Getting left at the altar is bad enough, but it’s even worse if you’re also stuck holding the bag filled with bills.

One website is helping would-be brides cut their losses if they’ve planned a wedding and then called it off.  Couples can lose thousands of dollars in deposits on reception halls, flowers, photographers and more.

“If you're a bride you can go ahead and log on and you'll be able to see if there are open wedding dates that have been called off or if there are vendors in your area that have open weddings that they would like to sell off at a discount,” said Lauren Byrne, founder of BridalBrokerage.com.

Angela Wakefield and her fiancé Chris Watkins used the site to save about $4,000 on their California wedding reception.
 
“We figured it was a no-brainer to get a pre-paid package and it was kind of all planned out, so it was easier and cost effective,” Wakefield said. “I think it was just really easy, it took the headache away from me.”

Wakefield found a canceled $12,000 package that was on sale through the brokerage for $7,900.

Wakefield ended up way ahead the game considering the average U.S. couple spent $25,656 for their wedding in 2012, according to research company Wedding Report, Inc.

“Since we're saving so much money, I can splurge on some other things,” Wakefield said.

The brokerage attracts deal seekers, along with “non-planners, and those on accelerated timelines, including active deployment and pregnancies,” according to the website. Most couples who buy canceled weddings are still able to choose their own food, colors, flowers and cake, depending on how close it is to the wedding date. In some cases, they incur extra fees for changes or upgrades to the originally purchased package.

“It's a win for everyone,” said Lauren Jennings, the general manager of Wedgewood Wedding & Banquet Center. “For the venue, we now have a wedding that we were hoping for on a particular date.  The old bride who canceled, she now gets a portion of her money back that she paid.  For the new bride, she gets an amazing deal for her wedding.”

Getty Images stock

Getting that first credit card is a big step for your child; one that can have serious negative consequences for years to come.

Your high school graduate wants a credit card. Is that good or bad?

Experts say it all depends on the child and how he or she will use the card.

“If they look at the card as a ticket to more spending, you should be worried,” said Laura Levine, executive director of the Jump$tart Coalition for Personal Financial Literacy. “If they know how credit cards work and are responsible, then it can be a good thing.”

Even though they don’t have a credit history yet, college-bound students may find offers that are comparable to what someone with excellent credit might get. The credit limit will be much lower, but the terms – including rewards – may be the same.

“This is because kids headed to college have a much higher earnings potential than those who are not,” explained Odysseas Papadimitriou, CEO of CardHub.com. “Banks know this and they want to build a relationship with them to get into their wallet as early as possible. “

CardHub.com just published its 2013 list of the Best Credit Cards for High School and College Graduates. None of the cards has an annual fee.

“A card without an annual fee allows the student to start building credit for free – and that is the number one priority,” Papadimitriou told me. “You build credit faster by using the card and paying in full each month, but you still build credit even if you throw it in a drawer or cut it in half. The card company will report to the credit bureaus that you are in good standing.”

Some other options
College kids are a prime target for credit card companies, so they will get offers as they prepare to head off to school.

The law says anyone under 21 who applies for a credit card must have a co-signer on the account or be able to show their ability to pay the bills. A part-time job could be enough to qualify.

“Parents need to remember that a lender may approve their kid for that credit card, even if they don't approve,” said Gerri Detweiler, personal finance expert at Credit.com.

Detweiler and other financial experts encourage parents not to become co-signers because of the potential risk: you put your credit on the line with no real control over how your child uses the card. Legally, you are liable for any debt they incur.

There is a better way.

John Ulzheimer, president of consumer education at SmartCredit.com, advises parents to add their age-appropriate children as “authorized users” on the card. He calls it “a credit card with training wheels.”

“This allows your child to have a credit card with their name printed on the front of it, but as the primary cardholder you maintain all the control,” he explained. “You can essentially manage your kid’s use of the card, almost in real time, and kick them off the card if they start to abuse it.”

Of course, as the primary cardholder, you are still responsible for paying the bill.

Go this route and your child gets all the benefit of having their own credit card, but you don’t have the downsides of a cosigner.

“Your child is actually building a credit history by being an authorized user because the account is showing up on their credit reports,” Ulzheimer said.

We need to talk
Getting that first credit card is a big step for your child; one that can have serious negative consequences for years to come.

Credit scores, which are based on a person’s credit history, will determine their ability to get credit in the future and what price they will pay for it.

Someone with a low credit score may not be able to rent an apartment, get a car loan or open a wireless phone account. Credit reports are now used by employers to screen job applicants and some insurance companies to set rates (where allowed by law).

It’s important to have a conversation with your child about the consequences of not managing that card properly. They need to understand that bills are to be paid in full and on time each and every month.

“One late payment can literally drop your credit score 50 to 80 points or more,” Detweiler explained. “A lot of adults don’t realize that, much less kids who are just starting out. So you want to talk to your kids about how this impacts their credit and how important it is to pay those bills on time.”

Where things stand
A new study from Sallie Mae finds that more college students these days “exercise caution with credit cards” and that’s encouraging.  A third of student card holders have a zero balance, 42 percent have a balance of $500 or less and just 24 percent have a balance of more than $500.

The survey found the percentage of college kids with credit cards has declined during the last two years, from 42 percent in 2010 to 35 percent in 2012. Freshman are least likely to have a card in their name (21 percent) compared to 60 percent of seniors.

Sallie Mae reminds students to only charge what they can afford, pay the bill before it’s due to avoid accidental late fees and to remember that a credit card is a convenience, not a source of spending money.

Herb Weisbaum is The ConsumerMan. Follow him on Facebook and Twitter or visit The ConsumerMan website.

The Great Recession hurt a lot of people and this loss of wealth will follow millions into retirement, according to a report released Thursday.

Early baby boomers (those born between 1946 and 1955) may be “the last group on track to retire with enough savings to maintain their financial security through their golden years," the study finds. But the rest of us are in for a world of hurt -- especially Gen-Xers (born between 1966 and 1975).

The study by Pew Charitable Trusts, Retirement Security Across Generations: Are Americans Prepared for Their Golden Years? shows that early boomers lost 28 percent of their median net worth; late boomers (born between 1956 and 1965) lost 25 percent from 2007 to 2010. However, Gen-Xers lost nearly half (45 percent) of their wealth – about $33,000 on average – during that same time period. And they didn’t have that much savings to begin with.

“Gen-X is the first generation that’s unlikely to exceed the wealth of the group that came before it and face downward mobility in retirement,” said Erin Currier, director of Pew’s Economic Mobility Project. “They have lower financial net worth than previous groups had at this same age and they lost nearly half of their wealth in the recession.”

Financial planners generally recommend that you save enough to replace 70 to 100 percent of your pre-retirement income when you leave the workforce. Pew’s research shows the typical Gen-Xer will only be able to replace half of that income.

When it comes to retirement savings, late boomers (born between 1956 and 1965) are more like Gen-X than early boomers. They’re on track to replace only 60 percent of their pre-retirement income.

RELATED: Retirement age in US rises to 61 (from 57 in the 1990s

You may be surprised to learn that some people saw their wealth grow during the recession. Pew found that a sizable minority of households – 39 to 44 percent – had a positive change in wealth between 2007 and 2009.

“As an example, more than a third of households in this age group experienced gains in home equity during that two-year period,” Currier noted.

Gen-X: the most financially-challenged group
Gen-X wasn’t in very good shape before the recession hit. Their net worth was less than other age groups that came before them. They also had lowest rates of home ownership of all the groups studied.

The recession only made things worse. They experienced the largest percentage decline in median net worth, losing nearly half of their wealth.

Gen-X has significantly higher levels of debt than those in the other groups did at the same age. Pew found that the average Gen-Xer has already accumulated $80,000 in debt.

Key Findings

• Early boomers are financially prepared for retirement: Those born between 1946 and 1955 are approaching retirement in better financial shape than the age groups that came before them. This group benefited from both the dot-com boom and the housing bubble.Americans in their 50s and 60s have higher overall wealth, financial net worth, and home equity than Depression babies (born between 1926 and 1935) or war babies (born between 1936 and 1945) had at the same ages.
• Wealth accumulation and savings for Americans born after 1955 is mixed: Neither Gen-Xers (in their 30s and 40s) nor late boomers (in their late 40’s and 50’s) are on track to exceed the financial position of those immediately preceded them.
• Baby boomers and Gen-Xers have significantly lower asset-to-debt ratios than do older Americans: Depression and war babies spent the last two decades reducing their debt, while baby boomers and Gen-Xers have been accumulating it. In 2010, war babies had accumulated assets worth 27 times more than their debts. In contrast, assets for late boomers were only four times their debts. Gen-Xers’ assets were about double their debts.

Pew’s Erin Currier believes there is a clear takeaway message for America’s policymakers from this data.

“As they focus attention on America’s retirement security, particular consideration should be paid to helping  the youngest groups change course to make up for these losses in order to prevent downward mobility in the long-term,” she said.

Herb Weisbaum is The ConsumerMan. Follow him on Facebook and Twitter or visit The ConsumerMan website.

James Braund / Getty Images

Your boss may be watching what you do online.

The idea of a totalitarian government monitoring your every move is probably still the stuff of fiction, but that doesn't mean your boss doesn't have a pretty good idea of your workday habits.

Experts say an abundance of fast-developing new technology is making it cheaper and easier for employers to read your e-mails, check out what you’ve been looking at on the Internet, track where you go with a company car or cell phone and find out when and where you were at work.

“Your employer can find out anything and everything about your life,” said Lewis Maltby, president of the National Workrights Institute, which advocates for workers on issues including privacy.

Of course, employers have good reason to want to know whether employees are stealing corporate secrets, sending out sexually harassing e-mails or just goofing off on the job. But experts say many companies are still trying to figure out a balance between monitoring wrongdoing and just plain snooping.

“In the information economy we have incredible new ways to gather data, many of which are very novel, very new, and we’re not entirely clear on what the standards are or should be,” said Trevor Hughes, chief executive of the International Association of Privacy Professionals, a trade group whose membership includes big corporations such as Google, Microsoft and American Express.

Hughes said that’s been made even more complicated because the line between work and home increasingly is blurred. For example, many employees might use their personal smart phone to send a work-related e-mail at night, and then use their work computer to send a personal e-mail during the work day.

Employers generally have the right to monitor employee e-mails and other online activity that happens at work, or even on a company cell phone or corporate network, said Lothar Determann, a partner at Baker & McKenzie LLP in Palo Alto, Calif., and author of “Determann’s Field Guide to International Data Privacy Law Compliance.” But they can only do so if they make clear to their employees that workers should have no expectation of privacy.

U.S. laws generally give employers much broader rights to monitor employee activity than in European countries, Determann said. That is raising complications for companies that operate in several countries.

But even in the U.S., Determann said companies risk running into trouble if they overstep their bounds. For example, an employer could use a keystroke tracker to get your password to that personal e-mail account you checked at work, and then use that password to check your account later. But he would recommend against a client doing that because it could violate the rights of the e-mail operator.

Many companies also are grappling with the thorny issue of how much control they have over the work activity people do on their personal cell phone or other device.

“It’s an unsettled area right now,” said Robert Sprague, an associate professor at the University of Wyoming College of Business and an expert on privacy and technology.

Related: Having fewer kids, or none at all, because of the economy?

The idea of asking employees or job candidates for access to personal social media accounts such as Facebook also has caused widespread outcry, and lawmakers in several states have moved to ban such practices.

Employees may be generally aware that their employer could monitor their activities, but Maltby said many people assume that with all that data flying around their individual correspondence won’t be tracked. In reality, he said, people are nosy and anyone from the IT guy to your boss may be tempted to peruse your activities.

To maintain privacy, he recommends sending any personal e-mails or other correspondence from a personal cell phone or device that isn’t connected to your corporate network.

Others say that it’s generally fine to send a few innocuous personal e-mails at work, or check a personal website now and again. But that rant about the CEO that you’re tempted to send your co-worker? Probably not a good idea.

 “If you don’t want your boss to read it, then don’t send the e-mail,” Determann said.

Credit scores are critically important. They determine your ability to obtain credit and how much you will pay for it. 

A bad score could prevent you from getting a credit card or renting an apartment. It can increase the cost of services, such as cell phone, electric and cable.

And yet, a lot of people don’t know much about credit scores.

A new survey done by the Consumer Federation of America and VantageScore Solutions finds that:

• Two-fifths do not know credit card issuers and mortgage lenders use credit scores to decide about granting credit and pricing.
  Two-fifths incorrectly believe personal characteristics such as age and marital status are used in calculating credit scores.
•  Between one-quarter and one-third do not know when lenders are required to inform them of the credit score used in their lending decision – after they apply for a mortgage, when they are turned down for a loan and when they don’t receive the best price or terms.
•  More than one quarter do not know the key ways to raise or maintain their scores – keeping credit card balances low and not applying for several cards at the same time.
•  More than one-third incorrectly believe credit repair agencies are always or usually helpful in correcting credit report errors and improving scores. They are not.

How can you raise your credit score?
To improve your credit score, do things that show lenders you are trustworthy and a low risk. That includes:

• Pay your bills on time every month.
• Keep a low balance on your credit and charge cards.
• Pay down debt rather than just move it around.
•  Don’t open new credit accounts rapidly.

You should check each of your three credit reports for errors at least once a year. It’s free. Go to www.annualcreditreport.com.

To help you learn more about credit scores, the Consumer Federation of America and VantageScore Solutions have updated their interactive  quiz Credit Score Quiz (English) or Credit Score Quiz (Spanish).

During a TODAY Money web chat on Wednesday, John Ulzheimer, president of consumer information at SmartCredit.com explained the ins and outs of credit reports and answered readers questions. You can read the full chat:

Many of the nation’s top retailers tout low-price guarantees: Someone else is advertising a lower price? No need to go to the other store -- we’ll match it. In practice, though, a price-match guarantee is no guarantee a store will match a competitor’s price. A new report by Cheapism.com compares the price-matching policies at more than half a dozen retailers and looks at how they’re applied in-store. It finds that even the most permissive retailers use careful wording and litanies of exclusions to deny customer requests. Shoppers unfamiliar with the fine print face frustration and stand to waste valuable time.

Here are some of the most common reasons a retailer may refuse to match a competitor’s price.

• The competitor isn’t local. Best Buy, for instance, confines its policy to stores that fall within a 25-mile radius. Other retailers use vague phrases such as “reasonable distance” and “same market area,” which are open to employee interpretation. Cheapism’s report on price-match policies cites an account from one shopper who says Target wouldn’t match a store a mile away because it was in a different ZIP code.
  RELATED: Store return policies comparison
   
• The competitor is an online retailer. Many companies extend their price-matching policies only to brick-and-mortar stores and, in some cases, the websites of local competitors. But until recently none included online-only competitors in their price-match guarantees. That’s why Target and Best Buy turned heads in recent months when they announced they would match prices offered by select online retailers, including Amazon, regardless whether there was a corresponding store in the same market. As Cheapism explains, however, online price matching comes with its own fine print. A bottle of contact solution was going for almost $4 less on Amazon, but Target wouldn’t match the price because it was listed by a third-party seller on the Amazon Marketplace, not by Amazon.com.
• The competitor is a warehouse club. Retailers including JC Penney and Target won’t match prices that require a club card, so forget about pointing to a lower price at Sam’s Club or Costco. Best Buy does match warehouse-club pricing, as long as the store is local, and Sears requires that customers show a valid membership card for the club store before matching a lower price.
  RELATED: Walmart vs. Target vs. Kmart
  
• You didn’t bring in a print ad. Most retailers don’t simply promise to match competitors’ prices; they promise to match competitors’ advertised prices. Not only that, many require a print ad as proof of the lower price -- a photo, photocopy, or mobile version may not cut it. At Walmart, the official policy states that you don’t have to have an ad with you (an employee may call to verify the price), but customers have found that cashiers often say they need to see an ad in order to match a price.

• The items are not identical. The lower-priced product at the other store must be the same brand, model, style, color, size, weight, quantity -- identical in every way. It also can’t be a used, refurbished, damaged, open-box, or display item. This often comes into play with appliances and electronics. A product at Home Depot might have a different model number than the same product at Lowe’s, making it ineligible for price matching. Non-branded items such as fresh produce also may not qualify, although Walmart promises to match food prices if they’re listed in the same unit of measure (e.g., per ounce).
  RELATED: Tire reviews and recommendations
   
• The lower-priced item is … advertised as limited-time, limited-supply, or limited-quantity or part of a clearance, closeout, liquidation, or going-out-of-business sale.

You get the idea. Retailers are happy to use ad-match policies to burnish their reputations for low prices, but they’re far from eager to honor those guarantees. Still, there’s some variation in the policies and how they’re applied in practice. Cheapism has identified some of the best price-match guarantees and a couple that may not be worth the effort. If you choose a relatively lenient retailer and go in with knowledge of the rules, you could save yourself time and money.

toysrus.com

Price match guarantees aren't so simple and include a list of caveats, as seen here in the Toys R Us price-match guarantee guidelines.

More from Cheapism:
Comparing stores that price match

Getty Images stock

As medical advances extend the average lifespan, projected health care saving requirements likely will have to rise accordingly.

Planning for retirement usually means budgeting for food, travel and other expenses. Don’t forget to include $220,000 for health care costs. 

That’s how much the average 65-year-old couple will spend on medical expenses through their retirement, according to the latest estimates from Fidelity Investments.

If you’ve set your sights on retiring earlier, plan on squirreling away an even bigger savings pile. The average couple hoping to retire at 55 will spend $744,800 on out-of-pocket health costs if they both live to age 85, according to a separate study released Wednesday by the Society of Actuaries.

That’s if you’re relatively healthy later in life. Those averages don’t include the cost of treating chronic diseases like cancer or heart disease.

“People with those conditions spend about twice what the aver age population does,” said Dale Yamamoto, the author to the Society of Actuaries study. “So you need to take these numbers and double them.”

Those numbers also don’t include the cost of long-term care like a stay in a nursing home, which isn’t typically covered by Medicare.

The latest estimates for the average health care tab is likely to come as something of a sobering surprise to most people planning for – or in - retirement. In a separate survey, Fidelity found that nearly half of people aged 55 to 64 planning for retirement figured they would need just $50,000 to pay for health care costs.

Estimating those costs is the thorniest wild card in any retirement plan, largely because longevity and illnesses are so difficult to predict. Those variables are further complicated for Americans by the ongoing reform of medical insurance coverage in the U.S., both through the Affordable Care Act and proposed changed to Medicare.

“It’s more difficult today to try and give people meaningful guidance because the individual insurance market is going to change dramatically,” said Sunit Patel, senior vice president of Fidelity's benefits consulting group. “But we still expect the (retirement health cost) number to be significant.”

Uncertainty over the cost of insurance coverage is further complicated by the potential rise in the cost of health care itself. Fidelity’s projection for how much would-be retirees need to save has fallen 12 percent from its high of $250,000 in 2010.

That drop largely reflects a sharp drop last year in Medicare spending, which rose just 0.4 percent per enrollee last year, and just 1.9 percent between 2010 and 2012. That’s well below the seven percent average annual increases between 1985 and 2009.

Overall, U.S. healthcare spending has been rising just 3.9 a year since 2009. That year, healthcare spending jumped 6.6 percent.

Part of the slowdown is the result of a weaker economy, according to economists. Spending increases have also slowed as many of the most common brand name drugs are now available in cheaper generic versions. The Affordable Care Act is slowing the rate of payment increases to hospitals, physicians and health plans. It remains to be seen whether those trends will continue.

Regardless of the changes in coverage and costs, the ultimate unknown is how long you’re going to live. As medical advances extend the average lifespan, projected health care saving requirements likely will have to rise accordingly.

The Society of Actuaries study, for example, found that a couple that expects to live until age 90 would need an average of $441,200 to meet out-of-pocket healthcare costs –  more than double the cost of living to age 80.

Reuters contributed to this report.

Getty Images stock

The top cities where people were going online to hire a divorce lawyer were Los Angeles, Houston and Chicago.

As the real estate and employment markets improve, Americans are no longer stuck in houses they've outgrown or jobs they can't stand — and that's not the only baggage they're unloading.

The recovery seems to have sparked an increase in divorces. 

“There’s been an uptick in divorces in general going on over the last several months,” said Alton L. Abramowitz, a New York City divorce lawyer and president of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers. 

Why? Abramowitz attributed the recovery of the economy, particularly the stock market’s robust run. “People become more secure that they’ll be able to take care of themselves,” he said. “With that security comes the belief that we can have two households and support two households.” 

“Increased mobility — both personal and career —  acts as a pressure valve for backlogged marital discontent,” Richard Komaiko, co-founder of AttorneyFee.com, a site that lets users compare lawyers and how much they charge, said via e-mail. 

More disposable income does more than just provide people with confidence and mobility — it means they can pay for legal representation. 

“Marriages are always going downhill ... but it is expensive to file for divorce,” said Kelly Chang Rickert, a divorce lawyer in Los Angeles. “Now they can afford a good divorce lawyer.” 

After the recession took its toll on Nevada’s labor and housing markets, “People simply couldn’t afford it,” said Gary Silverman, a divorce lawyer in Reno. “They didn’t have enough money to pay lawyers, there was nothing to divide and there was no way to support children and former spouses.” 

Silverman said “pent-up demand” is behind the 25 to 50 percent increase he’s seen in business over the past year. 

Related: Are you having fewer kids, or none at all, because of finances?

Although Census data shows only a tiny rise in the number of people who identified as separated or divorced in between 2008 and 2012, data from legal websites indicates that recent months could mark the leading edge of a trend. 

Avvo.com, a site where people can search for legal advice and representation, saw an 80 percent increase in divorce-related questions asked by users from 2012 to 2013. In the first quarter of this year, divorce searches accounted for nearly 10 percent of traffic on Avvo. During the same time period last year, only 1 percent of searches were about divorce. 

Komaiko reported similar findings when he took monthly housing stats and net job creation and compared them to the number of divorce consultations his site facilitated in April. 

“There’s a remarkable correlation between the housing curve and the divorce curve,” he said. “Job creation also varies positively with divorce. However, the housing market appears to be a more reliable predictor.” 

People seem to want out of their marriages all over the country. On Avvo’s new legal marketplace platform, company spokeswoman Kari Day said the top cities where people were going online to hire a divorce lawyer were Los Angeles, Houston and Chicago. 

“Most divorces come down to money,” Silverman said. “When they feel there are enough resources, they don’t have to live with somebody they don’t want to.”

Have you decided to have fewer kids - or no kids at all - because of your personal financial situation or the economy in general?

If so, we want to hear from you for an upcoming story.

Please send us an e-mail telling us a little bit about yourself, including how old you are, your current family situation, what you do for a living and how your finances affected your decision about kids.

Don’t forget to include contact information so we can get in touch.

The "gender gap" in retirement savings may be explained, in part, by differing financial goals.

While the top financial priority for men is to "maintain lifestyle in retirement," for women, the number one goal is to "not become a financial burden to loved ones," according to a 2012-2013 study by Prudential. But putting family first can be a setback to accumulating savings. 

Like many women looking toward retirement, entrepreneur Lorin Palmer says figuring out how to juggle family and personal finances has been an important lesson for her to learn over the years. Palmer, a 56-year-old funeral home owner in Sumter, South Carolina, finds making final arrangements for other families is instructive, underscoring the importance of ramping up planning for her own financial future. 

VIDEO: Sharon Epperson reports on the obstacles many women face, and how it is never too late to ramp up savings to meet retirement goals

"I have learned that in this business just as families preplan, they come in and they make funeral arrangements and they pay for them in advance. Likewise that same principle applies with retirement planning," Palmer says.  

Palmer - the third generation in her family to own this funeral business - believes careful planning is critical not only for her own nest egg, but her son's financial future as well. 

But like many women, she says staying on track hasn't been easy. 

"I've been through a divorce. I've raised a son as a single parent. I have educated my son," she says. All of these milestones have taken a toll on her savings. Many more women face similar challenges. 

A recent study by the State Farm Center for Women and Financial Services at the American College found that about 64 percent of all women say that their family's needs are really impeding their ability to save for retirement and only 42 percent of women say they save a certain amount each month. 

Since women generally make less money than men, how much money they'll be able to save is affected by those factors as well. According to the latest figures from the U.S. Labor Department, white women earn about 81 cents for every dollar white men earn. Black women earn 67 percent of what white men earn and Latino women earn only 60 percent. 

Women also spend 12 years out of the workforce on average to care for their families, according to the American College study, further impacting their retirement savings. Caregiving for children and parents, possible layoffs, disability are all factors that can derail women's savings. 

"We have to take a look at the things that could happen that would prevent the retirement date that you want, health issues, divorce, losing a family member," says financial advisor Deborah Breedlove with Ameriprise Financial. However, considering these issues early and how they could impact finances can encourage some women to start to save more. Breedlove says using 401(k)s, IRAs, Roth accounts and diversifying investments within those portfolios can help many clients reach their intended goals. 

Palmer says she wishes she had saved more for retirement, but she realizes it's not too late. She believes she now has an effective plan in place. She is putting herself first, so she can leave a legacy for her son and her family.

Sharon Epperson is CNBC's personal finance correspondent.  

Getty Images stock

Yoga pant makers are increasingly making pants for women who wear larger sizes.

Yoga is a weapon in the war on obesity, but it's also a fast-growing, $10 billion business. As its popularity expands in tandem with our collective waistline, analysts say there's a potentially lucrative market for clothing companies to outfit curvier bodies. 

In a country where roughly two-thirds of adults are overweight or obese, medical experts and a growing community of health bloggers are suggesting that the answer might lie on a yoga mat. The number of yoga practitioners, which skews more than 80 percent female, jumped 29 percent in the past four years, according to a Yoga Journal study. It's become so mainstream that the White House even added yoga classes to its annual Easter egg roll last month. 

“There’s a huge target market” for plus-size activewear, said Jaime Katz, an analyst at Morningstar. “It’s significant and it shouldn’t really be ignored because it’s getting bigger as a percentage of the total population.” 

Yoga Journal found that spending on classes, clothes and other items grew from $5.7 billion in 2008 to $10.3 billion last year. Research company IBISWorld estimates that consumers will spend $332 million on fitness apparel sold in specialty plus-size women’s clothing stores this year — which doesn't include purchases of plus-size clothes at brands that also sell standard sizes, like Gap Inc.'s Athleta brand. 

Analysts say it’s short-sighted for clothing companies to accept the stereotype that overweight people aren’t interested in fitness or exercise. A 2010 Gallup poll found that 53 percent of overweight people and 41 percent of obese people say these exercise three or more days per week. 

“I think there is something that can be found there... for people who want to be healthier,” Katz said. 

Despite the number of overweight people in the United States, though, plus-sized clothing in general has been what Alison Jatlow Levy, a retail strategist at consulting firm Kurt Salmon, calls an “underserved” market. When it comes to stretchy tank tops and yoga pants, that’s even more the case, she said. “Historically, that’s not where activewear has focused,” she said. 

It’s a chicken-or-egg conundrum for both brands and customers. Manufacturers don’t want to make a big bet on an unproven market, especially because are production challenges and higher costs that come with making larger sizes. 

But overweight women do want to be active — they just don’t have anything to wear, according to Deborah Christel, an assistant professor of design and merchandising at West Virginia University who wrote her doctoral dissertation on the women’s plus-size athletic clothing market. 

"There’s no clothing available for their figure they feel comfortable in,” she said. “I think plus size women aren’t engaging in exercise or going to the yoga studio because they don’t have the right clothes.” 

Athleta was a 10-year-old company when it was bought by Gap Inc. in 2008. At first an online-only outlet, Gap began opening Athleta brick-and-mortar stores two years ago — often within close proximity to stores of its top competitor, Lululemon Athletica. Although a small part of Gap’s empire, its size belies its potential impact on customer loyalty and sales, analysts say. 

Selling yoga wear in larger sizes can generate repeat business, if larger customers subsequently lose weight, as well as customer loyalty that might cross over to its growing stable of other brands. On its investor conference call in February, CEO Glenn Murphy indicated that Athleta was a gateway brand. “We're bringing new customers into the Gap Inc. portfolio and family of brands with Athleta,” he said. 

The Athleta brand includes yoga clothing in sizes up to 20. By contrast, Lululemon’s sizes top out at 12. 

“I think Lululemon needs to be concerned about Athleta,” said Jahnia Sandford, an analyst at Kantar Retail. “Activewear and yogawear is definitely an area for growth,” she said. Offering larger sizes show that a brand is “catering to that shopper’s specific needs and making it known you have these specific styles available to her."

Lululemon already faced a heightened threat from Athleta because of a manufacturing defect that affected 17 percent of its black bottoms. The pants, which cost roughly $100, were too sheer when customers put them on. 

“The lack of Lulu's core product in its stores and online could drive some customers to try competing brands,” CLSA analyst Barbara Wyckoff warned in a recent research note.

“Recent quality blunders and poor performance of new capsule collections have affected the company’s earnings results and hurt LULU’s brand equity,” she said. 

Although Athleta is considered Lululemon’s biggest competitor, there are a growing number of other brands where consumers can buy larger yoga gear. Gap’s Old Navy brand, for instance, sells moisture-wicking tank tops and stretchy yoga pants up through size 30. Nordstrom’s Zella brand offers some styles through size 24. Specialty plus-size stores Lane Bryant and Avenue also cater to the downward-dog crowd, along with boutique brands bolstered by word-of-mouth endorsements in the blogosphere. 

“I think it’s happening and it’s a trend but it will happen slowly and it’s still new,” Levy said.

Getty Images stock

Women having babies in the United States are more educated than ever, a trend that has accelerated during the recession.

The recession has been bad for a lot of people, but one sector is benefiting: babies.

Women having babies in the United States are more educated than ever, a trend that has accelerated during the recession, according to a new Pew Research Center analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data.

In the three years after the recession started in 2007, there was a 17 percent decline in births among women who did not have a high school diploma. By 2011, only 14 percent of new moms lacked a high school diploma, according to the report released Friday.

As of 2011, 66 percent of mothers with infant children had at least some college education, compared with 18 percent in 1960.

“We have a short-term-trend that is an exaggeration of a long-term trend,” said Gretchen Livingston, a senior researcher at Pew and the lead author of the report.

That’s good news for the babies, the Pew report notes, because of other research that has made a strong link between maternal education levels and healthy birth weights, delivering at term, improved cognitive skills and higher academic achievement. 

“It is difficult to determine whether maternal education is causing some of these outcomes, or if it is serving as a proxy for some other causal factor (for example, economic well-being). What is irrefutable, though, is that on average the more education a woman has, the better off her children will be,” the report states.

The caveat to that element is that on the extreme end, older women tend to have higher health risks during late pregnancies, Livingston said. And while overall, women are having fewer babies since the recession started, the exception is women in their 40s, whose biological clocks leave fewer options to delay a pregnancy until the economy rebounds. Since 2008, birth rates are up 9 percent for women ages 40 to 44, according to the study.

“This short-term trend may be due to the fact that younger, less educated women have been particularly hard hit by the recession, and thus have delayed childbearing, the report states. “Or, it may be the case that younger women know that they have the time to ‘make-up’ childbearing when their prospects improve in the future, while the typical 40-year-old does not have that opportunity.”

The study also points out that the percentage of higher-educated mothers can be linked to the fact that the share of women with at least some college education has more than doubled since 1960 and has again stepped up since the recession started.

In recent years, the share of women ages 15 to 44 with less than a high school diploma declined by 5 percent and the share with only a high school diploma but no further education declined by 4 percent. During that time, the percentage of women of child-bearing age with a college degree increased by 6 percent while the women with at least some college education increased by 3 percent.