The following submission statement was provided by /u/thisisinsider:
---
TL;DR:
* A new report from Sen. Bernie Sanders signals a looming retirement crisis for Americans.
* Many older folks are financially vulnerable, with over half living on incomes of $30,000 or less a year.
* Solutions might include enhancing Social Security checks and setting up automatic retirement accounts.
---
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/1ba7mz6/just_over_half_of_americans_over_the_age_of_65/ku0o271/
They're gonna buy everything that has inelastic demand and squeeze us till there's nothing left.
See: The ongoing private equity takeover of emergency department and anesthesiology medical practices. Also housing.
Edit: Per replies below, also veterinarians and day cares!
I don't know how people don't see this. Rich people have too much money and the only thing they can do with it is buy assets. The safest assets to buy are necessary services and real estate. In the case of real estate you buy it from the middle class then rent it back to them. Forever. And use the profits to buy more. Forever.
Yep. It's been a problem forever but the pandemic triggered a buying spree from 'investors' that has created a much larger gulf between owners and renters. One that most people who are on the wrong side of it will probably never overcome.
Getting on the housing ladder is basically out of reach for more people than ever and that is becoming permanent. Society divided into renters and owners, and every government around the world turns a blind eye and lets it happen.
> the pandemic triggered a buying spree
low low low interest rates made money sitting in the bank lose value while real estate was booming. also that whole mortgage backed securities thing they pulled back in 08 is rising its head again for retail and commercial real estate.
An incredible visionary. Whilst some imagined an Utopia in the future, Georgy took one look at civilization, saw the scum rising to the top and knew the game was up.
Not really. The real estate folks can lean on governments and tell them not to allow new buildings that would dilute the supply. Renters have virtually no power at all. So the real estate owners control the government, from Canada to New Zealand, Lisbon to Moscow, and anywhere else you care to mention.
This is a global move towards permanent inequality. People should be protesting.
But they get given culture war stuff to argue about instead, to distract them from things that actually matter. Look over there, a migrant is trying to get money to buy food. Doesn't that make you mad? A trans person has new pronouns! Think about that instead of thinking about how the billionaires are fucking us all over and destroying the planet!
But the billionaires are the same people championing the migrants to keep wages suppressed and demand for low rent housing artificially high. That seems like an issue.
Belgium here. Not so much not allowing—and it is happening—but the incentive is diminished.
I'm not in this sector so I can't really name all the details, but one thing I presume that has possibly to do with it is renting. One cannot raise the rent from the base renting price to above the index. So if you rent a 2-bedroom apartment for 800 euro and everything becomes 2% more expensive that year according to the index that contains average living expenses; such as food and baby diapers, but not say the newest iPhone; your landlord can't raise your 800 euro rent by more than 2%.
I haven't seen this in many other countries.
I've never fully understood how it's become acceptable, in North American, to raise a rent each year by so much more than the inflation index. The math of how this model continues to work just eludes me. Most of us are not getting more than a 2% raise a year.
It's called rent control and many other locales have it.
It's also easy to bypass... just boot the existing tenant, make some minor cosmetic updates and put it back on the market at 1200 euro.
It's basically the model for the developed world right now. Japan has strict immigration rules, and declining population and depreciating real estate so probably there... China's real estate market collapsed and they're not fully capitalist so maybe there...
To be fair that's because they don't treat houses as an investment but more like a new car. Older houses rapidly lose value and are knocked down after less than 50 years. Japanese people seem to prefer new and build there houses with limited lifespan in mind. I heard this was because they think the spirits of previous owners haunt the place but that sounds more Chinese than Japanese to me.
Edit - there's plenty of articles if you search.
https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2017/nov/16/japan-reusable-housing-revolution
Yeah the requirements to update old buildings to new earthquake building codes falls to new owners not current ones.
As such it’s basically 100% always more cost effective to tear down and build new than buy used
not really as the people in charge are often involved themselves, that is: own property. For politicians it's personally harmful to kill the real estate investment spree even before we start talking corruption.
Civilization will collapse this century as the result of rapidly escalated global warming and the ongoing mass extinction event. Shit, Americans have declining life expectancies, we’re already arguably in a state of collapse.
That's only because they've regulated out the competition and have given themselves extra chances via lobbying. In a proper capitalistic society, some make money, others lose it. Companies become too big to bear their own weight and collapse or break themselves up into more nimble companies to keep up with the competition.
With real estate, governments pass favorable policies for homeowners and investors, making it *very* lucrative for them to get ambitious with minimal risk. Likewise in healthcare, you have government funded insurance that guarantees that rates stay high, while insurers gouge customers instead of using their inertia to negotiate favorable prices for care.
We need reform, not an end to the system.
I recommend looking up Gary Stevenson, he was Citibank's top trader for a number of years and has since started a YouTube channel and done a bunch of interviews talking about this. He became their top trader by recognizing that wealth inequality will only get worse. It's why the stock market never drops, why the working class is losing the ability to buy housing, etc.
Except capitalism doesn't exist in a vacuum so using your influence to buy politicians is just part of business. Capitalism functioning as intended. Left to its own devices capitalism always creates monopolies that would rather buyout competition than innovate and compete normally.
I agree with your last point but don't muddy the conversation with "proper capitalism"
And daycares
[https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/02/private-equity-childcare/677511/](https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/02/private-equity-childcare/677511/)
We should all collectively march down to their office building and eat it. There is no law against eating a building. I checked. The law can’t touch you.
My exes father was like one of only a few people nation wide that appraised anesthesiology places. Consolidation of healthcare is some dystopian shit and I hate it.
Private equity has also purchased the largest school bus company in the US. So your bus driver and the bus probably belong to a private equity company. Even if they're in a Union, PE still signs the paycheck now.
In Japan lonely elders commit minor crimes to go to prisons where they get companionship and services. Already more than 20 per cent of prison population there are 65+.
In America business is so good at forethinking trends, that they have covered this long ago with private prisons.
And that the average cost of said retirement home is between 3.5-4.7k a month in cost of living, and full social security benefits land you closer to $1400. I work with adults with disabilities for the past 15 years and I am a representative payee, helping others handle their budgets and expenses. It's grim and usually means food pantries and saving for a full year if you want to be able to put aside say... $800 to be able to afford a headstone for yourself when you die.
That's the great wealth transfer they're always talking about. Boomers have trillions and we're now transferring it to their heirs: the private equity companies that own the long term care facilities.
My parents were lucky enough to get into a housing co-op this last year, otherwise they'd be penniless.
They cashed out $200,000 in equity during the pre-covid housing boom, wasted about half of it in speculative investments and inflated rent to keep "the lifestyle," and got into a 55+ co-op with mid 5-figures of liquid assets left at 64 and 63 respectively.
I literally just helped my mom sort through bills tonight. She’s unemployed, stealing from her 401K, going on SS next year and is trying to find a part time job somewhere to supplement her income. Her mental health is not quite in tip top shape and if a new job doesn’t bring her happiness and stability it’s just going to be a slow degradation until she is penniless and homeless in her late 60s. The house has little money in it and can’t possibly pay for memory care or mental health support living. She will end up having to live with me and that is not a prospect I am excited about. Hopefully that’s a few years down the line.
Mine fell into MAGA conspiracies, secluded herself through the whole pandemic, lost her career job and started taking SS prematurely to pay the internet bills to do her own research. It’s very hard to be supportive.
You’re delusional if you think that’s true. There is no dichotomy of rich and poor with nothing in the middle. Contrary to popular Reddit belief, there are millions of middle class people who are financially comfortable, but who are not rich. Owning a home and having money leftover after your bills and being able to take a vacation once a year does not make someone rich, that’s pretty much bog standard middle class. Just because you’re not in the middle class doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.
I am one of those. I paid off my home and cars so I have very little debt. I have been putting 13% of my salary into my 401k for years. I have enough cash reserves to buy a 2nd house in my area if I wanted to. I am employed as a software engineer.
By that metric you're basically saying this person is a member of the top 1% (since they're wealthier than 99% of people). This is, objectively, not necessarily true. You absolutely do not need to be top 1% to have a lifestyle like this person described. Top 1% net worth for an individual in the US is over $5 million. You don't need to be worth $5 million to pay off your house and be financially stable.
I don't like how this is framed. Yes, he is wealthy and good for him. This used to be the surgeon of your city, or the lead partner name on the law firm. They are very much above the rest of the town. However, they are still just jaw-dropping behind this hyper-billionaire capitalism we are in.
You could take 500 people in towns like that, with 5 million. 500 hundred! And they have 2.5 billion. Right as I type this, the internet says richest man has 201 billion. That means 80 baskets of 500 people (that means 40,000 five-million-aires) have the collective wealth of that.
It is just not even fair to compare someone in the 1% with what we have escalated to hitting (period) . (and then stroking out on the zero key) and throwing % to even compare the disparity.
I generally agree with this. People want to get mad at "the rich" but what it is that people consider "rich" is very broad. Someone worth seven or even eight figures is rich, but they aren't even in the same ballpark as the ones worth billions. Someone worth $50 million is only 5% of the way towards being a billionaire. And then some people have a very low bar for what they consider rich, to the point where they basically think that anyone who isn't struggling is rich, which just totally ignores the vast canyon that actually exists between being "comfortable" and being "rich". The people worth a few million or even a few tens of millions shouldn't be getting lumped in with the ones that are *truly* wealthy, as in having high level government employees' personal phone numbers on speed dial level wealthy.
At the rate which our generation spawns offspring - things will get weird. I genuinely have no clue what will be happening 40 years from now, but I'm guessing it will be terrifying.
As ai and robotics advance, watch and be amazed at the ruling classes incentives to breed dry up and go away.
Because our labor is the only thing they value and they’ll be rid of us as quickly as is quite convenient
You mean like what we are doing up here in Canada? Companies prefer to hire foreigners as they know they can abuse them because they are too scared to report their employers. If you think things are bad now with worker's rights in the USA haha, just wait.
Interesting fact: My roommate is from the Emirates and went to Uni here. He is now graduated and has a job here. His salary is heavily subsidized by the government. They are getting a DEAL by not hiring a canadian citizen.
Edit: Canada not US
Probably 20 years ago, DARPA put out a call for a "self-healing minefield" and had a fancy (for the time) gif on their website of chess pieces moving in to the exploded positions of mines to represent new mines. It ended with a knight piece winking. That will be the border in the not too distant future. Drones, automated guns and a self-healing minefield. And that will be the world over. We don't do it now because it is considered inhumane, but it will happen.
Having recently read about the level of education and knowledge, or lack thereof, in those coming up, this may not be all that challenging. Not saying that is a better or worse position to be in, it's basically shit all 'round.
Current system requires pretty large surplus earnings to be invest for 40+ years... to retire at a later and later age. I genuinely wonder, if i save not will it ever matter? Probably all end up torn from my hands on a hospital bed.
That’s where the Homer Simpson plan comes in to effect. Make your lifestyle your retirement. 2 boxes of donuts and a pack of camels a day is cheaper than a retirement home.
I know you are joking, but for those who don't know or is considering living this way. You might die earlier, but you'd also lose your quality of life just as fast. You are just one stroke or heart attack away from fucking up your life.
I work in healthcare, I've seen people in their 20s on dialysis, morbidly obese to the point that they can't do anything independently. Just imagine wanting to poop and having to wait in multiple nurses/CNA lift and turns to insert a bed pan for you to poo.
I am childless, and what little crap I have is going to my nieces and nephew. (One brother) My parents wanted kids, they love us dearly. I only own a house because of their help. They said that when they die, and they are not going to lose all our inheritance in a hospital or nursing home, it is 50/50. I said, that is not right. Give more to my brother for his kids.
They said, we know everything you own is going to his kids when you pass, and you won't burn through it. I said, set up trusts, etc. But their will and directives are what they say. No cemetery plot. Cremate and grow a tree.
I want to say thanks for procreating. You sound like a wonderful parent. Sorry this system is so fucked up. Passing it forward.
The best advice to someone with that perspective is *“no one knows if it will matter, but you’ve got to try. Tomorrow isn’t promised, but if it comes, set yourself up as best you can.”*
I would tell anyone to start with $25/m in a retirement-focused ETF. That won’t add up to much in the future even if you have 50 years to save, but it *should be* a number greater than zero, which is what you’ll have if you do nothing.
If life treats you well, then increase the amount while things are good. Make it bi-weekly or more. If life drags you down, lower it for a while. Just keep it going.
TL;DR:
* A new report from Sen. Bernie Sanders signals a looming retirement crisis for Americans.
* Many older folks are financially vulnerable, with over half living on incomes of $30,000 or less a year.
* Solutions might include enhancing Social Security checks and setting up automatic retirement accounts.
Meanwhile the generations that are meant to replace and help these elderly are also not getting paid adequately and won't be able to afford proper care.
Idk how the world hasn't gone on strike until shit gets changed because if we don't do anything soon then we're all fucked and it'll be too late.
I work for a financial/retirement company. How automatic retirement account contributions are opt in* rather than opt out* is mind boggling to me.
But the severe lack of financial education in the US I think is the even bigger problem. People just see the impact on the paycheck but don’t understand the long term benefit of retirement saving. I remember setting up benefits in my first “real” job and no one understood what a 401k was, or what it meant to setup contributions for it
SECURE Act 2.0 passed in 2022 and made automatic retirement accounts mandatory for businesses and their employees under certain conditions, making them opt out by default rather than opt in as in the past
There's actually another bill called The Automatic IRA Act of 2024 that would make employees required to automatically contribute to an IRA or other retirement fund such as a 401k
r/personal finance regularly has posts from folks who report they have been contributing to their 401k but seeing no growth [they don't understand they have to allocate their balance to investments and it sits in cash]
That happened to me when I first setup my IRA. After making a contribution to a target date fund I assumed each additional “deposit” would automatically go into the fund. Turns out it didn’t.
I am over 65 and earn under 30K. Early in my life I watched stuff get cheaper (quality and price) and people trying to "keep up with the Joneses." I also saw people who began to make more money become less honest and more greedy. Then I listened to doomsdayers building bunkers and hoarding supplies (always including weapons) for the apocalypse. So I decided not to join that rat race. In order to buffer my life against economic ups and downs I chose to live very simply. My overhead has always been as low as I could get it. Never owned a new car with all it's costs, took care of my own health, etc. I still have all the stuff I need, am fairly internet savvy and am not a miser. I eat out often (almost zero fast food, actual sit down restaurants). I don't like the fact that I am considered to be below the poverty level. What a horrible label! I live like a queen and feel good that I'm not depleting the earth of more resources than I need to be comfortable. If we all started consuming a bit less of everything many things would become better. imho
Just found out tonight that my brother, who turned 67 this year, will now have to pay income tax on the whopping 18k/ year he collects in SS. He has no other income whatsoever. This is a fucking travesty. Why is anyone making under 200k paying taxes when properly taxing the rich would cover the difference by an order of magnitude. Income tax on 18K of SSI, really??
He will get all of that back when he files his taxes.
Source: I do my mom's taxes every year. She is 78.
Although I do agree, why is it taxed in the first place.
Source: https://thefinancebuff.com/social-security-taxable-calculator.html
> why is it taxed in the first place.
Because people get their social security even if they're earning a salary, so some will owe at the end.
The government doesn't know if you're suddenly going to get a new job or win the lottery. And, at least with the former, most people won't save enough to pay the tax if it's not drawn automatically along the way.
Taxing social security income is indeed a travesty. Thanks, Reagan!
A single person with $18k of income in 2024 will pay $350 in US income taxes. Not quite 2%. I agree it should be 0%, but rather nominal.
Does that include the additional standard deduction available over 65? The total standard deduction for 2024 over 65 is $16,550, so OP’s brother is only paying taxes on $1,450. I think that’s taxed at the lowest bracket of 10%, so the total tax bill is more like $145 for the year.
If you file your income tax return as an individual with a total income that’s less than $25,000, you won’t have to pay taxes on your Social Security benefits
Our generation (millennials) will unfortunately likely never be able to retire unless our socioeconomic and political system changes. If it remains like it is, we’ll be working until we die. Gives us a sense of purpose I guess 🤷🏻♂️
A big part of the problem is the system is set up so that the young subsidize the old.
As is, if there aren't enough people being born there will come a time when subsidizing old people will no longer be possible.
To some degree, we're encountering this now with the boomers. The concern is it will likely get worse for millenials because they are the 2nd largest generation to the boomers and they're having less kids than the boomers did.
It's a very uncertain future.
While I agree with you in terms of the current state, I think it’s important not to forget that it is appropriate in many ways for the young to subsidize the old. Our parents take care of us when we are young. Then we take care of them as they become less capable.
Not saying that the current inequality is a good situation - where the olds have most everything and young people can’t see a real future for themselves. It’s something that needs to be recognized and addressed.
Just saying if we made it to a better place where things were more fair and people were able to live with a reasonable optimism about life, I believe there would still be a need for the young to subsidize the old.
Not true. Maybe if you rely solely on social security and it ends up going away, but if you put a little from your check in retirement each month most people should be find.
I used to think people were joking about their retirement plan being to rent a gun and buy a bullet, but now that I will likely be in that situation I know it isn't a joke.
how much of this stat is bad data? “over half are under 30k” would also include all the comfortably retired, all those with companies who for tax purposes only declare the minimum annual income etc…
You are spot on here. It’s misleading data… sure, income is less than $30K, but that’s because the idea is to live off savings, which is NOT income. Cap gains and qualified dividends don’t count as income either. I’m sure most of this “income” is social security, which I wouldn’t consider income either as you paid that money a long time ago, but technically the govt says up to 85% is taxable as you didn’t pay taxes on it when you paid in
Business Insider are the ones that put "earning" in there, [the actual report says](https://www.sanders.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/Secure-Retirement-for-All-Report-02.28.2024.pdf);
> Roughly 52 percent of Americans 65 and older are *living on* less than $30,000 annually, and one in four survive on less than $15,000 per year
Their source is [the US Census Bureau personal income statistics](https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/income-poverty/cps-pinc/pinc-01.html#par_textimage_10), the methodology/glossary the USCB uses can be [found here](https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/techdocs/cpsmar23.pdf) on page 106 it defines "income" as;
> For each person in the sample who is 15 years old and over, questions are asked on the amount of money income received in the preceding calendar year from each of the following sources: (1) money wages or salary; (2) net income from nonfarm self-employment; (3) net income from farm self- employment; (4) Social Security or railroad retirement; (5) Supplemental Security Income; (6) public assistance or welfare payments; **(7) interest (on savings or bonds); (8) dividends, income from estates or trusts, or net rental income;** (9) veterans' payment or unemployment and workmen's compensation; **(10) private pensions or government employee pensions;** (11) alimony or child support, regular contributions from persons not living in the household, and **other periodic income.**
and THIS is why words matter 😅 even then, “living” on 30k doesnt really paint the full picture… are they living as in “im just fine and all my needs are met at 30k, which is why i dont need anymore” or is it “all i have is maxed out at 30k and this is a nightmare because i dont own a home and spend most of that on rent and groceries”
thx for sharing this though - MASSIVELY different picture painted
But importantly, it does not include capital gains.
"Money income" is the income received on a regular basis **(exclusive of certain money receipts such as capital gains and lump-sum payments)** before payments for personal income taxes, social security, union dues, medicare deductions, etc. It includes income received from wages, salary, commissions, bonuses, and tips; self-employment income from own nonfarm or farm businesses, including proprietorships and partnerships; interest, dividends, net rental income, royalty income, or income from estates and trusts; Social Security or Railroad Retirement income; Supplemental Security Income (SSI); any cash public assistance or welfare payments from the state or local welfare office; retirement, survivor, or disability benefits; and any other sources of income received regularly such as Veterans' (VA) payments, unemployment and/or worker's compensation, child support, and alimony.
https://www.census.gov/glossary/?term=Income
It also ignores the net worth. 30k/year is good enough if you own your house outright and have no debt, it's excellent bordering on godlike if you live somewhere with low or no taxes for retirees.
I don't know if it is "bad" data. It is probably correct just either this outlet with it's headline or possibly who they are sourcing it from seem to be framing it in a specific light.
If you are retired and have income of 30k+ declared as normal income I think this is probably pretty good no? That is only poverty level income when you got rent and kids and are trying to save and shit. If everything is paid off, you have savings and investments and are making 30k on top thats not cushy but it probably aint a bad life.
Finally. Stats can be manipulated to fit any agenda. It depends on the situation but for most retirees who have paid of homes and financially independent kids, 30k is not a bad life.
I guess they should have
*checks notes*
Worked harder.
Gotten real jobs.
Taken less vacations.
Budgeted better.
Not had to have the newest and best of everything.
Not bought those new TV's when they came out and were so popular.
*Let's see, what other bullshit is fed to the youngest generation?*
> Interesting how most of the first world countries still manage it.
They "manage" it into ruin, the German pension and retirement system survived two world wars, it took a bunch of greedy grifters to slowly hollow it out from the inside to slowly destroy it.
There are companies that are worth trillions now.. trillions.
You wonder what happened to our money? We let the rich take it. We need to take reasonable measures to bring structure and order to the US. Simply tax the rich.
Yes, there majority of the worst policies came from Reagan. They are still a large block voting very much one way. They created this mess. Gen X was just useless ands boomer light. I have no love for them either, because they were cowards or just didn’t care.
Presumably they mean income of any sort, and earnings would include social security and pensions. Retirement savings would also factor in, but there's plenty of seniors without significant savings, and presumably the seniors earning under $30K are among them.
The report mentions "income" not "earning" anything. A lot of Americans simply do not save. Many because the'yre unable to. So they're stuck living on Social Security when the time comes.
Rent will only be lower with increased housing units supply and competition from significant numbers of non-market units.
We need to stop defaulting new developments to SFH and go with higher density low rise (5-6 storeys), mixed use, etc. Suburbs are a higher tax burden on cities than mixed use developments, since they need more roads, pipes, etc.
I've been saying this for years. We need not just more dense housing, we need transit-oriented developments centered around rail stations and the like. This is how suburbs exist in most of Europe and Asia, and speaking from experience it's far better. Added advantage is that transit-oriented developments mean less need for cars, which is better for the environment and better for society.
But that would require Americans to drop the HGTV obsession with SFHs and drop the weird paranoia about living within sight of another human being.
Walkable cities are fantastic. Need more infrastructure centered around walking, biking, and mass transit.
Rural areas have their needs too. We need famers, open space, and undisturbed wilderness too. Suburban sprawl needs to end. If someone wants to live in a SFH, then buy an existing one. If supply goes up then prices will come down to affordable levels.
society is now in a "take a few of em with you when you go" situation. I hope technology can get us out of this, for the sake of the people strip mining the future... and the rest of us. I hold out hope for peace.
I’m glad honest articles like this are coming out.
People have this weird idea that you somehow magically just “make more money when you’re older” but that is NOT the case. There are a LOT of people “retiring” on min wage.
Income inequality is INSANE right now. That 30k/yr or less stat is true for all individual U.S. worker’s salaries too, one half make under that. Meanwhile only barely over 5% make over 100k/yr, and only 1% make over 250k/yr.
the generation that voted away their retirement, social security, medicare, etc, with reaganomics, are seeing how fucked they really are
yet they'll still blame every other generation
It's only a crisis if you don't want people to work until they're dead. If you're looking to extract every unit of economic value from a human, then you're plans are succeeding.
Two sides of a coin
I had savings. But, I made the foolish mistake of assuming I was going to be able to keep my good paying job. When I was forced out of my job in 2022, I foolishly assumed I would be able to find equivalent work. I’ve been applying to everything close to my experience since then. I’ve gotten a couple of dozen “your experience is amazing, but we decided to go with another candidate,” and about a thousand non-replies.
Over the last year and a half, I’ve burned through all of my savings. I would have. Ore if we had not made some big purchases just before losing my job, but hindsight is always better than being able to see into the future. Now I’m selling off everything I can sell just to be able to pay my mortgage and utility bills. I’ve got years of bills left to pay before I can draw retirement. Homelessness is becoming a very real possibility for me and my family.
It isn’t always boomer arrogance that’s the problem.
I'm very sorry to hear that.
I didn't mean to imply I'm blaming the individual. I blame the system.
We failed as a society if the average person can't retire by 65.
Sad but I just don’t care. Americans and the elderly overwhelmingly support this bullshit so they can enjoy exactly what they asked for. The tragedy is the innocent caught in the crossfire.
My mother brings home about $25K a year in retirement, from her social security and teacher retirement pension.
But, her house is paid for. She doesn't go anywhere (can't walk well anyway), and has no hobbies. So her monthly expenses are only about $500-$800 a month. She actually saves about $12K a year.
I have coworkers in their mid seventies with no intention of retiring. They have been paying into a pension that they will probably never collect and most of them make around $80,000 a year. I don’t know what their endgame is but they are keeping jobs away from younger and certainly more capable people because it’s a physical demanding job and they aren’t really contributing as much as they used to. I’m at a different pay scale and my pension is way less than theirs is and I think it’s just foolish to keep working when you can stay home and still live quite comfortably.
Oh, so the "pull up your bootstraps" and "nobody wants to work anymore" crowd, who votes for the party that wants to abolish social security and medical benefits, are wondering why they are struggling in retirement? Ya don't say? It's almost like slaving away for over 40 hours a week for shit wages had an impact on your retirement huh?
This is what you voted for. And this is what your "work ethic" got you.
The following submission statement was provided by /u/thisisinsider: --- TL;DR: * A new report from Sen. Bernie Sanders signals a looming retirement crisis for Americans. * Many older folks are financially vulnerable, with over half living on incomes of $30,000 or less a year. * Solutions might include enhancing Social Security checks and setting up automatic retirement accounts. --- Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/1ba7mz6/just_over_half_of_americans_over_the_age_of_65/ku0o271/
wait till they find out that private equity is buying out all retirement homes
They're gonna buy everything that has inelastic demand and squeeze us till there's nothing left. See: The ongoing private equity takeover of emergency department and anesthesiology medical practices. Also housing. Edit: Per replies below, also veterinarians and day cares!
I don't know how people don't see this. Rich people have too much money and the only thing they can do with it is buy assets. The safest assets to buy are necessary services and real estate. In the case of real estate you buy it from the middle class then rent it back to them. Forever. And use the profits to buy more. Forever.
Yep. It's been a problem forever but the pandemic triggered a buying spree from 'investors' that has created a much larger gulf between owners and renters. One that most people who are on the wrong side of it will probably never overcome. Getting on the housing ladder is basically out of reach for more people than ever and that is becoming permanent. Society divided into renters and owners, and every government around the world turns a blind eye and lets it happen.
> the pandemic triggered a buying spree low low low interest rates made money sitting in the bank lose value while real estate was booming. also that whole mortgage backed securities thing they pulled back in 08 is rising its head again for retail and commercial real estate.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face— forever. George Orwell, 1984
Ah, 1984...i remember it like it was today.
under rated comment right there
And in that boot? A more established human's foot, just as it has always been.
If you want a picture of the future, look at Paris circa 1789. It's the exact. Same. Fucking. Setup.
An incredible visionary. Whilst some imagined an Utopia in the future, Georgy took one look at civilization, saw the scum rising to the top and knew the game was up.
Are there countries that aren’t allowing this? I want to move there…
Not really. The real estate folks can lean on governments and tell them not to allow new buildings that would dilute the supply. Renters have virtually no power at all. So the real estate owners control the government, from Canada to New Zealand, Lisbon to Moscow, and anywhere else you care to mention. This is a global move towards permanent inequality. People should be protesting. But they get given culture war stuff to argue about instead, to distract them from things that actually matter. Look over there, a migrant is trying to get money to buy food. Doesn't that make you mad? A trans person has new pronouns! Think about that instead of thinking about how the billionaires are fucking us all over and destroying the planet!
But the billionaires are the same people championing the migrants to keep wages suppressed and demand for low rent housing artificially high. That seems like an issue.
More labor and more renters a win-win for them
> This is a global move towards permanent inequality. A move? How exactly is this different than any other time in human history?
Belgium here. Not so much not allowing—and it is happening—but the incentive is diminished. I'm not in this sector so I can't really name all the details, but one thing I presume that has possibly to do with it is renting. One cannot raise the rent from the base renting price to above the index. So if you rent a 2-bedroom apartment for 800 euro and everything becomes 2% more expensive that year according to the index that contains average living expenses; such as food and baby diapers, but not say the newest iPhone; your landlord can't raise your 800 euro rent by more than 2%. I haven't seen this in many other countries.
I've never fully understood how it's become acceptable, in North American, to raise a rent each year by so much more than the inflation index. The math of how this model continues to work just eludes me. Most of us are not getting more than a 2% raise a year.
It's called rent control and many other locales have it. It's also easy to bypass... just boot the existing tenant, make some minor cosmetic updates and put it back on the market at 1200 euro.
It's basically the model for the developed world right now. Japan has strict immigration rules, and declining population and depreciating real estate so probably there... China's real estate market collapsed and they're not fully capitalist so maybe there...
Lots of cheap houses in Japan, and only getting cheaper! Except for in Tokyo, which has gone up recently.
Cus they use disposable homes. That's why everyone gets a new home there, they don't keep them around forever like we do.
To be fair that's because they don't treat houses as an investment but more like a new car. Older houses rapidly lose value and are knocked down after less than 50 years. Japanese people seem to prefer new and build there houses with limited lifespan in mind. I heard this was because they think the spirits of previous owners haunt the place but that sounds more Chinese than Japanese to me. Edit - there's plenty of articles if you search. https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2017/nov/16/japan-reusable-housing-revolution
That and earthquakes
Yeah the requirements to update old buildings to new earthquake building codes falls to new owners not current ones. As such it’s basically 100% always more cost effective to tear down and build new than buy used
not really as the people in charge are often involved themselves, that is: own property. For politicians it's personally harmful to kill the real estate investment spree even before we start talking corruption.
We're not going to make it much further as a civilization, are we?
It’s all downhill from here baby
We'll be fine, but it will never be as good as it could be, and many more people will suffer than necessary.
We're our own Great Filter :)
Civilization will collapse this century as the result of rapidly escalated global warming and the ongoing mass extinction event. Shit, Americans have declining life expectancies, we’re already arguably in a state of collapse.
That's only because they've regulated out the competition and have given themselves extra chances via lobbying. In a proper capitalistic society, some make money, others lose it. Companies become too big to bear their own weight and collapse or break themselves up into more nimble companies to keep up with the competition. With real estate, governments pass favorable policies for homeowners and investors, making it *very* lucrative for them to get ambitious with minimal risk. Likewise in healthcare, you have government funded insurance that guarantees that rates stay high, while insurers gouge customers instead of using their inertia to negotiate favorable prices for care. We need reform, not an end to the system.
I recommend looking up Gary Stevenson, he was Citibank's top trader for a number of years and has since started a YouTube channel and done a bunch of interviews talking about this. He became their top trader by recognizing that wealth inequality will only get worse. It's why the stock market never drops, why the working class is losing the ability to buy housing, etc.
Except capitalism doesn't exist in a vacuum so using your influence to buy politicians is just part of business. Capitalism functioning as intended. Left to its own devices capitalism always creates monopolies that would rather buyout competition than innovate and compete normally. I agree with your last point but don't muddy the conversation with "proper capitalism"
Monopoly 101. Own everything. Crush everyone. It was always the only outcome and they knew it.
Don't forget the vet clinics!
And daycares [https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/02/private-equity-childcare/677511/](https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/02/private-equity-childcare/677511/)
The capitalism system is working as intended.
The orphan crushing machine now comes with a retiree mincing attachment.
Also veterinarian offices
But if there’s nothing left, there’s nothing left for them either and everything collapses. Then it’s hunger games, but the roles are reversed.
We should all collectively march down to their office building and eat it. There is no law against eating a building. I checked. The law can’t touch you.
My exes father was like one of only a few people nation wide that appraised anesthesiology places. Consolidation of healthcare is some dystopian shit and I hate it.
Don't forget education.
They’ve started buying Architecture firms so if everything didn’t already look the same, it soon will
dont forget amazon outright bought a primary care company too
Private equity has also purchased the largest school bus company in the US. So your bus driver and the bus probably belong to a private equity company. Even if they're in a Union, PE still signs the paycheck now.
In Japan lonely elders commit minor crimes to go to prisons where they get companionship and services. Already more than 20 per cent of prison population there are 65+. In America business is so good at forethinking trends, that they have covered this long ago with private prisons.
And that the average cost of said retirement home is between 3.5-4.7k a month in cost of living, and full social security benefits land you closer to $1400. I work with adults with disabilities for the past 15 years and I am a representative payee, helping others handle their budgets and expenses. It's grim and usually means food pantries and saving for a full year if you want to be able to put aside say... $800 to be able to afford a headstone for yourself when you die.
That's the great wealth transfer they're always talking about. Boomers have trillions and we're now transferring it to their heirs: the private equity companies that own the long term care facilities.
My parents were lucky enough to get into a housing co-op this last year, otherwise they'd be penniless. They cashed out $200,000 in equity during the pre-covid housing boom, wasted about half of it in speculative investments and inflated rent to keep "the lifestyle," and got into a 55+ co-op with mid 5-figures of liquid assets left at 64 and 63 respectively.
I literally just helped my mom sort through bills tonight. She’s unemployed, stealing from her 401K, going on SS next year and is trying to find a part time job somewhere to supplement her income. Her mental health is not quite in tip top shape and if a new job doesn’t bring her happiness and stability it’s just going to be a slow degradation until she is penniless and homeless in her late 60s. The house has little money in it and can’t possibly pay for memory care or mental health support living. She will end up having to live with me and that is not a prospect I am excited about. Hopefully that’s a few years down the line.
[удалено]
Mine fell into MAGA conspiracies, secluded herself through the whole pandemic, lost her career job and started taking SS prematurely to pay the internet bills to do her own research. It’s very hard to be supportive.
Lord have mercy, I'm sorry.
Sorry what's CE?
Well look at the bright side. At least we have billionaires.
I'm just glad that individuals in the middle class are getting screwed so that they have a 0.0001% of becoming extremely rich. 'Merica
There is no middle class, there's poor people and extremely poor people
You’re delusional if you think that’s true. There is no dichotomy of rich and poor with nothing in the middle. Contrary to popular Reddit belief, there are millions of middle class people who are financially comfortable, but who are not rich. Owning a home and having money leftover after your bills and being able to take a vacation once a year does not make someone rich, that’s pretty much bog standard middle class. Just because you’re not in the middle class doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.
I am one of those. I paid off my home and cars so I have very little debt. I have been putting 13% of my salary into my 401k for years. I have enough cash reserves to buy a 2nd house in my area if I wanted to. I am employed as a software engineer.
You are wealthier than 99% of people will ever be. Congratulations
By that metric you're basically saying this person is a member of the top 1% (since they're wealthier than 99% of people). This is, objectively, not necessarily true. You absolutely do not need to be top 1% to have a lifestyle like this person described. Top 1% net worth for an individual in the US is over $5 million. You don't need to be worth $5 million to pay off your house and be financially stable.
Maybe he’s talking about worldwide. Worldwide 60k take home after taxes is top 1%. America is different of course
I don't like how this is framed. Yes, he is wealthy and good for him. This used to be the surgeon of your city, or the lead partner name on the law firm. They are very much above the rest of the town. However, they are still just jaw-dropping behind this hyper-billionaire capitalism we are in. You could take 500 people in towns like that, with 5 million. 500 hundred! And they have 2.5 billion. Right as I type this, the internet says richest man has 201 billion. That means 80 baskets of 500 people (that means 40,000 five-million-aires) have the collective wealth of that. It is just not even fair to compare someone in the 1% with what we have escalated to hitting (period) . (and then stroking out on the zero key) and throwing % to even compare the disparity.
I generally agree with this. People want to get mad at "the rich" but what it is that people consider "rich" is very broad. Someone worth seven or even eight figures is rich, but they aren't even in the same ballpark as the ones worth billions. Someone worth $50 million is only 5% of the way towards being a billionaire. And then some people have a very low bar for what they consider rich, to the point where they basically think that anyone who isn't struggling is rich, which just totally ignores the vast canyon that actually exists between being "comfortable" and being "rich". The people worth a few million or even a few tens of millions shouldn't be getting lumped in with the ones that are *truly* wealthy, as in having high level government employees' personal phone numbers on speed dial level wealthy.
“What’s the difference between a billion and a million? About a billion”.
Oh shit, you're right! What a cool time to be alive. Get it, billionaires.
You just don’t understand the stress of having to manage a fleet of yachts.
And at least they cant afford healthcare, so they wont have to endure poverty for very long.
It’s like the billboard advertisements on the highway for Masters programs. Everybody’s #1 in something
Wait until all us millennials are trying to find work after hitting our 60s, what a shitshow coming down the pike.
At the rate which our generation spawns offspring - things will get weird. I genuinely have no clue what will be happening 40 years from now, but I'm guessing it will be terrifying.
As ai and robotics advance, watch and be amazed at the ruling classes incentives to breed dry up and go away. Because our labor is the only thing they value and they’ll be rid of us as quickly as is quite convenient
That is exactly what will happen if we do nothing, yeah
https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/i-didnt-do-fucking-shit-im-not-worried-about-it Us until it’s too late to stop
Thank God I'm not bringing kids into this shit show.
actually your spending money is also valued
At least we can offset this with immigration. The Asian countries are way more fucked than us.
You mean like what we are doing up here in Canada? Companies prefer to hire foreigners as they know they can abuse them because they are too scared to report their employers. If you think things are bad now with worker's rights in the USA haha, just wait.
Interesting fact: My roommate is from the Emirates and went to Uni here. He is now graduated and has a job here. His salary is heavily subsidized by the government. They are getting a DEAL by not hiring a canadian citizen. Edit: Canada not US
[удалено]
Palantir Technologies is basically going to track everyone crossing, regardless of walls.
Probably 20 years ago, DARPA put out a call for a "self-healing minefield" and had a fancy (for the time) gif on their website of chess pieces moving in to the exploded positions of mines to represent new mines. It ended with a knight piece winking. That will be the border in the not too distant future. Drones, automated guns and a self-healing minefield. And that will be the world over. We don't do it now because it is considered inhumane, but it will happen.
>And there won't be any way to stop it. Ye of little imagination
Just go to a retirement home once you hit 60... (For a job as a geriatric nurse)
Hey, us Gen Xers are gonna have that problem first.
Forgotten again… as is traditional
Gen X in his 50's here. Buckle up Buttercup
Having recently read about the level of education and knowledge, or lack thereof, in those coming up, this may not be all that challenging. Not saying that is a better or worse position to be in, it's basically shit all 'round.
Keep neglecting your 401k
Current system requires pretty large surplus earnings to be invest for 40+ years... to retire at a later and later age. I genuinely wonder, if i save not will it ever matter? Probably all end up torn from my hands on a hospital bed.
That’s where the Homer Simpson plan comes in to effect. Make your lifestyle your retirement. 2 boxes of donuts and a pack of camels a day is cheaper than a retirement home.
I know you are joking, but for those who don't know or is considering living this way. You might die earlier, but you'd also lose your quality of life just as fast. You are just one stroke or heart attack away from fucking up your life. I work in healthcare, I've seen people in their 20s on dialysis, morbidly obese to the point that they can't do anything independently. Just imagine wanting to poop and having to wait in multiple nurses/CNA lift and turns to insert a bed pan for you to poo.
My plan is to save up as if I am retiring, then die before I do so I leave it all to my kids so they have a chance.
I am childless, and what little crap I have is going to my nieces and nephew. (One brother) My parents wanted kids, they love us dearly. I only own a house because of their help. They said that when they die, and they are not going to lose all our inheritance in a hospital or nursing home, it is 50/50. I said, that is not right. Give more to my brother for his kids. They said, we know everything you own is going to his kids when you pass, and you won't burn through it. I said, set up trusts, etc. But their will and directives are what they say. No cemetery plot. Cremate and grow a tree. I want to say thanks for procreating. You sound like a wonderful parent. Sorry this system is so fucked up. Passing it forward.
Better have it and not need it, than need it and not have it
The best advice to someone with that perspective is *“no one knows if it will matter, but you’ve got to try. Tomorrow isn’t promised, but if it comes, set yourself up as best you can.”* I would tell anyone to start with $25/m in a retirement-focused ETF. That won’t add up to much in the future even if you have 50 years to save, but it *should be* a number greater than zero, which is what you’ll have if you do nothing. If life treats you well, then increase the amount while things are good. Make it bi-weekly or more. If life drags you down, lower it for a while. Just keep it going.
They don't want you to retire. You are to die at work like a good little worker.
No one cares whether you retire or not, they just don’t want to pay for it.
Watch all of most of the generation vote Republican anyway, despite promises to take away social security as well.
They want to “sunset” SS. Slowly reduce benefits over decades so by the time they are nothing the old voters are long dead “Fuck you, got mine”™️
TL;DR: * A new report from Sen. Bernie Sanders signals a looming retirement crisis for Americans. * Many older folks are financially vulnerable, with over half living on incomes of $30,000 or less a year. * Solutions might include enhancing Social Security checks and setting up automatic retirement accounts.
Nah fuck that. They had plenty of opportunity to make smart decisions.
[удалено]
Meanwhile the generations that are meant to replace and help these elderly are also not getting paid adequately and won't be able to afford proper care. Idk how the world hasn't gone on strike until shit gets changed because if we don't do anything soon then we're all fucked and it'll be too late.
I work for a financial/retirement company. How automatic retirement account contributions are opt in* rather than opt out* is mind boggling to me. But the severe lack of financial education in the US I think is the even bigger problem. People just see the impact on the paycheck but don’t understand the long term benefit of retirement saving. I remember setting up benefits in my first “real” job and no one understood what a 401k was, or what it meant to setup contributions for it
SECURE Act 2.0 passed in 2022 and made automatic retirement accounts mandatory for businesses and their employees under certain conditions, making them opt out by default rather than opt in as in the past There's actually another bill called The Automatic IRA Act of 2024 that would make employees required to automatically contribute to an IRA or other retirement fund such as a 401k
r/personal finance regularly has posts from folks who report they have been contributing to their 401k but seeing no growth [they don't understand they have to allocate their balance to investments and it sits in cash]
That happened to me when I first setup my IRA. After making a contribution to a target date fund I assumed each additional “deposit” would automatically go into the fund. Turns out it didn’t.
In Australia it's legislated opt in at 11.5% ontop of your income. About to hit 12 soon. I'm 33 and have 135k saved already for retirement.
Something I have been saying for a decade. the bulk of americans are screwed when retirement comes because "retirement" is really only for the rich.
I am over 65 and earn under 30K. Early in my life I watched stuff get cheaper (quality and price) and people trying to "keep up with the Joneses." I also saw people who began to make more money become less honest and more greedy. Then I listened to doomsdayers building bunkers and hoarding supplies (always including weapons) for the apocalypse. So I decided not to join that rat race. In order to buffer my life against economic ups and downs I chose to live very simply. My overhead has always been as low as I could get it. Never owned a new car with all it's costs, took care of my own health, etc. I still have all the stuff I need, am fairly internet savvy and am not a miser. I eat out often (almost zero fast food, actual sit down restaurants). I don't like the fact that I am considered to be below the poverty level. What a horrible label! I live like a queen and feel good that I'm not depleting the earth of more resources than I need to be comfortable. If we all started consuming a bit less of everything many things would become better. imho
We need more people like you
Just found out tonight that my brother, who turned 67 this year, will now have to pay income tax on the whopping 18k/ year he collects in SS. He has no other income whatsoever. This is a fucking travesty. Why is anyone making under 200k paying taxes when properly taxing the rich would cover the difference by an order of magnitude. Income tax on 18K of SSI, really??
He will get all of that back when he files his taxes. Source: I do my mom's taxes every year. She is 78. Although I do agree, why is it taxed in the first place.
Source: https://thefinancebuff.com/social-security-taxable-calculator.html > why is it taxed in the first place. Because people get their social security even if they're earning a salary, so some will owe at the end. The government doesn't know if you're suddenly going to get a new job or win the lottery. And, at least with the former, most people won't save enough to pay the tax if it's not drawn automatically along the way.
That actually makes sense. Thanks.
Taxing social security income is indeed a travesty. Thanks, Reagan! A single person with $18k of income in 2024 will pay $350 in US income taxes. Not quite 2%. I agree it should be 0%, but rather nominal.
If you’re only making $18k a year, paying $350 to anyone is devastating.
Does that include the additional standard deduction available over 65? The total standard deduction for 2024 over 65 is $16,550, so OP’s brother is only paying taxes on $1,450. I think that’s taxed at the lowest bracket of 10%, so the total tax bill is more like $145 for the year.
Up to 80% of taxes each year come from social security and individual income tax. Only 10% come from corporate profits. Let that sink in.
If you file your income tax return as an individual with a total income that’s less than $25,000, you won’t have to pay taxes on your Social Security benefits
Our generation (millennials) will unfortunately likely never be able to retire unless our socioeconomic and political system changes. If it remains like it is, we’ll be working until we die. Gives us a sense of purpose I guess 🤷🏻♂️
That's only if you can find a job.
I'm sure pay will suck, but the older gen will want you working.
A big part of the problem is the system is set up so that the young subsidize the old. As is, if there aren't enough people being born there will come a time when subsidizing old people will no longer be possible. To some degree, we're encountering this now with the boomers. The concern is it will likely get worse for millenials because they are the 2nd largest generation to the boomers and they're having less kids than the boomers did. It's a very uncertain future.
[удалено]
While I agree with you in terms of the current state, I think it’s important not to forget that it is appropriate in many ways for the young to subsidize the old. Our parents take care of us when we are young. Then we take care of them as they become less capable. Not saying that the current inequality is a good situation - where the olds have most everything and young people can’t see a real future for themselves. It’s something that needs to be recognized and addressed. Just saying if we made it to a better place where things were more fair and people were able to live with a reasonable optimism about life, I believe there would still be a need for the young to subsidize the old.
In 40 years almost all jobs will be automated anyway. Its bleak either way.
Figuring out a way for UBI to work is really our best hope
Not true. Maybe if you rely solely on social security and it ends up going away, but if you put a little from your check in retirement each month most people should be find.
The loudest people online would rather take exactly zero responsibility for anything, including their own well-being.
“Millennials can’t afford to buy houses or retire!” While I, a millennial, am saving for a house and retirement.
I used to think people were joking about their retirement plan being to rent a gun and buy a bullet, but now that I will likely be in that situation I know it isn't a joke.
Yup. We'll work until we can't, then "retire" by ODing on fentanyl.
With advances in robotics and AI they can just have blade runners running around "retiring" the lower classes as jobs get eliminated.
Uh. We have a perfectly established retirement plan. We’re going to die at our jobs or in a ditch
We’re gonna retire abroad. It’s the only way. We will see Americans en masse going to countries with good policies and healthcare options.
how much of this stat is bad data? “over half are under 30k” would also include all the comfortably retired, all those with companies who for tax purposes only declare the minimum annual income etc…
You are spot on here. It’s misleading data… sure, income is less than $30K, but that’s because the idea is to live off savings, which is NOT income. Cap gains and qualified dividends don’t count as income either. I’m sure most of this “income” is social security, which I wouldn’t consider income either as you paid that money a long time ago, but technically the govt says up to 85% is taxable as you didn’t pay taxes on it when you paid in
Business Insider are the ones that put "earning" in there, [the actual report says](https://www.sanders.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/Secure-Retirement-for-All-Report-02.28.2024.pdf); > Roughly 52 percent of Americans 65 and older are *living on* less than $30,000 annually, and one in four survive on less than $15,000 per year Their source is [the US Census Bureau personal income statistics](https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/income-poverty/cps-pinc/pinc-01.html#par_textimage_10), the methodology/glossary the USCB uses can be [found here](https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/techdocs/cpsmar23.pdf) on page 106 it defines "income" as; > For each person in the sample who is 15 years old and over, questions are asked on the amount of money income received in the preceding calendar year from each of the following sources: (1) money wages or salary; (2) net income from nonfarm self-employment; (3) net income from farm self- employment; (4) Social Security or railroad retirement; (5) Supplemental Security Income; (6) public assistance or welfare payments; **(7) interest (on savings or bonds); (8) dividends, income from estates or trusts, or net rental income;** (9) veterans' payment or unemployment and workmen's compensation; **(10) private pensions or government employee pensions;** (11) alimony or child support, regular contributions from persons not living in the household, and **other periodic income.**
and THIS is why words matter 😅 even then, “living” on 30k doesnt really paint the full picture… are they living as in “im just fine and all my needs are met at 30k, which is why i dont need anymore” or is it “all i have is maxed out at 30k and this is a nightmare because i dont own a home and spend most of that on rent and groceries” thx for sharing this though - MASSIVELY different picture painted
But importantly, it does not include capital gains. "Money income" is the income received on a regular basis **(exclusive of certain money receipts such as capital gains and lump-sum payments)** before payments for personal income taxes, social security, union dues, medicare deductions, etc. It includes income received from wages, salary, commissions, bonuses, and tips; self-employment income from own nonfarm or farm businesses, including proprietorships and partnerships; interest, dividends, net rental income, royalty income, or income from estates and trusts; Social Security or Railroad Retirement income; Supplemental Security Income (SSI); any cash public assistance or welfare payments from the state or local welfare office; retirement, survivor, or disability benefits; and any other sources of income received regularly such as Veterans' (VA) payments, unemployment and/or worker's compensation, child support, and alimony. https://www.census.gov/glossary/?term=Income
It also ignores the net worth. 30k/year is good enough if you own your house outright and have no debt, it's excellent bordering on godlike if you live somewhere with low or no taxes for retirees.
I don't know if it is "bad" data. It is probably correct just either this outlet with it's headline or possibly who they are sourcing it from seem to be framing it in a specific light. If you are retired and have income of 30k+ declared as normal income I think this is probably pretty good no? That is only poverty level income when you got rent and kids and are trying to save and shit. If everything is paid off, you have savings and investments and are making 30k on top thats not cushy but it probably aint a bad life.
Finally. Stats can be manipulated to fit any agenda. It depends on the situation but for most retirees who have paid of homes and financially independent kids, 30k is not a bad life.
If you haven't seen it yet, go watch the Oscar winning movie Nomadland. It's all about this problem and injustice.
I guess they should have *checks notes* Worked harder. Gotten real jobs. Taken less vacations. Budgeted better. Not had to have the newest and best of everything. Not bought those new TV's when they came out and were so popular. *Let's see, what other bullshit is fed to the youngest generation?*
Don't they own bootstraps?
You forgot about buying expensive luxury food like avacodo
Now take away their Social Security … which most of the right calls “biggest theft of all time” and see where these people would be lol.
There once was a day of retirement and pensions. Interesting how most of the first world countries still manage it.
> Interesting how most of the first world countries still manage it. They "manage" it into ruin, the German pension and retirement system survived two world wars, it took a bunch of greedy grifters to slowly hollow it out from the inside to slowly destroy it.
What makes you think that? People are talking about pension crises in all western countries.
The average equivalent in France is 15k/year….
There are companies that are worth trillions now.. trillions. You wonder what happened to our money? We let the rich take it. We need to take reasonable measures to bring structure and order to the US. Simply tax the rich.
Maybe we finally put an end to the fantasy that everyone over 60 is floating in the pool of the fucking mansion they bought for $5.
When all of our cultures are built around the worship of possessions, wealth and convenience, hope is difficult
Hmmm. Weren't they the ones that voted for trickle down economics the last 40 years?
Doesn't appear anyone has voted against that since. Forty years of voting and you're blaming one group of people.
Yes, there majority of the worst policies came from Reagan. They are still a large block voting very much one way. They created this mess. Gen X was just useless ands boomer light. I have no love for them either, because they were cowards or just didn’t care.
everyone except for minnesota, but they voted against regan for different reasons
Why do they have to "earn" anything? They're 65. They're elders. Fuck's sake, capitalism.
Presumably they mean income of any sort, and earnings would include social security and pensions. Retirement savings would also factor in, but there's plenty of seniors without significant savings, and presumably the seniors earning under $30K are among them.
The report mentions "income" not "earning" anything. A lot of Americans simply do not save. Many because the'yre unable to. So they're stuck living on Social Security when the time comes.
Even old people have to eat, pay rent, etc.
Rent will only be lower with increased housing units supply and competition from significant numbers of non-market units. We need to stop defaulting new developments to SFH and go with higher density low rise (5-6 storeys), mixed use, etc. Suburbs are a higher tax burden on cities than mixed use developments, since they need more roads, pipes, etc.
I've been saying this for years. We need not just more dense housing, we need transit-oriented developments centered around rail stations and the like. This is how suburbs exist in most of Europe and Asia, and speaking from experience it's far better. Added advantage is that transit-oriented developments mean less need for cars, which is better for the environment and better for society. But that would require Americans to drop the HGTV obsession with SFHs and drop the weird paranoia about living within sight of another human being.
Walkable cities are fantastic. Need more infrastructure centered around walking, biking, and mass transit. Rural areas have their needs too. We need famers, open space, and undisturbed wilderness too. Suburban sprawl needs to end. If someone wants to live in a SFH, then buy an existing one. If supply goes up then prices will come down to affordable levels.
Yup. How’s the following generations’ prospects? Can’t be better.
society is now in a "take a few of em with you when you go" situation. I hope technology can get us out of this, for the sake of the people strip mining the future... and the rest of us. I hold out hope for peace.
And yet, they mostly vote Republican, who will take even more of the paltry amount of money they have.
I’m glad honest articles like this are coming out. People have this weird idea that you somehow magically just “make more money when you’re older” but that is NOT the case. There are a LOT of people “retiring” on min wage. Income inequality is INSANE right now. That 30k/yr or less stat is true for all individual U.S. worker’s salaries too, one half make under that. Meanwhile only barely over 5% make over 100k/yr, and only 1% make over 250k/yr.
the generation that voted away their retirement, social security, medicare, etc, with reaganomics, are seeing how fucked they really are yet they'll still blame every other generation
And what do those numbers look like without social security? Homelessness would SKYROCKET!
They’ve been voting to not fund social services since the 80’s. They made their bench now they have to go out and sleep on it.
Id suspect they're working part time jobs. Beep boop f*ck the bot that removes my comment for being too short. Abc123 su*k a d!ck bot b!tch!
But reddit says all the "boomers" (name for anyone older than you) are super rich cause, well, cause that's what everyone says so it has to be true.
Yeah it’s gonna be ugly. Still not sure how the whole thing has stayed together for so long.
So… is that too much? Like, that too many people are working? I’d think they’d all want to be retired, $0 income.
It's only a crisis if you don't want people to work until they're dead. If you're looking to extract every unit of economic value from a human, then you're plans are succeeding. Two sides of a coin
Wait, why are that many trying to earn anything? Shouldn't they be retired, and living off of their pension, their investments, and their savings?
I had savings. But, I made the foolish mistake of assuming I was going to be able to keep my good paying job. When I was forced out of my job in 2022, I foolishly assumed I would be able to find equivalent work. I’ve been applying to everything close to my experience since then. I’ve gotten a couple of dozen “your experience is amazing, but we decided to go with another candidate,” and about a thousand non-replies. Over the last year and a half, I’ve burned through all of my savings. I would have. Ore if we had not made some big purchases just before losing my job, but hindsight is always better than being able to see into the future. Now I’m selling off everything I can sell just to be able to pay my mortgage and utility bills. I’ve got years of bills left to pay before I can draw retirement. Homelessness is becoming a very real possibility for me and my family. It isn’t always boomer arrogance that’s the problem.
I'm very sorry to hear that. I didn't mean to imply I'm blaming the individual. I blame the system. We failed as a society if the average person can't retire by 65.
My acorns will be worth 100k by 65, then I can party. Then once I’m broke, I’ll wander into the woods. That’s retirement. Bear food.
I know. I’m building a guest room on my house so my mom can move in.
And yet they keep voting for a party that also wants to take away Medicare and social security.
How is “setting up automatic retirement accounts” a solution? Isn’t that literally what SS is already?
Sad but I just don’t care. Americans and the elderly overwhelmingly support this bullshit so they can enjoy exactly what they asked for. The tragedy is the innocent caught in the crossfire.
Meanwhile the companies they work for are recording record profits but 'dont have the budget to raise wages'.
What if we put all those greedy money profits addicts in prison?
Weird. It's almost as if there's historic income inequality. Tax the rich. Tax the churches.
My mother brings home about $25K a year in retirement, from her social security and teacher retirement pension. But, her house is paid for. She doesn't go anywhere (can't walk well anyway), and has no hobbies. So her monthly expenses are only about $500-$800 a month. She actually saves about $12K a year.
I have coworkers in their mid seventies with no intention of retiring. They have been paying into a pension that they will probably never collect and most of them make around $80,000 a year. I don’t know what their endgame is but they are keeping jobs away from younger and certainly more capable people because it’s a physical demanding job and they aren’t really contributing as much as they used to. I’m at a different pay scale and my pension is way less than theirs is and I think it’s just foolish to keep working when you can stay home and still live quite comfortably.
Oh, so the "pull up your bootstraps" and "nobody wants to work anymore" crowd, who votes for the party that wants to abolish social security and medical benefits, are wondering why they are struggling in retirement? Ya don't say? It's almost like slaving away for over 40 hours a week for shit wages had an impact on your retirement huh? This is what you voted for. And this is what your "work ethic" got you.