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 Yesterday, 08:10 PM
 
5,426 posts, read 3,446,805 times
Reputation: 13699

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jghorton View Post

When an 50K "average" wage earner adds up all their retirement income sources (including SS), the total gross amount of equivalent resources to produce a comparable amount with nominal risk ....is probably not far from $1.7M.
not any 50K average wage earners that one normally runs into.......unless you're adding the worth of a home they own into it

without adding the worth of a home into it, you honestly think a 50K per year wage earner has access to $1.7 million or $1.3 million in retirement? - a single person, not married - perhaps you're thinking of a married couple?

and most 50K per year wage earners do not even receive a pension, let alone the $52K per year pension which you cite.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Yesterday, 10:04 PM
 
Location: Grove City, Ohio
10,133 posts, read 12,381,010 times
Reputation: 13956
Quote:
Originally Posted by JOinGA View Post
Just be aware that there are forces at work to chip away at pensions and healthcare for retirees in the public sector. In Georgia, retired teachers used to all be able to stay on the employee health plan at the employee rate until Medicare. Whether you had 10 years or 30, if you qualified for a pension you all got the same health insurance rates. THEN they changed it based on years of service. So, to get the full employee subsidy to your health insurance, 75%, you need 30 years. Anything less and it is subject to a sliding scale. Ten years in only gives you a 20 percent subsidy vs. the 75% previously. The worst thing was that they made the change effective for employees who already had 5 years of service or less......so people worked 5 years thinking they would get one retirement benefit only to have it changed on them.
My wife worked at a public library in Ohio for 10 years and 2 days to get her pension.

The pension isn't much at all... just $282.65/month but that is after they take out for the dental insurance on both of us which is a really good policy as far as dental goes. Free cleaning twice a year and I just had a new crown and small cavity filled and the my portion was less than $700 which is a real good deal. I am not sure but I think our dental runs maybe $40/month for each of us and that comes out of her pension.

But the big deal isn't the money it's her medical. She gets reimbursed for everything, her Plan G, Plan D and even her Medicare Part B coverage PLUS they give her $2,500 per year in a medical savings account and that is a big deal! She needs eyeglasses and her medical savings account reimburses along with any prescriptions costs etc.

We are so very fortunate... she hasn't had any money out of pocket medical expense in four years where she didn't get all her money back! The reimbursement is worth more than the cash she gets every month.

When she took the pension she took a lower amount so there is a survivor benefit for me should something happen to her. I don't want it, I think of not having her and I start to cry.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 10:19 PM
 
Location: Grove City, Ohio
10,133 posts, read 12,381,010 times
Reputation: 13956
Quote:
Originally Posted by jghorton View Post
Of course this type of article is so generalized that all it does is fill someone's column-inch quota. However, the notion that $1.7M is such an outrageously high number that few could possibly need or have that much ... is equally silly.

When an 50K "average" wage earner adds up all their retirement income sources (including SS), the total gross amount of equivalent resources to produce a comparable amount with nominal risk .... is probably not far from $1.7M. (Consider, for example, that a $52K pension is equivalent to $1.3M at 4-percent annual return ... and that doesn't include inflation or taxes).
Look at what I found at The Motley Fool!

Americans' Average Social Security in 2019 -- How Do You Compare?

Quote:
Because the amount people are awarded in Social Security benefits runs the gamut from a few hundred dollars per year up to a maximum, it might be useful to know how many people collect benefits at various levels. In the next chart, you see that most people collect between $800 and $1,800 monthly in benefits and that very few collect more than $3,000 per month.
To back this up towards the end of the article there is a chart depicting the number of people that get certain amounts. Fascinating and it looks to me like the median is somewhere around $1,450 which seems really low to me but again I am fortunate because I could put off collecting until age 70 so my check is pretty hefty by comparison.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 12:52 AM
 
Location: Outside US
1,195 posts, read 471,357 times
Reputation: 1551
Quote:
Originally Posted by matisse12 View Post
not any 50K average wage earners that one normally runs into.......unless you're adding the worth of a home they own into it

without adding the worth of a home into it, you honestly think a 50K per year wage earner has access to $1.7 million or $1.3 million in retirement? - a single person, not married - perhaps you're thinking of a married couple?

and most 50K per year wage earners do not even receive a pension, let alone the $52K per year pension which you cite.
I did a calculation last year (and also asked folks here in C-D) what yearly gross earnings in a particular city in the west could allow saving a paltry $1,200 per month.

Single, $0 debt, no kids, no car payment, studio or (most) likely a 1-bedroom.

The detailed answers by many was $52,000K gross.

That does not go far at all these days.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 01:08 AM
 
Location: Pennsylvania
16,349 posts, read 10,334,620 times
Reputation: 28485
If you think of a savings of $1200/month paltry, maybe your standards need to be lowered a bit.



just saying..........
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 01:59 AM
 
Location: Eugene, Oregon
9,145 posts, read 3,000,345 times
Reputation: 13791
More than half the people in this country who are nearing retirement age, have no saved assets at all. More than half of them will have no income other than Social Security. The writers of articles like this one, dismiss all those people, as though they didn't exist and that the country consisted only of those who could maintain an affluent lifestyle. If something isn't done to fix the ever-growing poverty, no amount of money will protect the others from its repercussions. A gloomy tomorrow for our entire society will be coming along, sooner than most would like to think.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 02:05 AM
 
78,878 posts, read 33,547,251 times
Reputation: 15805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve McDonald View Post
More than half the people in this country who are nearing retirement age, have no saved assets at all. More than half of them will have no income other than Social Security. The writers of articles like this one, dismiss all those people, as though they didn't exist and that the country consisted only of those who could maintain an affluent lifestyle. If something isn't done to fix the ever-growing poverty, no amount of money will protect the others from its repercussions. A gloomy tomorrow for our entire society will be coming along, sooner than most would like to think.
I agree with you but that is a different subject and will get into topics that aren't really topical here. Go over to the politics section where it's discussed extensively.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 02:24 AM
 
71,520 posts, read 71,694,121 times
Reputation: 49105
1/2 the country never had any savings at all at any point in time ...but a good portion of them also have a lot more then the numbers reflect because the underground economy accounts for a few trillion dollars . the irs themselves say they lost 500 billion alone in unreported wages
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 02:28 AM
 
Location: Outside US
1,195 posts, read 471,357 times
Reputation: 1551
Quote:
Originally Posted by PAhippo View Post
If you think of a savings of $1200/month paltry, maybe your standards need to be lowered a bit.



just saying..........
Meaning, save less per month?

To me, saving $1,200 per month is a bad saving & investing rate at my age (40s).

That's a pittance today. $14,400 per year.

That'll get me a can of Alpo......when I'm old....if I live long enough.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 04:06 AM
 
Location: R.I.
975 posts, read 604,389 times
Reputation: 4223
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rachel976 View Post
This entire idea that one can claim a magic number needed - $1.7 million in this case - without factoring in one's living expenses is ridiculous.

In my case, my monthly expenses are about $5,500 - including taxes and the mortgage. Once the house is paid off (which it will be in a few years), my expenses drop to $4,100.
I agree there is no one size fits all magic number, but I will tell you as someone who has been mortgage free since 1998 my former mortgage payment was a drop in the bucket compared to what all my other home ownership expenses are now 20+ years later. For example, in 1998 my property taxes were $208/month and now they are $550/month. My electric and gas heat are paid on a monthly budget plan where I pay the same amount every month throughout the year. Two adults live in my 2200 square foot pretty energy efficient home that does not have central AC. We have no excessive energy use, heat never goes above 68 in the winter, we do 3 loads of laundry once a week, all our appliances and lightning are energy efficient, and despite that we pay $183/month for electric and $185/for gas. In 1998 those two costs combined were less than $185/month.

All that being said, paying off a mortgage certainly does help the bottom line initially, but as the years progress that bottom line becomes shorter and shorter because inflation chews away at it year by year. So projecting retirement expenses is very important, but that projection needs to factor in inflation over a possible 25+ year retirement because if it isn't, when year 13 rolls around one's retirement income may likely not be sufficient to cover one's COL.
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

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