Greetings from the Bay Area, hoping to FIRE by mid-2030s

[2035]

Hi Folks,

I've been visiting this site for awhile and finally joined tonight. This forum is very inspiring for people at all stages of retirement planning and I'm glad to be part of the group.

My stats:

- Single
- 38
- Female
- No kids (except a cat)
- Income: 70,000/yr (but I live in the Bay Area)
- Real Estate: I’m not currently a homeowner, but I’m looking to score a cheap (under $150k) condo in the next year or two. I've been a homeowner in another state, but didn't think I'd ever find something affordable in BA, until recently.
-retirement assets: 401(k): $84,685, Roth: $15,861...which if you do the math means my retirement assets just hit six figures tonight!!!

I'm sure this is a tiny amount to most here and not as much as I should have at my age, but this is a huge psychological milestone for me. Just a few years ago, my head was spinning because my portfolio hit $10K. Most of the people in my family (except for my dad) are terrible with money and broke in their 50s and 60s...so that was my wake-up call a few years ago to start saving!!!

May I ask a question? Although I work for a company that provides a good pension, I'm not factoring SS or a pension in my retirement planning. Has anyone here truly retired on the income from a 401(k) or IRA alone...no inheritances, or windfalls from real estate...just 401(k) and IRA? I just wonder if it's truly possible. I started maxing out both and plan to retire by 60 or 62.

 

[Koolau]

Welcome to the forum 2035. Sounds like you have "seen the light" when it comes to financial independence.

To answer your question. Yes, several on this forum live totally from their retirement savings stash. No pension, no SS (yet or perhaps ever). I'm not one of those folks, but you can search the forum and find several examples. Some will most likely chime in here shortly.

If you do have a promised pension and the promise of SS, I wouldn't totally discount them. As you get closer to your retirement goal, you should have a better idea of how much they will contribute to your retirement income. Certainly, I look at the folks without these sources of income as "heroes"! Still, I'm glad to have these resources available. YMMV

Best of luck.

 

[RockMonkey]

Hey I'm targeting the 2030s too! Specifically January 2032 For me, which is the first month of the year I will turn 55, in late December. Should be a year or so after my youngest is out of college too, so things line up nicely. So I'm a few years younger than you, and have a little more saved up in 401k and Roth IRA. I have no pention, and not planning on SS. If I get some SS payout it will be a bonus (and I bet I will, but I am not making my plan based on it). I expect to live quite comfortably from my savings alone. I do live in a lower cost of living region than you.

Congrats on your 100k! You're lightyears ahead of "normal"!

 

[Aiming_4_55]

Welcome to the forum and congrats on your milestone!

I believe a few folks are living solely on their stash (taxable and non-taxable) without pension or SS in ER. For my planning (I'm 42 now), I use 50% of SS number at age 62 for budgeting purposes (but will hopefully delay until 70). We will have a better idea in the future (10 or 15 years from now) if SS and/or your pension is safe or reduced, meanwhile try to enjoy the ride. Some stuff we just can't control!

 

[obgyn65]

Welcome. It is my understanding that some contributors here have retired on their savings only, with no SS benefit.

May I ask a question? Although I work for a company that provides a good pension, I'm not factoring SS or a pension in my retirement planning. Has anyone here truly retired on the income from a 401(k) or IRA alone...no inheritances, or windfalls from real estate...just 401(k) and IRA? I just wonder if it's truly possible.

 

[MichaelB]

Hi 2035, welcome to the forum. Congratulations on your milestone! You are ahead of the pack and hopefully you can stay there.

May I ask a question? Although I work for a company that provides a good pension, I'm not factoring SS or a pension in my retirement planning. Has anyone here truly retired on the income from a 401(k) or IRA alone...no inheritances, or windfalls from real estate...just 401(k) and IRA? I just wonder if it's truly possible. I started maxing out both and plan to retire by 60 or 62.

Many members here have retired without pensions and only have income from portfolios. Not always IRA or 401(k), because not all are US based, and some had taxable savings and portfolios to supplement their tax deferred savings. The way to financial independence is not windfalls but to spend less than you earn and save the difference.

 

[haha]

- Real Estate: I’m not currently a homeowner, but I’m looking to score a cheap (under $150k) condo in the next year or two. I've been a homeowner in another state, but didn't think I'd ever find something affordable in BA, until recently.

Out of curiosity, where in the Bay Area are you seeing condos<=$150K?

Ha

 

[FIREd]

Out of curiosity, where in the Bay Area are you seeing condos<=$150K?

Ha

Yes, I would be interested too! I will be moving to BA shortly and I am looking for bargains!

 

[Nords]

Yes, I would be interested too! I will be moving to BA shortly and I am looking for bargains!

I'm sure that Jacob Lund Fisker and the other Bay Area EREs have the inside track on cheap real estate...

 

[FIREd]

I'm sure that Jacob Lund Fisker and the other Bay Area EREs have the inside track on cheap real estate...

I am not looking for anything that cheap...

 

[haha]

I am not looking for anything that cheap...

Nor with wheels...

 

[Major Tom]

Out of curiosity, where in the Bay Area are you seeing condos<=$150K?

Ha

Think East Bay. Prices in SF didn't dip that much, but outside The City, prices are a lot lower.

 

[FIREd]

Think East Bay. Prices in SF didn't dip that much, but outside The City, prices are a lot lower.

Bummer. I am looking inside the city.

 

[Major Tom]

Bummer. I am looking inside the city.

Well unless 2035 has some inside information that we don't, I think you're out of luck. I don't think even TIC's are that cheap in The City (using capital T and capital C so as not to offend San Franciscans )

 

[haha]

Think East Bay. Prices in SF didn't dip that much, but outside The City, prices are a lot lower.

Like Hayward, Emeryville? I wonder about Albany, or Oakland up near Alcatraz?

 

[Major Tom]

Like Hayward, Emeryville? I wonder about Albany, or Oakland up near Alcatraz?

Precisely. Oakland in particular gets a bad rap with people who haven't visited, but there are some very nice residential areas there.
The Temescal, Rockridge, Lake Merritt and Piedmont Ave areas are pleasant, for example.

One thing the East Bay has that The City doesn't (unless you're near GG Park) is lots of trees and green.

 

[FIREd]

how's the commute between the East Bay and downtown SF?

 

[Major Tom]

how's the commute between the East Bay and downtown SF?

Depending on where in the EB you're talking about, it can be pretty quick.

I moved from the Outer Sunset area of SF, right by the beach, to Oakland, and found that my commute on BART took the same time.
The combined time of my 20 minute walk to the BART station and the 15 minute BART trip from the 19th Street Oakland BART station to downtown SF was about the same as my previously shorter walk to the MUNI stop and the much slower trundling street car that took me into downtown.

It all depends on which part of The City you're comparing to which part of East Bay.

 

[FIREd]

Depending on where in the EB you're talking about, it can be pretty quick.

I moved from the Outer Sunset area of SF, right by the beach, to Oakland, and found that my commute on BART took the same time.
The combined time of my 20 minute walk to the BART station and the 15 minute BART trip from the 19th Street Oakland BART station to downtown SF was about the same as my previously shorter walk to the MUNI stop and the much slower trundling street car that took me into downtown.

It all depends on which part of The City you're comparing to which part of East Bay.

I see. Thank you. We are currently looking in the South of Market / South Beach / China Basin area. It seems like the most convenient location for us.

 

[eytonxav]

Hi Folks,


May I ask a question? Although I work for a company that provides a good pension, I'm not factoring SS or a pension in my retirement planning. Has anyone here truly retired on the income from a 401(k) or IRA alone...no inheritances, or windfalls from real estate...just 401(k) and IRA? I just wonder if it's truly possible. I started maxing out both and plan to retire by 60 or 62.

Plan to retire this year, and RE could be funded solely from my before tax port, although I suspect SS will be there for me and DW.

By the way, I like your Avi

 

[Major Tom]

I see. Thank you. We are currently looking in the South of Market / South Beach / China Basin area. It seems like the most convenient location for us.

Your commutes from those areas will be pretty quick.

 

[explanade]

Precisely. Oakland in particular gets a bad rap with people who haven't visited, but there are some very nice residential areas there.
The Temescal, Rockridge, Lake Merritt and Piedmont Ave areas are pleasant, for example.

One thing the East Bay has that The City doesn't (unless you're near GG Park) is lots of trees and green.

Rockridge and Piedmont aren't exactly low-income housing areas, are they? Or at least they didn't used to be?

In the '80s, Oakland and East Bay was rising and SF was hurting. Lot of people of means opted to live in the Oakland hills, where you had a great view of SF and the bay. Dot com boom brought a lot of young professionals to the City, as well as startups. Oakland meanwhile stagnated as far as attracting businesses.

SF is definitely overpriced now. Companies like Apple and Google have made it real easy for their employees to live in SF, offering them free shuttles with Wifi, eliminating commuting costs and allowing them to be able to get some work done on the 1-hour ride each way.

$150k condo would have to be way out of the area, like south of Gilroy, way north of San Rafael and east of 580, out towards Stockton.

There are people who will commute 2 hours each way into the City or to Santa Clara Valley.

 

[FIREd]

In the '80s, Oakland and East Bay was rising and SF was hurting. Lot of people of means opted to live in the Oakland hills, where you had a great view of SF and the bay. Dot com boom brought a lot of young professionals to the City, as well as startups. Oakland meanwhile stagnated as far as attracting businesses.

Based on this article from the San Francisco Chronicle, it does look like people of means (millionaires for the purpose of the article) tend to live on the eastern and southern side of the Bay. There are surprisingly few millionaires living in the City itself.

 

[Major Tom]

Rockridge and Piedmont aren't exactly low-income housing areas, are they? Or at least they didn't used to be?

In the '80s, Oakland and East Bay was rising and SF was hurting. Lot of people of means opted to live in the Oakland hills, where you had a great view of SF and the bay. Dot com boom brought a lot of young professionals to the City, as well as startups. Oakland meanwhile stagnated as far as attracting businesses.

SF is definitely overpriced now. Companies like Apple and Google have made it real easy for their employees to live in SF, offering them free shuttles with Wifi, eliminating commuting costs and allowing them to be able to get some work done on the 1-hour ride each way.

$150k condo would have to be way out of the area, like south of Gilroy, way north of San Rafael and east of 580, out towards Stockton.

There are people who will commute 2 hours each way into the City or to Santa Clara Valley.

I haven't checked prices, but a 150K condo in Rockridge or Piedmont might be pushing it, yes. The Adams Point area, which is very close to Lake Merritt has some nice quiet residential streets, and small condos going for around 150K.

If you want a big 1 bedroom or a 2 bedroom condo for that price, you most likely will be looking further out, as you say.

I tend to forget that people often want more than 400 sq feet

 

[explanade]

Crime is more of an issue in Oakland and much of the East Bay. So I can see where Oakland has stagnated in terms of property prices, especially in the flat lands.

Space is an issue in SF. But you might have someone like Larry Ellison with a compound in Woodside but a bachelor pad in the City. Sea Cliff, Nob Hill and Pacific Heights are very expensive.

House Hunters on HGTV have featured a couple of properties in SF proper.