top Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"Baby boomers" may still outlive assets

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    "Baby boomers" may still outlive assets

    NEW YORK (Reuters) - Even baby boomers who prune spending when they retire risk outliving their assets as they likely will live longer and experience volatile rates of both inflation and investments, a new study said on Monday.

    Almost three out of five new middle-class retirees will outlast their savings unless they live more modestly after they quit the work force, said the study commissioned by Americans for Secure Retirement, a lobbying coalition for policies to help Americans retire.

    The oldest among the 77 million baby boomers are the best-prepared, according to the study, done for the coalition by accountants Ernst & Young. Middle-class people now retiring only face an average cut of 24 percent in their standard of living while those who won't retire for seven years face a 37 percent reduction, it said.

    Rhode Island, New York, Utah and the District of Columbia are the four places where residents are least likely to burn all their savings.

    Retirees in Montana, South Dakota and Wyoming are the most likely to outlive their nest eggs, according to the study.

    Companies that sell annuities would benefit from some of the policies the coalition supports. For example, the group backs a congressional bill that would shield half of the income from a lifetime annuity from taxation, up to $20,000 a year.

    Married couples are more likely to outlive their assets than single individuals, the study said. For example, so-called near retirees, at age 58, have an average nest egg of $105,000 if their yearly income is $50,000. Their savings rise to an average of $280,000 if they earn $100,000 a year.

    New retirees, with an average age of 65, have $175,000 in savings if they earned $50,000, and $585,000 if they earned $100,000 a year, the study said.

    "Many Americans envision a retirement where their lifestyle continues much as before," said Tom Neubig of Ernst & Young.

    "Our work shows this is not a realistic expectation and that, with the current state of savings and potentially very long life expectancies, many retirees will have to cut back far more on expenditures than they had ever expected."

    "The very real possibility of living to age 90 or 100 combined with the volatility of inflation and investment returns means that the risk of outliving one's assets is quite high," the study said.

    (Reporting by Joan Gralla; editing by Gary Crosse)

    The latest news and headlines from Yahoo News. Get breaking news stories and in-depth coverage with videos and photos.
    The information provided is not, and should not be considered legal advice. All information provided is only informational and should be verified by a law practioner whenever possible. When confronted with legal issues contact an experienced attorney in your state who specializes in the area of law most directly called into question by your particular situation.

    #2
    "Our work shows this is not a realistic expectation and that, with the current state of savings and potentially very long life expectancies, many retirees will have to cut back far more on expenditures than they had ever expected."
    it is not a realistic expectation? duh. you dont have to figure it out on paper...well maybe the elitists do. (hint hint)

    could that be because by the time you reach 58 very few working class will have the same job they hoped to retire with? now dipping into SS & what ever savings they have early working for minimum wage elsewhere because the yuppies today dont want them to take on any more benefits at that age.

    New retirees, with an average age of 65, have $175,000 in savings if they earned $50,000, and $585,000 if they earned $100,000 a year, the study said.
    but what did they study? tinkerbell, the pumpkin carriage & the castle at disney world?

    Comment


      #3
      I believe, with our National Debt as high as it currently is, and if Bam gets in with his free health care for all, the Feds will crank up thier printing presses to pay off these debts with soon to be worthless dollars. Until we mint money with intrinsic value in it, such as real silver, real gold, our paper is only numbers. Your bank account is only numbers and look at Germany in 1923. It took more money to purchase wood for a stove than the money would provide if the money was burned in the stove. We are on a bring of economic collapse. Only my opinion. (and many others) 'Hub
      If I knew it all, would I be here?? Hang in there = Retained attorney 8-06, Filed 12-28-07, Discharge 8-13-08, Finally CLOSED 11-3-09, 3-31-10 AP Dismissed, Informed by incompetent lawyer of CLOSED status, October 14, 2010.

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by AngelinaCatHub View Post
        Your bank account is only numbers and look at Germany in 1923. It took more money to purchase wood for a stove than the money would provide if the money was burned in the stove. We are on a bring of economic collapse. Only my opinion. (and many others) 'Hub
        preach!

        There is an old photo somewhere of them burning the bundles of cash during the depression. The wads of paper cash was cheaper to burn in a stove & keep them warm, than buying wood because they could not spend/trade with currency...providing they already had a stove.

        There were boxes & boxes of paper money in the picture. I wish I could remember where it was.

        Comment


          #5
          Assuming a modest 5% return yearly, in order to maintain the same livelihood the person making 50000 per year, needs to have 1000000 at retirement. (This is assuming mutual funds, the rate of return on savings account does not keep up with even modest inflation) The person making 100000 per year would need 2000000 in such funds at retirement.....

          Very few people put away that kind of money and I suspect they are overestimating the savings of the Baby Boomers. I really don't think many of them have anywhere near the estimates, to many thought that Social Security would take care of them....
          May 31st, 2007: Petition Filed by my lawyer
          July 2nd, 2007: 341 Meeting Held
          September 4th, 2007: Discharged and Closed.

          Comment


            #6
            Seems like every time I review my retirement plan I have to die a few years sooner.
            It's not what we have in our lives, but who we have in our lives and the quality of those relationships.

            Comment


              #7
              We went through our retirement money to try and stay ahead THEN decided to look into bankruptcy. We did it backwards.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by AngelinaCatHub View Post
                I believe, with our National Debt as high as it currently is, and if Bam gets in with his free health care for all, the Feds will crank up thier printing presses to pay off these debts with soon to be worthless dollars. Until we mint money with intrinsic value in it, such as real silver, real gold, our paper is only numbers. Your bank account is only numbers and look at Germany in 1923. It took more money to purchase wood for a stove than the money would provide if the money was burned in the stove. We are on a bring of economic collapse. Only my opinion. (and many others) 'Hub
                What is this soon to be worthless dollars. They have been completely worthless since we got off the Gold Standard. Money is created out of debt. The federal deficit can never be paid off. Its how the owners of the Federal Reserve planned it. Once a currency is taken over then the soveriegnty of nations can be controlled.

                "When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation, since the hand that gives is above the hand that takes... Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain." -- Napoleon Bonaparte, 1815
                "Paper is poverty,... it is only the ghost of money, and not money itself." --Thomas Jefferson to Edward Carrington, 1788

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by bmrigs View Post
                  What is this soon to be worthless dollars. They have been completely worthless since we got off the Gold Standard. Money is created out of debt. The federal deficit can never be paid off. Its how the owners of the Federal Reserve planned it. Once a currency is taken over then the soveriegnty of nations can be controlled.

                  "When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation, since the hand that gives is above the hand that takes... Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain." -- Napoleon Bonaparte, 1815
                  Do you think or does this explain why so many in the states are selling out, selling to other countries, to protect themselves in another country?
                  I doubt many realize the gold backing isn't there but these big wigs do. Why else would they keep selling out the united states to the global affair?

                  I mean, if you can sell milk from the cow, why would you sell the cow to another place & have nothing to do business with?
                  a) they move the cow to another country & have new people milk it but they never sell it.
                  b) they sell the cow but it stays on the same turf.

                  I am trying to figure out which way the United States is going to go in terms of communism, marxism, socialism & whatnot...

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by Bandit View Post
                    Do you think or does this explain why so many in the states are selling out, selling to other countries, to protect themselves in another country?
                    I doubt many realize the gold backing isn't there but these big wigs do. Why else would they keep selling out the united states to the global affair?

                    I mean, if you can sell milk from the cow, why would you sell the cow to another place & have nothing to do business with?
                    a) they move the cow to another country & have new people milk it but they never sell it.
                    b) they sell the cow but it stays on the same turf.

                    I am trying to figure out which way the United States is going to go in terms of communism, marxism, socialism & whatnot...

                    Good questions Bandit. I wonder these things too. The US is becoming more communistic in my opinion. A central bank is one of the main tenets of Communism and we have that in the Federal Reserve. We have a Federal govt that is increasing its power and jurisdiction in all facets of our lives, slowly eroding our natural born rights with privledges and licenses to own a gun, travel, work, etc. Enumerating us with SSN #'s. What's next, National I.D. cards that if you refuse to accept you cant travel on a plane. After that, microchips underneath the skin which if you dont accept, you wont be able to interact in society without them. The central govt will know every move you make. Yes, its communism at its best I would say.......
                    "Paper is poverty,... it is only the ghost of money, and not money itself." --Thomas Jefferson to Edward Carrington, 1788

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Well, there is no "gold standard" anymore. This only exists in those who believe a traded commodity (gold being one of these) dictates the wealth of a nation. In my opinion, wealth around the world is dependent upon the personal utility carried by the citizenry. In the US ( and by-the-way, such utility is not unique to the US,) a great deal of personal utility is measured by what we "own." However, the ownership is only a fallacy as creditors hold the "chips" of our debt. The debt itself is covered by the ability of our national treasury (again, we are not a lone country in this) to sell the lending debt to others (including nations offshore,) via long-term bonds. In addition, should the US lose its ability to print "money" for availability to the financial institutions, there will be no catastophe at the individual basis. The country will continue to operate but we will need to learn to do so without incurring additional debt. The change will be that the citizenry will have to learn to operate on pay-as-you-go as the country will lose the ability to make funding available to the private financial institutions for lending to their clients; oh well, big deal!

                      As the dollar continues to decrease against the Euro and the Yuan, goods manufactured in the US will become more of a commodity to those overseas. I giggle as I see the Euro far surpass the dollar in exchangeable currency, but keep in mind that it was only a few years ago that this was the opposite and americans flocked to buy goods overseas. I believe that many folks feel we can have our cake and eat it too. In the global economy, you probably can't have both. We "trained" the world in how "good" capitalism and the free-market can be; why should we expect to maintain the upper hand?

                      I'm not opposed to the next leadership of this country letting inflation run so rampant that it becomes impossible to even think about borrowing money or "building credit." Many folks are simply convinced that the only way to get ahead is to have "good credit." But good credit is NOT wealth. And wealth does not have to depend upon an individual's ability to borrow money.

                      Just as the wealth of the US depends upon debt owed to us from foreign entities, foreign entities also depend upon our ability to repay our own debt as sold in bonds. Is this communism? Nope, far from it!

                      While I do not care for the "politics" of the current US administration, I do have to say that the current institutional financial crisis may bode well in the long-term. Hopefully, a new administration will ease the rules for declaring bankruptcy on unsecured debt. I mean what could be better, dinging people for interest to support the old financial school or freeing them of debt so that there hard-earned dollars can go to builiding savings and/or buying goods/services that support a stronger nation? Tough call, I know.

                      Just my humble opinions. TH

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Can't help but add... Many folks have mortgages only because a "central bank" made funding at ridiculous interest rates available to the private financial institutions that loaned the money to clients (Americans wishing to buy homes.) If one were to strip away the "central" bank, and thus the cash flow running into the private banks, I would guess that most "private" banks' financial statements would not balance and they could not afford to finance mortgages at 6% or less for thirty years!

                        I'm hoping for a new home lending strategy that only supports lending mortgage amounts based upon an individual's income ability to pay off the mortgage in 3 - 5 years, LOL. Seriously, current home-owners will take it in the shorts in terms of lost equity, but future homeowners should at least find homes that truly represent their ability to pay. I'm already seeing new homes (solid construction and upgraded) in our area selling for 75% of the price that the same type of home sold for three years ago. Now, that's capitalism. Let the market reign!

                        Comment


                          #13
                          I think most Americans in the next decade will awake to the fact that our economy is based on a house of cards. It is an unstable house because we have tried to trade the future for today. The problem is the future is always uncertain. War, epidemics, disasters, can all affect the future to the point that it cannot pay for the present.

                          When it happens and we could be in the early stages now, the American economy will enter a depression. While it will be very difficult during those years it is likely a stronger economy can emerge. However it will be a very different economy than we have today. A consumer nation cannot survive and we must return more to the early America than America of today.
                          May 31st, 2007: Petition Filed by my lawyer
                          July 2nd, 2007: 341 Meeting Held
                          September 4th, 2007: Discharged and Closed.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by JRScott View Post
                            I think most Americans in the next decade will awake to the fact that our economy is based on a house of cards. It is an unstable house because we have tried to trade the future for today. The problem is the future is always uncertain. War, epidemics, disasters, can all affect the future to the point that it cannot pay for the present.

                            When it happens and we could be in the early stages now, the American economy will enter a depression. While it will be very difficult during those years it is likely a stronger economy can emerge. However it will be a very different economy than we have today. A consumer nation cannot survive and we must return more to the early America than America of today.

                            You know what it has done? In just a couple of hundred of years it has brought back the Roma Empire, stronger than ever. The very thing people ran away from is right back in their lap.

                            It makes people wish there was another land they could go to & pioneer it so they could have their freedom again.
                            These politicians & elitists are in fact positioning things through the globe in a particular direction, but it as all over the globe, not just our own kings behind it.

                            I know it was a much harder life phsically but I too wish we could return to the early america over the modern day convenience. I am not afraid of hard work but I see a generation today where everything has been done for them/us because of the early american days & become sleepy,not paying attention to government.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by bmrigs View Post
                              Good questions Bandit. I wonder these things too. The US is becoming more communistic in my opinion. A central bank is one of the main tenets of Communism and we have that in the Federal Reserve. We have a Federal govt that is increasing its power and jurisdiction in all facets of our lives, slowly eroding our natural born rights with privledges and licenses to own a gun, travel, work, etc. Enumerating us with SSN #'s. What's next, National I.D. cards that if you refuse to accept you cant travel on a plane. After that, microchips underneath the skin which if you dont accept, you wont be able to interact in society without them. The central govt will know every move you make. Yes, its communism at its best I would say.......
                              We think we have freedom of speech but they will use your freedom of speech against you & throw you in jail if they dont like what you say.
                              I would agree it is going in a communisitc direction. I am familiar with everything you have mentioned & it is all true.

                              They tried the pay by finger up here but it failed which was really nothing more than test run for future buying & selling.

                              Comment

                              bottom Ad Widget

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X