Middle aged boomers getting squeezed

[2putz]

In case you didnt see it there was a very interesting story in the New York Times a few weeks ago - "Not a Good Time to be Middle-Aged"
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/16/business/economy/16charts.html

The article says being in your 30's or 40's is the worst place to be in the current recession. Basically if you are younger you have time to rebuild your portfolio (and you probably didnt have much in it anyway). If you are over 65 you might have had more conservative investments, have cut back on your expenses already, and maybe even a traditional pension. Also, you are probably out of the job market. People aged 50-64 lost the most money in the recent stock market crash. They might not be having immediate problems paying bills, but their retirement lifestyles could be imperiled.

The Times was reporting on a poll by the Pew Research Center.

[classof70]

October 15, 2009. The New York Times has a special section that it devoted to retirementhttp://www.nytimes.com/retirement. Part of it chronicles how people are coping on reduced resources (controlling their spending, mostly).There's a very helpful article on negotiating your way through Medicare once you turn 65, including a discussion on the various options(Part A, B, and D), along with the low down on Medigap insurance coverages.Part of the best advice there is to go to www.medicare.gov - this is one of the best of all of the government web sites.

[admin]

Unfortunately this is a sad and continuing story. Most boomers didnt save enough and they might have had to leave the workforce earlier than they thought the would. The Wall Street Journal is reporting that 47% of early boomers won't have enough money to pay basic retirement costs. And because they are not talking beyond basic costs, the prospects are bleak.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/16/60-percent-of-baby-boomer_n_683191.html