A. The best you can probably do is point to the statistics that say otherwise along with telling stories about those who experienced layoffs.KlangFool wrote: ↑Fri Feb 07, 2020 2:46 pmA) How do you tell anyone that has no laid off experience that they may not be continuously fully-employed until retirement age?
B) And, they should not be "House Poor" and buy that big expensive house assuming full-employment until retirement age?
Unfortunately, it is too late for many people when they faced this reality in their 50s. They had overspent on their houses and they do not have the time and the future earning to recover from the house mistake.
B. Similar to A. But it's not necessarily too late to retire if you realize the gravity of the situation by around age 50 and are willing to make some potentially drastic changes to correct the problem. Pete the Planner had a good show last year about this exact issue. Basically, it comes down to
1. dramatically increasing your savings rate,
2. potentially downsizing your home, which might not be too difficult if the kids are grown,
3. ensuring that your mortgage, if applicable, is paid off by the time you retire in order to reduce your spending needs and sequence of returns risk,
4. deferring SS benefits until age 70, which only a small proportion of retirees do.
Of course, if you're laid off in your 50s and have to take on different job that pays significantly less, the difficulty of the above steps is more difficult. But the alternative is to keep working until you're dead or 'mostly dead', which is what many will have to do.