Why don't old folks retire when they can?

[coolerifyoudid]

1. They can't afford the Cobra (insurance) plan.
2. Identity. Most people define themselves by what they do.
3. Power. Seniority. Control. You give that stuff up when you retire.
4. Social interaction. At work, you see and interact with other people every day.
5. No desire to do other things. It's easier to explore other options when you're in your 20's & 30's. It's harder to do those wild things when you're older.

That said, some people need to retire when they're 25, and they don't. So, what're ya gonna do?

Add "The like what they do" to your list and I think you nailed it for most people.

I'd say #4 will likely be my reason if I work past retirement age. My parents retired nearly 20 years ago and still do a remarkable job travelling and interacting with their friends. My dad keeps saying that the minute he sees his friends "slow down", they die. Kinda like their reason to live just leaves them.

It's easy to say you'll have hobbies to keep you going, but if you're in your 30's or 40's now, you have to realize that you likely haven't lived half of your life yet.

Life isn't short. It's the longest thing you do.

 

[dualthreat]

I'm not sure i'd go that far.

There are multiple completely valid reasons why baby boomers often arent retiring right away, but the idea that 'kids these days have it easy' when costs of everything that one needs to get started in life, from school, to housing (whether buying or renting- rental prices have skyrocketed as lending criteria have tightened), and other basic expenses has risen much faster than the rate of minimum and average wages, which hits this generation the hardest when they are trying to get on their feet with such things.

http://www.thesimpledollar.com/a-dose-of-financial-reality/

I disagree with almost every sentiment of that. While the numbers may be accurate, they are overlooking the very obvious blessings of the society we have (in Iowa) today.

Yeah, too many people are over paying for useless degrees and housing, but that's another debate.

 

[ripvdub]

Divorce

 

[bostrem00]

Because Americans are defined by their work.

'Merica.
[video=youtube;6fZZqDJXOVg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fZZqDJXOVg[/video]

 

[Rhoadhoused]

I disagree with almost every sentiment of that. While the numbers may be accurate, they are overlooking the very obvious blessings of the society we have (in Iowa) today.

Yeah, too many people are over paying for useless degrees and housing, but that's another debate.

It's not just useless degrees. Even good degrees will take far longer to pay off compared to what the norm was before.

Life nowadays has a lot more bells and whistles, but basic things like home ownership, cost of rent, gas, ect are more expensive.

Food is dirt cheap, but with that comes terrible health overall as a country and high medical costs.

Even things you don't think about like internet, and the cost of computers and phones which have nowadays become basically necessities. That's $40 a month for internet, $30 a month of a phone, at least a few hundred dollars for a computer. None of these things existed awhile ago.

I'm sure there are things on the other side of the coin, but there are some very real issues out there where things are definitely worse off than they were.

 

[Jambalaya]

All I see and hear are old folks working till they're dead. They don't retire when they easily can. They just work, and sometimes work hard. I just don't get it. Maybe it's their generation where they know nothing, but work. I know once I'm set for retirement I'm riding into the sunset immediately. Do these folks not have hobbies or an outside life? Are they just workaholics? Why people work into their 70s and 80s is beyond me.

The largest employer in CR has a point system (age + years' employed). Combine the two and typically a persone can retire in their mid-50's there if they started after college graduation.\
. Dozens and dozens keep working for YEARS when they can retire with full benefits, pension, 401K, etc.

They're denying younger prospects from getting hired or moving up the chain. Huge entitlement mentality

Then try to take away their driver's license when they become senile

 

[00clone]

The largest employer in CR has a point system (age + years' employed). Combine the two and typically a persone can retire in their mid-50's there if they started after college graduation.\
. Dozens and dozens keep working for YEARS when they can retire with full benefits, pension, 401K, etc.

They're denying younger prospects from getting hired or moving up the chain. Huge entitlement mentality

Then try to take away their driver's license when they become senile

No, they don't, Jamby. They haven't for the last 15 years, at least. So, the denying younger prospects...also BS.

 

[dualthreat]

It's not just useless degrees. Even good degrees will take far longer to pay off compared to what the norm was before.

Life nowadays has a lot more bells and whistles, but basic things like home ownership, cost of rent, gas, ect are more expensive.

Food is dirt cheap, but with that comes terrible health overall as a country and high medical costs.

Even things you don't think about like internet, and the cost of computers and phones which have nowadays become basically necessities. That's $40 a month for internet, $30 a month of a phone, at least a few hundred dollars for a computer. None of these things existed awhile ago.

I'm sure there are things on the other side of the coin, but there are some very real issues out there where things are definitely worse off than they were.

I didn't say life is easy now. Look at it this way: compare what we have today to that of your typical family in the 1940s. It's not even remotely close. Even crime rates are way down-- and they're reported more often too.

I attribute a lot of that to the hard work of those who came before me. Not so that I could have it easy, but so I could have the opportunities to be successful.

 

[cyowa]

All I see and hear are old folks working till they're dead. They don't retire when they easily can. They just work, and sometimes work hard. I just don't get it. Maybe it's their generation where they know nothing, but work. I know once I'm set for retirement I'm riding into the sunset immediately. Do these folks not have hobbies or an outside life? Are they just workaholics? Why people work into their 70s and 80s is beyond me.

Okay, I'm 70, can't believe it, but I am. After 35 years with the same company, I retired at age 58 because I could. At age 60 I was bored out of my mind. Belonged to a fitness center used it everyday, played golf from time to time, traveled some but was home a lot and still bored.

Got a part time job as a courier for a lab and pick up blood and other stuff at doctor's offices, vets, hospitals, etc and take the specimens to the lab. I love the job. I drive all over town, Omaha, in the company provided car, they buy all the gas and they maintain the car, and basically I drive around and listen to the radio and cd's. Just go where the dispatcher tells me. No pressing time commitments. I get out of the house which is great , especially in the winter time - it cures cabin fever. I meet lots of people all day long. And I name my own hours - I usually work only in mornings and never on Friday, Saturday, Sunday or Monday, work Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday only - always a 4 day weekend to spend with the wife and grand children on my terms.

What's not to like. Beats vegetating!

 

[Jambalaya]

No, they don't, Jamby. They haven't for the last 15 years, at least. So, the denying younger prospects...also BS.

so 100 employees that are 5 -10 yrs over their retirement date--keep working, aren't denying anyone advancement?

I have a close family member waiting for the boss to retire, which is delaying my family members' advancement. (will take over the job upon this person's retirement) Then someone will move up behind my family member, and so on.

This person who won't retire on time has tons of financial responsibilities from extravagant purchases and two completely spoiled college kids they spend a fortune on on out of state tuition

plus, I hear other stories all the time of other LOADS who not only should be retired---but should of been fired years ago, yet hang on forever

you have no clue.

for the record, I respect the retirees who go on to other careers, whether full or part time.

 

[00clone]

so 100 employees that are 5 -10 yrs over their retirement date--keep working, aren't denying anyone advancement?

I have a close family member waiting for the boss to retire, which is delaying my family members' advancement. (will take over the job upon this person's retirement) Then someone will move up behind my family member, and so on.

This person who won't retire on time has tons of financial responsibilities from extravagant purches and two completely spoiled college kids they spend a fortune on

plus, I hear other stories all the time of other LOADS who not only should be retired---but should of been fired years ago

so you're full of BS

Says the guy claiming a decades old retirement plan is still in existence.

I think the main problem is you believe you relative has a right to the boss' job. He doesn't...grow up. If he's such a hot commodity, get the same job at a different company, or in a different department of the same company. I used to think you were a crotchety old fart, now I'm thinking you must be in your 20's, since you act like a self-entitled jackwagon.

 

[Rhoadhoused]

I didn't say life is easy now. Look at it this way: compare what we have today to that of your typical family in the 1940s. It's not even remotely close. Even crime rates are way down-- and they're reported more often too.

I attribute a lot of that to the hard work of those who came before me. Not so that I could have it easy, but so I could have the opportunities to be successful.

And people in the 40s had it better than those in the 1400s.

The article you responded to was specifically about the past 40 or so years and that is the generation that are the parents of people in their 20s, whose lives are compared to ours most of the time.

I think people who are my parents age if they applied themselves in high school, went to college, and graduated, they would be able to graduate with a little debt and quickly pay it off while purchasing a house on one person's salary. A college degree was a ticket to a good life and that led most of those people to essentially forcing their kids to go to college or at least setting that expectation.

Nowadays, and this is probably more with teenagers now but slightly for us in our 20s, colleges are way more competitive and high schools have to work way harder to get into school and get scholarships, ect. And everybody has a college degree, even STEM degrees often require unpaid internships even after graduation just to get into industries.

And then it pretty much requires a dual income to buy a house that is twice as expensive as it used to be along with paying twice as much for your student loans.

 

[alarson]

I didn't say life is easy now. Look at it this way: compare what we have today to that of your typical family in the 1940s. It's not even remotely close. Even crime rates are way down-- and they're reported more often too.

40s? Maybe not. 50s\60s? Absolutely there were many things they had better.

A single income could support a family back then, just for starters. Good luck with that now for most. Even with education being much, much cheaper, there were still plenty of jobs that didnt require that- now its almost a requirement to sign up for that debt just to get a decent career. Yes, some choose poor majors, and massive and unreasonable amounts of debt, but there are a lot more that are still stuck with fairly high (but more 'reasonable') amounts of debt even with good majors. Housing? A down payment was much easier to save up for when prices were much lower compared to average wages (as detailed in the article) and savings account rates were much higher.

 

[theshadow]

Says the guy claiming a decades old retirement plan is still in existence.

"Age + years of service" still exists as a plan in some areas, namely for public employees in Iowa (IPERS).
Vested IPERS members are eligible for monthly retirement benefits:

1. At age 65, the normal retirement age, with no reduction in benefits.
2. At age 55, with a .25% reduction for each month prior to age 65.
3. When the member's age plus years of service equals 88. Under this "Rule of 88," member benefits will be equal to normal retirement benefits even if the member is under age 65.
4. Before age 55 if the member is eligible for social security disability and receives approval from IPERS.

 

[00clone]

"Age + years of service" still exists as a plan in some areas, namely for public employees in Iowa (IPERS).
Vested IPERS members are eligible for monthly retirement benefits:

1. At age 65, the normal retirement age, with no reduction in benefits.
2. At age 55, with a .25% reduction for each month prior to age 65.
3. When the member's age plus years of service equals 88. Under this "Rule of 88," member benefits will be equal to normal retirement benefits even if the member is under age 65.
4. Before age 55 if the member is eligible for social security disability and receives approval from IPERS.

He was talking about a specific employer in Cedar Rapids....which again, hasn't had it for years.

 

[BCClone]

People do understand that a big push for needing college degrees and a little tighter work force is the near doubling of the people working? I'm not being sexist here, but in the 40s-60s and even 70s there was only one earner. Used to be dads working and moms taking care of home and kiddos. With both working, it has put many more employees and many more obtaining degrees so making degrees more important and allowing colleges/states to jack up the cost.

So, you could possibily deduce that the high cost of college is due to females, I wouldn't deduce that, but some might.

 

[Rhoadhoused]

40s? Maybe not. 50s\60s? Absolutely there were many things they had better.

A single income could support a family back then, just for starters. Good luck with that now for most. Even with education being much, much cheaper, there were still plenty of jobs that didnt require that- now its almost a requirement to sign up for that debt just to get a decent career. Yes, some choose poor majors, and massive and unreasonable amounts of debt, but there are a lot more that are still stuck with fairly high (but more 'reasonable') amounts of debt even with good majors. Housing? A down payment was much easier to save up for when prices were much lower compared to average wages (as detailed in the article) and savings account rates were much higher.

Exactly. Could I go get a mortgage and a house right now on top of student loan debt a couple years out of Iowa State with a STEM degree? I probably could. But I'd rather not be $200,000 in debt and unable to save up for a full down payment, paying high interest rates on loans and my mortgage.

 

[johnstoncy]

There wasn't a less rude way to say any of that?

I thought she said it perfectly.

 

[ImJustKCClone]

Maybe I read it wrong, but it seemed someone upthread was indicating that not retiring early when you're eligible is selfish. I'm 60. So is PapaLew. We both work full time. Our retirement plans took a serious hit in the during the last decade. After paying off the house after our kids left home, we bought an acreage, one that was well within our ability to pay off, and do so early. Our retirement plans began a slow rebuild as the economy recovered. Things were looking pretty good.

Then PapaLew got laid off. He found another job fairly quickly (even though he was in his fifties), but it pays about 2/3 what the previous job paid and the bennies aren't quite as good. It's a paycheck, though...and he has never been one to sit around on his *** doing nothing.

I've put in 31 years in at my job; if there were early retirement incentives offered, I would most likely be eligible. However, I would not take advantage of it. Reason 1: We love our quiet country home with us, the trees & the critters...it's very peaceful to come home to this place. Reason 2: Due to a couple of health issues, I have to take fairly expensive medications and my current insurance includes prescription coverage. If I retire early, I get partial retirement pay. And if it's before I'm eligible for medicare, we will have to choose between paying the mortgage or paying for a healthcare plan or reducing our lifestyle considerably, or some combination of the three. If it's selfish to want to maintain my home and health, I guess I'm guilty. I'll work until I'm ready to retire, and until such time as I feel that I can afford to retire. I think I've earned that right.

 

[CoKane]

My guess is that sitting around at home doing the same stuff every day waiting to die doesn't really appeal to them.