Talk:Surveys of retirement spending

Corrections or Additions Needed
Linuxizer 03:45, 6 August 2011 (EDT) Looks great guys. One niggle is that both surveys (CES and HRS) are called "longitudinal." This term usually refers to studies in which the same people are followed over periods of time (often also called a "panel" study). To an academic, this is not a mere academic distinction! Off the top of my head, I believe the HRS uses a panel design but the CES does not.


 * I'll check into the details of both surveys and add comments about the nature of the respondents being followed over time. My impression is that you are correct.  But I didn't spend much time delving into the survey mechanics.  Since you think it's important, others will too!--ThePrune 10:54, 6 August 2011 (EDT)

--ThePrune 18:14, 30 August 2011 (EDT) It has come to my attention that the original BLS Consumer Expenditure data can't be so easily converted to a per capita basis and still maintain its usefulness. This is because married couples (household unit = 2 persons) can live much more cheaply than twice the cost of a single person (household unit = 1 person). I need to do some more research on this topic, and potentially convert the CE table data back to a per unit basis.

--ThePrune 19:11, 5 September 2011 (EDT) I've run into a paper by Anna Rappaport titled, Spending Decisions in Retirement - What Choices can People Make?. In it she refers to retiree spending data generated by the MetLife Mature Markets Institute Demographic Profiles. I need to read through their collection of articles and see if their data is truly independent from the BLS CE survey or the HRS survey. If so, this data should be added as an expansion to this wiki.

Comments on Medical Spending
--Linuxizer 03:48, 6 August 2011 (EDT) The discussion of spending trends related to healthcare is a bit strange, since there is no mention of the role of Medicare. Does total health spending drop, or merely the share of spending paid for by the individual? If the latter, shouldn't we see a change in spending at age 65 (either because generous employer coverage goes away and the 20% Medicare copay starts hitting, or because less generous employer/individual coverage is replaced with Medicare+Medigap), and if so why isn't that discussed?


 * The CE and HRS databases do have detailed breakdowns for the types of medical spending. The tables in this article only contain the overall medical spending percentages. I was not as concerned about including deep medical spending details in this article since I plan a separate Wiki on just medical spending.  That one's going to be a challange to write!  Once both are written, everyone gets to help rearrange how "the facts" are distributed among the articles.  In all likelihood some duplication of information between the articles will prove useful.--ThePrune 10:54, 6 August 2011 (EDT)

This is the first of an article series on retirement spending, authored by User:ThePrune. I'm helping with the administrative details. The last article will be on medical spending.

There will be a top-level summary page (pending) with links to the pages below. --LadyGeek 09:09, 6 August 2011 (EDT)
 * Studies of Retirement Spending (this page)
 * Replacement Rate Models of Retirement Spending (pending)
 * General Models of Retirement Spending (pending)
 * Inflation and Retirement Spending (pending)
 * Medical Spending in Retirement (pending)

A few administrative comments
This article was created from ThePrune's Word file using the Word to Wiki Converter. It uses a very conservative approach, which can result in superflous  tags. I removed a few of them manually.

For future articles, this converter can handle complicated tables. It will also translate footnotes directly into the citation tags for the wiki; there's no reason to do this manually. Take a look at: Word to Wiki Converter Example

The Table of Contents is automatically generated by the wiki, there's no need for one in the Word file.

--LadyGeek 11:19, 7 August 2011 (EDT)

Retirement Spending Sidebars
--ThePrune 09:49, 8 August 2011 (EDT) I really like the sidebars added by LadyGeek. But from my perspective the picture icon selected (egg in a nest) suggests "savings" rather than "spending". Perhaps a picture of a cash register at a store might better suggest spending. Other ideas, anyone?

I want to avoid the stereotypical Grandma and Grandpa retirement pictures, as well as anything controversial or gives a negative intention. Piggy banks imply saving and cash registers don't suggest spending to me (it's closer to a business purpose). I found a generic "paying bills" picture and uploaded. See if this is closer to the topic.

The sidebar images are small and must have minimal detail for ease of readability. Clip-art is perfect in this application. BTW, any wiki editor can upload a file (under the Toolbox menu on the left). --LadyGeek 17:56, 8 August 2011 (EDT)


 * --ThePrune 20:27, 8 August 2011 (EDT) Great picture LadyGeek!  Thanks for making the change.

General Comments on the Article
This is a wonderful addition to the Wiki and I look forward to the rest of the series and appreciate the skill and experience that’s going into them.

I approached this first article as a retiree (looking at the spending “trends”) and former journalist/editor (thinking of the target audience). My first thought is that this first article is quite technical, focusing a lot on the studies themselves so that it would be enjoyed by financial planners and software developers first and then individuals (retirees, near-retirees, etc.). My guess is that the latter will be looking mainly for more details on the spending trends noted, as they’ll most easily relate to those, rather than technical aspects of the studies. For example, they probably will want to see more on housing spending since it is the largest and what the category includes. It would also be important to note higher up (or possibly in the planned summary) what the definition of “retired” includes since it is, as noted, “rather strict.”

It may be that the other articles and the all-important “summary page” planned will lead the series and pull together key findings of the studies along with key technical aspects of the studies. --Fallible 13:40, 10 August 2011 (EDT)


 * --ThePrune 17:09, 10 August 2011 (EDT)  Yes, Fallible, you are correct in supposing that the subsequent articles in the series will be much more user friendly!  I am currently working on the Replacement Rate article, and it will be end-user focused.  That being said, there will also be a fair amount of detail (i.e. explaining how the ratios are derived).  I started with an article on "studies of retirement spending" since it contains the "facts" upon which all subsequent simplified retirement spending models must be based.  The "facts" help the more in-depth student of the subject to decide what's B.S. and what is reasonable.  And I in particular needed that help!


 * The top level article, "Retirement Spending" , will be primarily focused on the end user, with summaries of the more detailed articles and "cook book" approaches to estimating retirement spending.


 * One of the biggest helps that the Wiki community can offer me is to say, "Too theoretical - make it more directly practical." There is always a way to structure the articles to achieve both ends: factual and practical .  I am confident we can all work together to make it so!