When do you plan to retire?

I can not afford to retire.

Obama is raising everyone's taxes, killing any potential for an economic recovery.

He has spent the income of people not even born yet, how could I think of retiring?

Maybe I could crash at the Kennedy compound, Teddy will be leaving soon and that should create room for 5 or 6 people.

18 years ago.

I am 66, so I could retire...if I want to struggle along on a fixed income and with the dang Republicans doing their best to destroy Social Security and Medicare! I guess the Republican (and "conservative" Democrat) plan for retirement is the same as in "Logan's Run": when you reach the optimal age, they execute you to make room for the younger generation. I guess that's one way to do it, but it's a bit rough on the older generation.

BTW, let's not forget that Obama INHERITED Iraq (a few trillion bucks wasted there!) and Afghanistan from the Bushies. Republicans complete control of Congress and the White House from 2001-2006. They are the ones who are responsible for most of our deficit. Oh yes, and their laissez-faire policies toward big business and the financial industry made the collapse of the housing market an accident looking for a place to happen...and it happened!

Democrats' hands aren't squeaky clean, but the real mud is to be found under the Republicans' fingernails...especially Bush's.

When are people going to start asking about how much the deficit has gone up because of the illegal and ill-thought-out war in Iraq? It ain't the Dems that started the spending spree, but now they're the ones trying to salvage the damage to the economy! I think we should be docking Emperor George's and Lord Dick's wages

I'm gonna work long enough to get my wife through med school then I'm done. She thinks I should be a stay-at-home dad, take care of our son and our little ranch. I like the way she thinks! Though I'll never really "retire" per se, I'll just be closer to the house.

You can't look at deficits year by year. Economies rise and fall year by year. If you want to look at policy effect on deficits, you can only look administration by administration. What did the deficit do from 1981 to 1988? How about 1989 to 1992? 1993 to 2000? 2001 to 2008? When you look at the last 30 years, it becomes obvious which presidencies are deficit hawks and which ones are oblivious. As Dick Cheney said, ""You know, Paul, Reagan proved deficits don't matter." He was talking to Former Bush Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill.

Good luck with that.

0-18: dependent

19-55: work

56-80: retired

Spending over half of your life (44 of 80 years) not contributing to society seems like a waste to me. We live longer than previous generations therefore we should also work and contribute for more years. This is a major reason why Social Security will go bankrupt -- people collect benefits and retire too early for the average lifespan.

I agree but my personal lifestyle i will be lucky to see 55

counselortroi2 wrote: "let's not forget that Obama INHERITED Iraq (a few trillion bucks wasted there!) and Afghanistan from the Bushies."

Not that I agree with either war, but the fact is that both combined have still cost less than 1 trillion dollars. Obama spent more in his first 6 month as President, and wants to spend more.

http://costofwar.com/

I am against anyone, Republican or Democrat, who wastes our tax dollars so freely. We are bankrupting our country.

This idea that you work 'till you die is unrealistic. The 90-year-old who is sharp, healthy, and employable is the exception, not the rule. Plenty of people just hold on until 62 or 65 to avoid the endless hassles of applying for disability. And for those who manage to remain healthy enough to work, who hires people who are 65+? Supposidly age discrimination is illegal, but it is rampant; your resume says you are on the high side of 50, and you just don't get called in for an interview.

By the end of this fiscal year, we are projected to have spent about a trillion on Iraq and Afghanistan. That's money that could have financed most of single-payer health care. Or it could have been used to replace the money that has been stolen from Social Security funds by Congress over the years! We could have used that money for something productive, instead of wasting time in Iraq, which had nothing to do with 9/11. Face it: we have thrown away the money that we should have used to create effective health care and fund retirement.

Best way to insure health care for all and retirement for all: make the health care and retirement of members of Congress dependent upon their providing decent coverage to all American citizens. We get the axe; they get the axe. I'll bet they'd find a way in a hurry!

I'll retire when I get the same benefits as our "posters" in Government.Heres an Idea: "The Proposal"

When a company falls on difficult times, one of the things that seems to happen is they reduce their staff and workers. The remaining workers must find ways to continue to do a good job or risk that their job would be eliminated as well.
Wall street, and the media normally congratulate the CEO for making this type of "tough decision", and his board of directors gives him a big bonus.

Our government should not be immune from similar risks.

Therefore:
Reduce the House of Representatives from the current 435 members to 218 members.




Reduce Senate members from 100 to 50 (one per State). Then, reduce their staff by 25%.

Accomplish this over the next 8 years

(two steps/two elections) and of course this would require some redistricting.

Some Yearly Monetary Gains Include:

$44,108,400 for elimination of base pay for congress. (267 members X $165,200 pay/member/ yr.)

$97,175,000 for elimination of their staff. (estimate $1.3 Million in staff per each member of the House, and $3 Million in staff per each member of the Senate every year)

$240,294 for the reduction in remaining staff by 25%.

$7,500,000,000 reduction in pork barrel ear-marks each year. (those members whose jobs are gone. Current estimates for total government pork earmarks are at $15 Billion/yr).

The remaining representatives would need to work smarter and improve efficiencies. It might even be in their best interests to work together for the good of our country!

We may also expect that smaller committees might lead to a more efficient resolution of issues as well. It might even be easier to keep track of what your representative is doing.

Congress has more tools available to do their jobs than it had back in 1911 when the current number of representatives was established. (telephone, computers, cell phones to name a few)

Note:
Congress did not hesitate to head home when it was a holiday, when the nation needed a real fix to the economic problems. Also, we have 3 senators that have not been doing their jobs for the past 18+ months (on the campaign trail) and still they all have been accepting full pay. These facts alone support a reduction in senators & congress.

Summary of opportunity:

$ 44,108,400 reduction of congress members.

$282,100, 000 for elimination of the reduced house member staff.

$150,000,000 for elimination of reduced senate member staff.

$59,675,000 for 25% reduction of staff for remaining house members.

$37,500,000 for 25% reduction of staff for remaining senate members.

$7,500,000,000 reduction in pork added to bills by the reduction of congress members.

$8,073,383,400 per year, estimated total savings. (that's 8-BILLION just to start!)

Big business does these types of cuts all the time.

If Congresspersons were required to serve 20, 25 or 30 years (like everyone else) in order to collect retirement benefits, tax payers could save a bundle.

Now they get full retirement after serving only ONE term.

We are being sold out by our elected officials……It is us (me included) that need to consider our freedoms, and what we choose to pour on ourselves with the government that we the people vote in for our lifestyle.

Johnnywad,

Reducing the number of Senators and Representatives cannot be accomplished except through amending the US Constitution. Each state has 2 Senators and the House has each state having at least 1 Representative and extra based on the population of the State. The staff on the other hand should be all fired and new staff hired that had no previous connection to anyone in politics.

The staffs are ones actually writing and reading the bills that do get read. The staffs are the ones that have been in Washington, DC for many decades. They are the ones that know all the political maneuvers to get bills passed and keep the language blurry enough to allow donors and lobbyists to get away with anything they want. They are the ones completely entrenched in the political apparatus and that the newer Representatives and Senators rely upon for advice.

Yeh, right, things would be so much better if we made sure that noone had time to read the bills or anything else, and if nonone in Washington knew how to get anything done. Government exclusively by rank amateurs would be sooooo productive. Not.

I know Craig, thx. I just sent this to Boxer and Pelosi along with a personally note on their upcoming loss of employment. Hopefully they will get wind of it and say "Uh Oh, how did they figure it out"

It is not the taxes Obama and liberal Dems are increasing it is the Gianormous deficit he and Pelosi have run up. Obama and Pelosi in 6 months have run up more deficit than all administrations thru Bush all the way back to George Washington total, combined.

They are going to have a secret tax. It is called Inflation. If you save a couple of million with several years of hyper inflation a Mac Donald's happy meal will cost a half million. Lots of luck, buy gold mine shocks. The problem is the Government can alway take that over and stiff the stock holders. Guns and Whiskey will be the currency. Maybe crack and weed. Obamanation. Pass the crack pipe please.

To Captain Marvelous, I highly doubt that Obama has raised your taxes. Since you're uneduated enough to think he has, I'm positive you're not in an affected tax bracket. Nice try though.

All these stories about folks actually wanting to work well into there retirement age is a bunch of hooey!

Msnbc is actually printing these stories because there will not be any money left in SS for retirement, so instead they just brainwash people into thinking they will actually be bored if they don't work. Yea OK!

We all worked for umteen years and couldn't stand it then what the heck makes them think we would like to work another 10-20 years!!!!!!!

I recently took a short vacation and was dressed in shorts and a t-shirt, and I was looking around at the airport at all the people dressed up and hustling and bustling with their laptops and cell phones, and I realized that there would never be a time in my life that I wouldn't want goals and deadlines and the social aspects of work.

I'm "working" till I drop. Maybe not 40-60 hours per week, but at least 3 days a week, 20 hours or so, etc.

I want to retire right now!!! I want to become one of the many that the government is taking care of. I want to get on that gravy train before it runs out of gas!!!  WOO-HOO...I LOVE MY GOVERNMENT!!! I love what it does for the hard working Americans. I love that it turns it's back on them and gives money to the very companies that brought it to it's knees, expecting them to  "FIX" what they broke. I love that my government sees fit to whine about needing education and health benefits for everyone, while everyone (that wants a job) can't get one because the economy doesn't merit an increased work force.

I love that my government will decide what kind of health care I'm going to get in my "golden" years. I love the fact that THEY won't have to use their health care. I love the fact that they can decide for me what health care needs I have or am going to need.

That's why I want to retire now. TO get on the "right" side of the government handouts. You know the old saying...If you can't beat them (And you can't beat every politician), join them. I'm ready goverment. I'm ready for you to take care of me. I'm ready to stop being a contributor and ready to be a receiver!  GIMME, GIMME, GIMME!!!!!

I am 67. My wife and I saw how the economy was going in 1994, when my corporation started downsizing, and let me go after fourteen years. We had property in four states, so I asked her what state she wanted to "retire" in. I went to that state, and started all over again, at 53 years old. We changed our strategy, made a new budget, lived a different lifestyle. In just fourteen years, we now have a 2000 sq. ft. home on 25 acres of property, and all are paid off. Our only debts are medical. I make much less that I did in 1994, but we cut our frills, and made do. My job is easy, and I plan to stay until I'm 75, Lord willing.

No joke Joe! What country is this, France? Americans are lazy. That's why the Chinese make everything we buy!

At least in France, there is a safety net, so if you lose your job you don't end up on the streets. And they have single-payer health insurance, so no one goes without medical care, even if they are unemployed. Are the taxes higher? Of course! At least the French get something for the taxes they pay! We get to sit and watch those dollars flowing into the pockets of big business, big insurance, big pharma, etc. We aren't overtaxed; we just don't get much out of the taxes we pay. It all goes to the wealthiest 1%.

We get to sit and watch those dollars flowing into the pockets of big business, big insurance, big pharma, etc.

And don't forget the pockets of Senator Max Baucus (D-MT). I heard he's getting gold rims put on his limo this month, paid for by Merck. Too bad he's chair of the Senate Finance committee.

We buy items made in China because we want to buy a $10 pair of jeans at WallyWorld and China can give us that price by using child/slave labor not because Americans are lazy laggards. If we want to solve part of the health issue bring back blue-collar jobs.

I don't want to pay $70 for a pair of jeans. Why should I have to pay for your health insurance? Mine costs $400 a month as is.

schwan....

do you not know that your insurance is 400 because you are allready paying for the uninsured! Its time to increase the insurance pool with more healthy benificiaries and doing more preventave care. That is how we lower costs for all...Too bad we are living during the 3rd Red Scare.

I always thought it was a bad idea for a free nation like the U.S. to trade with a communist nation like China. Without some strong protections, that trade limits the choices of free people to those of the communist country, where labor relations are handled by the red army. We've been asking Americans to compete directly with people who will work for $3/day. In the united States, $3 won't even buy a fast-food lunch, let alone buy a house, educate your kids, and save for retirement. This is a rigged competition American workers were intended to lose. Putting off retirement is just one symptom.

Merck installs gold rims on tires?

Sometimes it's best to stick to core competencies, I always say.

I with Arkie. Unfortunately, I'm a late bloomer and am finally making the money that I could start saving for retirement. I plan on saving like heck (used cars, no gimmicks, cheap home) and start cutting my hours at 57 to like 30 hours a week till I'm 65. Then I'll get my full Social Security and medicare.

I started working at 15 paying into the system. I deserve to retire.

Everyone wants a gov't paycheck. When I'm 65, there won't be one.

If I try to retire early, my health insurance will be $20,000 the year I turn 64. That's on top of losing a third of my 401K, and if my parents need to go into a home, the home will want a couple thousand a month from me to help pay that bill because just taking my parent's house isn't enough anymore.

"Everyone wants a gov't paycheck. When I'm 65, there won't be one."

There won't an industry paycheck either. The jobs will be offshored. The big boys in Wall St. don't like employing American geezers.

Well that's not true for me. I am highly educated in a growing field that requires virtually zero manual labor. Why do you think I sit in front of a computer everyday? I'm employable for decades....and I better be. Like I said, there won't be a gov't paycheck when I'm 65. I can't honestly say I'll need one. I'm in pretty good shape and intend to stay that way.

schwann,

Maybe you missed the part about the computer engineer who was fired at age 62? And hasn't been able to find a decent job since? I assume that you are young, but you'll be amazed at how quickly those years fly by. And you don't have to be very old to become unemployable: I have read of many computer employees in their 40s who have been dumped and have not been able to re-enter their profession. Don't think that because everything is OK now it will stay that way. The essence of life is change, and with Chinese and Indian economies booming, especially in the high-tech field, you could end up having the rug pulled out from under your feet in the future. Maybe you'll be lucky; maybe not. "Ask not for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee"...and me...and all of us, if big business has its way!

There is an old quote about them coming for people; when they came for the ... I didn't protest because I wasn't a ...; and when they came for me there was noone to turn to.

Well, thats how we've been treating our workers for the last 30 years. We let manufacturing of one sort after another go because it was always those other people losing their jobs. Then it was outsourcing office work like answering the phone or transcription; again other people's jobs and little protest. Then there was the importation of cheap, possibly illegal, foriegn workers; well those were the jobs that supposidly no American wanted. Well guess what, the engineering and computer jobs are already leaving. It makes sense that engineering would be better done next to the factory that is already gone, and computer jobs are probably easier to outsource than dictation. So now when those smug, independent "information workers" lose their jobs, it's going to be a mighty fall.

aarpmom

I don't want to burst your bubble, but...you won't get full social security benefits at age 65...the age to receive full benefits has already been raised to 66. By the time you reach 66 the age to receive full benefits will probably have been increased beyond that!

Also very optimistic of you to think Medicare will still be solvent when you reach 65!

I could not agree more. If we all focused on working more in and with our local communities and local governments, we would all be better off. Local programs to insure at least PT work (or volunteer) for elderly citizens, or training seminars designed for this age group would go a long way to easing the retirement burden.

A lot of people on these forums blame the current administation, or the last two, but Congress (both R and D, I am neither), for the last twenty years or so that I've followed them, has been just as much at fault. They are both at fault and waste our time by blaming each other instead of doing the real work necessary to fix it. REAL CHANGE STARTS AT THE LOCAL LEVEL!! GET INVOLVED!! Politicians have to start somewhere, it is usually in local/county government...

I could not agree more. If we all focused on working more in and with our local communities and local governments, we would all be better off. Local programs to insure at least PT work (or volunteer) for elderly citizens, or training seminars designed for this age group would go a long way to easing the retirement burden.

A lot of people on these forums blame the current administation, or the last two, but Congress (both R and D, I am neither), for the last twenty years or so that I've followed them, has been just as much at fault. They are both at fault and waste our time by blaming each other instead of doing the real work necessary to fix it. REAL CHANGE STARTS AT THE LOCAL LEVEL!! GET INVOLVED!! Politicians have to start somewhere, it is usually in local/county government...

Sadly, local and state governments are strapped for cash because of all of the UNFUNDED MANDATES from Congress. For example, my parents had a meeting not too long ago with Jake Corman the Chairman of the Pennsylvania Senate Appropriations Committee. He told my parents that the budget could only be balanced based on 1/3rd of its actual value, because 2/3rds of it was taken by Federal Programs run through the state government. My parents were meeting with him to discuss the Agriculture programs that were having funding cut from them. My family owns one of the larger dairy farms in Centre County, PA.

So, part of the problem with PA's budget crisis is due to the fact that the Federal Government has essentially taken 2/3rds of that budget for themselves and told the state you can only do your own stuff with the last 1/3rd. This makes it hard for states to handle lowered revenue due to recession because they do not have the flexibility of having complete control over their budgets.

Oh, I completely agree, I should have clarified I wasn't speaking of the immediate future. I hope I didn't come off sounding too idealistic...

This economic dip has hurt myself and a lot of people I know, older and younger. We need real people like you and your folks to stay involved and keep the pressure up at the local and state levels to prevent things like this from happening in the future.

I became disabled at 43 and am now 60.  I live a good life with my partner and am envyed by most because I wake up every morning with a plan to do something to make myself useful.  I could @!$%# but that is stupid.

That's obscene. Another reason SocSec is in trouble as well the country. Disability needs to be overalled and RE-DEFINED. It is disgusting more often than not. You can't even get a clear definition of disability from anyone. It's a very grey and abused area and someone NEEDS TO DO SOMETHING. Enjoy your "good life" living off the people's taxes, if that is the case. Disabled used to mean something -- people in wheelchairs, people who can't do for themselves, people who are in serious conditions and unable to function without the help of others. Well... look what has happened.

The fact is, dissability is a grey scale and not black and white. We pretend that it is an easy determination that some people are disabled and some are not; in fact we make the mildly disabled work longer and harder than the able-bodied. If you are disabled, you probably have an associated medical condition, a "pre-existing condition", so early retirement is not an option because you need that health insurance that is tied to your job. So as long as you can function, you keep going in, regardless of the pain or breathing problems. Meanwhile, the able bodied without medical expenses get to save more and can buy health insurance, and the disabled make use of the disability insurance of Social Security. It's a cruel system if you are only a little disabled, but I'm told that even if you are clearly disabled you no sooner prove it than you are dropped and asked one more time to prove it again.

If things go on as they are, eventually dissability will be the only way out, other than dropping dead on the job.

Waddell,

Our society should of that before rejecting people because of their differences.

I'm a Civil Engineer. I know what you mean about not being able to find qualified replacements. Like Obama himself said, this country needs more Engineers and fewer Lawyers.

Ditto!   As a  Medical Technologist in a small regional hospital laboratory in a rural area, I will be working until I die.  Like the nurses, there are not enough replacements coming in. Forced closure of training programs isn't helping, Labs no longer can afford to train the students because of fee cuts.

agreed - sad but true....

I tell people I work with that I hope they'll see me here one day with my cane or wheelchair.

I've been involuntarily retired from work I love since 2002, had 3 temporary jobs since - the last ended in October of last year. I'd gladly work again if I could find something, anything, in our area but unless you're a nurse or PT/OT, long-haul trucker or engineer, the jobs aren't there, even at half pay. At 57 my prospects are less than stellar.

My husband is 2+ years shy of his own retirement. Between his (defined benefit) pension, my defined benefit pension, 403b rollover to an IRA and a Roth IRA, plus Social Security and no debt beyond a small HELOC, we'll be fine. We always lived below our means, saved up to 25-30% of our income, and wear things out before replacement. Yes we got clipped by the downturn but have recovered half or more since and won't actually need it for some years to come (having a good-sized nest egg in cash) so it can continue to grow until I reach 70 1/2 for the IRA or beyond, for the Roth.

I tell my kids to do the same: keep debt low, savings high, and investments varied. Turn off the talking heads (they only confuse and increase anxiety), make sure you buy sufficient life, disability, homeowners or renters insurance to cover possible losses, and work at staying as healthy as possible for the long haul. Having fun does not involve great expense but do treat yourself once in a while. Life is going to throw you curveballs, some nasty, so don't be surprised or complain "why me?" when it does.

One day you will be able to tell those who retired before the last year of the Bush administration from those who retired after. If the retiree looks comfortable and relaxed, they retired before Bush; if they look anxious and worn out, they retired after Bush.

If you don't mind me asking, how is it that you were able to retire at 35? Run your own successful business?? If so in what industry?

old $

I am American,

You would think that if you are doing that well you should be able to use correct spelling and grammar.

Good going. The bulk of my retirement is in mutual funds: I have 2 aggressives right now and one in a balanced fund. The more $$$ will go into the balanced fund.

I had to set up my own IRA's as IT is mainly contract work now. What a blessing because it taught me to divest and not place everything into one company plan.

Union,

I agree that if it is possible financially, we boomers should move over and make room for the coming generations. We have dominated American life since we came into being. Let's give the young a chance. There are plenty of ways to "stay active" without having a paying job that a young family needs.