People who don't save for retirement

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those stats might not be accurate. Average 401k balance doesn’t mean total net worth.

I have a Roth IRA with only $7000 in it and another IRA with 60k. One of my 401k’s has 120k. Total net worth is in the millions.

The you did save. Not relevant. Social security.

People these days job hop all the time so there aren’t very many people with huge 7 figure retirement accounts unless you consolidate them or stayed in the same job for 20 years

It’s amateur hour not to roll over. Anyone who earns enough to reach 7 figures should be embarrassed

+1. Ours have always been consolidated.
Much better investment options that way, as well as who wants to keep track of "who is managing which 401k this year?"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those stats might not be accurate. Average 401k balance doesn’t mean total net worth.

I have a Roth IRA with only $7000 in it and another IRA with 60k. One of my 401k’s has 120k. Total net worth is in the millions.

The you did save. Not relevant. Social security.

People these days job hop all the time so there aren’t very many people with huge 7 figure retirement accounts unless you consolidate them or stayed in the same job for 20 years

Why wouldn't you consolidate them so you don't have to keep track of multiple 401ks? I guess the same reason most people don't have wills and trusts.

Spread risk. You can consolidate all the old ones into a rollover IRA at one brokerage, but start a new one when you start a new job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will be working until I die. I can't afford to retire. That's for rich people.

Same. I live paycheck to paycheck. I'm single and don't have the benefit of a second income. It doesn't leave much to save for retirement.

Find a roommate and split expenses.

Beyond age 24/25, who wants a roommate? It can create so many issues. You sign a 1 year lease, they want to move at the end, so you have to relocate (and/or find new roommates) to a 1 bedroom, you need at least a few days of overlap, you have to pay movers or do the work yourself, etc. If you have to pay for 1 extra month because of moving apartments, you have negated the savings of having roommates.

My kid has seen it happen with too many of their friends, so they happily pay the premium for their own 1 bedroom and space.

I rented a room in a group house until I was 32. I saved a lot of money that way. The only reason I moved out was when my grandmother died and left me her condo. We all had individual leases with our landlord so there were no issues with people moving out and needing to move or pay their portion of the rent. DCUMs are such snobs.

Outside of college housing, there are not many places where landlords rent "rooms" to individuals with each having their own lease. The scenario I described above is real and can end up costing you $2K+, which negates the savings of having a roommate.

Not true. My son lives in a house like this in Baltimore now and he lived in one in DC. Both after college. Not many college grads can afford their own place anymore.

I lived in a group house with young professionals until I turned 30. I knew a lot people in similar situations at that time. I’m 51 now. I don’t think this is a new phenomenon.

Dh also lived in a group house until we married. There were 5 bedrooms, 2 baths with 5 separate leases. The head roommate charged each person 1/5 of the utilities each month.

I have rental properties including one with four bedrooms and I include in the listing that I can only rent to 3 unrelated adults per town code, and only have parking spots for 2 cars. As a landlord who self-manages, the group housing situation is a nightmare and the neighbors hate it. I don't know how or why others manage these setups.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those stats might not be accurate. Average 401k balance doesn’t mean total net worth.

I have a Roth IRA with only $7000 in it and another IRA with 60k. One of my 401k’s has 120k. Total net worth is in the millions.

The you did save. Not relevant. Social security.

People these days job hop all the time so there aren’t very many people with huge 7 figure retirement accounts unless you consolidate them or stayed in the same job for 20 years

It’s amateur hour not to roll over. Anyone who earns enough to reach 7 figures should be embarrassed

+1. Ours have always been consolidated.
Much better investment options that way, as well as who wants to keep track of "who is managing which 401k this year?"

I don't roll over and don't have trouble managing multiple 401ks. I have three and do different things with each one. It's a once yearly re-allocation (and many years I don't even re-allocate) which isn't exactly time consuming.

I like having one account that is more aggressive, one more conservative, and one where I experiment with diversification.

I also manage individual investments, an HYSA, a treasury Dept account, and have a bunch of different CDs. Again none of this is particularly hard, I actually enjoy doing it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those stats might not be accurate. Average 401k balance doesn’t mean total net worth.

I have a Roth IRA with only $7000 in it and another IRA with 60k. One of my 401k’s has 120k. Total net worth is in the millions.

The you did save. Not relevant. Social security.

People these days job hop all the time so there aren’t very many people with huge 7 figure retirement accounts unless you consolidate them or stayed in the same job for 20 years

Why wouldn't you consolidate them so you don't have to keep track of multiple 401ks? I guess the same reason most people don't have wills and trusts.

Spread risk. You can consolidate all the old ones into a rollover IRA at one brokerage, but start a new one when you start a new job.

What type of risk are you trying to avoid?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those stats might not be accurate. Average 401k balance doesn’t mean total net worth.

I have a Roth IRA with only $7000 in it and another IRA with 60k. One of my 401k’s has 120k. Total net worth is in the millions.

The you did save. Not relevant. Social security.

People these days job hop all the time so there aren’t very many people with huge 7 figure retirement accounts unless you consolidate them or stayed in the same job for 20 years

It’s amateur hour not to roll over. Anyone who earns enough to reach 7 figures should be embarrassed

+1. Ours have always been consolidated.
Much better investment options that way, as well as who wants to keep track of "who is managing which 401k this year?"

I don't roll over and don't have trouble managing multiple 401ks. I have three and do different things with each one. It's a once yearly re-allocation (and many years I don't even re-allocate) which isn't exactly time consuming.

I like having one account that is more aggressive, one more conservative, and one where I experiment with diversification.

I also manage individual investments, an HYSA, a treasury Dept account, and have a bunch of different CDs. Again none of this is particularly hard, I actually enjoy doing it.

We have each worked at 5 or 6 different places, so that's 10-12 different 401Ks. Sure, I could manage it that way. But it's much simpler to have it all in one place, and that one place has lower fees and more investment options.

So yeah it's possible to do, but definately much simpler to have it all in one place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What are people who don’t make enough to live supposed to do? It’s a privilege to save for retirement. It really is.

Asian American here. I was a child of immigrants. DH and I support my parents and his mom. We know many adult Asian Americans supporting their elderly parents. It is actually quite common.

I know. I wish more people would do that. We see the Asian families shopping and they are almost always three generations. It helps the elder to be healthier and happier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DH is from a small town in PA. All of his relatives live off of Medicare and SS. Their houses are paid off by the time they retire, but they were like 50k. None of them have any issue living within what they get from SS. It's not a great life, but they still can afford to eat out and a trip every once in a while. In small towns I think SS goes pretty far.

DH's grandma needed a nursing home for her last 3 months and medicaid paid for it. It wasn't "nice" and did have 3 to a room, but she wasn't left out in the cold. Frankly I think that's how medicaid should be. No frills, but you still get care.

My grandmother had a much nicer set up in Medicare. No frills but she was in a former convent that was largely populated by elderly nuns. They received wonderful care and she had her own room. No frills but great care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What are people who don’t make enough to live supposed to do? It’s a privilege to save for retirement. It really is.

Asian American here. I was a child of immigrants. DH and I support my parents and his mom. We know many adult Asian Americans supporting their elderly parents. It is actually quite common.

Do you feel resentful about this? Genuinely curious.

No, I’m not resentful at all. They moved to this country and did the best they could. I always had housing and food. It isn’t like they spent frivolously and wasted money. They just never had money.

I’m surprised at Americans who seem to be able to turn their backs on their family.

Same. And just as bad are the ones who feel resentful. My father died young leaving my mother with teenagers and a paid for house. Once I had kids she babysat and wouldn’t take a dime. She would stay at our house on weekends when my husband and I went away. I would leave cash for her and the kids on the table but she never used it. She would come over early before the kids got out of school and would do the laundry, make the beds. And So much more. She’s older now and I’ll be there for her whatever it takes.

I think sometimes adults forget what their parents did for them. Or they will pick some rough times in their childhood to use as excuses not to help. They sleep better when they put the blame on someone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What are people who don’t make enough to live supposed to do? It’s a privilege to save for retirement. It really is.

Asian American here. I was a child of immigrants. DH and I support my parents and his mom. We know many adult Asian Americans supporting their elderly parents. It is actually quite common.

Do you feel resentful about this? Genuinely curious.

No, I’m not resentful at all. They moved to this country and did the best they could. I always had housing and food. It isn’t like they spent frivolously and wasted money. They just never had money.

I’m surprised at Americans who seem to be able to turn their backs on their family.

Psst. You're an American. Not all Americans turn their back on their family.

My family has been here since the mayflower. I work my ass off to make sure I can care for them if they need it. My mom has needed help to a small extent. My dad has been independent. And we've helped other family to small degrees. But I know (and my mom knows) that I always have their backs.

NP-I'm not from the US but I don't feel like I want to have my parents' or in-laws' back: they did not have my back as an adult in any way so why should I have theirs? There's something really not right about having to be fully independent at 18 in all ways and then still have to care for people in their old age as you yourself never had help. And as a parent I feel even more strongly about this: support should flow down to kids, not up to parents. I would feel like an absolute failure and bad person if my adult kids had to financially worry about me.

+1