Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-10-2015, 05:07 AM
 
Location: Elsewhere
88,224 posts, read 84,144,315 times
Reputation: 114530

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
one of the reasons we did not move to where we had our potential retirement home in the pocono mountains was the fact if i wanted to work there was nothing but very low paying tourism jobs or local stores.

it was all well and good the area was cheaper than where we were in nyc but there was a big price to pay and lack of a public transportation system if we couldn't drive , lack of medical specialists and facilities and the biggie unable to find meaningful paying work if i wanted had us rule out retiring there.

i have had so many part time offers from competitors and reps in my field to work part time if i get bored. even my own company wants me to do technical training a day or 2 a week if we are not traveling .

being able to find work in retirement that pays decently can be a plus to an area .
Exactly. While I'm obviously still within commuting distance of the city, I'm still 47 miles away (I know you're in Queens, Mathjak, so you can understand that this is train distance. If I could fly over the water it would be a lot shorter!) and near the shore area, so I'm on the outer edges of the metro business world. I would resign myself to continuing the commute for a few more years if a job in the city is worth it.

My sister lives in the Poconos. No, not much there. She worked most of her life at various horse stables and then as a store manager. She had a stroke at 61 that left her with a weak leg and took SS at 62. They hunt and grow much of their food and heat with a wood stove, so she'll survive!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-10-2015, 05:13 AM
 
Location: Suburbia
8,820 posts, read 15,261,453 times
Reputation: 4522
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdflk View Post
ahhhh, but she can try

If the days are paid days off....take them.
Any day my employer pays me for that I don't have to work....I won't be there....

I know it's a totally different conversation and different "Pot" of days, but in 19 years, thank G-d I've been blessed with good health and never called out sick. But I'm sure we all know co-workers who use those those toward the end of the year -- when it's HIGHLY unlikely they're sick. When we retire we ARE paid for unused vacation and CTO -- but not sick days. I gotta tell ya that last year I'm gonna have to pray hard about using my sick days even if I'm not. Not that I want to -- you know -- inconvenience the co workers who'll have to fill me shifts -- but......I want those days off. I am actually quite adamant that people shouldn't use sick days as personal days, or call out when they're not truly sick. So well see if I can continue to live up to my own standard.
Three days a year may be used as personal leave. Sure sick leave can be used, but one would have to then be "sick" at least ten days out of the school year just to use up the leave earned and break even. She feels no guilt being out from time to time, but more often than not it's more work being absent than being there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2015, 07:11 AM
 
Location: Jamestown, NY
7,840 posts, read 9,157,947 times
Reputation: 13779
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
Every time frame always has those that were forced in to retirement one way or another .

But if that was getting worse the average age would be dropping not getting longer. or getting really pushed out as those with jobs had to work much longer but 62 really is right in the early retirement time frame still.

So i think that what the poll shows is while folks think they can't retire when push comes to shove they find a way.

For as bad as the media portays things and how few can retire the poll is a positive in that it shows one way or another they are and even those who stilL are working are pulling the plug earlier than they thought.
I think that the media assumes that most Americans have upper middle class lifestyles and live in high COL areas like the East and West Coasts. Consequently, they figure that that most Americans will need retirement nest eggs big enough to support those assumptions. You see this mindset in just about every single commercial for retirement planning and hear it from all the retirement "gurus" all the time.

With the median US household income between $50 and $55k, most Americans are barely living middle class lifestyles, and most people do not live in the pricey coastal metros, either. Never having had two new cars at the same time or a brand new 3000 square foot house or a vacation home in the mountains or at the shore, most Americans are not going to miss those things when they retire, and so they don't need the very large retirement nest eggs the media thinks they need.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2015, 07:41 AM
 
Location: Los Angeles area
14,017 posts, read 20,854,783 times
Reputation: 32530
Quote:
Originally Posted by Linda_d View Post
I think that the media assumes that most Americans have upper middle class lifestyles and live in high COL areas like the East and West Coasts. Consequently, they figure that that most Americans will need retirement nest eggs big enough to support those assumptions. You see this mindset in just about every single commercial for retirement planning and hear it from all the retirement "gurus" all the time.

With the median US household income between $50 and $55k, most Americans are barely living middle class lifestyles, and most people do not live in the pricey coastal metros, either. Never having had two new cars at the same time or a brand new 3000 square foot house or a vacation home in the mountains or at the shore, most Americans are not going to miss those things when they retire, and so they don't need the very large retirement nest eggs the media thinks they need.
I have posted variations on your thought a number of times. Your post is perhaps more coherent and better expressed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2015, 07:46 AM
 
31,672 posts, read 40,940,324 times
Reputation: 14419
Quote:
Originally Posted by Linda_d View Post
I think that the media assumes that most Americans have upper middle class lifestyles and live in high COL areas like the East and West Coasts. Consequently, they figure that that most Americans will need retirement nest eggs big enough to support those assumptions. You see this mindset in just about every single commercial for retirement planning and hear it from all the retirement "gurus" all the time.

With the median US household income between $50 and $55k, most Americans are barely living middle class lifestyles, and most people do not live in the pricey coastal metros, either. Never having had two new cars at the same time or a brand new 3000 square foot house or a vacation home in the mountains or at the shore, most Americans are not going to miss those things when they retire, and so they don't need the very large retirement nest eggs the media thinks they need.
Yes and Yes, most of the articles originate in financial publications and or are marketing campaigns to get people to invest with them. Clearly their targets are those with the money to invest as that is their intended and or subscribed audience. What happens is that USA Today, Yahoo etc picks up on these articles and distributes them to far more than the intended audience. The YOU in the article changes from the original target to a much broader audience as it gets redistributed. Pure research based articles are as you also say targeting a similar audience to the researchers and research centers publishing the article. Then you have the broader based articles by intent that talk about how many won't be able to retire. Those are often written by PHD's etc with a wider range of retirement options than the Joe average they are writing about. The best answer on how much any of us as a YOU needs to retire can best be found in looking around us at folks with similar paths and seeing how many of them made it. Also a absolutely wonderful resource is the data section of city data. Example the median income in Wake County NC I believe is about 67K per year and Wake is a popular retirement destination. The income range within in the county varies. If others can work and live there on that amount another could certainly retire on that amount.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2015, 10:33 AM
 
Location: SW Florida
14,871 posts, read 12,012,506 times
Reputation: 24656
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdflk View Post
ahhhh, but she can try

If the days are paid days off....take them.
Any day my employer pays me for that I don't have to work....I won't be there....

I know it's a totally different conversation and different "Pot" of days, but in 19 years, thank G-d I've been blessed with good health and never called out sick. But I'm sure we all know co-workers who use those those toward the end of the year -- when it's HIGHLY unlikely they're sick. When we retire we ARE paid for unused vacation and CTO -- but not sick days. I gotta tell ya that last year I'm gonna have to pray hard about using my sick days even if I'm not. Not that I want to -- you know -- inconvenience the co workers who'll have to fill me shifts -- but......I want those days off. I am actually quite adamant that people shouldn't use sick days as personal days, or call out when they're not truly sick. So well see if I can continue to live up to my own standard.
I can sympathize with you about wanting to use up any leave- even sick time, that you accrue over the eons you've worked with that company. I also very seldom used sick time before I retired, and as a result had almost 700 hours of sick time. I figured I could have been "sick" for about 4 months or so before I retired if I were inclined to, but didn't.. My employer's policy was to pay a retiree, or someone leaving their employment for 25% of their unused sick leave, but nor more than I think it was 250 hours.
So I did get that.

I also wondered if your company had any type of policy where you might be able to donate your unused sick leave, either to a co-worker who might be in need, or to a "sick leave pool". My employer had a "sick leave pool" which allowed employees who had used their own sick leave to take from on a case by case basis- required their manager's or department head's prior approval. To join that an employee had to donate 8 hours to the pool and still have about 40 hours left. Occasionally as the hours were used they'd ask for another 8 hours donation. I thought it was a great idea but they did disband that pool eventually ( at least for a while) because they said people were taking advantage of it- and this might well be a problem.

I knew I wouldn't be able to use my 700 hours of sick time before I retired, and wouldn't be paid for all of it, and we had a co-worker in need of as much sick time as she could get. She wasn't a slacker by any means, had been there for a number of years and worked hard, but she got pregnant and apparently had a placenta previa that nearly killed both her and her baby, who was born about 3 months prematurely. So she used up her vacation and sick time, and still had a premie who needed a lot of care. They had a program where one could donate sick time ( under the supervision and approval of management) to an employee who needed it, and while I know there were others who also donated sick time, I figured what the heck, I won't be using it. So I was able to donate 4 weeks ( 160 hours) to her, which was a drop in the bucket of what I had. I offered to donate more if she needed more, but as it turned out, she didn't.

I was happy to be able to donate that much time, that we had a program in place to do it ( not all companies do), and that the sick time I had left wouldn't all go "poof" into oblivion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2015, 04:23 PM
 
Location: SW Florida
14,871 posts, read 12,012,506 times
Reputation: 24656
Quote:
Originally Posted by Linda_d View Post
I think that the media assumes that most Americans have upper middle class lifestyles and live in high COL areas like the East and West Coasts. Consequently, they figure that that most Americans will need retirement nest eggs big enough to support those assumptions. You see this mindset in just about every single commercial for retirement planning and hear it from all the retirement "gurus" all the time.

With the median US household income between $50 and $55k, most Americans are barely living middle class lifestyles, and most people do not live in the pricey coastal metros, either. Never having had two new cars at the same time or a brand new 3000 square foot house or a vacation home in the mountains or at the shore, most Americans are not going to miss those things when they retire, and so they don't need the very large retirement nest eggs the media thinks they need.


Exactly! And I bet they don't think they're martyrs if they don't get to retire at 55, either.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2015, 04:31 PM
 
106,059 posts, read 108,035,793 times
Reputation: 79628
Folks live on just social security in many areas. Humans are adaptable.

What differences in income and savings give you are more choices and as much as we have we will just keep adding more and more choices and options.

But depending on the area the basics can be had for a lot less.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2015, 05:11 PM
 
31,672 posts, read 40,940,324 times
Reputation: 14419
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
Folks live on just social security in many areas. Humans are adaptable.

What differences in income and savings give you are more choices and as much as we have we will just keep adding more and more choices and options.

But depending on the area the basics can be had for a lot less.
Yes and those either living on or on track to live on just SS probably aren't reading the original source of most financial retirement articles.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2015, 08:19 PM
 
Location: Suburbia
8,820 posts, read 15,261,453 times
Reputation: 4522
Quote:
Originally Posted by Travelassie View Post
I can sympathize with you about wanting to use up any leave- even sick time, that you accrue over the eons you've worked with that company. I also very seldom used sick time before I retired, and as a result had almost 700 hours of sick time. I figured I could have been "sick" for about 4 months or so before I retired if I were inclined to, but didn't.. My employer's policy was to pay a retiree, or someone leaving their employment for 25% of their unused sick leave, but nor more than I think it was 250 hours.
So I did get that.

I also wondered if your company had any type of policy where you might be able to donate your unused sick leave, either to a co-worker who might be in need, or to a "sick leave pool". My employer had a "sick leave pool" which allowed employees who had used their own sick leave to take from on a case by case basis- required their manager's or department head's prior approval. To join that an employee had to donate 8 hours to the pool and still have about 40 hours left. Occasionally as the hours were used they'd ask for another 8 hours donation. I thought it was a great idea but they did disband that pool eventually ( at least for a while) because they said people were taking advantage of it- and this might well be a problem.

I knew I wouldn't be able to use my 700 hours of sick time before I retired, and wouldn't be paid for all of it, and we had a co-worker in need of as much sick time as she could get. She wasn't a slacker by any means, had been there for a number of years and worked hard, but she got pregnant and apparently had a placenta previa that nearly killed both her and her baby, who was born about 3 months prematurely. So she used up her vacation and sick time, and still had a premie who needed a lot of care. They had a program where one could donate sick time ( under the supervision and approval of management) to an employee who needed it, and while I know there were others who also donated sick time, I figured what the heck, I won't be using it. So I was able to donate 4 weeks ( 160 hours) to her, which was a drop in the bucket of what I had. I offered to donate more if she needed more, but as it turned out, she didn't.

I was happy to be able to donate that much time, that we had a program in place to do it ( not all companies do), and that the sick time I had left wouldn't all go "poof" into oblivion.
That's not bad. We don't get any pay for unused sick leave, although we can accrue it with no limit.

We used to have a sick leave bank. They got rid of it when they started up short term and long term disability plans. STD provides salary replacement if the employee has been disabled for more than 20 continuous workdays. So I guess it's a good idea to build up at least 20 days. After that time, the employee will automatically be transferred to the STD program. After that long term disability kicks in. If employees are receiving payment from the short-term disability (STD) program and the claim is approaching the end of the five-month STD period, they automatically transition the disability claim to the long-term disability (LTD) program to determine if they are eligible to collect additional benefits. The program pays 66 2/3 percent of pay if employees continue to be disabled after 180 days which coincides with the end of STD payments.

Right now I have about 130 days saved up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:58 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top