5 ms·

Getting old is a crisis more and more Americans can’t afford

26 points by e15ctr0n 5y ago

cebert 5y ago
I can relate to this. My parents are baby boomers and not in the best of health or in a good financial situation. Being privileged enough to be in the tech industry and doing relatively well financially, I can foresee my parents moving in and living with me to help with costs and assistance. As this generation continues to age, I suspect multi-generational households will become more common.
Barrin92 5y ago
Here in Germany around Munich we have quite a few cooperative communities for retirees where retired people live together, take care of each other, with some assistance from nursing staff or food delivery and so on if it's needed. From what I have heard it works very well, is much more dignified because elderly people can take care of themselves, keeps people active and is significantly cheaper. Lots of the crisis around the retired population seems to come from the degree with which it has been commodified. People isolated from their family or community, taken care of by strangers, no social life, no stimulation, just horrible. In the US in particular it seems to be amplified by the dominance of the nuclear family.
- kyleee 5y ago
  Do you have a negative opinion of the nuclear family?
  - bitwize 5y ago
    The nuclear family is an artifice probably promoted by suburban land developers and durable goods manufacturers during the 40s and 50s or something. Humans naturally live in extended families three or more generations deep.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - notathrowaway2 5y ago
      This is false. Nuclear families have been a primary arrangement in England since the 13th century as an example.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - notathrowaway2 5y ago
      Not sure why my comments are getting flagged, but I read that nuclear family units came.about in Europe/England in the 13th century. It's not a modern creation, but for some reason everyone thinks they are.
    - cafard 5y ago
      Gee, yesterday I was just reading in Hegel's Philosophy of Right that properly speaking the nuclear family is the family. I can't speak to other countries, but the United States has tended to be unusually mobile. That can make the extended family household hard to maintain.
  - Barrin92 5y ago
    yes because the loss of the extended family and the multi-generational home in my opinion is one of the largest drivers of disintegration of our social fabric, not just for the old but also the young, and also a driver of inequality. The nuclear family benefits people who can outsource what were traditional tasks of the family or community to the market, while the poor have no such options. There's also a racial component with marginalized peoples often suffering strongest from the fragility that is the result of the loss of larger family structures.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - notathrowaway2 5y ago
      >The nuclear family benefits people who can outsource what were traditional tasks of the family Women entering the workforce is one of the main drivers behind this. >There's also a racial component with marginalized peoples often suffering strongest from the fragility that is the result of the loss of larger family structures. Not with Latinos or Asians. They heavily rely on extended families.
  - octokatt 5y ago
    I do. The nuclear family only works with a stay-at-home wife, a husband capable of always being employed with enough income to support four people (two adults, two kids, and a dog), and magically no one ever gets sick. If one of those two providers gets sick or leaves, the system collapses. Either a maid or a pension (or both) is needed, and those are entirely outside the reach of the vast majority of Americans. A more robust, anti-fragile system would involve support from either an extended family to help when things get hard, or a meaningfully robust set of public programs. The nuclear family has no support from extended family by default, and the public programs have been largely removed (as the article states). The idea that nuclear families work is a lie. They don’t scale due to fragility.
- UncleOxidant 5y ago
  There are some co-housing/intentional communities in the US but it's quite rare. The one I visited a couple of years ago had several what we would call townhouses surrounding a common area and a community center building in the center with a meeting area and a large community kitchen. The people I met who lived there were of all different ages from people with young children to retired folks in their 70s. There was a community garden area and even a small wooded area with a creek. Some of the residents were even doing beekeeping with a community hive. It seemed really nice, but, as I said, it's a rare living arrangement here.
sesuximo 5y ago
I wish I were more sympathetic. But this generation: - had cheap housing for years - lived through a strong American economy - had relatively cheap access to education - had a cheaper tax burden - many of them have pensions that are paid for by today’s workers - spent most of their lives polluting the earth and not putting money aside for the cleanup Not sure what other advantages this generation wants?
- atlgator 5y ago
  And social security. Millennial and younger generations would be wise to plan for retirement without it.
  - nly 5y ago
    I suspect those who save wisely and privately saved for their retirement will see their nest eggs raided by the state if the public social security system collapses. One of the reasons contributions made in to pensions in the UK are 100% tax free is because nobody trusts a future government not to double dip.
    - atlgator 5y ago
      That's my fear as well. The last wall to topple is a straight tax on capital. Sure, they'll sell it as a tax on the uber rich just like they did with the income tax, but that threshold will drop drop drop until the middle class is paying out on both ends: tax on earned income + tax on everything you have. Every year.
    - mbg721 5y ago
      As a US-er, everyone I've talked to regards me as overly cynical, but I think about Roth IRAs and to some extent all tax-advantaged retirement accounts the same way; that money is a fat target once it becomes politically expedient.
- axaxs 5y ago
  They're called the 'me generation' for a very valid reason...
Gunax 5y ago
I know I am supposed to by sympathetic, but if youve left the bay area and been out in the rral world, you would know that most people do not save at all. I used to sell RVs. I would say less than 20% of our clients could actually afford their purchase. By that I mean, people all ready in debt, but trying to max out their spending because having something leftover after bills and debts would be a waste.
- imtringued 5y ago
  Btw don't save in money. Save in stocks or bonds. The banks don't need your money for loans.
- mbg721 5y ago
  I thought it was sort of an opposite; people in the Bay Area can't save, because they spent 4x their income on their rent. People in West East-Northington, Ohio can't save, because Wal-Mart, Amazon, and Denny's gutted their towns. So the only savings accounts are in Pittsburgh and Omaha.
curation 5y ago
There is no functional Economy and this is due to the policies in place that the outgoing generation supported or, in the least, did not violently protest. So, in that way it is expected. To watch from the cupola of privilege that we in the West resided in, the horrors of the world and think that, eventually that brute Market Logic would not fall upon us was incredibly cruel and naive. It is here now; as soon as you open the dimension of hollowed out and marked for death human - for example the entire Global South - it is only a matter of time before it comes to us. (Fanon; Mbembe)
nine_zeros 5y ago
Cousin's parents spent entire life working. Kids moved out and now they have no one to take care of them. Elder care near them in $3000/mo per person. They can't afford that. So vegetable life in a suburban house it is for them

26 points by e15ctr0n 5y ago

I can relate to this. My parents are baby boomers and not in the best of health or in a good financial situation. Being privileged enough to be in the tech industry and doing relatively well financially, I can foresee my parents moving in and living with me to help with costs and assistance. As this generation continues to age, I suspect multi-generational households will become more common.

Barrin92 5y ago

Here in Germany around Munich we have quite a few cooperative communities for retirees where retired people live together, take care of each other, with some assistance from nursing staff or food delivery and so on if it's needed. From what I have heard it works very well, is much more dignified because elderly people can take care of themselves, keeps people active and is significantly cheaper. Lots of the crisis around the retired population seems to come from the degree with which it has been commodified. People isolated from their family or community, taken care of by strangers, no social life, no stimulation, just horrible. In the US in particular it seems to be amplified by the dominance of the nuclear family.

kyleee 5y ago
Do you have a negative opinion of the nuclear family?
- bitwize 5y ago
  The nuclear family is an artifice probably promoted by suburban land developers and durable goods manufacturers during the 40s and 50s or something. Humans naturally live in extended families three or more generations deep.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - notathrowaway2 5y ago
    This is false. Nuclear families have been a primary arrangement in England since the 13th century as an example.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - notathrowaway2 5y ago
    Not sure why my comments are getting flagged, but I read that nuclear family units came.about in Europe/England in the 13th century. It's not a modern creation, but for some reason everyone thinks they are.
  - cafard 5y ago
    Gee, yesterday I was just reading in Hegel's Philosophy of Right that properly speaking the nuclear family is the family. I can't speak to other countries, but the United States has tended to be unusually mobile. That can make the extended family household hard to maintain.
- Barrin92 5y ago
  yes because the loss of the extended family and the multi-generational home in my opinion is one of the largest drivers of disintegration of our social fabric, not just for the old but also the young, and also a driver of inequality. The nuclear family benefits people who can outsource what were traditional tasks of the family or community to the market, while the poor have no such options. There's also a racial component with marginalized peoples often suffering strongest from the fragility that is the result of the loss of larger family structures.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - notathrowaway2 5y ago
    >The nuclear family benefits people who can outsource what were traditional tasks of the family Women entering the workforce is one of the main drivers behind this. >There's also a racial component with marginalized peoples often suffering strongest from the fragility that is the result of the loss of larger family structures. Not with Latinos or Asians. They heavily rely on extended families.
- octokatt 5y ago
  I do. The nuclear family only works with a stay-at-home wife, a husband capable of always being employed with enough income to support four people (two adults, two kids, and a dog), and magically no one ever gets sick. If one of those two providers gets sick or leaves, the system collapses. Either a maid or a pension (or both) is needed, and those are entirely outside the reach of the vast majority of Americans. A more robust, anti-fragile system would involve support from either an extended family to help when things get hard, or a meaningfully robust set of public programs. The nuclear family has no support from extended family by default, and the public programs have been largely removed (as the article states). The idea that nuclear families work is a lie. They don’t scale due to fragility.
UncleOxidant 5y ago
There are some co-housing/intentional communities in the US but it's quite rare. The one I visited a couple of years ago had several what we would call townhouses surrounding a common area and a community center building in the center with a meeting area and a large community kitchen. The people I met who lived there were of all different ages from people with young children to retired folks in their 70s. There was a community garden area and even a small wooded area with a creek. Some of the residents were even doing beekeeping with a community hive. It seemed really nice, but, as I said, it's a rare living arrangement here.

sesuximo 5y ago

I wish I were more sympathetic. But this generation: - had cheap housing for years - lived through a strong American economy - had relatively cheap access to education - had a cheaper tax burden - many of them have pensions that are paid for by today’s workers - spent most of their lives polluting the earth and not putting money aside for the cleanup Not sure what other advantages this generation wants?

atlgator 5y ago
And social security. Millennial and younger generations would be wise to plan for retirement without it.
- nly 5y ago
  I suspect those who save wisely and privately saved for their retirement will see their nest eggs raided by the state if the public social security system collapses. One of the reasons contributions made in to pensions in the UK are 100% tax free is because nobody trusts a future government not to double dip.
  - atlgator 5y ago
    That's my fear as well. The last wall to topple is a straight tax on capital. Sure, they'll sell it as a tax on the uber rich just like they did with the income tax, but that threshold will drop drop drop until the middle class is paying out on both ends: tax on earned income + tax on everything you have. Every year.
  - mbg721 5y ago
    As a US-er, everyone I've talked to regards me as overly cynical, but I think about Roth IRAs and to some extent all tax-advantaged retirement accounts the same way; that money is a fat target once it becomes politically expedient.
axaxs 5y ago
They're called the 'me generation' for a very valid reason...

Gunax 5y ago

I know I am supposed to by sympathetic, but if youve left the bay area and been out in the rral world, you would know that most people do not save at all. I used to sell RVs. I would say less than 20% of our clients could actually afford their purchase. By that I mean, people all ready in debt, but trying to max out their spending because having something leftover after bills and debts would be a waste.

imtringued 5y ago
Btw don't save in money. Save in stocks or bonds. The banks don't need your money for loans.
mbg721 5y ago
I thought it was sort of an opposite; people in the Bay Area can't save, because they spent 4x their income on their rent. People in West East-Northington, Ohio can't save, because Wal-Mart, Amazon, and Denny's gutted their towns. So the only savings accounts are in Pittsburgh and Omaha.

curation 5y ago

There is no functional Economy and this is due to the policies in place that the outgoing generation supported or, in the least, did not violently protest. So, in that way it is expected. To watch from the cupola of privilege that we in the West resided in, the horrors of the world and think that, eventually that brute Market Logic would not fall upon us was incredibly cruel and naive. It is here now; as soon as you open the dimension of hollowed out and marked for death human - for example the entire Global South - it is only a matter of time before it comes to us. (Fanon; Mbembe)

nine_zeros 5y ago

Cousin's parents spent entire life working. Kids moved out and now they have no one to take care of them. Elder care near them in $3000/mo per person. They can't afford that. So vegetable life in a suburban house it is for them