A Prudential survey reveals a surprising retirement paradox: more than half of retirees — 54% — would rather leave money to heirs than risk spending it all. Even those with substantial savings feel the pinch; 61% of retirees with at least $500,000 invested say they are uncomfortable spending on enjoyment.

Financial author and AARP columnist Jean Chatzky says the shift away from pensions toward 401(k)s and IRAs has left many retirees struggling to convert savings into income. In her book The Forever Paycheck, she recommends using roughly a quarter to a third of retirement savings to build a reliable monthly income stream through bonds, dividends, or annuities.

You did everything right. You contributed to your 401(k), built up your IRA, and watched the balance grow for 30 or 40 years. Now you’re in retirement — and you still can’t bring yourself to spend it.

This is the retirement spending dilemma, and it’s affecting millions of Americans. New research from Prudential shows the fear is widespread, even among retirees who saved more than most people ever will.

Here’s the paradox at the heart of American retirement: people spend 30 to 40 years building a nest egg, driven by the fear of not having enough — and then arrive at retirement unable to shake that same fear, even when they have plenty. Financial experts say the emotional attachment to a growing account balance is one of the most powerful forces in personal finance.

For previous generations, the anxiety was different. A pension delivered a predictable monthly check no matter how long you lived. Today’s retirees are largely on their own, managing 401(k)s and IRAs they built themselves — which means deciding not just how much to save, but how much to spend, and when.

That emotional investment in the balance is at the core of what Jean Chatzky — author of ‘The Forever Paycheck’ and an AARP personal finance columnist — calls the spending dilemma. Retirees who spent decades watching their savings grow find that the act of drawing it down feels psychologically dangerous, even when it is financially sound.

The shift away from pensions is a big part of why. When a monthly check arrives automatically, there’s no decision to make — and no fear that you’re draining a finite pool. When the money lives in an account you control, every withdrawal feels like a loss.

The complexity Chatzky describes isn’t just psychological. Converting a lump-sum account into reliable lifetime income involves navigating tax brackets, required minimum distributions, market timing, and healthcare cost projections — all at once. Getting it wrong in either direction carries real consequences: spend too much early and risk running short later; spend too little and never enjoy what you earned.

The income-generating approach Chatzky outlines in ‘The Forever Paycheck’ reflects a broader shift in how retirement experts think about the second half of financial life. Accumulation — saving as much as possible — gets most of the attention and most of the cultural messaging. But decumulation, the art of spending down intelligently, is what actually determines whether a retiree lives well or lives anxiously.

The retirement spending dilemma matters to America because it represents a fundamental gap between financial preparation and financial freedom. Millions of Americans have done the hard work — they saved, they invested, they stayed patient through market downturns. But without a plan for the spending phase, that hard work doesn’t translate into the life they imagined.

Jean Chatzky’s central argument is simple but counterintuitive: the path to spending confidence isn’t a bigger balance. It’s a paycheck — predictable, monthly, and built to last as long as you do. For the millions of retirees currently watching their savings sit untouched, that shift in thinking may be the most important financial move left to make.

Read more @kbzk