WASHINGTON — Prices U.S. consumers paid in November for goods and services surged on higher energy costs, while underlying inflation sped up, data Friday said.

Consumer prices rose 0.8% last month, and the core rate that excludes food and energy costs climbed 0.3%, the Labor Department reported.

A separate report on the economy showed industrial production in the U.S. rose 0.3%, more than Wall Street expected.

The numbers seemed to support the Federal Reserve’s view that inflation risks remain. The policy-making Federal Open Market Committee this week voted to lower interest rates just 25 basis points to 4.25% despite indications the economy is slowing. Some on Wall Street had argued for a 50-point cut.

“The acceleration in the core does suggest, in our view, that the Fed will remain concerned about inflation risks despite the steady slowdown in growth,” Lehman Brothers economist Zach Pandl wrote in a note to clients.

The CPI’s 0.8% increase was up sharply from October’s 0.3% rise and marked the biggest climb since September 2005. The 0.3% advance in the core CPI followed a 0.2% gain in October and marked the biggest increase in underlying inflation since January.

“Inflation is not going away, and it is not just the rising cost of energy is that is punishing households,” said Joel Naroff, who runs an economic consulting firm.

Energy prices last month increased 5.7% compared with October. Food prices increased 0.3%. Medical care prices, meanwhile, advanced 0.4%, while clothing prices were up 0.8%. Transportation swelled 2.9% on the month. Housing, which accounts for 40% of the CPI index, was up 0.4%. Rent increased by 0.4%.

Friday’s report completed a trio of horrible reports on inflation. The Labor Department reported Wednesday that import prices rose at a 17-year high in November, reflecting higher energy prices as well as the weak dollar. Thursday, it said producer prices jumped at a 34-year high, largely on the back of high energy prices.

Still, annual growth in core consumer inflation is not too far above the top end of the Fed’s assumed comfort zone of under 2%. The Fed’s preferred gauge, the core price index for personal consumption expenditures, is within that range at 1.9% annual growth through October.

“With economic activity expected to be weak over the next several quarters, there is little risk of any significant rise in core inflation,” Insight Economics chief economist Steven Wood wrote in a note to clients. “Future FOMC actions will depend on conditions in the financial markets and the broader economy, not on inflation concerns.”

The economy is fighting a housing slump expected to restrain growth sharply in final months of 2007. The first estimate for fourth-quarter gross domestic product, which is the measure of the economy, is due out Jan. 30. GDP rose by 4.9% in the third quarter, which includes July through September.

The manufacturing side of the economy expanded modestly in November after a big drop during October, a Fed report showed Friday. U.S. industrial production increased 0.3%, driven higher by increased output of cars, trucks and computers. It had tumbled 0.7% in October.

“The welcome rebound in U.S. manufacturing output growth during November, in tandem with other recent data, indicate that while factory activity remains sluggish, it has yet to fall into an actual contraction,” said Cliff Waldman, economist for the Manufacturers Alliance/MAPI, a trade group.

Manufacturing production increased 0.4% compared with October. Motor vehicles and parts rose 1.7% last month, after falling 1.5% in October and 3.2% during September.

Machinery production increased 0.5% in November after dropping 1.3% in October. Business equipment increased 0.9%. Output fell 0.6% in October. Output at the nation’s technology firms increased 2.3% in November, with computers up 1.7%.

WASHINGTON — A “large proportion” of U.S. workers are unlikely to save enough through their 401(k) or other defined contribution plans to last them through retirement, a government report released Tuesday said.

The study by the Government Accountability Office said that the defined contribution-based system, which has largely replaced the more traditional pension plan, faces and presents “major challenges” for workers.

“While some workers save significant amounts toward their retirement in [defined contribution] plans, a large proportion of workers will likely not save enough in [defined contribution] plans for a secure retirement,” the study said.

The GAO found the trouble with contribution-based plans was particularly acute for low-wage workers. The preferential tax treatment of contributions is unlikely to entice low-wage earners, since these workers already face low marginal tax rates. Additionally, making a contribution out of their take-home pay may not be possible, the study said.

“Many of these workers face competing income demands for basic necessities that may make contributions to their retirement plans difficult,” GAO said in the study.

The report, prepared at the behest of U.S. House Democrats, provoked concern on Capitol Hill.

“Today’s workers will more likely struggle to make ends meet during retirement than previous generations,” Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., said in a statement. “While Social Security faces long-term challenges that must be addressed, this GAO report makes it clear that the real retirement security crisis is the lack of savings in private retirement plan.”

Miller, who chairs the House Education and Labor Committee, noted that GAO projected that 37% of workers born in 1990 and just now entering the workforce would reach retirement age with no savings in a 401(k) or similar account.

Rep. Rob Andrews, D-N.J., said the report shows the “need for action is imperative.”

“Today’s GAO report is a clear indication that a large portion of Americans are heading toward retirement insecurity,” Andrews, who chairs the subcommittee with oversight over pensions issues, said in a statement.

The GAO study suggested policy-makers could take steps to boost the projected savings in defined contribution plans. These ideas include making workers instantly eligible to participate in a 401(k) or similar plan when they enter the workforce, as well as automatically rolling over workers’ retirement savings into a new plan when they leave a job.

NEW YORK — Regulators are starting to evaluate complaints by customers about brokers who hold any of three popular designations that imply expertise in working with seniors and retirees.

The sweep is the second phase in a push by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority to uncover whether brokers use designations as mere marketing tools to dazzle investors, or whether the titles have some educational value.

Susan Merrill, Finra’s enforcement chief, said her staff is evaluating the requirements behind the three most popular senior-related designations: Chartered Retirement Planning Counselor, Certified Senior Advisor and Chartered Advisor for Senior Living. Finra is also compiling the records of complaints against advisors who hold those designations, to see if any patterns exist.

Protecting retired and elderly investors from unscrupulous financial advisors has been a major focus among state, federal and industry regulators since 2006. Especially with waves of baby boomers beginning to retire, regulators view their huge amounts of assets as vulnerable to would-be predators.

Educating financial advisors on how to help seniors or retirees navigate the financial, health and social challenges facing them isn’t necessarily a bad thing, said Jean Setzfand, director of financial security for the AARP. But, she added, many titles come with training that shows advisors “how to sell to this market,” instead of skills that will actually help clients.

“With so many designations out there, it’s really hard for any individual to figure out…what’s credible and what’s not,” she said.

In the sweep’s first stage, announced in September, regulators found that reps were using more than 50 designations touting experience related to seniors or retirement.

Now, Merrill said, Finra is trying to determine whether the designations are misused. Part of that is finding out what the educational qualifications are for earning the titles. The other part is learning how reps market them.

“If there are designations that are practically self-conferred…how are the firms and reps then marketing that expertise?” Merrill said. “Are they exaggerating the expertise that goes along with it?”

It’s not clear what exactly would constitute a misuse of a title. For example, just listing a designation on a business card may not be considered misleading. But it could be a problem “if someone’s saying, “Because I have this I am therefore qualified to give you retirement-related investment advice,’” Merrill said.

Programs’ Requirements

According to the providers of the titles Chartered Retirement Planning Counselor, Certified Senior Advisor and Chartered Advisor for Senior Living, the coursework for students is rigorous. But the requirements for the three vary widely.

The CASL designation consists of five distance-education courses offered by The American College. The college estimates that it takes 300 to 450 hours — a year or two — to complete the coursework, which includes topics like understanding the older client and fundamentals of estate planning. To participate in the program, people must have three years of professional experience. After completing the coursework, students take closed-book, proctored exams at nearby locations.

A spokesman said the college doesn’t conduct background checks on students, but that it remains in contact with state, federal and industry regulators to monitor those holding its designations.

Those trying for a CRPC, offered by the College of Financial Planning, are tested on the contents of 11 books as part of a self-study program that takes anywhere from 100 hours to 250 hours to complete, according to the college. There are no prerequisites for taking the course, which covers information like sources of retirement income and investing for retirement.

Once someone passes a proctored, online, closed-book exam, he must promise to disclose conflicts of interest and not to solicit business through false or misleading statements or ads. Students must also fill out a form saying whether they’ve been criminal or civil defendants, or are the subject of any investigation. If they answer yes, the college does a background check.

The CSA self-study coursework includes four online courses — including one on ethics — with short, open-book, multiple-choice exams. The courses, along with a textbook that students must read, take 26 to 35 hours to complete, the CSA Society estimates. They must also conduct an interview of a professional in another field who works with seniors and write a 900-word report. They must sign a code of ethics and pass a closed-book, proctored exam before receiving the CSA. Students can also take the course in a classroom environment, where the coursework is slightly different.

Starting in January, candidates who want to sit for the final exam — whether or not they take the course — will have to have some amount of work or volunteer experience working with seniors, or a degree or certificate from an accredited college or university in a field related to working with seniors.

Those who hold CSAs are obligated to inform the Society of CSAs about disciplinary, legal or civil proceedings against them. If they don’t self-report, they can face a one-year suspension of the designation. Also starting in January, CSAs will be required to disclose on marketing materials that the “designation alone does not imply expertise in financial, health or social matters.”

Concerns

Despite the programs’ arguments that their courses are valuable, some investors’ advocates are skeptical of the general idea, especially given the proliferation of such programs.

Some designations give “the impression to potential clients that someone is more important than they are, or more qualified educationally than they are,” said Stuart D. Meissner, an investors’ lawyer. “Often the reality is they just pay a fee and get a book, and they get the degree.”

Finra’s sweep comes alongside efforts by state regulators to curb the types of designations financial advisors can use. Earlier this year, Massachusetts securities regulators adopted a rule saying financial advisors can only use senior designations that have been accredited by a national agency recognized by the state. And the North American Securities Administrators Association is floating a similar model rule.

Merrill said it’s too early to know whether enforcement actions will come out of the sweep, but said “it may help sensitize firms to the issue.” She said she’s already seeing firms get more rigid about what designations they will allow reps to use.

She said five firms have said they would ban the use of senior-services designations by the end of 2007, and others are drafting procedures to oversee their brokers’ use of the credentials.

Merrill said guidance for firms might be the key outcome of the Finra sweep. “We have to help educate firms about how designations are being used,” she said.

Breathe a sigh of relief. The nation’s leading-edge baby boomers — about 3 million strong — are turning 62 years old this year and, contrary to popular opinion, they are not in desperate straits.

In fact, Americans born in 1946 are in relatively good financial shape and seemingly entirely different from other boomers. Maybe that’s because only 2% of them report that they attended Woodstock.

Consider, for instance, some highlights from MetLife’s Mature Market Institute just-released study of boomers turning 62. The majority are in good health; 77% report being in good to excellent health. They have relatively good income, $71,400, which is a tad more than the average household income in America.

They have a decent net worth; $550,000 including the value of their homes. (The average retiree, by the way, has just about $254,000, excluding the net present value of Social Security, in net worth, according to a Boston College Center for Retirement Research study.)

Nearly half have a traditional pension plan, 50% have a 401(k), and 50% have an IRA. Nearly 70% have employee or retiree health insurance. And about a third have long-term-care insurance.

But what’s especially telling about this group’s financial health is this: While roughly 80% of Americans take Social Security at age 62, this group — which includes such well -known Americans as Jimmy Buffet, President George W. Bush, former President Clinton, Sally Field and Diane Keaton — will not. Just one-third said they plan to take Social Security when they turn 62; the rest plan to take Social Security at age 65 or later.

In the past, those who took Social Security early did so for health reasons. (At least one study has established a correlation between a person having a high body mass index and taking Social Security early.) But the leading-edge of boomers will take Social Security early for different reasons.

“They feel they’re entitled and would rather have the money than let the government have it,” according to MetLife’s study. Those who will take the payouts now said they fear there will be nothing left in the Social Security system if they wait.

Lots Of Positives At 62

But even though the majority of leading-edge boomers don’t plan to take Social Security early, they do say the best things about being 62 are “retirement” and “not having to work.” When asked to use one word to explain the best aspect of being 62, those surveyed also answered: being alive, freedom, health, Social Security, wisdom and independence. “As one person put it, “I’m glad to be on the planet, rather than in it,’” the survey said.

As for the worst aspects of being age 62, those surveyed answered: illness, disability, wrinkles, aches and pains, discrimination, underappreciation, memory loss, mortality and generally getting older.

The leading-edge boomers also seem different from other boomers in other ways. For instance, they have lots of grandchildren upon which to dote. Nearly eight in 10 have grandchildren. In addition, Republican presidential candidates should take note of this: Conservatives outnumber liberals by 2-1.

Health and beauty and fitness industries should take note of this: Most of these leading-edge boomers don’t think they will be old until they are 78, unless of course they are in good health, in which case old is 83. And the builders of retirement communities should take note of this: One in four say they plan to move to another area for retirement. By contrast, other studies suggest that nine in 10 elders want to age in place.

To be sure, this may be as good as it gets for baby boomers. After this, surveys likely will find that fewer and fewer boomers have traditional pension plans, fewer and fewer boomers will have retiree health care and fewer and fewer may be as secure in retirement. But for 62-year-olds, Camelot may have arrived.