Well One Gets Old

Preparing for life after work. RRSPs, RRIFs, TFSAs, annuities and meeting future financial and psychological needs.
Shine
Gold Ring
Gold Ring
Posts: 2022
Joined: 13 Dec 2010 01:32

Well One Gets Old

Post by Shine » 15 Jul 2011 07:14


izzy
Gold Ring
Gold Ring
Posts: 2947
Joined: 19 Feb 2005 19:06
Location: Winnipeg MB

Re: Well One Gets Old

Post by izzy » 15 Jul 2011 11:56

Cute! Thank you :thumbsup:
"I disagree strongly with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

User avatar
ghariton
Diamond Ring
Diamond Ring
Posts: 11969
Joined: 18 Feb 2005 18:59
Location: Ottawa

Re: Well One Gets Old

Post by ghariton » 13 Mar 2013 13:03

New mortality tables based on 2007 to 2009, at Statistics Canada[/url]. Broken out by age (of course), gender and province.

George
The plural of anecdote is NOT data.

User avatar
newguy
Gold Ring
Gold Ring
Posts: 8076
Joined: 10 May 2009 18:24
Location: Montreal

Re: Well One Gets Old

Post by newguy » 13 Mar 2013 13:17

ghariton wrote:Broken out by age (of course), gender and province.
I can live an extra year by moving to BC but an extra 5 by getting a sex change, hmmm........

User avatar
Bylo Selhi
Diamond Ring
Diamond Ring
Posts: 24699
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 10:36
Location: Waterloo, ON
Contact:

Re: Well One Gets Old

Post by Bylo Selhi » 13 Mar 2013 13:22

newguy wrote:I can live an extra year by moving to BC but an extra 5 by getting a sex change
So get a sex change and move to BC :twisted:
hmmm........
.....what if everyone got a sex change and moved to BC?
Sedulously eschew obfuscatory hyperverbosity and prolixity.

User avatar
NormR
Gold Ring
Gold Ring
Posts: 4012
Joined: 18 Feb 2005 11:19
Contact:

Re: Well One Gets Old

Post by NormR » 13 Mar 2013 13:38

Bylo Selhi wrote:
newguy wrote:I can live an extra year by moving to BC but an extra 5 by getting a sex change
So get a sex change and move to BC :twisted:
hmmm........
.....what if everyone got a sex change and moved to BC?
So, just what is the life expectancy of the transgendered? One might think a "major" operation might cut down on it...

ig17
Gold Ring
Gold Ring
Posts: 2528
Joined: 21 Feb 2005 20:54

Re: Well One Gets Old

Post by ig17 » 13 Mar 2013 13:43

Becoming a pessimist also helps. :(

Benefits of Seeing a Dark Future
Survival analyses revealed that, in later adulthood, underestimating one’s life satisfaction 5 years later was related to lower hazard ratios for disability (n=735 became disabled) and mortality (n=879 died) across 10 or more years, even after controlling for age, sex, education, income, and self-rated health. Findings suggest that older adults are more likely to underestimate their life satisfaction in the future and that such underestimation was associated with positive health outcomes.

User avatar
ghariton
Diamond Ring
Diamond Ring
Posts: 11969
Joined: 18 Feb 2005 18:59
Location: Ottawa

Re: Well One Gets Old

Post by ghariton » 13 Mar 2013 14:02

newguy wrote: an extra 5 by getting a sex change, hmmm........
Newgirl, is that really you? :shock:

I wonder whether issuers of annuities make you sign to the effect that you won't get a sex change operation.

George
The plural of anecdote is NOT data.

User avatar
optionable68
Gold Ring
Gold Ring
Posts: 1135
Joined: 19 Feb 2005 18:47
Location: GTA

Re: Well One Gets Old

Post by optionable68 » 17 Mar 2013 15:56

ghariton wrote:New mortality tables based on 2007 to 2009, at Statistics Canada[/url]. Broken out by age (of course), gender and province.

George
81 appears to be the magic number for males. I'm thinking of setting up my future cash flow requirements to "live it up" between now and 81, and then "live it down" if I survive beyond 81.....
"Facts don't care about feelings"

User avatar
eezee
Gold Ring
Gold Ring
Posts: 1847
Joined: 28 Feb 2005 09:44
Location: Manitoulin Island, ON

Re: Well One Gets Old

Post by eezee » 17 Mar 2013 17:07

Bylo Selhi wrote:
newguy wrote:I can live an extra year by moving to BC but an extra 5 by getting a sex change
So get a sex change and move to BC :twisted:
hmmm........
.....what if everyone got a sex change and moved to BC?
What would change if EVERYONE got a sex change ? :rofl: :rofl:
I am going to live forever .... so far so good.

j831robert
Silver Ring
Silver Ring
Posts: 752
Joined: 01 May 2005 14:12
Location: SW Ontario

Re: Well One Gets Old

Post by j831robert » 17 Mar 2013 20:06

Be careful what you wish for ... I'm 81 and the tables keep moving away from me at each birthday. :roll:

j831robert
Silver Ring
Silver Ring
Posts: 752
Joined: 01 May 2005 14:12
Location: SW Ontario

Re: Well One Gets Old

Post by j831robert » 17 Mar 2013 20:16

On the other hand it might be nice to survive through my 90th year at which time you good people would have paid me an indexed pension for the same number of years that it took me to earn it - seems about right since a soldier 'works' 24/7 with time off discretionairy and subject to immediate recall.

SQRT
Gold Ring
Gold Ring
Posts: 1969
Joined: 01 Nov 2012 11:33
Location: Alberta/Ontario/Arizona

Re: Well One Gets Old

Post by SQRT » 19 Mar 2013 13:24

A question on mortality tables. Seems to me that these tables do not become definative until the entire cohort dies. Obviously, this cannot be the case for those of us who are still alive. Since the trend is for longer life spans, wouldn't we expect our actual life expectancies to be longer than those predicted in the tables? Or do he tables somehow take this into account? Obviously I am not an actuary.

User avatar
ghariton
Diamond Ring
Diamond Ring
Posts: 11969
Joined: 18 Feb 2005 18:59
Location: Ottawa

Re: Well One Gets Old

Post by ghariton » 19 Mar 2013 14:04

SQRT wrote:A question on mortality tables. Seems to me that these tables do not become definative until the entire cohort dies. Obviously, this cannot be the case for those of us who are still alive. Since the trend is for longer life spans, wouldn't we expect our actual life expectancies to be longer than those predicted in the tables? Or do he tables somehow take this into account? Obviously I am not an actuary.
My understanding is that Statistics Canada's tables reflect observed death rates, except for ages 95 and up, where a logistic model is used (because data becomes scarcer and less regular) and except for ages 0 to 4, where patterns are unusual, e.g. proportionally more deaths in the first few days or weeks of life, and so smoothing techniques must be modified.

Statistics Canada discusses its methodology here, but I found them to be less than clear.

If I am right as to what Statistics Canada does, these tables are examples of periodic or static mortality tables, i.e. they implicitly assume no change in life expectancies going forward. There are also cohort tables, that try to capture changes, through models, but of course they are subject to modelling error.

George
The plural of anecdote is NOT data.

brucecohen
Diamond Ring
Diamond Ring
Posts: 10913
Joined: 20 Feb 2005 16:47

Re: Well One Gets Old

Post by brucecohen » 19 Mar 2013 19:55

ghariton wrote:New mortality tables based on 2007 to 2009, at Statistics Canada[/url]. Broken out by age (of course), gender and province.
I loaded the new data into my spreadsheet which calculates likelihood of reaching a given age. The results show an astounding increase. So astounding that I'll have to verify the data integrity when my eyes are sharper. Here are summary tables using the new 2007-09 data and the previous 2000-02 data.

Image

ig17
Gold Ring
Gold Ring
Posts: 2528
Joined: 21 Feb 2005 20:54

Re: Well One Gets Old

Post by ig17 » 19 Mar 2013 20:11

brucecohen wrote:I loaded the new data into my spreadsheet which calculates likelihood of reaching a given age. The results show an astounding increase. So astounding that I'll have to verify the data integrity when my eyes are sharper.
Graph in today's WSJ:

Image

User avatar
parvus
Gold Ring
Gold Ring
Posts: 9884
Joined: 20 Feb 2005 16:09
Location: Waiting for the real estate meltdown on Rua Açores.

Re: Well One Gets Old

Post by parvus » 19 Mar 2013 20:19

ig17 wrote:Becoming a pessimist also helps. :(

Benefits of Seeing a Dark Future
Survival analyses revealed that, in later adulthood, underestimating one’s life satisfaction 5 years later was related to lower hazard ratios for disability (n=735 became disabled) and mortality (n=879 died) across 10 or more years, even after controlling for age, sex, education, income, and self-rated health. Findings suggest that older adults are more likely to underestimate their life satisfaction in the future and that such underestimation was associated with positive health outcomes.
Oh I like this one.

+1
Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muß man schweigen — a wit
Imagefiniki, the Canadian financial wiki Your go-to guide for financial basics
Image

j831robert
Silver Ring
Silver Ring
Posts: 752
Joined: 01 May 2005 14:12
Location: SW Ontario

Re: Well One Gets Old

Post by j831robert » 19 Mar 2013 20:48

+1 here as well. I am astonished to find myself still here considering that my father died in his mid 70's and my mother in her late 60's both of cancers plus my life's employment choice (soldier) is not rated as a high survival factor. Mind you, I've been 'lucky' in almost aspect of my life from being selected as a suitable life's partner by the right woman, through not riding in the vehicle that ran over the mine, to taking up investing as a hobby after being retired as 'to old to sleep on the hard ground anymore'. All should be so fortunate.

SQRT
Gold Ring
Gold Ring
Posts: 1969
Joined: 01 Nov 2012 11:33
Location: Alberta/Ontario/Arizona

Re: Well One Gets Old

Post by SQRT » 19 Mar 2013 22:39

So if I read the responses correctly, currently being 62 and in excellent health, my actual expected age at death will probably be higher than the tables suggest. i always figureed 83 was the expectation. Now I'm thinking maybe 85-90. Fathr died at 78 and my mother is still alive and almost 88. So far I am in much better health than either of them ever were.

brucecohen
Diamond Ring
Diamond Ring
Posts: 10913
Joined: 20 Feb 2005 16:47

Re: Well One Gets Old

Post by brucecohen » 20 Mar 2013 08:55

SQRT wrote:So if I read the responses correctly, currently being 62 and in excellent health, my actual expected age at death will probably be higher than the tables suggest.
Yes. Life expectancy is really average life expectancy. It's not the point at which you're expected to die, but the point at which half of the people in your hypothetical 100,000-member birth & gender cohort are expected to be dead. Some died as infants, some as young people, some in middle age, etc. The significance of this is that if you base your retirement plan on running to life expectancy, there's a 50% chance of outliving your money. Some financial planners run retirement funding projections to the age that clients have a 10% chance of reaching. 90 used to be the magic number. Now, I'm told, many planners use 95.

If you're male, the StatCan table suggests you have a 22% chance of reaching 90 and a 7% chance of reaching 95. If you're female, the projections are 35% and 15%. Note: the StatCan tables reflect the general population. The healthier and wealthier you are, the greater your chance of outliving the table.

Also note that the older you are, the older you're likely to become....because you're a statistical survivor. For example, the StatCan table puts life expectancy for a newborn male at 78.6 years and life expectancy for a 62-year-old male at 82.7.

The downside is that rising longevity also implies more years of living with a disability, especially for women. StatCan does calcs on what it calls disability-free life expectancy. Their page is here but right now it comes up blank.

User avatar
kcowan
Diamond Ring
Diamond Ring
Posts: 13193
Joined: 18 Apr 2006 20:33
Location: Pacific latitude 20/49

Re: Well One Gets Old

Post by kcowan » 20 Mar 2013 10:34

This is also why it is important to not use median ages. Do you really want only 50% chance to not run out of money. When I last ran the model in 2003, I had a 10% chance of passing on at 84 or 98, so my planning used the worst case. Now 10 years on, I suspect that 98 is no longer 10% and might be 20% probable or higher.

IOW the odds of outliving my money is getting better. OTOH the fact that I have not touched the principal makes the whole exercise moot...as long as I keep my money in safe places!
For the fun of it...Keith

SQRT
Gold Ring
Gold Ring
Posts: 1969
Joined: 01 Nov 2012 11:33
Location: Alberta/Ontario/Arizona

Re: Well One Gets Old

Post by SQRT » 20 Mar 2013 11:10

Thanks. Bruce/Keith. I think I understand how the tables work but my point is the tables are likely understating the true probabilities as these probalities are in a state of flux. Keith, I'm with you about only spending the income. This does raise an issue about what to do with the likely large residual. Good problem to have.

User avatar
ghariton
Diamond Ring
Diamond Ring
Posts: 11969
Joined: 18 Feb 2005 18:59
Location: Ottawa

Re: Well One Gets Old

Post by ghariton » 20 Mar 2013 13:31

SQRT wrote:This does raise an issue about what to do with the likely large residual. Good problem to have.
I'm available for adoption.

George
The plural of anecdote is NOT data.

User avatar
kcowan
Diamond Ring
Diamond Ring
Posts: 13193
Joined: 18 Apr 2006 20:33
Location: Pacific latitude 20/49

Re: Well One Gets Old

Post by kcowan » 20 Mar 2013 14:25

We did have exotic approaches of a charitable remainder trust but decided that we have enough runway to defer such decisions until we see what will become of our savings after the meltdown of the world's financial markets before our eyes...

(Where to put the money? RE, not in Canada, GICs no, Stocks, not sure, Gold, maybe? Oil, not so sure anymore...) :rofl:
For the fun of it...Keith

SQRT
Gold Ring
Gold Ring
Posts: 1969
Joined: 01 Nov 2012 11:33
Location: Alberta/Ontario/Arizona

Re: Well One Gets Old

Post by SQRT » 20 Mar 2013 18:37

kcowan wrote:We did have exotic approaches of a charitable remainder trust but decided that we have enough runway to defer such decisions until we see what will become of our savings after the meltdown of the world's financial markets before our eyes...

(Where to put the money? RE, not in Canada, GICs no, Stocks, not sure, Gold, maybe? Oil, not so sure anymore...) :rofl:
Yes, that's what I'm thinking too. Play things out a bit and see how it goes. Given all the doom and gloom, I may not have to worry about this anyway.

Post Reply