Elders' Triple Economic Whammy
Friday, 03 April 2009
When we – people 65 and older – were starting out in the world, there were no investment opportunities for ordinary workers. That was for rich people. If we were lucky, our employers offered pension plans (I never worked for one), but what we did have was a habit of saving.
Growing up during the Depression or as children of people who did, we learned the importance of putting money aside. Mostly, we did that in individual bank accounts which paid, back then, about two percent.
Mutual funds had been around since the 1920s, but they did not catch on until after a 1975 IRS change allowing individual retirement accounts (IRAs). In 1978, 401(k) plans (named for a new section of the IRS code) allowed workers to defer paying taxes on a percentage of their salaries until after retirement.
Then, in the 1990s, the internet happened, brokerage houses offered cheap, online trades and suddenly anyone could invest in the stock market. Advertising made it seem easy and we were exhorted to jump into Wall Street. It was mostly young people who did. Many who were older, like me, did not feel competent to choose investments wisely and continued to rely on more traditional financial advisers if we had enough to warrant the fees.
Through all these changes, we were led to believe that our diligence, together with Social Security, would see us through our old age in relative comfort.
Whammy No. 1: Drained Savings
In 2008, all that changed. We discovered that the people with whom we had invested our life savings had made themselves wealthy – obscenely so in many cases – while plundering 30, 40, even 50 percent and more of the modest nest eggs we had accumulated. As investment income was slashed over the past year, it has been devastating.
"About 433,000 unemployed Americans age 65 and older were actively seeking employment in February, more than twice as many as in November 2007, just before the recession began.
"Another 1.3 million adults age 55 to 64 were unemployed. 'This is a daunting economy for older people. A lot of older people are coming to see us that are scared or bewildered,” says Cynthia Metzler, president and CEO of Experience Works, a nonprofit organization that helps older people retrain for new jobs. 'We have people who are in their 80s who are taking on new jobs.'"
- - U.S. News & World Report, 31 March 2009
Whammy No. 2: Forced Early Retirement
Those numbers don't include millions of older people who are seriously underemployed in supermarkets, fast-food joints or as helpers at Home Depot making salaries that don't begin to cover even modest expenses their savings had allowed and they are now committed to.
The media is only now beginning to notice – and barely - that many old people are in a desperate bind with much of their savings wiped out and no possibility of future employment as companies lay off more than half a million people each month. March figures report 663,000 layoffs in that month alone, in addition to 706,000 in February and 655,000 in January – a total of more than 2 million people out of work in the first quarter of 2009.
For older workers, this amounts to forced early retirement. Just as the medical advances of the 20th century have given us an average of 30 years more life – healthy life in most cases – and the children are finished with college allowing old people to increase their amount of retirement savings, the employment rug has been ripped out from under them along with their evaporated investments.
Whammy No. 3: Stuck in Their Homes
In addition, elders who had been planning to move into continuing care communities – those that provide health care starting with independence through assisted living and nursing care – find that their homes have lost as much as 20 percent of their value (much more in some regions) - if they can find a buyer at all.
“...hundreds of thousands of older Americans...are sitting on homes they cannot sell, watching dividends disappear and, in many cases, putting off much-anticipated moves into retirement communities.”
- - The New York Times, 2 April 2009
Some of these people are in need of care now, but are going without because with the crash of the housing market they do not have the cash they expected and planned for from the sale of their homes.
So: lost savings, lost jobs, lost home value – a triple whammy. But wait. There's more.
On top of the triple whammy, meals on wheels programs, home health care visits and senior centers around the country are cutting back services and in some cases, closing. People who were able to continue to live independently due to these services, now cannot. Because selling their homes is not likely, they are left adrift, sometimes in actual danger without help.
Additionally, some physicians are "firing" their Medicare patients while fewer doctors are accepting new Medicare patients and even when they do, the number of internists, who have been taking up the slack from the dramatically diminishing number of geriatricians, is decreasing.
Let's go through this again, then: lost savings, lost jobs, lost home value, lost community services and lost medical care.
Further, yesterday, Senator John McCain announced his alternative to President Obama's budget and to that of Congress. It includes taking an axe to Social Security and Medicare:
“McCain would achieve those cuts mostly from entitlements like Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, spending $922 billion less than Obama over the next five years on those and other 'mandatory' programs and $3.1 trillion less over 10 years, according to his office.
“'There is no expert or ordinary citizen in America that doesn’t agree that we have to reform Medicare, Social Security and the other mandatory spending programs which are consuming a larger and larger part of our budget,' McCain said on the Senate floor.”
- - CQ Politics, 1 April 2009
Easy for Senator McCain to say with his ten homes, rich wife, $2000 monthly Social Security benefit for pocket change and Senate health care. His budget plan would create a commission to “retool” those programs, although not to affect people 55 and older. “Retool” means “cut.”
McCain's budget has no chance of passing Congress, but it is the highest-level opening salvo in the conservative agenda to eviscerate Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid - which would be a sixth or seventh whammy (I've lost count) that affects elders more than younger people.
It is not that I wish to make light of the suffering of all Americans at this time. But elders are my special interest on this blog and unlike the youngest adults whose careers may be delayed, and unlike midlife adults whose retirements may need to be postponed (which, if you believe surveys, they say they want to do anyway), old people are taking the brunt of it.
I don't mind tightening my belt along with everyone else in the country. As the old saying goes, shit happens and we all, necessarily, will live with less for a long time to come. What I don't like is the apparently willful disinterest in how deeply elders are being disproportionately affected.
[At The Elder Storytelling Place today, Marvin Waldman is back after a long absence with a poem, A Wake for My Dick, Please.]
Ronni, this is absolutely sickening. The over 65ers should be the first to be protected in planning for economic stability. Where and when can we start marching for our rights?
Posted by: doctafill | Friday, 03 April 2009 at 04:48 AM
The Obama budget passed last night without 1 Republican vote. The Pew Institute reports their, Republicans, approval rating is at a low of 28%.
Feb. saw some housing sales rising; March saw some auto sales; yes times are tough, especially for those of us 65+ who will have to work till????
We have to get involved and stay vigilant to make sure we are not the forgotten generation.
Ronni, as always, great post. I still flounder in blogging but you never let us down with yours. Well done!
Posted by: Nancy B | Friday, 03 April 2009 at 05:07 AM
Before Roosevelt began SS, most elders had to live with their families if they didn't face a rented room in someone's house. I guess we all thought things had changed permanently with elders having more options. For awhile a sizable proportion were comfortable with some having the most money of any group with plenty of time for hobbies and living often in two (or three) different climate zones. Pensions were gone but the 401k seemed as stable a source of routine income.
Not that I don't still see some of that here in Tucson with a lot of elders and a lot of money but what you are describing is here too. We have become a dual society with some in all ages living lives so different than you'd think it was two different countries. I guess it's not new to the world but it's new to my generation who hoped we had seen a permanent new way.
I don't know what the solution will be. The right wing clearly doesn't care about the poor. Whether the poor are old or young, the right sees them blocking their own prosperity and a booming economy.
The big question, in my mind, is who are we as a people and do we want to see all citizens have decent opportunities. Who we are as a people shows up most in how we treat the weakest among us which clearly are the children and the old. Right now, it seems to me, the answers are up in the air...
Posted by: Rain | Friday, 03 April 2009 at 06:17 AM
A great piece, Ronni (although the headline for Whammy #2 isn't coming across on my PC).
How we treat old people--people who, unlike the young and their potential--says who we are as a people. And what it says is that we are is an immoral people.
Posted by: mary jamison | Friday, 03 April 2009 at 06:39 AM
Best summary of how this hits we elders that I've seen. Thanks.
Posted by: janinsanfran | Friday, 03 April 2009 at 08:08 AM
Well, count me as one middle-ager (49) that does NOT want to keep working well into my late 60s.
I live in Montgomery County, Maryland. One of the wealthiest counties in the US. On my way to work a few days ago, my jaw literally dropped when I was listening to a local report about the hugh budget deficits in the county and how there was a proposal on the table to cut services to the elderly and disabled! The most vulnerable in our society. Unbelievable...
Posted by: possumlady | Friday, 03 April 2009 at 08:10 AM
Good for you, Ronni! I've been waiting for someone to notice this!
To summarize the possible disasters for a 50- to 80-something in America: 1) Early forced retirement 2) Retirement savings looted by financial industry 3) Right wing attacks on Social Security 4) Medical providers permitted to stop taking Medicare patients 5) Home values plummet while sales freeze 6) Local senior services slashed.
It just gets better and better, doesn't it?
Not quite our fathers' retirement.
Posted by: Paula | Friday, 03 April 2009 at 08:42 AM
Funny thing is, Reagan made us all believe in the 401Ks because we thought our social security would be at risk later on and might not be there. But now our 401Ks are what is failing and social security is ok for the moment. Weird.
Who knew it was all just another scam for the rich to use our money. ;^)
Posted by: donna | Friday, 03 April 2009 at 10:14 AM
This makes me very happy that McCain didn't get elected!
Posted by: kenju | Friday, 03 April 2009 at 11:54 AM
Thank you for the important post, Ronni. When I want to be informed about matters that affect me, I know I'll find it on your blog first, and it will be the most comprehensive. I also appreciate that you don't allow us to become complacent. It's good to be cranked--ready for action. If there's ever a "call to arms", your readers will be the first to show.
Posted by: Carol | Friday, 03 April 2009 at 11:57 AM
I wonder what McCain's mother thinks about all of this? Someone should ask her. Dee
Posted by: Dee | Friday, 03 April 2009 at 01:06 PM
But it's all going to be all right!
I heard on the BBC that Obama and Brown are going to save the world!
Phew! Lucky us oldies.
Seriously, we are no better off in the UK and the future is bleak.
Posted by: Friko | Friday, 03 April 2009 at 02:33 PM
You forgot one of the ugly trolls that has yet to rear its head...and may not...but I am on the watch and that is inflation. With all this money being poured into salvage programs I am worried about inflation which is the worst for elders.
Posted by: Tabor | Friday, 03 April 2009 at 02:35 PM
The Republicans have just proven that Einstein's hypothesis concerning the possibility of the existence of parallel universes is valid. Last night, after congress passed President Obama's budget, Senate Minority Leader Mitch Mc Connell (R) said that this was a prelude to the upcoming battle over Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, and national health care.
No big surprise there; everyone knows that that's coming. But what he said next blew my mind. Paraphrasing: "If the Democrats try to strong-arm us on these issues, that will be the beginning of the end of bipartisanship." What??? Are the Republicans suffering from some sort of mass delusion or are they just bald-faced liars?
They are the party of NO! There has been no bipartisanship. All the Republicans in the House and all but three in the Senate voted against the Stimulus Bill, and all Republicans voted against Obama's budget. With this record, if Mc Connell isn't lying through his teeth, he's living in another universe.
Posted by: George P. | Friday, 03 April 2009 at 03:07 PM
"The One" will take care of you. Don't worry about it. We are all East Europeans now.
Posted by: Renee | Friday, 03 April 2009 at 04:13 PM
UPDATE:
Yep, Mitch Mc Connell is definitely living in an alternate universe. He's now claiming that bi-partisanship does exist in Congress because some Democrats also voted against Obama's budget, not just all the Republicans. Conveniently, he neglected to mention that there were only two Democrats. He also omitted the fact that the Republican budget was also proposed but rejected, with 38 Republicans voting against it.
How can these politicians be so blatantly dishonest and do so with a straight face? I guess the old adage is true: "You can be sure that a politician is lying if his lips are moving."
Posted by: George P. | Friday, 03 April 2009 at 07:27 PM
The real fools are the ones who think they're smart- smarter than others. Those are the fools who have been running this country from 2000- 2008 and they still don't understand anything. They'd rather see the Ship of State go down than let someone who's a little brighter than they are take the wheel. A "Ship of Fools"indeed.
Posted by: mythster | Friday, 03 April 2009 at 10:04 PM
I hope all these Republicans who keep voting NO will find themselves out of office after their next elections.
It's wonderful to be proud of our President and First Lady for a change! Their reception and actions in Europe remind me of the Kennedys in many ways. It's so good to have an intelligent, articulate, tactful, reasonable, ethical leader representing us and not winking, massaging shoulders, and making blunders! Yea!!!
Posted by: Joy D | Saturday, 04 April 2009 at 10:19 AM
What you say is pretty much right on, all the way around...at least in my camp. After the collapse of the Bush economy trashed my retirement savings, I figured I'd have to keep working at my job until age 70 (at least): another seven years. Then a couple of weeks ago I was told my employer is closing my office and canning my entire staff.
At my age, I haven't a snowball's chance of landing another job. Social Security is a pittance -- $1160 a month. Combining that with a drawdown from what remains of my savings will not yield enough for me to live on.
I guess the Republicans and their befogged allies would just as soon see the entire older generation living out on the street, cheek by jowl with the mentally ill we threw into the gutters some years ago. The most infuriating thing about these people is their sanctimonious appeal to religion to justify and sell their craven theories. Evil bunch, all of them.
Posted by: Funny about Money | Friday, 17 April 2009 at 07:08 PM