Connect with us

Company

Opinion: Older workers, especially minorities, are being pummeled by the downturn

Published

on


There are 3 million older Americans—defined as age 55 and older—who are now out of the U.S. labor force because of the pandemic and recession.

That’s according to a study by the Schwartz Center for Economic Policy Analysis (SCEPA) at The New School of New York.

The data shows a roller coaster-like pattern, beginning with a sharp drop in employment last Spring, followed by a recovery between May and August, and a further drop through January of this year.

Foe context, there were 37 million older workers in the labor force this time a year ago, says SCEPA’s Michael Papadopoulos.

“The recovery has slid backward for older workers,” he says, nothing that the labor-force participation rate (the percentage of the workforce that has a job or is looking for one) among this age group “has dropped continuously since August and is now at its lowest point since the recession began.”

This rate hasn’t just fallen. When compared with midcareer workers— (ages 35-54)—it has fallen five times faster. Since the downturn resumed in August, for example, the participation rate for the middle-aged group has declined 0.5 percentage points, but for older workers, it has fallen 2.7 points.

These aren’t just data points, of course. They reflect deep economic pain and anxiety for millions of older Americans, many of whom may never work again—at least not at the same salary and with the same benefits they enjoyed before the downturn.

“Of the 3 million older Americans who are now out of the labor force, about a third of them could fall below the poverty line,” Papadopoulos estimates. And keep in mind SCEPA says the real poverty line is actually about twice the federal estimate. The federal government thinks that a single person’s poverty level is about $12,800 a year, and $17,420 for a couple. SCEPA says such figures are absurdly low, given things like high housing costs and taxes in certain parts of the country, along with items that hit seniors disproportionately, like the surging cost of prescription drugs.

Read: What will low interest rates do to retirement savings?

“We think the true poverty level is about $24,000 for an individual and $30,000 for a couple,” Papadopoulos says, adding that the “downward mobility” that many older Americans are now experiencing will feed into future poverty rates.

The SCEPA report also reinforces a longstanding fact, namely that nonwhite workers fare worse during a downturn. “The decline in employment for Black, Hispanic, and Asian older workers was more than twice that of white older workers,” it says.

“Older workers have a deeper hole to dig out of,” says Papadopoulos, and “nonwhite older workers not only face that, but the double disadvantage of racial discrimination as well.”

“I’m sorry this news is bad,” SCEPA’s director Teresa Ghilarducci tells me. “But it’s based on numbers that are precise and calculated. I feel this is quite startling.”

Ghilarducci says the hope she had that things were getting better for older workers over the summer has faded. Because it’s generally harder for older workers to find jobs—age discrimination is alive and well—those who are unable to find decent work will have to begin drawing down retirement assets early, and, if they’re 62, begin taking Social Security.

Read: Turned 60 last year? Social Security has an unpleasant surprise for you

The problem with the former is that older workers who want to work for a few more years—or need to work—will have to tap into an IRA or 401 (k) instead of contributing to them, perhaps getting a company match and letting those assets grow.

The problem with the latter—taking Social Security at 62, the earliest possible age—is that it means reduced benefits. According to the Social Security Administration, the average benefit in 2021 is $1,543 a month.

For many older Americans whose fortunes have fallen in the last year—through no fault of their own—and experienced this “downward mobility,” Ghilarducci offers this grim prognosis:

“It’s really the end of the line for them,” she says.



Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Company

Opinion: Few 401(k) participants changed portfolio allocation when market tanked

Published

on

By


The rumor has been that 401(k) participants took little action when the stock market declined by more than 30% in February and March 2020. A Morningstar study provides some numbers to back up the lore.

The data come from a major record-keeper for defined-contribution plans. The starting point was snapshots for two dates: Dec. 31, 2019 and March 31, 2020. To be included in the analysis, the participant had to show up in both samples. That is, they had to be enrolled on or before Dec. 31, 2019 and still in the plan March 31, 2020. This construct ensures that observed changes reflect active decisions by participants as opposed to the sponsor replacing one fund with another. The final sample consisted of 635,116 participants across 509 plans.

The important finding is that only 5.6% of participants enrolled as of Dec. 31, 2019 changed their portfolio allocation during the first quarter of 2020. Participants who adjusted their portfolios changed their equity allocations. Most of these changes were relatively small, with an average equity reduction of about 10 percentage points. However, older participants who changed their accounts made larger changes than younger participants, particularly if they were invested more aggressively.

Much of the report goes on to look closely at the 5.6% who did move their money. For this exercise, the report identifies four types of participants: self-directing their accounts, using a target-date fund, defaulted into a managed account, and opted into a managed account. The pattern across participants shows that those with professionally managed solutions — target-date funds or managed accounts — were much less likely to change their allocation.

On balance, this report seems like good news. Buying high and selling low doesn’t end well.



Source link

Continue Reading

Company

I’m 28, have zero debt, a 401(k), Roth IRA and $45K in the bank. My parents want me to save for a home. I want a Tesla Model 3. Who’s right?

Published

on

By


Dear Quentin,

I’ve been flip-flopping back and forth between buying a new car or putting a down payment on my first home. With my parents being very money-minded and keeping a careful eye on my finances (still), I’m caught in a predicament.

The original plan was to save up 20% to 30% for a down payment on a condo in the suburbs of Los Angeles and buy into the market within the two years or so, and right now I’m about 40% towards that goal.

However, with the Green Act possibly on the horizon again, the Model 3 has been a temptation, especially with all the extra bonus incentives my state offers, with a net final price of around $27,000. I’m not desperately in need of a new car, but this seems like a great way to save some money on a vehicle with smart features.


With the Green Act possibly on the horizon again, the Model 3 has been a temptation, especially with all the extra bonus incentives my state offers.

I am 28 years old with zero debt as of January 2021. Retirement wise, I am well on my way to maxing out 401(k) contributions this year, and I have already maxed out my Roth IRA contributions, and if everything stays the same, I’ll have about $60,000 in retirement by the end of the year.

In terms of liquid assets and investments, I’m sitting on about $45,000 as of right now. I currently save and/or invest 50% to 60% of my take-home pay, since I moved back home with my parents after being laid off last year, and started a new job remotely.

I don’t know if I should (a) purchase the car straight up and empty out my savings as I will probably have the time to save up the money again before a potential housing crash, (b) not purchase the car and keep saving for the down payment, (c) do both or (d) invest the money elsewhere.

As financial conservatives, my parents are strongly against me buying the car because it’s a depreciating asset, and they believe entering the market should be my priority, so they think that I should have the down payment waiting, to jump into the market whenever I see a good deal.

I believe I can buy the car and strap down, and save more aggressively to replenish the funds. Any advice for me?

Pressured by the Parents

You can email The Moneyist with any financial and ethical questions related to coronavirus at qfottrell@marketwatch.com

Dear Pressured,

What the hell! Give into your impulse, splash out on the Tesla
TSLA,
-8.55%

Model 3. You will be empowered by the knowledge that you are using your spending power to get America back on its feet, while making a cool statement that you have finally arrived. Fully embrace the American dream of being smack-bang-wallop in the middle of the eco-warrior, Tesla-driving, tech-savvy zeitgeist. All any of us have is today, after all and global warming is coming for us all in the end.

Cruise the neighborhoods where you would like to buy a home in your 30s, 40s or 50s (it will all depend on how the property market fares between now and then). Take a good look at those homes, assuming they are not obscured by manicured hedges, and enjoy the view. Drive back to your parents’ house, honk the horn so they can marvel at Elon Musk’s bold vision for themselves, and then and only then ask them nicely if they would make space in their driveway for your Model 3.

I am kidding, of course. You have done everything right so far. Buy the house first and the $27,000 electric car later. You already have a destination in mind. Don’t allow an automobile, regardless of how cool you think it would be to drive, to deter you from that destination. Listen to your parents. They have seen more than you have. They are trying to set you on the road to financial freedom. And as nice as they are to drive and to be seen driving, you don’t need a Tesla to achieve that.

The Moneyist:‘Warren Buffett and Harry Potter couldn’t get those two retired early’: Our spendthrift neighbors said our adviser was ‘lousy.’ So how come WE retired early?

Hello there, MarketWatchers. Check out the Moneyist private Facebook
FB,
-0.47%

 group where we look for answers to life’s thorniest money issues. Readers write in to me with all sorts of dilemmas. Post your questions, tell me what you want to know more about, or weigh in on the latest Moneyist columns.



Source link

Continue Reading

Company

My wife and I are in our 60s. Should we skip our undeserving children and leave everything to our grandkids instead?

Published

on

By


Dear Quentin,

My wife and I are in our mid-60s and we are both retired. My parents have passed on. I have no living siblings or children. My wife has three adult children in their 40s. None of them are mature, responsible adults (alcohol, drugs, can’t hold a decent full-time job, etc.). They have four children.

We have to make some tough decisions regarding estate planning. Is it a viable option to skip the “middle generation” and bequeath all to the four grandkids? They are aged between 10 and 18.

We don’t want the middle generation to gain from our estate while cheating our grandkids out of their rightful inheritance, and we don’t want our life savings burned up by three undeserving kids while the grandchildren suffer. Can a trust or will assure us that our desired plan will actually happen?

Concerned Grandparents

You can email The Moneyist with any financial and ethical questions related to coronavirus at qfottrell@marketwatch.com

Dear Grandparents,

Can you skip the middle generation? You can. May you skip the middle generation? You may. I don’t want to sound like an elementary-school teacher, so let me reassure you that my opinion is not a judgment call on whether you should or shouldn’t, it is merely a vote of confidence for you to trust your gut and always remember that past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior.

A trust is a more private option than a will, and you can obviously set out terms of that trust and give the beneficiaries an income instead of a lump sum, if you don’t feel comfortable that your grandchildren would give the money to their parents to support bad habits. You could also provide money from the trust for, say, a down payment for a home in the beneficiaries’ name.


‘Alternatively, you could add terms to the trust to encourage good behavior in your wife’s children.’

Alternatively, you could add terms to the trust to encourage good behavior in your wife’s three children. “Incentive distribution schemes are common ways clients encourage productivity. If a beneficiary is in school, cash distributions from the trust can be made only if the beneficiary maintains a certain grade point average,” according to the Sketchley Law Firm.

Similarly, any distribution to your kids or grandkids could require proof that they have been alcohol- or drug-free for X number of years. ”Distributions may be conditioned on continued participation in drug and alcohol counseling, completion of in-patient rehabilitation programs, or remaining free of any further criminal or traffic violations related to drugs or alcohol,” the Sketchley Law Firm adds.

Your letter comes at an opportune time. I moderated a “MarketWatch: Mastering Your Money” online town hall, and I hosted a session on setting up wills and trusts with Elizabeth Forspan, an estate-planning attorney and partner at Forspan Klear, and Amy Zehnder, managing director and leadership and legacy consultant at Ascent Private Capital Management of U.S. Bank.

Zehnder summed up the difference between a will and a trust this way: “You don’t want all of your stuff to be visible to everyone, dumped in the front yard. And that’s probate! Trusts help to maintain privacy.” Should you decide to have a conversation with your kids about a trust — and you are under no obligation to do so — Zehnder suggests using words like “hopes,” “dreams,” “achieve” and “preserve.”

Forspan recommends that wills and trusts be revisited and, if need be, updated every four to five years. “Any time there is any major change in the tax law, or if there is any change in your family situation, or you get divorced, married or, God forbid, if someone in your family dies, you should always have a plan,” she said. “And appoint a power of attorney should you become incapacitated.”

There is much you can do to help your children and your grandchildren, whether they see it that way or not.

Hello there, MarketWatchers. Check out the Moneyist private Facebook
FB,
+0.18%

 group where we look for answers to life’s thorniest money issues. Readers write in to me with all sorts of dilemmas. Post your questions, tell me what you want to know more about, or weigh in on the latest Moneyist columns.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending