), I hope at some point they figure out that "hope is not a strategy".

Overall, they each made a lifestyle choice and I've learned that choices have consequences.


Sent from my iPhone using Early Retirement Forum
 
Sad story, but designed that way by the reporter I think. It seems to me that with just a little planning and common sense she could stretch her money a lot further - and it is likely she does, the reporter just ignored inconvenient truths.

And really, being caught speeding if she is as destitute as portrayed.....
 
I admire the first woman in the article to a certain extent. She is a 79 y/o woman out on her own getting by as best she can, not a typical woman of her generation. She is not making the best financial choices (and so is making her life that much harder) and is under a lot of stress. However at her age i can imagine she might say to herself "oh what the heck, when am i going to have a chance to see a Frank Lloyd Wright building?" Or "what the heck, i deserve prime rib". And at her age, i dont know if i disagree with her. If not now, when? She's obviously not going to pay off her cc debt.

This is not the circumstance i want to be in should i be lucky enough to live that long. I think thats true of most posters on this board. I think most wont be able to relate to the financial decisions made by the folks in this article.
 
Miranda said:
She's obviously not going to pay off her cc d
Click to expand...
I agree with you, at this point trying to pay this off would be foolish, it would make her life much worse, and couldn't possibly help anything.

She is doing the only thing rational for her, live for the present.

Ha
 
Scary article. Two of my step children (from DW's former marriage) are 50 ish and right on track to join that crowd.
 
The stuff is to sad for me to read them in it's entirety.
 
I wonder how much of the coming retirement crisis will arise from folks who raided their 401k/IRA/DC plan when changing jobs or laid-off and in effect lost ground because that money never got to compound.... back in the day you couldn't raid your DB plan if you changed jobs or got laid off... if you were vested it was still their for you.

As for the woman featured in the article who is still working at 76, it sounds like she would be equally poor if she lived in the age of pensions because she never had a steady job and would have never become vested... there will always be poor.
 
gcgang said:
Atlantic had two things I didn't know: 1). Two thirds of Americans have no retirement account; 2). Nearly half of homeless adults in 2016 were over 50 yrs old vs 11% in 1990.
Click to expand...

Maybe that just means the homeless got older than 50 in the intervening 16 years?
 
You mean the homeless enjoy longer lifespan the same as the general public does? And there are no youngins joining them?

Maybe. Anything is possible in this world.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Literally: Life After Fire
2 3
Replies
62
Views
3K
Koolau
Koolau
N
Article: 'I'm too young to retire': What forced these workers to retire
2
Replies
46
Views
4K
meleana
M
M
Retirement account beneficiaries
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
jesaco
J
T
Struggling with asset allocation as young retiree
2
Replies
39
Views
3K
USGrant1962
USGrant1962
M
withdrawal rates on portfolio charts
Replies
12
Views
843
mathjak107
M

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom