Yahoo, following in the footsteps of several other websites and publications, says the Bridgeport-Stamford metro region is once again the worst place to retire in America, based on costs.
Citing Census data and studies by private companies, including Genworth Financial, Yahoo said housing and nursing home costs, combined with taxes on social security and pensions, are some of the reasons this is a terrible place to retire. There was no mention of the weather.
Here’s the link to the analysis that will tell you why these places are so terrible for retirees:
There was also no mention of why then the state is not being emptied of older residents and continues to see an increase in the median age or why then, Connecticut ranks sixth in the nation for having the most Centenarians. Could it be the public transit system is a wee bit better than other parts of the nation?
Some how, these lists always fail to note one reason these places are so darn expensive is a result of demand.
Rounding out the top 10 worst places to retire were:
Los Angeles (No argument there. It’s hot and traffic is brutal… It’s also home to the Dodgers)
New York City (Expensive, but subways, buses, walkable and with some of the world’s greatest cultural sites and activities.)
Oxnard, Calif. (See L.A. Also, it’s the name.)
Poughkeepsie (Hard to spell)
San Diego.(This community is so beautiful, with such great weather, it just makes you angry you don’t live there when you visit.)
San Francisco. (See NYC. Also, this is home to the World Champion Giants. It’s a baseball team folks.)
And D.C. (Great monuments, museums and history, but then there are all those politicians and lobbyists.)