Join Early Retirement Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
[election] Are ER plans still good to go?
Old 11-05-2014, 06:54 AM   #1
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
gauss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,709
[election] Are ER plans still good to go?

My ER plan is based on the assumption of continued access to ACA health plans, if necessary, and the $60,000 per year at age 70 that DW and I have accrued under Social Security. Actually I have discounted SS by 1/3 but I would hate to see that buffer margin disappear so early in the retirement life cycle (we are currently age 49).

Other items possibly at risk could be laws regarding corporate pensions and PBGC.

My current WR is less than 2% but this would change if there are material changes to the fixed income streams/expenses that I have alluded to above.

FWIW, I am viewing this filtered through an INTP personality type.

Thoughts?

-gauss
__________________

__________________
gauss is offline  
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!

Old 11-05-2014, 08:07 AM   #2
Moderator
MichaelB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Rocky Inlets
Posts: 24,456
Mod note: let's avoid a discussion about the partisan outcome of yesterday's elections and what they mean for future elections. How they impact specific topics, like ACA, and how specific changes will impact our early retirement plans, are topics for discussion.
__________________

__________________
MichaelB is online now  
Old 11-05-2014, 08:13 AM   #3
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Seattle
Posts: 2,906
No change to ACA (it would get a veto)

SS will never change significantly (too many old people vote)

Possible that some work may be done now to repatriate corporate profits at a lower tax rate. If they indeed do bring back a trillion or so and some of it goes into the US economy, expect DOW 20,000 shortly after. That might advance your ER plans?
__________________
Fermion is offline  
Old 11-05-2014, 08:41 AM   #4
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
easysurfer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 7,888
The biggies of the ACA like no pre-existing condition exclusion, and keeping someone on the policy until 26 years old aren't gonna change any time soon.
__________________
Have you ever seen a headstone with these words
"If only I had spent more time at work" ... from "Busy Man" sung by Billy Ray Cyrus
easysurfer is offline  
Old 11-05-2014, 08:44 AM   #5
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
brewer12345's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 16,391
The big thing I think is at risk is ACA reforms. My suspicion is that there will be two years of solid gridlock on this, followed by . There may be tweaking around the edges of some provisions, but it would be hard to believe that would not be the case regardless of who won what election.
__________________
"There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest have to pee on the electric fence for themselves."



- Will Rogers
brewer12345 is offline  
Old 11-05-2014, 08:45 AM   #6
Moderator
ziggy29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 15,612
I see no way that ALL of the ACA is repealed. Too many of the provisions of the law are very popular, even as some of them are rather unpopular in many circles.
__________________
"Hey, for every ten dollars, that's another hour that I have to be in the work place. That's an hour of my life. And my life is a very finite thing. I have only 'x' number of hours left before I'm dead. So how do I want to use these hours of my life? Do I want to use them just spending it on more crap and more stuff, or do I want to start getting a handle on it and using my life more intelligently?" -- Joe Dominguez (1938 - 1997)

RIP to Reemy, my avatar dog (2003 - 9/16/2017)
ziggy29 is offline  
Old 11-05-2014, 09:02 AM   #7
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
easysurfer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 7,888
The possible impact, in article form:

Quote:
While Republicans picked up seven seats in the U.S. Senate on Nov. 4 to assume a majority, recent good news surrounding the Affordable Care Act (ACA) will likely safeguard major aspects of it from GOP repeal.

Three of the nation’s largest insurers - Aetna, WellPoint and UnitedHealth Group –recently posted third quarter profits that exceeded Wall Street expectations, and all will be maintaining or adding to plan offerings during the next ACA open enrollment cycle, which begins Nov. 15.

That news, along with the drop in the country’s uninsured rate, could help protect major parts of the ACA from a targeted GOP appeal.

One element of the law that could be challenged is the medical device tax, which has triggered intense lobbying from the healthcare industry and has bipartisan repeal support, according to the Washington Post.

On the Medicaid expansion front, Republicans governors lost in six key states where party changes were possible, leaving the future of expansion in doubt.
GOP gains won’t have much impact on ACA | Managed Healthcare Executive
__________________
Have you ever seen a headstone with these words
"If only I had spent more time at work" ... from "Busy Man" sung by Billy Ray Cyrus
easysurfer is offline  
Old 11-05-2014, 09:16 AM   #8
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Live And Learn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Tampa Bay Area
Posts: 1,689
I am 52 and my WR is 3% so I have less cushion than the OP. Like the OP I have discounted my SS estimate by 1/3rd. I'm not to worried about SS changing much.

Due to the newness of ACA my budget is based on non-subsidized HC but in my heart I was counting on the subsidy to ease my fears associated with my "high" 3% WR.

I struggle with OMY syndrome and potential ACA changes will probably have me searching for a PT job once I ER.
__________________
"For the time being no discipline brings joy, but seems grievous and painful; but afterwards it yields a peaceable fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it." ~
Hebrews 12:11

ER'd in June 2015 at age 52. Initial WR 3%. 50/40/10 (Equity/Bond/Short Term) AA.
Live And Learn is offline  
Old 11-05-2014, 09:50 AM   #9
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 7,408
Hmmm - savings /investing period 1966 to 1993. ER 1993 to present.

Not recommended but I went 12 years with zero health insurance and some expense cutting that went 'beyond frugal.'

So 1966 to 2014 there were some political changes. However hindsight says don't overreact.

heh heh heh - 401k, health insurance in a different state and much cheaper much later post Katrina,ROTH, and index funds(1977?). Now I notice my Target Retirement Fund is shifting more international as time rolls on.

? Politics. Or just slowing adjusting to the times?
__________________
unclemick is offline  
Old 11-05-2014, 10:07 AM   #10
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
pb4uski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Vermont & Sarasota, FL
Posts: 16,432
Quote:
Originally Posted by gauss View Post
My ER plan is based on the assumption of continued access to ACA health plans, if necessary, and the $60,000 per year at age 70 that DW and I have accrued under Social Security. ....Other items possibly at risk could be laws regarding corporate pensions and PBGC.

My current WR is less than 2% but this would change if there are material changes to the fixed income streams/expenses that I have alluded to above.
....
I don't see any substantial changes to ACA. For one thing, the changes to pre-existing conditions is very popular and would not be changed.

I don't see any changes to SS that will affect near-retirees other than perhaps chained-CPI which isn't a really significant change.

Ditto with pensions and the PBGC.

If your WR is less than 2% I don't think you have anything to fret about.
__________________
If something cannot endure laughter.... it cannot endure.
Patience is the art of concealing your impatience.
Slow and steady wins the race.
pb4uski is online now  
Old 11-05-2014, 10:37 AM   #11
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Chuckanut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: West of the Mississippi
Posts: 6,331
Most likely would be a fix to the 30 hour a week problem that keeps many people stuck in part-time jobs earning less than they should. Or having to cobble together two part time jobs to earn a full time income.

As long as they don't do something stupid, like returning to the days of pre-existing condition exclusions, I think improvements will be welcome.
__________________
The worst decisions are usually made in times of anger and impatience.
Chuckanut is offline  
Old 11-05-2014, 10:43 AM   #12
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Senator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Eagan, MN
Posts: 3,050
A few things might change in the medical insurance arena.

Letting insurance companies do business across state lines
Tort reform would save medical costs
Less emphasis on subsidies, more emphasis on controlling costs and increasing competition
__________________
FIRE no later than 7/5/2016 at 56 (done), securing '16 401K match (done), getting '15 401K match (done), LTI Bonus (done), Perf bonus (done), maxing out 401K (done), picking up 1,000 hours to get another year of pension (done), July 1st benefits (vacation day, healthcare) (done), July 4th holiday. 0 days left. (done) OFFICIALLY RETIRED 7/5/2016!!
Senator is offline  
Old 11-05-2014, 11:30 AM   #13
Moderator
MichaelB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Rocky Inlets
Posts: 24,456
I continue to believe the greatest risks to our retirement and early retirement are our own health and ability to enjoy. Very little can happen in DC or elsewhere that comes close in magnitude, most of the legislative things we can react or adapt to. What will catch us mostly unprepared and be more difficult to react to are accidents, terminal disease, and lifestyle choices that lead to debilitating old age.
__________________
MichaelB is online now  
Old 11-05-2014, 11:31 AM   #14
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
REWahoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Texas Hill Country
Posts: 42,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelB View Post
I continue to believe the greatest risks to our retirement and early retirement are our own health and ability to enjoy.
+1

Plus those pesky asteroids...
__________________
Numbers is hard

When I hit 70, it hit back

Retired in 2005 at age 58, no pension
REWahoo is offline  
Old 11-05-2014, 12:03 PM   #15
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Historic Florida
Posts: 1,647
It would be nice if they made it better (ACA that is). To benefit more of the people who need it most rather than the insurance companies. Repeal is futile IMHO, so band together and give us a plan that comparable to other free civilized nations. I wonder what those chances are?
__________________
"Arguing with an Engineer is like rolling in the mud with a pig. Just remember that the pig likes it."
ShokWaveRider is offline  
Old 11-05-2014, 12:58 PM   #16
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,867
Two things in the ACA which were/are in teh courts can be fixed through rather simple legislation:

(1) Make sure that those who signed up for the ACA through the federal (not state) exchanges be eligible for the federal subsidies (i.e. end the pending lawsuits which to me lack any merit to begin with).

(2) Allow those in states which stupidly rejected the Medicaid expansion but would have been eligible for that be allowed to apply through an exchange (federal or state) and receive a federal subsidy anyway (see #1) instead of getting caught the the law's glitch in this area.
__________________
Retired in late 2008 at age 45. Cashed in company stock, bought a lot of shares in a big bond fund and am living nicely off its dividends. IRA, SS, and a pension await me at age 60 and later. No kids, no debts.

"I want my money working for me instead of me working for my money!"
scrabbler1 is offline  
Old 11-05-2014, 01:06 PM   #17
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
David1961's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,076
This is sort of a tangent, but I remember reading in Money Magazine years and years ago where they did a study of how the stock market did depending on which party held the White House and which party controlled Congress, or if Congress was divided. I seem to remember that the best scenario by far for stocks was with a divided government - one party had WH and the other had Congress. Wonder if anyone here can elaborate on this and bring it up to date, as it must have been 20 years ago since I read this.
__________________
David1961 is offline  
Old 11-05-2014, 01:15 PM   #18
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 5,326
The CBO estimates that repealing the ACA would increase the federal deficit by $109 billion:
Letter to the Honorable John Boehner providing an estimate for H.R. 6079, the Repeal of Obamacare Act | Congressional Budget Office

I am ramping up the part-time hours a bit even though our retirement budget has pad already. We could live another 50 years so as long as we don't have to have heart attack inducing jobs, a little extra income isn't going to hurt, may help to keep the brains functioning as well as help cover any unexpected increases in health care costs along the way.

I was not mentally prepared when our COBRA premiums went from around $900 a month in December of the first year to around $2300 January of the next year, so I guess in this crazy health care system in the U.S. maybe I need to plan for premiums to go back that high or even higher again some day.
__________________
daylatedollarshort is offline  
Old 11-05-2014, 01:29 PM   #19
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,702
Quote:
Originally Posted by David1961 View Post
This is sort of a tangent, but I remember reading in Money Magazine years and years ago where they did a study of how the stock market did depending on which party held the White House and which party controlled Congress, or if Congress was divided. I seem to remember that the best scenario by far for stocks was with a divided government - one party had WH and the other had Congress. Wonder if anyone here can elaborate on this and bring it up to date, as it must have been 20 years ago since I read this.
Looking at a 20 year chart of the Dow, I can't really see where one could identify a particular party or congressional combination that had a direct influence.

There's an ebb and flow and short term spikes, but it really seems to be about allocation, a mix of good companies and long term investing vs 'trading'. And let's remember that downturns are 'bargain buying time'.

IMHO
__________________
Living well is the best revenge!
Retired @ 52 in 2005
marko is online now  
Old 11-05-2014, 01:29 PM   #20
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,629
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelB View Post
I continue to believe the greatest risks to our retirement and early retirement are our own health and ability to enjoy. Very little can happen in DC or elsewhere that comes close in magnitude, most of the legislative things we can react or adapt to. What will catch us mostly unprepared and be more difficult to react to are accidents, terminal disease, and lifestyle choices that lead to debilitating old age.
Agree, but most may not realize the extent to which legislation & regulations (Fed/state/local) can significantly affect this. Folks need to stay involved in the process (like VOTING, contacting legislators, etc.). Recent legislative changes to HI have had obvious impacts, good or bad depending on individual circumstances. And many of my older relatives are STILL PO'ed about the Fed's change to start taxing SS benefits 25+ yrs ago. Who knows what health, tax, and other issues could negatively affect our 'generation' of retirees?

Stay thirsty informed my friends
__________________

__________________
ERhoosier is offline  
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Stuff we've all heard before but still good mickj Young Dreamers 1 02-17-2011 04:52 PM
Good ol' fashioned things you still do... freebird5825 Other topics 60 11-28-2009 07:33 PM
Weak dollar good/bad for ER plans trib1 FIRE and Money 7 05-14-2009 10:38 AM
for those still wo*king, are you still putting $ in your 401K? ER_Hopeful Young Dreamers 58 01-14-2009 01:12 PM
Work Less Live More: Is his balanced portfolio still good? Shabber2 FIRE and Money 28 02-03-2008 10:27 AM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:30 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.