[bradleyjg]

It's strange to me how some people seem to obsess so much over retirement. Is your intertemporal discount rate negative (i.e. do you value a dollar 50 years more than you value a dollar today)? That's awfully counterintuitive if you do. There is a risk that the utility will drop to zero if you die before then, and even if it doesn't there is every reason to believe that you will be able to wring more enjoyment out of it today then at a time when you are very likely to be physically and mentally diminished.

Perhaps it is an expensive minimaxing strategy.

[VexXtreme]

I had to upvote this as this is something I've been saying for years. The amount of things a college grad can do with a million dollars is vastly bigger than the choice an octogenarian has. A dollar simply doesn't have the same value to a young person and an old person. The potential of what you can do with your money greatly diminishes as you age and at some point money even becomes a non-factor. When you're pissing your diapers in an old people's home, what good is your retirement money?

I am not advocating recklessness with personal savings, but at a certain age you pass the point where you can reasonably enjoy money.

[tjpick]

> When you're pissing your diapers in an old people's home, what good is your retirement money?

As I've understood, the point is to blow all your retirement money between the age of 65(standard retirement age), and as you so eloquently put it, the age when you are pissing yourself in an old folks home. With a little luck, you've got about 30 years there.

[bradleyjg]

More than a little luck. It'd take quite a bit of luck just to live that long, much less be healthy till 95.

[snikeris]

You are assuming that as your age increases you eventually become more and more debilitated. Although this has been true for all of human history, it's not unreasonable to think that this might change during our lifetime. See SENS:

http://www.sens.org/

People associate frailty with age, but it doesn't have to be that way. If we can fix or clean up the underlying processes that cause aging, being 90 years old will be a very different experience.

[benched]

If you're in the US, that money is always for keeping you off the street, at any age. It's funny you mention retirement homes. Those cost more than my current lifestyle does. Medicaid, you say? Ok, but first you need money for a lawyer to help you get on Medicaid, because the state will seek to deny you no matter your situation, as a matter of policy. We've been going through this pathetically broken process with my grandfather for a year. Just in case any young people out there are under the impression that 'the system' just sort of kicks in and takes care of things at a certain age, it doesn't. So you don't save for retirement so you can go jet-skiing in the tropics at 90. You save so you don't end up stuck, suffering alone for years in bad conditions, because you can't afford a roof and humane care.

[precisioncoder]

I think that's exactly what a lot of people are missing. They forget that the US has very little in the way of social assistance. It seems nerve wracking to live there. I save because I like to have the peace of mind but I know that if I need it there will be assistance.

[frogpelt]

It's not that much different than squirrels saving nuts for the winter. Saving for the future is wise.

More to your point though, I think retirement dreams have been born out of blue-collar type work. People physically cannot do most types of blue-collar work when they reach the "golden years". Consider how you can enjoy your life now and how you can position yourself to have an income when you are not as nimble and healthy as you are now.

[stouset]

If you save a dollar, you can always spend it (plus interest) later. If you spend that dollar now, you lose the option to spend it on something you would have ended up valuing more later.