In the 20th century, the typical retirement lasted about 10 to 15 years. These days, if you retire in your 60s, your golden years could last upward of 30 years or more. The more people recognize this, the more it becomes evident that we can’t work our careers in quite the same manner anymore. Working for 40 years — particularly in our more materialistic culture — typically won’t provide enough income to both live and save for a retirement that could last nearly the same amount of time.
Longevity experts are now calling for a revolution in the workplace, one that enables people to work longer. For one thing, it doesn’t help our economy to have our most knowledgeable and experienced workers completely out of the workforce. On the other hand, few people want to work for 50 or 60 years without taking a break. So, why not take a break?
Today’s longer life expectancies behoove employers to consider more flexible and part-time options for people. Employers may need to consider options for employees to move in and out of the workforce periodically. In other words, being out of workforce for a few years shouldn’t hurt a person’s ability to find a new job.
With this new approach to work, young people could travel the world for six months to a year at an age in which they can truly soak in that experience. They could enter the workforce and work long enough to earn the money to take off for a year — but not so long that they’re already burdened with children and a mortgage.
Such a work culture might also help remove the stigma of young moms and dads taking time off work to raise children. Retirees and near-retirees could take off a few years to hit the links, then go back once they get bored. Mid-career workers could jump out of the rat race for a while to re-charge their batteries, then jump back on that wheel with re-energized motivation. MORE
This story is from Rich Paul’s website. He is the host of the Rich Paul Show and is an advertiser on WJR