General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBlackRock CEO believes boomers should retire later than 65
BlackRock (BLK) CEO Larry Fink has some strict criticism for the generation born in the 1950s, often known as baby boomers, or boomers for short. The executive, who is a boomer himself, claimed in a new letter to BlackRock investors that the older generation hasnt been doing enough to help the economically anxious younger generations and should retire at an age later than 65.
Its no wonder younger generations, Millennials and Gen Z, are so economically anxious, said Fink in the letter. They believe my generation the baby boomers have focused on their own financial well-being to the detriment of who comes next. And in the case of retirement, theyre right.
Fink also said in the letter that younger generations have lost trust in older generations, and that it is the responsibility for boomers to gain it back by making investments. Young people have lost trust in older generations, he said. The burden is on us to get it back. And maybe investing for their long-term goals, including retirement, isnt such a bad place to begin.
Fink also states in the letter that he believes that older generations should retire at an age over 65 due to changing demographics in the country. He claims that people are living longer than they did in the early 20th century, and that the Social Security program worked during that era because more than half the people who worked and paid into the system never lived to retire and be paid from the system.
Read more at: https://www.sacbee.com/news/business/article287120430.html#storylink=cpy
brooklynite
(94,919 posts)Retired at 62.
BlueWaveNeverEnd
(8,141 posts)marble falls
(57,427 posts)And that decision was based on deteriorating health. Not everybody can go on working and working and working. Republicans would have us believe that 65 is the fountain of youth, which, of course is baloney.
marble falls
(57,427 posts)GoodRaisin
(8,933 posts)There are all kinds of things that can get you when you start getting older. Younger generations had better wise up to these Republican lies or they are going to live in hell when they reach our age.
marble falls
(57,427 posts)Someone younger than I am now has a job with benefits since I vacated it. See how that works, Mr. Fink?
edhopper
(33,652 posts)How many of the companies he owns stopped Unions and a living wage for those younger workers.
senseandsensibility
(17,201 posts)freaks.
Captain Zero
(6,856 posts)I'm sure this ass and his company had something to do with at least one of my lay-offs over the years, that resulted in less pay at my next job, and lower social security benefits. And I'm probably not the only fellow boomer he screwed over that way.
Fuck him.
50 Shades Of Blue
(10,085 posts)Not all boomers have cushy jobs like his!
irisblue
(33,047 posts)ripcord
(5,553 posts)But I got bored and went back to work.
Silent3
(15,424 posts)...and don't feel at the slightest risk of getting so bored I'd want to go back to work!
I might consider a contract job now and again to make a few extra bucks, but I'm in no rush whatsoever for that.
marble falls
(57,427 posts)usonian
(9,937 posts)If they paid their fair share, young people would have a much easier time.
Most of us have been generous with the scraps that CEO's reluctantly pay to people who actually work(ed) for a living.
No yachts, no golf courses, no airplanes, no bomb-proof bunker.
I am so tired of morans projecting their own guilt on others.
KarenS
(4,092 posts)often targeted the older workers,,,,
Plus, it was said if the Boomers would retire there were more jobs for the younger folks.
They can't have it both ways
LiberalFighter
(51,265 posts)quaker bill
(8,225 posts)I started working at 15. 49 years was enough.
sinkingfeeling
(51,490 posts)Last edited Wed Mar 27, 2024, 11:34 AM - Edit history (1)
boomers are retiring at 66 or 67, not 65.
spooky3
(34,518 posts)What is wrong with Social Security doesnt have even the most basic facts straight?
And, the US normal retirement age is in line with, and in many cases, higher than, that in other developed countries.
Prairie_Seagull
(3,344 posts)Some, even many have been talking about raising this limit. I think this greedy fuck is afraid of it's increase for myriad reasons. Greed, greed greed and of course greed.
He knows that increasing this limit is the best answer. IMO.
Good morning,
wishstar
(5,272 posts)I retired from a fairly lucrative but stressful job after 26 years but had a good pension with healthcare and adequate savings. I always felt it was selfish for those of us "boomers" to continue working if we were well off financially and could retire with a pension and savings. My job went to someone just starting out who needed the chance for a good career.
But my main reason for retiring early was because my parents and my mother-in-law all required intensive caregiving assistance that I could only adequately provide wihout having the responsibilities of a full time job.
Delmette2.0
(4,176 posts)I started by using my ex deceased husband's SS benefits. He never remarried and my SS advisor suggested it.
I was caring for my son who had muscular dystrophy and my 89 year old mother with macular degeneration.
They were able to care for themselves but I knew it would only get worse.
Within two years they were both deceased. I am glad I was able to be available for them and to enjoy both without the stress of working.
My SS had time to grow a bit more which includes Medicare and an excellent supplement. This helped me cope with my medical issues that showed up.
DJ Porkchop
(453 posts)LastLiberal in PalmSprings
(12,601 posts)Other than looking like the spawn of Satan, what qualifications does he have to espouse his negative philosophy wherever there is a microphone? He sounds like the smart-ass kid in high school who had to argue with the teachers, no matter what the subject. All he did was waste the time of the rest of us who were there to learn.
I read that people who just have to argue do so because they are addicted to the adrenaline high they get from the "flight or fight" situation they've created. Shapiro fits that description.
BTW, my opinion is that anti-abortion people have the same addiction. What better trigger than believing you are fighting for the life of an unborn child? Once Dobbs was passed, the source of their addiction was removed, so they've been forced to look for another trigger. Birth control and IVF are temporary sources, but they don't provide the incredible high they got from their anti-Roe fight. Even getting a nationwide ban on abortion is dull when compared with thrill of fighting for an unborn child. (Once the child is born, however, they're on their own.)
What will be the next target they'll use to feed the dragon?
I am now permanently kicking Shapiro out of the place he's been living rent-free in my head.
Upthevibe
(8,102 posts)I just turned full retirement age, 66 1/2 on March 1st. If you were born in 1957, that's the age when you get your full retirement check. I should be getting my first direct deposit in April.
I've worked since I was 16 years old. I'm tired!
LiberalFighter
(51,265 posts)Rebl2
(13,583 posts)health reasons need to retire at 65 or younger. He is wrong saying we live longer. I am sure I heard earlier this year that we are going backwards and dying younger. I sure see a lot of obituaries in the paper the last few years and many people dying in their 50s, 60s and 70s. He should just shut the F up.
catrose
(5,076 posts)ProfessorGAC
(65,337 posts)The slide in life expectancy is over a shorter time frame than going back to the 30s, 40s, or 50s.
The life expectancy is still higher than when SocSec started, but much less significantly than Shapiro suggests.
It's simply untrue that "most people" didn't live to collect the benefit.
He just pulled that "fact" out of thin air.
pecosbob
(7,547 posts)brush
(53,968 posts)That helps how?
How about raising the ceiling on FICA deductions to insure SS will continue to be funded?
Duh!
How'd that guy get to be a CEO?
KarenS
(4,092 posts)Guys like him just think they're smart.
plus
The only thing wrong with Social Security is that they borrowed money from it to pay for wars,,,, now they don't want to pay it back,,,, remember when those coffers were overflowing??
brush
(53,968 posts)BlueWaveNeverEnd
(8,141 posts)Backseat Driver
(4,401 posts)brush
(53,968 posts)Renew Deal
(81,895 posts)Keep people working longer so they keep their money in 401K's.
DBoon
(22,414 posts)Hassler
(3,395 posts)niyad
(113,776 posts)MMBeilis
(191 posts)......tax on employees wages, both by the rate and by paying them as little as possible. And doesn't want to pay into the system on income over $168,600 because he views it as a bad investment compared to his portfolio. This is reason that Social Security's solvency is always a long term concern. He doesn't want to pay on more of his income and prefers that low income workers just work longer and pay more.
albacore
(2,408 posts)Very few teachers can last beyond 30 years. Kids and schools change.
CrispyQ
(36,552 posts)The same people who want us to work until we're 70 are the same ones who won't hire us after we're 50.
dlk
(11,597 posts)Talk is cheap.
Bucky
(54,088 posts)catrose
(5,076 posts)Funny how nobody mentions this. Full retirement has been moving up every year thanks Ronnie Raygun
LakeVermilion
(1,046 posts)He's got lots of money, so he can hire "Boomers." But don't expect us to work for nothing. I'll work if the job and the pay meet my worth. In a market economy don't expect me to work for peanuts. I have value.
Just sayin'.
jimfields33
(16,073 posts)Silent3
(15,424 posts)Especially if AI and other automation starts reducing employment opportunities without, as we've often been able to count on in the past, creating new jobs.
It's all quite doable if wealth distribution doesn't remain so insanely lopsided.
Captain Zero
(6,856 posts)Captain Zero
(6,856 posts)And of course he will want Black Rock to scoop up some of that privatization.
Yavin4
(35,453 posts)"But you should keep working...just not for us. But definitely keep working past 65... just not for us."
NanaCat
(1,436 posts)With the shine on his arse from sitting on it all day and exploiting everyone and everything that strikes his fancy on a given day, rather than, you know, working for a living.
Lonestarblue
(10,144 posts)He might not be so eager to extend retirement age. This attitude also ignores the reality that average life spans for Native Americans is 62 and 70 for Black Americans. He also thinks people dont save enough for retirement, which is because they arent paid enough for working. Every idea that people like this pontificate about is based on assumptions they make because they are white and wealthy.
Kaleva
(36,384 posts)It's too hard to live on SS alone
DFW
(54,480 posts)I'm 72 and I'll retire when I feel like it. My wife felt like it at age 60, and did. The only reason she's "living longer" is because when she was 64, a very aware oncologist told her that she might have one of the worst forms of cancer out there (she did), and she needed to have it treated immediately to have a chance of survival (she did, and she survived, even if statistics said she wouldn't).
Our two children are now 39 and 41, and have all the trust in the world in generations both older and younger, as well as their own. One of them lives in New York City, and, along with her husband, makes enough to live there and not be in dire financial straits. The other lives outside Frankfurt am Main, Germany, and makes five times as much as I do if not more. She pays more in taxes than my gross income is altogether. We hear more generalizations than there are stars in the Milky Way. We stopped paying them much attention a long time ago, since none of them seem to have any relevance to us at all.
Midnight Writer
(21,841 posts)"Boomers have focused on their own financial well-being to the detriment of who comes next."?
Does this guy have a mirror? Has he got any self-awareness at all?
What has a hedge fund ever done for you? What has a hedge fund ever done to help "those who come next"?
doc03
(35,432 posts)until I was 62 then retired and haven't regretted it for one second.
Voltaire2
(13,245 posts)The youngest boomers are 70.
intheflow
(28,516 posts)Like, young people are economically anxious, so let's make sure the older generation stays in jobs longer, giving younger people less actual job openings.
leftyladyfrommo
(18,874 posts)layed off and then couldn't find another job.
LiberalFighter
(51,265 posts)It is easy for him to continue working past 65 when he has a cushy job with top-level health care and living conditions.
Deep State Witch
(10,472 posts)I retired at 56, about a month after I became eligible in 2020. Between COVID and being a Federal employee under TFG, I'd had it. Hubs retired six months later. We're happily spending my parents' money.
Mosby
(16,401 posts)Just saying.