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.
Nice. You must have a lot of friends with that demeanor.
I do have plenty of friends thanks for your concern
Quote:
It's less than 5%.
So widely relevant, or not
Quote:
My point is that if you can delay collecting until age 70, you'd need an enormous portfolio to have a larger retirement portfolio distribution than Social Security check. The inflation protection feature of Social Security is a huge win.
Great point but it's not relevant to what I posted or the context of the point. There is a large portion of the elderly population who live near poverty because they are so dependent on SS and lack other sources of inome
you don't need much to survive . a tent in a camp ground in some areas are all you need . once we get above basic needs it is all about the lifestyle and the want list for retirement you have .
i always planned around a better retirement life then i did when working .
i have a whole bucket list of wants and things we want to do and see .
all those wants are what cost money and that budget can be endless as we are seeing now with so much time to do things daily. it all depends on what you hope to get out of retirement and where you are located .
You need more than a tent to survive in many areas.
a hut or bungalow works fine too , you get the point . to get by we can make do on very little . but it is the wants and desires in life that can cost endless amounts of money .
our retirement is working out just the way we planned . every day we have been going somewhere else locally doing many of the things nyc has to offer . some is free but most is not .
as i always say time can cost money and one thing you have as a retiree is plenty of time .
a hut or bungalow works fine too , you get the point . to get by we can make do on very little . but it is the wants and desires in life that can cost endless amounts of money .
our retirement is working out just the way we planned . every day we have been going somewhere else locally doing many of the things nyc has to offer . some is free but most is not .
as i always say time can cost money and one thing you have as a retiree is plenty of time .
True, but in most cases the acquisition of money costs/takes time. Some of us aren't willing to roll the dice and prefer to spend time together while we're young.
I'm not in the 49% of people who have nothing saved and/or can't come up with $2,000, but I still look at time and money as trade-offs.
In 2014, most U.S. deaths occurred between the ages of 54 and 69 (36%), with the next highest grouping being 70 - 74 (35%). If we beat the odds and make it to age 75, we have a 12% chance of making it to 85, but only 4% of the U.S. population (13.6 million people) survives to age 85 (up 2% from 2010). Statistically, that's not great! (And if you're alive now, your odds of dying from cancer are an even 50% - regardless of age.)
I'm almost 60, and with a slightly better than 2 to 1 shot at making it to age 75, I'm far more interested in the quality of my life than the quantity of it. As for material acquisition; no thanks. I'd rather have less money and spend more time with my husband. YMMV.
actually your statistics are not quite correct when it comes to retirement planning . as we age statistically our odds of reaching older ages increase .
looking at things even from birth will show very different results . but as we age we weed out those either not as healthy or those who have a likelihood of dying young and hjey become water under the bridge . .
so today a 65 year old women has a 54% chance of seeing 85 , a 65 year old man has a 42% chance , but a couple has a 73% chance since you have two horses on one bet and either can outlive the other .
a couple has a 47% chance of one of them seeing 90 . so make it until 65 and there is almost a 50/50 chance one of you may hit 90 , that is amazing today .
we have been adding 1 year of life more every 4 years since 2000.
Last edited by mathjak107; 10-09-2015 at 04:47 AM..
Hmm. Apparently, current medical data doesn't quite dance with JP Morgan's 'Asset planning' data. Is this supposed to be current, as in 2014/15? Was this data extracted from actuarial tables, or is it purely conjecture, as in from a forecasting model?
Low interest rates give homebuyers greater purchasing power. The increased purchasing power of home buyers increases the equity in your home, while (again) doing squat for renters until they become home buyers.
I suspect a good number of renters have car payments and benefit from lower interest rates. I could be wrong but I see a lot of cars parked at apartment buildings.
I suspect a good number of renters have car payments and benefit from lower interest rates. I could be wrong but I see a lot of cars parked at apartment buildings.
Interest paid on a car loan is peanuts compared to whats paid on a mortgage.
Hmm. Apparently, current medical data doesn't quite dance with JP Morgan's 'Asset planning' data. Is this supposed to be current, as in 2014/15? Was this data extracted from actuarial tables, or is it purely conjecture, as in from a forecasting model?
TIA,
Mahrie.
it is actuarial tables . you can not use life expectancy data from birth to retirement plan . counting every age group will have very different results once the weak as they say are eliminated .
you can see on the cdc gov data the difference between birth vs 65
a female from birth is 81.2 but at 65 it is almost 86 back in 2012 and we are adding 1 more year now every 4 years .
Last edited by mathjak107; 10-09-2015 at 05:50 AM..
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.