Comment on This 81-year-old still works at Home Depot to support herself and her 90-year-old husband
partial_accumen@lemmy.world 3 weeks agoI would argue that they were in fact victims of circumstance. The 2008 mortgage implosion seems to be the root of their troubles.
I would disagree with you. The root of their trouble started in 1994. The husband was making the equivalent of $195,221.66/year and quit that job to start a band. They could have been set for life if he worked just a few years at that job and saved for retirement. How badly would you blame anyone today that quit a nearly $200k/year job to start a band, and then had a tough time covering their basic needs in retirement?
I doubt they thought they were making subpar choices in the aftermath.
It looks like right now they’re paying on a vehicle that cost at least $37,000. They are still making bad choices.
Putting the blame on them really shifts focus from the elephant in the room, that our society should provide a baseline level of dignified existance for the elderly and infirm no matter the quality of their life choices.
I’ll be the first one to say we need something like UBI, but we do have a system in place that provides a baseline level: Social Security. As I pointed out, their income they are receiving today would give them hundreds of dollars in surplus if they didn’t live in Connecticut, but instead in a lower cost of living area. Again, they’re choosing to live in a more expensive place forcing the wife to work. It was no mystery how much they would be getting in Social Security when they retired. I can look up right now how much I’ll get when I retire. The disconnect seems to be them not doing simply math to see what a sustainable path is. Now, I’m sure there is more to it that my simplification above for their specific circumstances, but even with additional complexity the simply math by itself doesn’t add up to a sufficient answer before adding any other life complexity/challenges.
Suggesting they move to west virginia because it’s cheaper is a ridiculous idea that only someone who lacks life experience would propose. I’m calling out a kid, aren’t I?
I lack life experience? I think I could accuse you of that if this is your take. Life doesn’t always go as we want. You don’t get to do something just because you want to. You do what you have to in life to live. Sometimes that means moving for work, or making choices you wouldn’t like to do otherwise. This is a lesson our couple didn’t seem to learn as it looks like they’re living above their means and having to kill themselves working far into their years to continue on this path, nor is it one it sounds like you’ve had to experience yet. What the wife is doing, working at Home Depot, isn’t sustainable. What is their plan when she can’t work? Who is going to pay the rent and the expensive car payment? They have no plan B. They still aren’t looking at their circumstances and making changes to secure their futures for the years they have level.
Further, West Virginia was an example of cheaper cost of living place to live. I’m not prescribing that’s the only place on the planet they can go and live within their means. I wouldn’t not have told them to end up where the are in circumstances. I am simply taking what they have left and suggesting an alternative that addresses the fire in the room, her working at 81 to keep a roof over their heads. On this current path, they’re headed for homelessness if they don’t change course.
Your writing is too verbose
Sorry, this is how I talk and write. You’re under no obligation to interact with me if it bothers you that much. I’m certainly not changing just for you.
and lacks tact.
Your first response to me was accusing me of victim blaming. I’m following your tone on tact.
Dogyote@slrpnk.net 3 weeks ago
I get where you’re coming from, but I don’t think it holds up the way you’re framing it. Pinning the root of their trouble on a decision made in 1994 is a bit of a reach. You’re talking about a 30-year-old choice—one that may not have panned out financially, sure, but let’s not act like anyone who steps off the traditional path is just writing themselves into a future of failure. People take risks. Sometimes they pay off, sometimes they don’t. That doesn’t make someone reckless or undeserving of support three decades later. You’re applying hindsight like a hammer, and it oversimplifies everything that likely happened in between.
And honestly, the “$200k job to start a band” line feels a little too convenient. Maybe he quit for health, burnout, family reasons—we don’t know. Framing it as a dumb, selfish move is an assumption dressed up as fact. Life’s not a spreadsheet. People don’t always make optimal economic choices, and pretending everyone has the foresight, stability, and circumstances to do so just isn’t realistic.
As for the $37,000 car—yeah, that’s not ideal. But again, you’re pulling one purchase out of what’s probably a complicated financial picture and using it to write off their entire decision-making process. Have you priced reliable vehicles lately? Even used ones? You don’t know if that was their only option after a breakdown or if it was financed under pressure. It’s easy to diagnose “bad choices” from the outside when you’re not in the thick of it.
And about “doing what you have to”—I agree in principle. Life is about hard choices. But let’s not pretend that “just move to a cheaper state” is some silver bullet. Moving costs money. Leaving behind your doctors, your social support network, everything familiar—that’s not nothing. It’s not just a matter of pulling up Zillow and hopping a U-Haul to West Virginia. The fact that you think that’s a simple fix kind of underlines how disconnected this solution is from the reality of aging in poverty.
You say they have no Plan B. That’s fair, maybe. But they also don’t have many cards left to play. Working at 81 isn’t ideal—but it’s what they’ve got. And instead of asking “why didn’t they plan better 30 years ago?” maybe ask why we expect any 81-year-old to be keeping a job just to afford rent. That’s not a personal failure—that’s a systemic one. The fact that they’re still working shows grit. The fact that they have to shows a breakdown in the system we’re all supposed to be able to rely on someday.
You’re focused on their past decisions like they were filling out a retirement strategy on a clean whiteboard. But most people aren’t living with that level of control, especially over decades. You don’t know their full story, just some snapshots, and you’re building a moral framework around it. That’s fine if you want to play armchair financial advisor, but don’t pretend it’s empathy.
And yeah, they’re in a bad spot. But treating them like a cautionary tale instead of real people facing a brutal system isn’t going to help them—or anyone else headed in the same direction.
partial_accumen@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I just read your post and you responded to 10 or 12 of my points, which I appreciate. However, in all but 2 which you had good faith responses you strawmanned ever single other one misrepresenting what I said or claimed I said the exact contradictory language to what I actually said so it fit your point.
I don’t think there’s a path forward we can continue conversing on this. I hope you have a nice day.
Dogyote@slrpnk.net 3 weeks ago
Sure bud