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.
If you were able to wisely save and invest for your retirement - Congratulations!
However for the rest of us, who were never able to save or worse had our savings destroyed by some financial, medical or otherwise disastrous occurrence, we will be looking at retirement depending upon mainly or solely on social security.
I have combed all the online retirement reports on this matter and as would be expected that all differ widely. So based upon your experience, which one of these cities would get your vote as an ideal retirement location if all you have is SS?
NOTE: YOU CAN MAKE MULTIPLE SELECTIONS IF NEEDED.
And if none of these strike your fancy, then make your own suggestion(s).
choose the capitol or biggest city in a small population, but big area, state.
cannot choose Rhode Island because is too small and California has too many people.
the capitol (of small population states) usually has the best healthcare.
the biggest city usually has everything that state can offer.
personally, i would choose a city in a Low-Tax or No-Income-Tax state.
taxes, fees, and surcharges will eventually eat up a lot of SS income.
What is the motivation for some of these cities? I worked in several of these cities (Dayton, Richmond, and Erie) and they would not be cities that I would recommend retiring to unless you had family there. And a number of the ones that you mentioned are HCOL areas.
When you say you have only SS to live on, how much is your benefit? That could be as little as $800 per month to over $4k per month for married couple.
What is the motivation for some of these cities? I worked in several of these cities (Dayton, Richmond, and Erie) and they would not be cities that I would recommend retiring to unless you had family there. And a number of the ones that you mentioned are HCOL areas.
When you say you have only SS to live on, how much is your benefit? That could be as little as $800 per month to over $4k per month for married couple.
Richmond's actually a pretty nice place to retire, but I wouldn't include it on this list because the areas where you'd want to live probably aren't going to be places you could afford using only social security. It's changed quite a bit in the last few years, so it may not be the same place you remember. Unless, of course, you're remembering the hot summers. That hasn't changed, LOL.
My question: Does the social security have to be used to pay for your housing? Or can we assume people already own homes and the social security will be used for other COL needs?
Since SS was only established to replace about a third of your working income, you are asking a lot. Pick a place where no one wants to live if they can afford not to. Housing will be cheaper.
Don't pick a state that taxes SS 100%. Pick a location with mild weather to save on utilities, but not somewhere scenic or everyone will want to retire there and rent/housing will be expensive. If you can plant a garden or raise chickens to help with food, all the better. Or find somewhere you can use cheap public transport or "shanks pony"to get you to the grocery store and medical.
Some of the places in your poll are really expensive.
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.
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.
