Tuesday, March 7, 2017

In Case You Missed It: Sister Shares Moving Account of Early Onset Dementia

From the Washington Post, an especially moving account written by former White House Communications Director Jennifer Palmieri about her sister, who died at age 58 following some ten years with "early onset" Alzheimer's:

Every day, more Americans receive the devastating news that someone in their family has this affliction. For now, there is not a lot of hope for recovery. It can make you envious of cancer patients; their families get to have hope. Having come through this experience with my sister, I am afraid that I can’t offer these new Alzheimer’s families hope for a recovery. But I do hope that by relaying the story of my sister’s journey, I can offer them some peace.

 

My sister Dana was brilliant, beautiful, full of positive energy, a force of nature. She was not an easy person. She was driven and successful, and, as the disease progressed unbeknown to all of us, it became harder to connect with her. Ironically, that began to change once she got the diagnosis.

 

When she called each of us with the news, she already had it all figured out. We were all to understand that, really, she saw the diagnosis as a blessing. It was going to allow her to retire early. It would motivate our family to spend time together we would not have otherwise done. It would shorten her life, but she would make sure the days she had left were of the highest quality.

The thoughtful piece can help all of us as we and our family members tackle challenges.  For more, read The Blessings Inside my Sister's Alzheimer's Disease.

March 7, 2017 in Advance Directives/End-of-Life, Cognitive Impairment, Dementia/Alzheimer’s, Ethical Issues, Retirement, Science | Permalink | Comments (0)

Wednesday, March 1, 2017

Acting Now for a Better Retirement

I've noticed a fair number of articles recently on the topic of planning for retirement, including this recent one from the New York Times. What to Do Now to Retire Better looks at actions you should based on your age group, starting when one is in her 20s.  For example, for folks in their 40s the article suggests working with a financial advisor,  portfolio rebalancing, establishing a self-employed  plan such as a SEP IRA and using a retirement calculator to make sure you are on the right track. The advice for those in their 50s is more extensive, including planning for what happens after retirement, checking out Social Security, reducing debt, investigating downsizing and more.

Since financial literacy is so important,  this article would be good to assign to students to get them thinking about their own futures and planning for their retirements.

March 1, 2017 in Consumer Information, Current Affairs, Retirement | Permalink

Monday, February 27, 2017

Are You Saving for Retirement? The "Right" Way?

The Washington Post ran a recent story about saving for retirement. Two-thirds of Americans aren’t using this easy way to save for retirement stress the importance of workers taking advantage of various workplace retirement accounts yet many fail to do so.

Fewer than one-third of Americans are saving money in their 401(k)s and other workplace retirement accounts, according to an analysis of tax records by Census Bureau researchers.

Although nearly 80 percent of Americans work for an employer that offers retirement programs — whether a 401(k), 403(b) or something else — only 32 percent of workers sign up for such accounts, according to a working draft of the study by Michael Gideon and Joshua Mitchell. The researchers studied W-2 tax forms from 2012 from 155 million American workers for their findings, which help shed light on just how ill-prepared many Americans are for the future.

The article discusses the importance of saving for retirement for the various age groups and notes that it's unlikely that those close to retirement have a realistic idea of what it costs to live during retirement.

Older workers ...  are increasingly experiencing sticker shock when they realize just how much money they’ll need for retirement, said Manisha Thakor, a financial adviser in Portland, Ore. The most conservative calculations estimate Americans will need to have about eight to 10 times their annual salary saved for retirement, she said.

“By the time people see how much they need, it seems so horrific and out of bounds that they just freeze and do nothing,” she said, adding that she counsels clients to save at least 20 percent of their income toward retirement and other expenses. “They just throw their hands up and say, ‘What’s the point of even trying at this point? I’m so far off.’ ”

At the same time, people are living longer, which means they’ll have to save up that much more to help support themselves in their post-work years. She added, “Layered on top of both generations is the specter of student loan debt, which has now eclipsed credit card debt.”

The student debt referenced in the article is that taken on for their kids or grandkids.

What is the way to get more workers to take advantage of the offered workplace retirement plans? One idea in the article is automatic enrollment. Even though that may be successful, don't forget, "[i]n recent weeks ...  Congress has moved to repeal Obama administration measures that allow states to automatically enroll workers ii retirement programs."

February 27, 2017 in Consumer Information, Current Affairs, Retirement, Social Security | Permalink | Comments (0)

Will "Everyday Americans" Lose Potential Protections re Investment Advice?

NPR had a good recent summary of the politics behind opposition to full implementation of fiduciary duty standards for investment brokers in providing retirement advice: 

Over the past two weeks, the Trump administration has taken steps to delay and perhaps scuttle a new rule designed to save American workers billions of dollars they currently pay in excessive fees in their retirement accounts.

The Obama administration spent 5 years crafting the rule through the Labor Department. It requires that financial advisers and brokers act in their customers' best interest when offering them investment advice for their workplace retirement accounts. Firms must comply by April [2917 under the current rule].

As the commentary pointed out, early-on Trump pledged to support the interests of ordinary working Americans and to take on Wall Street:

In his inauguration speech, President Trump talked about giving America back to everyday working Americans. In one of the more memorable moments, the president said, "The forgotten men and women of our country will be forgotten no longer."

The fiduciary duty rule for investment brokers directly signals the tension between President Trump's pledge to working Americans and his career-long focus on big business.

AARP supports the rule, recognizing that the U.S. has an "under savings" problem. Distrust of investment advisers plays into the reluctance of ordinary Americans to engage in professionally-assisted planning for the future.  Will AARP rally retirees to resist repeal or delay of the fiduciary duty rule? 

For more, read or listen to Trump Moving to Delay Rule that Protects Workers from Bad Financial Advice.Trump Moving To Delay Rule That Protects Workers From Bad Financial Advice and White House to Investors: Put Savers' Interests First.

Warren Buffett has been counseling -- for years -- to avoid high fee "experts" for investment advice, recommending the use of index funds instead.  See e.g. Newsday's "Warren Buffett Says Don't Waste Money on Investment Fees." 

 

February 27, 2017 in Consumer Information, Estates and Trusts, Ethical Issues, Federal Statutes/Regulations, Retirement | Permalink | Comments (0)

Wednesday, February 22, 2017

Are Seniors the Target of Unfair Foreclosures in Florida Reverse Mortgage Cases?

The marketers of reverse mortgages often paint a rosy picture of how seniors will be able to draw on the equity in their homes to cover daily expenses, without risk of repayment before death.  But details of these mortgages can be overlooked and as we've reported before, seniors can be surprised when terms and conditions create traps that can lead to foreclosure.  However, from Florida, we're now hearing about cases where one of the simplest conditions -- the borrower continuing to live on site -- has become the subject of litigation.  

From Law.com:

“All of a sudden, we saw a spate of foreclosures where the mortgage companies alleged the seniors no longer lived in the home,” said Gladys Gerson, supervising attorney for Coast to Coast Legal Aid of South Florida’s senior unit. “This has been happening around the state.”

 

About a dozen similar cases reached Gerson and other attorneys at Coast to Coast, who have helped a growing number of low-income seniors fight and win dismissals despite aggressive lender litigation.

 

Florida is ground zero for seniors’ issues, but as the strategy has often proved effective, it’s likely to spread, according to defense attorneys. “If you see the volume of national advertising that’s geared to seniors, I can’t believe this is limited to Florida,” Corona’s father and partner, Ricardo, said. “The servicers are not even based in Florida, so I don’t see why they would limit themselves.”

 

Corona admits he didn’t expect a hard fight when he first reviewed El Hassan’s case, but court records show he was wrong. Over the last 10 months, the ongoing litigation yielded two hearings, 40 docket entries and attempts by both sides to collect attorney fees.

For more, read the full article, Foreclosure Litigation Strategy Takes Aim at Seniors, Attorneys Say.

Thank you to my colleague, Dickinson Law Professor Laurel Terry, for this source.  

February 22, 2017 in Consumer Information, Current Affairs, Ethical Issues, Federal Statutes/Regulations, Housing, Retirement | Permalink | Comments (0)

Thursday, February 16, 2017

Exceeding Expectations: 20 New Yorkers

Check this out! A project from "the Robert N. Butler Columbia Aging Center at Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health",  Exceeding Expectations is the stories of

20 New Yorkers from all different circumstances and backgrounds who have both exceeded life expectancy and who are disrupting commonly-held expectations of what it means to grow old.

Every few weeks, [the authors] introduce the story of a new person to our readers. You will meet a woman who cares for her 1-year-old great-grandchild, a man who was in prison for 30+ years and is trying to make up for lost time and an optometrist who has retired four times but keeps returning to work.

And check out NextAvenue's  This Is What Growing Old Really Looks Like: 12 pictures that will make you think differently about getting older.

Isn't it time for a little positive news?

February 16, 2017 in Consumer Information, Current Affairs, Other, Retirement | Permalink | Comments (0)

Friday, February 10, 2017

Setting New Fitness Records at 100+

When I first saw the news stories of the French cyclist who had set a cycling record for sixty minutes, I wasn't particularly impressed -- that is, until I realized that Mr. Robert Marchand is now age 105 and he's trying to break his own record of almost 17 miles per hour, set when he was 103.  Turns out this is part of a much larger story about fitness in aging.  From the New York Times:  

At the age of 105, the French amateur cyclist and world-record holder Robert Marchand is more aerobically fit than most 50-year-olds — and appears to be getting even fitter as he ages, according to a revelatory new study of his physiology.

 

The study, which appeared in December in the Journal of Applied Physiology, may help to rewrite scientific expectations of how our bodies age and what is possible for any of us athletically, no matter how old we are.

For more, read Lessons on Aging Well, From a 105 Year-Old Cyclist.  Inspiration for your own weekend workout, perhaps! 

February 10, 2017 in Consumer Information, Health Care/Long Term Care, Retirement, Science, Sports | Permalink

Thursday, January 26, 2017

Generational Divide: Millenials & Boomers: Financial Health

The Young Invincibles recently released a report that looks at the financial health of the Millennials. The Financial Health of Young America "compares the financial health of young Americans in 1989 compared to today’s young adults to reveal major declines across five key factors – income, assets, net wealth, home ownership and retirement savings.  In summary, Boomers had higher incomes, owned more homes, and had twice the net assets that Millennials have today."

In addition, the report notes the following key findings:

  • Millennials have earned a net wealth half that of Boomers at the same age. 
  •  Young adult workers today earn $10,000 less than young adults in 1989, a decline of 20 percent.
  •             Education attainment still an individual’s best pathway to financial security.

  • When Boomers were young adults, they owned twice the amount of assets as young adults.
  • Disturbing racial inequality persists and grows. Young African Americans’ median wealth declined by a third since 1989.
  •             Student debt blunts some of education’s benefits.

The report makes various recommendations in the following categories: skills, education,  income, employment benefits, housing policies, improving the ability to save and gain wealth,  and improve portable retirement choices.  This is the first of several reports. The full report runs 30 pages and is available here.

January 26, 2017 in Consumer Information, Current Affairs, Housing, Retirement | Permalink | Comments (0)

Wednesday, January 25, 2017

Retiring Abroad

The Denver Post ran an AP story a few weeks ago about Americans retiring abroad. Growing number of Americans are retiring outside the U.S.  highlights the increase in the number of Americans who decide to retire and live abroad. "The number grew 17 percent between 2010 and 2015 and is expected to increase over the next 10 years as more baby boomers retire... Just under 400,000 American retirees are now living abroad, according to the Social Security Administration. The countries they have chosen most often: Canada, Japan, Mexico, Germany and the United Kingdom." The article references a lower cost of living or cheaper health care as a reason some Americans choose to retire to other countries.  Climate may also be a factor.  It would be an interesting exercise for students to list the issues and considerations when clients decide to retire to another country.  Anyone want to assign this as a project?

January 25, 2017 in Consumer Information, Current Affairs, International, Retirement | Permalink | Comments (0)

Sunday, January 22, 2017

Illinois Law Professor Kaplan on "Reforming Taxation of Retirement Income"

University of Illinois Law Professor Richard Kaplan responded to my post last week, that questioned the appropriate age to compel IRA distributions, by providing a more in-depth look at the topic, via his own article, Reforming Taxation of Retirement Income.  

His recommendations include simplifying how Social Security retirement benefits are taxed, bifurcating defined contribution plan withdrawals into capital gains and ordinary income components, repealing certain exceptions to the early distribution penalty, reducing the delayed distribution penalty and adjusting the age at which it is triggered, and changing the residential gain exclusion to avoid unanticipated problems with reverse mortgages.

The 2012 Virginia Tax Review article demonstrates that increased life expectancy supports an increase to age 74 (from 71.5) as the trigger for mandatory distributions.  

Thanks, Dick!  As always, you have important analysis to share. 

January 22, 2017 in Current Affairs, Estates and Trusts, Federal Statutes/Regulations, Retirement, Social Security, Statistics | Permalink | Comments (0)

Friday, January 20, 2017

Is Age 70.5 No Longer an Appropriate Age to Compel IRA Distributions? What Sayeth Donald Trump?

Under long-standing IRS rules, IRAs and similar retirement accounts created with tax deferred income are generally subject to "required minimum distributions" when the account holder reaches age 70 and a half.  As the IRS.gov website reminds us:

  • You can withdraw more than the minimum required amount.
  • Your withdrawals will be included in your taxable income except for any part that was taxed before (your basis) or that can be received tax-free (such as qualified distributions from designated Roth accounts).

As the Wall Street Journal recently reported, as baby boomers are now reaching that magic age of 70 1/2+, there will be huge mandatory transfers of savings, creating taxable income, even if they don't actually need the retirement funds yet.

Boomers hold roughly $10 trillion in tax-deferred savings accounts, according to an estimate by Edward Shane, a managing director at Bank of New York Mellon Corp. Over the next two decades, the number of people age 70 or older is expected to nearly double to 60 million—roughly the population of Italy.

The account holders may not actually "need" the money in their early 70s, an age now often seen as "young" for retirement, and they may still be in high tax brackets, thus cancelling the original reasons for the savings and deferral.  The rules were made when average lifespans were shorter. 

On average, men and women who turned 65 in 2015 can expect to live a further 19 and 21.5 years respectively, according to the U.S. Social Security Administration’s most recent life-expectancy estimates; those post-65 expectancies are up from 15.4 and 19 years for those who turned 65 in 1985.

....[D]istributions are expected to grow exponentially over the next two decades because of a 1986 change to federal law designed to prevent the loss of tax revenue. Congress said savers who turn 70½ have to start taking withdrawals from tax-deferred savings plans or face a penalty. Specifically, retirees who turn 70½ have until April of the following calendar year to pull roughly 3.65% from their IRA and 401(k) funds, subject to slight differences in the way the funds are treated by the Internal Revenue Service. Then they must withdraw an increasing portion of their assets every year based on IRS formulas. The rules don’t apply to defined-benefit pensions, where retirees get automatic distributions.

There is a 50% penalty for failure to make required minimum withdrawals.  And not all retirees are aware of the consequences of failing to make with withdrawals, especially when accounts were created originally by a spouse who is no longer alive or is unable to manage the account personally. From the Wall Street Journal article:

Bronwyn Shone, a financial adviser in Pleasanton, Calif., said many of her clients aren’t aware of their legal obligation to take distributions. “I think some people thought they could let the money grow tax-deferred forever,” she said.

Certainly the federal government wants -- and an argument can certainly be made that it "needs" -- more tax revenues, but if the goal of the permitted deferral is to encourage saving for the the "real" needs of retirement, which can include disability, health care, long-term care, and other "late in aging" needs, is it still realistic to set the mandatory threshold for withdrawals at age 70.5?  For example, Donald Trump is just today commencing his "new job" at age 70 and a half, and yet he could be subject to the RMDs for any IRAs. Maybe this is a financial issue that might interest the new Trump Administration? 

For more, read Pulling Retirement Cash, but Not by Choice, by WSJ reporters V. Monga and S. Krouse (paywall protected article from 1/16/17).

January 20, 2017 in Current Affairs, Estates and Trusts, Ethical Issues, Federal Statutes/Regulations, Health Care/Long Term Care, Retirement, Social Security | Permalink | Comments (0)

Thursday, January 19, 2017

NYT: Who Will Care for the Caregivers?

The New York Times has a recent article that resonates with me.  I am spending my sabbatical time in Arizona in order to be of more help to my sister with our parents who are both in their 90s. Neither my sister or I have children and we sometimes question what will happen with us if we reach our parents' age with similar needs. Here's an excerpt from the piece that gets right to the point:

While the demand for caregivers is growing because of longer life expectancies and more complex medical care, the supply is shrinking, a result of declining marriage rates, smaller family sizes and greater geographic separation. In 2015, there were seven potential family caregivers for every person over 80. By 2030, this ratio is expected to be four-to-one, and by 2050, there will be fewer than three potential caregivers for every older American.

For more, read the thoughtful essay Who Will Care for the Caregivers? by Dr. Dhruv Khullar, a resident physician at Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School. 

January 19, 2017 in Cognitive Impairment, Current Affairs, Dementia/Alzheimer’s, Ethical Issues, Health Care/Long Term Care, Retirement, Statistics | Permalink | Comments (0)

Wednesday, January 11, 2017

When Was the Last Time You Looked at Your Retirement Account?

A recent article in the Washington Post by Michelle Singletary suggested a New Year's resolution, knowing your retirement account. Resolve to take a closer look at your retirement account offers insights from author (Empire of the Fund: The Way We Save Now), William A. Birdthistle, who participated recently in her online discussion.   The article contains 3 questions and Mr. Birdthistle's answers, one of which discusses in what types of investments to invest retirement funds. Ms. Singletary closes her article with this advice to readers: "Let 2017 be the year that you take a closer look at your retirement savings. Don’t just blindly throw money in your account. No one can predict the unpredictable when it comes to your nest egg. But at least you can become better informed about what there is to know for sure."

Thanks to Professor Naomi Cahn for sending us this article.

January 11, 2017 in Consumer Information, Current Affairs, Retirement | Permalink | Comments (0)

Monday, January 9, 2017

Social Security Full Retirement Age in 2017

Social Security's blog, Social Security Matters, posted the full retirement age info for 2017. 2017 Brings New Changes to Full Retirement Age explains that for those between 1955-1956, full retirement age is 66 and 2 months.  The post also explains what the increase in full retirement age means to benefits: "[a]s the full retirement age continues to increase, there are greater reductions in benefits if you claim them before you reach full retirement age.  For example, if you apply for benefits in 2017 at age 62, your monthly benefit amount will be reduced nearly 26 percent." The blog also offers tips to those who are contemplating retirement along with helpful links.

January 9, 2017 in Consumer Information, Current Affairs, Federal Statutes/Regulations, Retirement, Social Security | Permalink | Comments (0)

Thursday, November 17, 2016

Home Sharing for Elders-Mark Your Calendars

AARP is offering a online chat on November 21 from 3-4 p.m. on Home Sharing: A Powerful Option to Help Older Americans Stay in their Homes. The website offers a summary of this upcoming chat:

The vast majority of older adults have told AARP that they want to “age in place” by remaining in their current home and neighborhood. But much of the U.S. housing stock isn’t very aging-friendly (stairs are an example), and millions of older Americans face economic hardships that challenge their ability to afford the costs of safe and suitable housing.

The rise of home sharing — in which people rent space in their residence to a traveler or short-term tenant — is allowing people of all ages (but especially older adults) to literally earn an income from where they live.

Join AARP’s Nancy LeaMond, former Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter, Airbnb executive Sarah Bianchi and Gene Sperling, an economist and consultant to Airbnb, for an online discussion and Q&A about the benefits of home sharing for older adults and the new Airbnd report “Home Sharing: A Powerful Option to Help Older Americans Stay in their Homes.”

The accompanying report will be available here starting  November 21.

November 17, 2016 in Consumer Information, Current Affairs, Housing, Retirement, Webinars | Permalink | Comments (0)

Wednesday, November 9, 2016

A Two-Question Quiz on The Timing For Your Retirement

The Wall Street Journal ran an article last month about a study that focused on people's decision-making regarding whether to retire.  Before Retiring, Take This Simple Test reports on study by "Philipp Schreiber and Martin Weber at the University of Mannheim in Germany, [where]  a simple two-question quiz [was developed] that can help predict whether you’ll regret the timing of your own retirement."  Two questions-that's pretty easy, right. Here we go, it won't take you long to answer them:

Question 1: You just learned that you are due a tax refund. If you’d like, you can get the $1,000 refund right away. Alternatively, you can get a $1,100 refund in 10 months. Which do you prefer?

Question 2: You just learned that you are due a tax refund. If you’d like, you can get a $1,000 refund in 18 months. Alternatively, you can get a $1,100 refund in 28 months? Which do you prefer?

How did you answer them? According to the article, "[t]he point of the exercise is to measure the consistency of a person’s time preferences. Someone with consistent time preferences should answer both questions the same way—choosing the early option both times, or the delayed option both times. Such consistency is a requirement for making financial plans that you stick with."  There are folks who don't answer consistently, and that's a red flag, the article explains. Those folks  "exhibit a tendency known as present bias, or hyperbolic discounting. They strongly prefer rewards that arrive right away." As for timing of retirement, the article notes that study shows that those who provided inconsistent answers ultimately regret the timing (too early) of their retirement.

The article suggests some positive applications of the study results. For those of us who participate in savings via payroll deductions, such programs could be improved "if they were personalized according to the results of the two-question quiz. Consider a person who exhibits a strong bias for receiving rewards in the present. Given the likelihood that she’ll be tempted by an early retirement, she might want to be defaulted to a higher savings rate during her working years. This will help her avoid future regret over the timing of her retirement decision, since she will have sufficient savings."  The article goes further, suggesting changes to enrollment in Social Security to minimize buyer's remorse for early retirement (evidently a lot of folks start drawing Social Security at age 62, which we all know results in a permanent reduction in benefits).

The study referenced in the WSJ article is reported in The Influence of Time Preferences on Retirement Timing. The abstract explains

This study analyzes the empirical relation between the decision when to retire and individuals time preferences. Theoretical models predict that hyperbolic discounting leads to dynamic inconsistent retirement timing. Conducting an online survey with more than 3,000 participants, we confirm this prediction. The analysis shows, that time inconsistent participants decrease their planned retirement age with increasing age. The temptation of early retirement seems to become stronger the closer retirement comes. We show that the negative effect of age is between 1.5 and 3 times stronger for participants who can be classified as hyperbolic discounters. In addition, we find that time inconsistent participants actually retire earlier. On average, the most time inconsistent participants retire about 2.2 years earlier. The time inconsistent behavior has severe consequences: Time inconsistent participants are ex post more likely to regret their retirement timing decision. Also, the unplanned early retirement leads to a constant decrease of retirement benefits of about 13%.

The full paper can be downloaded from the SSRN link here.

 

November 9, 2016 in Consumer Information, Current Affairs, Retirement, Social Security | Permalink | Comments (0)

Tuesday, November 8, 2016

Using Age-Progression Virtual Reality as an Incentive to Save

The Wall Street Journal recently published an article by Maddy Dychtwald, co-founder of Age Wave, on using virtual reality (VR) to help folks save. How Virtual Reality Can Boost Retirement Savings reports on a project and explains how it unfolded

Professor Hal Hershfield of UCLA’s Anderson School of Management partnered with Daniel Goldstein of Microsoft Research, Jeremy Bailenson, director of Stanford’s Virtual Human Interaction Lab, and several other Stanford researchers to see if connecting people with their future selves could affect their willingness to save for that future self. They took photos of college-age research subjects and digitally altered half of them to create virtual avatars at age 65—complete with jowls, bags under the eyes, and gray hair.

Why don't people do a better job of saving for retirement? According to the article, experts think it's psychological to some extent. "When you’re in your 20s and 30s, you can’t even imagine your life at 65 or 95. If you can’t imagine it, chances are you’re not planning for it."

Back tot he project.  Digitally aging the participants wasn't the end of the project. Next the participants were provided with "goggles and sensors and were dropped into virtual reality, where they faced a mirror reflecting either their current self or their future self. As part of the experiment, they were each given $1,000 to spend. They could either buy a gift for someone special, invest in retirement, plan a fun event, or put money into a checking account."

This is getting intriguing. Want to bet what happened? According to the article, "[t]hose research ...  greeted by their aged avatar put more than twice as much money toward retirement as those who saw their contemporaneous selves." The researchers, to double check the results, also showed "some research participants ... the aged avatars of other test subjects to see if that impacted their choices. It didn’t. Only those who saw themselves at retirement age were likely to invest in their future." 

The  WSJ article explains that VR tools are under development "to offer experiential solutions to our nation’s lack of retirement planning... [and] provide a visceral experience that might even immerse [the user] in several different future scenarios, so [the user] can experience, for instance, what it’s like to live with limited funds at 65, 75 or 80."

The article about the study, Increasing Saving Behavior Through Age-Progressed Renderings of the Future Self, is available here.

This is the abstract from the research study article:

Many people fail to save what they need to for retirement (Munnell, Webb, and Golub-Sass 2009). Research on excessive discounting of the future suggests that removing the lure of immediate rewards by pre-committing to decisions, or elaborating the value of future rewards can both make decisions more future-oriented. In this article, we explore a third and complementary route, one that deals not with present and future rewards, but with present and future selves. In line with thinkers who have suggested that people may fail, through a lack of belief or imagination, to identify with their future selves (; ), we propose that allowing people to interact with age-progressed renderings of themselves will cause them to allocate more resources toward the future. In four studies, participants interacted with realistic computer renderings of their future selves using immersive virtual reality hardware and interactive decision aids. In all cases, those who interacted with virtual future selves exhibited an increased tendency to accept later monetary rewards over immediate ones.

Wow, just wow.  Now, can we get these for our students?

November 8, 2016 in Consumer Information, Current Affairs, Retirement, Statistics | Permalink | Comments (0)

Sunday, November 6, 2016

Too Poor to Retire

Our local newspaper, the Tampa Bay Times, recently ran a story about elders who work at low-paying jobs. Although they may wish to retire, they find themselves unable to afford retirement.  For some low-income workers, retirement is only a dream explains that for low-wage workers can't afford to retire. "Studies have found that about one-third of low-wage workers ... say they'll never be able to afford retirement. The problem is particularly acute among minority women... mA 2016 study by the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found that a quarter of workers 50 or older say they won't retire. Among low-wage workers, earning less than $50,000 a year, it was 33 percent."

Consider the following statistics:

A 2016 report by the nonpartisan research nonprofit National Institute on Retirement Security shows that many black, Hispanic and Asian women have to work past retirement age to be able to afford basic expenses. Women were 80 percent more likely than men to be impoverished.

The research showed that for men ages 70 to 74, about 19 percent of their income comes from wages. For women, it's about 15 percent.

Some low-wage workers will be able to collect Social Security, which will be of some help, but as the story notes, some without legal status won't be able to draw Social Security.  One of the individuals featured in the story is 70 years old and works 6 days a week as the caregiver a 100 year-old person.

So what happens if the low-wage worker falls ill and is unable to continue to work?  Might family step in to help? Are there options?

November 6, 2016 in Consumer Information, Current Affairs, Health Care/Long Term Care, Retirement, Social Security | Permalink | Comments (1)

Monday, October 31, 2016

What is "Early Onset" Dementia?

Recently, San Diego residents learned the sad news that a much appreciated former coach of the Chargers football team, Marty Schottenheimer, age 73, has Alzheimer's Disease.  The article I read called it "early onset Alzheimer's."  Apparently the original diagnosis was made in 2011, when retired Coach Schottennheimer was approximately age 68.  Our wishes to "Coach Marty" and his family. 

It is, perhaps, also appropriate to point out that "early onset dementia" is different than than "early diagnosis of dementia." Medical experts typically refer to early onset dementia (sometimes EOAD for Alzheimer's type dementia) only for individuals age 65 or younger, often in a person's 50s, or even earlier.  

As an example from the sports world, legendary University of Tennessee women's basketball coach, Pat Summitt, publicly revealed her diagnosis of "dementia, Alzheimer's type," in 2011, at age 59.  She continued as the head coach for another academic year, before electing to retire (with, in her words, a "small r").  

In the last chapter of her third book, Sum It Up, Pat wrote movingly about her final year of coaching and the impact of her diagnosis, also admitting that she had probably been functioning "well" with Alzheimer's for about three years before she, with the help of her son, sought a diagnosis.  She explains how the fact of her diagnosis also led them to explore treatments and management techniques they might otherwise have ignored.  

As larger numbers of adults are living longer, I think we are hearing more frequently directly from persons in high positions about diagnoses of Alzheimer's or other neurocognitive impairments. This is important, because when healthy-living sports heroes are affected, we are more likely to pay attention and seek answers for everyone.  Whenever I see such news, even as I'm sad, I admire the courage of the speakers and am grateful for their candor. Seeing famous people continue to function, make realistic plans, and enjoy life is important for the "not-so-famous" too.  Their public candor highlights the critical need for discovery of preventions and cures for everyone.  

I suspect that when a member of the press -- or the nonmedical public -- refers to "early onset Alzheimer's," it is a reflection of hope, hope that any diagnosis at 70, 75, or even 80 must be unusual, rare, and therefore not a threat to "me" before some magically "older" age that is still far off, in the future.  

October 31, 2016 in Cognitive Impairment, Consumer Information, Dementia/Alzheimer’s, Retirement | Permalink | Comments (0)

2017 COLA & Inflation: Not Keeping Up

SSA announced recently that there would be a COLA for 2017, but it is a teensy COLA, actually, a .03% increase. Big gap between Social Security cost-of-living adjustment and retiree inflation offers a critical look at the 2017 COLA compared to inflation and how the government calculates the COLA using the consumer price index. An article in USA Today about the 2017 COLA noted that this COLA won't allow beneficiaries to get ahead, even slightly. Instead, they will likely lose ground, because of the Medicare Part B premium costs

The nation’s 65 million Social Security beneficiaries will receive a paltry 0.3% cost-of-living adjustment to their monthly checks in 2017, the government announced Tuesday. In dollars and cents, it means the average retired beneficiary’s check will rise about $5 to $1,360 per month in 2017.

The even more bitter pill: Many current Medicare beneficiaries won’t be able to spend any of that extra money. Instead, they’ll likely have to send their COLA straight back to Uncle Sam to cover higher Medicare Part B premiums.

Almost a third of Medicare's 56 million beneficiaries could see their premiums jump 22% next year, according to the Medicare Trustees Report, putting the cost at an estimated $149 per month. Those unlucky 30% of beneficiaries include people enrolling in Part B for the first time in 2017, people who are on Medicare but who aren't currently taking Social Security benefits and current enrollees who pay an income-related higher premium.

October 31, 2016 in Consumer Information, Current Affairs, Federal Statutes/Regulations, Health Care/Long Term Care, Medicare, Retirement, Social Security | Permalink | Comments (1)