{"id":1099,"date":"2019-04-12T18:42:21","date_gmt":"2019-04-12T23:42:21","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/thelight.com\/index.php\/2019\/04\/10\/inequality-in-retirement-is-getting-worse\/"},"modified":"2019-04-10T18:48:44","modified_gmt":"2019-04-10T23:48:44","slug":"inequality-in-retirement-is-getting-worse","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/thelight.com\/index.php\/2019\/04\/12\/inequality-in-retirement-is-getting-worse\/","title":{"rendered":"Inequality In Retirement Is Getting Worse"},"content":{"rendered":"

As the LIGHT! stands up for shrinking the inequality gap this article from Forbes is an important reminder for all of us to remember the older folks in the LIGHT! (50+ crowd) as they enter into retirement.<\/p>\n

We don’t want everyone to have exactly the same things – we just need them to not be so wildly far apart that social trust and community connectedness disappear!<\/p>\n

\n

\"\"How lifelong inequalities add up is one of the hottest issues in academic gerontology. A new book from Boston University professor Deborah Carr, the editor-in-chief of Journal of Gerontology, <\/em>provides a much-needed reality check on the nation\u2019s plans for dealing with retirement. Titled\u00a0Golden Years? Social Inequalities In Later Life<\/a>,\u00a0Carr’s book\u00a0brings home a sobering message:\u00a0 Unless we do something about it, healthy retirement will be a reality only for the privileged few.<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

The seeds of late-life inequalities are planted early on. Childhood personality factors\u2014such as being conscientious or not particularly cheerful\u2014lead to increased life span<\/a>. But childhood obesity, no surprise, has been linked<\/a> to bad economic and health outcomes over\u00a0one’s life course. Various studies show<\/a> that the\u00a0zip code you were in can help predict longevity. Class differences at childhood also play a role.\u00a0Between two billionaires living in Greenwich, Connecticut, the one who was poor in childhood is predicted to die first, all else equal.<\/p>\n

Retirement inequalities also follow broader socioeconomic cleavages. Having\u00a0lower levels of education, being black, and growing up in financially struggling families are all linked to adverse consequences in old age. These issues include major health problems, heightened risk of elder abuse<\/a>, and insufficient income to cover even modest food, housing, and medication costs. Women, even if white and born rich, are especially vulnerable<\/a> to late-life poverty.\u00a0These inequalities stem in large part from the fact that the wealth accumulation process does not work for most people. Middle- and lower-income workers face more economic shocks<\/a> throughout their life, from unstable jobs to family and health problems.<\/p>\n

For most people in their sixties,\u00a0working longer\u00a0into old age<\/a> to make up for low incomes may be harder than\u00a0they hoped when they were younger. Work can be an important source of purpose, social engagement, identity and, of course, income for older adults. But the irony is that older adults who can afford to retire young are precisely the people who can and do work into old age, because they have enjoyed the privilege of good health and hold professional jobs that are a good \u201cfit\u201d for aging bodies. Those who control the pace and content of their work are more likely to\u00a0enjoy their jobs, to be paid well, and\u00a0to be able to work into their\u00a0seventies, even if they have some aches and pains.<\/p>\n

Most everyone else, more often with limited or no pensions, can\u2019t afford to retire young. Yet many end up leaving the labor force because their employers don\u2019t want them, their jobs are inflexible, or their jobs require young and vigorous bodies. For instance, Walmart is making\u00a0its greeters be more active<\/a>, with tasks requiring stooping and bending\u2014a move that many presume is a way to squeeze out the aged and the disabled.<\/p>\n

American retirement policy is built on the notion that everyone should enjoy a healthy, rewarding retirement. Yet back in the 1980s,\u00a0Steve Crystal and Dennis Shea<\/a> debunked the idea that life gets more equal and more democratic as we approach the most\u00a0universal\u00a0of all life processes, old age. When Social Security was expanding, wages\u00a0growth was strong\u00a0and pension programs were more robust, economic inequality narrowed in the US after age 65. Benefit programs replaced labor markets as principal income sources.\u00a0Yet since the 1980s, inequality has been greatest among the aged. As Boston College economist Alicia Munnell\u00a0has found<\/a>, deeper income inequality is awaiting today\u2019s workers when they retire.<\/p>\n

Current research at the New School’s Retirement Equity Lab finds\u00a0wealth inequality to be growing immensely. Among workers approaching retirement in 1992, the\u00a0lowest-earning fifth of the population\u00a0held only 3% of retirement wealth\u00a0while the top\u00a0fifth held\u00a049%. In 2010, the bottom quintile\u00a0was down to\u00a0only 1% of retirement wealth, with the top quintile at 50%. Economic advantages and disadvantages create inequality in old age. With no policy to alter the course, inequality among the elderly will only grow.<\/p>\n

There is hope, however. Some components of the proposed Social Security 2100 Act<\/a>, introduced earlier this year by Democrats in the House and Senate, would provide an added boost to low-income older adults by increasing the minimum benefit provided to beneficiaries and raising the annual cost-of-living adjustment to reflect older adults\u2019 outsize medical expenses. That would\u00a0go a long way in\u00a0preventing retirees in low-wage work from falling into poverty.<\/p>\n

Yet as Carr documents, the picture is not a hopeful one at present. As Carr writes, starkly summarizing much of the current research: \u201cA long, healthy, and prosperous old age is the ultimate reward of economic and racial privilege.\u201d<\/p>\n