Add to it the "market correction" that wiped out 60% of our 401k, and we are back under $200k towards retirement . . .
For anyone banking on a pension, time to face the reality that the odds are high it won't be there when you retire.
So you're saying we're all screwed either way? You're right that money can be lost either way. The real key is not to put all your money in any one place; it's unlikely that multiple sources will disappear.
Keep in mind that not all pensions are as outrageous as the ones you hear about in places like California. I've heard stories about places where a person could put in as little as 5 or 10 years and draw a pension for life. Someone on this thread mentioned something about pensioners drawing $200,000 per year. No one ever talks about my state pension, which pretty much offers, "Work 30 years, get a pension of about 2K/month after taxes for life". That's moderate, and moderate isn't newsworthy. Most pension plans are much more modest; thus, less likely to be unable to fulfill their obligations. I'm not saying that something tragic couldn't happen anywhere, but I do read the information that comes in the mail periodically about the strength of my state pension, and it doesn't share the problems that exist in Detroit and New Jersey.
Rather than a person's pension disappearing altogether, it's more likely that it'd be adjusted. For example, in my state teachers must work twice as many years to become "vested" in the pension program. In a state near us, I've heard that they're upping the total number of years that a teacher must work to draw a pension, and that regardless of years served no one can draw a pension 'til age 60 (?). I've heard several other possibilities about cuts that may become necessary to keep pensions solvent.
And regardless, if you've saved in multiple places, a pension cut won't be devastating. I'm counting on my pension. If it were to be cut (or even disappear), it would hurt my retirement lifestyle, but it would not mean I'd be forced to live on cat food. Someone else commented that pension money should just be extra money, slush money. Not many of us can afford to put in 30 years work for fun money.
That is true. I only make $38K as a 7th year teacher (and $150 a week in pocket after my pension is taken out and childcare costs) so it doesn't feel exceptionally high, but you are right, we are fortunate and my husband did a good job of saving before we met and had kids in our late 20's.
Sounds pretty high to me! I'm in my 23rd year of teaching, and I'm only making about 5K more than you.
I wouldn't turn down a pension, but I'd save my own money as well. The issue is that a lot of public jobs pay less - and often the justification for that included the sweet pension deals - often including medical as someone upthread talked about. So that is less in your paycheck, which means saving on your own for retirement has a burden.
But if someone were to pay me my non-pension salary - or even come close, and put a pension on top of it, I wouldn't say no......
Yes, it only makes sense to save money on top of a pension. Any one "pot of money" may dry up.
Yes, public jobs are pretty much the only ones that offer pensions. The trade-off has always been that you'll receive a low paycheck, but you'll have a decent pension at the end of a career.[/QUOTE]Yes, I agree. The problem isn't dumb/selfish, but it is ignorance of how money works. It doesn't take a great deal of sacrifice, if you start early, and you can never get that time back.
I think finance in general is an area our schools should focus more attention on.
It's taught in our schools. In fact, I just picked up a piece of lost paper from my classroom floor a couple days ago, and it was a worksheet about wise use of credit cards -- I think it was from a 10th grade Civics class.
The thing is, kids don't internalize the lessons on money and finance because it doesn't seem real to them. They figure it's all going to just work out, or they figure that they're going to make so much money that it'll be easy to live comfortably.
What DOES stick with kids is real-life lessons that their parents provide at home: Involving them with household finances, giving them an allowance and requiring them to buy certain things with that money, etc.
My kids math textbooks have so many compound interest word problems it isn't funny. Their Home Econ included consumerism. They require Micro and Macro Econ to graduate.
But some people are ready to hear this from the time they put their first quarters in a piggy bank, and some hear it their whole lives and turn around at 68 with "why didn't I listen!?" (or even "why didn't anyone tell me?")
We had it in my high school as well - I remember doing this 30 years ago - compound interest, balancing a checkbook, budgeting, investing. And I know some of my fellow alumni didn't hear it. And will tell you they never got it. "Really, I was sitting right next to you when we played the Stock Market Game"
Yeah, I can say the same type of thing. I've seen this material in my own daughters' high school work, and it's prompted conversations at home. I specifically remember my own algebra teacher making us repeat over and over, "I want a simple interest, no pre-payment penalty loan."