Guess I better read this again. Seems to be all about what people THINK about where they are. No real information about what we SHOULD have, no real facts..

Based on the comments (original post was back in 2011), I'd imagine that for most, the past couple of years has been more dreadful than usual for adding to one's nest egg. If you're on this site, you've had first hand experience in the not very pretty reality of aging & the astounding cost of aging care in America.There is no way the US can continue with the current system. In 10 - 15 years, we will think of the old Medicaid system with it's 5 year lookback, exemptions on homesteads, and coverage of NH costs as the good olde days. Jacobsonbob perspective is spot-on (although I think he should wait closer to 70 to retire to maximize his SS payout). We're planning on living abroad too when we retire.

Whenever I see one of these statements that one needs to replace a given proportion of his/her pre-retirement income, I always figure it is written by someone who either spends most of his money as soon as it is received or assumes the readers do. Income and spending are different things, and in many cases one can live on much less than his income. I save about half my income for retirement, so obviously I don't need that much to support myself, and any unexpected money also goes into my retirement portfolio, now about 750K. I'm 60 now, and because of my thriftiness over the years on a moderate income (low 50s), I plan to retire at 62 1/2. If things ever get so bad in the US that I can't afford to live here, I will move overseas. Until then, I will continue to drive my 1989 Oldsmobile with 335K miles to work each day.

Pretty scary concept. With the Great Recession updating our conceptions, chances are the current and future generations will need to increase their working ages to accomodate for increased lifespans. No surprise that this would happen, but the surprise was that this new era came about so suddenly.