As I retired this year and less focused on financials of saving, this running out of time idea has begun to come more and more to the forefront. I don't think the idea is that you should spend it because you have it. But rather if there is some thing or some travel or some giving that would make your life better and more enjoyable, it might be better to go ahead and enjoy it now, rather than keep waiting for a time that will never come. I have to admit that we have a budget and are planning to spend less than 4%, but while we are not spendthrifts, we do happily blow some money on things we use, travel, entertainment and pursuing adventures as they arise.
I ... personally have a hard time with anything over 4%, too many unknowns, and just don't want to have to ever become a Walmart greeter.
I originally planned to spend 3.5%, but after sitting down to figure out our SS, am quite comfortable going up to 4%. After spending 1% on the maintenance and update of our homes this year, I am still at less than 4%.
I would not throw money away, meaning spending it without thinking about what to get in return, but on the other hand have stopped worrying about running out of money. If things get really bad, out of control, and we have to get rid of the homes and live full-time in a small motorhome, so what? Fewer expenses, and less things to take care off, and more travel... I would still find a way to enjoy life. As long as one has life, with some reasonable health, money is secondary.
Me worry?
I originally planned to spend 3.5%, but after sitting down to figure out our SS, am quite comfortable going up to 4%. After spending 1% on the maintenance and update of our homes this year, I am still at less than 4%.
I would not throw money away, meaning spending it without thinking about what to get in return, but on the other hand have stopped worrying about running out of money. If things get really bad, out of control, and we have to get rid of the homes and live full-time in a small motorhome, so what? Fewer expenses, and less things to take care off, and more travel... I would still find a way to enjoy life. As long as one has life, with some reasonable health, money is secondary.
Me worry?
You need to research a sleep number bed with full tilt control. If you have or get acid reflux it's worth every penny. And no those nice non name brand mattresses are not even close. Quality mattresses are like good books. You can't just judge them by their cover.
Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum
That article is nuts.
An expensive mattress? That's one of the things you should splurge on? (Don't get me wrong - if your mattress is crappy, replace it - but you can get very nice mattresses that are as good as the name brand ones, for a lot less. My sister just replaced hers - top of the line materials, totally researched what she wanted - and got a local furniture store brand that is equivalent to the big name brands for half the cost.)
As someone still new to retirement - so nervous about the budget... reading this article does not make me want to spend more. Especially when they suggest a 4-6% WR.
The point that I have been trying to make here on this forum, for the past year or so ever since I survived an unexpected serious life-threatening disease, is that for those of us who are in the late 50s and above, the health risk is much more serious than the finance risk.
I can say that because for most people who manage to save and invest to have enough to either actually retire or contemplate doing so, they would know to manage and cope if some economic hardship happens. We are no dumb lottery winners who happen to get a windfall then blow it all on trinkets.
If people get so worried about having to live on less in their old age, meaning monetary issues, I wonder how devastated they would be if they suddenly discover some health problems, and they may not get to that old age after all? Not all of us will get to the 90s, let alone the 100s.
Just a few days ago, I talked with a fellow RV'er. His wife has flown back home due to some pain, and he's driving the RV home alone. They now suspect stomach cancer. They had planned to get a boat to sail the world. She is only 52.
... In the end we all have to do what is comfortable. However, I suspect there are a number here that will have one of those "Crap. If I knew THIS was going to happen I would ...taken those trips, had the beach house, eaten really great food, drank better wine, etc" moments. But, I'd guess we're all actually doing what feels best for us and that's what matters...
People seem to be overly optimistic in assessing their longevity (or the good years they can live a good lifestyle) yet so pessimistic in assessing markets.
Even before I got diagnosed with that disease which I overcame, I often asked myself that if I suddenly learned that I had only a short time left to live, I would regret anything. And the answer was no.
I have been thinking that other than the regret of not being able to live longer, I could not have done much better. I would not regret not getting that fancy car, or that big home. I already had enough travel. I could have spent more for my travels, like paying for better aircraft seats, but these benefits were really marginal, meaning they would not enhanced my experience at the destination. I doubt that on a deathbed, people would regret these things.
What I am saying is that it's OK to scrimp, as long as you would feel comfortable with leaving all that money behind if your longevity is not as planned. In my case, my wife or heirs will enjoy that, and I do not have to spend it all. But on the other hand, I am not going to let money worry keep me from enjoying life (let's see if I can still say the same if my WR happens to grow way beyond 4% due to market ebbs ).
I really don't think you'll be able to change your spending habits substantially. But it is fun to think about, isn't it?
That is kind of where I am at. I decided since I probably spend 85% of my time at my home (my preference) I might as well spend some money on my home. And that means busting out the wallet for...............
The point that I have been trying to make here on this forum, for the past year or so ever since I survived an unexpected serious life-threatening disease, is that for those of us who are in the late 50s and above, the health risk is much more serious than the finance risk.
I can say that because for most people who manage to save and invest to have enough to either actually retire or contemplate doing so, they would know to manage and cope if some economic hardship happens. We are no dumb lottery winners who happen to get a windfall then blow it all on trinkets.
If people get so worried about having to live on less in their old age, meaning monetary issues, I wonder how devastated they would be if they suddenly discover some health problems, and they may not get to that old age after all? Not all of us will get to the 90s, let alone the 100s.
Just a few days ago, I talked with a fellow RV'er. His wife has flown back home due to some pain, and he's driving the RV home alone. They now suspect stomach cancer. They had planned to get a boat to sail the world. She is only 52.
I love this thread. When I get out of the hospital next week, depending on the results and prognosis, I will take this into consideration. I might not have 30 yrs left. Or even 20.