⌐ AV8OR WANNABE

The vast majority of them didn't!

They like to use that scenario as an excuse to keep working but the majority had followed the common sense advice and got out of the stock market...

Like I said earlier, this is a great retirement "bonus" for them while their retirement money waits for them safely invested in bonds and CDs...

BrownClown

While you and others in your mid/early 50's may not fit into the 5 year category, the Favres do. All of them were already on the panel when the 65 legislation was passed. So, they should have been out of stocks. Besides that, as any finance guru will to you to get less risky as you age. In fact, on the Fidelity website under the "Planning" tab it says as much. So how did they end up losing so much if they followed common wisdom?
I'm with others on here...I don't buy that excuse from them. From your age group; I would believe it.

Jetjok

BC,

Although I'm not at UPS, I believe you're full of patuka juice. First of all, how do you KNOW what other people have in their retirement accounts, never mind what the makeup of said retirement accounts are? Secondly, where did you get the idea that just because someone is getting older (ie 55, 60, or even 65) they shouldn't have any stocks in their portfolio? You always want SOME amount of money in stocks, regardless of your age. Thirdly, "they" are probably not making excuses to you, so it's unimportant whether you "buy" it or not. And finally, how about pre-reading what you write, so that it actually makes sense. I reference: "Besides that, as any finance guru will to you to get less risky as you age." Less risky (in this case) doesn't mean to stop investing in stocks, it just means to have less in stocks and more in other forms of assets. Other than that, I love your post.

JJ

⌐ AV8OR WANNABE

They didn't - you're the one who keeps saying they lost money. Every over 60 pilot I've talked to said his money was in bonds way before this market tanked...

Now they are simply making even more money they can stash away...

UPSFO4LIFE

Your right, you are not..Not to be rude, but you would be very shocked how many brag in very public places on how much money they still have and why the only reason they are still here is to pay off the second or third home or some other toy. Yes, some need to still work for a variety of reasons, but I think the anger over this whole age 65 thing is for those who are simply still here to pad their pockets.

To me, these guys have every right to be here, as the law has changed. But to act like complete *******s, whether is on the crew van or in the ASC or a jumpseat, is fueling a fire to an even larger group of people here as displacement after displacement occures. The only people here that seem unaffected by this whole mess are the most senior and over 60 crowd, which seem to be one in the same. And let me tell you, most don't give a rats ass about those junior to them, and they make that very clear! So no, you don't work here and you don't sit the sort most night like I do, so you don't hear what is really going on. If you ever get the chance to do so, I think it would really open up your eyes and ears to what is going on here.

Jetjok

You're right, guys who go around boasting about their "toys", "houses", "airplanes", "3rd or 4th wives", etc are way off base, and to do so in front of anyone whose been negatively effected by the Age 65 rule change, is the pits, and shows a decided lack of class. But I can't believe they all do it. I know plenty of over 60 guys at FedEx and most of them accept their luck with a degree of humility and don't go around trying to upset the apple cart. I'm sure it's the same at UPS. As for coming down to Louisville and sitting the sort, well I did that for a year when I flew for UPS and didn't like it much then, I'm sure I'd like it even less now. Probably the same at FedEx right about now.

JJ

BrownClown

Not sure what patuka juice is, but I'll answer the rest.

1. I know what said retirement accounts are composed of because they run their mouths about them.
2. Some stocks are fine, but don't be investing like you're 35 when you're 59. This is what many of them did.
3. Actually they do make excuses to me and anyone else that they have verbal diarreah with.
4. Judging by your response, you seem to have gotten what I wrote. You make not have liked it, but you understood it just fine.
5. I don't really care if you liked my post or not.

Jetjok

BC,

It's good that you don't generalize. I know you don't know what patuka juice is, because it's a made-up thing. I agree that someone whose 60 shouldn't be investing as if they were 35, unless of course they have a LOT of money and they want to make sure that a portion of that pot grows to the best of its ability. Then they probably should be investing heavily in stocks, but again, generalizations are not always so great. I do get what you were saying, and I can tell you I'm really hurt that you don't care that I liked your post. Oh, the hurt of it all.

JJ

UPSFO4LIFE

You are right though, it is the few that can't keep their mouth shut that give the whole group a bad name.

say that again

So......you're saying that because a few told you they were into stocks, you make the assumption that all of them are? Have you polled each and every one of them?