“My husband and I were going to retire at 65, but the house we owned was too big and too expensive. We downsized to a co-op. Working longer helped, too, both financially and because I love what I do.”
As readers can likely guess, those are the words of retirement expert Alicia Munnell, director of Boston College’s Center for Retirement Research. The 82-year old economist is herself retiring at year-end.
In an interview about what’s ahead with the Wall Street Journal, Munnell was asked whether “the U.S. faces a retirement crisis.” Munnell indicates one is still likely given calculations at her Center that indicate 40% of the working population isn’t saving enough to maintain their current lifestyle in retirement, but the bet here is that she’s not as firm as she used to be about the difficult times ahead.
The answer for why can be found in Munnell’s own career. As the top quote indicates, Munnell’s long-time plan had been to retire seventeen years ago, only for her to stretch out work she plainly loves until 82. And even at 82, Munnell will not cease working altogether. She will remain at the Center for a year as senior adviser, though without knowing her the guess here is that one year will turn into many. Which is the point.
Fears about retirement alone and the ability to maintain pre-retirement living standards are rooted in extraordinarily dated notions. Think 65 as retirement age itself. And in thinking about it, readers might consider their own age. The very notion of walking away from work when bodies and minds are so young no longer makes sense.
After which, it’s about so much more than age. Work gives life meaning. As argued in my 2018 book The End of Work, life without work is unhappy. Work is where more and more of us get to showcase our unique skills and intelligence, it’s where we get to shine.
This is important to think about with retirement top of mind. Historically the latter was the reward after decades of blood, sweat and tears. Which again speaks to how dated the very notion is. This isn’t to say that everyone has work as fulfilling as Munnell’s has been for her, but it is to say that the 40 percent number provided by her Center almost certainly includes individuals who haven’t engaged in serious financial planning for retirement precisely because they never intend to retire.
Better yet, it’s easy to see how more and more of us will fall into the “never retire” category. The clue to why can most notably be found in the very advances of the automation and “AI” variety that so many needlessly fear, and fear because prominent investors like Vinod Khosla claim the advances will lead to the automation of 80% of the work for 80% of the jobs. Notable about Khosla’s numbers is that he’s offered them optimistically. With good reason.
Assuming automation and AI even partially live up to their billing, those working today will have even greater reason to continue on the job precisely because the most mind-numbing and backbreaking (are you listening longshoremen?) aspects of work will soon enough be handled by mechanized others.
In short, it’s no reach to expect that in future decades the percentage of workers not financially situated for retirement will actually go up. And the growth will be bullish. It will exist as a loud market signal of work and work options that individuals can’t get enough of, and that they don’t intend to quit. In other words, we’re on the doorstep of more and more viewing work in the way Munnell presently does.
