To: TobagoJack who wrote (47842 ) 3/30/2004 10:19:58 PM From: EL KABONG!!! Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 74559 Hi Jay, As far as I'm concerned, that Barron's article is nothing but a bunch of horse puckey... Quite fallacious in my opinion... First of all, to the best of my knowledge, prior generations of Americans have had happy and productive retirement years with far, far less than $7M (reverse adjusted for inflation, etcetera) in their retirement funding... Next, the author ignores the fact that it's highly unlikely that there's $7M in available monies for each and every retiree to enjoy in his/her retirement nest egg. Even adjusting that figure, and saying that the needed $100K in retirement monies supports 2 people (spouse/spouse) which would have the net effect of splitting the $7M down to $3.5M per person, sounds highly unlikely, if not outright impossible to me. And the author presumes that everyone is going to leave $7M to his/her heirs upon their death. Preposterous!!! To the best of my knowledge, in all of history, that's never happened on any large scale. Yes, maybe the Vanderbilts or a handful of other families could have done it. But all or most all of the Joe-Six-Packs of years bygone? Fugeddaboutit... People are resourceful during their retirement years. They grow vegetable gardens to supplement their retirement income. Retirement income is not just Social Security/Medicare plus savings. Many people have a defined benefit pension plan and/or a 401(k), 403(b), SEP, IRA or some other retirement vehicle like an annuity. And there's personal savings plus any equity in real estate. The author makes it sound like the current generation is less prepared for retirement than prior generations. The truth is that the current generation is far better prepared than were their forefathers. Granted, expectations for a grandiose retirement may need to be curbed for some folks, but the vast majority know pretty much what they can and cannot afford on their projected retirement incomes. And the author neglects to point out that retirees actually need less income in retirement than when they were working. Most retirees have no mortgage to pay. Most retirees eat far less in their waning years than they did when they were younger. Most retirees make do with far less clothing than they did in middle age. Most retirees don't drive as often, nor as far, as they did in middle age. In fact, other than for health care and pharmaceutical related expenses, most retirees live far more cheaply in retirement than they did when they were younger. So most retirees can have a successful retirement on far less than the author's prerequisite $7M, even if that means that they are spending some (or even a good chunk) of the income generating principal. KJC