Archive for June, 2008

Is there a way out of this mess?

This is a contribution from Bud Hebeler who runs Analyzenow.com

The current economic mess:

 

Debts

 

“Households have used 30% or more of their available credit –considered a risky percentage by the industry– has risen to more than one-quarter of all card users.

Average revolving balance is $9,890, up from  $8,069 just four years ago.

US households now hold an average of 2.8 cards—compared with 2.4 cards four years ago.”  Bottom Line Personal, Feb. 1, 2008, p. 15.

 

“The past 10 years will go down as one of the greatest consumer-lending sprees ever.  Adjusted for inflation, consumer debt – including mortgages – rose an average 7.5% per year since 1997, far faster than the 4.2% rate of the previous 10 years. . . If Americans had kept borrowing at the pre-1997 pace, they would have had about $3 trillion less in debt.”  Business Week, 2/4/08,  p. 27.

 

“the average debt-to-income ratio for middle-class Americans now stands at 141%, double what it was in 1983. . . the U.S. hasn’t faced a credit crunch like this in 25 years.”  Business Week, 2/18/08, p. 34, 36.

 

“Eighteen percent of workers had a loan outstanding from their retirement plan in 2007, up from 11% in 2006….[T]he average unpaid balance at the end of 2006 was $7,300 according to  the Employee Benefit Research Institute.”  Wall Street Journal, 2/18/08, p. D1.

 

Surprise retirement costs

 

“Caring for parents can cost children: …People who don’t prepare to care for their sick and aging parents could fall victim to what economists call “negative inheritance.”.. It is when costs to children caring for their relatives outstrip any gifts or bequests they might receive in return.”  Wall Street Journal, Personal Finance: “When Inheritance is Negative.”

 

Public employees enjoy security at our costs.

 

“Public jobs see pay gains. ..State and local government workers now earn an average of $39.50 per hour in total compensation …Private workers earn an average of $26.09 an hour. . . From 2000 to 2007, public employees enjoyed a 16% increase in compensation after adjusting for inflation compared to 11% for private workers. . . The nation has 20 million state and local government employees [+ 2.7 million federal workers not including the military or supporting contractors].  About 116 million people work in the private sector.”  USA Today, 2/1/08, p. 1.

 

“public pension funds have $3 trillion in assets but unfunded liabilities of $440 billion…An economic slowdown would only aggravate the situation for many funds…” Wall Street Journal, 2-28-08, p. C1.

 

 

Medical costs increase naturally as we age—but so does the unit cost.

 

“The survey of 1,000 Americans over the age of 65, conducted for Medco by Directive Analytics, found that one in three retirees say medical and drug costs far outpaced expectations. Results also showed that one in four retirees spend 10% or more of their monthly retirement income on medications alone.”  Reported 2/13/08 on FoxBusiness.com.

 

Taxes

 

“Eliminating the 75-year Medicare deficit would require an immediate 122% increase in the 2.9% Medicare payroll tax, a 51% cut in benefits, or a combination of the two.”

American Academy of Actuaries quote from USA Today 1/17/08, p. 3B.

 

“Daunting future for Medicare.  Spending will soar from 3% of gross domestic product now to 8% of GDP in 2040, according to Boston College’s Center for Retirement Research.  By 2040, income tax rates will need to rise by 20% to cover the government’s Medicare costs, and out-of-pocket costs will devour more than half of the average Social Security benefit.”  Kiplinger’s Retirement Report, January 2008, p. 9.

 

“If today’s tax rates remain in place, 76% of all federal income tax revenue in 2050 [vs. 8.6% in 2010] will be soaked up by [Social Security and Medicare] –before a penny is spent on defense, national parks, health care for the poor or haircuts for congressmen.”  Money, 3/08, p. 88.

 

“Senior benefits costs up 24% [above inflation in last 8 years.]  The average Social Security benefit per senior in 2007 was $13,184…The [total] cost of government benefits for seniors soared to a record $27,289 per senior in 2007, according to a USA TODAY analysis.”     USA Today 2/14/08, p. 1.

 

Inflation

 

“If you start measuring inflation after the Great Depression, inflation has been 4%, not 3%.  Long periods of recent history had over 6% inflation.  My father retired in 1965.  He lived to 96.  During those years his purchasing power declined 80%!  In the first ten years of my own retirement, my fixed pension lost 30% of its purchasing power–and that was in a time of supposedly low inflation.”  Inflation Can Destroy Retirement, www.analyzenow.com, Helpful Articles by Henry K. Hebeler.

 

Retirees inflation greater than the CPI

 

“By 2017, total health care costs will double to more than $4 trillion a year, accounting for one of every $5 the nation spends…The 6.7 percent annual increase in spending – nearly three times the rate of inflation – will be largely driven by higher prices and an increased demand….That [$4.3 trillion] would be about 20 percent of the U.S. gross domestic product….In 2006, people and the government spent …an average of $7,026 a person.  In 2017, health care spending will cost an estimated $13,101 a person.”  Seattle Times, 2/26/08, p. A4, referencing report from Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

 

 Investments

 

“Corporate Earnings.  Yes, there’s been a profit boom in recent years….But here’s an unfortunate truth – the profit surge has been mainly in one area, financial services.  Financial institutions have benefits from the consumer credit boom, the proliferation of new financial instruments, and relatively low rates.  By contrast, the earnings of nonfinancial companies over the past decade have averaged …about the same since the mid-1980’s.”  Business Week, 2/4/08, p. 27.

 

“In 2003, 10 big Wall Street firms paid $1.4 billion in fines and penalties to settle civil charges by securities regulators that they issued overly optimistic stock research to win investment-banking business from companies they were supposed to analyze separately.”  WSJ, 2/16/08, p. B1.

 

Your home as an investment

 

“As baby boomers retire, home markets will hurt. . .The math is simple:  79 million boomers have driven up housing demand.  That trend will reverse itself when boomers are age 65 to 75;  there will be three sellers for each buyer.”  Dowel Myers, Prof. of policy, planning and development, USC.  USA Today, 1/16/08, p. B1.

 

Count on energy problems

 

“Our energy problems will not go away—at least in our lifetimes.  Our dependence on foreign oil is too great and our political process too weak to permit mobilizing solutions. It is virtually impossible to develop domestic oil fields, increase refineries, build dams, construct power plants, lay pipelines, string high power lines, open coalmines, dispose of urianium, and the like.

 

“Industrial and commercial growth has always demanded more energy.  We have seen it here, and we are starting to see it in developing countries.  China by itself is going to be a massive user of energy—even bigger than the United States.  India is going to add to the problems.”  Getting Started In A Financially Secure Retirement, Wiley & Sons, 2007.

 

The average person can’t recover.

 

It’s important to understand the history of national savings rate, that is, the percent of disposable income (gross income less income tax).  During the Great Depression, savings rates were about 4% and dipped below zero for only two years.  The Great Depression was followed by World War II.  During the war, the national savings rate was its highest value ever averaging about 25%.  After World War II and until 1985, the national savings rate was generally between 8% and 10%.  The exceptions were the couple of years immediately after the war when the savings rate was only about 5% to 7%.  That was when people once again had an opportunity to buy automobiles and previously rationed items.  Still, the savings rate was not negative, and debt was a bad word.

 

The fuse to our financial disaster was lit about 1985 when national savings rates started an abrupt decline until savings became virtually non existent from 2005 on. Consumption increased at a mad pace as men, women and children raced to get the latest electronics, large houses and vacation expenses far beyond their means.  Debts increased as well as people stretched to borrow on the remaining assets to be like their friends and the “Jones” across the street.  Grade school kids had to have cell phones.  High school kids had to have cars.  Mom and Dad had to have a bigger TV and cable connection to the internet.

 

“The financial industry, intent on keeping an image of ever upward growth, makes one excuse after another to minimize the importance of national savings. At one time, financial “experts” said people didn’t have to save because they were going to inherit so much.  When the stock market was booming in the late nineties, these same experts said people don’t have to save because what they have already saved had grown so much.  Then the next excuse was that people have made tremendous savings from the growth of their home equity.  After watching all of these theories fall apart, these experts must have crawled into the woodwork, because their silence is deafening after the tide has turned in each instance.

 

“So, how much would people have to save in the future to make up for lost savings over the past 20 years?   To get this answer, we have to calculate what they would have accumulated with 9% savings over both the past 20 years plus the number of years ahead when they will retire.

 

“Let’s first assume that they have 20 years ahead to save.  Over the past 20 years plus the future 20, they would have accumulated what amounts to 10.9 times the final year’s after-tax wages—if they could get a consistent return as high as 8% in a deferred-tax account and preserve 3% wage growth over the entire period. (10.9 times final wages might finance a retirement income of 40% to 50% of working wages.)  In order to get 10.9 times final wages using the actual past 20 year’s savings rates, they would have to save almost 21% of their disposable income for the next 20 years.  Starting now!

 

“Can you imagine the difficulty of getting the national savings rate to 21%?  The only time it has been that high since the Great Depression was during World War II when virtually all people, wives included, were working and there was nothing to buy.  Industry was focused on weapons production, not goods for civilians.  Further, almost everything was rationed.  It was politically correct for everyone, including school children, to invest in savings bonds.  It took that kind of environment to achieve such high savings rates, all in spite of the highest income tax rates we’ve ever had.”  Quotes above are from www.analyzenow.com from the Economics page of Helpful articles.

 

In fact saving 25% of disposable income took more than war conditions.  It took a nation that had just come out of the Great Depression where people were conditioned to a harder life.  Most people had very little.  There were no television promotions of a more desirable lifestyle or media advertisements for innumerable pieces of intriguing electronics.  Further the nation had a cause: the possibility of being overrun by aggressors just as was happening in Europe.  People were patriotic and united.

 

One would think that people would be saving more as employers abandoned pensions in favor of savings plans.  For the most part, the government jobs are the ones that still have both pensions and savings plans.  Not only that, but most of the government pensions have cost-of-living adjustments, COLAs.  These are very rich pensions indeed—usually supported by strong government unions.  Together they form an extraordinarily powerful voting block that will surely not support a reduction in their jobs (many with tenure), compensation or benefits.

 

With almost one out of every five people working for the government, four out of five must pay for their support—adding to the problem.  This ratio will rapidly deteriorate as the working population decreases when the baby boomers retire and the size of government continues to increase, both in ratio and in absolute numbers.  Remember, too, that the government sector has wage and benefit levels about half again higher than private sector employment.

 

The way out of this economic mess:

 

We won’t be able to solve the nation’s problems, but we in the private sector can do something as individuals to help ourselves.

 

“Forgo the Joneses’ lifestyle,

 

Make conservative plans,

 

Preserve some funds as reserves for unknowns,

 

Shift to fixed income investments [as we age],

 

Ladder immediate annuities late in life,

 

Repeat planning process every year.”

 

Points are from “Getting Started in a Financial Secure Retirement,” Wiley & Sons, 2007.

 

Actions like these will make what is inevitably an unbearable situation for the average person in the private sector to something that’s tolerable for those who save, invest conservatively, and plan for a difficult economy.  This is much of the theme in the Web site, www.analyzenow.com.

 

The final point is the often cited 1787 quote supposedly from Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of  Edinburgh.  There is no evidence of this being an actual quote, but the thought is something to consider.

 

“A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.  From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy.”

 

I hope that this is not the final outcome of our future years, but the alternative outcome often cited seems quite unlikely.  That alternative outcome is a booming economy with relentless consumerism that provides enough money to support our government’s largess, thriving business and retirees without savings.  This dream will fade as the majority of baby boomers count on Social Security as their primary retirement resource and a financially failing Medicare for their health needs.  All this while the private sector work force reduces and tries to bear ever increasing government costs.


Note:  Many of the things above are covered in more detail in “Getting Started In A Financially Secure Retirement,” Wiley & Sons, 2007, as well as in the Helpful Articles section of www.analyzenow.com.

Fit, Not Frail: Exercise as a Tonic for Aging

The New York Times, June 24 2008

Fact: Every hour of every day, 330 Americans turn 60.

Fact: By 2030, one in five Americans will be older than 65.

Fact: The number of people over 100 doubles every decade.

Fact: As they age, people lose muscle mass and strength, flexibility and bone.

Fact: The resulting frailty leads to a loss of mobility and independence.

The last two facts may sound discouraging. But they can be countered
by another. Regular participation in aerobics, strength training and
balance and flexibility exercises can delay and may even prevent a
life-limiting loss of physical abilities into one’s 90s and beyond.

This last fact has given rise to a new group of professionals who
specialize in what they call “active aging” and an updated series of physical activity recommendations for older adults from the American Heart Association
and the American College of Sports Medicine. These recommendations are
expected to match new federal activity guidelines due in October from
the United States Health and Human Services Department.

But you need not — indeed should not — wait for the government. Even
if you have a chronic health problem or physical limitation, there are
safe ways to improve fitness and well-being. Any delay can increase the
risk of injury and make it harder to recoup your losses.

Miriam E. Nelson, director of the John Hancock Center for Physical Activity and Nutrition at Tufts University
in Boston and lead author of the new recommendations, observed last
fall in The Journal on Active Aging that “with every increasing decade
of age, people become less and less active.”

“But,” Dr. Nelson said, “the evidence shows that with every
increasing decade, exercise becomes more important in terms of quality
of life, independence and having a full life. So as of now, Americans
are not on the right path.”

Jim Concotelli of the Horizon Bay Senior Communities in Tampa, who
oversees fitness and wellness program development for communities for
the elderly in several states, noted this year in The Journal on Active
Aging that many older Americans were unfamiliar with exercise
activities and feared that they would cause injury and pain, especially
if they have arthritis
or other chronic problems. Yet by strengthening muscles, he said, they
can improve joints and bones and function with less pain and less risk
of injury.

The key is start slowly and build gradually as ability and strength
improve. Most important is simply to start — now— perhaps under the
guidance of a fitness professional or by creating a program based on
the guidelines outlined here.

Read more of this article

About Reverse Mortgages:  Learn all about reverse mortgages at NewRetirement.com

Annuity Advice for Retirement:   Evaluate and compare annuities at NewRetirement.com

NewRetirement Retirement Calculator:   Assess your retirement plan with the NewRetirement Retirement Calculator.

Fidelity: $85k needed for long-term care costs

The Boston Globe, June 26, 2008

A 65-year-old couple needs $85,000 on average to cover
insurance costs for long-term care such as nursing home stays in
retirement, according to a study to be released Thursday by Fidelity
Investments.

The
finding underscores the need to financially prepare for the possibility
of eventually needing assistance to get by — a burden that often falls
on elders’ adult children, who can jeopardize their own finances by
caring for an ailing parent while finding they must cut their work
hours.

Setting aside adequate savings heading into retirement can
help defuse family tensions should physical or mental illness hit
parents who slowly realize they can no longer perform tasks such as
household chores, or bathe or dress on their own.

“If you plan
adequately and you have the ability to pay for assistance in whatever
form that might be, it makes it easier on everybody if you can do
that,” said Kathleen Kelly, executive director of the Family Caregiver
Alliance, a San Francisco-based nonprofit that helps families cope with
adults’ disabilities. “Families really want to do the right thing, but
there are so many pressures on them.”

Fidelity, a Boston-based
financial services firm whose mainstay is mutual funds, surveyed
insurers offering long-term care policies to come up with the estimate
that a couple aged 65 this year can expect to need $85,000 to cover
annual premiums for long-term care coverage throughout retirement.

Read more of this article

About Reverse Mortgages:  Learn all about reverse mortgages at NewRetirement.com

Annuity Advice for Retirement:   Evaluate and compare annuities at NewRetirement.com

NewRetirement Retirement Calculator:   Assess your retirement plan with the NewRetirement Retirement Calculator.

Medicare Savings vs. the Lobbyists

The New York Times, June 25, 2008

To cut costs and reduce fraud in one corner of the sprawling
Medicare program, Congress called for competitive bidding on medical
equipment that is provided to elderly and disabled Americans and set a
sensible schedule for phasing in the program. Demonstration projects
were held, the results looked promising, and last year Medicare
received competitive bids from companies to supply equipment in 10
metropolitan areas.

With those companies about to start selling their wares next month,
Congress has bowed to pressure from the losing bidders. The House
approved legislation Tuesday that would terminate the contracts and
delay the launch for 18 months. In the Senate, key committee leaders
are leaning toward a delay.

This backtracking inevitably makes one wonder if major reform will
ever be possible in a medical marketplace dominated by imperfect
government bureaucracies and private lobbyists bent on resisting
governmental reforms.

There is little doubt that Medicare has been paying far too much for
equipment — including wheelchairs, hospital beds, oxygen concentrators,
diabetic test kits, and walkers — under fee schedules based on
historical charges. According to federal officials, Medicare currently
pays $1,825 for a hospital bed that can be bought online for $754, and
$4,023 for a power wheelchair that can be bought online for $2,174.

When Medicare awarded competitively bid contracts to some 325
companies to serve the 10 metropolitan areas, it reduced equipment
prices by 26 percent on what it would have paid for the same equipment
under the current fee schedule. That means that if the contracts were
allowed to proceed, beneficiaries would save 26 percent on their
co-payments. Medicare would save $125 million the first year and as
much as $1 billion a year if the program went nationwide.

Read more of this article

About Reverse Mortgages:  Learn all about reverse mortgages at NewRetirement.com

Annuity Advice for Retirement:   Evaluate and compare annuities at NewRetirement.com

NewRetirement Retirement Calculator:   Assess your retirement plan with the NewRetirement Retirement Calculator.

Rising Challenger Takes On Elder-Care System

The Wall Street Journal, June 24, 2008

In the spring of 2001, Bill Thomas, dressed in his usual sweat shirt
and Birkenstock sandals, entered the buttoned-down halls of the Robert
Wood Johnson Foundation. His message: Nursing homes need to be taken
out of business. “It’s time to turn out the lights,” he declared.

Cautious but intrigued, foundation executives handed
Dr. Thomas a modest $300,000 grant several months later. Now the
country’s fourth-largest philanthropy is throwing its considerable
weight behind the 48-year-old physician’s vision of “Green Houses,” an
eight-year-old movement to replace large nursing homes with small,
homelike facilities for 10 to 12 residents. The foundation is hoping
that through its support, Green Houses will soon be erected in all 50
states, up from the 41 Green Houses now in 10 states.

“We want to transform a broken system of care,” says
Jane Isaacs Lowe, who oversees the foundation’s “Vulnerable Populations
portfolio.” “I don’t want to be in a wheelchair in a hallway when I am
85.”

The foundation’s undertaking represents the most
ambitious effort to date to turn a nice idea into a serious challenger
to the nation’s system of 16,000 nursing homes. To its proponents,
Green Houses are nothing less than a revolution that could overthrow
what they see as the rigid, impersonal, at times degrading life the
elderly can experience at large institutions.

Susan Feeney, a spokesperson for the American Health
Care Association, which represents thousands of for-profit and
not-for-profit nursing homes, says the criticisms levied against the
industry by Dr. Thomas and his supporters are “overly harsh.” She says
many nursing homes are embracing cultural changes to create a more
homelike feel. “While it may not be scrapping a large building…we are
changing,” she says.

Green Houses
face a host of hurdles. Many Green House builders say they’ve
encountered a thicket of elder-care regulations. It takes enormous
capital to build new homes from scratch. Plus, experts say the concept
faces stiff resistance from many parts of the existing nursing-home
system. Traditional nursing homes, many of which care for 100 to 200
patients, are predicated on economies of scale — the larger the home,
the cheaper it is to care for each individual resident.

Foundation officials acknowledge they don’t know
whether Green Houses are a viable economic model. But they’ve decided
not to wait for an answer. Hewing to its recent strategy of making “big
bets” on ideas to change social norms, Robert Wood Johnson is investing
$15 million over five years — one of the bigger grants the institution
has handed out to a single entity.

The foundation, which has $10 billion in assets, is
trying to encourage the building of Green Houses and is directing the
cash to NCB Capital Impact, a Washington, D.C.-based not-for-profit
that has been offering consulting, education, architectural and other
help to any party interested in operating a Green House. The foundation
is also studying the viability of Green Houses and says more support
could follow.

“Robert Wood Johnson is making an important investment
to try to make sure there is a sufficient cadre of early adopters of
the Green House model — and research to make sure the model is
actually working,” says Thomas Hamilton, who oversees nursing-home
quality and regulatory issues for the Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services. He says his agency is trying to coax nursing homes
into changing their cultures and adopting more humane,
“patient-centered” models such as the Green House.

Read more of this article

About Reverse Mortgages:  Learn all about reverse mortgages at NewRetirement.com

Annuity Advice for Retirement:   Evaluate and compare annuities at NewRetirement.com

NewRetirement Retirement Calculator:   Assess your retirement plan with the NewRetirement Retirement Calculator.

House Votes to Delay Competitive Bidding on Medical Equipment for Medicare…sounds like a return to the $500 hammer

The United States House of Representatives voted on Tuesday to delay legislation that would have instituted competitive bidding on medical equipment that is provided to elderly and disabled Americans.

It appears that the Senate leaders are leaning toward supporting the delay.

What does this mean? 

It means that wheelchairs, hospital beds, diabetic test kits and other medical equipment will continue to cost the government far more than it should – bloating the system with waste, costing the government and tax payers too much.

The New York Times reported today in an editorial that this legislation would save beneficiaries (seniors with Medicare) 26 percent on their co-payments and Medicare would save $125 million in the first year and as much as $1 billion a year if the program went nation-wide.

 

Mmmmm… How would you spend your own personal savings?  Can you think of a use for $1 billion a year?

 Why is congress delaying this cost saving legislation?

Apparently congress has bowed to pressure from the companies who lost the bids.  The big money lobbyists win again!

Why should we care?

Seniors and all Americans need to care about the financial health of Medicare because it is one of our nations’ greatest costs and a most treasured resource.  But, we won’t be able to sustain this program if Medicare does not become more efficient

Contact Your Senator and Congressperson

If you are interested in contacting your Senator or Representative about this legislation, you can locate their information here:

 

"Get Your Finances Ready"-Staying Put, The Pros & Cons of Reverse Mortgage

PBS, June 23, 2008

SUZANNE PRATT: Many new or soon to be retirees want to stay in their
homes. But they worry they won’t have enough money to do so or wonder
what will happen if they face a financial crisis. For some a reverse
mortgage can be a viable option. But it’s not for everyone. Tonight, as
we continue our series “Get Your Finances Ready for Retirement,” Connie
Hicks looks at the pros and cons of reverse mortgages.

CONNIE HICKS, NIGHTLY BUSINESS REPORT
CORRESPONDENT: If you love your family home, perhaps the last thing you
want to do when you retire is to sell it and move away. But staying put
on a fixed income may not be easy. And if it’s a problem, Robin Talbert
of the AARP Foundation says a reverse mortgage is often seen as a
solution.

ROBIN TALBERT, EXEC. DIR., AARP FOUNDATION: Typically people take out
a reverse mortgage because they need the additional income to stay in their
home; they may be what we call house rich but cash poor.

HICKS: A reverse mortgage is a loan taken
against the equity you — the retired homeowner — have in the home.
The bank provides you with cash, either monthly or in a lump sum or as
a line of credit that you can draw on as needed. However, you never
have to make a mortgage payment. That’s because the loan is usually
paid back from the proceeds of the home sale after you die or move
away. Two years ago, Diana and Peter Nicholson decided to get a reverse
mortgage on their Washington, DC condo. They didn’t need the money
immediately, but they wanted a safety net. So they got a $260,000 line
of credit.

DIANA NICHOLSON, RETIREE: It provides us with money in case we have
an accident or a crisis. We don’t have to go into our savings.

HICKS: Financial planner Terry Savage thought a reverse mortgage was
such a great idea, she helped her father get one.

Read more of this article

About Reverse Mortgages:  Learn all about reverse mortgages at NewRetirement.com

Annuity Advice for Retirement:   Evaluate and compare annuities at NewRetirement.com

NewRetirement Retirement Calculator:   Assess your retirement plan with the NewRetirement Retirement Calculator.

UPDATE 2-US home slump harder to reverse than usual-Harvard

Reuters, June 23, 2008

Record foreclosures and
limited access to credit will make it harder than usual for the
U.S. housing market to rebound from this slump, the worst since
at least World War Two, according to a Harvard University study
released on Monday.

A two-year drop in home prices is eating into housing
wealth, curbing consumer spending and slicing away economic
growth. This is unlikely to change until potential home buyers
are convinced that prices have stopped tumbling, the study
found.

The downturn has room to run.

“I tend to be optimistic. I want to be optimistic. I find
at this point in time it’s not warranted,” Nicolas P. Retsinas,
director of the Joint Center for Housing Studies at Harvard,
said at a press briefing.

The highest home loan rates in nine months and strict
lending standards are keeping buyers on the sidelines, even
after aggressive Federal Reserve intervention and a 16 percent
national home price slide from the 2006 peak.

“Historically, housing markets recover only after the
economy has entered a recession and a combination of falling
mortgage interest rates and house prices have improved housing
affordability,” Retsinas said in a statement released with the
study.

“It will take longer this time to rebound given the
unusually high levels of foreclosures and constrained credit
markets,” he said. “The slump in housing markets has not yet
run its full course.”

Price declines and mortgage defaults are the worst on
records dating back to the 1960s and 1970s, the study noted.
Job losses and falling prices intensify risk of foreclosure.

The number of homes entering foreclosure nearly doubled to
1.3 million in 2007 from about 660,000 in 2005.

Read more of this article

About Reverse Mortgages:  Learn all about reverse mortgages at NewRetirement.com

Annuity Advice for Retirement:   Evaluate and compare annuities at NewRetirement.com

NewRetirement Retirement Calculator:   Assess your retirement plan with the NewRetirement Retirement Calculator.

8 Reasons You Should Not Expect an Inheritance

The New York Times, June 21, 2008

You’ve probably heard about the bumper sticker, even if you haven’t
seen it. It’s the one on Cadillacs in Florida and Lexuses in Arizona
that says “I’m spending my children’s inheritance.”

We’ve laughed at that for years. But the truth is, retirees have a
lot of demands on their savings. Out-of-pocket health care costs, for
one, are rising fast. At the same time, many people are not waiting
until they die to help their children and grandchildren financially.
And some are finding creative ways to draw on money that would
otherwise be part of their estate.

For all these reasons and many more (I’ve ticked off eight below),
it would be a bad idea to plan on getting any inheritance from your
older relatives.

Many people have figured this out, though not all. An AARP analysis
of the Federal Reserve Board’s 2004 Survey of Consumer Finances noted
that 21 percent of people born after 1964 thought they would inherit
some money someday. After all, most of them still have living parents
or grandparents.

But with each passing year, the pressures on the nest eggs of those
older people will only grow. The truly rich will be fine, as they
usually are. But a lot of other people, even retirees with net worths
well into the seven figures, could end up spending every dime before
they die.

There is nothing wrong with that, by the way. This is a
judgment-free column on that front. There is no moral obligation to
leave a cent to the next generation. And there are some people who
struggle each day to make ends meet who only wish they could leave an
inheritance.

But for those who thought that they would have something to pass on,
or that money would be coming to them, here are some of the things that
may get in the way.

People who make it to 65 will live a lot longer. As of 2005, according to National Center for Health Statistics data,
males aged 65 could expect to live to 82; for females, it was 85.
That’s 37 years of living expenses for couples, and it isn’t easy or
fun to scale back your standard of living.

Want to get a sense of how long you or your older relatives may
live? Drop the phrase “How long will I live” into a search engine and
play with some of the longevity questionnaires that pop up on the results page.

Social Security and Medicare will probably change.
It’s hard to find anyone who thinks those programs will get much more
generous. Medicare premiums will rise, and the program may cover fewer
procedures or not cover emerging ones. Meanwhile, taxes on Social
Security benefits may rise, and everyone may have to wait longer to
collect.

Read more of this article

About Reverse Mortgages:  Learn all about reverse mortgages at NewRetirement.com

Annuity Advice for Retirement:   Evaluate and compare annuities at NewRetirement.com

NewRetirement Retirement Calculator:   Assess your retirement plan with the NewRetirement Retirement Calculator.

Uncle Sam’s Top-Notch Retirement Calculator

Yahoo Finance, June 19, 2008

An improved tool from Uncle Sam is one of the best resources available to help calculate your retirement finances.

Most people have the same first question about retirement: How big a nest egg will I need? Two years ago, the Employee Benefits Security Administration, part of the Department of Labor,
published “Taking the Mystery Out of Retirement Planning.” This smart,
62-page guide helps answer that question in a detailed, but
easy-to-understand, manner.

And now it’s even better.

The original booklet contained eight worksheets — involving assets,
income and expenses — to help calculate Your Particular Number. Now,
these worksheets have been moved online and you can let the Labor Department‘s computers do the math.

What’s
more, you can store and revise your data and calculations for as long
as a year (by means of a simple username and password; the site doesn’t
ask for any information that might identify you).

What makes
“Mystery” so valuable? Clarity, to start. The unidentified authors
recognize that retirement planning can be intimidating and have taken
pains to keep the text and graphics simple and engaging. At the same
time, they have managed to pack a lot of information into a small space
– tackling issues like diversification within portfolios, Medicare and how to close gaps in your savings.

The
booklet also gets the “little things” right — which can have big
consequences. For instance, many retirement planners account for
inflation in their calculations. But “Mystery” assigns a separate –
and higher — rate of inflation for health care (7% vs. 3.5%). That’s a small, but critical, detail in a retirement that could last 30 years.

Of course, the guide isn’t perfect. Jerry Sonnenschein, a retired pension actuary in Bloomfield, Mich., who has studied retirement calculators,
notes that long-term-care expenses get short shrift. “Mystery” is also
designed primarily for people about a decade from retirement (although
the online worksheets, which address distributions from savings in
retirement, can help recent retirees).

That said, the booklet
“does a very nice job helping people get started” with retirement
planning, Mr. Sonnenschein says. “You get good explanations and good
guidance.”

You can find “Mystery” and the worksheets at www.dol.gov/ebsa
(click on “Publications/Reports”). You can print the booklet from the
site, or order a copy at 866-444-3272. The cost? That’s a nice feature,
too. It’s free.

We at NewRetirement recommend you take a look at http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/publications/nearretirement.html

About Reverse Mortgages:  Learn all about reverse mortgages at NewRetirement.com

Annuity Advice for Retirement:   Evaluate and compare annuities at NewRetirement.com

NewRetirement Retirement Calculator:   Assess your retirement plan with the NewRetirement Retirement Calculator.



NewRetirement Blogs Home