|
|
10-15-2010, 07:38 PM
|
#1
|
Gone but not forgotten
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,924
|
cut off point
When calculating your retirement, what age cut off point do you use?
Looking at the TSP calculators I see they go all the way to 115.
I consider 80 the far point.
I really do need to get all finances in order for 5 10 20 years.
__________________
"Knowin' no one nowhere's gonna miss us when we're gone..."
|
|
|
|
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!
|
10-15-2010, 07:51 PM
|
#2
|
Full time employment: Posting here.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 649
|
I use 100 mainly because the parents both turn 90 next year and are still plugging along pretty well.
__________________
"There is no dignity quite so impressive, and no independence quite so important, as living within your means." Calvin Coolidge
|
|
|
10-15-2010, 08:00 PM
|
#3
|
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,525
|
The easiest charts to find are the ones social security administration publishes
Actuarial Life Table
Needless to say...YMMV
|
|
|
10-15-2010, 08:05 PM
|
#4
|
Gone but not forgotten
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sarasota,fl.
Posts: 11,447
|
I use 90 even though I have a 94 year old Mom in amazing health .
|
|
|
10-15-2010, 08:07 PM
|
#5
|
Gone but not forgotten
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,924
|
Most of my relatives didn't make it to/much past 80. That includes a few who killed themselves.
__________________
"Knowin' no one nowhere's gonna miss us when we're gone..."
|
|
|
10-15-2010, 08:18 PM
|
#6
|
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,596
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Khan
Most of my relatives didn't make it to/much past 80. That includes a few who killed themselves.
|
Truth be told, I had an uncle who killed himself. Good Kansas farmer. He had cancer and offed himself with a shotgun. My dear Aunt was never the same. She found him.
In reply go your question, I use 100. I figure we are unlikely to make it that far, and if we do, chances are we won't much care anymore.
__________________
I purr therefore I am.
|
|
|
10-15-2010, 08:22 PM
|
#7
|
Full time employment: Posting here.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 969
|
Looks like I am on the conservative side here: I use 120 which is pretty much the current upper limit of human life span. As (if?) that continues to rise, I will probably adjust my planning accordingly.
Yep, there is a good chance that I will be leaving money on the table when I check out; but, very little chance of outliving my stash this way. (Probably very, very little chance in my case since there hasn't been a man in my family to live past 50 in a couple of generations...all heart attacks.)
__________________
If there's one thing in my life that's missing; It's the time I spend alone
Sailing on the cool and bright clear waters; There's lots of those friendly people
Showin me ways to go; And I never want to lose your inspiration
|
|
|
10-15-2010, 08:48 PM
|
#8
|
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Collin County, TX
Posts: 9,296
|
I posted this poll when I was just a forum pup....way back in Jan, 2007.
http://www.early-retirement.org/foru...ncy-25401.html
I use 90 now...seems I'm the optimistic sort as none of the ladies in my family ever made it over the age of 76.
__________________
There's no need to complicate, our time is short..
|
|
|
10-15-2010, 09:14 PM
|
#9
|
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 47,500
|
Longevity runs in my family. Right now I use age 93-95 in doing my computations.
But what if I live longer? In my eighties (if I live that long) I plan to recompute my withdrawals with a lifespan somewhere around 100-105 so that my nestegg lasts a few years longer.
That may not be necessary, though, depending on how much I actually spend between now and then. We'll see.
__________________
Already we are boldly launched upon the deep; but soon we shall be lost in its unshored, harbourless immensities. - - H. Melville, 1851.
Happily retired since 2009, at age 61. Best years of my life by far!
|
|
|
10-15-2010, 09:29 PM
|
#10
|
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Waimanalo, HI
Posts: 1,881
|
80 doesn't seem very old to me, but then I'm already 68. My mother died two years ago at 89, and I really think I can do better than she did. She walked a lot, but never did other aerobics or weights (to maintain calcium uptake), which I do. And I expect some medical advances in the next 20 years to give me an extra couple of years. 80 is not nearly enough. 96 would be more realistic.
However, I don't have to settle on a figure, personally, since my retirement will be funded mostly by pensions which go on forever.
__________________
Greg (retired in 2010 at age 68, state pension)
|
|
|
10-15-2010, 09:37 PM
|
#11
|
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,171
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Khan
When calculating your retirement, what age cut off point do you use?
Looking at the TSP calculators I see they go all the way to 115.
I consider 80 the far point.
I really do need to get all finances in order for 5 10 20 years.
|
I use 100, because I think there is a reasonable possibility I may live to that age, based on lifespan of close relatives, but I am not worried about running out of money even if I live longer than I expect to. I used an online Monte Carlo simulator to find a portfolio size with a 100% survival rate to age 100, and when I ran the simulations again using age 110 & 120, the portfolio still didn't run out. Now, I need to re-do the simulations using my updated pension estimate.
|
|
|
10-15-2010, 09:42 PM
|
#12
|
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,688
|
I use 100 - I'd rather be unrealistically optimistic about my life expectancy than unrealistically optimistic about my money's life expectancy.
__________________
Budgeting is a skill practised by people who are bad at politics.
|
|
|
10-15-2010, 11:00 PM
|
#13
|
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Oahu
Posts: 26,860
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Khan
That includes a few who killed themselves.
|
Well, that's a different kind of survivor bias than we usually discuss, but it still skews the sample statistics.
You already know how you're going to feel in 10-20 years. Your longevity risk (the "risk" of living longer than your assets) rises slightly with every year you survive from now on. How would you feel if you survived those 10-20 years and realized that you could make it another 20? Do you want to add longevity risk to your list of worries? Or would you rather put a number on your plans that will minimize the risk of outliving your money, allowing you to do more philanthropy today?
I use age 115 or 120, depending on what limit the software allows. Spouse's Ashkenazim lineage has four centenarian grandparents to verify her longevity risk. She says she's going to nag me to stay with her, which will have the same relative time-dilation effect as living to age 115-120.
One option for you would be to see how Social Security at age 62/66/70 affects your longevity risk. Another would be to consider annuitizing what's not already covered.
__________________
*
Co-author (with my daughter) of “Raising Your Money-Savvy Family For Next Generation Financial Independence.”
Author of the book written on E-R.org: "The Military Guide to Financial Independence and Retirement."
I don't spend much time here— please send a PM.
|
|
|
10-15-2010, 11:20 PM
|
#14
|
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,671
|
I used 90 last time I checked. By then I should be in enough discomfort to pull out the stash of pills hidden in the closet. The only risk is that my memory may be gone by then so I need a back up plan for someone to get them and mix up a good batch and open up a good bottle of wine to wash them down.
|
|
|
10-16-2010, 02:02 AM
|
#15
|
Full time employment: Posting here.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 567
|
I plan to live forever pretty much. Age 97 seems to be when the women in my family died before but now grandma lived to 98 so that barrier is broken. Mom is 84 and her doctor says she doesn't have anything to prevent living to 120. She is in better shape now than she was the last few years. Exercising and dieting and looking and feeling great. She is worried because she could only afford assisted living for 12 years if she needed assistant living but she doesn't need it and probably won't for another 10 years or more. Grandma got assisted living at 97 because she broke her leg.
So I plan on much longer than I really think I will live because I don't want to get to 90 and see myself running out of money.
|
|
|
10-16-2010, 02:33 AM
|
#16
|
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 5,105
|
Won't the 'Death Panels' answer the question for us?
__________________
Sometimes death is not as tragic as not knowing how to live. This man knew how to live--and how to make others glad they were living. - Jack Benny at Nat King Cole's funeral
|
|
|
10-16-2010, 02:48 AM
|
#17
|
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: midwestern city
Posts: 4,061
|
I use 95.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Khan
When calculating your retirement, what age cut off point do you use?
|
__________________
Very conservative with investments. Not ER'd yet, 48 years old. Please do not take anything I write or imply as legal, financial or medical advice directed to you. Contact your own financial advisor, healthcare provider, or attorney for financial, medical and legal advice.
|
|
|
10-16-2010, 07:39 AM
|
#18
|
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 26,889
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Htown Harry
The easiest charts to find are the ones social security administration publishes
Actuarial Life Table
Needless to say...YMMV
|
Be aware that those are average life expectancies. Half the people in each group live longer. I liked the one at Vanguard that gave % probabilities of living to X age.
https://personal.vanguard.com/us/ins...etirement-tool
Example - 60 YO Female has 13% chance to reach 95 YO; 31% chance to hit 90 YO.
What's the point of running FIRECALC for a 95% or greater success rate, and then using 50% "success rate" for Life Expectancy?
I voted > 90. Once your WR is good enough for 40 years, it pretty much approaches "forever" status anyway - more or less, no guaranties, etc.
-ERD50
|
|
|
10-16-2010, 10:55 AM
|
#19
|
Administrator
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 40,710
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Khan
When calculating your retirement, what age cut off point do you use?
Looking at the TSP calculators I see they go all the way to 115.
I consider 80 the far point.
I really do need to get all finances in order for 5 10 20 years.
|
It depends on the impact of being wrong.
If you have a higher percentage of indexed pension or annuity income it makes less difference because you’ re less likely to run out of money. If you depend mostly on portfolio, a more conservative number helps avoid the most undesirable outcome.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50
What's the point of running FIRECALC for a 95% or greater success rate, and then using 50% "success rate" for Life Expectancy?
I voted > 90. Once your WR is good enough for 40 years, it pretty much approaches "forever" status anyway - more or less, no guaranties, etc.
|
+1
|
|
|
10-16-2010, 11:24 AM
|
#20
|
Recycles dryer sheets
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Southern California
Posts: 489
|
I use 98. But my parents both passed on from illnesses in their 60s. My older brother is 70 and he still plays a really competitive game of tennis everyday so I expect that my siblings and I may live longer than our parents did.
|
|
|
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
» Recent Threads
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
» Quick Links
|
|
|