How long did you plan for?

rescueme

Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
3,851
Location
Eastern PA
"America's population of centenarians - already the largest in the world - has roughly doubled in the past 20 years to around 72,000 and is projected to at least double again by 2020, perhaps even increase seven-fold, according to the Census Bureau."

My Way News - Number of 100-year-olds is booming in US

It looks like I/DW are going to have to extend our retirement income plan beyond what we currently planned for - at age 100 :LOL: ....
 
Don't think my body can last till 100. 90 is stretching it, I think. I also think that the older generation (those who are 70 -100 years old now) have a better chance of a long and healthy life as they were less exposed to chemicals and pollution in their younger days. Nowadays, we grow and develop in a fast food world with higher pollution in the food we eat, water we drink and air we breathe. So, even if we have good genes, we may not necessarily live longer.
 
My worst case scenario left enough money at age 85 to buy a life annuity. Since I retired at 59, that could be called 26 years, or it could be called "unlimited".
 
I planned to 92 and at that point I'm well below 4% withdrawals. Ready for the new rejuvination process they will develop in 2041.
 
I am planning out to age 97 for DW and I, but we hope we both go poof long, long before then...80 would be plenty.
 
I planned to 92 and at that point I'm well below 4% withdrawals. Ready for the new rejuvination process they will develop in 2041.

Exactly, don't you all want to have your brains frozen so you can live again in a host body:ROFLMAO:
 
My plan goes to 92-95, but if I live to be 85 I will re-do it at that time. Part of this financial plan overhaul could involve spending about 25% on a fixed lifetime annuity, which should be pretty cheap at age 85.

Several in my family have lived to be over 100 already, so although I don't expect a life that long I do need to plan for it.
 
Last edited:
Since it's basically pensions, my plan goes forever, or until a pension plan default, a catastrophic illness, or hyperinflation.
 
Have been using 80. Averaging various relatives results in somewhere between 70 and 75. Of course that includes the suicides and the ones who drank themselves to death.
 
My plan goes to 95, but the funds will last longer depending on the actual return. If the retirement account runs dry, there is still the pension and SS for as long as they last.
 
I am planning for 100. As for freezing my brain, I don't want to freeze all of my brain. That's why I cull the weak cells from the herd. :whistle:
(dw asked about the ones that I don't use!!)
 
100 and hope to make it. Great-granddad was 114 and many others lived close to or over 100.
 
Plan A is to die with more money than I have now. So I would have to say forever. In a worse case scenario Plan B involves peanut butter sandwiches and riding a bicycle.
 
115 because spouse's grandparents all made it to trip digits.

I'm also lazy. I wanted to do the planning right the first time, and I didn't want to have to do it over again at age 98 only to discover that I'd need a Wal-Mart job to tide me over...
 
I used 50 years for planning purposes. Since there isn't much (if any) difference) between 50 years and forever, this might as well be forever.
 
I bought longevity insurance from Smith & Wesson.
 
Nowadays, we grow and develop in a fast food world with higher pollution in the food we eat, water we drink and air we breathe. So, even if we have good genes, we may not necessarily live longer.
Out of interest, can you name a single pollutant, directly hazardous to human heath, which is significantly more prevalent now that it was 40 years ago? As far as I know, major items like the quality of air and river water have never been higher since the Industrial Revolution started than they are now. In the US, it's some time since any rivers caught fire...

Life expectancy continues to rise, and even the obesity epidemic (apply as many quote marks as you like around each of those words) hasn't made a dent in it yet. Saying that everything is polluted, etc, is easy and gets nods, but I'm not aware of it being borne out by any form of scientific research.
 
Out of interest, can you name a single pollutant, directly hazardous to human heath, which is significantly more prevalent now that it was 40 years ago?
Carbon dioxide.
co2growth1.JPG

http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2004/10/12/much-ado-about-nothing/
 
Wow, you all seem to have good genes with relatives living up to or above 100. My family's genes are not too good. My dad who is in early eighties appears to be one of the rare ones to be able to reach this ripe old age. Financially, I should be fine even if I live to 100 as I don't spend much and intend to move back to my country of origin (Malaysia) when I am old and bent and cost of living is comparatively low there.
 

Thanks, Greg. I must admit I am not a statistical person with reports ready but I have read a number of articles relating to new dangers to us for eg. the increasingly amount of fish tainted with melamine. I used to eat fish very often but even the articles I read are recommending we eat less fish in a week to avoid built up of pollutants.
 
Back
Top Bottom