487
submitted 11 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

The great baby-boomer retirement wave is upon us. According to Census Bureau data, 44% of boomers are at retirement age and millions more are soon to join them. By 2030, the largest generation to enter retirement will all be older than 65.

The general assumption is that boomers will have a comfortable retirement. Coasting on their accumulated wealth from three decades as America's dominant economic force, boomers will sail off into their golden years to sip on margaritas on cruises and luxuriate in their well-appointed homes. After all, Federal Reserve data shows that while the 56 million Americans over 65 make up just 17% of the population, they hold more than half of America's wealth — $96.4 trillion.

But there's a flaw in the narrative of a sunny boomer retirement: A lot of older Americans are not set up for their later years. Yes, many members of the generation are loaded, but many more are not. Like every age cohort, there's significant wealth inequality among retirees — and it's gotten worse in the past decade. Despite holding more than half of the nation's wealth, many boomers don't have enough money to cover the costs of long-term care, and 43% of 55- to 64-year-olds had no retirement savings at all in 2022. That year, 30% of people over 65 were economically insecure, meaning they made less than $27,180 for a single person. And since younger boomers are less financially prepared for retirement than their older boomer siblings, the problem is bound to get worse.

As boomers continue to age out of the workforce, it's going to put strain on the healthcare system, government programs, and the economy. That means more young people are going to be financially responsible for their parents, more government spending will be allocated to older folks, and economic growth could slow.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] SpringMango7379@lemmy.world 58 points 11 months ago

My father has Parkinson’s and my mother, who was his primary caregiver, passed a few months ago. They went from being comfortable with their finances and having a small, but nice home, to my father now going into a nursing home and likely lose everything he owns because of how expensive nursing care is. We are looking at $7k a month with zero assistance from Medicare and he has enough money that he doesn’t qualify for Medicaid but will burn through all his assets in just a short time. It’s ridiculous that people work hard and save and it’s all gone in a flash.

[-] fidodo@lemmy.world 26 points 11 months ago

Let the debt die with him. Get that house into a trust, or out of his name however you can. Don't let greedy corporations steal the generational wealth he worked hard for and surely wants to pass on, and not have taken away by the health care industry. A few grand on lawyers and accountants now will save you hundreds of thousands down the line.

[-] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 21 points 11 months ago

Your father needs to put his assets into a trust ASAP then. Once he divests through the trust he will qualify for Medicaid. It's unfortunate that we need to jump through these hoops, but it is what it is.

[-] fidodo@lemmy.world 13 points 11 months ago

I've seen it go both ways. Things are so much better for the kids when assets are in a trust. Without it, I've seen people lose everything. Don't give the dirty debt collectors a dime.

[-] hark@lemmy.world 19 points 11 months ago

Sorry to hear about that. This is one reason why I wonder if it's even worth saving for the future. Live the best life you can in your prime years and then let the pieces fall where they may in the end. You'll qualify for more programs if you didn't bother saving anyway.

[-] fidodo@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

If you want to pass on generational wealth you need a trust. It keeps those assets protected, and once you die the debt dies with you.

[-] CeruleanRuin@lemmings.world 4 points 11 months ago

Assuming those programs still exist by the time you get to that point.

If the oligarchs continue to get their way, those programs will disappear. It doesn't serve them to have a class of people whose labor or income they can't exploit.

[-] monkeyslikebananas2@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

If you’re 40 or under it isn't worth saving. Retirement is a Myth for Millennials onward. Unless we get UBI, everything is going to go tits up anyway.

[-] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 7 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

This feels like a self fulfilling prophecy

[-] btaf45@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

If you’re 40 or under it isn’t worth saving.

That is precisely the best time to save and invest.

[-] SaltySalamander@kbin.social 2 points 11 months ago

You've been given some horrible advice. That or you're just not very smart.

[-] monkeyslikebananas2@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago

If you believe the same retirement options that were available for boomers is realistically available for younger people, I have a 401k to sell you and a Social Security check is in the mail.

Without significant changes to the way we handle our economy no amount of savings now will make up for the shit that’s coming.

That being said, it should be noted I have a good paying job, I have a 401k, I have investments and none of that is going to carry any of us through to the retirement expectations that we’re being sold.

If you’re under 40, between automation and climate change, shit is going to get real very quickly.

[-] Sagifurius@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

How does giving everyone a UBI solve that we can't afford to pay the old pensions now? Gonna tax the UBI to pay for it?

[-] stoly@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

Think of it as the circle of life. It's basically what powered the Boomers--all those freeways and suburb projects put money in their pockets. You give UBI and you drastically reduce homelessness, allowing more people to participate in the economy. Those with good incomes won't notice the UBI but for those without, it will save their lives.

[-] 31337@sh.itjust.works 3 points 11 months ago

Dunno your country's specifics, but in the U.S., the eventual social security deficits could be completely resolved by removing the caps on social security contributions.

UBI could be payed for by a radically progressive tax structure similar to the U.S. tax structure in the 1950s.

[-] Sagifurius@lemm.ee -1 points 11 months ago

I've looked that structure up before, it only worked if you paid yourself. They just plowed all the money straight back into business expenses or acquisition.

[-] 31337@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 months ago

In the U.S., the difference between average and median income is ~$25k/yr, so, if my logic is correct, it should theoretically be possible to have an UBI of $25k/yr (which would bring the average income on top of UBI down to around the median).

[-] Sagifurius@lemm.ee -1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Well, I'll give you this. Most communists don't actually admit they want to drag everyone down to their level. The honesty is refreshing. That's not sarcasm, this is rare as hell.

[-] CeruleanRuin@lemmings.world 1 points 11 months ago

Because the system isn't designed to work for even the upper middle class, or even the comfortably independently wealthy. The system is designed to continue diverting all of that hard work's rewards towards the wealthiest tier of wealthy.

Nobody is safe from this vampirism, not even those who would call themselves rich. As it is, wealth will always siphon down to the parasites at the bottom. We've all been fooled into thinking we're at the bottom of a pyramid (or, if you're lucky, somewhere in the middle), but it's really just a funnel, sucking everything down to a single point.

this post was submitted on 12 Jan 2024
487 points (94.8% liked)

News

23664 readers
3552 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS