No doubt there are a lot of “is it worth it threads” or any of what appears to be an infinite ways to ask the same question threads here. But most of those tend to have the same cast of characters making the same points over and over (like its a de novo review each time) and a sprinkling of new faces joining the fun. But ultimately, when you look at the site as a whole, I think its pretty clear that the majority (and really vast majority) of people here are not chasing prestige (or trying to justify not chasing it). Just looking for a school that works well for their kid at a cost they can reasonably afford. But if you focus on a narrow type of thread, you won’t see that.
There are a lot of people here who paint with very broad brushes. And they believe that everyone has the same experiences/views that they have. Simplifies things I guess. Just not reality. And there are a few people where who are total masters at it. True artists if you will.
The problem is that if it is working well for fewer people, leaving more people discontented with the way the system is working, more people may follow extremist (right or left wing) politics out of desperation. This is likely to be undesirable even if you are among those who are otherwise doing well in the system as it is, since extremists may tear down that system or decide to make you the scapegoat for their discontent.
Indeed, the trend of the US economy is an increasing trend toward less competitive oligopoly situations. This may be good for the capitalist class (including the minority of retirees who actually saved enough to live on their investment income in retirement), but is probably bad for the labor class, which makes up the majority of people who are not in the dependent class.
I always thought that was just a product of how the system works. If you have a teachers’ union, bad teachers with seniority will be protected. Maybe they were good at one point but had an attitude change. Maybe there was a life event that changed how much effort they could devote to their job. Maybe they couldn’t keep up with the times. Or they never good but somehow skimmed by. So if you will have a certain number of not-so-good-teachers, where do you put them? Administration ideally which I think happens. But if they stay in teaching positions, you don’t want them teaching young kids. Bad foundations are compounding. And you don’t want them teaching the kids about to enter college. So you put them in the middle.
Overall my kids had a great experience in their public K-12 schools. Each had many excellent teachers (some of them new and some of them teaching 20-25+ years). But the worst ones (and it was only 1 or 2 that we would have changed had we had an option – and where there was a bad one, you often had the option of avoiding him/her) were in middle school.
I grew up in a family that was below the poverty level. I have 6 other siblings (I’m the baby). We all are doing better than our parents (neither of which graduated high school), some better than others. We all realized that we had to work hard if we wanted to succeed. Several of us will be well set up for retirement. Others of us will be depending mostly on social security. In the end we’ll have to adjust our retirement plans to meet our resources. We’ll need differing amounts depending on the lifestyle we want to and are able to live.
The real threat to security in old age is potential health care costs. I do not want to be a burden on my child and I do not want to spend everything I have on longterm care before I am eligible for Medicaid. My father has a lot of money; he’s legally blind, and wheelchair bound, and a prisoner of his body (his mind is sound). But because he has money, he’s able to live in a place that smells nice and doesn’t have peeling paint, dirty linens and cloudy windows. The people who care for him are paid enough to be attentive and courteous and not exhausted. I could care for him but I’d have to quit my job and condemn myself to old age poverty to do so. I can’t do this because my own child will be the one who is punished if I did.
It’s health. That’s the wild card. I’ve been thinking about these hybrid insurance/long term care plans. I will probably inherit enough money to buy one for myself and for my husband. The advantage is that our heirs will get something if we don’t need the long term care (I would like to die in my bed of a massive stroke while sleeping, please–no resuscitation). The downside is that I don’t trust the financial health of the companies offering such plans. The people I know who have long-term care insurance plans have had tremendous premium increases.
Michelle Cottle in the NYT has been writing a series of articles about these issues in the last week or so; it’s illuminating (as are the comments). Several commenters are stockpiling drugs so as to be able to kill themselves if things look bleak. It should not be this way.
the bogleheads have a lot of thoughts on LTC so it might be worth your time perusing those threads. (Hint: LTC insurance alone can make sense, but hybrid plans are not good investments.)
Well the attraction of the hybrid plans is that you pay upfront rather than exposing yourself to huge rate increases, and that if by the grace of God you don’t need long term care, your heirs get something. I would like to believe that long term care insurance is the prudent thing to do, but it seems that the actuarial science is pretty negative and realistic pricing is still going to be very, very expensive and probably beyond most middle-class people’s means.
yes, what your heirs receive is essentially a payout of (high commission) whole life insurance, which, do you/they really need? In other words, would you purchase life insurance today?
We still have term life insurance for income protection so if either of us kicked it, we would be compensated for salary and mortgage payment. But yes, when we retire, we will drop our term life insurance.
LTC insurance is just so expensive and just keeps getting worse. I like the idea of being able to get some value out of it even if we don’t use it. I want to be able to leave something to my heirs. But again, it all depends on the financial health of the sellers.
If we’re going into Mad Max apocalyptic mode, none of this matters of course. Will these insurers be around? That’s my basic question.
Our state has a new law requiring everyone to contribute .58% of their paycheck into a state LTC fund. If you contributed for a 10 yr period, you will get $3k a month for as long as 36 months, inflation-adjusted. Even if you stop working after those 10 years prior to needing LTC. I checked my math… buying LTC on the private market would have exempt me from this paycheck withholding, but it would be much more expensive at my age than the state plan. I do intend to work for at least 10 more years of life permits me…
The issue of long term care is coming to the fore. When the SS age of retirement at 65 was instituted in the late 1940s, the life expectancy was something like 70. Our current policies don’t reflect the realities of aging and the artificial extension of lifespans through medical intervention. I am a Christian and I understand the philosophy of preservation of life. I also think that placing elderly and ill people on the rack of life-extension treatment without any context or judgment is cruel. It makes me feel ill to hear that people want to preserve the option of killing themselves in order to avoid life-extending “treatment.” We need to rethink how we handle dying with dignity. Our medical culture, driven by risk aversion and legal paranoia, causes much unnecessary suffering IMHO.
Agree w/you NJSue - healthcare is the wild card - even with some money, I have seen folks (in old age) in absolutely horrific conditions. It’s pretty terrifying. When you’ve watched both your beloved parents physically decline - and seen the systems, the fake luxe lobbies of ritzy LTC facilties with underpaid and overworked staff behind the scenes and neglected residents- it makes you really think ‘there must be a better way.’
To me this is all relevant to “how much do you need to retire” since I’m unwilling to move forward on the premise of “I’ll be financially & otherwise fine unless there is some catastrophic medical event and I need 24/7 care for years.” That catastrophe is a very real possibility.
That’s why I’m looking into co-housing w/mixed aged folk. lol.
I’m learning so much from the insights on this thread btw. Wow!
I’ve probably mentioned this before, but since we have some new folks I’ll recommend “Being Mortal” book. I read it with parents in mind, but it gave me insights about what I’d like for myself in later years - Being Mortal | Atul Gawande
@BunsenBurner, be sure you are aware of the loopholes in the plan, like you qualify for benefits only if you still live in WA when you claim, etc. Just follow the details so you know what to expect.
Thanks! Of course I read the fine print. For now, the plan is to retire here. In any way, if I keep working for another 10-15 years, I will be 2x ahead of what I would pay for comparable coverage (assuming I will need this in my eighties). LTC is a ripoff IMO, no matter how it is painted.
ETA: state coverage: 10 years, and I can stop working and paying the tax and still get the benefit. Private plan: have to keep paying the premium until the need arises (and through that). Based in the family history, I will be either dead at 60 (soon) or might need some when I am 85 (long ways out).
LTC insurance use to be ‘less’ of a rip off than what you can get now, even with blended type of plans to make it more sellable. But one has to look at it like short term and long term disability – you hope to never have to use. But if there is a strong family history of certain illnesses or diseases that make it more likely to ‘need’…
For many, the more reasonable approach is to try to set up some investment money to specifically use for this kind of situation – so ‘self fund’ for any long term care needs.
Another thing is to pay close attention to family health history and what is going on with your own health, try to stay fit and keep off the fat. Get enough vitamin D and proper nutrition to keep your own immunity good and overall health good. Avoid putting yourself in a situation where you might have an accidental fall, or avoid bad traffic times to avoid being in a auto accident (can do some of that in retirement).
It certainly helps to engage in healthy behaviors and be aware of one’s family history of illness. But the idea that one can attempt to avoid catastrophic, deblitating health care issues in later (or mid!) years (and tie any sort of finanical planning to that hope) is a bit too wishful for me.
Anticipating self-funding medical needs is certainly a valid approach (and still trying to figure out where LTC fits into it all!!). But to think that one can (through healthy behaviors) minimize the need for - say - 24/7 care for a stretch and partial care maybe for a very long stretch - is a gamble.
For instance, I had been a life-long runner, non-smoker, non-drinker, healthy vegetarian with no family history of illness when I became quite ill several years ago (ok now, but it was close). It can come out of the blue - no matter what you do.
For me, planning around anticipated health care needs for our family is the biggest of all retirement financial condumdrums to get a handle on.
