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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-24-2016, 12:51 PM
 
16,597 posts, read 14,069,693 times
Reputation: 20558

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by matisse12 View Post
$150,000 income per year in retirement is no panacea?? How do you figure that? That would be way more than any retiree needs and would be an ultra luxurious very abundant life for most any retiree. Many retirees (if not most) live on a tiny or small fraction of that.
It isn't a panacea it is imaginary.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-24-2016, 01:00 PM
bg7
 
7,697 posts, read 8,165,342 times
Reputation: 15093
Quote:
Originally Posted by matisse12 View Post
$150,000 income per year in retirement is no panacea?? How do you figure that? That would be way more than any retiree needs and would be an ultra luxurious very abundant life for most any retiree. Many retirees (if not most) live on a tiny or small fraction of that.


Moreover, it doesn't run out - it continues till you drop.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-24-2016, 01:01 PM
bg7
 
7,697 posts, read 8,165,342 times
Reputation: 15093
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkb0714 View Post
It isn't a panacea it is imaginary.
NYS FOIA documents prove otherwise.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-24-2016, 01:47 PM
 
29,775 posts, read 34,860,277 times
Reputation: 11697
Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP View Post
Again this isn't about their pensions but about their investment portfolios's. 150K income with no savings/liquidity is no panacea.
Once again folks have been tricked into responding to something that was quoted out of context with key parts left out. Here is the original quote. Note the key point isn't that 150K is no panacea but that the lack of liquidity is the problem. Liquidity or savings which as we all know becomes necessary to pay large costs without debt. If you have 150K income and are saving investing then you logically are beginning to have savings. This thread which I started is about achieving that liquidity in retirement regardless of fixed income amount and how the options offered by employers can impact how successful your saving effort (fees). Once again folks are getting their panties in a bunch as a result of someone failing to fully quote someone. If any are you are advocating retiring with no savings/liquidity regardless of income then ok have a go at that in your personal life and best of luck to ya. Sorry folks we are 8 1/2 years in retirement and our reality has matched the planning and goals that went in to it.

It was our ability to afford a high quality lawyer that enabled our family to avoid a devastating tragedy that many others would not have been able to because of not having the cash to do so. I mentioned that in another post. Often legal battles become a contest of who can outlast the other.

I know many of you are of the opinion your children once grown are on their own but not all of us share that opinion. Divorce and nasty child custody with tragic outcomes if lost are a reality. However if you do care about your kids and their kids you might want to be a Boy Scout and be prepared.

Sometimes you need to see beyond the trees and realize there is a lot of life's crap that is a result of not having the money to avoid unwanted outcomes.

Again my comments are about the liquidity part which many of you didn't realize was the emphasis in my quoted post that was incomplete.

Last edited by TuborgP; 10-24-2016 at 02:00 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-24-2016, 02:21 PM
 
8,834 posts, read 5,126,299 times
Reputation: 10096
Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP View Post
Once again folks have been tricked into responding to something that was quoted out of context with key parts left out. Here is the original quote. Note the key point isn't that 150K is no panacea but that the lack of liquidity is the problem. Liquidity or savings which as we all know becomes necessary to pay large costs without debt. If you have 150K income and are saving investing then you logically are beginning to have savings. This thread which I started is about achieving that liquidity in retirement regardless of fixed income amount and how the options offered by employers can impact how successful your saving effort (fees). Once again folks are getting their panties in a bunch as a result of someone failing to fully quote someone. If any are you are advocating retiring with no savings/liquidity regardless of income then ok have a go at that in your personal life and best of luck to ya. Sorry folks we are 8 1/2 years in retirement and our reality has matched the planning and goals that went in to it.

It was our ability to afford a high quality lawyer that enabled our family to avoid a devastating tragedy that many others would not have been able to because of not having the cash to do so. I mentioned that in another post. Often legal battles become a contest of who can outlast the other.

I know many of you are of the opinion your children once grown are on their own but not all of us share that opinion. Divorce and nasty child custody with tragic outcomes if lost are a reality. However if you do care about your kids and their kids you might want to be a Boy Scout and be prepared.

Sometimes you need to see beyond the trees and realize there is a lot of life's crap that is a result of not having the money to avoid unwanted outcomes.

Again my comments are about the liquidity part which many of you didn't realize was the emphasis in my quoted post that was incomplete.
Point taken. Still, if I want to do something like retain an attorney, with a guaranteed income of 150k per year, unless I have messed up my credit I can borrow the retainer if I need to.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-24-2016, 02:29 PM
 
29,775 posts, read 34,860,277 times
Reputation: 11697
Quote:
Originally Posted by Petunia 100 View Post
Point taken. Still, if I want to do something like retain an attorney, with a guaranteed income of 150k per year, unless I have messed up my credit I can borrow the retainer if I need to.
That is debt and do you really want to be taking that on at this stage of the game if you could have avoided it by taking advantage of your 401/403 over the years? This can be cumulative. We got hit hard with flooding in NC and their are/were constant stories about folk with no where to go or unable to rebuild because of a lack of money many seniors. Home foundations in Conn are falling apart due to faulty concrete and insurance not covering the damage.

This thread is about wanting to have a decent nest egg and having a workplace savings plan that doesn't work in your best interest. If you don't want liquidity in retirement and want to spend as much as you can while working than ok. Not you but anyone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-24-2016, 02:30 PM
 
Location: Albuquerque NM
1,657 posts, read 1,522,722 times
Reputation: 3632
Agree it is a little silly to invest in an annuity if you already have a pension and social security (i.e., two sources of fixed income). But IRAs and 401ks can also be problematic as taking out funds for unexpected expenses often requires that you pay taxes on these at a high rate. And in my case the government "401k" is not very flexible as we are allowed only one withdrawal in a lifetime except for regular pre-determined monthly withdrawals that can be changed only once a year. Then there is the Roth IRA but you are encouraged to withdraw it last to let it grow. I do plan to get a HELOC before I retire in case there are some surprises while getting my home ready to sell.

Although my retirement planning is rather far along, cash is one area of concern. While I have saved up a chunk since paying off my mortgage a couple of years ago, most of this cash is earmarked for realtor fees, relocation costs, replacing my old car, etc. We are encouraged to have emergency savings and CD ladders so that we don’t have to withdraw from our investments during stock market corrections. But the interest rates on money markets and CDs are so low now and it is not easy to save up that much money. I've read that some save it by not investing in their IRAs/401ks the last couple of years before retirement. Others allocate a certain amount of their pension/SS/investment withdrawals each year to be set aside for emergencies and large periodic purchases (e.g., new roof, replacement car) and let it build up until needed. This is an area where there could be more guidance for retirement planning.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-24-2016, 02:39 PM
 
29,775 posts, read 34,860,277 times
Reputation: 11697
^^^^^^ and this thread is hopefully good for thought.

Last edited by TuborgP; 10-24-2016 at 02:58 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-24-2016, 02:57 PM
 
29,775 posts, read 34,860,277 times
Reputation: 11697
Quote:
Originally Posted by ABQ2015 View Post
Agree it is a little silly to invest in an annuity if you already have a pension and social security (i.e., two sources of fixed income). But IRAs and 401ks can also be problematic as taking out funds for unexpected expenses often requires that you pay taxes on these at a high rate. And in my case the government "401k" is not very flexible as we are allowed only one withdrawal in a lifetime except for regular pre-determined monthly withdrawals that can be changed only once a year. Then there is the Roth IRA but you are encouraged to withdraw it last to let it grow. I do plan to get a HELOC before I retire in case there are some surprises while getting my home ready to sell.

Although my retirement planning is rather far along, cash is one area of concern. While I have saved up a chunk since paying off my mortgage a couple of years ago, most of this cash is earmarked for realtor fees, relocation costs, replacing my old car, etc. We are encouraged to have emergency savings and CD ladders so that we donít have to withdraw from our investments during stock market corrections. But the interest rates on money markets and CDs are so low now and it is not easy to save up that much money. I've read that some save it by not investing in their IRAs/401ks the last couple of years before retirement. Others allocate a certain amount of their pension/SS/investment withdrawals each year to be set aside for emergencies and large periodic purchases (e.g., new roof, replacement car) and let it build up until needed. This is an area where there could be more guidance for retirement planning.
Withdrawal procedures vary from employer to employer and are determined by the employer usually and not the investment company. Fidelity has shared the many restrictions various other employers have with me. Some are not user friendly as you note. One way around once a year limitation is to set up a IRA with them and roll money into that which you will have full control over.

I understand building up after tax accounts and we have ours where we want it to be. Took a few years but I am comfortable with the amount. I won't share because of feared meltdown by some. You have strategies and best of luck with them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-24-2016, 04:04 PM
 
Location: Virginia
8,113 posts, read 12,682,638 times
Reputation: 3770
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkb0714 View Post
Source?

I live in one of the most generous pension states, with top 5 salaries. We can expect to have a pension about 40% of our final salary, give or take. Most retirees are not making 6 figures when they retire, so its more like 35K a year.

If there are teachers making 6 figure pensions, they are far and away a tiny extreme outlier of the norm.
We'll see if you get a source.

I will say that the previous post was referencing the income of two retirees and not just one, if I'm not mistaken. Still, I agree those numbers are outliers on the very high end. We get paid decently, but a dually retired couple from my district at the top of the scale, would fall well short of $200k.
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