Retirement at 107

[Gardening Grandma]

finance.yahoo.com/focus-retirement/article/111841/view-of-retirement-at-107?mod=fidelity-livingretirement&cat=fidelity_2010_living_in_retirement

"Dad never made more than $10,000 a year in his life," says his son Bob, a 73-year-old retired GE aircraft engineer."

I found this interesting and warmly fuzzy. It helps,, hugely of course, that he's never had a major health problem...

[whoisjohngalt]

I've said it numerous times on here, that I firmly believe that many many many people are one serious illness away from being homeless. But, if you are healthy, this country has a lot to offer and most of the people just don't work hard enough and don't look for opportunities hard enough.

Lena

[stillontheroad]

I read that article too, and on the one hand I give this guy credit for being frugal, but I also question a lot of the advice given based on his example.

Clearly, the advice to avoid the stock market is bad, and his son backs it up with the most illogical reasoning possible: "gee, think of all the money he would have lost when the stock market crashed!" Really, it should be "think of all the money he would have made had he been at least partially in stocks throughout his working life." I mean, I can understand why a centenarian would not be invested in stocks, but using this guy as an example of a reason not to invest in stocks makes little sense to me.

I also don't understand the real estate "investments" the article mentions. It states that he bought and sold 35 houses, but also implies that they weren't rental houses but houses that he and his family lived in; his son makes a comment about how his father and mother "invested" in nice houses for themselves. First off, a personal residence shouldn't be viewed as an investment; second, if he bought even 20 of those houses as personal residences, that's got to be an average of moving at least every four years. Think of the transaction costs...

Also, not to criticize this gentleman, but the anecdote about having to work two jobs at a huge paycut at apparently the age of about 62 doesn't scream financial success to me. I applaud his work ethic and all, but IMHO being financially successful means that being laid off at 62 requires minor adjustments to one's financial plan, if any.

[cronewitch]

They were just being nice to the old people, they like attention.

Buying 35 houses in 80 years is a big waste of money he would have been better off with many less moves.

Avoiding investing it stocks is simply too conservative long term. If he had started investing 90 years ago he would be wealthy even with all the crashes.

[lynnerself]

It's hard to tell from the way the article is written, but I wonder if bought house fixed them up and sold them, sometimes for a profit sometimes not.

[wodehouse]

oh, my Lord! You're saying that he couldn't retire until he was 107?

[cronewitch]

My dad had a SIL who worked to 89 they were planning her 90th birthday party at work when she was rushed to the hospital. She got a pace maker but lost her job. She needed to work since she hadn't started saving for retirement yet.

[Gardening Grandma]

You're saying that he couldn't retire until he was 107?

No I'm not. The article said he's been retired since 1969.