I'm trying real hard to be positive here on Hubski and that includes keeping the doom and gloom articles to a minimum. That said, this article really helps illustrate an ongoing conversation FirebrandRoaring and kleinbl00 are having about how retirement is changing and evolving here in The States. So I thought I'd post it and give a shout out to them on here.
Here's their conversation, in case you missed it.
For those of you wondering: no, that's not the tone of the conversation. This is bizarre — that 70-year-olds have to work to get by... but not so bizarre that I wouldn't believe it. My grandmother worked as a janitor in the city administration all the way into her 60s, despite the retirement being (back then, for women) at 50. She put work to rest around her 70th birthday, and that was considered far beyond what she was supposed to be working in her life. Russia has pensions, you see. Sufficient for survival, though not much in the way of living. Me? I never even gave a thought to retirement. I'm young and hip: it's way too early for me to consider it.No. Fuck you. No.
The discussion is "want to work" vs. "have to work." There are plenty of people with no interest in retiring but there are even more who don't have the financial wherewithal to do so. Social Security doesn't cover the expenses for a lot of people (despite being a quarter of the budget). That number is growing. There will be people who are happy being a Walmart greeter into their 80s - after all, your job is to say hi to people and act friendly. But there will be more who weren't into what they were doing before they were forced out at 68 and now they're finding out who wants fries with that to make ends meet. Until the robots come, anyway.
Worth noting: this is a reprint of this Washington Post article: I've since read that McKinsey report and moved onto Technology & The American Economy, the 50-year-old LBJ administration version of said-same.