5 ms·

So someone who didn't save enough for retirement works two jobs to earn extra income? This really isn't news.

uptown 13y ago
It's one example of a person affected by a variety of truly challenging events. The financial crisis which affected retirement savings. The housing crisis which affected what was typically people's largest asset. Rising health-care costs. Baby-boomers entering retirement and the impact that'll have on Social Security. Lack of pensions, and dependence on 401k's. The jobless recovery. It's easy to blame an individual for not having planned for the predicament he finds himself in, but it's also possible to see what he's going through as a sampling of unexpected or uncontrollable macro-economic factors, weighing on a much-larger sector of the population than just this one man, in a way that will ultimately have an effect on society as a whole.
30thElement 13y ago
The kicker is located in the middle, > The median 401(k) balance for households headed by people aged 55 to 64 who had retirement accounts at work was $120,000 in 2011 The 77 year old highlighted is just an easy way to personalize the larger statistics.
- alexeisadeski3 13y ago
  The 401k needn't constitute their entire savings.
nilkn 13y ago
It may not be news, but it's a nice reminder of how much the purchasing power of the middle class has fallen. He was unable to both support his own retirement and support his children (i.e., pay for their college, help with initial house downpayments, etc.). Granted, times are a lot tougher for him since his wife died, but that really only strengthens the point: the middle class is becoming more and more reliant on dual incomes. That is a terrible eventuality, as it makes divorce or separation even more devastating to families and their children. I suspect many posters are thinking, "well, he shouldn't have tried to help his kids so much." And that is also exactly part of the point: he shouldn't have to choose between his own retirement and his kids.

It's one example of a person affected by a variety of truly challenging events. The financial crisis which affected retirement savings. The housing crisis which affected what was typically people's largest asset. Rising health-care costs. Baby-boomers entering retirement and the impact that'll have on Social Security. Lack of pensions, and dependence on 401k's. The jobless recovery. It's easy to blame an individual for not having planned for the predicament he finds himself in, but it's also possible to see what he's going through as a sampling of unexpected or uncontrollable macro-economic factors, weighing on a much-larger sector of the population than just this one man, in a way that will ultimately have an effect on society as a whole.

30thElement 13y ago

The kicker is located in the middle, > The median 401(k) balance for households headed by people aged 55 to 64 who had retirement accounts at work was $120,000 in 2011 The 77 year old highlighted is just an easy way to personalize the larger statistics.

alexeisadeski3 13y ago
The 401k needn't constitute their entire savings.

nilkn 13y ago

It may not be news, but it's a nice reminder of how much the purchasing power of the middle class has fallen. He was unable to both support his own retirement and support his children (i.e., pay for their college, help with initial house downpayments, etc.). Granted, times are a lot tougher for him since his wife died, but that really only strengthens the point: the middle class is becoming more and more reliant on dual incomes. That is a terrible eventuality, as it makes divorce or separation even more devastating to families and their children. I suspect many posters are thinking, "well, he shouldn't have tried to help his kids so much." And that is also exactly part of the point: he shouldn't have to choose between his own retirement and his kids.