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.
Ok, this just seems bizarre. I'm not talking about living in a mud hut for God's sake.
Somehow of Camaro 2SS cars didn't exist, you'd get over it. It's an ego thing. I don't care if you want to assuage your ego with this stuff that I consider stupid. But I do care when people prioritize it over not saving for retirement or when they say "Oh hitting $1M is impossible because you can't just drive a basic car your whole life". Um, why the h*ll not? I don't care what people do. But I want them to OWN THEIR CHOICES. You want the fancy car that you can't easily afford? (general you, not specific to you Jonathan), then say "I spent the money on cars and other fund stuff, and now my old age is pretty meager". But most people who save little or nothing don't say that. They make excuses, and expect other people (family, friends, the taxpayers) to bail them out in one form or another.
I didn't mean to say or imply that. I've slowly (operative word there) upgraded my lifestyle over time.
I would say paying someone to clean could actually bring more happiness than owning stuff. Having less maintenance is generally a happiness booster.
At the same time, pretty much every study out there proves beyond a certain income level, people's day to day happiness doesn't really change much. People love to argue about that. It's hardwired in our brains to want more and more. It's evolutionary biology. And evolution doesn't really care if we're happy or not.
I think we're actually in general agreeing, like I think it's utterly stupid to waste money on "fun toys" if you can't afford them. If I were in a bad financial position, I would live like a freakin' Spartan for years to put aside savings or do whatever I could to better my position. If that means a roommate in an apartment, or a room in someone's house, fine, if that means taking the bus, sucks, but alright.
I am just saying if you have the money to enjoy life a bit more, then don't feel bad about it, that's all. I also never said I don't have an ego, I definitely have an ego. I don't feel shy to admit that, either, I have certain standards and I want them met.
I do find most peoples' standards for sleep to be absolutely horrible. I talked to this waitress yesterday who works night shift and she has to sleep during the day with no AC, when it's 99 outside. That is a horrible situation and if it were me I'd make any other sacrifice to get myself out of that. I don't care if it meant giving up all entertainment, meals, car, whatever, no way could I tolerate that level of sleep. That's what I meant by my comment -- I value quality sleep over everything else because a happy life starts with just the basics. Sleep isn't an optional thing, it's a basic thing, and I'm shocked at what people tolerate when it comes to their sleep. It shouldn't be a "nice luxury" to have a cool, dark, quiet room. That should just be expected in any first world country, yet I think it's fair to say I couldn't sleep in 95% of peoples' homes.
I have also seen those same studies about beyond a certain level, extra money doesn't bring more happiness. While I don't really sit there and debate against well researched studies (humans have a tendency to adapt to anything, and that may explain why they adjust to any new, better situation and aren't actually "happier"), I think they only apply to most and not all people. The higher your imagination and desires, the greater your ability to spend the money in ways that maximize your happiness. If you gave me an extra $500K per year right now, I'd use it to direct one low budget feature film every year. Considering that's my dream is directing movies, it's a bit hard to argue that it wouldn't make me happier, it inarguably would. Yet those studies say above $220K or whatever it is, there is no 'added happiness' and I simply don't believe that's true of everyone. Sure wouldn't be for me.
I am just saying if you have the money to enjoy life a bit more, then don't feel bad about it, that's all.
I agree. Once one has funded their retirement buckets/savings at the level they choose and paid their bills, then the rest is to enjoy or use however one wants. *IF* someone's goal is to get to a financial place where they can retire as early as possible, then that's a choice and there are ways to accelerate to get there, but like everything in life it's a tradeoff.
I personally never had a timeline in mind, hadn't even heard of "FIRE" or retiring early until a couple years ago. I didn't think too hard about the "when," I just knew I needed to sock $$$ away for the future and keep working so I could fund my future and my present.
And here's the good news: just practicing good financial behaviors consistently (like save from every paycheck, invest in 401K, IRAs, and not run up CC debt) will put someone in good financial stead for the future. It doesn't even require much thought or planning.
I agree. Once one has funded their retirement buckets/savings at the level they choose and paid their bills, then the rest is to enjoy or use however one wants. *IF* someone's goal is to get to a financial place where they can retire as early as possible, then that's a choice and there are ways to accelerate to get there, but like everything in life it's a tradeoff.
I personally never had a timeline in mind, hadn't even heard of "FIRE" or retiring early until a couple years ago. I didn't think too hard about the "when," I just knew I needed to sock $$$ away for the future and keep working so I could fund my future and my present.
And here's the good news: just practicing good financial behaviors consistently (like save from every paycheck, invest in 401K, IRAs, and not run up CC debt) will put someone in good financial stead for the future. It doesn't even require much thought or planning.
That’s a good attitude. I have a feeling a lot of people who focus on retiring early really hate their jobs, which is sad. They either made a mistake in their career path (I would argue it’s always a mistake no matter how much you make to trade your time for so long for something you hate, but that’s just my view) or they made a mistake with their current job and should find a new one. It’s easier to find a job you enjoy more than to save so fast for retirement you can retire much earlier. If you enjoy what you do to some extent then you won’t be so focused on just retiring early.
I sometimes wonder what other peoples’ imaginings are there for these early retirements, what would bring them happiness. I’m just curious as someone who is for all and intents and purposes able to retire any second I choose lol but at my age, I’m way too young for that to elicit anything but laughter. If I didn’t have my career to get me excited and to focus on and work hard at, the rest of my hobbies and whatnot just aren’t enough. Don’t get me wrong, I have and love tons of hobbies, but maybe it’s just a matter of “unfinished business” or even that I really enjoy pursuing my career. If you hate your work I guess you’re so focused on hating it presumably anything is preferable even just doing hobbies all day every day. I just think it’s funny because if my goal or dream was early retirement I would have it, but in their dream I find only restlessness and a desire for greater achievement.
the good news is that if a portfolio achieves at least a 90% success rate in firecalc or the fidelity planner , that 90% success rate coupled with the life expectancy stats give very very good odds to us of doing just fine .
most of us will not last 30 years in retirement . about a bit less than 1/2 will not see 90 . so the two stats bolster the success rate pretty much up to 99% .
also seniors don't require inflation adjusting yearly . the things we no longer do or buy as we age defray a lot of increases in costs .
so it is no surprise that 90% of us with at least 50% in equities end with more leftover than we started with .
Could you explain to me how at any point in my life inflation wouldn’t apply? I really don’t get that logic. If you eat food, and you watch cable or movies, or buy clothes, or do anything inflation applies. Some things rise faster than others sure, but everything costs more eventually.
I can’t think of anything I do that would be cheaper in the future. I already have a tiny mortgage, so not that. I already work from home so not gas either. I don’t buy fancy clothes either. I just don’t follow this logic whatsoever. My expenses would only continue to rise.
well the amazons of the world and technology have all brought better , cheaper goods to us .
i used to buy a good pair of Italian shoes a decade ago for my suits for 120 bucks a pair . today i get better quality , well made shoes from china for 70 bucks .
electronics have prices plunging for what you get .
my health insurance plunged in cost going from private health insurance to medicare and a supplement .
many foods are way cheaper . remember buying melons in the winter ? they were so high before we had imports .
i know in our lives and we are retired in nyc we have not needed an inflation adjustment in 3 years now
30 years ago i was thrilled to have a mortgage at 8-1/4% . today that mortgage cost thousands a month less . the biggest factor is as we age we spend in a smile shape .
we spend more early in retirement , then through the middle ages spending plummets . what is no longer bought or done offsets what is still bought or done that went up in price .
later on healthcare costs kick up . so inflation has far less of an effect on seniors than someone raising a family
interesting study by famed researcher michael kitces .
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The very essence of saving for retirement is to accumulate a nest egg sufficiently large enough to replace the retiree’s employment income and sustain a stable standard of living throughout retirement. If the prospective retiree doesn’t have enough saved up to maintain his/her lifestyle for the next several decades, it’s not yet time to retire.
Yet a growing volume of research studying the actual spending habits of retirees is revealing that this traditional approach may not be entirely appropriate after all. Because as it turns out, retirees don’t actually maintain a stable lifestyle in retirement; instead, spending levels tend to decline (in real terms), as the retiree goes from the “Go-Go” early years of retirement, to the “Slow-Go” years, and eventually the “No-Go” years.
In addition, not only does retirement spending slow in the later years, but the underlying composition of the retirement spending begins to shift as well as clients cross through these “age bands”, as spending on housing and entertainment activities fall significantly in the later years, while health care expenses are rising. Still, though, discretionary spending tends to fall by more than health care expenses rise – leading to an overall decrease in retiree spending as retirees proceed through the age bands.
Ultimately, this suggests that rather than merely assuming a stable standard of living throughout retirement, a better approach may be to look more directly at not just the composition of the retiree’s spending goals, but also how those particular types of expenses tend to change as the retiree moves through the different age bands. In other words, projecting retirement expenses using an age-banding approach may allow for a more nuanced and accurate representation of how spending will change over time. Which is important, because the data indicating that retiree expenses tend to fall throughout retirement – especially in some categories – implies that retirees may not actually need to be saving as much, or accumulating as large of a nest egg, to retire in the first place!
Gonna have to believe that and chalk it up to another thing that doesn’t apply to me. We aren’t having kids so that makes some difference but the biggest difference is my net worth continues to increase far beyond my spending habits while I’m young. I will, in time, increase my quality of life to match that. So I think it depends greatly on the person. For me it has been a trend upwards to more and more expensive houses for one, which creates higher expenses on everything from maintenance to property taxes. Since it’s only the 2 of us there wouldn’t be any downsizing either, only hopefully upsizing
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.
