First, we need to keep a distinction in mind between efforts to ensure the elderly do not suffer actual material deprivation, whether that’s lack of nutritious food or adequate housing or medical needs, for instance, and efforts to help Americans plan for retirement and alleviate their expressed worries about the unknowns of retirement.
Second, issues of well-being, such as social isolation, and larger questions of the “right” form of provision of long-term care assistance, are not simple issues of finances but are nonetheless important as Americans age, and these topics should not be drowned out by a “retirement crisis” narrative. It should also go without saying that we will urgently need to turn our attention to the Medicare system as well.
And, third, in one crucial respect our models may fail us: experts have worked out a set of recommendations for asset allocation and income spend-down in retirement, and a set of projections for building those models, which fall apart if our new low-interest world continues, Japan-like, rather than being a temporary situation that resolves itself as we recover from the pandemic. Whether this is a result of government policies or an inevitable consequence of the changing economy, this could upend both Biggs’ projections of retiree well-being and the path to retirement security envisioned by legislation like the SECURE Act 2.0.
Here’s some good news: using the costs of actual annuities available for consumers to purchase in June 2020, and comparing them to bond rates which were similar to the investment portfolios those insurance companies hold, the authors calculated “money’s worth ratios” that show that, for annuities purchased immediately at retirement, the value of the annuities was between 92% – 94% (give-or-take, depending on type) of its cost. That means that the value of the insurance protection is a comparatively modest 6 – 8% of the total investment.
But there’s a catch — or, rather, two of them.
In the first place, the authors calculate their ratios based on a standard mortality table for annuity purchasers — which makes sense if the goal is to judge the “fairness” of an annuity for the healthy retirees most likely to purchase one. But this doesn’t tell us whether an annuity is a smart purchase for someone who thinks of themselves as being in comparatively poorer health, or with a spottier family health history, and folks in these categories would benefit considerably from analysis that’s targeted at them, that evaluates, realistically, whether annuities are the right call and whether their prediction of their life expectancy is likely to be right or wrong.
If 40 million Americans were suffering from the same severe problem, you might think it would be the subject of considerable media attention, a host of government programs, infusions of business capital and a hot topic of national conversation.
The differences in reliance on income sources between those who are already retired and those who are not yet retired are likely attributable, at least in part, to apprehension about the Social Security system, as well as the rise of 401(k)s accompanied by a decline in work-sponsored pension plans.
57% of retired U.S. adults say they rely on Social Security as a major income source, and 38% of nonretirees expect it to be a major source for them.
Likewise, 36% of retirees and 19% of nonretirees say a work-sponsored pension plan is or will be a major income source.
Nonretirees are most likely to say a 401(k) or other retirement savings account will fund their retirement (49%). Meanwhile, 35% of retirees mention 401(k)s as a major funding source of their retirement.
Public servants often spend multiples of what their salaries will be in the jobs they seek in order to get those jobs since they have other incentives. One of those is likely the pension, even for part time employment, that comes with the job.
Though job-hopping makes it impossible to finger all the mayors or council people who game the system, here are some whose last employer was the Office of the Governor, Senate, or General Assembly who, based on data on retirees in the New Jersey Retirement System taken from the the state pension website are getting over $50,000 annually – along with some other familiar names.