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)
 
Old 01-02-2022, 10:29 AM
 
Location: NMB, SC
43,093 posts, read 18,259,632 times
Reputation: 34970

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph_Kirk View Post
Correct, although I would not extend the Boomer generation as far as 1964 (and originally, it did not extend that far).

If you check birthrate statistics, there was a post-WWII baby boom and then a smaller--but very definite--post-Korean War peak as well. But the high birth rate statistics take a sudden and abrupt nose dive in 1959...they fall right off a cliff. The baby boom was definitely over by 1960.

And in terms of shared generational experiences, there is still a cut-off recognizable. Boomers, for instance, remember where they were when Kennedy's assassination was announced just as War-Genners remember where they were when the attack on Pearl Harbor was announced.
How true. I remember being sent home from school and my mother was sitting in front of the TV crying.
Also remember watching the funeral on TV. And that was about all I remember.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-02-2022, 10:31 AM
 
18,725 posts, read 33,385,615 times
Reputation: 37296
Except for the actual demographic event of the baby boom (specified by Ralph Kirk), all the other generational designations are pure marketing.

I think a lot of retirements (like mine) are predicated by age 65 for Medicare. Nothing else about the generational thing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2022, 10:34 AM
 
28,667 posts, read 18,784,602 times
Reputation: 30949
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMSRetired View Post
How true. I remember being sent home from school and my mother was sitting in front of the TV crying.
Also remember watching the funeral on TV. And that was about all I remember.
I had just gotten paddled by the principal for failing to do my math homework. I had gotten back to class, still pretty sore (physically and emotionally). I had dropped my pencil under my desk and was reaching for it when the principal came over the intercom with "I have terrible news to report."

My thought was, "It can't be as terrible as I feel right now."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2022, 11:05 AM
 
Location: NMB, SC
43,093 posts, read 18,259,632 times
Reputation: 34970
Quote:
Originally Posted by brightdoglover View Post
Except for the actual demographic event of the baby boom (specified by Ralph Kirk), all the other generational designations are pure marketing.

I think a lot of retirements (like mine) are predicated by age 65 for Medicare. Nothing else about the generational thing.
It does have some bearing. The peak of boomer births was 1957. All those boomers will be turning 65 this year. Peak births may just be reflected in peak retirements. And the pandemic for the past 2 years may have pushed many to just retire a few years earlier than planned.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2022, 11:51 AM
 
18,725 posts, read 33,385,615 times
Reputation: 37296
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMSRetired View Post
It does have some bearing. The peak of boomer births was 1957. All those boomers will be turning 65 this year. Peak births may just be reflected in peak retirements. And the pandemic for the past 2 years may have pushed many to just retire a few years earlier than planned.
Yes. I was born in 1953 in the thick of it and turned 65 in 2018, chose retirement then from sheer exhaustion and the Medicare availability.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2022, 12:15 PM
 
10,612 posts, read 12,126,824 times
Reputation: 16779
I wonder how much all the COVID deaths have saved Soc Sec. I'm not glad people died. But there's nothing we can do about that. So we might as well see if there's any "positive" for others.

The Boomers born in 57 won't get to their SS FRA until they're 66-and-6 months old -- which is June '22 to June '23, if my math is correct. But that doesn't mean they won't "retire" before that. I wasn't born until 1960. But I plan to be right there with them. When they'll be collecting at 66.6, I'll be filing at 63.

As a late curve boomer, I've always been concerned about the earlier boomers taxing and draining certain social programs before I could get mine-- or should I say before I could benefit as they did. That sounds better. To this day, I still feel some kind of way about the raising of the FRA for late Boomers.

As for older workers retiring...I just plan to retire from a full-time career. I'll likely work part-time. So I'd still be in the workforce....and technically not really retired, depending on the definition of "retired."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2022, 12:20 PM
 
18,725 posts, read 33,385,615 times
Reputation: 37296
I filed 2 months before age 65, with my FRA being at least 66 and maybe some change. Costs me about $150/month since I didn't wait. It was the only way I could stop working and felt a visceral need to stop working, stop working nights, and living on the East Coast.

Now, my fourth anniversary of retirement is Jan. 23. I still can't believe I don't have to go to work.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2022, 02:26 PM
 
Location: Central CT, sometimes FL and NH.
4,538 posts, read 6,800,839 times
Reputation: 5985
I'm one of these people. I retired, went back part-time (turned into nearly full-time) and am trying to retire again. My boss won't let me!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2022, 03:13 PM
 
Location: Pennsylvania
30,524 posts, read 16,217,604 times
Reputation: 44424
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lincolnian View Post
I'm one of these people. I retired, went back part-time (turned into nearly full-time) and am trying to retire again. My boss won't let me!
why are you letting it be your boss' decision?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2022, 03:46 PM
 
1,589 posts, read 1,189,263 times
Reputation: 6756
Quote:
Originally Posted by selhars View Post
I wonder how much all the COVID deaths have saved Soc Sec. I'm not glad people died. But there's nothing we can do about that. So we might as well see if there's any "positive" for others.

The Boomers born in 57 won't get to their SS FRA until they're 66-and-6 months old -- which is June '22 to June '23, if my math is correct. But that doesn't mean they won't "retire" before that. I wasn't born until 1960. But I plan to be right there with them. When they'll be collecting at 66.6, I'll be filing at 63.

As a late curve boomer, I've always been concerned about the earlier boomers taxing and draining certain social programs before I could get mine-- or should I say before I could benefit as they did. That sounds better. To this day, I still feel some kind of way about the raising of the FRA for late Boomers.

As for older workers retiring...I just plan to retire from a full-time career. I'll likely work part-time. So I'd still be in the workforce....and technically not really retired, depending on the definition of "retired."
I think I get what you're saying, but if it's any consolation, your starting FRA is probably larger than mine- given the same rate of salary history, simply because of the delay in your birth. I noticed some people's normal FRA is the same as what I was hoping for at age 70.

Regardless, it's kind of a wash, except I agree it's not fair about losing a year of DRCs if you wanted to delay. I think the people that thought out these last changes to SSA were pretty clever in choosing a middle ground to keep the program funded. Unfortunately, we're kinda' out of rabbits, and the next change to SSA is going to have to have some really good out-of-the-box thinkers. I honestly HOPE they prove me wrong, but I'm feeling that pretty much excludes current Congress...most of both parties.
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.

© 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