The Graying o0f Americas Bankruptcy filers.

Since 1991 we have seen a huge increase in the number of senior citizens over age 65 filing for bankruptcy despite them mostly being of an age when they cannot recover financially.The number of filers over age 75 has increased 10 fold since 1991, and is on an upward arc.With pensions having been eliminated or reduced significantly, and recent Social Security Cost of Living increases small to none existent, in recent years, this problem will definitely get worse before it if ever gets better.So despite all the claims of a booming economy the gains, as usual, are restricted to the already wealthy.

 

Interesting. And I don't mean to say bankruptcy of seniors is not something showing a shift in wealth in society, but I think they'd be able to keep their house and soc sec benefits, so I can see why some people would do this.

 

Your rant doesn't match the data....



Who's Filing for Bankruptcy?
http://www.filingforbankruptcyonline.com/interest/who-is-filing-bankruptcy.html

 

He's talking about the surge of bankruptcy filings for people over 55 - not the total number of bankruptcies.
1994 numbers had about 10% of people over 55 filing for bankruptcies, while most recent numbers put it at about 20%.

I watched my dad burn through about $700,000 because his insurance didn't cover a pre-existing condition prior to Obamacare - so I can see
how it happens.

 

I would be more interested in as to why they filed. I have seen so many people live outside the means. Big Houses, 2nd Mortgages, Cars, Travel and toys along with the instant gratification culture will catch up to the wallet.

 

This is the area of statistics where it is easy to mislead. When you take a group which make up a small amount of the whole and then state that their group has changed by a large factor in relation to itself, it takes only a small change for that to take place.

For example, you might have a group that makes up on 2% and then increases to 3%, you can accurately say they increased by a factor of 50%. Yet their net change may be within the margin of error or not significant.

 

That's not surprising. Close to a quarter of people rely on SS as 90% of their total retirement income. Half of retirees rely on SS for 50% of income. We all know that with the decline of pension, these numbers will keep going up.

Now, the median 401k balance for people 65+ is $69,000. This means that the vast majority of Americans is woefully unprepared for retirement. If you annuitize this balance, you may receive a monthly payment of around $350, that won't even cover the mortgage payments that 44% of retirees still have.

This sad state of affairs is a combination of two factors: 1) Inability of the average person to save, with the barrage of constant temptations for stuff to spend on. 2) Inadequacy of the defined contribution retirement system, i.e. low employer match, opt-in vs. opt-out contribution system, high-fee fund options, lack of education of future retirees, borrowing against 401k to fund unexpected health care expenses etc.

Now, just imagine how things would be if SS were also privatized. I don't even want to think about it, old age poverty would be the norm rather than the exception.

 

Health care costs are a major factor in filings coupled with the disappearing pensions.The only major part of our population who still have really good pensions all work for government either Federal,State,municipal or local or the military which is government.They are all TAXPAYER SUPPORTED!!

 

Taxpayer supported, but also earned just like any other enterprise where health care and pensions are part of the compensation.

 

The notion of privatizing Social Security is rooted in the notion of taking the same forced contribution to FICA, and allowing the individual to invest that money themselves ( or some % of that money) if they so chose. It is also rooted in the concept that the individual would not be able to under any circumstances access that money until they are of retirement age.

The individual could earn more money, and the state could build in enough safeguards in order to save people from themselves. It would require careful planning, but it could ABSOLUTELY be accomplished safely. If the individual started earning interest on their money 45 or 50 years before it is needed, they would have FAR more money at the end, even with the very predictable market downturns that will inevitably occur during that time span.

 

I do not have a factual source for this information, but the material seemed reliable. It is either happening or projected to occur that 1 out of 4 persons over age 65 will declare bankruptcy due to overwhelming medical expenses. Personally, I would be most agreeable to paying higher taxes so that our seniors can live in more security. (The taxes wouldn't need to be much higher at all.)

 

They start divesting assets to heirs and trusts via gifts around the time they retire so they can successfully bankrupt any underwater assets, then qualify for Medicaid several years down the road. Estate Planning for Seniors 101.

What seems to be just another variation of "seniors eating cat food" that lying Democrats resort to every few years is really just their complete ignorance of basic estate planning techniques (they live on the dole from the get-go, never contributed to society in any meaningful enough way to pay income taxes, had no estate and will never have one, so they don't learn these things like their productive betters in the private sector do).

As medical costs increase, increasing copays after Medicare, this will increase.

Just another consequence of the rotten, corrupt welfare state.

 

How about another consequence of the feed the fat cats economy, and screw the rank and file!!

 

You know exactly how that would work. Under the battle cries of "freedom" and "it is my money", the privatized SS system you propose would be undermined to a point where the financial advisers and the free market gets their hands on all these SS payments. That's the end goal anyway, retirees be damned.

 

Both U.S.News &World Report and the L.A.Times had articles dealing in this topic within the past week.

 

I dont know "that" to be the case even remotely. It is however, a nice attempt at scare mongering that would no doubt frighten a fair amount of people. If people wanted to come up with a way for that to work, it is easily possible, and we as the recipients of our forced savings, would end up with far more money than the current arrangement.

 

Meanwhile so called socialist nation of 5.4 Million Norwegians has an investment fund dedicated to it's citizens in excess of 1 TRILLION dollars while we the almighty USA and our 330 Million citizens have a DEBT approaching 22 Trillion???Now who is GREAT???

 

I guess you can look all over the globe to find things that you might find quite nice. You obviously like this investment fund that they have, so what's stopping your city or state from doing the same thing?

That's the beauty of the tenth amendment. You don't have to wait for the federal government to get up off your duff and do it yourself.

 

This is not a problem.

My buddy Richard is a WWII veteran, and loves mail order catalogs, and they love extending credit. He racked up a bunch of debt, and was living in bone crushing poverty trying to pay the minimum on everything, and they were all dicks about lowering interest rates and reducing balances, so I advised him to stop paying them.

What are they going to do?

 

Have you heard of the Social Security, Medicare, and Old Age, Disability, and Survivors Trust?

 

people like Dirty Donald, how many times did Trump use BK

 

There are already extremely generous tax incentives to save for medical expenses. You can literally save money, invest it at compound gains, and then withdraw it tax free. I feel no remorse.

 

sad thing is, Bush's over-reaction to 911 set us on this course, two multi-trillion dollar wars, yes we should of retaliated, but we went way overboard, and the effects will be felt for years and years

 

If only there was a Federal agency that offered retirement savings with the lowest investment fees in the nation. Oh wait, there is, and it has a proven track record longer than I've been alive.

 

sure, if your paid a salary where you have the extra $$$ to put away..... not everyone is as lucky as you and I