U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
 [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 03-18-2016, 05:57 AM
 
Location: Ponte Vedra Beach FL
14,628 posts, read 17,927,825 times
Reputation: 6716

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
all spot on . we have to include the fact that in some aras even having a paid off home may add little to the affordibility of it .

take long island where when my friends and i entered the home buying era of our lives back in the 1970's a home was 30-40k in suffolk county .

so after 30 years you paid off a mortgage that represents 1/2 a utility bill today and taxes are 12 to 15k.

you still may not be able to afford to live there even with that paid off mortgage. folks forget as time goes on that mortgage can represent less and less of your monthly nut .
Agreed. My father was a home builder who started building houses in Nassau County in the 50's. They cost about $15k back then .

But - even without a mortgage (we haven't had one for years) - the costs of ownership can be fairly high once you figure in property taxes - insurance - utilities - landscaping - maintenance/repairs - HOA/condo fees - etc. I think the general rule of thumb is you should expect to pay about 10% of the value of a house these days a year to keep it up and running. Which - if we had a mortgage - is about what we'd be paying (we're at 6-7&/year now). Robyn
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-18-2016, 06:26 AM
 
Location: Mount Airy, Maryland
10,460 posts, read 5,926,819 times
Reputation: 16151
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robyn55 View Post
Agreed. My father was a home builder who started building houses in Nassau County in the 50's. They cost about $15k back then .

But - even without a mortgage (we haven't had one for years) - the costs of ownership can be fairly high once you figure in property taxes - insurance - utilities - landscaping - maintenance/repairs - HOA/condo fees - etc. I think the general rule of thumb is you should expect to pay about 10% of the value of a house these days a year to keep it up and running. Which - if we had a mortgage - is about what we'd be paying (we're at 6-7&/year now). Robyn
We live in a very old house with a lot of propery to maintain, about as expensive as it gets. But 10%/year would be $35,000-$40,000 annually and it's not even close to that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2016, 07:09 AM
 
6,616 posts, read 3,746,469 times
Reputation: 13682
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vision67 View Post
I've read lots of articles about how much people should save for retirement and about how few actually are successful reaching that goal. This article demonstrates how dependent retirees actually are on Social Security.

"Based on this data, only the top quarter of all savers and only the top 12% of all retirees in this age range can count on a minimum of $16,000 in income each year from their nest eggs."

US retirement savings vary widely - Business Insider
I'm surprised it's $16k. After all, that's 4% of $400,000 or 5% of $300,000 from the income portion of a portfolio. There would probably be a growth part for the later years. That's pretty good, actually, compared to what most people are able to save.

That's what Social Security is for. To supplement one's life savings for the declining years. Add $20k to tht $16k, and Grandma will be fine. She'll have over $30k net income to last for the rest of her life.

I've read that most people have far less than $300k or $400k saved up at retirement, so I'm surprised they can get $16k income on their savings.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2016, 07:12 AM
 
Location: Forests of Maine
30,680 posts, read 49,443,611 times
Reputation: 19129
10% of the assessed value of a house seems rather high.

We have never owned any home that had HOA or condo fees.

Our current property taxes are 8/10 of 1%.

Insurance is roughly equal to that amount amount.

Utilities: we had never focused that much on utility costs until recently. There is a wide variation from one house to the next, in electric consumption, water, heating, cooling. Our winter heat has been costing us around $1500/year. Yet we have neighbors who spend 4X that much for heating. We just shifted to solar-power last fall and we hope to shift our heating to mostly a solar-thermal system in the next few months. We hope to be near net-zero for utilities soon.

I do not think there is any consistent ratio between assessed value and utilities expense. I would guess that most home-owners utilities must run between 2% and 5% of their homes assessed values. When we are done with our setup the amortized cost should be close to 1%.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2016, 08:25 AM
 
Location: Somewhere in deep in Maine
3,658 posts, read 2,810,658 times
Reputation: 4436
Quote:
Originally Posted by Submariner View Post
10% of the assessed value of a house seems rather high.

We have never owned any home that had HOA or condo fees.

Our current property taxes are 8/10 of 1%.

Insurance is roughly equal to that amount amount.

Utilities: we had never focused that much on utility costs until recently. There is a wide variation from one house to the next, in electric consumption, water, heating, cooling. Our winter heat has been costing us around $1500/year. Yet we have neighbors who spend 4X that much for heating. We just shifted to solar-power last fall and we hope to shift our heating to mostly a solar-thermal system in the next few months. We hope to be near net-zero for utilities soon.

I do not think there is any consistent ratio between assessed value and utilities expense. I would guess that most home-owners utilities must run between 2% and 5% of their homes assessed values. When we are done with our setup the amortized cost should be close to 1%.
I thought this thread was about SS, SUB.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2016, 08:26 AM
 
Location: Somewhere in deep in Maine
3,658 posts, read 2,810,658 times
Reputation: 4436
Waht's the maximum that you can draw from SS?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2016, 09:22 AM
 
29,775 posts, read 34,863,854 times
Reputation: 11705
Quote:
Originally Posted by bpollen View Post
I'm surprised it's $16k. After all, that's 4% of $400,000 or 5% of $300,000 from the income portion of a portfolio. There would probably be a growth part for the later years. That's pretty good, actually, compared to what most people are able to save.

That's what Social Security is for. To supplement one's life savings for the declining years. Add $20k to tht $16k, and Grandma will be fine. She'll have over $30k net income to last for the rest of her life.

I've read that most people have far less than $300k or $400k saved up at retirement, so I'm surprised they can get $16k income on their savings.
That 16k was for the top 12 percent of investors not the average
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2016, 09:41 AM
 
Location: Forests of Maine
30,680 posts, read 49,443,611 times
Reputation: 19129
https://www.ssa.gov/news/press/facts...facts2016.html

Maximum Social Security Benefit for 2015
Worker Retiring at Full Retirement Age: $2,663/mo.

Maximum Social Security Benefit for 2016
Worker Retiring at Full Retirement Age: $2,639/mo.



Estimated Average Monthly Social Security Benefits Payable in January 2016:
All Retired Workers $1,341

Aged Couple, Both Receiving Benefits $2,212

Widowed Mother and Two Children $2,680

Aged Widow(er) Alone $1,285
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2016, 10:45 AM
 
2,294 posts, read 1,560,184 times
Reputation: 2737
[quote=TuborgP;43377772]Most teachers pay into and receive benefits. A number of selective state employees don't participate but most do. EScort is in Calif and they don't.

Actually, many teachers don't pay into SS and so rightly so...don't receive benefits.

From a reputable publication :

"about 40 percent of teachers are not covered by Social Security because they teach in jurisdictions that have not elected to participate in Social Security"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2016, 11:01 AM
 
2,294 posts, read 1,560,184 times
Reputation: 2737
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChessieMom View Post
Yikes. I had no idea that there were states that excluded teachers from SS payments. Thank goodness only 15 states do this.
If teachers don't pay into it, why should they receive it? Answer: They . In fact if I was her I wouldn't want Social Security taken out. I would invest the difference and be way ahead. But of course teachers are no different than anyone else. They don't save On average. Don't get me started about the poor teachers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

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 > Retirement
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - 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 - Top