Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why work has failed us: Because no one can afford to retire anymore

fastcompany.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 147 posts

Re: Why work has failed us: Because no one can afford to retire anymore

#61

Post by fomojola »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #44

If you turn 65 in 2040 or 2050 or 2060 Some historical perspective: My understanding is that when Social Security was created, the average life expectancy was 67. So offering it for people age 65 was intended as providing for people in extreme old age who had probably worked physically hard their entire lives and were pretty beat up. I'm not saying we don't have genuine problems here, but this article is bellyaching…

This is not emphasized enough: prior to the last 100 years, the concept of retirement as currently visualized simply did not exist. You had kids, and the kids took care of you in your old age (or you just had a terrible old age).

A very small number of people had the resource base to survive growing old gracefully: Social Security was an attempt to extend that to all on a consistent basis. That's not to say some form of it can't be made to work, but as much as we may love the core concept of retirement we may need to accept that it isn't broadly economically viable without a meaningful, direct index against increasing life expectancy (with the usual caveats for infirmity, disease, etc).

It is (in my opinion) a well meaning, long term social experiment that might be coming to an end. I am quite curious to see what (and how) we get to the other side of that.

Re: Why work has failed us: Because no one can afford to retire anymore

#62

Post by ryandrake »

L_Rahman wrote: post #60
the_gastropod wrote: post #18

C'mooon > The IRA won’t make anyone rich. A calculator on the site estimates that if you’re 22 years old and making $14 an hour–saving around $120 a month–you could end up with around $230,000 by the time you’re 65 1. $14 / hour? The median household (yes, I know, household, but wait) income is the highest it's been since at least 1985 [1] at $59k/year. So $14 is definitely a bit lower than "normal". 2. Saving $120/m…

It's staggering that this is the top voted comment. > car loan most of America doesn't have any way of getting to jobs without one > eat anything but rice and beans most people need fundamental nutrients from vegetables just to be able to survive, these vegetables tend to be more expensive than less healthy things > a >$30 month cell phone bill internet access gates opportunity in American and for many people their c…

This idea that having a car and eating more than beans and water means you’re spending too much comes from those (slightly fanatical) Money Mustache followers. I agree that we should not advocate for a world where we have to sacrifice a middle class lifestyle in order to retire middle class.

Re: Why work has failed us: Because no one can afford to retire anymore

#63

Post by marshray »

the_gastropod wrote: post #41
NTDF9 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The IRA won’t make anyone rich. A calculator on the site estimates that if you’re 22 years old and making $14 an hour–saving around $120 a month–you could end up with around $230,000 by the time you’re 65 So no room for 2 years of education or a drop year for health issues or layoffs or travel or starting a risky business?

Look, it's just math. Of course there's room for these things. Learning to consume just a little less than you currently do grants you a ton of flexibility.

Just out of curiosity, do you have kids?

Re: Why work has failed us: Because no one can afford to retire anymore

#64

Post by 1stranger »

yardie wrote: post #23
grecy wrote: post #2

In Australia the official retirement age when you can start to receive a pension (or access your own retirement money without penalties) was recently moved up to 67. The new Prime Minister just announced he won't raise it to 70, which was on the table. I think it's clear that's just a sign of things to come.

I find it completely ridiculous and totally regressive that you have to live in Australia to receive your state pension. It’s like a final FU to the workers who have spent all their life contributing to it.

Meaning you can't retire abroad and receive your pension? How many months out of year do you have to reside in Australia?

Re: Why work has failed us: Because no one can afford to retire anymore

#65

Post by meguest »

bdcravens wrote: post #38

Work hasn't failed us. Consumerism has. Stop buying brands. Stop buying Starbucks. Stop eating out. Stop buying the newest phone. Don't buy a fancy Macbook if you don't have a use case for one. Stop buying too much car. Stop trading resources for lifestyle. A 25 year old who only puts $300 into a reasonable retirement fund each month will have over $1M at retirement age.

I'm mid 20s and am putting just over $1000 a month into retirement, split between a private and workplace pension. I intend to do this for as long as possible!

Disclaimer: I don't live or work in the U.S

Re: Why work has failed us: Because no one can afford to retire anymore

#66

Post by the_gastropod »

mdorazio wrote: post #55
the_gastropod wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some households have two earners. Most do not. The average is 1.3 earners per household. https://www.bls.gov/opub/btn/volume-6/use-with-caution-inter...

Right, so that's a median per-worker wage of around $22/hour. But $14/hour is right in the middle of the 2nd and 3rd income quintiles [1], meaning a solid 40% of Americans don't even make that much. It's not a very strong argument unless you're OK with current poverty and lack of retirement ability trends for large swathes of the country. [1] https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/household-income-...

Read the title of the article again ;-) Most Americans can retire. And there's this pretty broad movement to rationalize middle class earners failing to save. For those earning under ~25k/year, I agree: it's challenging. Especially if they've got medical problems or other extenuating circumstances to deal with.

Re: Why work has failed us: Because no one can afford to retire anymore

#67

Post by ryandrake »

fomojola wrote: post #61
DoreenMichele wrote: post #44

If you turn 65 in 2040 or 2050 or 2060 Some historical perspective: My understanding is that when Social Security was created, the average life expectancy was 67. So offering it for people age 65 was intended as providing for people in extreme old age who had probably worked physically hard their entire lives and were pretty beat up. I'm not saying we don't have genuine problems here, but this article is bellyaching…

This is not emphasized enough: prior to the last 100 years, the concept of retirement as currently visualized simply did not exist. You had kids, and the kids took care of you in your old age (or you just had a terrible old age). A very small number of people had the resource base to survive growing old gracefully: Social Security was an attempt to extend that to all on a consistent basis. That's not to say some form…

I’m curious too. What’s the solution? Life expectancy keeps going up, but the age at which our bodies can no longer work has stayed relatively flat. People are living long past when they can no longer work. Fact. Society needs to solve this or we risk letting the elderly starve on the street.

Re: Why work has failed us: Because no one can afford to retire anymore

#68

Post by sharkmerry »

Mc_Big_G wrote: post #6

I’ve been so poor my calculated net per month was minus $1000 for about 16 years while supporting a family. I worked and saved my way out of it and know that the inability to save for the vast majority of people is just bullshit. Its an inability to sacrifice and “suffer” in a consumerist society. They won’t make their own coffee or cook their own food or give up cable or Netflix or their cell phone or fix their own…

seems like you created a strawman you created and are arguing against that.

>> and know that the inability to save for the vast majority of people is just bullshit. Its an inability to sacrifice and “suffer” in a consumerist society.

How do you know this? median income (50th %) in US is 37k before taxes. The average rent is 1k, so 33% of pretax is going to housing but its definitely lazy people?

>> I’ve been so poor my calculated net per month was minus $1000 for about 16 years while supporting a family. I worked and saved my way out of it

How did you save while having a net of -$1000/month?

Re: Why work has failed us: Because no one can afford to retire anymore

#69

Post by the_gastropod »

ryandrake wrote: post #62
L_Rahman wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's staggering that this is the top voted comment. > car loan most of America doesn't have any way of getting to jobs without one > eat anything but rice and beans most people need fundamental nutrients from vegetables just to be able to survive, these vegetables tend to be more expensive than less healthy things > a >$30 month cell phone bill internet access gates opportunity in American and for many people their c…

This idea that having a car and eating more than beans and water means you’re spending too much comes from those (slightly fanatical) Money Mustache followers. I agree that we should not advocate for a world where we have to sacrifice a middle class lifestyle in order to retire middle class.

If you're broke. If you're in debt, you absolutely should be making some sacrifices to get out of debt. Once you have some money saved, feel free to spend on the luxuries you most desire.

Re: Why work has failed us: Because no one can afford to retire anymore

#70

Post by ryandrake »

jdavis703 wrote: post #53
russellbeattie wrote: post #24

My Vanguard 401k home page has this helpful notice in the dead center of the page: "We think you need $7,840 more per month." Sure... That makes two of us. I guess it's extrapolating my current salary out and how much I'll need to save to live with the same income after I retire. That's not going to happen. Here's a helpful article to see how far behind you are in your retirement: https://smartasset.com/retirement/av…

There's no way that number is correct. You're only allowed to save $18,500 in your 401(k) for 2018. You'd hit that number in less than 3 months. I'm guessing that you must be closer to retirement age right now and probably haven't saved enough or had investments with low returns (no personal judgement here, shit happens). Thus the system is predicting how much "catching up" you need to do and not taking various param…

Note the IRS limit for 401k elective pre-tax contributions is $18,500 but the overall contribution limit, including After-Tax, is $55,000.
Post reply on HN