Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Cut-Throat
I have suggested to Dory that a 'safety Valve' such as this could be built into FireCalc. Like Cut Spending X% after a Y% Market Downyear. Increase X% Spending after a Y% Market Upyear. I'll bet the SWR could be increased substaintially!
|
I am wondering about a conceptual discrepancy when Firecalc is combined with a longevity calculator.
As several have mentioned, Firecalc is a worst case planning tool, not an estimating tool. For those new to these discussions, let me use an analogy:
If someone were to claim an ability to predict the temperature in St Louis for August 13, 2007, he would universally be recognized as a charlatan. But if someone were to say that, based on recorded history, you could be safe leaving your heavy winter clothing at home that day -- everyone would see that as a blinding flash of the obvious.
Could there be a new ice age? Sure. But not too likely.
THAT kind of prediction is what Firecalc and Intercst's spreadsheets offer.
Now, turn to longevity. Now we are tring to predict a lifespan. Just as problematic -- everyone is different, medical advances, etc. *Besides, there is good reason to believe that the E-Rs will outlive their otherwise identical employed counterparts, for lots of reasons which can be explored in a separate thread.
So to stay with the model Firecalc uses, we'd have to incorporate a"worst case" *longevity calculator that says something along the lines of "there's negligible chances of you living beyond age 110."
I think that most of the longevity factors that are used in most models will affect the mean lifespan, but because of the high variance, will be pretty useless for predicting individual cases.
Besides... You have to understand that the bulk of Firecalc was built while I was still working, and thus had plenty of time to do such things.
All my spare time has vanished since I retired. *To make major changes now would require that I go back to work, so I'd have more free time! 
Linear Mode
