Not the retiring type

Boomers keep working to keep up

Dear John: I enjoyed your recent column about workers over 65 staying glued to their seats as I am one of those workers at 68 years old.

A major reason for me and some of my colleagues staying in the workforce is that many of us had big jobs throughout our careers that paid quite well. Through downsizing and continuous acquisitions and mergers, many of us were let go. That resulted in our regaining employment but at much lower income ranges than we were used to.

Although some of us knew the bubble would eventually burst and saved for a rainy day, our savings power was greatly reduced because of the income drops.

As a result, many boomers like myself are now working 3 days per week not only because we want to stay busy and challenged, but also because of the extra income we bring in.

This allows us to maintain a lifestyle we enjoyed during our peak years with some gentle downsizing.

Thank you for the great job you do covering the employment market with an accurate, true vision of what is actually happening in the marketplace. LO

Dear LO: Thanks for that view.

Others have suggested that the fact that full Social Security payments don’t start for many until age 66 is also keeping people in the workforce.

And it could also be that people are lying to Labor Department surveyors when they say they are working.

Nobody wants to tell a stranger that they are sitting at home watching TV all day long and not an active member of the working class.

I have several friends who’ve retired, and they seem perfectly happy. Their financial advisers have told them how long their money will last — like that commercial on TV — and they figure the kids will at least inherit their house.

If they live too long, that might not turn out to be a good plan.

Dear John: So baby boomers are not leaving the workforce.

Why? Because, though educated, etc., we simply don’t have the income to retire. Nor do we have the rich retirement others have gathered.

I will need to work until at least 73 years of age (I’m now 64), due to divorce, the implosion of my career choice, the housing crash of ’08 and wretched student loans (for one son) as ordered by the state of Connecticut for divorced parents. Isn’t life great! J.Z. Dear J.Z. Do I have to ask the police to do a wellness check at your house?

Hope things work out better for you. On the bright side, the Labor Department says there are lots of jobs out there. Maybe one of them will be your dream job that you’ll want to do beyond 73. Dear John: You overlook one additional reason for the workforce participation rate for those 65 and older: Maybe people simply enjoy their jobs and feel productive and fulfilled in their work.

Though I am only 61 and work part time, I enjoy tutoring at a college where I am around smart, highly motivated young people; thus, I intend to continue this “work” as long as I am mentally and physically able.

It’s not “work” — it’s actually invigorating.

Also, many older people have few financial concerns, so we can do what we want to without regard for money.

I typically earn 5 to 15 times my “pay” in annual investment income. I appreciate your insights on the topic, but you seem to be a bit jaded. D.M.

Dear D.M. OK, let’s add “likes to work” as one of the reasons more people aren’t retiring so that younger people can take their positions in the workplace.

Thanks for the input.

Dear John: I have been retired three years, having left at 57.

I think an additional reason for the delay in retiring is the cost of health care. I am blessed to financially be able to retire, but my annual health-care cost (ObamaCare) still stings. I pay $14,000 a year. It is a high deductible and high co-pay plan.

My sense is that not many can afford that type of cost.

My wife does not work. She is 55. Our total health-care cost is $24,000 a year. V.S. Dear V.S. Ouch! And let’s say you are blessed to live another 30 years. That’s $720,000 just for health care, and without accounting for inflation.

Luckily, you can get on Medicare at a cheaper rate in just eight years. The missus will have to wait 10.