Like he** I'm going to pay these prices! (Boston, Worcester: to buy, good schools)

[msRB311]

MIT gives employees a pension in addition to a 401k.

https://hr.mit.edu/benefits/retirement/pension

[brightdoglover]

Partners Healthcare has a pension along with the 403b. A huge employer.

[mdovell]

Originally Posted by massnative71

Here is the latest local aid distribution.



https://budget.digital.mass.gov/govb...y22/local-aid/


Concord gets a total of $3,797,771 in Chapter 70 aid, which by my calculations is just under $3,000 per pupil. Their total per pupil expenditure in 2019 was $23,573.40. That means the town still has to come up with over $20,000 per student. And due to receiving METCO students, Concord gets a higher amount of Chapter 70 aid than some other wealthy towns. Now take a family with two kids moving in, $20K X 2 = $40K. Just for the cost to schools alone. You are out of your mind if you think a typical new home is going to bring in that amount in new taxes. It's not even close. There is zero incentive for a town like Concord to zone for new housing that is not 55+.


I agree that school costs are out of control in Mass., but a big problem is the special ed and other unfunded mandates coming from above that local districts have almost zero control over.

Some of this gets a bit complicated though.

https://concordma.gov/DocumentCenter...ALYSIS-FY-2021

4.3 million lost by granting abatements.
2.3 million lost by going from taxable to exempt

6.6 million lost total...but total tax value is 6.6 billion any attempts to try to go after this is insignificant to the bottom line.

https://concord.wickedlocal.com/phot...20since%202011.

Average house value is 1.1 million. Average tax bill is $15K. Of course two kids are going to be well beyond what you said.

https://www.doe.mass.edu/finance/sta...chool-ppx.xlsx

Average teacher salary is at least 95K. High school over 100K. It's also one of the top districts in the state. Concord, Lexington, Wellesley, Westwood, Dedham, Milton etc there's about eight that constantly compete with one another. Foreign exchange students also pay in but during covid I doubt any exist. I've heard from a few people that are on visas that employers are just not hiring for them.

Special ed costs quite a bit and I think that most teachers will pretty much agree on it even if they don't teach it. The bureaucracy for a IEP alone...districts can also be on the hook for homeless children even if they don't live there. Say one was from Dedham and somehow ended up in Lowell. Dedham can actually be charged to transport the kid from Lowell.

In larger districts transportation costs come from choices. A district can have neighborhood schools (which I grew up with and can sympathize) and choice with magnet and vocational schools. Suppose in Boston a kid from East Boston wants to go to one in Roxbury or Hyde Park to Charlestown...it can happen. The conflict can be strong and ugly at the same time. These are easily half an hour rides each way.

The state pays at least 17.5% of a per student (I don't like pupil there is a difference) tuition.
https://www.wgbh.org/news/education/...or-its-schools

I know some that hate charter schools. Busing can get charged to public but they can't get msba grants. The argument is that they don't take special ed students for the most part. Well to be frank vocational school usually don't either. Larger districts often can have more in resources and smaller ones are much harder to get services.

[mdovell]

Originally Posted by AtkinsonDan

Pensions are not as prevalent as they were for the prior two generations. Many people in the boomer generation can't afford to retire.

Pensions for public are still around. 11% vs social security 6.25%. For non profits and private it is much harder to find.

Baby boomers have retired. It's 2021. If you take the 1945-1965 range that means on early retirement say 62 was 2007. If we take it at age 67 that takes us to 2032 for the last ones.

Now generation X..I don't think any will be retiring in 2028 (age 62 born in 1966)

I was in retail from about 2004-2008. I worked with many..many retirees doing work part time but after awhile they had to stop. If you work beyond a given point they start taxing social security and it nullifies the point of working.

Personally I rather have a gradual retirement over 3-5 years. The cliff concept doesn't sound nice.

[masssachoicetts]

Originally Posted by mdovell

Pensions for public are still around. 11% vs social security 6.25%. For non profits and private it is much harder to find.

Baby boomers have retired. It's 2021. If you take the 1945-1965 range that means on early retirement say 62 was 2007. If we take it at age 67 that takes us to 2032 for the last ones.

Now generation X..I don't think any will be retiring in 2028 (age 62 born in 1966)

I was in retail from about 2004-2008. I worked with many..many retirees doing work part time but after awhile they had to stop. If you work beyond a given point they start taxing social security and it nullifies the point of working.

Personally I rather have a gradual retirement over 3-5 years. The cliff concept doesn't sound nice.

Of my 30+ aunts and uncles, where all but one is a baby boomer... 3 have fully retired. 3/32sh.

So where you getting that boomers are fully retired? Would love to see that stat

[GeoffD]

Originally Posted by masssachoicetts

Of my 30+ aunts and uncles, where all but one is a baby boomer... 3 have fully retired. 3/32sh.

So where you getting that boomers are fully retired? Would love to see that stat

The oldest boomers are 75. The labor force participation rate for 65-74 is 32%. It was 20% twenty years ago. Far fewer have pensions. Only 20% have a household net worth of over $1 million including home equity.

Most early boomers are retired. The youngest boomers are 57. They’re still working. You get to 50% retired for men at age 65. That is up several years from twenty years ago. Women are a couple of years younger.

I’d guess almost half of all boomers are still working.

[mdovell]

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ameri...145837368.html

If you actually think that 75 year olds are still working and keep in mind that life expectancy is only about 78 years you would be incorrect. You're older Baby Boomers have retired their younger ones which are only in their mid-50s obviously aren't.

Now of course retirement means different things to different people and if somebody has a side gig does that count as appearing as full-time work or not? If someone has a side business or has rental income or some additional form of investment income coming in should that look like work or not?

[id77]

Originally Posted by mdovell

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ameri...145837368.html

If you actually think that 75 year olds are still working and keep in mind that life expectancy is only about 78 years you would be incorrect. You're older Baby Boomers have retired their younger ones which are only in their mid-50s obviously aren't.

Now of course retirement means different things to different people and if somebody has a side gig does that count as appearing as full-time work or not? If someone has a side business or has rental income or some additional form of investment income coming in should that look like work or not?

The way I've read their rules, the IRS considers any level or amount of employment as "still working" as long as it's all year long (no seasonal jobs) for the purposes of things like RMD on IRAs and 401ks. I'm basically reading that as you have to be getting income via W2 or 1099, though all of the investment 1099s (B, DIV, INT, etc) don't apply obviously as if someone could claim 1099-DIV income as 'still working' a lot more people would be exploiting the rules to throw more money in retirement accounts even after they've stopped working or to delay RMDs.

Not sure if that's how the Census Bureau also looks at it though. I actually imagine their data is largely collected just by asking people, so they probably get some responses that may not be entirely accurate.

[bigfatdude]

Anyone in Boston with a 401K and a condo who has worked for over 10 years is most likely a millionaire on paper.

Originally Posted by msRB311

no one here will understand...they're all millionaires.

[bigfatdude]

Supply and demand my good friend! Get a bunch of communisms on the books that make construction extremely expensive for developers and throw in a bunch of screeching NIMBYs which makes supply minuscule, add insane demand and that's how you get 300sqft basement closets selling for a cool half million. Keep demanding more communisms and give more control to NIMBYs as comrade Wuskin has promised and that basement closet will be a whole million before you know it.

Originally Posted by Boston Shudra

I've been living at home for about a year and a half now. At first it was to save money while I looked for a job. Then soon after finding one, the pandemic hit, and I figured it'd be good to hunker down where I was. Now, I'm starting to look around again and seeing the options available to me feels like hearing the punchline of a sick and twisted joke.

I really don't want to rent for a few reasons. For one, I feel like I'm going to be in the area for the foreseeable future. So why not buy a place that I can sell back later on? For another, paying rent feels like throwing money into the wind. The last thing I want to do is pay some unemployed shmuk tens of thousands of dollars a year for a single room in the working-class housing that his grandparents built a century ago before the Fair Labor Standards Act for peanuts and pocket change.

So, I'm looking around at condos for sale on Zillow (I like the idea of a condo over a house because I don't need the space and they seem to require less upkeep), and all I'm seeing are places like this:

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/6...56073292_zpid/

Like, are you KIDDING ME?! Not only does it seem to lack any modern amenities (in-unit laundry, central air, etc.), it's assessed value is 146k compared to the asking price of 280k and it sold for 135k in 2017! It's in Lynn, and the nearest schools are all ranked abysmally. It's MILES from downtown, and not even a very comfortable walk to the Swampscott commuter rail station.

Or take this one in Somerville. Remember that "working class housing built for peanuts and pocket change" I mentioned earlier?

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/2...13388443_zpid/

At least this one has central air, but OVER HALF A MILLION!? For 875 SQUARE FEET!? It sold for just 285k in 2011!

And these last 2 examples aren't the exception to the rule. I practically just picked two listings at random!

Best option I can see for myself at this point is to continue living with my parents for 3-5 years and pray I can find a job somewhere else in the country where I won't be spending my entire income to be able to live in a shack. Doing so means that I'll have to put off any thoughts of getting married or having kids for that duration. I can't believe that people find the state of affairs in the area acceptable. It's a disgrace!