Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 05-23-2013, 09:14 AM   #41
Moderator
ziggy29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 15,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by nun View Post
Well for me it would be zero as I have pension, SS and rent that will cover my expenses. Most people would spend cash, but the WR from the equities/bond portion would be zero. It might be a touch semantic as money would still be coming out of the overall portfolio.
See, that changes things for you. You can afford to be extremely conservative in your approach to tapping your portfolio. An increasing number of younger folks looking to retire early do not have the good fortune of a large pension. They need to consider taking larger bites out each year.
__________________

__________________
"Hey, for every ten dollars, that's another hour that I have to be in the work place. That's an hour of my life. And my life is a very finite thing. I have only 'x' number of hours left before I'm dead. So how do I want to use these hours of my life? Do I want to use them just spending it on more crap and more stuff, or do I want to start getting a handle on it and using my life more intelligently?" -- Joe Dominguez (1938 - 1997)

RIP to Reemy, my avatar dog (2003 - 9/16/2017)
ziggy29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 05-23-2013, 09:27 AM   #42
Recycles dryer sheets
RISP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 307
Quote:
Well for me it would be zero as I have pension, SS and rent that will cover my expenses. Most people would spend cash, but the WR from the equities/bond portion would be zero. It might be a touch semantic as money would still be coming out of the overall portfolio.
I agree with your last sentence.
Of course you are free to define "SWR" however you want. As you surely know, the generally accepted definition is something along the lines of "The quantity of money, expressed as a percentage of the initial investment, which can be withdrawn per year for a given quantity of time, including adjustments for inflation, and not lead to portfolio failure" [quoted from Safe Withdrawal Rates - Bogleheads].
__________________

__________________
RISP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2013, 09:36 AM   #43
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,255
Quote:
Originally Posted by nun View Post
Well for me it would be zero as I have pension, SS and rent that will cover my expenses. Most people would spend cash, but the WR from the equities/bond portion would be zero. It might be a touch semantic as money would still be coming out of the overall portfolio.
It's not semantics at all. Cash is part of the portfolio.

Now, if you spend only pension/SS or other income, your portfolio WD is zero, but not if you spend cash. A WD is a WD, whether from equities or fixed (maybe as part of re balancing), from dividends, interest, or cash.

-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2013, 10:32 AM   #44
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 11,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by ziggy29 View Post
See, that changes things for you. You can afford to be extremely conservative in your approach to tapping your portfolio.
It changes the way things appear for the retiree, I'm not sure it changes the situation much. If the economy is in the tank and bonds, equities, and tax receipts aren't keeping up with inflation, then the entities providing that pension, SS, etc will be eating into their own reserves. If it goes on long enough, something has to give, just like if it were in an individual's own account. The retiree could pretend that everything is fine and he/she won't be irritated by seeing those pesky declining account balances, but pulling down the windowshades won't stop the tornado from hitting your house.
There are some advantages to the pooled risk and institutional backing of DBs and pensions, and there are some advantages to having control over the "pot" and the rate at which it is drawn down when things aren't going well. IMO, having a mix (diversification . . . as we preach in other areas) provides some flexibility and complementary characteristics that are potentially very important.
__________________
"Freedom begins when you tell Mrs. Grundy to go fly a kite." - R. Heinlein
samclem is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2013, 10:53 AM   #45
Moderator
ziggy29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 15,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by samclem View Post
There are some advantages to the pooled risk and institutional backing of DBs and pensions, and there are some advantages to having control over the "pot" and the rate at which it is drawn down when things aren't going well. IMO, having a mix (diversification . . . as we preach in other areas) provides some flexibility and complementary characteristics that are potentially very important.
Agreed, which is why I have long advocated for a FERS-style retirement as a good model for the rest of us in terms of the "three legged stool" of providing for retirement. The only problem is that we'd have to get past the problem with DB pension plans being nearly worthless when it's hard to keep a job for more than 10 years...
__________________
"Hey, for every ten dollars, that's another hour that I have to be in the work place. That's an hour of my life. And my life is a very finite thing. I have only 'x' number of hours left before I'm dead. So how do I want to use these hours of my life? Do I want to use them just spending it on more crap and more stuff, or do I want to start getting a handle on it and using my life more intelligently?" -- Joe Dominguez (1938 - 1997)

RIP to Reemy, my avatar dog (2003 - 9/16/2017)
ziggy29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2013, 11:20 AM   #46
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 11,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by ziggy29 View Post
The only problem is that we'd have to get past the problem with DB pension plans being nearly worthless when it's hard to keep a job for more than 10 years...
That's one reason I wonder if a resurgence in DB plan offerings would be such a wonderful thing. There's lots of talk of how great things used to be with the wonderful DB plans, but they never covered most people and the US economy has changed. Many workers will want to stick with DC plans for the right reasons ("If I get canned or hate this place I'll take the dough and scoot") and the "wrong" reasons ("Woo-hoo! Free matching funds! When I leave this place in a year I can spend that money like I did the last time!"). And any "efficiencies" employers get by using DB plans likely come from money saved when workers leave/get laid off/downsized before getting fully vested. That doesn't seem like such a good thing to me.
__________________
"Freedom begins when you tell Mrs. Grundy to go fly a kite." - R. Heinlein
samclem is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2013, 01:29 PM   #47
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
nun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,834
Quote:
Originally Posted by ziggy29 View Post
See, that changes things for you. You can afford to be extremely conservative in your approach to tapping your portfolio. An increasing number of younger folks looking to retire early do not have the good fortune of a large pension. They need to consider taking larger bites out each year.
I'm lucky to have a pension, but it will only be $5k a year and there's no COLA. My ability to fund retirement post 66 from none portfolio sources will come from having the small pension, rental income and two SS checks. I will have to use my portfolio until 66 and my WR should be 2.5%. My goal is to generate that from dividends, interest and gains and reinvest any excess. If my returns in any year are negative I can increase my rental income, go back to work, economize or spend cash from the portfolio. I will try to minimize the spending from the portfolio in down years.

I really wish that Prudent Withdrawal Rate was used rather than Safe Withdrawal Rate as I think many retirees believe that "4% SWR" blindly applied to the portfolio will see them ok, if they have ever even heard of SWR.
__________________
“So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.”

Current AA: 65% Equity Funds / 20% Bonds / 7% Stable Value /3% Cash / 5% TIAA Traditional
Retired Mar 2014 at age 52, target WR: 0.0%,
Income from pension and rent
nun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2013, 03:04 PM   #48
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Midpack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 11,959
Quote:
Originally Posted by nun View Post
I really wish that Prudent Withdrawal Rate was used rather than Safe Withdrawal Rate as I think many retirees believe that "4% SWR" blindly applied to the portfolio will see them ok, if they have ever even heard of SWR.
Semantics, but you could write William Bengen, the Trinity Study team and the many others that coined the term to define:

"The quantity of money, expressed as a percentage of the initial investment, which can be withdrawn per year for a given quantity of time, including adjustments for inflation, and not lead to portfolio failure; failure being defined as a 95% probability of depletion to zero at any time within the specified period. Initial methods utilized historical data to statically determine what would have been safe given the actual results that past portfolios would have generated with the variables given.

The word planning is emphasized because of the great uncertainties in the stock and bond markets. Mid-course corrections likely will be required, with the actual dollar amounts withdrawn adjusted downward or upward relative to the plan. The investor needs to keep in mind that selection of a withdrawal rate is not a matter of contract but rather a matter of planning."

If they had chosen to call it PWR, I have no doubt we'd have posts criticizing the choice of the word "prudent"...
__________________
No one agrees with other people's opinions; they merely agree with their own opinions -- expressed by somebody else. Sydney Tremayne
Retired Jun 2011 at age 57

Target AA: 60% equity funds / 35% bond funds / 5% cash
Target WR: Approx 2.5% Approx 20% SI (secure income, SS only)
Midpack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2013, 03:32 PM   #49
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
nun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,834
Quote:
Originally Posted by Midpack View Post
Semantics, but you could write William Bengen, the Trinity Study team and the many others that coined the term

..........

If they had chosen to call it PWR, I have no doubt we'd have posts criticizing the choice of the word "prudent"...
Not semantics as "Prudent" is very different from "Safe". As long as the Trinity et al Safe WR is used for historical portfolios I'm ok with it, but when applying it to the future it seems a bit ridiculous to me as there's an air of certainly in using a term like Safe and one thing I know for sure is that I don't know what will happen in the future. Yes the caveats are there and we all know them, but the headline use of "SWR" often omits them and leads people to an incomplete understanding. Prudent gets across the uncertainty of future returns and allows for the possibility of failure without needing the caveats, Safe is just too definite an adjective for such an uncertain subject as future retirement income.
__________________
“So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.”

Current AA: 65% Equity Funds / 20% Bonds / 7% Stable Value /3% Cash / 5% TIAA Traditional
Retired Mar 2014 at age 52, target WR: 0.0%,
Income from pension and rent
nun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2013, 09:25 PM   #50
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
haha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Hooverville
Posts: 22,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
It's not semantics at all. Cash is part of the portfolio.

-ERD50
Apparently, he is speaking of some other type of cash that has nothing to do with portfolio. At least on Tuesdays.

Ha
__________________
"As a general rule, the more dangerous or inappropriate a conversation, the more interesting it is."-Scott Adams
haha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2013, 11:38 PM   #51
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,255
Quote:
Originally Posted by haha View Post
Apparently, he is speaking of some other type of cash that has nothing to do with portfolio. At least on Tuesdays.

Ha
Ahhh, the 'Tuesday Cash' stash. Now I understand. As in "I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today".

-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2013, 05:58 AM   #52
Recycles dryer sheets
Richard4444's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: South Florida
Posts: 402
Well, here's a different thought: I am 63. 25% is in IRA. At 65 I am considering beginning a ladder of SPIAs of 5% annually until 70, then laddering IRA SPIA's for 5 years beginning at 70. So that would account for 50% being in fixed instruments. The other 50% would be an AA TBD. This would 'guarantee' a forever income flow of 50% and the rest for inflation needs, emergencies, and beneficiaries.
__________________
Richard4444 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2013, 02:32 PM   #53
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,407
Schwab says to start out at 4% and adjust:

Is the 4% Rule Still Appropriate?

BTW, is 4% including Social Security and all your different accounts, IRA as well as taxable accounts, 401k and cash?

Do you include home equity as well?

One thing I have to do before thinking of ER is to consolidate my accounts. Individual stocks here and there, mutual funds at different brokerages, etc.
__________________
explanade is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2013, 02:36 PM   #54
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
braumeister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Northern Kentucky
Posts: 8,582
Quote:
Originally Posted by explanade View Post
BTW, is 4% including Social Security and all your different accounts, IRA as well as taxable accounts, 401k and cash?

Do you include home equity as well?
The standard 4% (or whatever WR you choose to use) is based on the starting value of your investment portfolio, nothing else.

Assuming you have a very good handle on what your retirement expenses will be, you can use your WR, along with any other sources of income (SS, pensions, annuities, etc.) to get an idea of whether your expenses will be covered.
__________________
braumeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2013, 02:55 PM   #55
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
mickeyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: South Texas~29N/98W
Posts: 5,880
Quote:
Originally Posted by explanade View Post
Schwab says to start out at 4% and adjust:

Is the 4% Rule Still Appropriate?

BTW, is 4% including Social Security and all your different accounts, IRA as well as taxable accounts, 401k and cash?

Do you include home equity as well?

One thing I have to do before thinking of ER is to consolidate my accounts. Individual stocks here and there, mutual funds at different brokerages, etc.

I have always assumed that SWR was refering to my entire portfolio of investments but not my home or income streams (SS, DB). In my case most of my investments are in my IRA/Roth.
__________________
Part-Owner of Texas

Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. Groucho Marx

In dire need of: faster horses, younger woman, older whiskey, more money.
mickeyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2013, 12:50 AM   #56
Recycles dryer sheets
galeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Alajuela, Costa Rica
Posts: 220
We use a 3% AWR that needs to last us 40 years. FireCalc says we can spend 3.3% of port and still have a success rate of 100%.
__________________
galeno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2013, 06:26 AM   #57
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Huston55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: The Bay Area
Posts: 1,800
Quote:
Originally Posted by galeno View Post
We use a 3% AWR that needs to last us 40 years. FireCalc says we can spend 3.3% of port and still have a success rate of 100%.
Are you still using the same AA and withdrawal method (6 yrs of cash, etc)?

Would like to hear how it's worked for you the past 5+ yrs.
__________________

__________________
You may be whatever you resolve to be.
Huston55 is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
annuities, withdrawals


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:10 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.