CBS News/ November 11, 2011, 10:54 AM

Most baby boomers expect to work after 65: Poll

For generations, 65 has been America's traditional retiring age. But for the baby boomers retiring at that age may not be realistic.

According to a poll by the Associated Press and LifeGoesStrong.com, a website for the middle-aged, among baby boomers, 73 percent plan to work past retirement -- a number that's up six percent since March.

"If things keep up, this is what we'll all assume," personal finance expert and CBS News financial contributor Carmen Wong Ulrich said.

So why the shift in thinking?

Wong Ulrich said, "Since the poll was taken in March and then the next poll was in early October before the gains of October, the Dow (Jones Industrial Average) was down 10 percent. So it's an additional big hit -- 62 percent of those surveyed said they took a big hit with one or many of their retirement vehicles. For example, in terms of IRA and their work IRAs, that they have lost on average 42 percent, 41 percent in personal investments and real estate -- we don't necessarily think about real estate as an investment -- but that's something that we have all depended on as a foundation; 29 percent of respondents ... have lost value and equity there."

"Early Show" co-anchor Rebecca Jarvis added that a lot of people think of moving when they retire. And, all of the sudden, if you have a home that's decreased in value, either you can't move or you get less to retire on."

Wong Ulrich said almost a third of respondents are considering a move. She said, "(They) will have to move in retirement to downsize to be able to afford to retire."

However, Wong Ulrich says there are things people can do to prepare for retirement if they're closing in on 65.

She said, "The usual plan is to withdraw four percent of the retirement savings. ... You've got to be more flexible with your plan. You can kind of react and adapt to what's going on in the market. So if four percent doesn't work for you, maybe you can go down to three percent for a year when the market is down. When the market recovers, go back up to four. Make sure someone runs simulations for you at least once a year so you can see if you are on track."

"Also, what about your asset allocation?" Wong Ulrich said. "People think 65 is when the time bomb goes off. ... Guess what? You've got another 10 to 20 years, hopefully, that you can keep that money, hopefully recover it, even grow some, but it's if you have a 10-year window that you need the money, the money should not be exposed to the market. You have more time, so make sure the assets reflect the time frame for retirement."

Wong Ulrich advised that people adapt.

"Adapt your spending and saving habits. Really hunker down," she said. "Make sure you're up on technology. Use all the technology at your disposal to cut back on costs. Make sure you are saving automatically. Those are things that you can do to be pro-active about it, instead of just sitting back and staying with the same program."

© 2011 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
8 Comments Add a Comment
linkicon reporticon emailicon
formerusmcsgt1 says:
Many can't retire because they spent what would be their retirement saving on frivolities during their lives. I've been watching my contemporaries do so for decades. (I'm, 58.)

Buiying the most expesive house they could qualify for to impress others.

Buying more car and more often than they could afford - again, to impress others.

I'm done @ 61 and retiring to the south coast of Guatemala and they'll work 'till they die. Mainly because I haven't lived my life trying to impress others with luxuries I couldn't afford and retire early as well.

So, who wins?

Me.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
get_down says:
After working for the same IT Company for more than 25 years, I recently retired. My better-half and I live on my pension and my Social Security benefit. Before my retirement, I've being keeping track of our yearly expenses for a few years by using a Spread-Sheet which showed we could survive in our retirement living on the above mentioned two resources alone and pass along our safety net to our offspring so that they could have a head-start in their lives. God bless everyone.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
tsigili says:
The preference for welfare, in this country, means that the economy is going to remain in the tank, for an indefinite period, probably quite extended.

That means fewer people can take retirement, due to losses in 401K accounts, loses on home values, inability to sell homes, and other financial factors, that impact on retirement.

Of course, people are having to postpone their retirement, IF they can. Problem is.....many, many employers are laying off the over 50 age group, because they can simply replace them, with younger, cheaper employees. (Don't even try, to argue that's illegal. It is happening every day, because companies ALWAYS get around that law.)
reply
1notrub11 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
I agree

Particularly in states where the employment situation is "at will", such as California. They, in fact, don't really even have to have a solid reason to eliminate the position and create another one.

I found myself in a situation where the company I worked for simply closed. No matter what the law says about age discrimination or what you might think about the value of experience - the employer controls the situation. Each case is, of course, different - but overall, I have to agree with your assessment.
linkicon reporticon emailicon
LRM216 says:
I am coming up to my 65th birthday, and only pray to God that my health remains good so that I am able to continue to work. I could never exist on just social security, and with the recent hits to my 401K - I'm not going to live high on the hog! Received a breast cancer diagnose for my 62nd birthday, and am continuing to "thrive," am a widow and also raise my 16 year old grand-daughter, whose Mom died last March (my youngest daughter). So I don't agree with some of the posters on board that feel most boomers will be retiring by 65. Not most of those I know. I just pray that the decision will still be mine to make in the coming years, and not foisted upon me due to a medical recurrence - as I have a child to get through college.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
brooklynjoys says:
Totally disagree with your "polls". I'm a boomer and know so many others who have already retired and if not - they will MOST certainly be retired at age 65. Did you even hear how absolutely absurd sitting there and telling people they won't be able to retire until 80 really sounds like? People, scale down, sell the house that is worth less than what it was when you bought it and move into something affordable - AND LIVE WITHIN YOUR MEANS. And by all means retire and enjoy your life and have something to truly live for instead of making some fat cats even fatter!! Spend time with family and friends, travel as much as you can afford AND RETIRE AS EARLY AS YOU POSSIBLY CAN. These polls are nothing but scare tactics. If you lost money then adjust to it - AND RETIRE.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
KJeroH says:
Each boom is shorter and each bust deeper, each recovery takes longer and doesn't bring you to the same point. We never fully recovered before the 2007 bust came because wages had been stagnant with buying power actually declining. Now since the last bust, unemployment is even hitting people in their 40s and 50s. I know a couple of people who were forced into early retirement, received lousy packages. Then after the bust, they can't even sell their houses and instead have hit their 401(k)s to get by. And the next generation won't be better off than this one. Depending on whether the West is ready to move into the present so it can walk into the future, the next two generations may pay.
reply
1notrub11 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Have to agree about boom/bust. In fact, I don't think we have even recovered from the 2000 bust.
Scroll Left Scroll Right