Typical American Career path - esp after 50

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I started to worry about ageism at 40 and saved 50% or more of my salary over many years.

40 isn’t that terrible. I am not actively looking but hiring managers and recruiters are still pinging me regularly. Don’t go to an industry with a lot of young people like tech or gaming/leisure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that many Americans 50+ didn't exercise the required financial discipline to maximize their investments starting in their 20s. They also didn't invest in themselves by taking on stretch projects, continuing their education throughout their careers, and constantly demonstrating their value to others.

Now some would say that all is just "living to work". No, it's not. It's being vigilant and looking out for yourself instead of relying on others to look out for you. Newsflash - no one is going to look out for you unless you represent value to them, and they'll look out for you commensurate with that value. If you can't do something that someone 20 years younger than you can do, then you're far less valuable than someone with a unique, in-demand skill set.

Getting laid off at 50+ sucks, and it sucks far worse if you didn't plan 30 years earlier for such an eventuality. But not all is lost. You need to grieve for a short time, then come up with a plan to take charge of your life. If you just want to keep working for someone else, then you'll have to accept much lower pay and benefits.

I think you are a bit delusional about the ability of most Americans to invest with a target retirement of 50.

We are both professionals but most of our income goes into housing, student debt, childcare — we have always maxed out 401k and did $5k Ira, but to retire at 50 you need to putting away like $75k a year or investing with huge risk to get the necessary returns (like crypto level).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I started to worry about ageism at 40 and saved 50% or more of my salary over many years.

40 isn’t that terrible. I am not actively looking but hiring managers and recruiters are still pinging me regularly. Don’t go to an industry with a lot of young people like tech or gaming/leisure.

No one was talking about ageism when I started working at 25, and my family was all govt workers so it was a foreign concept to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I started to worry about ageism at 40 and saved 50% or more of my salary over many years.

40 isn’t that terrible. I am not actively looking but hiring managers and recruiters are still pinging me regularly. Don’t go to an industry with a lot of young people like tech or gaming/leisure.

No one was talking about ageism when I started working at 25, and my family was all govt workers so it was a foreign concept to me.

I think ageism has become a thing since tech took off (not to mention the huge growth of the stock market) and the big F100 had to start competing. So, long term jobs started getting phased out to keep the workforce young and (hopefully) hungry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I started to worry about ageism at 40 and saved 50% or more of my salary over many years.

40 isn’t that terrible. I am not actively looking but hiring managers and recruiters are still pinging me regularly. Don’t go to an industry with a lot of young people like tech or gaming/leisure.

No one was talking about ageism when I started working at 25, and my family was all govt workers so it was a foreign concept to me.

I think ageism has become a thing since tech took off (not to mention the huge growth of the stock market) and the big F100 had to start competing. So, long term jobs started getting phased out to keep the workforce young and (hopefully) hungry.

We had software development before tech took off. The social media tech is really a product for young people which made sense for young people to design and market.
Same with gaming and leisure, young people are spending money on in game currency and skins, who is better at designing them than young designers?
Other than that, old people can do the jobs just fine in: finance, manufacturing, logistics, medicine, education, industrials, chemicals etc…

[Anonymous]

Tech is also unique in “capital light”, you can create a product with a few brogrammers and a couple laptops, and then in profit in 6 month. Or go bust and everyone gets fired within 6 month.
Manufacturing - 6 month is barely enough to calibrate your equipment and that engineer who logged the configuration isn’t going anywhere for 15 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I started to worry about ageism at 40 and saved 50% or more of my salary over many years.

40 isn’t that terrible. I am not actively looking but hiring managers and recruiters are still pinging me regularly. Don’t go to an industry with a lot of young people like tech or gaming/leisure.

No one was talking about ageism when I started working at 25, and my family was all govt workers so it was a foreign concept to me.

I think ageism has become a thing since tech took off (not to mention the huge growth of the stock market) and the big F100 had to start competing. So, long term jobs started getting phased out to keep the workforce young and (hopefully) hungry.

We had software development before tech took off. The social media tech is really a product for young people which made sense for young people to design and market.
Same with gaming and leisure, young people are spending money on in game currency and skins, who is better at designing them than young designers?
Other than that, old people can do the jobs just fine in: finance, manufacturing, logistics, medicine, education, industrials, chemicals etc…

Agree with you on medicine and education, but there aren’t any junior bankers in finance who are 50 — you have to advance to stay in later years. Industrials lay off middle age workers all the time and swap in young line workers and engineers willing to work longer hours for the same or less pay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I started to worry about ageism at 40 and saved 50% or more of my salary over many years.

40 isn’t that terrible. I am not actively looking but hiring managers and recruiters are still pinging me regularly. Don’t go to an industry with a lot of young people like tech or gaming/leisure.

No one was talking about ageism when I started working at 25, and my family was all govt workers so it was a foreign concept to me.

I think ageism has become a thing since tech took off (not to mention the huge growth of the stock market) and the big F100 had to start competing. So, long term jobs started getting phased out to keep the workforce young and (hopefully) hungry.

We had software development before tech took off. The social media tech is really a product for young people which made sense for young people to design and market.
Same with gaming and leisure, young people are spending money on in game currency and skins, who is better at designing them than young designers?
Other than that, old people can do the jobs just fine in: finance, manufacturing, logistics, medicine, education, industrials, chemicals etc…

Agree with you on medicine and education, but there aren’t any junior bankers in finance who are 50 — you have to advance to stay in later years. Industrials lay off middle age workers all the time and swap in young line workers and engineers willing to work longer hours for the same or less pay.

Regarding finance, agree there are not junior bankers at 50 but there is clear progression path upward (and the lifestyle actually gets better as you move up). For those that move out of banks, you can do all sorts of roles on the buy side in your 40s and 50s that don’t require moving into executive/management roles.

I agree with the PP that a lot of this thread is biased toward certain industries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I started to worry about ageism at 40 and saved 50% or more of my salary over many years.

40 isn’t that terrible. I am not actively looking but hiring managers and recruiters are still pinging me regularly. Don’t go to an industry with a lot of young people like tech or gaming/leisure.

No one was talking about ageism when I started working at 25, and my family was all govt workers so it was a foreign concept to me.

I think ageism has become a thing since tech took off (not to mention the huge growth of the stock market) and the big F100 had to start competing. So, long term jobs started getting phased out to keep the workforce young and (hopefully) hungry.

We had software development before tech took off. The social media tech is really a product for young people which made sense for young people to design and market.
Same with gaming and leisure, young people are spending money on in game currency and skins, who is better at designing them than young designers?
Other than that, old people can do the jobs just fine in: finance, manufacturing, logistics, medicine, education, industrials, chemicals etc…

Agree with you on medicine and education, but there aren’t any junior bankers in finance who are 50 — you have to advance to stay in later years. Industrials lay off middle age workers all the time and swap in young line workers and engineers willing to work longer hours for the same or less pay.

Junior bankers have enough options, they often come to the buy side after 2-4 years and they can stay at senior analyst level until they retire. For the couple of HFs I worked at, a lot of them have children who are married.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I started to worry about ageism at 40 and saved 50% or more of my salary over many years.

40 isn’t that terrible. I am not actively looking but hiring managers and recruiters are still pinging me regularly. Don’t go to an industry with a lot of young people like tech or gaming/leisure.

No one was talking about ageism when I started working at 25, and my family was all govt workers so it was a foreign concept to me.

I think ageism has become a thing since tech took off (not to mention the huge growth of the stock market) and the big F100 had to start competing. So, long term jobs started getting phased out to keep the workforce young and (hopefully) hungry.

We had software development before tech took off. The social media tech is really a product for young people which made sense for young people to design and market.
Same with gaming and leisure, young people are spending money on in game currency and skins, who is better at designing them than young designers?
Other than that, old people can do the jobs just fine in: finance, manufacturing, logistics, medicine, education, industrials, chemicals etc…

Agree with you on medicine and education, but there aren’t any junior bankers in finance who are 50 — you have to advance to stay in later years. Industrials lay off middle age workers all the time and swap in young line workers and engineers willing to work longer hours for the same or less pay.

Junior bankers have enough options, they often come to the buy side after 2-4 years and they can stay at senior analyst level until they retire. For the couple of HFs I worked at, a lot of them have children who are married.

The more I’m in this thread, the more I wished I went into finance. It’s a complete life hack.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what is the best plan if you can’t slide into Big Law/Big Tech/Medicine?

Work corporate and try for executive suite, but if by 40 not on clear trajectory angle for a government job? Just go for government job early if you don’t want to be an executive?

Yes, just go for government or healthcare, or open a business.

Consider private companies. They are not subject to the whipsaw of Wall Street analysts and quarterly earnings calls, so there is less of hiring followed by downsizing waves “because everyone is doing it”. Less MBA fads too. There are quite a few people with 25+ years tenure where I work, but you have to fit with the culture.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that many Americans 50+ didn't exercise the required financial discipline to maximize their investments starting in their 20s. They also didn't invest in themselves by taking on stretch projects, continuing their education throughout their careers, and constantly demonstrating their value to others.

Now some would say that all is just "living to work". No, it's not. It's being vigilant and looking out for yourself instead of relying on others to look out for you. Newsflash - no one is going to look out for you unless you represent value to them, and they'll look out for you commensurate with that value. If you can't do something that someone 20 years younger than you can do, then you're far less valuable than someone with a unique, in-demand skill set.

Getting laid off at 50+ sucks, and it sucks far worse if you didn't plan 30 years earlier for such an eventuality. But not all is lost. You need to grieve for a short time, then come up with a plan to take charge of your life. If you just want to keep working for someone else, then you'll have to accept much lower pay and benefits.

I think you are a bit delusional about the ability of most Americans to invest with a target retirement of 50.

We are both professionals but most of our income goes into housing, student debt, childcare — we have always maxed out 401k and did $5k Ira, but to retire at 50 you need to putting away like $75k a year or investing with huge risk to get the necessary returns (like crypto level).

Where did I say a target retirement of 50? This thread is the typical American Career path - especially after 50. It then detoured into getting laid off at 50 and what to do about it. My last sentence said that if you didn't plan, and want to continue working, you'll have to accept much lower pay and benefits (and probably work until 65-70).

[Anonymous]

Honestly? The thing to learn is how to manage up to people who are younger than you are. Younger managers assume—sometimes but not always incorrectly—that older workers will not take direction well from them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I started to worry about ageism at 40 and saved 50% or more of my salary over many years.

40 isn’t that terrible. I am not actively looking but hiring managers and recruiters are still pinging me regularly. Don’t go to an industry with a lot of young people like tech or gaming/leisure.

No one was talking about ageism when I started working at 25, and my family was all govt workers so it was a foreign concept to me.

How old are you?

I am 51, started working in 1995. The writing on the wall was already there in huge letters. I posted a link in DCUM a few months ago - there was an article in NYTimes around 2001 about middle aged tech executives who never found another comparable job after a layoff. It was called “Commute to nowhere”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My brother is 48 and got laid off from Accenture in November 2023. His specialty was software testing and he got up to a junior management level. He got 5 months of severance from Accenture and is now collecting unmployment while drawing down his savings. He hasn't found another tech role yet. He is starting to consider leaving California, if he can get a tech job in another state.

That's a dying field, he should be more in touch with the market and train in more in demand tech areas