Americans Retiring Early, Then Running Out of Money.

[Fermion]

When you are retired you don't need to commute, you don't need to dress up, and you can usually travel cheaper because it doesn't matter if you stay on weekdays instead of weekends.

The only reason expenses should go up is if you let/want them to go up. Especially now that healthcare is mostly taken out of the equation with subsidized premiums.

[Cassie]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 48Fire I don't think you need a lot of detail if you are sure you are spending a lot less than you expect in ER income including the 4 % SWD. In my case it was not a slam dunk, so I need to know where it is all going, and what I could do if I need to adjust discretionary expenses. For example, second home would be first to go. It is high discretionary.

My retirement income will be from my pension which will cover expenses, savings, emergency fund, etc. I won't be doing the 4% SWD. I think the prospective budget I've prepared shows a good snap shot. I meet with HR Tuesday to begin the process.....yippee! Thanks 48Fire & W2R for the responses.

[Retire Soon]

I think Genworth may be trying to hide something. Why did they not disclose the actual number of retirees? Instead they lumped them together with pre-retirees.

Genworth states they used: "A quantitative online survey of 1,340 retired consumers and pre-retirees"

Could it be that they interviewed 1,240 pre-retirees and 100 retired consumers? Why did they fail to differentiate between the two?

Also, if it was an "online survey" does the target group actually represent a cross-section of our population? i.e, How did they choose who would participate in the study?

[48Fire]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cassie My retirement income will be from my pension which will cover expenses, savings, emergency fund, etc. I won't be doing the 4% SWD. I think the prospective budget I've prepared shows a good snap shot. I meet with HR Tuesday to begin the process.....yippee! Thanks 48Fire & W2R for the responses.

Good luck!

[photoguy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bondi688 The article cited this Genworth study

It's not really a study but rather an annuity sales brochure.

[Katsmeow]

This "study" is terrible. Basically the main point is that 77% of retirees found that general living expenses went up after retirement. There is no indication of how much they went up. In fact, the article seems to be including ordinary increases due to inflation. I mean that doesn't seem like much of a newsflash. Also living expenses went up relative to what? Pre-retirement overall expenses, some specific pre-retirement expenses or more than "expected" expenses or was it more than expenses where in Year 1 of retirement.

To put it in perspective, DH retired in 2010. Our overall expenses are way less than they were pre-retirement (less than half) but at the same time some general living expenses have increased and overall the increase is a little more than I would have expected. That said, none of it has jeopardized our retirement in the least particularly given that our investments have performed far better than we anticipated.

The other funny thing is it said that 91% of people with an annuity had a positive or neutral opinion about annuities. That isn't surprising but it showed that over 50% had only a neutral opinion which seems kind of bad given that these are people who actually have annuities.... NOt a ringing endorsement.

[Malcolm2]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tinlizzy My helper one year was "retired". He retired at 46 or so with $200K in savings - still had a teenage daughter and a mortgage and for some reason thought that was enough money. When he worked with me he was about 50 and had almost depleted his savings and was working part-time jobs trying to hang onto his retirement. He had none of the savings invested because he didn't trust the stock market. The post office was evil. He could quote FOX news and Rush Limbaugh and women like me were the reason good men couldn't get decent jobs. He showed up to work everyday but it was the longest month of my life.

I was with you until the media reference. That sounded more like it came out of the few folks that listen to MSNBC.

I had a similar employee. Complained about the unfairness of the 'system' and how low his SS would be, thought the government should do more for him and complained about high pay for executives . Left at exactly 5 PM every day.
In my experience success is inversely related to how much one complains about anything.

[2B]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malcolm2 I was with you until the media reference. That sounded more like it came out of the few folks that listen to MSNBC. I had a similar employee. Complained about the unfairness of the 'system' and how low his SS would be, thought the government should do more for him and complained about high pay for executives . Left at exactly 5 PM every day. In my experience success is inversely related to how much one complains about anything.

I've had both types of employees. What's fun is watching two people firmly committed to being the "victim" fighting over their respective ideologies. In reality we're all victimized by the system in one way or another so they are both right. It comes down to making do with what you have available and moving forward as best you can. People have prospered in all forms of horrible situations. Life is not, has never been and will certainly not ever be "fair."

[Walt34]

Quote:

Originally Posted by daylatedollarshort I just try to be a sympathetic listener and not give advice, but I fundamentally do not understand the core lifestyle decisions of many of the people around me. If I was worried about my financial future I wouldn't be going on a cruise or be buying 10 more pairs of shoes because they were on sale.

That's always be incomprehensible to me as well.

DW's brother has a good job at a power plant, low six figures with overtime, but now there is a possibility that the plant will be closed next year because it is coal-fired. Eleven years ago his total debt was ~$90k for a mortgage and that was it. Then he married "Spendarina", a waitress, and their total debt is now north of $300k.

If the plant closes and he can't find an equivalent income they will probably lose everything. There is not a shade of a doubt in my mind that they will do their normal $3k-$4k vacation this summer and several three or four day shorter ones during the year.

DW and I would be eating rice & beans and saving every nickel we could.

Go figure.

[HFWR]

Quote:

In my experience success is inversely related to how much one complains about anything.

Now you tell me...

[2B]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Walt34 That's always be incomprehensible to me as well. DW's brother has a good job at a power plant, low six figures with overtime, but now there is a possibility that the plant will be closed next year because it is coal-fired. Eleven years ago his total debt was ~$90k for a mortgage and that was it. Then he married "Spendarina", a waitress, and their total debt is now north of $300k. If the plant closes and he can't find an equivalent income they will probably lose everything. There is not a shade of a doubt in my mind that they will do their normal $3k-$4k vacation this summer and several three or four day shorter ones during the year. DW and I would be eating rice & beans and saving every nickel we could. Go figure.

I've had lots of experience in seeing what happens to hourly and salaried people in plant staffing reductions. The professional staff usually struggle a bit but generally find reasonably comparable positions. Maintenance crafts have the opportunity to move somewhere else and continue with their craft. Operators are the bottom of the heap and find it nearly impossible to move to other operating positions. Most companies shy away from experienced operators with more than a few years experience. Companies like to train their own. Salaried supervisors that came up through the ranks are pretty much in the same boat as the people they supervised.

I wish your DW's brother all the luck but he needs to look into where he will go from here. He and Spendarina will either learn to live with reality or reality will teach them.

What I've always gotten a kick out of is that the hourly people, despite making serious money, consider themselves oppressed working class people. I've never been able to convince them that at the money they are making they are in at least the top 25% of wage earners. If their spouse works, they could even be in the top 10%. They seem to refuse to accept how good they have it.

[HFWR]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Walt34 DW and I would be eating rice & beans and saving every nickel we could. Go figure.

Indeed...

[Brooks Saddle]

I read an article by Scott Burns recently on his web-site about an interview he did with a PHD researcher at Blackrock doing research on retirement percentages to preretirement income needed. The research indicated that most people can retire on 60 to 75% of their preretirement income. Some were getting by on 50% & doing just fine. It was interesting to read.

[2B]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brooks Saddle I read an article by Scott Burns recently on his web-site about an interview he did with a PHD researcher at Blackrock doing research on retirement percentages to preretirement income needed. The research indicated that most people can retire on 60 to 75% of their preretirement income. Some were getting by on 50% & doing just fine. It was interesting to read.

If you are a married, wage-slave making $100K and saving 15% (pretax), you are losing just over $17K in federal income, SS and medicare taxes. Of this, about $11K of income covers the SS, medicare and income tax on these taxes. Without savings and the $11K for the double taxation, a taxable income of only $$71.6K is required to net the same $64.8K the orignal $100K income netted. That sounds like living on 70% of your pre-retirement income would not require any adjustments. Paying for health care could increase it and SS would reduce it. Eliminating employment related expenses would also reduce it.

[NW-Bound]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2B ... What I've always gotten a kick out of is that the hourly people, despite making serious money, consider themselves oppressed working class people. I've never been able to convince them that at the money they are making they are in at least the top 25% of wage earners. If their spouse works, they could even be in the top 10%. They seem to refuse to accept how good they have it.

I wonder if the workers' feeling was because the perception that exempt or professional people make so much more than they do, which may not be true. Or in the case that the latter do make a lot more, that the higher pay was undeserved?

[Moneygrubber]

Quote:

Originally Posted by daylatedollarshort So many of us here are just wired completely differently than the population in general. I talk to people who know they will have major income cuts before too long for one reason or another - forced retirement, layoff, losing child support - but they are living pay check to pay check now or close to it and putting shopping sprees and vacations on credit cards, instead of ramping down the expenses and preparing for the future. I just try to be a sympathetic listener and not give advice, but I fundamentally do not understand the core lifestyle decisions of many of the people around me. If I was worried about my financial future I wouldn't be going on a cruise or be buying 10 more pairs of shoes because they were on sale. I have posted this before, but for those that have not viewed it yet this is a cute article and video from The Onion - Chipmunk's Plan for the Future Better Crafted Than 8 out of 10 Americans Chipmunk "Researchers also repeatedly witnessed the small quadruped stuffing its cheeks with seeds and nuts and depositing them in one of its subterranean chambers for consumption during winter, displaying an inclination toward saving resources for the future that had “almost no behavioral equivalent” among U.S. citizens."

jj

I hear you and feel the same way, biting my tongue until it bleeds sometimes!

[gcgang]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Walt34 DW and I would be eating rice & beans and saving every nickel we could. Go figure.

I like rice and beans.

I remember in the early 1980's, buying a tub of liver for less than a buck, an onion and a couple of potatoes and fed myself for about $0.50 per meal, living in my furnished apartment where I could walk to work, while I saved up a down payment on a house.

Never understood why anyone would amass huge credit card debt.

[dtbach]

I like rice and beans also! When I was in college I lived on macaroni and hot dogs. I could go 2 days on a box of Kraft macaroni and a 8 pack of Oscar Meyer dogs. Plus it was a one pot meal as I tossed the dogs into the water as it was boiling!!

Funny that I was able to put myself through college with no debt and ate well at the same time. Well, perhaps not the latter LOL. . .

[48Fire]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dtbach I like rice and beans also! When I was in college I lived on macaroni and hot dogs. I could go 2 days on a box of Kraft macaroni and a 8 pack of Oscar Meyer dogs. Plus it was a one pot meal as I tossed the dogs into the water as it was boiling!! Funny that I was able to put myself through college with no debt and ate well at the same time. Well, perhaps not the latter LOL. . .

When I first lived on my own, I did an estimate for P & J sandwich at 7 cents each.

[Debinnov a]

gcgang

Ugh... a tub of liver - now I love my liver and onions as much as the next person (especially with crispy bacon) but a "tub" and eating it often - I'm feeling a bit queasy.... LOL

Deb