Traditionally, retiring entails leaving the workforce permanently. However, experts found that the very definition of retirement is also changing between generations.

About 41% of Gen Z and 44% of millennials — those who are currently between 27 and 42 years old — are significantly more likely to want to do some form of paid work during retirement.

This increasing preference for a lifelong income, could perhaps make the act of “retiring” obsolete.

Although younger workers don’t intend to stop working, there is still an effort to beef up their retirement savings.

It’s ok! Don’t ever retire! Just work until you die, preferably not at work, where we’d have to deal with the removal of your corpse.

  • squiblet@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    86
    ·
    1 year ago

    Main reason I never had kids was I was screwed over by just about everything financially. Student loans, housing/“financial crisis”, medical system, deck stacked against self-employment, predatory credit cards. Great job, USA. Then the same cunts who did that bemoan low birth rates and cry about immigrants.

    • Acters@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      1 year ago

      There are TOO MANY procedures/fees/tax/unsafe ways to lose everything you have or be in a position where you will never be able to live without constantly being demanded to provide more work/cash/time.

      • squiblet@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Agreed, life wasn’t this shakey in the past. Depression era: certainly, but it was caused by the same BS we are dealing with now. For example, it’s amazing that medical bills are a leading cause of bankruptcy and thus degradation of quality of life in the US, and there’s little will among politicians or citizens to do much about it. You could save up enough money to retire, even have good insurance, and then be screwed because you or any member of your family had a severe illness or accident, and lose everything.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Even if you make it to 65, Medicare Hospice at the end of your life is designed to wipe you out. So no inheritance…

          • squiblet@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            Right, The hope for Gen X/Z has been “just wait until until your boomer parents die! Then you can have a normal life!” and then it’s oh, sorry, guess you have $4 million in medical bills if they don’t just die instantly.

    • bluGill@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      55
      ·
      1 year ago

      Despite all that, things are overall better than previous generations. There is and always has been bad news. Life has always been a constant string of disasters, yet when you pause for a moment to reflect you realize that despite the bad news, overall it wasn’t that bad.

      • squiblet@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        43
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        In many countries, yes. People in India and China for instance are on average more likely to not be in severe poverty and subsistence vs 40 years ago, though western-style modernization has caused it’s own problems. However most people are less well off in the US than we were in the 50s-90s. Reagan economics seems to have been ‘wait, why are we letting the middle class exist? We could just keep all their money’. Seriously though i was completely fucked over by what I mentioned and it’s only based on luck that I’m not homeless.

        • bluGill@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          64
          ·
          1 year ago

          Most people in the Us are better off than the 50’s-90’s. They may feel worse off, but that is not an objective measure.

            • BenadrylChunderHatch@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              14
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              The argument of people being ‘better off’ now is that technology is better and more available. It is much cheaper to buy a big 4k flat panel tv now than a black and white tv with four channels and no remote back in the 50s. We have the Internet, smartphones, better health care, video games, music, streaming services, cheap air travel, food from all over the world, robot vacuum cleaners, air conditioning etc. etc.

              What we don’t have so much of is cheap housing, good secure jobs, any reasonable degree of income equality etc.

              • squiblet@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                1 year ago

                Okay, fair point that racial equity and access to opportunity has increased significantly in most of the country. Gender equality has come a long way as well, though it’s also a “ha ha you have to work now too and your family is still worse off than it was, good luck with paying for day care”

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Which was a huge bullshit injustice which need correcting and hurt a lot of people.

                But now we’re at the point where skin color doesn’t matter in this scenario. Only bank balances matter. And you probably don’t have a high enough one to afford a house no matter what color your skin is.