Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
It’s still the same thing. They are trading off things to be retired or independently wealthy.
Pretty sure it is showing you today‘s dollars. Someone posted a link to another tool they offer to predict your SS earnings and it had an option to see it in future dollars.
If you don’t have a plan, or it entails an unhealthy lifestyle, maybe.
I highly recommend this one: https://ssa.tools/calculator
Ha. Last thing I want is a big send off. I’ll tell my manager, tell her to keep it on the DL and do an Irish exit.
If you have nipples, I can milk you, too, Focker.
That's rough. Ohio has a pretty good teacher retirement system. I can be out at 34 years with about 78% of my top 5 year average. The target is moving to 35 years, but that was recently delayed until 2028, so I can take advantage of the 34 year escape.
Seems way too high to me unless you intended to not need it in 10yrs. Continuing some part time work and drawing a decent amount less would seem like a more certain / less risky path.
A 10% withdrawal rate is very very high. In the past, 4% was recommended for a normal retirement length but even that has proven to be too aggressive because of inflation.
The original 4% rule by William Bengen assumed 3% inflation with a 30 year retirement period. Investors in a 50/50 stock/bond portfolio very rarely ran out of money historically in 30 years. When he tested it at 5% it didnt work, sometimes only giving you 20 years of retirement which he deemed unacceptable.
If you withdraw 10% per year, those funds will be gone in somewhere between 10 and 20 years, probably closer to 10. In theory, a 4% withdrawal rate leaves the principal untouched so you can draw that percentage forever. That’s how endowments work.
The 4% rule wasnt meant to do that. You're thinking of the Crossover Point rule.
You’re assuming no inflation, which impact compounds. For all the folks planning to retire at 55, unless a date with the bottom of the Golden Gate Bridge is planned at age 70 seems like the math will be problematic.
Well, Dave Ramsey and his 8% rule is dumb and he's an idiot. I'll go that far.
No doubt. It's just a simple rule of thumb for discussion purposes. Someone asked about a 10% draw down so it's a decent response. I run a full cashflow analysis every three months and have been tweaking the inputs for years.
Florida is 1.6% for each year.
I think that equation only makes sense if you assume inflation is 0%.
Sure, lots of opinions and options but I don't agree with your sentiment that everyone's convinced their method is correct and that everyone else is an idiot. Also, there is a difference between opinions and math. The math says that drawing down 10% every year from a fund will deplete that fund within a certain time window. If that works for a particular retiree, then that could be a fine option for them. But for most, they'll need their nest egg to hold out longer.
As others note, everyone will find their own dynamic. SS for my wife and me, along with a pension of hers, will rise with inflation. So we do have some protection for that.
I am in a similar boat ... 60 yo and 35 years with same company. Started at the bottom .. making good $ now, but due to "complications" my 401K/retirement is not where I would like it... about 60% of what the "forecast" of what I will need for wife & I.
That’s assuming no return on investment during the break even period. I’ve done numbers before and my plan is to start at 62 and invest (probably will use the SS $$$ but not withdraw that amount). If you include any type of return it extends the breakeven from the simple math. This assumes you have enough of a nest egg to invest and still have stocks/index funds. If you get enough of a return (I think around 7% or 8%), the extra SS $$$s you got at 62-70 will cover the extra monthly difference you get at 70 and you have that SS nest egg from 62-70 in your account for your kids.
The vast majority of people consume the money, not invest it. And there is no guarantee at all of the returns you're talking about even if you have the largesse to invest this instead of spend it. With treasury rates being so high, though, maybe there is a strategy that has a bit more certainty to it.
Win the lottery? Married into money?
There’s no guarantee you make it to 70 either. We aren’t talking about people who need SS to live in here so it’s a valid discussion for this thread. Also, the point about the nest egg is that 7% isn’t some far fetched rate. That’s 30% less than the historical index. If you have enough of a nest egg that either you invest the SS money or use SS and don’t withdraw the same amount, you should be able to have a long term investment look.
I agree with you and if you wait and then start investigating it at 70 the break even point for waiting is closer to 90. I think my model uses 6% instead of 7%. I'll have to check.
NFL / etc?
![[icon]](/data/avatars/s/5/5167.jpg?1660313464){kind=avatar}