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 03-23-2017, 11:00 AM
 
61 posts, read 45,518 times
Reputation: 234

Advertisements

Yes, I am one of the few 30 and out beneficiaries. But, truly, although if I live to 86 (seems a good bet as Mom is going to celebrate her 90th in June and still lives on her own) I will break even on work/retirement balance, it's not all about the $$ in and $$ out. For me, when I took retirement at 54 I didn't feel like I would fit in as "retired", so I had a FT job lined up before the candles went out on the retirement party cake. Now, 11 years later, I am still working PT and feel like it is a good fit for me. It is about where you feel comfortable as well as what you can afford. Just my .02!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-23-2017, 11:04 AM
 
Location: USA
1,818 posts, read 2,679,551 times
Reputation: 4173
Quote:
Originally Posted by maciesmom View Post
I think these examples will be fewer and fewer. Very few private companies offer pensions anymore - particularly those that include healthcare coverage. People are working FT until at least 65, if not 70, to get healthcare and max out SS benefits. If one works from 22 - 65, they'd have to live until 108.


So many of the jobs that used to offer great benefits (GM, postal service to name just a couple), years ago instituted the "tier" wage scale for those of us near the end of the baby boom years and after. The wages are not what earlier workers made, nor are the pensions and/or benefits anywhere close. Unless you start saving with the first penny you ever earned, you are stuck working until Medicare an/or age 70 (or beyond)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2017, 11:40 AM
 
4,315 posts, read 3,975,513 times
Reputation: 7796
Many posters stated they worked after retirement.


However, I consider one retired if they are drawing a retirement check from their employer where they worked most of their careers.


Teachers and state workers who have " rule of 90"


Graduate college at age 22 and work 34 years until age 56.


Thus at age 90 they will have drawn a retirement check for 34 years and have worked in their profession 34 years.


Military retirees will probably rack up more years but I'll bet it is harder for many to live on a military retirement check compared to a teacher or other state employees' retirement check.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2017, 11:47 AM
 
Location: Tennessee
37,767 posts, read 40,889,365 times
Reputation: 62061
If you are in a law enforcement career with the federal government, you can retire after 20 years and at age 50, not 30 years at age 55 like other feds.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2017, 12:57 PM
 
Location: Elsewhere
88,282 posts, read 84,257,762 times
Reputation: 114621
Quote:
Originally Posted by David A Stone View Post
Many posters stated they worked after retirement.


However, I consider one retired if they are drawing a retirement check from their employer where they worked most of their careers.


Teachers and state workers who have " rule of 90"


Graduate college at age 22 and work 34 years until age 56.


Thus at age 90 they will have drawn a retirement check for 34 years and have worked in their profession 34 years.


Military retirees will probably rack up more years but I'll bet it is harder for many to live on a military retirement check compared to a teacher or other state employees' retirement check.
I am a person like that. There was no "rule of 90", but as I stated earlier, if you had 30 years and you were 55, you could retire without a penalty. I had 37 years when I retired at 57. I worked for a public transportation agency that is in a state pension plan. The pension is based on your final average salary, which is your three highest consecutive years. Then there's a formula based on your years of service. In the end, I get 67% of my FAS. Whether you can live on it or not depends upon your salary, your years of service--and whether you take an option that involves another person surviving you, such as your spouse. I took a single allowance, the highest available, since I am long divorced and have no spouse, and the payments end when I die.

So, I am retired. But I work part-time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2017, 01:36 PM
 
Location: TN/NC
34,932 posts, read 31,062,157 times
Reputation: 47307
Quote:
Originally Posted by David A Stone View Post
Many posters stated they worked after retirement.

However, I consider one retired if they are drawing a retirement check from their employer where they worked most of their careers.

Teachers and state workers who have " rule of 90"

Graduate college at age 22 and work 34 years until age 56.

Thus at age 90 they will have drawn a retirement check for 34 years and have worked in their profession 34 years.

Military retirees will probably rack up more years but I'll bet it is harder for many to live on a military retirement check compared to a teacher or other state employees' retirement check.
Many younger teachers and government employees are not getting the sweetheart deals that many of the current generation retirees received.

An ex of mine's mother was a state employee in TN, hardly a generous pension state, started sometime between 18-22 back in the late 70s or 1980. Worked for 30+ years, died at 54 a few years back. She specified her daughter to have survivor's benefits, and that benefit persists for life. Due to her mother's fairly low salary, it's a fairly low benefit, about $600/month, but I think my ex was 23 or 24 when this happened.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2017, 01:51 PM
 
Location: Elsewhere
88,282 posts, read 84,257,762 times
Reputation: 114621
Quote:
Originally Posted by Serious Conversation View Post
Many younger teachers and government employees are not getting the sweetheart deals that many of the current generation retirees received.

An ex of mine's mother was a state employee in TN, hardly a generous pension state, started sometime between 18-22 back in the late 70s or 1980. Worked for 30+ years, died at 54 a few years back. She specified her daughter to have survivor's benefits, and that benefit persists for life. Due to her mother's fairly low salary, it's a fairly low benefit, about $600/month, but I think my ex was 23 or 24 when this happened.
The people in the tiers after mine no longer have the 30-year/retire at 55 without penalty option. They have to work to 62 to get their full pension. Can retire at 55 with a reduced benefit. Employees no longer stay that long at jobs, so I think there will be fewer of them overall anyway.

But the biggest difference between me and and the ones who come after me is in the health benefits. We always got primo health insurance paid for in full. That was until 2010, or 2011, when they told us we had to start contributing. We were eased into paying more and more gradually over four years. However, for people like me who started after a certain date, we took the health benefits with us when we retired, at no cost. I think the cutoff was that you had to have 25 years by a certain date. That was quite a blow to people who had, say, 22 years. I believe that there is a gradual cost for them, that they won't pay the whole thing in retirement but will pay a percentage. But that health benefit is what kept many of us working there for so many years, even through pay freezes and political upheavals and other benefits being taken away.

I don't entirely trust these politicians not to take away my health benefits or reduce them in some way now that I'm retired. I'm not an idiot. But for now, it's nice to have those benefits until I turn 65 and Medicare kicks in. Then it will be my secondary.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2017, 02:20 PM
 
Location: TN/NC
34,932 posts, read 31,062,157 times
Reputation: 47307
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mightyqueen801 View Post
The people in the tiers after mine no longer have the 30-year/retire at 55 without penalty option. They have to work to 62 to get their full pension. Can retire at 55 with a reduced benefit. Employees no longer stay that long at jobs, so I think there will be fewer of them overall anyway.

But the biggest difference between me and and the ones who come after me is in the health benefits. We always got primo health insurance paid for in full. That was until 2010, or 2011, when they told us we had to start contributing. We were eased into paying more and more gradually over four years. However, for people like me who started after a certain date, we took the health benefits with us when we retired, at no cost. I think the cutoff was that you had to have 25 years by a certain date. That was quite a blow to people who had, say, 22 years. I believe that there is a gradual cost for them, that they won't pay the whole thing in retirement but will pay a percentage. But that health benefit is what kept many of us working there for so many years, even through pay freezes and political upheavals and other benefits being taken away.

I don't entirely trust these politicians not to take away my health benefits or reduce them in some way now that I'm retired. I'm not an idiot. But for now, it's nice to have those benefits until I turn 65 and Medicare kicks in. Then it will be my secondary.
A lot of this is going to be industry or location dependent.

Where I am, government employment is likely the best employment options outside of the hospital chains and other medical providers. People are desperate to get into local government because it tends to offer better pay (low pay area here) and more stability and benefits than the private sector.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2017, 03:19 PM
 
Location: Milwaukee Area of WI
1,886 posts, read 1,832,009 times
Reputation: 2025
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red On The Noodle View Post
I'm the tale end of the baby boomers and I will not get as many years retired as I have worked.


IF I have to go to full retirement age of 66 (which I'm hoping not to), it will mean I will have worked continuously (no break in work history whatsoever) for 49 years. I would have to live to be 116 to have equal work/retirement.


And to add insult to injury, my birthday is in late December, which means I have to work the whole year before I'm 66. Thanks Mom!
I can totally relate to this as well! I have to work until 67 for FRA!! UGH!! My birthday is also late December. Real bummer....I'm 55 now and the thought of working another 12 years is totally sickening....I've been working since I was 17.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2017, 03:43 PM
 
Location: Elsewhere
88,282 posts, read 84,257,762 times
Reputation: 114621
Quote:
Originally Posted by Serious Conversation View Post
A lot of this is going to be industry or location dependent.

Where I am, government employment is likely the best employment options outside of the hospital chains and other medical providers. People are desperate to get into local government because it tends to offer better pay (low pay area here) and more stability and benefits than the private sector.
That makes sense. I worked in NYC, so pay was better in the private sector, plus they get bonuses and other perks that are off-limits to public employees. But the pension and health benefits kept many of us there. You were never going to be rich, but you could make a living and have a bit of security at the end.
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

All times are GMT -6.

© 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