Retirement

[Ravioli]

A dentist with the handle of "painless". I like it!

Must be a fan of M*A*S*H. (The movie, not the series)

 

[Cap'n Jack]

Only if you choose to live a life where you ignore data.

The plural of anecdote is not data.

You absolutely need to use the CPI and other measures of inflation if you want to know inflation rates. That is kind of Econ-102 class material. And if you don't understand it, that could be an activity before you retire.

If you do see inflation, won't to benefit from it?

Do you think inflation is a negative thing?

I have lived thru Deflation, and I can assure you I saw a lot of people hurt because of deflation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I feel you are oversimplifying economics.
There is some debate about whether deflation across an entire economy is a cause or effect of bad economic times [1]. I note that deflationary episodes happen after a economic crisis. People are out of work, and bid down the cost of labor, a substantial cost of goods and services. As there is less demand due to discretionary spending and investment, prices are also depressed (less demand for the supply). The main reasons listed that deflation is bad for the economy is that the cost of debt rises (IE, you do get a new job after getting laid off and you get paid less, but your mortgage doesn't decrease). As the deflation happens after the crisis, deflation is a response to economic conditions but once established, it can exacerbate the poor economy and slow the recovery.

It seems that you are taking a monetarist POV to the economy, but as Volcker found out, restricting the money supply had its own issues. He tried to fix a period of low growth and negative and high inflation by restricting the money supply- however, the problem with a poor economy actually existed prior to the deflation.

I'm separating the economic deflation from what occurs in a business segment or particular market, such as computers, where the deflation is driven by advances in technology reducing prices while allowing growth to the market. In this case, deflation is actually a good thing if your are a market driver, as long as the market grows faster than the deflation.

[1] https://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/es/10/ES1030.pdf

 

[JoseCuervo]

I feel you are oversimplifying economics.
There is some debate about whether deflation across an entire economy is a cause or effect of bad economic times [1]. I note that deflationary episodes happen after a economic crisis. People are out of work, and bid down the cost of labor, a substantial cost of goods and services. As there is less demand due to discretionary spending and investment, prices are also depressed (less demand for the supply). The main reasons listed that deflation is bad for the economy is that the cost of debt rises (IE, you do get a new job after getting laid off and you get paid less, but your mortgage doesn't decrease). As the deflation happens after the crisis, deflation is a response to economic conditions but once established, it can exacerbate the poor economy and slow the recovery.

It seems that you are taking a monetarist POV to the economy, but as Volcker found out, restricting the money supply had its own issues. He tried to fix a period of low growth and negative and high inflation by restricting the money supply- however, the problem with a poor economy actually existed prior to the deflation.

I'm separating the economic deflation from what occurs in a business segment or particular market, such as computers, where the deflation is driven by advances in technology reducing prices while allowing growth to the market. In this case, deflation is actually a good thing if your are a market driver, as long as the market grows faster than the deflation.

[1] https://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/es/10/ES1030.pdf

Yes, I am likely oversimplifying economics, due to the audience reading. When you have someone state "I don't need no fancy data and no stinkin' CPI to tell me that my hamburger will be $25 in a couple of years"... then one must oversimplify.

If you want to see "economic" pain, go into the suburbs when housing prices start deflating. Drive across the middle of America when farm ground and farm commodities start deflating.

When we leverage America to keep our economy growing, you don't have much safety margin for deflation before a lot of pain starts occurring.

 

[JoseCuervo]

This is gold, Jerry, gold!!!!!

I honesty have no idea where you are coming from ideologically. I happen to disagree with some of the current economic data and statistics that is presented to suggest that inflation is not a problem, but, you seem to suggest that inflation in itself is not a problem to begin with, which is a position with which I disagree. In my opinion we can tolerate small, predictable amounts, but not large amounts. I don't care what kind of CPI stats you throw at me, they simply aren't reflective of real world economics that people have to live with. You probably aren't shocked that you are paying seven dollars for a mocha at Starbucks because you can afford it. But you should be, these days a car costs as much as a house, and a house costs as much as a mansion. Yet, in the last twenty years bank interest had been a fraction of a percent.

You can't retire that way, at least for very long. The only alternative is to take very risky high yield investments to stay ahead of it that you probably shouldn't be taking at the retirement stage.

I don't care about Econ 101 and all the rhetoric and models about healthy economic growth through controlled currency devaluation (which I frankly find abhorrent but that's just me), rather I'm talking about real world living.

I am laughing at this discussion.....

I honesty have no idea where you are coming from ideologically. ...... you seem to suggest ..... a position with which I disagree

That is rich, you don't know what my position is, so you fabricate a position for me, and then disagree with it. Keep on fabricating..... I guess....

I don't care what kind of CPI stats you throw at me

Well, thanks for advising us all that stats and data don't matter to you.... Sure makes for an intelligent discussion. Are most of the intellectual discussions you get involved with find yourself sitting on a barstool with a can of Keystone Light during daylight hours?

they simply aren't reflective of real world economics that people have to live with

Because people spend millions and millions of $$$ gathering stats from artificial worlds?? I am guessing you try and live a life in an artificial world, so I will defer to you. Facts and data are such nuisances for decision making.

You probably aren't shocked that you are paying seven dollars for a mocha at Starbucks because you can afford it.

Never drank a $7 Starbucks Mocha or any other kind of Mocha in my life. And, unlike you, I actually paid attention in Econ classes, and then lived and worked in the real world. So, I know that a Starbucks Mocha is likely not tracked in the CPI, and, would likely be considered a "luxury good", that doesn't affect the inflation rates. The fact someone can sell $0.39 of coffee beans for $7 has nothing to do with inflation, it has to do with marketing. That was a different class, down the hall, that I am guessing you missed.

these days a car costs as much as a house

In what world are you living where a "car costs as much as a house"? Most new cars I see advertised are $20-30k. Most houses in the country are $100-200k, and on up. Again, people buying $200k cars are buying what the economists (the people you refuse to listen to) would describe as a luxury good. Rolls, Maybachs, Bentleys, have never been in the CPI.

a house costs as much as a mansion

Sure.... I guess.... if you say so. I am not sure there is any data to back your claim, but good luck getting some one to sell you a mansion for the price of a house.

in the last twenty years bank interest had been a fraction of a percent

This really tells me you don't understand how inflation works. You do realise that inflation and higher interest rates go "hand in hand"? The low interest rates are driving the low inflation. Watch as the interest rates tick up the next year, and watch the inflation rates... Unless you remain committed in 2017 to not look at data.

only alternative is to take very risky high yield investments to stay ahead of it that you probably shouldn't be taking at the retirement stage.

This is the part that makes me think you have never taken a Finance class. And, likely shouldn't be managing your own retirement money. See if you can find an expert that can talk over you to manage your money.

I don't care about Econ 101 and all the rhetoric and models

I don't blame you. They don't fit your world view, so they would be unsettling to you.

I'm talking about real world living.

Keep it real, dude. Keep it real.....

 

[N747JB]

What would cause one to not be able to live off of $3.2 million in retirement funds?

That is a large chunk of change, and could generate significant income.

Owning a Duke?

 

[JoseCuervo]

Owning a Duke?

Worse than a Queen Air?

I have a feeling a KingAir 90 is my loftiest goal...

 

[N747JB]

Personally, I would like to retire in about 7-8 years, around 60. At that time we will sell our house here in Atlanta, and most likely move to Destin. Sell the Conquest, if I still have it then, buy a 182 or something similar if I still want to fly. For us it will be a huge lifestyle change, we are used to traveling first class, flying ourselves wherever we want to go, having a new "demo" instead of owning a car, lots of perks that I will miss from the business. My ideal situation would be to either hire a GM or if one of my children want to take over the business, that would keep up a good income stream, otherwise I will sell it. For me using the 4% rule, I think I'll need a lot more than I have!!

 

[mscard88]

Personally, I would like to retire in about 7-8 years, around 60. At that time we will sell our house here in Atlanta, and most likely move to Destin. Sell the Conquest, if I still have it then, buy a 182 or something similar if I still want to fly. For us it will be a huge lifestyle change, we are used to traveling first class, flying ourselves wherever we want to go, having a new "demo" instead of owning a car, lots of perks that I will miss from the business. My ideal situation would be to either hire a GM or if one of my children want to take over the business, that would keep up a good income stream, otherwise I will sell it. For me using the 4% rule, I think I'll need a lot more than I have!!

Heck when you sell it make a usage of a free demo every year part of the deal!

 

[Stearman]

Am I the only young person who thinks retirement sounds boring?

 

[mscard88]

Am I the only young person who thinks retirement sounds boring?

Been retired 3 1/2 years, and love it. Not bored at all. Glad to be away from the airline rat race, and especially commuting to it!

 

[JoseCuervo]

Am I the only young person who thinks retirement sounds boring?

Not sure if I am "young", but that is a struggle for me. What I would do to fill up the hours in the day. I can only mow the lawn for a few hours a week, for 9 months of the year. I am not going to suddenly fire my cleaning lady and start cleaning my own toilets.

My dad is 75 and still goes to work every day. He may not be productive every day, but he gets out of the house, dresses nice, and interacts with people.

 

[Checkout_my_Six]

ya but.....

 

[Art VanDelay]

Am I the only young person who thinks retirement sounds boring?

Actually ,no .... I am an old person and I think it sounds terrifying !

 

[Bill]

Am I the only young person who thinks retirement sounds boring?

Whaaaat? When I retire I could hang glide, fly, boat, motorcycle, and camp full time. And, I'd like do volunteer work at least one day a week. Boring? No.

Edit: One of my bigger fears in life is that by the time I can retire, i won't be physically fit enough to do the things I want to do. THAT certainly drives a desire to retire early.

I try to keep on shape, running, biking, lifting at the gym, but I had an issue a few years back that shows no matter how hard you try to stay fit, one can still have issues.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Whaaaat? When I retire I could hang glide, fly, boat, motorcycle, and camp full time. And, I'd like do volunteer work at least one day a week. Boring? No.

Could you do those and extra 40-50-60-70 hours per week, that you currently spend on working, commuting, dressing nicely, etc?

What does "camp full time" end up looking like? Waking up and cooking eggs/bacon on a cast iron pan over a fire or in an RV instead of in teflon coated skillet in a kitchen?

Even "camping" requires an activity to consume the hours....

 

[Bill]

C
What does "camp full time" end up looking like?

OK, you're taking me to literally. I would not do all of those things full time, but between them all, i can certainly fill up most of my available time.

My preferred camping? Tent camping while on motorcycle trips.

 

[JoseCuervo]

OK, you're taking me to literally. I would not do all of those things full time, but between them all, i can certainly fill up most of my available time.

My preferred camping? Tent camping while on motorcycle trips.

Oh, I agree, I love to camp, just bought a new hammock as I am going to try and use it this year on solo backpacking trips instead of a tent. Little lighter, supposed to be more comfortable.

But, "camping" to me means "sleeping and eating outdoors", which, that fills up the 8 hours at night, and the 2 hours of cooking and eating. But then, you have 14 more hours in the day to fill up. I love fishing, but casting for 14 hours would bore me after a couple of days. Hunting keeps me going 3-4 days before I need a mental break.

To have to look at 365 days of "weekends", and fill those hours would be daunting.

 

[ejensen]

Sorry not 75 mil its 750K. Should read what I write.

Actually

Heh. I was thinking you might consider a bigger airplane.

Or several

 

[ejensen]

Oh, I agree, I love to camp, just bought a new hammock as I am going to try and use it this year on solo backpacking trips instead of a tent. Little lighter, supposed to be more comfortable.

But, "camping" to me means "sleeping and eating outdoors", which, that fills up the 8 hours at night, and the 2 hours of cooking and eating. But then, you have 14 more hours in the day to fill up. I love fishing, but casting for 14 hours would bore me after a couple of days. Hunting keeps me going 3-4 days before I need a mental break.

To have to look at 365 days of "weekends", and fill those hours would be daunting.

Try that hammock before you commit. I tried and you're in one tight position all night.

 

[Stearman]

It's not so much that it would be "boring" as that it would be meaningless. Nothing to live for but my own appetites. I'd have to at least do volunteer work or something unpaid that I believed in.

But that's just me. Rock on y'all.

 

[SoCal RV Flyer]

But, "camping" to me means "sleeping and eating outdoors", which, that fills up the 8 hours at night, and the 2 hours of cooking and eating. But then, you have 14 more hours in the day to fill up. I love fishing, but casting for 14 hours would bore me after a couple of days. Hunting keeps me going 3-4 days before I need a mental break.

Hey, there's lots of other things to do. Running away from bears, treating snake bites, making loincloths from animal skins, fashioning an atlatl from a tree branch...

It's not so much that it would be "boring" as that it would be meaningless. Nothing to live for but my own appetites. I'd have to at least do volunteer work or something unpaid that I believed in.

But that's just me. Rock on y'all.

That's the challenge...you have to reinvent yourself a bit. No one said not working was easy.
If you have a job you thoroughly enjoy, keep at it until you drop. Personally, I really like doing the Young Eagles thing, inspiring the future of aviation.

 

[SoonerAviator]

Am I the only young person who thinks retirement sounds boring?

I'm only 33 and would retire now if I had the means. I have so many interests/hobbies that I could fill the time easily. There are hundreds and hundreds of books that I'd love to read, if I just had the time. I'd love to go take some additional college courses in a few areas that interest me. I'd love to go take some courses at the local votech (advanced carpentry/welding). I'd love to take an RV exploring every state in the US and Canada, spending a few weeks in each state. I'd love to complete all manner of aircraft ratings, maybe even build an experimental. I'd love to spend a lot of early mornings fishing and skiing. On and on . . . It's most always a problem of having the time. Retirement provides that.

Sent from my SM-T700 using Tapatalk

 

[X3 Skier]

Am I the only young person who thinks retirement sounds boring?

Been retired 20 years and not a day of boredom. Skiing 4-5 times a week in the winter, cycling in the summer, travel to Europe, Mexico, South America and around the USA, building two airplanes, flying and part time consulting keeps me occupied.

Growing up is giving up.

Cheers

 

[painless]

Must be a fan of M*A*S*H. (The movie, not the series)

Hangar rats at my airport gave me that name. My last name is Orear, so my classmates in dental school naturally called me Rectum.

I like Painless better...

Unless I make a total rectum of myself.......

 

[Ravioli]

http://www.lyricsbox.com/mash-suicide-is-painless-lyrics-kdv9zd1.html

And in the movie, Painless (the dentist) wanted to commit suicide because he couldn't preform is 'manly duties' so they staged a fake suicide for him.

Would you believe the actor who played Painless was also Hymie on Get Smart. <- See what I did there?

 

[JoseCuervo]

Try that hammock before you commit. I tried and you're in one tight position all night.

Already committed, worse case is I give it to someone if I don't like it. Fortunately, I have always been blessed to be able to sleep in any configuration, position,and level of comfort. I have always slept as well on the floor as in an expensive bed.

The funny part of the Hammock is trying to figure out the suspensions from trees. There seems to be a couple of different ways... So, I did a bit of google and came across ...
https://www.hammockforums.net/forum/content.php
A forum dedciated to the hobby/vocation of sleeping 3' off the ground.

Seems to be an active community....

There are currently 452 users online. 112 members and 340 guests

Most users ever online was 4,561, 11-02-2015 at 00:20.

 

[ejensen]

Actually ,no .... I am an old person and I think it sounds terrifying !

v

http://www.lyricsbox.com/mash-suicide-is-painless-lyrics-kdv9zd1.html

And in the movie, Painless (the dentist) wanted to commit suicide because he couldn't preform is 'manly duties' so they staged a fake suicide for him.

Would you believe the actor who played Painless was also Hymie on Get Smart. <- See what I did there?

Painless Pole!

 

[ejensen]

Actually ,no .... I am an old person and I think it sounds terrifying !

v

http://www.lyricsbox.com/mash-suicide-is-painless-lyrics-kdv9zd1.html

And in the movie, Painless (the dentist) wanted to commit suicide because he couldn't preform is 'manly duties' so they staged a fake suicide for him.

Would you believe the actor who played Painless was also Hymie on Get Smart. <- See what I did there?

Painless Pole!

Already committed, worse case is I give it to someone if I don't like it. Fortunately, I have always been blessed to be able to sleep in any configuration, position,and level of comfort. I have always slept as well on the floor as in an expensive bed.

The funny part of the Hammock is trying to figure out the suspensions from trees. There seems to be a couple of different ways... So, I did a bit of google and came across ...
https://www.hammockforums.net/forum/content.php
A forum dedciated to the hobby/vocation of sleeping 3' off the ground.

Seems to be an active community....

I don't have much trouble sleeping but on my back with arms tight to the sides and head and feet up was too much. In Mexico they build them different and use them 90 degree to the ends. Better for me.

 

[Everskyward]

I don't really work that much in my job, especially this past year, but retirement would mean that my time is my own.

 

[wanttaja]

One of my bigger fears in life is that by the time I can retire, i won't be physically fit enough to do the things I want to do. THAT certainly drives a desire to retire early.

This. Had a co-worker hanging on to get a few more months of full paycheck (large family). He suffered an aneurism and it's a good day when he can crawl out of bed.

Going to walk out the door while I still can; get rid of the pressure and concentrate on livin' instead of workin'.

Ron Wanttaja

 

[JoseCuervo]

Retirement was a great idea back 50 years ago.... When people were physically "worn out" and the average life expectancy was 62 years (and Social Security was going to kick in at 65).

And retirement was a great idea when people worked for The Company and got a defined benefit plan (called a Pension back in the day).

We changed society in the last 50 years. We don't physically work as hard, in many cases, we got our life expectancy increased another 20 years.

If you retire "early", in the 55-60 year range, you could be looking at 30 years of having to create entertainment for yourself.

Is there a "moral" obligation for people to be productive for the last 30 years of life, or, are we allowed to be selfish and enjoy the good life?

If your kids are struggling to get by, and you are buying new airplanes, new golf clubs, etc.... is that ok?

If there are less fortunate people in shelters, and you are enjoying country clubs and new cars, is that ok?

I don't see myself retiring early, so I wonder if it is to avoid having to do any moral gymnastics to address the above.

 

[Cap'n Jack]

Yes, I am likely oversimplifying economics, due to the audience reading. When you have someone state "I don't need no fancy data and no stinkin' CPI to tell me that my hamburger will be $25 in a couple of years"... then one must oversimplify.

If you want to see "economic" pain, go into the suburbs when housing prices start deflating. Drive across the middle of America when farm ground and farm commodities start deflating.

When we leverage America to keep our economy growing, you don't have much safety margin for deflation before a lot of pain starts occurring.

The problem is that you over-simplified it to the point that Sac is able to interpret your comments in the way that he has. We've had deflation in the energy sector the past couple of years which has filtered into other aspects of the economy, easing inflation, and even causing commodity prices to fall. The price of fuel and fertilizer has fallen due to the reduction in natural gas prices. This allows deflation to occur in corn, soybean, etc. prices without affecting profitability. The energy sector has been hurt, but the rest of us did better- lower gas prices, heating prices, etc. I live in the middle of America and commodity prices have deflated- not a lot of pain here.

Food prices have gone down a bit- good news for CFIs since I saw ramen noodles at 12/$2.20 (~5/$1) at WalMart, better than 3/$1 a few years ago. Again, you assume deflation is the cause of pain; I showed you a citation where deflation is considered the result of an economic crisis. You still write as if the deflation was the cause.

As for deflation in the suburbs, in recent times, that was due to investors (rather than people looking for a place to live) driving prices up. People trying to flip houses. Both times I waited the bubble out before buying a place to live. When people with modest incomes talk about flipping houses, there's a good chance you are going to see a bubble burst soon. The deflation you mentioned was the market "correcting" itself to a level not driven by "flippers".

When you over-simplify, you really don't have a sound premise anymore. Someone who has lived through a few economic cycles really doesn't need a CPI to know that there will be inflation. $25 burgers in a couple of years? Yeah, if he really said that, it's an exaggeration (I hope). It could happen though, and has happened in some economies. It doesn't do a discussion any good to talk down to people either. I'm sure the audience here can take the more realistic version.

 

[Bob Noel]

If you retire "early", in the 55-60 year range, you could be looking at 30 years of having to create entertainment for yourself.

I accept that challenge!

I've lost energy and enthusiam for work. I'm punching out while I'm still relatively heathly. I watched my Dad's frustration when he wasn't physically able to do much of anything and got a taste of it myself when out on medical leave (twice).

 

[denverpilot]

<deleted accidental post>

 

[denverpilot]

Retirement was a great idea back 50 years ago.... When people were physically "worn out" and the average life expectancy was 62 years (and Social Security was going to kick in at 65).

Everyone born after 1960 is currently required to work to 67. I suspect that will continue to rise.

And retirement was a great idea when people worked for The Company and got a defined benefit plan (called a Pension back in the day).

Almost nobody other than government workers still have those in my generation, and nobody was ever offered one. Old news. Real old.

Not even a majority of my parent's generation (Boomers) had them.

My grandparent's generation had many people who had them who were told the plan was insolvent and wouldn't be sending any more money in their 80s. Including my grandfather.

The family that both offered that pension and allowed it to go insolvent on my grandfather, flies on @Everskyward 's employer's jets. They sold the company to a bigger one and didn't keep their parent's promises to their employees.

The Boomers who make it to 80 who still have pensions might have a similarly bad surprise. Lots of people in charge of those plans may do that.

Especially if Gen-X votes in 20 years not to bail out the programs that are already insolvent today.

20 more years of watching continuous insolvency might be motivation enough to say "no more".

Hard to say.

But again, realistically, pensions haven't been reality for anyone not working for government for more than two generations already.

I've never given a pension any serious thought toward my retirement, ever. If someone asks me to bail out someone else's, I have very little interest in prolonging insolvency.

(Oddly, for professional aviators, pensions held on a little longer than other private sector jobs too. Airlines had them longer than most companies. Those companies that survived all the M&A activity, anyway.)

We changed society in the last 50 years. We don't physically work as hard, in many cases, we got our life expectancy increased another 20 years.

This shows a bit of the crowd you run with. I know a number of folks who's bodies will be "worn out" by their 60s because of their jobs. Huge numbers.

Basically anyone in trades or non-aviation transportation. They work hard. Society didn't change much for them. Society may have changed for you, though.

My neighbor the roofer and handyman isn't working any less hard than the same business owner did 30 years ago. His body and ability won't last much beyond 65. Life expectancy may have risen, but ability to work hasn't in many jobs. A new kind of gap.

If you retire "early", in the 55-60 year range, you could be looking at 30 years of having to create entertainment for yourself.

Or just be drooling on yourself in a nursing care facility. It's very variable.

Is there a "moral" obligation for people to be productive for the last 30 years of life, or, are we allowed to be selfish and enjoy the good life?

If your kids are struggling to get by, and you are buying new airplanes, new golf clubs, etc.... is that ok?

If there are less fortunate people in shelters, and you are enjoying country clubs and new cars, is that ok?

I don't see myself retiring early, so I wonder if it is to avoid having to do any moral gymnastics to address the above.

Those questions are broader than retirement. Morals don't suddenly kick in at retirement age.

More importantly, continuing to work doesn't absolve anyone of answering those questions.

Immoral behavior is immoral, working or not. You can decide while working the answers to all of those questions for yourself just as well as after retirement. You can support the struggling kids, send money to the homeless shelter, or buy new golf clubs or fancy cars at any time. Doesn't matter if you're working or not.

They're not really retirement questions. They're lifelong questions.

Food prices have gone down a bit- good news for CFIs since I saw ramen noodles at 12/$2.20 (~5/$1) at WalMart, better than 3/$1 a few years ago.

Be cautious with food items as economic comparisons.

Most processed food makers lowered portion sizes during the last recession to make pricing stay equal or only go up smaller amounts. Can only compare like for like.

The reality is that inflation doesn't raise and lower all boats equally. Or deflation for that matter.

Fiat currency value moves and prices move, but they don't move at the same time in all markets. Friction.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Holy cow you type nonsense......

Everyone born after 1960 is currently required to work to 67. I suspect that will continue to rise.


.

Where are these mandatory work camps you have been imprisoned into that require forced labor until age 67?
North Korea? Putin's Russia, Trump's Amerikkka?

I will try and read thru the rest of the nonsense, to see if you have more gems like mandatory work until age 67....

 

[denverpilot]

Holy cow you type nonsense......



Where are these mandatory work camps you have been imprisoned into that require forced labor until age 67?
North Korea? Putin's Russia, Trump's Amerikkka?

I will try and read thru the rest of the nonsense, to see if you have more gems like mandatory work until age 67....

Read your own paragraph I was responding to.

You said social security "kicked in at 65" "50 years ago".

SS retirement age for anyone born after 1960 has been 67 since 1983. 34 years ago.

Both your age and your date of enactment were "nonsense" as you say. It wasn't 50 years ago and it wasn't 65 years old.

I said nothing at all about work camps. That's the real "nonsense"' now.

Most adults retire somewhere around the time their SS benefit kicks in.

Anyone 56 or younger today, has been roughly planning 67 as a "retirement age" since the law change in 1983.

 

[Cap'n Jack]

Everyone born after 1960 is currently required to work to 67. I suspect that will continue to rise.
<SNIP>
Be cautious with food items as economic comparisons.

Most processed food makers lowered portion sizes during the last recession to make pricing stay equal or only go up smaller amounts. Can only compare like for like.

The reality is that inflation doesn't raise and lower all boats equally. Or deflation for that matter.

Fiat currency value moves and prices move, but they don't move at the same time in all markets. Friction.

Nate-
I agree with being cautious about food items, and I was attempting to inject a (very small) bit of humor with the raman noodle example. However, I do note that I can buy more with the same money as compared to couple of years ago when we really were in the recession.

I also agree that inflation or deflation doesn't affect every product, nor even every producer of a product in the same way (internal processes play a role too). I suspect we are on the same side of the discussion, and you help to make my point that Jose is over-simplifying economic theory.

 

[Tom-D]

when you think of retirement, do you believe that you won't work any more? I do things that I get paid for that I once did full time. Twice my hobby has turned into a business.
My feelings are, you must have some thing to do to fill your day.

 

[wayne]

Retirement was a great idea back 50 years ago.... When people were physically "worn out" and the average life expectancy was 62 years (and Social Security was going to kick in at 65).

And retirement was a great idea when people worked for The Company and got a defined benefit plan (called a Pension back in the day).

We changed society in the last 50 years. We don't physically work as hard, in many cases, we got our life expectancy increased another 20 years.

If you retire "early", in the 55-60 year range, you could be looking at 30 years of having to create entertainment for yourself.

Is there a "moral" obligation for people to be productive for the last 30 years of life, or, are we allowed to be selfish and enjoy the good life?

If your kids are struggling to get by, and you are buying new airplanes, new golf clubs, etc.... is that ok?

If there are less fortunate people in shelters, and you are enjoying country clubs and new cars, is that ok?

I don't see myself retiring early, so I wonder if it is to avoid having to do any moral gymnastics to address the above.

Many are still worn out, but not as many. Many/most are not ready financially to retire at 55, if ever. They spend as much if not more than they make and save little to nothing. I have a lack of sympathy for those that don't plan for the future. It's not just the low income folks in that situation, there are many making excellent incomes that have little to no safety net, and most of what they do have is credit, not money.

I don't know that anyone ever has a moral obligation to be productive. I think they have an obligation not to be a burden on society, but they don't need to be productive.

Yes, it's ok to be buying "new stuff" while the kids are struggling, if by that you mean they can't "buy everything they want"/"get instant gratification at any moment, for anything". If on the other hand they are truly having trouble making ends meet I would certainly help my kids. That might mean explaining that they have to downsize the McMansion and stop buying new cars every two years; but then my kids know better than that already and two of them are in college. I'm not going to fund an extravagant lifestyle for them though, just because I can spend money on myself.

"less fortunate"? Really? So while others were spending their money going out, traveling, buying new stuff and I was spending mine on new computers and my time working on developing new software and investing my money in a home and not buying new cars every few years, I was just "lucky"? And their misspent youth was just "unlucky"? Sorry, I'm really tired of the "less fortunate" nonsense. My luck was being born to parents that gave a damn. My father was in the Navy, then went to college while he worked and raised two kids. There were no country clubs for us. We did almost all of our car repairs and home repairs ourselves, plus worked in building one of our homes. I was not born rich, or even well off.

That said, my wife and I give significant amounts of money and time each year to charities.

I have no problem planning to spend my time traveling and enjoying hobbies in my retirement.