How much did you have on hand at FIRE time?

[Rich_by_the_Bay]

POLL is closed. Try the NEW and IMPROVED poll: "Part 2: Whatcha worth?"

http://early-retirement.org/forums/index.php?topic=6578.0

 

[Ed_The_Gypsy]

As y'all know, I am still in harness, but I am projecting a number. Won't be far off.

 

[unclemick]

300k his and hers, duplex putting out 6k/yr.

age 49, 1993. That was then, This is now.

I was a really really cheap bastard back then.

heh heh heh heh

 

[Martha]

One quirky thing with your poll is that a number here retired with pensions and a number did not. Those with good pensions of course would need less saved. Those without pensions and without retiree healthcare benefits need more savings.

 

[wildcat]

Not part of the FIRE group so could you unlock the poll so everyone can see the results? Also I think everyone should try to project an inflation adjusted amount - say 3% a year since you retired to give us today's dollars.

 

[youbet]

Martha and wildcat make very pertinent points! I'll add that not distinguishing whether the number represents the portfolio of a couple or a single makes the validity of the numbers even more questionable.

 

[brewer12345]

Maybe capitalize pensions at 25X for inflation adjusted, 20X for non adjusted?

 

[Rich_by_the_Bay]

One quirky thing with your poll is that a number here retired with pensions and a number did not. Those with good pensions of course would need less saved. Those without pensions and without retiree healthcare benefits need more savings.

Right. I guess this won't tell us how well everyone's needs are being met, just their savings habit. I have a suspicion that those with pensions on this board are pretty good savers, too.

 

[Andre1969]

Alas, I'm still a working stiff, but my goal is $1M or age 45, whichever comes first! Of course, if I hit 45 and know there's no way in hell I'm going to be able to cut it, I'll force myself to keep working. Or ho myself out.

 

[bosco]

Maybe capitalize pensions at 25X for inflation adjusted, 20X for non adjusted?

don't think I can change the poll answer since I've already voted, but that is my situation exactly--good pension, so don't need savings as large.

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

You stuck me from the get-go. My home equity was a major component of my asset allocation strategy and investment plan. I hold a paid for home as a sort of "bond holding" and inflation protection component.

Excluding it makes no sense in my case. Its like saying "except for cash and bonds, how much do you have?'

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

The other minor problem is that this doesnt adjust for inflation. Some people may have ER'ed 10-20 years ago when a half mil or a mil was a pretty good stash, and it appreciated to 1-2mil today. Comparing someone who ER'ed 20 years ago with a half mil and someone today at 2mil might be financially a real money wash.

 

[Martha]

The other minor problem is that this doesnt adjust for inflation. Some people may have ER'ed 10-20 years ago when a half mil or a mil was a pretty good stash, and it appreciated to 1-2mil today. Comparing someone who ER'ed 20 years ago with a half mil and someone today at 2mil might be financially a real money wash.

I went to a handy dandy inflation calcuator (CPI version of inflation) and saw that $500,000 in 1985 is equal to $887,330 today. http://www.westegg.com/inflation/

 

[haha]

I went to a handy dandy inflation calcuator (CPI version of inflation) and saw that $500,000 in 1985 is equal to $887,330 today.  http://www.westegg.com/inflation/

Maybe formally; but look at housing, medical care and oil. The figures will be quite different. Also look at prevailing interest rates- in '85 that $500,000 could generate a fair amount of money. And looking back at least (for those of us on this board who do not believe in valuation differences) it turned out to be a pretty good time to make long term bond or equity investments.

Not so sure about today.

Ha

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Yep, there are a lot of 'state' problems. I'm presuming Rich is trying to learn what the 'go point' was for people.

Might be a better question to ask 'what multiple of your annual expenses were you at' or 'what was your initial withdrawal rate', that normalizes a lot of things. I think the reasonably well accepted numbers of 25x and 4% end up to be about the same. Anything over 25x or under 4% is gravy?

But then you still have other problems...a retiree who went in january of 2000 with 3mil probably felt a lot better about 'the go' than someone who retired in 2003 with 1.5M....

 

[SteveR]

Might be a better question to ask 'what multiple of your annual expenses were you at' or 'what was your initial withdrawal rate', that normalizes a lot of things.  I think the reasonably well accepted numbers of 25x and 4% end up to be about the same.  Anything over 25x or under 4% is gravy?

I agree.
The issue for me is not somebody elses dollar amount but what percentage of income that amount will allow. My retirement spending plan is complex and has many adjustment points over the next 20 years so my $$ amount has to fund a higher initial income than 20 years from now. That affects my investment strategy and my tax strategy.

While a nice fat $$$ amount would allow me to sleep at night (as if :) it is not the right way for me to look at it. Sure $3-4 MM would be enough but that is not going to happen before I ER again. Sort of this kind of money, most of us will have to work on a different figure that more closely represents our SWR for the income level we anticipate considering our other income streams (pension or none, COLA or not, paid medical or none, or inheritance or none.) All these affect the "number" each of use needs to ER. Just stating a number is ineffective in gauging how it relates to an income stream.