1. What is a “retirement age?”
2. Who determines it?
3. How is it determined?
4. Does it exist everywhere?
5. Is it the same for everybody?
6. WHY DOES IT EVEN EXIST?

Do we stop and think this through?

We get all wrapped around the axel over a concept that:

1. Is an unnatural act that doesn’t exist in nature.
2. Didn’t exist anywhere on the planet 150 years ago.
3. Doesn’t exist in many cultures, many of which also have much longer healthspans and average lifespans than countries enamored by retirement.
4. Was conceived for political and not humanitarian purposes.
5. Establishes an arbitrary and artificial finish line based on political decisions made 86 years ago.
6. Was creatively exploited and packaged up by insurance salespeople to create a multibillion-dollar financial services industry in which it’s only about the numbers.
7. Promotes a mindset that says work is to be avoided and often establishes lifestyle habits that are contrary to the grow-or-die nature of our biology and physiology.
8. Has become a deeply entrenched pseudo-entitlement with little basis for existence that has become so deeply entrenched in the western psyche as to be virtually unassailable.

I’m one of a still small but growing group of “retirement-aged” people who question the sensibility of retirement as we’ve had it drilled into us for the last 50+ years.

Perhaps you could tell from the above.

I came to that conclusion about 40 years ago –

-as I observed that many of the most successful world-changers were living longer and didn’t disengage from the creative process i.e. they didn’t retire.

Today, in the U.S., we still cling to the number 65 as that coveted retirement age although it was a number established 86 years ago by FDR and his union and business cronies to get older people out of the workforce to make room for rioting younger workers during the great depression.

The average lifespan at the time was 62, reinforcing the fact that it was not a humanitarian move.

Mysteriously, with the help of a powerful financial services industry, we still see that number as the top of the productivity hill and the start of – – – –

-well that’s where it gets interesting.

The roadmaps past 65 are limited. And the financial services folks aren’t trained, qualified, or interested in providing anything other than a financial roadmap – and one that is unrealistic and unachievable for most.

Check out these recent numbers from a retirement study from the Transamerica Center:

Total household retirement savings among all workers is $93,000 (estimated median). Baby Boomer workers have the most retirement savings at $202,000, compared with Generation X ($107,000), Millennials ($68,000), and Generation Z ($26,000) (estimated medians).

So you are a boomer with $200k in the bank and a financial advisor saying you need 5x that to sustain a “pleasurable” retirement. And, if you can’t get there, it’s because you aren’t disciplined enough or working hard enough.

Certainly, they say, the charts and graphs can’t be the problem – YOU are the problem. But, still, 1-2 % of that $200K lines their coffers each year while you get your act together.

Not a bad gig if you can get it and spread it across enough sheep.

An alternate plan with mental, physical, psychological, and spiritual considerations are not part of their program or expertise.

That didn’t matter much if you only lived 3–5 years beyond 65. Beach, bingo, bridge, and bocce ball made sense then. Not today, with 20–30 years of potential productive runway left.

It is unrealistic, in today’s world, to expect very many to reach the saving goals that retirement professionals say are required to sustain a 20–30 year non-income-producing life.

For one, fewer people can save much, if any. For another, most start too late with no chance of catching up to these large numbers.

So, we are on our own negotiating the aftermath of the questionable decision to exit the production mode and enter the leisure mode. It’s understandable that there is more angst today than ever amongst the U.S. population (where I am) about being able to reach the financial numbers that will support an extended non-work retirement life.

Perhaps we should start by accepting the reality that it’s near impossible to expect 40 years of “bust-your-hump” savings to finance 20-30 years of doing mostly nothing.

Comfort, convenience, and conformity.

As Americans, we are notoriously poor savers. We link that with short-term thinking linked to a cultural-driven tendency to seek comfort, convenience, and to conform to those around us.

Add to that the fact that most of us still cling to the 20th-century linear life model of 20 years of learn, 40 years of earn, and 20 years of relax and die.

Your financial adviser isn’t likely to inform you that the chances are better than 50% that 10 of those last 20 years are going to be in poor health and not very enjoyable because of the habits developed during the 40 years of busting the hump to earn, reach their unrealistic saving numbers, and enable a lifestyle that may take you out early.

How many other 86-year old concepts do you still have operating in your life?

We’re seeing a gradual, long-past-due transition away from the traditional retirement model with its onerous savings requirements.

The gradual demise of learn-earn-relax-die is giving way to a model that supports continued working past the normal retirement age. And it’s not just the money that is motivating this movement. There is a growing understanding that having some form of purposeful work – for pay or not for pay – in the latter third of life is a key to healthier longevity.

A balance of a purposeful life mixed with leisure and continued learning is an emerging post-career lifestyle model.

The concept of semi-retirement is growing rapidly, not only amongst those of retirement age but also amongst millennials and GenXers who don’t buy into the linear life model.

Some are semi-retiring in their 30s and 40s into a lifestyle doing what they enjoy and are good at and doing it on their terms with the expectation of doing it well past the normal retirement age.

It works for those well past the artificial finish line, like yours truly.

Think about trying it – you might like it, especially the relief from the aforementioned financial planner guilt trip.

Here’s an article that provides a perspective on this concept:

Exactly What It Means To Be Semi-Retired