Nearly half of Gen X say they'll need a miracle to retire, study finds

Can't they just call their wealth managers for a little extra money?

Excuse me, Miss but I've got problems of my own.

Ha-HA.

My bff is a single, straight, and childless Xer with two master's degrees. I know she has money set aside for her retirement, but she bought a condo (by the Jersey shore) in her 40s, and she tells me she'll have to work until she's 75 to pay it off. And then, she'll still have condo fees.

I love her little place (especially the location), but with a mortgage hanging over her head like that, I'm glad to own my shabby-but-servicable trailer and the land it sits on.

Besides, I can always visit her.

Yep, that's me

Why did they use that old man's stock photo to represent GenX?

Please, God in Heaven, let us not start with the typical Wealthy Reared DL thread of:

" My Husband and I reared debt free ten years ago with a beautiful mountain home, good pensions and $5M in our 401k. "

^retired

Don't many people have more or less forced retirement ages in their professions?

Probably easier to live until death in Europe too.

we don't have luxurious retirement benefits but usually enough to manage to retire without going homeless.

Why, according to Datalounge everybody has 3 million dollars to retire.

R7. 6.8 million here, but do please continue.

I should be able to retire at 62-65 with my SS, and 401k income, although I will probably need to WFH or partially until I'm 65, not fully retire. Our house is paid off in LA County and under Prop 13 with a moratorium on increasing prop taxes - so we'll probably be here until we die. If we do move out of state it better be somewhere with affordable prop tax and enough left from the sale to be very comfortable. Otherwise, not budging. Our house is small but its paid for and we own it. We can always renovate if it doesn't affect the title.

And the Republicans want to raise the Social Security age to 70 or higher. They even pay their little pussybois like Ben Shapiro and Charlie Kirk to tell the rubes that they don't need to retire. Just keep working until you drop dead, people.

Better vote accordingly in November, people.

There’s no moratorium on property taxes—you want to wait until you better understand how property taxes actually work in CA.

Thanks for telling us R14, I was worried.

R16 you're rude, whereas I merely used the wrong term. Assessor increases are restricted under Prop 13. I hope you're happy being a smart aleck.

I always knew I was ahead of my time.

And that cap does not apply to voter approved debt. I’m glad you’ve learned your lesson. If you’re going to lather on with your personal story, at least be accurate. And know when to use affect vs. effect. And know the home renovations don’t impact title, unless you get stuck with a mechanic’s. lien because you hired a bad contractor.

And over half of Gen X is voting Trump, his biggest bloc of voters. So maybe stop voting Republican? Or blame the 50%+ that is!

[quote]Don't many people have more or less forced retirement ages in their professions?

Actually no, close to 50% of people in the US are self-employed or are some form of Gig Worker. Forced retirement is only for the very old school corporate workers.

[quote]I hope you're happy being a smart aleck.

Sweetpea, this IS Data Lounge, not FeelGood Farm.

Back in the 80s, I was unemployed during the Reagan Recession. I took a huge paycheck cut and went to work for local government. I took one of those crappy low paying jobs with decent benefits. I was surprised five years later when I received a vesting letter in the Defined Benefits Retirement Plan

I left government for 10 years but left my account untouched so when I returned, I continued my contributions.

I retired with a $3K per month for life benefits. I'm really bad at math, so can someone figure out how much I would need in cash to generate $36K at 3%?

Gen X here R21, never voted for Trump, neither has my partner, or my mediate family or most of my friends. He's destroyed America and civility in our culture at the same time.

There is virtually zero mandatory retirement in the corporate world. Buyouts and pushouts, sure…but that’s different.

Being allowed to work yourself to death is one of the under appreciated perks of the US labor scene.

R25 as Ron Brownstein writes online in The Atlantic this week, Trump is Noah Cross in the flesh. America is Chinatown, the movie, writ large.

I worked hard, saved my money, paid for school, have 3 million in the stock market, own 2 homes worth 1.5 million each, will be retiring on 10,000 a month. I am so worried about how I can survive in this "Biden Economy". - DL MAGA HUMBLE BRAGGERS.

$1,200,00 in cash. Fuck, my paid off house isn't worth a million two.

.

R24

R23 and there’s nothing smart-alecky about the post. WTH?

Thanks R25 but I also hope you realize it's a lot of your peers right now propping MAGA up and being trolls disparaging the younger generations. All over social media

Cant argue with pigs R32, I tried, just end up getting dirty which is what the pig wants. I would say most of the ones I know who are Trump voters never went to college. Or if they did it was much later in life so they never got the memo that college was not just about learning a skill, it was about learning to think critically about what you here and question your own beliefs on a regular basis.

Gen X is NOT the Trumpiest generation. That title goes to Boomers. It's split like most of the country.

About half of Americans retire with only their Social Security benefits. This is not specific to Gen X and isn’t particularly news.

Considering their diets and usual condition, they probably don't need to worry about retiring.

R33 current quality polling tosses that all out window. Biden is polling better and better with the older and oldest voters, as he appears to lose support from younger voters.

R6, and holding foreign currency at that!

[quote] And the Republicans want to raise the Social Security age to 70 or higher.

Raising the retirement age is necessary to keep the system afloat, and it would affect young people entering the system, not Gen X. Try harder.

^ That's a GQP garbage talking point. Another way to keep the "system afloat", as you say, would be to raise the cap on what gets paid into the system. But it's not going broke as people like you love to say.

You do understand that Republicans see a giant pot of money that they want to steal, I mean invest, in the stock market? So that when there's a stock market crash/recession, retirees have nothing left.

And no, if you work a blue collar job, extending the retirement threshold is a death sentence. Maybe it's fine if you're in a white collar job in an air conditioned corner office where you can nod off and take naps.

Raising the age is not necessary at all. The fix is to raise the cap on wages subject to the tax. Or add a surcharge on higher/highest bracket(s).

The grasshoppers who made bad choices and didn’t save properly for retirement need to allow the ants to have their moment and let them crow that their acting responsibly has paid off.

[quote] Raising the retirement age is necessary to keep the system afloat, and it would affect young people entering the system, not Gen X. Try harder.

Oh but of course. We can't have anything adverse affect those vaunted Baby Boomers and Gen Xers who make up the majority of congress and people in power calling the shots.

Let's kick the can down for the Millennials and Gen Z to take care of our leftover trash strewn everywhere.

[quote] if you work a blue collar job, extending the retirement threshold is a death sentence.

Considering it wouldn’t affect anyone for forty years, you saying that life in the 2060s will be just like today has no value.

You’ll have your own chance to kick the can—sit tight.

R43 not quite. As far as previous changes to the full retirement age, they are not postponed..they do impact you now. I’m one who didn’t always have 67 as my full retirement age. The law changed on me, and changed my expectations…somewhat.

[quote] Considering it wouldn’t affect anyone for forty years, you saying that life in the 2060s will be just like today has no value.

Then why not just raise the retirement age to 90? By 2060 people will be living to their 120s, so why not just keep working.

[quote] Raising the retirement age is necessary to keep the system afloat, and it would affect young people entering the system, not Gen X.

I wish EVERY millennial, Gen Z and even Alpha could read this quote so they could understand what the two asshole generations before them plan on doing!

I wish EVERY millennial, Gen Z and even Alpha could take a moment to learn the actual economics of SS, and the way the system works.

R48. Raising the retirement age for younger generations who are already far more financially behind? How nice that you get to retire with your comfy and cozy age limits and benefits

R49 you’ve completely misread my comments. It already happened to me—duh! I made the point not to do it again, but to focus on extending the wage tax to upper income folks. Read, please.

Sorry R50 I got carried away. I'm so used to the older generations just TRASHING us any chance they get and leaving behind all of their used up condoms and tampons and trash for us to clean up after they're gone

My retirement plan is to die.

R51 oh, I’ll still do that at my leisure, as a new (early) retiree. I just won’t support fucking you over on SS, Medicare, ACA and similar. 😘

R6, I love you!

R6 most Gen X look like that now

That pic is actually a Gen Z in Hungary, counting is euros

his.*

The current generations for those lost

We aren’t lost…no hieroglyphics needed.

I should be able to retire at 63 with a little over a million in my pension, plus I’ll be eligible for Canada pension. My partner will be more or less in the same position. Home will be paid off. I’m pretty certain I’ll be dead by 75, so we should be okay 🤓

[quote]My retirement plan is to die

My plan is waiting for my parents to die R52

Oh really r59? Are you sure? Because I'm pretty sure I see posters referring to teenagers as Millennials still. People think people in their 90s are Boomers.

We are all sorts of fucked up and confused here!

I’m 54 and frankly would love to retire NOW, or at least do something other than my soulless, corporate job.

I have $1.7M in retirement savings/investments, and a $100K mortgage on my condo which is up for renewal in a year and a half (which I’ll probably just pay off rather than renew at a higher rate).

I’m thinking age 60 is probably more realistic but I’m so glad I followed mom’s advice when I got my first part-time job and started socking money away in a tax-shielded retirement account. At least I have options between now and age 60…

They should vote wisely then.

R62 please feel free to “search me.” I know my age brackets, and I’m Ok with mine. Im the end of the boomer line, and I feel fine.

R63, I'm puzzled about why you can't retire now on a million and a half. With even moderate interest income, you should have plenty to live on without cutting into your principal. Curious how your math is shaking out. I'm a financial layman, but still, if I were you, I'd give serious thought to early retirement.

The best way to get a foothold on some financial security is to room in an apartment with at least two other people, and start saving something every month. Don't keep spending your money on eating out all the time and drinking at bars and clubs. That's where a good deal of your money goes. And perhaps limit your vacation to once every three years. I see younger people at work constantly eating out and going to bars and they are flat broke until payday comes around. It's good to enjoy life but don't just live within your means, live a bit below it. And avoid getting into too much debt. If your credit card balance is where you couldn't pay it off within three monthly installments, then stop using your credit card regularly.

Okay, I've had it. Look at that old lady in the graphic at R58. Who in the hell do these people think GenX are?

If you can't make it as a retiree, move to a red state shithole and live in a trailer. Maybe Oklahoma or Tennessee!

R67 how old are you, 19?

mortgage on my condo which is up for renewal in a year and a half…

What is that supposed to mean?

Who could possibly have a balloon mortgage at this point in time?

[quote]college was not just about learning a skill, it was about learning to think critically about what you here

R33? I guess your college didn't require you to discern the difference between "here" and "hear," so why should anyone take any advice from you?

Just curious.

[quote]I'm puzzled about why you can't retire now on a million and a half. With even moderate interest income, you should have plenty to live on without cutting into your principal.

I'll have $2.5 million and that's what I plan to do. I'd like to continue to grow the principal and never cut into it.

R72 my college did. The auto correct feature within this message board failed —as it does for every poster here, now and again…I guess except for you?

Oh no! The poor things!

Maybe they could start by not kissing baby Boomer ass for once in their lives?

[quote] I guess your college didn't require you to discern the difference between "here" and "hear," so why should anyone take any advice from you? Just curious.

It taught me to focus on real issues and critical thinking over typos from basement grammar Nazis who get their feelings of superiority by focusing on the arrangement of text on paper instead of the intent behind the word.

I think most of us hit the workforce after Black Monday when the stock market crashed, jobs were few and far between and labor unions had been busted by Reagan and his cronies.

Most of us got shitty jobs with shitty pay and were the first generation that had to set aside money on our own instead of contributing to pension funds.

How many did that? How many people took the initiative to find out about 401Ks and start investing at our first jobs?

Not many. Now the thugs want to do the same to social security so their cronies can grab even more money and force us to work until we drop.

Fuck those greedy shitheels!

That's a year just before I entered the workforce r77. I totally agree with you. All the buzz around 401K on my meager salary made no sense. Plus, the company I worked for had a one year waiting period to join and ZERO matching. So it never even happened for me, but the Boomer management was all excited about it at the time. Turns out what sounded scammy back then really was scammy after all these years.

What really happened is before all that big companies used to put money aside for retirement after 30 plus years of loyalty. By switching the concept of that to saving the money yourself in stock portfolio, the company saved billions shifting the burden of retirement from the employer onto the employees all while selling it as the next big thing. And back then, I think if you changed jobs, you had to liquidate your 401K and start over. Not transferable. I know now they are, or roll into a roth.

I’m a teacher so with my low salary I’ll never be able to retire in this economy.

[quote] I’m a teacher so with my low salary I’ll never be able to retire in this economy.

It’s a bad decision to work as a teacher where there’s a combination of lower pay and high cost of living. You should do research to determine the optimal locations of maximum pay and minimal cost of living and then move to that district in that other state.

A triumph of conservatism. Us workers should work our asses off, eat unhealthy food, have crappy healthcare and then drop dead in our early 60's so as to not cost taxpayers any money. MAGA!

R78, if you roll a 401k into a Roth, you have to pay taxes on it.

I wish Roth 401ks had been available more widely when I was younger and in lower tax brackets. You pay taxes on the income you use to make the deposits, but not on the gains. That is an amazing opportunity.

pretty much

R74/R76?

The answer is simple: check your work.

I do.

My employer started offering Roth Basis accounts which don’t have an income cap to contribute.

Roth IRAs are a gift! Get the taxes out of the way upfront, so as to then invest the funds to grow then be able to use them tax-free after retirement. Who knows what the tax code will look like by then.

r79 as a teacher - public school, I presume? - don't you have a pension as a municipal or state employee?

This is a direct result of Reaganomics.

My $2.5 million 401k is thanks to Reaganomics? Cool.

R68 I suppose I could retire now but I’d like to build up more of a “buffer “ just in case later in life I end up in some expensive retirement home/ managed care. And I plan on doing a lot of travel while physically able to do so and that’s not cheap.

[quote]mortgage on my condo which is up for renewal in a year and a half…

R71 what I mean is that the 5 year mortgage on my place (at 1.79% !!) is due in 2026. Rather than renew at a higher rate I’ll pull money from my savings and pay it off. I could pay it off today but why, when I’ll earn far more than 1.79% through investments?

R80, perhaps we should PAY TEACHERS MORE.

FFS

R90, you campaign to have my profession paid more, and me in particular, and then we can discuss.

R89 again I ask why would you have a balloon mortgage? I’ll assume you are outside the U.S. because what you’ve just described makes no sense here.

R89 Does your mortgage amortize, or not. If it does then there’s nothing to refinance. If it doesn’t then that’s a balloon mortgage…they fell by the wayside in the US a long time ago.

[quote]The study found the average retirement savings of Gen X households is only about $150,000,

Why wouldn't $150,000 in savings PLUS a good Social Security benefits package be enough for retirement? And why wouldn't most of them have a good SS benefits packages?

Because they are too fucking lazy to look up their estimated SS—or read that statement you get every year.

R95, do you really think that's true? Hard to believe they're THAT stupid and/or lazy.

Just read any “generational” thread and you’ll come around to reality.

It's pretty hard to feel sorry for the group who are most devoted to Trump. I guess the face-eating leopards are eating their faces now

Some simple rules: 1. Do not marry. 2. Do not have children. 3. Do not live in any large city, like NYC, LA or Chicago. If you do, relocate asap. 4. Never carry ANY credit card debt - EVER! Apply for one credit card only - use it very sparingly and pay off the balance IN FULL as soon as the bill arrives. 5. Never buy a new car. NEVER EVER lease a car. 6. Contribute max to 401K. Never EVER withdraw $$ from this. 7. Get a second job and/or part time side hustle. 8. Do not take out student loans in any form. 9. Live modestly: no bars, restaurants; no cable/streaming services of any kind; no buying anything online. EVER. and finally, and most importantly: SAVE every nickel you get your hands on - religiously!!

I am now 73. I was an RN for 40 years; I am a St Louis native but was recruited for a 2 year stint in Chicago in 1996. Single, never married. The most I ever made in one year was $65K during my Chicago years. Otherwise averaged around $50K back in St Louis. During the 80s and 90s always picked up extra shifts, also worked in two different bookstores just for fun. Never incurred any credit card debt/student loan. Bought my house, a nice modest ranch with a finished basement and nice yard, in 2003. ($135K). Refinanced the 30 yr almost immediately and went into a 15 yr - made one additional payment per year, paid off mortgage 2014. Took max 401K deductions, plus "catch up" contributions when turned 50. Contributed to small Roth IRA as well. Bought long term care insurance starting 2010. Drove a string of VW bugs, by the 90s had a couple of Toyotas and a Ford Escort. When A/c crapped out swapped it for a 2007 Subaru wagon with a rebuilt engine. Runs like a top, mechanic assures me it will do another 100K miles.

Retired early at 63, working for insurance companies nearly drove me INSANE. At retirement had around $100K in the rollover IRA, and about $10K in the Roth, always $2-5K in personal savings. Took Obamacare till age 65 - it was in the early days, had a great policy for $32.50 a month. Paid off mortgage at 63, started taking SS - $1750 a month, now $2035. No car payment, no house payment. Now have $30K in personal savings (had to start taking IRA disbursements at 72 1/2, around $4-5K, went straight into savings. Live solely off SS now with any leftovers put into savings. No travel - went to London in my 20s, couldn't pay me to fly now. All family and friends here now anyway. Real estate tax about $2400/yr; car insurance not that bad, utilities negligible.

I don't understand situations like these. There still is money to be made out there. Nurses in this city now pull in $65K easily with one job. You manage your money - it does not manage you!!

Well, that’s dumb. Living in Manhattan without a car reduces your fixed cost by several hundred dollars a month. No payment, no insurance, no gas, no parking… there’s more than one way to make it work.

So I checked my SS and my pension, and without any savings, I could potentially get over $6000/month if I retire at 70. It's not amazing, but it's not horrible.

R99 are you manic? You type manic! What a bizzare post—literally, no one cares.

[quote]Why wouldn't $150,000 in savings PLUS a good Social Security benefits package be enough for retirement? And why wouldn't most of them have a good SS benefits packages

Probably R94. I'm convinced that these constant articles are plants by investment firms (like Vanguard) to get people to save, so they can make money.

Watching my parents in retirement has been a real eye opener. They spend no money. They just aren't up for going to Europe in their 80's. They watch television, see friends once in a while, maybe go out to eat 2-3 times a month. They pay people to clean/mow the lawn.

I will say, they have a paid for house, which makes a huge difference. There are still taxes, upkeep, etc. but their expenses are minimal.

R92 I live in Canada.

What’s a balloon mortgage?

My mortgage is a 5-year term, amortized over 15 years. At the end of the 5 years I can refinance, or pay the balance off.

You should have led with Canada…a balloon mortgage is where some or all of the principal is deferred until maturity (interest only) and thus the payments are not equal or uniformly amortized. Your type of mortgage would not be available, much less requested, in the US. Completely different circumstances from a US borrower—fyi only.

“At the end of the 5 years I can refinance, or pay the balance off.” That’s a non-standard amortization, in the U.S. at least, for a fixed rate loan. Typically amortization is equal payments of principal and interest, such that at maturity there is no balance and thus nothing to refinance.

[quote]My mortgage is a 5-year term, amortized over 15 years. At the end of the 5 years I can refinance, or pay the balance off

They have these in the UK too, and (as an American) I find it kind of wild.

We can buy a house, with a (for example) 4% interest rate, for 20-30 years.

With the Canadian/British loan, you have to refinance every 5 years, and your rate (and payment) could dramatically increase. I'd be terrified. What if you can't afford the new terms? Do you sell the place?

Generation Idiot!

Can I ask a dumb question? If you have no children and aren't married (most gays) what's the problem with dying with some debt, like a mortgage if the interest rate isn't too high? I mean, to sacrifice living relatively better now for an easier time, maybe, in your retirement by way of a paid-off mortgage and no car loan or whatever, how is that a superior decision? And by extension, why not just rent instead buying into home ownership and its hassles -- especially, let's say, if you didn't have your shit together anyway till your 40s -- like most people, I suspect?

Actually R107 you can get 10 year fixed rate mortgages in Canada, but most people don’t do that. Until very recently it was always better to be on a variable rate mortgage, because the rates were lower and recent history suggested they would stay low. I had a VR mortgage prior to getting a fixed 5 year rate in 2021 which was too good to pass up.

FYI for Americans, we in Canada cannot write off mortgage interest :-(

[quote]Watching my parents in retirement has been a real eye opener. They spend no money. They just aren't up for going to Europe in their 80's. They watch television, see friends once in a while, maybe go out to eat 2-3 times a month. They pay people to clean/mow the lawn.

You're describing the life of poor people. I don't want to go from being well off to being poor when I retire.

🎵 i need a miracle, i need a miracle

Pic at OP looks like Jon Stewart misplacing a million or two.

Is that a bigger percentage than any other generation polled at the same point?

[quote] The grasshoppers who made bad choices and didn’t save properly for retirement need to allow the ants to have their moment and let them crow that their acting responsibly has paid off.

Dear, you do realize that that fable ends with the starving grasshopped eating the ant and taking his stuff, right?

[quote] This is a direct result of Reaganomics.

R87 Yes, “Trickle-down Economics” meant the money would trickle down from the 0.1% to the 1%.

[quote] Dear, you do realize that that fable ends with the starving grasshopped eating the ant and taking his stuff, right?

“The fable concerns a grasshopper (in the original, a cicada) that has spent the summer singing and dancing while the ant (or ants in some versions) worked to store up food for winter. When winter arrives, the grasshopper finds itself dying of hunger and begs the ant for food. However, the ant rebukes its idleness and tells it to dance the winter away now.”

Dance, irresponsible people.

The ants sound miserable, R117. Who wastes their entire best years just so that they can live a little more comfortably during their worst, last years?

[quote]The ants sound miserable

People who save and are responsible get to enjoy their working years and their retirement. Those who are profligate during their working years and have little to live on in retirement must endure the natural result of irresponsible behavior.

R119, the problem with your response is that it fails to acknowledge that only high-income earners can live a nice life during their working years and also save for retirement.

For the the working and middle classes these days, saving enough for retirement (e.g., the million-plus the righteous experts say you must have) means cutting out even basic expenditures that make life bearable, such as a car, the occasional meal out, new clothes, needed medical treatment, or air conditioning. It means constant vigilance about every dollar spent, and it's hard. I don't feel I'm enjoying my working years; I'm penny-pinching my way through them to avoid poverty in old age.

For perspective, I'm single, childless, and earn 60K a year.

[quote]People who save and are responsible get to enjoy their working years and their retirement.

Bullshit argument. There is no grantee you will make it to retirement. I have met many people who died of various things before the age of 60. Everything from breast cancer, to car accidents, AIDS to heart attacks, drowsing in a lake to liposuction gone wrong. Imaging scrimping, saving, not enjoying any life all for that day you turn 67 and then you drop dead a year later. It happens all the time. I am not saying its all or nothing but the kind of life R99 describes sounds absolutely miserable.

I would rather work past retirement when I get there than spend my whole life in a shitty existence just so I can have some cash at the end which I would be not in the best shape to enjoy by then.

[quote] Bullshit argument. There is no grantee you will make it to retirement

If you are a responsible adult and properly save for retirement, but die before that, you’ll never know and will be no worse for having done the right thing. Also, you could direct your money to be used for some other good purpose after your untimely death.

Many late Boomers also in this boat.

[quote] the problem with your response is that it fails to acknowledge that only high-income earners can live a nice life during their working years and also save for retirement.

I’m not a high-income earner yet have what I want while still saving responsibly. My car is basic and ten years old but it’s low mileage and runs fine. I do buy things on sale and avoid buying anything that is full price, but I prefer doing that.

On the other hand, you also need to set yourself up to succeed by making the good life choices to maximize income with the right job/career choice and to reduce expenses by not living in a high cost of living location.

We are the first generation to have 401k plans available all throughout our careers, mostly in lieu of pensions.

So that experiment failed.

When's global Universal Basic Income being implemented?

[quote]If you are a responsible adult and properly save for retirement, but die before that, you’ll never know and will be no worse for having done the right thing. Also, you could direct your money to be used for some other good purpose after your untimely death.

Oh yes, my life's goal, live in shitty squalor so when I die, my money can go to some undisclosed charity who will squander it on some CEO's salary in the mid six figures.

[quote] We are the first generation to have 401k plans available all throughout our careers, mostly in lieu of pensions. So that experiment failed.

That's a good point. You can scold people for making bad choices all you want but the 50% or so who were told to use 401K as their path to retirement are broke. Not a good result for such a societal experiment.

What happens if you already have more than your parents and feel the need to save in case of expenses? I mean I can’t leave mom in a median, even though sometimes as a child it was tempting.

[quote] I mean I can’t leave mom in a median,

Does "median" mean parking lot?

No. It means a median. A raised or distinct area between two sides of a street or highway.

Aka in the middle of the freeway!

[quote] If you are a responsible adult and properly save for retirement, but die before that, you’ll never know

True, you'll never all the fun you could have had in your youth. I'm with R120. I make a middle-class living, single, no kids and other than a reasonable car loan (by today's standards) I have no debt. I rent because I cannot buy a home in my 2-tier city where anything halfway decent (2 bed, 1 bath, in a safe neighborhood) starts at $350,000. There are other reasons I prefer not to buy, but that's more about my eschewing the myth of home ownership wealth. Let's talk about repairs, taxes, and Association fees. Saving up for a $1M retirement fund would mean spending most of my adult life with roommates. I'd rather have roommates when I'm 70s/80s and staving off loneliness or the fear of dying and decomposing for weeks before discovery. Sorry for rambling a bit, but the point is that for single, middle-income people it's very hard to get by let along plan a fabulous retirement. Your posts, also, have a haughty tone that belies a certain level of unpleasantness if not bitterness.

I don’t really have much savings to speak of, but I do have a state pension. If I work 5 more years, I’ll be able to make almost as much as I do now every month. I can keep the state insurance, but will have to start paying for it. I’ll be in my early 60s when I retire, so I’d like to do little part time jobs until I can draw full SS.

Huddle with other X'ers -- buy a big house together -- pitch in together to the end. Cut costs and loneliness. Fuck the program.

What part of "I'll probably need to start saving money for my retirement" did they not understand?

Saving meant investing and investing meant stocks and stocks is a rigged game propped up by government. Thieves were rewarded, too bigs to fail were bailed out, and someday the wheels WILL fall off that bus.

OMG that's worse than the parking lot! Love it. Thanks R130. Yes I know the median strip sorry.

The same sentiment we've been hearing from boomers for year. The parents of boomers and gen xers are probably the only generation where most people had a reasonable degree of retirement security.

R131, that's it exactly. Thanks for putting it so well and speaking for so many of us.

When she typed “where anything halfway decent (2 bed, 1 bath, in a safe neighborhood) starts at $350,000” she’s not speaking for anyone I know…who the hell leaves where you can’t get a house for that cheap?

lives*

Fuck it —I mean can! It was a snark reply …ignore the lame attempt.

[quote]Saving up for a $1M retirement fund would mean spending most of my adult life with roommates. I

But what's the need for a $1M retirement fund, or any amount even close to that, if you also are going to receive a decent amount of money per month in Social Security benefits when you retire -- which, presumably, you are. Can you please explain?

r139, it has to be somewhere in Ohio or something dire like that.

R139 - Orlando, FL. But if you look at Zillow, you'll see that's true for most 2nd tier cities so moving doesn't mean much. Cities with cheaper housing (e.g. Detroit, Gary, etc.) are all shithole war zones. Is that where I should go?

R143 - I have no idea what you even mean. Dire? In what sense? And why would assume the Midwest which (so far) is lagging behind the coastal states in terms of housing costs?

So Gen X is a thing, really?

I guess for them, they are.

Yes, they're a thing R146. They vote Trump at alarming numbers and then wonder why things like retirement are out of reach from them.

R99 here - the reason I posted and included so many financial details is because I fit the exact position described in that article - a retiree with $150K in IRA/Roth savings who is able to live comfortably off Social Security only. Rereading my post, I realized my house is actually 2 bed/2 bath -(I always forget about that basement bath with the shower.) I got lucky with this house - in the 20 years I've been here, I have only replaced the roof and gutters and bought a new HVAC system - all paid for.

Anyone who thinks I live a penny pinching, "miserable" life needs to think again - far from it! I was 63 when I retired and at that time had about $5K in liquid savings. Ten years down the line, I now have $30K. Maybe some of you don't realize that priorities change as you age: If I wanted to, I could book a Viking River Cruise tomorrow. However, during my retirement to date, not only have I been able to cover immediate unexpected expenses, (like a car battery or new tires), I have money available to gift (not loan!) to share with family and friends. I have been increasingly generous to my nieces and their children, as well as being able to help out a couple of friends through the years without asking for repayment. Not to mention being able to make charitable contributions to organizations and causes I support, which is something I never was able to do when I was younger. That beats any Viking River Cruise, believe me. And there is not much I deny myself, either - theater or symphony tickets, picking up the check for lunches/drinks with friends, etc. I realize I am a Boomer and not Gen X (thank God) but I believe I have done very well for myself, both personally and financially - and I DON'T need a million dollars, nor do I need a miracle!

Hilarious post R148

If I had a company pension rather than a 401K with 50% matching, I would have twice as much retirement money. Basically by 2000 or shortly after most companies have discontinued their pension plans and switched to 401K where the employee has to have agreed upon amount deducted from their paycheck, of which the company will match 50% or whatever percentage. So, where with the pension plan they would be contributing 100% of employees pension fund, now they are only contributing 33% of the amount, and that is only for those who are in the plan. Many are not because they are not earning enough on their salary to also put savings aside. I read somewhere that companies are basically 20% of the amount they were earmarking before for pensions. And who is benefiting from the difference? Top executives salaries and bonuses and shareholders. That has a lot to do with why many middle class and lower middle class workers find it difficult to retire.

[quote]When she typed “where anything halfway decent (2 bed, 1 bath, in a safe neighborhood) starts at $350,000” she’s not speaking for anyone I know…who the hell leaves where you can’t get a house for that cheap?

Hu? The average price of a home in Los Angels is around 850,000. And that's not Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, Pasadena, WeHo, or anywhere that's really popular. And before you say move to a small town in the mid west, that's not where the jobs are you silly Simpletons. The kind of work I do could never be found in a small town. That does not mean I am making buckets of money either, it just that there are so many other types of jobs that only flourish in big population centers. Especially jobs that require a high level of specialized training. Not everyone can work as a nurse or grocery clerk.

The one thing talks about is how to deal with the increasing costs of rentals. I can see this becoming a problem for many as they retire and are on a fixed income. The rent increases while they’re SS or pensions do not. Is it moving in with family members when the rent is too much?

R148 has to win for the most Boomer post ever. It's actually quite hilarious

[quote] My retirement plan is to die.

I like that plan. It’s simple, straightforward and easy to understand.

[quote]You're describing the life of poor people. I don't want to go from being well off to being poor when I retire.

It isn't that they can't afford to go to Europe R111, they just don't want to/can't do it at their age. I think a lot of people over estimate how active they will be in their 70's/80's.

I just want to be able to afford my air-conditioning bill.

That's the thing, if you want until you retire to do things, it's too late physically to do them. I went on a cruise to Alaska when I was 40 something. Everyone kept saying they would wait until they are 60 something when they retire. But the thing is I had so much more fun being able to walk all day long, ride bumpy jeeps, hike on a glacier without any physical problems there is no way I could do that stuff when I am 65. Everyone I know that age is having knee probables, shoulder problems, hip problems, replacement surgery. That's why they dont want to do anything that physical at that age. They have given up on life, just existing until death knocks at the door.

R157, you go on the cruise at 40 and you save responsibly for retirement, so you have the option to use your retirement income on what you like, including another cruise if that’s your thing. The lie has been promoted on this thread that it’s all either/or, when in fact you can do both. I traveled extensively in Europe in my 20s, 30s, and 40s, and also saved toward my retirement all on my middle class income.

There are people who feel if they have money in the bank, or a credit card not used to the max, they need to spend it all. Later they tell themselves, and others, the lie that they couldn’t save for retirement, to avoid feeling bad about fucking up their future.

Not if you live like R99 suggests.

He's all about total denial until long past retirement, THAT is the LIE that has been promoted as the only way to save for retirement.

[quote]And no, if you work a blue collar job, extending the retirement threshold is a death sentence. Maybe it's fine if you're in a white collar job in an air conditioned corner office where you can nod off and take naps.

Good luck getting either type of job if you lose your current one. The GOP wants you to return to work an hour after your hip replacement surgery, yet getting hired after 50 is difficult in most fields.

"Why wouldn't $150,000 in savings PLUS a good Social Security benefits package be enough for retirement? And why wouldn't most of them have a good SS benefits packages."

According to my social security statement, if I retire at 67 I will get about $3060 a month in Social Security. I have close to $150,000 in my 401k right now. I've worked for several companies throughout the years who did not offer 401k's at all and the one I have right now is zero matching from my employer. My rent currently for a 1 bedroom is close to $3000 per month (in California). So I would need an extra $1500 per month just to live most likely...for utilities, bills, food, etc. If you do that math, that $150,000 will last me 8 years. So I guess I should hope I die before I turn 75.

I know I will likely have to move to another state to afford to live longer, but right now my career is here and so I cannot leave. Never could afford a home here. Was only making $60,000 per year until 5 years ago. I now make $92,000 and that's consider low class in Los Angeles.

Why would one accept a job with no 401(k) match? Who doesn’t match? I’ve always had match of 6% —2 bucks for every buck I put in (core plus more).

I worked for three different companies and they all matched 50% if what I put into my 401K up to 6% of salary. That is standard industry practice. How did you get your employer to match 200% of what you put in? I never heard of that. The most I heard was 100% match.

How did I get it? It was in the benefits handbook as part of my offer. It wasn’t unique to me or my title.

When I first started with the company in 2016, r162 they were a small company and offered no 401k but my pay was significantly higher than what I was making at the job I left. My previous job had a 401k at 6% matching but after you reached 6%, they stopped matching.

New company just started offering a 401k about 3 years ago. No matching. It's not a requirement.

It is an expectation, for any salaried position with any decent employer.

Well, my employer is headquartered out of Spain. We DO get one month of paid sabbatical leave every three years in addition to our 3 weeks paid vacation so there's that.

R167 - Not to mention the post-lunch siesta time and your pick of the month's matadors.

I'm 58 years old. I'm retired, have over a million dollars in the bank, my house is worth over half a million dollars, my debt is low and my credit score is 800. I also look 15 years younger than I am!

You’re almost OK!

R169 i believe everything but the 15 years younger bit.

The goal posts are moving just for r169.

Fire away— the DL is a piker compared to the WP when it comes to comments.

[quote] New company just started offering a 401k about 3 years ago. No matching. It's not a requirement.

What’s the point of that if no matching? Lower management fees?

I am confused, does the contribution to an 401K reduce current taxable income?

Your 401(k) contribution is a pre-tax deduction. There is no upfront tax on the employer match or any investment earnings. You pay ordinary income tax on the amount of your withdrawals after you are 59 1/2 (or later retirement).

[quote] I am confused, does the contribution to an 401K reduce current taxable income?

Yes.

R175 401Ks defer tax payments.

You then, should find a time before 59 1/2 years of age to do a Roth IRA ladder conversion and pay the deferred taxes before Social Security (62 and one month until 70) and RMDs from your retirement plans (at 70), kick in, when you have no income or capital gains and are in the lowest tax bracket possible.

Before 59 1/2 when you have no income or capital gains, r178? When would you have no income?

The work of shaming profligate people into saving more is paying off.

[quote] You then, should find a time before 59 1/2 years of age to do a Roth IRA ladder conversion

R178 Did you mean to say “AFTER 59 1/2” so as to avoid the 10% penalty for early withdrawals from a 401(k)?

R178 was trying to make a good point, but that post was more confusing than helpful. Bottom line: laddering of those accounts is good only for a limited group.

[quote]Why would one accept a job with no 401(k) match? Who doesn’t match? I’ve always had match of 6% —2 bucks for every buck I put in (core plus more).

Because you are fresh out of school and need the job? 401K matching is considered a benefit or a perk by most employers, not the main draw for any given job. Only half of all business in the US actually offer that. And that only applies to large companies, mom and pop never offer that kind of thing.

“And that only applies to large companies.”

You’re mistaken. And that’s a reason why the younger ones find themselves in these situations. They don’t think. They just act.

Aren't IRAs there to fill the gap?

Lord help ya

OK Boomer r184.

Look, the point it many companies do not offer 401K. That's the point. And most people do not have the luxury of picking from multiple job offers when they are starting out or even later in life. That's toe problem with Boomers, they think everyone has had a charmed life like they had, if only everyone else would "work as hard" as they did the would would be all roses.

To be 35 and childless, with a healthy 401k and a pension living in flyoverstan.

R187 repeating shibboleths…

R181 Yes, thank you.

FYI, people will be able to contribute up to $23,500 in 2025, an increase of $500. While catch up limit for 50 and over remains $7500, age 60-63 will have increased limit of $11,250.

I am counting on my inheritance yet I don't want my mom to die.

Super COVID 2037 = "Miracle"

Then they might be interested in supporting politicians who want to boost Social Security.

They printed two trillion dollars to bail out the banks in 2008. We can afford anything we can do. The money system is a proxy not the other way around. Reality isn't a proxy of the money system.

Everyone should set up a Roth IRA if they are eligible. Put it in a mutual fund and when you retire the money comes out tax free. It’s the best way to generate money in retirement possible. Even if you put in the minimum it’s worth it. The worst hit to workers has been the end of pensions. Thanks Republicans.

^^^R196, the way I understand it, if you have a Roth IRA you have to pay taxes as you go along, whereas if you have a traditional IRA, you have to pay when you withdraw upon retirement. So it's really a question of whether you'd prefer to pay little by little as you go along, or in one lump sum at the end, but unless I'm misunderstanding, the amount you pay for taxes is going to be roughly or even exactly the same in either case. So assuming my understanding is correct, why do you view a Roth IRA as a much better option than a traditional one?

[quote]R6 Why did they use that old man's stock photo to represent GenX?

Yes, who is that elderly man?? We are a vital, BUBBLING generation, bursting with promise!

I think both a traditional and a Roth IRA are great. I’m not sure what the legibility rules are though. In the past, anyone with a high income could not set up a Roth IRA. I think putting after tax income in the market and taking it out decades later tax free is the best option. But I’m not an accountant!

..eligibility..

[quote]r7 Please, God in Heaven, let us not start with the typical Wealthy Retired DL thread of: [italic]"My Husband and I retired debt free ten years ago with a beautiful mountain home, good pensions and $5M in our 401k."[/italic]

On that subject, why don’t we create an ‘Adopt a Queen’ program where comfortable DLers like that welcome mature members who haven’t “made their mark” yet into their homes and hearts for the retirement years? It would make the wealthier members feel they’re really giving something BACK to the community.

And who knows? One of us silver lashed actor/waiter/models might at last hit the big time under your care (sometimes it just takes new headshots, if you can help with that), and you can hook your wagon to our star!

Miracle = Mom's Large Life Insurance Policy, House and Savings

[quote] the way I understand it, if you have a Roth IRA you have to pay taxes as you go along

No

R203, I believe that by saying "pay taxes as you go along", they mean "put post-tax dollars in the Roth IRA as you go along", which is correct. That's the point of a Roth. You put post-tax dollars in it, but then you never have to pay taxes on the contributions or gains when you someday withdraw them.

r204, do you work in the White House Press Office? That's quite a clean-up of someone's statement.

Well, they can keep just right on voting for Trump. I’m sure that’ll help them. /s

[quote]I believe that by saying "pay taxes as you go along", they mean "put post-tax dollars in the Roth IRA as you go along", which is correct. That's the point of a Roth. You put post-tax dollars in it, but then you never have to pay taxes on the contributions or gains when you someday withdraw them.

Yes, that's what I meant With a traditional IRA, you get to avoid paying taxes every year on whatever amount of money you contribute to your IRA up to the maximum -- currently $7,500, I believe -- but they you have to pay taxes on all of those contributions when you start withdrawing from the IRA. Whereas with a Roth IRA, it works how R204 explained it. So stuff it, R205.

Your fucking idiot generation deserves to be homeless and starve on the streets!

Gen X are just as bad or even worse than Boomers.

“Nearly half of Gen X say they’ll need a miracle to retire”

And if they did say that, imagine what they’re saying now.

The only ass Trump wants to save is his own.

[quote]Nearly half of Gen X say they'll need a miracle to retire, study finds

And they somehow think they are unique?

I am living proof you can save your way to early retirement with a mediocre job.

These people obviously did not save a portion of every paycheck they have received..

Too bad, so sad.

The same Gen x who voted orange?

Apparently. Good luck to us now. . . . .

You'll never retire now, you stupid cunts!

I don't care.

Die on the streets.

Maybe Trump will let them set up encampments at Mar-A-Lago

It's too bad Social Security can't be removed only for Gen X. That's what they voted for.

It's what they deserved for voting for republicans. They came for the private sector pensions in the 90s. Then the public sector pensions (but not those of the police).

A lot of these morons are depending on Social Security to keep them afloat. Talk about being utter idiots and shooting yourself in the foot.

Late Boomers and Early Gen X really suffered from the switch from defined benefit to defined contribution schemes. They had no concept on their 20's and 30's that they needed to plan ahead (who does?). A lot of them saw their parents and older relatives retire comfortably and just assumed it would be the same for them. Later Gen X and Millenials have been shouted at since they first started working to save for retirement, not that it's really working for them either. Between education and housing debt they don't have much to put aside, but at least the can see the povery train coming for them.

Thankfully my government saw the shit show well in advance and made retirement savings compulsory, by employers in lieu of productivity wage rises in the 90's.

Good thing they helped elect Trump! He will help them!