What Holiday Shopping Tells Us About Innovations in Retirement Planning & Healthy Behaviors

Are you done? How many more days? Tick tock, tick tock. A recent Rasmussen poll may give you comfort or a kick. The nationwide survey conducted November 29-30, 2011 gives us a snapshot of how well everyone is preparing for the holiday rush that culminates in less than a month.

Have You Started Your Holiday Gift Shopping Yet?

  • Yes (47%)
  • No (49%)
  • Not Sure (3%)
  • Have you finished your holiday gift shopping yet?

  • Yes (11%)
  • No (86%)
  • Not Sure (3%)
  • The survey reveals that 11% of people reported that they are finished with their holiday shopping…good for them. Now for the rest of us – the other 89% that say they are not finished.  Chances are you are among the 49% of Americans who report they have not even started or among the other 47%  who claim they have started but are still muddling through. Nevermind the 3% who say they are ‘not sure ’…

    Which generation best handles their holiday shopping? Would you expect the younger or middle-aged holiday revelers likely to get the job done earlier than others? A breakdown by age shows negligible differences. Only 10% of younger buyers between the ages of 18-29 say they are finished with their shopping while those ages 40-49 and 50-64 respectively report 12% and 13% have cleared their lists. About 11% of holiday shoppers in their 30s and over age 65 years old say they are done.

    There are differences between men and women…but not necessarily in ways some might expect. Yes, women are first to start. 56% of women compared to only 37% of men say they have begun their shopping. But, the finish line is remarkably gender neutral. Only about 10% of men and 12% of women said they were finished less than a month out. But 55% of women do say they tend to finish shopping early, compared to 50% of male laggards who say they tend to wait until the last minute.

    Rasmussen gives a glimpse of behaviors for something in the next 20-30 days. How about expected consumer behaviors in the next 10-20-30 years? The Employee Benefit Research Institute in collaboration with Mathew Greenwald & Associates provides an interesting measure of retirement planning engagement – the percentage of workers having tried to calculate how much money they need to save for a comfortable retirement. Averaging data between 2007-2011 indicates that about 45% have tried to calculate their needs and are at least thinking about retirement. Certainly can’t say if these are the same folks who are still shopping for holiday gifts – but the proportion of people thinking about retirement is eerily similar to the proportion of us still scurrying from store to store.

    Longevity takes planning. Retirement planning requires investment today for security tomorrow. Health takes planning and investment too. Eating well, exercising often and engaging in healthy behaviors improve the chances of well-being tomorrow. Current models that segment the population based upon age, gender, life stage and socio-economic status alone may not be altogether wrong, but they may be missing something less obvious but readily evident in holiday shopping.

    Eventually holiday shopping does get done – not sure that can be said for retirement planning and certainly not for healthy behaviors. So what can financial services, employers and health insurers learn from holiday shopping? Unlike the facts and fear relied upon by health and wealth service providers to incentivize behavior, holiday shopping relies on soft cues that produce predictable outcomes. These include:

  • Ritual: holiday shopping is a ritual that few people need to have explained. Ritual by definition is outwardly simple. Experienced from a young age regular and celebrated activities are readily understood and repeated. This is not novel for finance, just forgotten. Whatever happened to the Christmas Club? Many older baby boomers may remember the weekly $1, $2 or even $5 per week payments at the bank teller window and the coupon book showing your progress until receiving a check at year end...not to mention the lollipop. Likewise healthy behaviors begin at home, often with three opportunities a day – breakfast, lunch and dinner.
  • Reinforcement: when everyone is doing the same thing, it becomes a norm that very few will deviate. Nearly everyone exchanges a gift or a smile during the holiday season regardless of their background. Christakis and Fowler in their great book Connected show that social networks (the people we used to call friends and acquaintances before social media) reflect and reinforce good and bad behaviors. Family, friends, fellow employees can impact everything from savings plan participation rates to healthy behaviors in the company cafeteria.
  • Responsibility: ultimately we get our holiday shopping done because we don’t want to disappoint – not us – but others. Adequate retirement planning and health behavior are about more than our own security and vitality, they are about our responsibility to the people we care about. Retirement planning and healthy behaviors can be redefined as something we give others – to spouses and adult children – so they need not worry about our financial security in old age or about extended caregiving due to a chronic condition that might have been better managed.
  • Many people planning for their futures have the best of intentions, yet most procrastinate. Successful consumer engagement strategies in health and wealth requires far more than brochures, flashy website content or another ‘product’ it requires the soft nudges seen in other consumer behaviors that may not seem rational but make sense all year.

    Related Articles

    Major study: Drug overdoses over a 38-year period reveal hidden trends

    It's just the current cycle that involves opiates, but methamphetamine, cocaine, and others have caused the trajectory of overdoses to head the same direction

    From the study: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/361/6408/eaau1184
    • It appears that overdoses are increasing exponentially, no matter the drug itself
    • If the study bears out, it means that even reducing opiates will not slow the trajectory.
    • The causes of these trends remain obscure, but near the end of the write-up about the study, a hint might be apparent
    Keep reading Show less

    How a huge, underwater wall could save melting Antarctic glaciers

    Scientists think constructing a miles-long wall along an ice shelf in Antarctica could help protect the world's largest glacier from melting.

    Image: NASA
    Surprising Science
    • Rising ocean levels are a serious threat to coastal regions around the globe.
    • Scientists have proposed large-scale geoengineering projects that would prevent ice shelves from melting.
    • The most successful solution proposed would be a miles-long, incredibly tall underwater wall at the edge of the ice shelves.

    The world's oceans will rise significantly over the next century if the massive ice shelves connected to Antarctica begin to fail as a result of global warming.

    To prevent or hold off such a catastrophe, a team of scientists recently proposed a radical plan: build underwater walls that would either support the ice or protect it from warm waters.

    In a paper published in The Cryosphere, Michael Wolovick and John Moore from Princeton and the Beijing Normal University, respectively, outlined several "targeted geoengineering" solutions that could help prevent the melting of western Antarctica's Florida-sized Thwaites Glacier, whose melting waters are projected to be the largest source of sea-level rise in the foreseeable future.

    An "unthinkable" engineering project

    "If [glacial geoengineering] works there then we would expect it to work on less challenging glaciers as well," the authors wrote in the study.

    One approach involves using sand or gravel to build artificial mounds on the seafloor that would help support the glacier and hopefully allow it to regrow. In another strategy, an underwater wall would be built to prevent warm waters from eating away at the glacier's base.

    The most effective design, according to the team's computer simulations, would be a miles-long and very tall wall, or "artificial sill," that serves as a "continuous barrier" across the length of the glacier, providing it both physical support and protection from warm waters. Although the study authors suggested this option is currently beyond any engineering feat humans have attempted, it was shown to be the most effective solution in preventing the glacier from collapsing.

    Source: Wolovick et al.

    An example of the proposed geoengineering project. By blocking off the warm water that would otherwise eat away at the glacier's base, further sea level rise might be preventable.

    But other, more feasible options could also be effective. For example, building a smaller wall that blocks about 50% of warm water from reaching the glacier would have about a 70% chance of preventing a runaway collapse, while constructing a series of isolated, 1,000-foot-tall columns on the seafloor as supports had about a 30% chance of success.

    Still, the authors note that the frigid waters of the Antarctica present unprecedently challenging conditions for such an ambitious geoengineering project. They were also sure to caution that their encouraging results shouldn't be seen as reasons to neglect other measures that would cut global emissions or otherwise combat climate change.

    "There are dishonest elements of society that will try to use our research to argue against the necessity of emissions' reductions. Our research does not in any way support that interpretation," they wrote.

    "The more carbon we emit, the less likely it becomes that the ice sheets will survive in the long term at anything close to their present volume."

    A 2015 report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine illustrates the potentially devastating effects of ice-shelf melting in western Antarctica.

    "As the oceans and atmosphere warm, melting of ice shelves in key areas around the edges of the Antarctic ice sheet could trigger a runaway collapse process known as Marine Ice Sheet Instability. If this were to occur, the collapse of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS) could potentially contribute 2 to 4 meters (6.5 to 13 feet) of global sea level rise within just a few centuries."

    Why the worst part about climate change isn't rising temperatures

    The world's getting hotter, and it's getting more volatile. We need to start thinking about how climate change encourages conflict.

    Christopher Furlong/Getty Images
    Politics & Current Affairs
    • Climate change is usually discussed in terms of how it impacts the weather, but this fails to emphasize how climate change is a "threat multiplier."
    • As a threat multiplier, climate change makes already dangerous social and political situations even worse.
    • Not only do we have to work to minimize the impact of climate change on our environment, but we also have to deal with how it affects human issues today.

    Human beings are great at responding to imminent and visible threats. Climate change, while dire, is almost entirely the opposite: it's slow, it's pervasive, it's vague, and it's invisible. Researchers and policymakers have been trying to package climate change in a way that conveys its severity. Usually, they do so by talking about its immediate effects: rising temperature, rising sea levels, and increasingly dangerous weather.

    These things are bad, make no mistake about it. But the thing that makes climate change truly dire isn't that Cape Cod will be underwater next century, that polar bears will go extinct, or that we'll have to invent new categories for future hurricanes. It's the thousands of ancillary effects — the indirect pressure that climate change puts on every person on the planet.

    How a drought in the Middle East contributed to extremism in Europe


    Nigel Farage in front of a billboard that leverages the immigration crisis to support Brexit.

    Because climate change is too big for the mind to grasp, we'll have to use a case study to talk about this. The Syrian civil war is a horrific tangle of senseless violence, but there are some primary causes we can point to. There is the longstanding conflicts between different religious sects in that country. Additionally, the Arab Spring swept Syria up in a wave of resistance against authoritarian leaders in the Middle East — unfortunately, Syrian protests were brutally squashed by Bashar Al-Assad. These, and many other factors, contributed to the start of the Syrian civil war.

    One of these other factors was drought. In fact, the drought in that region — it started in 2006 — has been described as the "worst long-term drought and most severe set of crop failures since agricultural civilization began in the Fertile Crescent many millennia ago." Because of this drought, many rural Syrians could no longer support themselves. Between 2006 and 2009, an estimated 1.5 million Syrians — many of them agricultural workers and farmers — moved into the country's major cities. With this sudden mixing of different social groups in a country where classes and religious sects were already at odds with one another, tensions rose, and the increased economic instability encouraged chaos. Again, the drought didn't cause the civil war — but it sure as hell helped it along.

    The ensuing flood of refugees to Europe is already a well-known story. The immigration crisis was used as a talking point in the Brexit movement to encourage Britain to leave the EU. Authoritarian or extreme-right governments and political parties have sprung up in France, Italy, Greece, Hungary, Slovenia, and other European countries, all of which have capitalized on fears of the immigration crisis.

    Why climate change is a "threat multiplier"

    This is why both NATO and the Pentagon have labeled climate change as a "threat multiplier." On its own, climate change doesn't cause these issues — rather, it exacerbates underlying problems in societies around the world. Think of having a heated discussion inside a slowly heating-up car.

    Climate change is often discussed in terms of its domino effect: for example, higher temperatures around the world melt the icecaps, releasing methane stored in the polar ice that contributes to the rise in temperature, which both reduces available land for agriculture due to drought and makes parts of the ocean uninhabitable for different animal species, wreaking havoc on the food chain, and ultimately making food more scarce.

    Maybe we should start to consider climate change's domino effect in more human and political terms. That is, in terms of the dominoes of sociopolitical events spurred on by climate change and the missing resources it gobbles up.

    What the future may hold

    (NASA via Getty Images)

    Increasingly severe weather events will make it more difficult for nations to avoid conflict.

    Part of why this is difficult to see is because climate change does not affect all countries proportionally — at least, not in a direct sense. Germanwatch, a German NGO, releases a climate change index every year to analyze exactly how badly different countries have been affected by climate change. The top five most at-risk countries are Haiti, Zimbabwe, Fiji, Sri Lanka, and Vietnam. Notice that many of these places are islands, which are at the greatest risk for major storms and rising sea levels. Some island nations are even expected to literally disappear — the leaders of these nations are actively making plans to move their citizens to other countries.

    But Germanwatch's climate change index is based on weather events. It does not account for the political and social instability that will likely result. The U.S. and many parts of Europe are relatively low on the index, but that is precisely why these countries will most likely need to deal with the human cost of climate change. Refugees won't go from the frying pan into the fire: they'll go to the closest, safest place available.

    Many people's instinctive response to floods of immigrants is to simply make borders more restrictive. This makes sense — a nation's first duty is to its own citizens, after all. Unfortunately, people who support stronger immigration policies tend to have right-wing authoritarian tendencies. This isn't always the case, of course, but anecdotally, we can look at the governments in Europe that have stricter immigration policies. Hungary, for example, has extremely strict policies against Muslim immigrants. It's also rapidly turning into a dictatorship. The country has cracked down on media organizations and NGOs, eroded its judicial system's independence, illegalized homelessness, and banned gender studies courses.

    Climate change and its sociopolitical effects, such as refugee migration, aren't some poorer country's problem. It's everyone's problem. Whether it's our food, our homes, or our rights, climate change will exact a toll on every nation on Earth. Stopping climate change, or at least reducing its impact, is vitally important. Equally important is contending with the multifaceted threats its going to throw our way.