5 ms·

exciting! between this and that blood-from-young-people therapy that was on here not so long ago, it seems we can expect older and older people to be productive

exciting! between this and that blood-from-young-people therapy that was on here not so long ago, it seems we can expect older and older people to be productive in the future :) I realize I'm selling my own pension here, but I think it's a good thing. perhaps I can have shorter work-weeks after 60 or something?

craftyguy 8y ago
Humans != worms (well, ignoring the figurative worms, who were not in this study)
lalaithion 8y ago
If you save 15% of your (post-tax) income every year for 43 years, you can live off of market investment returns for essentially forever. Assuming you started working at 22, that's a retirement age of 65 with no government assistance.
- baccheion 8y ago
  How did you arrive at this number? Based on my calculations, it will take 50 years of saving 20% of take-home into an inflation-offsetting account to be able to retire. It's assumed a house is purchased separately. If the fabled 8% YoY over and above inflation isn't available at retirement, the final amount lasts about ~20 years.
- billmalarky 8y ago
  Curious, are you using Mr. Money Mustache for that estimate? It seemed on point for this post: http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/01/13/the-shockingly-simple-math-behind-early-retirement/ http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/01/13/the-shockingly-sim... If so you should probably update your comment to say "invest" instead of "save," which sounds nitpicky but the difference is huge.
Cthulhu_ 8y ago
Oh no, don't promote tech like this until you're retired yourself - THEN you can vote for this kind of tech to make the generation then supporting you and your retirement work longer! (that's what's happening in Europe with the age of retirement being raised left and right. I mean it's just in e.g. Greece but where I live it's gone up by 2 years because there's a slightly older generation that are now all retiring, and the system is based on growth - that is, a younger generation paying for the retirement of the older one - instead of on saving, which causes the system to collapse unless they make people work longer.
- kenmicklas 8y ago
  On an aggregate scale it doesn't make sense to talk about a system based on "saving". You can't eat money in retirement. So retirees are always extracting some fraction of the productive output of current labor. This fraction can go up or down depending on the economic growth rate and expectation of standard of living of retirees.
  - toomuchtodo 8y ago
    The only solution is for nation states to invest pension funds in technology and innovation so that you're not on the hook for fiat decades in the future to support the elderly. Social Security in the US has lent ~$2.6-2.9 trillion from its trust fund to the US government; imagine if that had been spent on driving down the cost of caring for the elderly instead of frivolous wars and tax cuts. You can't save up for the future to pay for expenses you can't predict; you have to invest today's dollars in getting ahead of the curve, to drastically drive down the cost of future predicted services you'll need to provide. TL;DR Invest resources today to ensure a steep cost decline curve for existing in the future.

craftyguy 8y ago

Humans != worms (well, ignoring the figurative worms, who were not in this study)

lalaithion 8y ago

If you save 15% of your (post-tax) income every year for 43 years, you can live off of market investment returns for essentially forever. Assuming you started working at 22, that's a retirement age of 65 with no government assistance.

baccheion 8y ago
How did you arrive at this number? Based on my calculations, it will take 50 years of saving 20% of take-home into an inflation-offsetting account to be able to retire. It's assumed a house is purchased separately. If the fabled 8% YoY over and above inflation isn't available at retirement, the final amount lasts about ~20 years.
billmalarky 8y ago
Curious, are you using Mr. Money Mustache for that estimate? It seemed on point for this post: http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/01/13/the-shockingly-simple-math-behind-early-retirement/ http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/01/13/the-shockingly-sim... If so you should probably update your comment to say "invest" instead of "save," which sounds nitpicky but the difference is huge.

Cthulhu_ 8y ago

Oh no, don't promote tech like this until you're retired yourself - THEN you can vote for this kind of tech to make the generation then supporting you and your retirement work longer! (that's what's happening in Europe with the age of retirement being raised left and right. I mean it's just in e.g. Greece but where I live it's gone up by 2 years because there's a slightly older generation that are now all retiring, and the system is based on growth - that is, a younger generation paying for the retirement of the older one - instead of on saving, which causes the system to collapse unless they make people work longer.

kenmicklas 8y ago
On an aggregate scale it doesn't make sense to talk about a system based on "saving". You can't eat money in retirement. So retirees are always extracting some fraction of the productive output of current labor. This fraction can go up or down depending on the economic growth rate and expectation of standard of living of retirees.
- toomuchtodo 8y ago
  The only solution is for nation states to invest pension funds in technology and innovation so that you're not on the hook for fiat decades in the future to support the elderly. Social Security in the US has lent ~$2.6-2.9 trillion from its trust fund to the US government; imagine if that had been spent on driving down the cost of caring for the elderly instead of frivolous wars and tax cuts. You can't save up for the future to pay for expenses you can't predict; you have to invest today's dollars in getting ahead of the curve, to drastically drive down the cost of future predicted services you'll need to provide. TL;DR Invest resources today to ensure a steep cost decline curve for existing in the future.