In 2011 The Baby Boomers Start To Turn 65: 16 Statistics About The Coming Retirement Crisis That Wil

In 2011 The Baby Boomers Start To Turn 65: 16 Statistics About The Coming Retirement Crisis That Will Drop Your Jaw

blacklistednews.com

#4 Over 30 percent of U.S. investors currently in their sixties have more than 80 percent of their 401k invested in equities. So what happens if the stock market crashes again?

#5 35% of Americans already over the age of 65 rely almost entirely on Social Security payments alone.

#6 According to another recent survey, 24% of U.S. workers admit that they have postponed their planned retirement age at least once during the past year.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Everyone in the U.S. knew this has been coming. The effects of it will be most any ones guess. There are some key points to note. Some are delaying there retirement. Some may just continue working until they can no longer work. The retirement industry is booming, meaning where retired people spend the money, if they have any to spend.

blacklistednews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

reply to post by RedGolem


I am a baby boomer who was born in the mid-fifties.
I am starting to wonder if my retirement package could
include the following...
1.All expenses paid trip to a "fema" camp nearest you.
2.A team of "top" officials convincing you to end your
life for the "good" of others.
3.To be deemed obsolete by the NWO...

reply to post by mamabeth


Mamabeth
thanks for posting
To give my opinion I would say numbers two and three sound more likely.

reply to post by RedGolem


there's a bunch of other listed items - in the link you posted - that are relevent...

Companies all over America have been dropping their pension plans in anticipation of the time when the Baby Boomers would retire. 401k programs were supposed to be part of the answer, but if the stock market crashes again, it is absolutely going to devastate the Baby Boomers.

State and local governments are scrambling to find ways to pay out all the benefits that they have been promising. Many state and local governments will be forced into some very hard choices by the hordes of Baby Boomers that will now be retiring.

companies and corporations have blatently dropped all the pension plans that used to be the norm about 40 years ago... they got the rules changed so they didn't have to maintain vast sums of money to satisfy the pensions due their employees....the defined benefit rip-off is the norm now...
i've read just yesterday that a person that was due $1,350. per month for 30 years service in a unnamed company now receives $245. month...after the legalized rip-off handed the corporations' accountants

the same article states that many States retirement plans are severely underfunded & will likely go into default if they don't cut benefits by at least 50% of what was promised right now....NJ and IL were noted along with CA
just as the OP link cites.

it seems that medicaid is the most expensive entitlement out there, its unfunded but serves as the health provider for (it seems) 90% of the children in the USA.... why are all these youth on the dole... because the corporations do not pay their workers Living Wages---and---a great number of unwed single mothers birthing posterity on the publics dime.


the whole situation is hopeless in the current state of behavior in the world...just like the burning man gathering, we have built grotesque frameworks of social enterprise with the only logical purpose of being burnt up in a final blaze of glory.

~~~~~~~~~~~

i also read that the only way the 401k can work optimally..is if the owner paid in the maximum ammount every payday and did so for 20+ years... just about 100% of all 401k plans are underfunded...
lets say the employee only contributes only 10% of the paycheck because they cannot afford to cut their take home any more than that pitiful ammount....
so the 401k retirement portfilio looks like a vacation budget instead of a retirement account.




sorry, had to run out and find the referenced links:


www.time.com...
www.time.com...

reply to post by St Udio


St udio thanks for posting star
I am aware there are many more points I just wanted to list a few of them. This is an important topic fore every one who plans to retire some day. Unfortunately what I am seeing is there will be an awful lot of people who will not be able to retire, and there not rich.

To be clear I am no Pollyanna, and don't always see the glass half full.

However as someone in their mid 50's who is approaching retirement age, I see ways to rectify the ills of the past. I'm inspired by this famous quote by JFK:

"Our problems are man-made, therefore they may be solved by man. And man can be as big as he wants. No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings."

Granted, potential doom is an option on the horizon if sweeping changes/reforms are not enacted but there are several fatal flaws in the system which can be corrected, however most of these reforms are vehemently contested by Republicans.

Raising the yearly SS cap above $100,000.00 ( Once a person earns gross income of $100K per year, SS deductions cease. That represents lost revenue and if you are making that kind of dough, you can afford it.)

Eliminate offshore tax havens for large corporations. (Cruise industry, Exxon Mobil, GE to name a few) Trillions in lost tax revenues

More solutions here

Granted the biggest obstacle is going to be healthcare but I refuse to accept the "Death Panel" scare tactics of Republicans.

Sorry didn't intend to get political and thanks to OP for bringing this to our attention. Chilling and sobering nonetheless.

I heard somewhere (sorry cant find the source) that starting in 2011 there will be 10,000 people a day set to retire. That is staggering and completely unsustainable for the US pension system. Coupled with failing state budgets this is a recipe for disaster.

Ooops, it was #1 in the OPs posted link. Sorry.

brill

In my experience here with the post-war babyboomers, most of them don't even live to see 50 and die of cancer before that age, or are in treatment for SOME form of cancer. So maybe it would be smarter to add some landslots designated as graveyards/ashfields instead of planning for more retirements.

reply to post by brill


That stat is in the linked article.

I plan on going down swinging. If there is a Gold Rush......I intend to sell shovels.

Originally posted by Romekje
In my experience here with the post-war babyboomers, most of them don't even live to see 50 and die of cancer before that age, or are in treatment for SOME form of cancer. So maybe it would be smarter to add some landslots designated as graveyards/ashfields instead of planning for more retirements.

Romekje
every thing you said is very true. I have seen more then one of the people I work with die before they can retire. Thus because of that the need for space to bury all of these people is something that is going to be needed.

This is going to be a problem throughout the developed world, if not immediately, certainly over the next decade or two.

The statistic in the article : that during 1950`s you had 16 working age/tax paying workers for every retiree .
Golden era indeed.

Over the next 30 years my country will fall in line with the average European age-old dependency ratio .. 2: 1

Two working age/ tax payers to every retiree .......... how in the hell are we going to pay for that.!!!!


Increase the retirement age ............. encourage migration from the developing world to replace those dropping out of the workforce. As standards of living increase people have smaller sized families - i.e less tax payers .

Japan is screwed ..... many nations aren`t far behind.

Age dependency ratio, old (% of working-age population) - Dynamics - Population - Health - World Development Indicators (2008) found here

reply to post by UmbraSumus


Umbra
that is a pretty good link to look at, thanks for posting it.
There has been a lot of good information listed in this thread, thanks to everyone for posting it.

reply to post by kinda kurious


I know the death panel stuff is extremely controversial, but what I don't think people realize is 30 percent of all medical costs come in the last month of life. That is very often when someone is kept alive by a respirator, is that really a good use of money we don't have when it will eventually keep medical care from someone who can fully recover and live for several more years?

I know nobody wants to deny care for any reason, but really it's just like any budget, priorities for spending have to be made. In a perfect world we would not need to make such decisions, but we don't live in a perfect world.

Hello all

Just added a link to a BBC series called ''what if....''

news.bbc.co.uk...

This link is very relevant because it covers the DIVIDE that may open up between the old and the young..

Unfortunately the program / video is no longer available (still looking) but there is a transcript of the program.

It was first run in 2004 so TPTB should be aware and the public should have paid attention to it....

IMO the world needs to move away from it's greed mentality. The huge salaries, bonuses and pension pots of the few are completely out of step with reality BUT these are now the EXPECTATION of the CEO's et al who get into high positions today.
I personally blame those whom have and are in the process of retiring now who have changed for the worse the social fabric of society......

I Strongly propose that any Top dog, CEO or a.n other should receive a salary and bonuses of NO MORE than 20 times the lowest full time salary of that company. I think this is a perfectly solid position and this should be applied across Industry, Sport, Films etc etc etc...... any surplus monies being pushed back into society for the greater good...... any takers.......??

PDUK

reply to post by PurpleDog UK


Purple
You do bring up a good point about a ceo salary being linked to that of his employees. That Idea has been throw around before. Nothing much became of it in the past I don't really see it happening now.

reply to post by RedGolem


RedGolem

Thanks for the reply....

If the idea has been thrown around before (here or on a wider stage?) then what was the outcome ?

I can only see those who would decry it as the ones whom are a little greedy and perhaps self centred.

We live and are definately entering an age where if we always do what we've always done then we will always get what we have always got........ and to be honest most of the 'real' world is somewhat dissatisfied with that!!

Maybe we should 'kick the idea around again' and ruffle a few feathers...

Regards

PDUK

reply to post by PurpleDog UK


Purple dog
Speaking just from memory, I recall the ceos in question would not take the position when there salaries were linked to that of there workers. Got to remember that good old greed aspect again.

reply to post by proximo


Yes, I see your point which is why a living will is important and heath care surrogate/appointee to enforce it.. Mine states no artificial life support or resuscitation.

I've told this story before: When my Dad was in his final days and it was clear he wouldn't pull through, the medical staff at the hospital continuously attempted to keep him alive despite his do not resuscitate choice in his living will. As his HC surrogate, I was forced to stick to his wishes. It was a tough yet necessary task. I realize that Doctors are bound to a hippocratical (sp?) oath and feel that was the case vs. wanted to bilk his medical insurance.

To quote an old song: "Life goes on long after the thrill of living is gone."

Me, I'm "too old to rock and roll but too young to die."

reply to post by RedGolem


It's a very sad reality really..

gives credence to so many conspiracies. I see it in my own family here with people who've had a certain vaccine (also leaves a distinctive scar/mark for the rest of your life on your shoulder), you can practically put a timer on those people...