Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It does not. I related my experience . It is offensive to call other's experiences, in the context of this discussion here, an "anecdote".
Hopefully that was not your intent.
I don't argue against saving - just the opposite. I saved very aggressively, semi-retired at 40 and fully retired well before 50 with a solid 8-figure net wealth. (The only reason I didn't retire earlier is I'm a father - and all fathers are role models to their children - both about what type of person to become as an adult, and what type of spouse to look for as a life partner. I didn't want the role model to be someone who doesn't work.)
But let's be clear: the MSN article, in BIG BOLD LETTERS says "OPINION: Why we all should save like we're going to retire early"
This article isn't a report - it is a self proclaimed opinion piece. Moreover, the author retired at age 38 (her husband at 42). She hawks a book on early retirement and has a advertisement supported blog on early retirement.
That is, far from being a dispassionate analytical look at the real world - the author definitely has a horse in this race, so to speak.
Let's look at the underlying source of data used by the author:
* The Economic Policy Institute. This is a biased source that has a heavy paternalistic SJW theme. Its "about" tab doesn't refer to policy analysis or data analysis or data collection; rather it advocates its own non-free-market view: "EPI believes every working person deserves a good job with fair pay, affordable health care, and retirement security."
* The Urban Institute. "The Urban Institute was established in 1968 by the Lyndon B. Johnson administration to study the nation's urban problems..." It is far from unbiased, and it solutions to urban problems always involve - surprise - more federal dollars, government oversight, regulatory apparatus and bureaucracy.
The underlying data analyzed is from the Health and Retirement Study, or HRS. HRS is self-reported survey data. "Since 1992, the study has followed a nationally representative sample of about 20,000 people from the time they turn 50 through the rest of their lives." That's a good data set. However, it is self-reported data. If I'm fired for cause, maybe I'll just report I was laid off. Or maybe I'll report I was the victim of age discrimination. Or maybe I'll report nothing whatsoever because I'm ashamed to have been fired for cause. None of the data come from corporate databases nor from employer required reporting - it is all self reported and hence subject to its own set of biases. Maybe I was offered a job at an increased salary but it would require moving & uprooting my family, so I don't take it. Do I report that? Maybe. Maybe not.
Then, there is the actual study itself:
We focused on workers who enter their 50s with stable, full-time jobs and who’ve been with the same employer for at least five years — those who HRS data and other economic studies show are least likely to encounter employment problems. We considered only separations that result in at least six months of unemployment or at least a 50 percent drop in earnings from pre-separation levels.
That is, their data will give the following conclusions: it sucks to be over age 50, lose your job, and be out of work for at least 6 months or have at least a 50% drop in earnings. Big whoop-dee-doo.
They exclude the over-50 person who lost her job, and found a new job within 6 months. Or who found a new job with a pay increase. etc.
I agree that we all should save. I agree that it sux to be over 50 and lose your job.
But there is nothing new in that.
I'm not a fan of most left-wing think tanks, either. But her point is well made and grounded in practicality. You can find other less biased sources that show a similar, if less exaggerated picture.
No doubt it's an opinion piece. It's an opinion that I believe is largely correct and based on fact, even if her sources aren't the best.
It does not. I related my experience . It is offensive to call other's experiences, in the context of this discussion here, an "anecdote".
Hopefully that was not your intent.
Using our life experiences to try to prove something that involves millions of people IS using anecdotes. If you want to take offense, that's your choice. I certainly didn't intend to offend, but I'm not walking around on eggshells, either. Yes, anecdotes drawn from life experience are necessary and useful starting points, but they often lead to incorrect conclusions and assumptions.
The main problems I see with actually retiring early is -
What do you do about health insurance for you and your family? Also, you will eliminate or greatly reduce benefits like social security, pension and employer match of 401k. Even employer sponsored life insurance.
That is too much to give up so early on in life, unless you're so wealthy that none of these things will matter to you.
The main problems I see with actually retiring early is -
What do you do about health insurance for you and your family? Also, you will eliminate or greatly reduce benefits like social security, pension and employer match of 401k. Even employer sponsored life insurance.
That is too much to give up so early on in life, unless you're so wealthy that none of these things will matter to you.
I retired at 61, so not that early, but...
Health insurance is a biggie. When I retired, DH was Medicare-eligible and my only child, DS, had a good job with benefits. I spent more than I would have expected on health insurance till Medicare kicked in; luckily, I was very healthy and the giant deductibles weren't an issue.
Pension? what pension? I was vested in a couple of small ones and consider myself lucky, but had been downsized out of one company and had had the other pension frozen after my company was acquired. No additional benefit from working longer.
Life insurance- didn't need it. DH would have been fine on what we had saved, plus his SS.
SS- the formula is heavily weighted in favor of low earners. I was making the SS max during the last 20+ years of my career and working another 4 years would have increased my monthly benefit by $50/month. Before taxes.
401(k) match and savings in general: yes, you have to look at that- you're now in spending mode. In my case I decided it was feasible and haven't looked back.
The main problems I see with actually retiring early is -
What do you do about health insurance for you and your family? Also, you will eliminate or greatly reduce benefits like social security, pension and employer match of 401k. Even employer sponsored life insurance.
That is too much to give up so early on in life, unless you're so wealthy that none of these things will matter to you.
I’ve paid for my own health insurance since I was 24. I’ve never had an employer so it has always been on me.
In my experience, anecdotal evidence is more reliable than statistics.
Hopefully this was intended as a joke. Of course your anecdotes are more reliable than stats......what if we compare stats to Bill Gates anecdotes.....which one is more reliable then? “All my friends have Rolls Royce’s so....I don’t see why people have trouble paying their mortgages....
I’ve paid for my own health insurance since I was 24. I’ve never had an employer so it has always been on me.
Your Dad hooked you up...let’s not pretend you’re some zero to hero entrepreneur
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I was vested in a couple of small ones and consider myself lucky, but had been downsized out of one company and had had the other pension frozen after my company was acquired. No additional benefit from working longer.
