Connect with us

Business

Opinion: 'Work longer' is no solution for people who can't afford to retire

Published

on

Opinion: 'Work longer' is no solution for people who can't afford to retire

In April 2023, Betty Glover, a 91-year-old grocery store clerk in Oregon, was finally able to retire after a GoFundMe campaign raised $82,000 for her. After seven decades in the workforce, Glover couldn’t save enough to retire and cover basic expenses such as for food and medicine.

“I hate the thought of not working,” Glover told a local TV station. But she wanted to spend time with her two children, four grandchildren, six great-grandchildren and two great-great-grandchildren.

Glover’s was not the only GoFundMe retirement. Earlier that year, 82-year-old Walmart cashier Butch Marion retired, thanks to a GoFundMe campaign.

These outpourings of generosity are not feel-good stories; they reveal America’s severely broken national retirement system. Welcome to retirement American style, where retirement is work.

Most Americans do not have enough money to retire on. Forty-four percent of households with members ages 55-64 have no savings at all. The median retirement account balance is about $100,000; most middle-class people need $600,000. No wonder there are about 39 million workers 55 and older in the U.S. Workers 75 and older are the fastest-growing age segment of the workforce.

Advertisement

While some older workers are making good money, feathering their retirement nests and enjoying comfortable jobs — senators, corporate executives, lawyers — millions are stuck in low-paying, physically demanding and dangerous jobs at which they have little if any voice or power.

Older workers are closing the earnings gap with their younger counterparts, not because employers suddenly prize age and experience more than they did in the 1980s, but because older workers are ramping up their hours to meet financial needs, as highlighted by Pew Research.

When retirement security declines, so does older workers’ bargaining position to demand good wages and conditions. Employers know that more older people must keep working, even with less favorable wages, hours and conditions. My research shows that at least two-thirds of workers 62 and older are working because they don’t have enough money to retire.

Workers over age 55 are disproportionately represented in jobs that are lower-paid and physically demanding: 31% of home health and personal-care workers and 34% of janitors are over 55, while older workers make up 23% of the overall workforce.

This grim picture is on track to get worse. Most of the fastest-growing jobs in the U.S. economy, such as in healthcare and software engineering, are unlikely to benefit older workers. (The software sector has a median age of 38, while the wider workforce median age is 42.) Many of the jobs in healthcare are low-paid, physically taxing work that may not be a good fit for most people in their 60s or 70s.

Advertisement

Paradoxically, even as many older folks need to keep working to make ends meet, most people 62-70 are not able to work for a host of reasons and will retire with inadequate incomes or savings. As the Schwartz Center for Economic Policy Analysis reported in 2019: “Between the years 2010 to 2018, 55.3 percent of workers aged 55 and up in the bottom half of the income distribution were forced to leave the workforce because of layoffs, plant closings, age discrimination, poor health, and family concerns.”

And yet, the “work longer” mantra persists; the Economist magazine featured a headline last month that trumpeted: “Why you should never retire.” That may have benefits for the economy when the labor market is tight, but the nation should not depend on people working longer to make up for inadequate retirement-income security. This only exacerbates inequalities in wealth, health, well-being and retirement time.

Working until you drop is not a civilized plan for a civilized society. We desperately need a Gray New Deal that improves jobs for older workers while also restoring and boosting pensions and retirement security. Federal and state incentives should promote better-paying and age-appropriate work. Improved job training and stronger unions would also make a difference.

An Older Workers’ Bureau at the Department of Labor could help steer and support such efforts. Strengthening pensions would help ensure that older workers get better wages and conditions and are working by choice rather than necessity. We need subsidized guaranteed retirement accounts and advance-funded pensions, and an expanded Social Security system.

Some may fret about the price tag of a different approach, but the status quo is unacceptable and unsustainable in both human and economic terms. A Gray New Deal would save money and save lives.

Advertisement

Teresa Ghilarducci, a professor of economics at the New School for Social Research, is the author of the forthcoming “Work, Retire, Repeat: The Uncertainty of Retirement in the New Economy.”

Business

David Ellison hits CinemaCon, vowing to make more movies with Paramount-Warner Bros.

Published

on

David Ellison hits CinemaCon, vowing to make more movies with Paramount-Warner Bros.

Paramount Skydance Chief Executive David Ellison made his case directly to theater owners Thursday, pledging to release a minimum of 30 films a year from the combined Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery company during a speech at the CinemaCon trade convention in Las Vegas.

“I wanted to look every single one of you in the eye and give you my word,” Ellison said in a brief on-stage speech, adding that Paramount has already nearly doubled its film lineup for this year with 15 planned releases, up from eight in 2025.

He also said all films will remain in theaters exclusively for 45 days, starting Thursday. Films will then go to streaming platforms in 90 days. The amount of time that films stay in theaters — known as windowing — has been a controversial topic for theater owners, as some studios reduced that period during the pandemic. Theater operators have said the shortened window has trained audiences to wait to watch films at home and cuts into theater revenues.

“I have dedicated the last 20 years of my life to elevating and preserving film,” said Ellison, clad in a dark jacket and shirt with blue jeans. “And at Paramount, we want to tell even more great stories on the big screen — stories that make people think, laugh, dream, wonder and feel — and we want to share them with as broad an audience as possible.”

Ellison’s CinemaCon appearance comes as more than 1,000 Hollywood actors and creatives have signed a letter opposing Paramount’s proposed acquisition of Warner Bros. Supporters of the letter have said the deal would reduce competition in the industry and “further consolidate an already concentrated media landscape.”

Advertisement

Some theater operators have also questioned whether the combined company could achieve its goal of releasing 30 films a year, particularly after the cost cuts that are expected after the merger closes.

“People can speculate all they want — but I am standing here today telling you personally that you can count on our complete commitment,” Ellison said. “And we’ll show you we mean it.”

The speech came after a star-studded video directed by “Wicked: For Good” director Jon M. Chu that was shot on the Paramount lot on Melrose Avenue and showcased directors and actors including Issa Rae, Will Smith, Chris Pratt, James Cameron and Timothée Chalamet that are working with the company.

The video closed with “Top Gun” actor Tom Cruise perched atop the Paramount water tower.

“As you saw, the Paramount lot is alive again,” Ellison said after the video. “And we could not be more excited.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

Video: Why Your Paycheck Feels Smaller

Published

on

Video: Why Your Paycheck Feels Smaller

new video loaded: Why Your Paycheck Feels Smaller

Ben Casselman, our chief economics correspondent, explains why wages are not keeping up with inflation and what that means for American workers and the economy.

By Ben Casselman, Nour Idriss, Sutton Raphael and Stephanie Swart

April 18, 2026

Continue Reading

Business

Civil case against Alec Baldwin, ‘Rust’ movie producers advances toward a trial

Published

on

Civil case against Alec Baldwin, ‘Rust’ movie producers advances toward a trial

Nearly two years after actor Alec Baldwin was cleared of criminal charges in the “Rust” movie shooting death, a long simmering civil negligence case is inching toward a trial this fall.

On Friday, a Los Angeles Superior Court judge denied a summary judgment motion requested by the film producers Rust Movie Productions LLC, as well as actor-producer Baldwin and his firm El Dorado Pictures to dismiss the case.

During a hearing, Superior Court Judge Maurice Leiter set an Oct. 12 trial date.

The negligence suit was brought more than four years ago by Serge Svetnoy, who served as the chief lighting technician on the problem-plagued western film. Svetnoy was close friends with cinematographer Halyna Hutchins and held her in his arms as she lay dying on the floor of the New Mexico movie set. Baldwin’s firearm had discharged, launching a .45 caliber bullet, which struck and killed her.

The Bonanza Creek Ranch in Santa Fe, N.M. in 2021.

Advertisement

(Jae C. Hong / Associated Press)

Svetnoy was the first crew member of the ill-fated western to bring a lawsuit against the producers, alleging they were negligent in Hutchins’ October 2021 death. He maintains he has suffered trauma in the years since. In addition to negligence, his lawsuit also accuses the producers of intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Prosecutors dropped criminal charges against Baldwin, who has long maintained he was not responsible for Hutchins’ death.

“We are pleased with the Court’s decision denying the motions for summary judgment filed by Rust Movie Productions and Mr. Baldwin,” lawyers Gary Dordick and John Upton, who represent Svetnoy, said in a statement following the hearing. “He looks forward to finally having his day in court on this long-pending matter.”

Advertisement

The judge denied the defendants’ request to dismiss the negligence, emotional distress and punitive damages claims. One count directed at Baldwin, alleging assault, was dropped.

Svetnoy has said the bullet whizzed past his head and “narrowly missed him,” according to the gaffer’s suit.

Attorneys representing Baldwin and the producers were not immediately available for comment.

Svetnoy and Hutchins had been friends for more than five years and worked together on nine film productions. Both were immigrants from Ukraine, and they spent holidays together with their families.

On Oct. 21, 2021, he was helping prepare for an afternoon of filming in a wooden church on Bonanza Creek Ranch. Hutchins was conversing with Baldwin to set up a camera angle that Hutchins wanted to depict: a close-up image of the barrel of Baldwin’s revolver.

Advertisement

The day had been chaotic because Hutchins’ union camera crew had walked off the set to protest the lack of nearby housing and previous alleged safety violations with the firearms on the set.

Instead of postponing filming to resolve the labor dispute, producers pushed forward, crew members alleged.

New Mexico prosecutors prevailed in a criminal case against the armorer, Hannah Gutierrez, in March 2024. She served more than a year in a state women’s prison for her involuntary manslaughter conviction before being released last year.

Baldwin faced a similar charge, but the case against him unraveled spectacularly.

On the second day of his July 2024 trial, his criminal defense attorneys — Luke Nikas and Alex Spiro — presented evidence that prosecutors and sheriff’s deputies withheld evidence that may have helped his defense . The judge was furious, setting Baldwin free.

Advertisement

Variety first reported on Friday’s court action.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending