Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics > Personal Finance
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-09-2018, 06:50 PM
 
Location: Honolulu, HI
24,630 posts, read 9,458,962 times
Reputation: 22970

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by lottamoxie View Post
Corporate America is where pensions have (by and large) gone away. Most companies stopped pensions for new employees around 1995-ish.
That doesn’t undermine the fact that pensions are still here for those who want and work government jobs.

 
Old 07-09-2018, 07:04 PM
 
18,088 posts, read 15,670,593 times
Reputation: 26794
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocko20 View Post
That doesn’t undermine the fact that pensions are still here for those who want and work government jobs.
Then that's another source of retirement income, making the argument that it's nearly impossible to save enough $$$ for retirement moot.

Social Security + Pension + 401K/IRAs/HSA/Taxable Savings/Taxable Brokerage/OtherLiquidAssets/RealEstateHoldings = Total Nest Egg.

The more a person will get with social security & pension, the less the person has to save themselves to meet their nest egg requirement.
 
Old 07-09-2018, 11:28 PM
 
30,897 posts, read 36,958,653 times
Reputation: 34526
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lizap View Post
I don't think unions can be solely blamed for this. In our state, most state workers are not union.
But the general idea of people not wanting to save is still the same. Government bureaucracies pretty much operate the same way everywhere.
 
Old 07-09-2018, 11:33 PM
 
30,897 posts, read 36,958,653 times
Reputation: 34526
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocko20 View Post
Newsflash: if you can’t meet the minimum requirements to work for the government, you have bigger issues. Surely, you know this.
Um, no. I don't "know" that. To say or imply that anyone can get a government job with a pension is to be willfully obtuse.

First of all, as a public sector worker, I can tell you that not everyone who works in the public sector qualifies for a pension.

Second, government jobs have real requirements just like everywhere else and there is a fair amount of competition for a lot of government jobs. You don't just walk in and get a job. Implying otherwise is ridiculous. I've seen people work part time (no pension) where I am for YEARS and never get a full time position with a pension. There's nothing wrong with their qualifications. But it's a game of eeny meeny miny moe. Lots of people are qualified for the job and some people are better at playing the networking and interviewing game than others (sometimes it's the less competent/those with a weaker work ethic/those with an inside connection--as sometimes happens in the private sector as well).

Third, it's just math. There are a small percentage of jobs that offer pensions. And even in government, those are being scaled back in various ways, especially for new hires. It's like playing a game of musical chairs. There are fewer chairs than people.
 
Old 07-10-2018, 05:35 PM
 
Location: Ohio
24,621 posts, read 19,165,825 times
Reputation: 21738
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburban_Guy View Post
And I wholeheartedly agree, because I will have nowhere near $1 million by the time I get to retirement age.
If you plan on living 30 years after your retire, and your desire is to have at least $50,000 annually, then, yes, you'd need $1 Million.

The average person only lives 19 years beyond retirement.

The average person also doesn't do very much, except sit around and vegetate, and you don't need $50,000/year to do that.

If your intent is to travel extensively, then, yes, you'd probably spend $10,000 to $15,000 a year traveling, so you might actually want $500,000 to $750,000 for retirement.
 
Old 07-10-2018, 05:57 PM
 
106,671 posts, read 108,833,673 times
Reputation: 80164
life expectancy changes as we age and the cohort becomes it's own group . there is a 54% chance a 65 year old woman will be alive at 85 and a 42% chance for a man but as a couple that jumps to 74% one of them will be alive . in fact it is still an almost 50% chance 1 will still be alive at 90 .

only roughly 1-in-10 people born in 2014 is expected to die prior to age 60 (i.e., 90% are still alive), but beyond that point, the rate of death begins to increase substantially. However, over 60% of children born in 2014 are still expected to be alive when the cohort reaches their “life expectancy” (i.e., average age at death) of 79. The median (age 83) is equivalent to the 50th percentile, and the mode (89) is roughly around the 30th percentile. By age 100, only 2% of people born in 2014 are expected to still be alive.


 
Old 07-11-2018, 10:17 AM
 
24,559 posts, read 18,259,472 times
Reputation: 40260
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
If you plan on living 30 years after your retire, and your desire is to have at least $50,000 annually, then, yes, you'd need $1 Million.

It all depends on the size of your Social Security check. ...and your pension if you have one of those. It also depends on the composition of your nest egg. I can spend money from my cash emergency fund without paying tax. Ditto my Roth. The tax deferred stuff I'm paying income tax. The after tax investments I'm paying capital gains tax.



I'm 60. I'll be getting close to a max Social Security check. I can spend a COLA protected $50K forever on about $700K.
 
Old 07-11-2018, 07:41 PM
 
Location: Oregon, formerly Texas
10,068 posts, read 7,239,454 times
Reputation: 17146
I would prefer that it be said "the median household may spend $1 million over a 30 year retirement."

That way you think more about income streams over time, and less about needing 7 figures of cash in the bank the day you retire.
 
Old 07-12-2018, 09:11 AM
 
Location: The Triad
34,090 posts, read 82,975,811 times
Reputation: 43666
Quote:
Originally Posted by redguard57 View Post
I would prefer that it be said "the median household may spend $1 million over a 30 year retirement."
That way you think more about income streams over time,
and less about needing 7 figures of cash in the bank the day you retire.
But that sort of reasonable approach and thinking will just put a check on the hysteria
so many seem to thrive on here ... and wouldn't produce a 250 post thread saying nothing.
 
Old 07-15-2018, 05:40 PM
 
493 posts, read 442,922 times
Reputation: 445
You don't necessarily need 1 million to retire. You need to figure out how much you need per year and estimate how many years you expect to live.

Assuming you need $40k per year and you liev 25 more years, then you will need 1 million. Make sense? It's all relative.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics > Personal Finance

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:18 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top