ANSWERS: 2
  • It's been too long since my last history class, so I can't say whether retirement was intended for that generation exclusively, but they did have one factor that enabled their retirements: shorter lifespans. When Social Security was first instituted, the average 65-year-old could only expect to live about five more years. So SS payments were intended to keep seniors out of poverty for the few remaining years of their lives. Now, people are routinely living 30 years past retirement age. The government can't afford to subsidize everyone because of the increased life expenctancy (and since I'm a young person, SS will be bankrupt by the time I'm a senior, so who knows if my agemates and I will be able to retire). In recent times, adults have spent more time in their dotage than in the workforce. So the retirement age will probably rise with life expectancies.
  • The comments below are from the Centre for Research on Globalization: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - "The second generation is having a devastating reality check. 2008 was supposed to be a watershed year for retirement: it was the first year that the baby-boomers turned 62, and the retirement frenzy was to begin (since people could begin to draw on their social security benefits). Early in the year, however, a study was conducted that found one-fourth of these boomers were delaying retirement (only the baby-boomers who were actually able to plan for retirement were studied). The economy has since nosedived, and many more retirements are being delayed. The unfortunate reality is that many who planned on retiring will work until the grave, joining the millions of other baby-boomers who never had such dreams." http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=11379

Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy