Social Insecurity
We have lead a pay-as-you-go style of living for more than thirty years of our married life. While we have stayed out of debt, we've put proportionally quite a bit into this house and land. What savings we had for our post-retirement years is less than we'd need, and even that is smaller than it was by half since the investment bubble popped a few years ago.
So now, we're faced with a decision: can we afford to give up full development value on our property by putting it under conservation easement? It seems the right thing to do as stewards of the land in a county quickly being fragmented by development. Will we have enough to live on without selling the place we hope to live out our lives?
Until November, we were planning to go ahead with the easement, trusting that social security would be there to provide for basic needs when our income stream dries up. We no longer harbor that trust. The future of Social Security was already bleak four years ago. This "Trojan Horse" of privitization put forth by the current administration gives me a queasy feeling, reminding me of the kind of deception a Senior Someone ten years ago spoke of as "blue smoke and mirrors."
I'm meeting with a CPA this week to help us decide: can we make it through our actuarial lifetimes without expecting to get back all or most of what our working years have contributed? Can we afford to protect our land from becoming a future commodity? It may be about the only card we have to play.
Comments
Oy, Fred, this sounds like a tough one. I'll be thinking about you as you wrestle through it. Retirement is farther in the future for me... I am not expecting there to be any Social Security by the time I retire. I don't think my retirement savings are quite reflecting that, though...
Posted by: Pica | December 13, 2004 8:20 AM
Good for you for caring so much about your land. In a way, a conservation easement makes the land one's heir -- much of the value of one's estate goes to the land itself.
I'm reading Richard Brewer's book about land trusts. He really goes into the pros and cons of conservation easements. If you're reluctant to make such a permanent decision, to change the deed of your property... remember that you can steward in other ways. Devoting time and (less) money to an existing local land trust is also a form of stewardship. Good luck!
Posted by: Val Ann C | December 14, 2004 2:54 AM
Now you're worried?
After decades of Congress funneling our FICA payments into the General fund and writing off-the-books IOU's to the SS Trust Fund?
SS will be there for those within ten years of retirement, but not your children or grandchildren unless the system is radically changed. The ratio of workers vs retirees will not sustain the rob Peter-to-pay-Paul scheme now employed.
Keep in mind that when SS was created average life expectancy was 62 for men and 67 for women, so only a small percentage of payees were expected to draw on the fund long term resulting in a surplus Congress saw as an unlimited source of unaccountable funding. The occasional fixes have done nothing to correct the fatal, inbuilt flaw in the system exposed by the post-war baby boom. The system should have been changed in the 60's as the Boomers began to contribute and govt. statisticians began to warn Congress of the imbalance building in the system.
Germany is already feeling this demographic/generational squeeze and has been forced to pare down their generous benefits that retirees paid for with high contribution rates and income ceilings. This is not only effecting retirees but their economy as a whole.
So perhaps you should consult your daughter and son as well? Of course it would be wonderful if you could protect your splendid piece of land to for future generations to enjoy. I hope you can and do. However, very few of us have that option as our homes are our largest asset and hedge against poverty in our latter years.
Posted by: Feste | December 18, 2004 4:03 PM