I was always uncomfortable with the idea of retirement apartment buildings.
They were owned by corporations and provided services for financially
comfortable, relatively healthy, elderly people: a dining room for meals,
transportation to shopping areas, cleaning and laundry services, often a beauty
parlor and bank on the premises. If they were called facilitated living
facilities, they also offered physical care at increasing levels of expense.
But if one was no longer ambulatory, if one's needs went beyond what that
retirement facility could offer, then one was out of there. If you'd used up
most of your savings, if you didn't have a continuing dependable, very good
income, then what? I know what, a second or third tier nursing home which is so
bad, it's beyond description, at least here where I live.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2020 2:03 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: America Faces an Epidemic of Retirement
Insecurity
It's a sad, old refrain...the rich get rich and the poor get poorer.
It's not just an Epidemic of Retirement Insecurity. It's a snowball gathering
size and speed as it plows its way to Hell.
Many of the comfortable and affordable retirement facilities have begun pricing
themselves out of business. Long established apartments have reduced their
services to the bare bones, and then sold out to larger national chains. These
chains operate on tighter profit margins, and the very first two things that
happen is that the monthly rent goes up and the services go down. Just
following this one line, residents, faced with costs rising so fast that they
will spend their last days under a bridge, locate cheaper and less desirable
housing in more affordable dwellings and cut their overhead by discharging care
givers. As the rise in the cost of existing continues, Seniors in private
homes also must cut back, no longer able to afford services such as gardeners,
house cleaners, and care givers for spouses or elderly parent. All of those
workers will be forced to cut back in turn, continuing the downward rush of the
snowball. And with most communities, when customers begin to stay home, the
stores do not reduce prices, they reduce staff. At the bottom of the decline,
when the snowball splatters, former "middle class" towns will have been
transformed into Slumvilles For most, the road back turns out to have been a
one way road.
Carl Jarvis
On 3/3/20, miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
America Faces an Epidemic of Retirement Insecurity Kevin Labianco /
Flickr The Dow Jones Industrial Average just dropped nearly 1,200
points in a single day because of the coronavirus's impact on global
trade, leaving many Americans sick with worry.
It's not just a rapidly spreading, mysterious disease that made
Americans feel vulnerable. The Dow's freefall erased millions of
dollars from retirement accounts and exposed another kind of
epidemic-retirement insecurity.
There once was a time when the combination of company pension plans,
Social Security and personal savings could carry retirees through
their golden years.
No longer. Most companies eliminated defined-benefit plans providing a
reliable income stream and implemented 401(k) plans that leave workers
at the mercy of stock market volatility, like the kind that rattled
investors recently and crushed workers in 2008.
Today, Americans have so much angst about the future that about 29
percent of baby boomers, 36 percent of Gen Xers and 77 percent of
millennials fear they'll never be able to retire or will have to work
past normal retirement age.
Americans work hard so they can provide for their families and enjoy
retirement. But no matter how carefully they plan, their retirements
depend on factors beyond their control.
Patricia Cotton, a home health aide in Maryland, lost half of her
$150,000 investment nest egg in the 2008 recession and retired 12
years later than planned.
In all, Americans lost about $2.4 trillion in retirement earnings
during the second half of 2008, and the average household lost a third
of its net worth.
Cotton was one of many who experienced losses so severe that they had
to work longer than intended. The memory of the 2008 recession still
gives Americans retirement jitters, and stock market drops like we've
just seen compound the fear.
Before 401(k) plans dominated the retirement landscape, companies
provided defined-benefit pensions. Workers earned
specific-defined-amounts based on their wages and years of service.
When workers retired, the employer provided those amounts no matter how the
stock market fared.
But now, even workers and retirees with these plans can lose what they
earned. For example, 1.3 million Americans are in about 150
multiemployer pension plans at risk of collapsing.
These plans, enrolling workers from two or more companies in fields
such as transportation and paper, lost investment earnings in the 2001
and 2008 recessions. Some companies also used bankruptcies to wriggle
out of pension obligations. Now, the plans owe more money to
beneficiaries than they have coming in.
Because of financial problems plaguing her late husband's plan, Mary
Fry saw her pension cut by more than half, to $1,514 a month, in her
early 70s.
"It's worrisome," she said, "and I don't think I need worry in my life
right now."
The U.S. House last year passed the Butch Lewis Act, a measure that
would provide low-interest loans to save multiemployer plans, but
Senate Republicans refuse to consider it.
Instead, Republican Sens. Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Lamar Alexander
of Tennessee want to prop up the plans with higher taxes on workers
and retirees. Workers didn't create the problem, but Grassley and
Alexander expect them to fix it.
The senators also want to impose hefty new fees on multiemployer
plans, something that would push even the healthy ones into financial ruin.
Meanwhile, pensioners agonize about losing houses or paying medical
bills if their plans fold. Others try to conserve as much as they can.
Alan Ebert, a United Steelworkers (USW) member who retired about four
years ago from a Louisiana paper mill, is in a multiemployer plan at
risk of insolvency in 10 years.
He wants to put off collecting Social Security as long as he can.
Retirees who delay collecting benefits after their eligibility dates
get bigger checks when they do tap into the system, and Ebert hopes to
maximize his Social Security in case his multiemployer plan fails.
But Social Security also is imperiled. Some Americans fear it won't
even be around when they're old enough to retire.
If Congress fails to bolster the trust funds within about 15 years,
the program will have to reduce benefits by about 20 percent. That
would impoverish millions of retirees.
Mass retirement of baby boomers stresses the program. By 2030, Social
Security will have 44 recipients for every 100 workers paying into the
system, up from 35 recipients per 100 workers in 2014. But that isn't
the only reason for the funding crisis.
Rich people don't pay their fair share in Social Security taxes.
That's left billions in badly needed funding on the table.
Federal law ostensibly requires Americans to pay 6.2 percent of their
wages in Social Security taxes. However, earnings above $137,700
aren't taxed at all. That means millionaires and billionaires really
pay a Social Security tax of less than 1 percent.
While average Americans pay Social Security taxes all year, a person
making
$1 million stopped contributing on February 19. Bigger earners
finished even earlier.
Making millionaires and billionaires pay Social Security taxes at the
same rate as ordinary Americans would stabilize the program.
Under the current, broken system, the rich feather their own nests at
everyone else's expense. They enjoy cushy retirements while average
workers struggle to provide for the present, let alone the future.
Because of decades of stagnating wages, many workers live paycheck to
paycheck. Some juggle multiple jobs.
They're saddled with medical bills and college debt and can't afford
an unexpected $400 expense.
Many Americans have nothing to bank for old age.
Roberta Gordon, for example, worked all of her life. But she held a
variety of low-paying jobs that provided no pension, meager Social
Security benefits and zero savings.
So, at 76, Gordon spent her Saturdays working at a California grocery
store, handing out food samples for $50 a shift. She got her own
groceries at a church food bank.
Passing the Butch Lewis Act is one step the Senate can take to ease
Americans' retirement insecurity. Making the rich contribute their
fair share to Social Security is another commonsense move Congress
owes the American people.
Right now, many worry that their resources will expire before they do.
This article was produced by the Independent Media Institute.
Tom Conway is the international president of the United Steelworkers
Union (USW).
