Poll: How would you feel with $90k/year in retirement?

[catccc]

I didn't answer the poll because I really feel there are two parts to this. the $90K is part one. The age 60 is the other.

$90K would be plenty for us to live on in retirement, but there is no way I'm waiting until 60 to retire. (Currently 33, hoping to retire by 48)

[Richard4444]

Just throwing in that a $90,000 annual 'income' without a COLA for a 65 year old male requires a $1,368,014 SPIA .... just for fun.

[Animorph]

While I answered that I'd be disappointed, I have to think that it would be a well above average retirement income, especially if SS is added. Hard to complain about that.

[kyounge1956]

Quote:

Originally Posted by catccc I didn't answer the poll because I really feel there are two parts to this. the $90K is part one. The age 60 is the other. $90K would be plenty for us to live on in retirement, but there is no way I'm waiting until 60 to retire. (Currently 33, hoping to retire by 48)

Quote:

Originally Posted by rbmrtn At current expenses... way more than I need. I just would not want to wait till 60 to get out, I left younger with a lot less....

+1
I didn't vote in the poll. $90K/year is more than I made when working full time, and if "in today's dollars" means this is a COLA'd income, it's way more than I would need in retirement.

But I'm planning to retire at 57 and I don't think I'd be willing to work for another 3 years, even if at the end of it I'd get $90K with a COLA.

[Major Tom]

I'm curious as to why you chose the figure of 90K? Why not 120K, 60K, 30K or 150K? Is it the figure that you think you might be able to retire on when you reach 60, and the poll is a way of gauging how many others are in a similar position to you?

I hope I don't come across as grouchy (which is not the intention) - was merely wondering why you chose that figure.

I agree with catccc in that I wouldn't want to wait until 60 to retire. 90K is more than 5 times what I'm living on now (in the Bay Area too), so I'd be ecstatic with that as an income. I stopped working at about 47. If I'd had a choice to continue working, I'd probably work until my mid 50's and retire on more than I have now, but less than 90K/year.

However, as we've seen in this thread, there are all sorts of people with all sort of income requirements, so you're getting a whole range of answers, from "It's way more than I need" to "Not on your Nelly!" Actually, I don't think I've seen a "Not on your Nelly" answer yet, though I did see a few indicating that 90K would be a bit tight for them.

[NW-Bound]

Beyond basic food and housing needs, most of what people spend on are not truly necessary. I can spend quite a bit less than what I do now (which is less than 90K), if I have to. But I can easily spend 100x or 1000x more, as that takes no skills.

What most people spend in retirement is a continuation of their lifestyle when they were working. And that depends on their working income. It's that simple.

[Major Tom]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NW-Bound But I can easily spend 100x or 1000x more, as that takes no skills.

A nicer RV and more RV'ing stuff

Yes, I could certainly use the extra income

[NW-Bound]

A 100X factor, if applied to RV shopping, would mean a multi-million-dollar RV. I guess someone somewhere makes one like that, else I would be able to order a custom one, I am sure. As I said, spending money is quite easy, and I can also get used to having people kowtow to me.

On the other hand, as I have been a pedestrian all my life, I feel uneasy to even hire a house cleaner as it feels, well, just too imperialistic for lack of a better word.

PS. Yes, I would definitely need to have one custom made, because I would still like a small RV and no one makes a super expensive one that is so small. Solid-gold faucets and cabinet handles throughout?

[Alan]

For us $90k/year, inclusive of taxes but exclusive of SS, at age 55 provides an excellent lifestyle with lots of travel money so financial set-backs would cause a cut back on the travel budget.

I'm also assuming that $90k /year is COLA'ed, the COLA being taken care of by a SWR. I have non-COLA'ed pensions that bring in somewhat less than $90k, the difference being made up by nest egg dividends.

[Major Tom]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NW-Bound As I have been a pedestrian all my life, I feel uneasy to even hire a house cleaner as it feels, well, just too imperialistic for lack of a better word.

I'm drifting completely off-topic with this, but this is exactly the way I feel too. I know people of all income levels who hire cleaners - even at the very low end of the range, but I've always felt that if I make a mess, it's only right that I should clean it up. Somehow, I just can't bring myself to let anyone else clean up after me.

Glad I'm not the only person who feels that way.

[W2R]

For a single person living in the South with a modest paid off home, like me, I think it is impossible to spend even half that much without traveling or moving to a larger home.

[W2R]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Major Tom I'm drifting completely off-topic with this, but this is exactly the way I feel too. I know people of all income levels who hire cleaners - even at the very low end of the range, but I've always felt that if I make a mess, it's only right that I should clean it up. Somehow, I just can't bring myself to let anyone else clean up after me. Glad I'm not the only person who feels that way.

I just like my privacy too much to hire someone to clean my house. However, I do have someone to help with the mowing outside, because I can't do it any more. So I suppose that maybe at some point I will have to relent and hire a housekeeper (or else adjust my definition of "clean").

[Lsbcal]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelB All for me or do I have to share with DW?

Ask her and get back to us on the answer.

[NW-Bound]

I do not have problems with hiring people to trim trees or to do work on my homes that I could not do. But to have people to wait on me hand and foot feels uncomfortable to me. House cleaning is somewhat in the gray area, for me anyway.

But back on spending, our full-time income would allow us to spend in the low 6-figure when we were working, but we did not. It is the LBYM lifestyle that allowed us to ER.

And I am grateful that our cut-back level is still more than what other people spend. That makes me believe that we should be able to weather any hardship in the future (not that I would want it to realize, of course). Hence, I have been "party'ing". Me worry? Maybe I should "kick it up a notch", like Emeril likes to say, and spend more.

But, but, but that 1st class ticket price hurts like crazy, I do not know if I could stand it. Hence, have not had one paid out of pocket yet. I would need my portfolio to grow much more.

[Zathras]

The money is good, but there is no way I would wait till 60

[Bestwifeever]

off topic--We have had a "cleaning lady" (Chicago term) off and on through the years. Right now we are on, every two weeks, $75 a visit. Our small house has always been tidy (no personal messes for her to take care of) but it is really clean only after Gina's been here (hello dusted light bulbs). For us it is worth every penny and she would say the same as it is her profession.

[Midpack]

Quote:

Originally Posted by W2R For a single person living in the South with a modest paid off home, like me, I think it is impossible to spend even half that much without traveling or moving to a larger home.

Just eat at Commander's Palace (and the like) every night, you'll be well on your way to spending $90K...

[Andre1969]

Quote:

Originally Posted by catccc I didn't answer the poll because I really feel there are two parts to this. the $90K is part one. The age 60 is the other. $90K would be plenty for us to live on in retirement, but there is no way I'm waiting until 60 to retire. (Currently 33, hoping to retire by 48)

Yeah, that's my sentiment, too. Personally, I'd be happy with a $90K pension in today's dollars, but definitely do NOT want to wait until I'm 60 to retire! I'm currently 42, thinking about going out around 47, depending on what the economy/stock market does.

FWIW, FireCalc tells me that at the rate I'm going, if I work til age 60 I'd have a 98.8% change of being able to live on 90K per year, anyway. And that's assuming zero for SS.

[W2R]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Midpack Just eat at Commander's Palace (and the like) every night, you'll be well on your way to spending $90K...

Nope, I'd be dead as a doornail if I ate food that rich every night. I have to restrict myself to one night a year at my favorite restaurant here. I love the food here, don't get me wrong, but in moderation! Living here is so different from being on a short vacation. Locals don't eat at Commander's every night, bare our breasts at Mardi Gras, or routinely get drunk on Bourbon Street.

Besides, why would I want to pay through the nose like a tourist, when I live here and know lots of places to eat great New Orleans food that I like better and that cost less? Tourist restaurants are in business to raid tourists' wallets, IMO.

[gauss]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NW-Bound What most people spend in retirement is a continuation of their lifestyle when they were working. And that depends on their working income. It's that simple.

And, of course, their working savings rate for the case of serious LBYM.