Bloomberg on working to 65

[LastOfTheBoomers]

Did anyone else catch the Bloomberg radio piece yesterday about working until you are 65 is the new status symbol and retiring early is not!

Not sure what to make of it.

If you have the Bloomberg radio app it was 1:30pm eastern time

 

[eytonxav]

LOL, whats the thought process here, if you don't get riffed by the time your 65 you must be good?

 

[ElizabethT]

LOL, whats the thought process here, if you don't get riffed by the time your 65 you must be good?

The emphasis was more that having the physical ability to work until 65 was the new status symbol. As compared to, say, being FIRE'd and having both the time(!) and physical ability to spend 30 days backpacking the John Muir trail, which we plan to do next year.

Absolute rubbish IMHO.

 

[rodi]

Well... my LBYM mindset has me ignoring status symbol stuff anyway. LOL.

 

[marko]

Did anyone else catch the Bloomberg radio piece yesterday about working until you are 65 is the new status symbol and retiring early is not!

Not sure what to make of it.

If you have the Bloomberg radio app it was 1:30pm eastern time

At age 65, RE'd with a 32 y.o. new wife might be a better status symbol. IMO.

I guess Bloomberg has lost sight of the old leisure class. Having a trust fund is the ultimate status symbol in my neck of the woods.

 

[GrayHare]

Interest-in-status-symbols and FIRE are often mutually exclusive.

 

[Chuckanut]

Actually, for many of the younger Boomberg employees, working until 70 will be the norm due to longer healthier life spans, so working until one is 'only' 65 will be an ER status symbol, I suppose.

 

[Tadpole]

OK all you trend following RE website folk, back to work or your peers will jeers at you. Who will step to the plate and develop the not-early-retirement.org?

 

[rodi]

OK all you trend following RE website folk, back to work or your peers will jeers at you. Who will step to the plate and develop the not-early-retirement.org?

It can be called Work-till-you-drop.org.

 

[dixonge]

Did anyone else catch the Bloomberg radio piece yesterday about working until you are 65 is the new status symbol and retiring early is not!

Not sure what to make of it.

If you have the Bloomberg radio app it was 1:30pm eastern time

Well *someone* needs to keep feeding cash into the pension and SS coffers...

 

[2017ish]

Did anyone else catch the Bloomberg radio piece yesterday about working until you are 65 is the new status symbol and retiring early is not!

Not sure what to make of it.

If you have the Bloomberg radio app it was 1:30pm eastern time

Hmm. Maybe I should start focusing on status--I've been lax in that for a while. Time to change my username to 2026ish--and hope that DW doesn't find out, as she'd probably kill me if I told her that she has to work for another decade.

 

[rodi]

Hmm. Maybe I should start focusing on status--I've been lax in that for a while. Time to change my username to 2026ish--and hope that DW doesn't find out, as she'd probably kill me if I told her that she has to work for another decade.

Well technically *she* wouldn't have to work another decade... only you.

 

[2017ish]

Well technically *she* wouldn't have to work another decade... only you.

Nah, she claims to want me around to carry her bags--one for all and all that!

 

[FreeBear]

The emphasis was more that having the physical ability to work until 65 was the new status symbol. As compared to, say, being FIRE'd and having both the time(!) and physical ability to spend 30 days backpacking the John Muir trail, which we plan to do next year.

Absolute rubbish IMHO.

You're my hero ElizabethT!! I'd love to backpack JMT, but DW has a bad back. Still loving FIRE though, never planned to work to 65

FB

 

[FreeBear]

I guess Bloomberg has lost sight of the old leisure class. Having a trust fund is the ultimate status symbol in my neck of the woods.

I guess many of us built our own trust funds over the years. So we didn't ER at 18 like some trust fund kids or Failures To Launch, but it's a great feeling to know that we've built something great and rather unusual.

FB

 

[daylatedollarshort]

Interest-in-status-symbols and FIRE are often mutually exclusive.

Very true. There was a lot written about that in The Millionaire Next Door.

 

[foxfirev5]

Go figure. I'm ERing in 68 days and now it's out of style! What will I do?!

 

[frayne]

Hey, for those of you reading this and are still working, go for 70, the hell with 65.

 

[athena53]

I retired at 61 due to toxic politics. I'm 63 and I think if I were still working I'd be counting the days till retirement (had planned age 65). I loved what I did and worked mostly for great companies with great people but 38 years was enough.

 

[Senator]

Did anyone else catch the Bloomberg radio piece yesterday about working until you are 65 is the new status symbol and retiring early is not!

I have never been one for the status thing. I am ready to climb in the wagon and stop pulling it for a while.

Thank goodness for those that work til 65+. It keeps my SS solvent longer.

136 days left!

 

[daylatedollarshort]

Did anyone else catch the Bloomberg radio piece yesterday about working until you are 65 is the new status symbol and retiring early is not!

Not sure what to make of it.

I think it fits in with all the other work until you drop and you need a zillion dollars to retire scare stories. Our financial and corporate overlords want us to keep paying taxes into SS and not withdraw money from our retirement accounts so they can keep collecting their management fees as well as help keep stock prices high.

I like reading up on happiness studies instead. Working 60+ hours a week isn't usually listed as one of the main paths to bliss, unless you are in a career you really love.

 

[FUEGO]

Sounds good to me. Less folks taking up the lap lanes at 11 am and clogging up the aisles in the grocery store mid-day.

 

[Sasset]

Even though I currently have OMM issues, I know I won't work 10 more years to get to 65!

 

[jim584672]

Yahoo Finance has an article today "You'll Need $2 Million Before You Can Think of Retirement". Conditioning the drones again.

 

[W2R]

Yahoo Finance has an article today "You'll Need $2 Million Before You Can Think of Retirement". Conditioning the drones again.

That's for sure. Many of us who didn't have $2 Million when we retired, are doing just fine.

So much depends on other factors.

• Is the house paid off? Is it a giant mansion that is expensive to maintain?
• Is money coming in from a pension or SS?
• How many people in the household?
• Any debt? Any dependents?
• Does the retiree live in Manhattan or someplace cheaper? http://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/10-cheapest-places-to-live-in-the-us/
• Does the retiree thirst either for expensive international travel, or for other aspects of "Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous"?

We are individuals, and so often our situations differ markedly.

From the Yahoo Finance article, taken from TheStreet,

People need more money in retirement than they initially believe. Many clients are spending a minimum of $3,000 a month once they stop working on basic necessities such as property tax, car payments and federal taxes, Ulin said.

Here's the link: You'll Need $2 Million Before You Can Think of Retirement - TheStreet

Perhaps the quote above is correct, but I think many of us live quite comfortably on less than the conventional 4% of $1M (plus annual cost of living increases) from our portfolios.