From: gerald_a_levy (gerald_a_levy@msn.com)
Date: Fri Mar 28 2003 - 11:02:40 EST
The following article claims that many financial planners say that "a $1 million dollar nest egg is a bare minimum" amount of savings required for retirement for most people in the US. Yet, the same article claims that, according to the Employee Benefits Research Institute, "more than 75% of people aged 40 to 59 have less than $100,000 saved towards retirement." The advice given in the article is to: a) take a part-time job! Yet, if you take a part-time job to be able to supplement your income then you are *not* fully retired. b) take out a home equity line of credit. And, thereby, run the risk of losing your home. Also, for this to be an option -- as the article notes -- you would need substantial equity in your home. This is hardly an option for most working-class families who either own relatively inexpensive houses or rent apartments or houses. c) replace your mortgage with an interest-only loan. Doing so, though, will mean that you won't build equity in your home and you are "forestalling the inevitable -- at some point your home loan has to be paid off." Hardly a solution. d) "move to a less-costly area"! All in all, this advice sounds like "Let them eat cake!". Realistically, it means that most members of the working-class will have to postpone their retirement and work more years. This is especially the case because of the great losses experienced in pension funds and individual retirement plans in the current recession. Compounding the problem is age discrimination against older workers. Will this mean that in the US workers will to a much greater extent die before they are able to retire? In solidarity, Jerry http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/Retirementandwills/Playingcatchup/P34754.asp
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Mar 29 2003 - 00:00:01 EST