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 12-13-2016, 09:37 AM
 
Location: Columbia SC
9,002 posts, read 7,766,040 times
Reputation: 12231

Advertisements

I am 74 and have recently begun to withdraw some from some my retirement savings (mutual funds). I based this withdrawal rate on age 90 with no increase in principal as in share values increasing. Other than RMD's, I have not touched my IRA's yet. As I age I will be faced with withdrawing more (no need to leave any of it) or extending my age expectation. Either way I am fortunate as I can easily live within my means and with being single, I only have myself to consider.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-13-2016, 03:07 PM
 
12,825 posts, read 20,160,725 times
Reputation: 10910
>= 100.

And then I normally do this:

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-13-2016, 03:11 PM
 
12,825 posts, read 20,160,725 times
Reputation: 10910
Quote:
Originally Posted by borninsac View Post
If you look at most actuary tables, the older you are the longer is your life expectancy.

Take the IRS tables used for required minimum distributions for example.

At age 70, you use 27.4 years so that equals 97.4 years.

At age 90, you use 11.4 years so that equals 101.4 years.

https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/uniform_rmd_wksht.pdf

So the lesson learned? The older you are the older you'll be with you being not you but the masses.
Interesting how that works, isn't it? There is some interesting science and stats behind that.

Take some 18 year old young buck. Chance of that person dying from gunshot / baseball bat / wrapped around tree / alcohol poisoning / STD / cumulative life style impacts / etc is significant.

Now take a 90 year old. In most cases, most of the above are N/A, other than some really weird black swan scenarios. The other stuff is actually low rate of occurrence compared with controllable / behavioral items. The wrench in the works is dementia, which can make a person "young and dumb" again in a bad way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-13-2016, 09:49 PM
 
Location: NE Mississippi
13,690 posts, read 8,601,319 times
Reputation: 19962
Quote:
Originally Posted by borninsac View Post
Some here are very numerical and analytical in their retirement planning. You use cost-of-living, rate of return and life expectancy assumptions in the analysis you do. Whether you use a website calculator, one of a planning professional you employ, or your own spreadsheets/napkins, these and other assumptions are necessary to do the math.

If this is you, what is your life expectancy assumption?

I'll go first. I use age 95 years. I don't have family history to support this life expectancy but I feel comfortable when using 95 years in my math.

Years ago I recall seeing a financial planning company's advertisement; I thought it was very clever. It had a photo of an older man in a business suit with hands in his pocket with a caption reading something like this: "Well off at 65 and broke at 80."
Infinity.

Our invested assets (mostly real estate) pay enough so that we have some left over each month. So for right now we are not drawing down our capital at all. As far as we can see, that will go on for another 15 years or so, and then we'll begin to sell off the real estate. I'll be 85 then and I may not feel like fooling with it anymore.
But then we WILL begin to use up our assets.
But I don't like spending money; not a big vacationer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-13-2016, 11:08 PM
 
Location: Haiku
4,179 posts, read 2,595,608 times
Reputation: 6155
I used 95 but I don't expect to get anywhere close to that. I am not a fan of living to a ripe old age and have no problem with taking an early exit. But I won't go before my wife or our dog so it is in their hands to some degree. Bottom line, while financially our worst case scenario is 95, I am thinking 85 is more like it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-14-2016, 08:14 AM
 
Location: RVA
2,172 posts, read 1,270,926 times
Reputation: 4492
Quote:
Originally Posted by Listener2307 View Post
Infinity.
...... I'll be 85 then....
But I don't like spending money; not a big vacationer.
I'm 58 and am already tired of fooling around with real estate. People that have income properties love to say how they are practically ATMs. Nothing is farther from the truth. My family has always had income property and it was always a PITA. I broke that trend until recenty, and it is still a PITA. Give me dividends, annuities and taxable income any day of the week!

And I LOVE spending money. And vacationing! ..I see no point in just collecting it so someone else can blow it after I'm gone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-14-2016, 10:04 AM
 
Location: Lakewood OH
21,698 posts, read 23,692,507 times
Reputation: 35450
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewbieHere View Post
You must not see the oldest woman alive, she only eats eggs now. She is 120, looks reasonably healthy.
In our circle of relative, there is one grandma died at age 104. No dementia, nothing.
She eats more than just eggs but she does eat a lot of them.

Here's her story.

https://www.google.com/amp/www.cnbc....?client=safari
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-14-2016, 10:48 AM
 
Location: equator
3,466 posts, read 1,544,827 times
Reputation: 8620
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clemencia53 View Post

This is a great read! Echoes my sentiments exactly. I don't think we can count on living longer than our parents....my grandparents lived to late 90's but both my parents passed at 87. All were non-smoker, non-drinker, active....no dementia, healthy weight.


You may all live to 100 but what will your quality of life be? As the article addresses. I too would stop diagnostic tests and so forth, at 75, if not before. Kind of already have since not much of that is available here, and reduced income.


I like the Native Americans of times past who walked into the woods to freeze when they were no longer a productive member of society. Too much of a burden on family.


Having said that, I think our financial planner used the age of 90. I like 75....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-14-2016, 11:32 AM
 
Location: Central NY
4,686 posts, read 3,256,586 times
Reputation: 12012
Clemencia53: May I ask how old you are now?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-14-2016, 12:21 PM
 
6,334 posts, read 5,072,656 times
Reputation: 12885
Quote:
Originally Posted by nygal1542 View Post
clemencia53: May i ask how old you are now?
56
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