Will
retirement be golden for boomers?
Today's seniors enjoy a "golden age of retirement
security." Yet the median income of individuals age 65 and
over last year was just $15,199 in the United States.
For many, those two sentences may sound contradictory.
Living on 15 grand a year does not sound like a flush
American living standard. Of course, many retirees own their
homes outright and aren't paying a mortgage anymore. But
they are still paying property taxes, maintenance, and
utilities.
Baby boomers will soon face retirement. Considering
economist Mauricio Soto's description of today's retirement
scene as "golden age," will it be worse for them?
Perhaps not. The real income of baby-boom retirees - those
born between 1946 and 1965 - probably will be higher. Two
researchers at the Urban Institute in Washington, D.C.,
predict that median household income (usually couples, not
just an individual) will increase from $36,000 now to
$50,000 among early and late boomers in the 2013-2032
period. Moreover, the poverty rate at age 67 will drop from
8 percent today to 4 percent among early boomers and to 2
percent among late boomers, say researchers Barbara Butrica
and Cori Uccello.
Boomers will benefit from a long-term trend in the US for
wages to grow faster than prices - a change that should
boost living standards for a majority.
But many boomer retirees may feel poorer compared with
those who are still working. Those retiring nowadays have an
income of about 86 percent of their income before
retirement. That "median replacement rate" will drop to 80
percent for late boomers, those born after 1956, the study
finds. And 46 percent will have less than three-quarters of
their preretirement income, compared with 42 percent today.
Because Congress has been considering changes in Social
Security and in laws governing pensions and retirement
savings plans, two experts at the Congressional Research
Service (CRS) thought it relevant to look at the income of
older Americans today.
Here are some of their findings:
• Twenty-eight percent of those 65 or older - many of them
grandmas and grandpas - had incomes of less than $10,000 in
2004. Ten percent had incomes of $50,000 or more.
• Social Security paid benefits to 88 percent of these
older Americans. It is the largest single source of income
among the aged.
Sixty-nine percent of Social Security beneficiaries age 65
or older receive more than half of their income from Social
Security.
For 39 percent of elderly recipients, Social Security
contributes more than 90 percent of their income.
For nearly one-quarter of recipients, it is their only
income.
Given such numbers, Congress has been cautious in dealing
with proposals to partly privatize Social Security or trim
the indexing of pensions to the inflation rate. With a
midterm election ahead, most observers doubt Congress will
make such changes this year or next.
• In 2004, 35 percent of people age 65 and older received
income from a private pension or a non-Social Security
public pension. The median government pension - half
received more, half got less - was $15,600 last year. The
median private pension was a much skimpier $6,720.
• Of the 35.2 million Americans age 65 or older living in
households, 19.7 million (56 percent) received income from
assets such as dividends, interest, rent, or royalties. For
half of these, the amount was less than $952.
• Poverty for seniors has fallen from 1 in 3 older persons
in 1960 to 1 in 10 today, partly because Congress made
Social Security more generous.
But poverty remains high for women, minorities, the less-
educated, and those over 80, according to CRS's Debra
Whitman and Patrick Purcell.
As for the future, several factors could trim retiree
incomes. Social Security benefits are already being cut by
gradually raising the normal retirement age to 67 by 2019,
notes Mr. Soto of the Center for Retirement Research at
Boston College.
Furthermore, a bigger chunk of Social Security income will
be taxed by Uncle Sam. Medicare premiums, which are deducted
from Social Security pensions, will rise.
Another problem is that traditional corporate pensions are
rapidly shrinking in number; some are shrinking in value as
well. Many companies instead offer 401(k) plans. In general,
401(k)s are cheaper for corporations. Employees should, but
often don't, contribute adequate sums toward their own
retirement. The employee also assumes the investment risks.
Many future retirees will either have no private pension or
a smaller one.
Nonetheless, if productivity and living standards rise (as
most economists assume they will), and if stock market
investments do pay off (as they have in the past), future
retirees will make out all right."Future retirees are not
likely to be so secure," says Soto. "But they will have
enough resources at retirement to do well."
On average, that is. Divorced women, never-married men,
Hispanics, high school dropouts, those not eligible for
Social Security, and the working poor could face financially
grim retirements, the experts note.