Is Everyone a Multi-Millionaire?

[calmloki]

I've spent the past week driving from northern Virginia to Denver and I took the opportunity to do it the way that my working class family would have done it when I was a kid. I've been sleeping in under $50 hotels, eating at fast food, staying with my still working class sister, etc. The only luxury that I allowed myself was playing golf on small town courses ($20 green fees). I've been through small towns in VA, WV, KY, IN, IL, MO, KS, and CO on this trip ranging from disastrously poor to clean and neat. Total daily cost (gas, golf, food and lodging) was just under $100/day.

My wife flew into Denver last night and met me at our better quality hotel where we will spend the week. I greeted her with, "It is really amazing just how wealthy we are." When you see the opportunities and comfort that a net worth of even $900K brings you compared to most of the people in the US (let alone the developing world) it really makes me glad that we made the choices we did. I'll make the return trip the same way that I came out. Most of my future travel will be at a slightly higher level of luxury than this one, but this has been a great reminder of just how lucky I am.

I've had a great time on the trip. I really enjoy small town golf and driving, once you are out of the East Coast mess, is sort of fun. The only negatives have been musty hotel rooms and noisy AC. Just like growing up. It doesn't take a lot of money to have a good time, but it is nice to have options for your comfort.

Mostly when we are traveling around we stay in the lo-buck places - some, ok most, are pretty gawd-awful, but some are downright charming (thinking of the 4 unit in Congress Az and an old adobe motel in Santa Fe). We most recently stepped up to $100+ rooms, and while I much prefer the better beds, I have to say my expectations jumped up pretty much immediately. The same exact breakfast at day two's Holiday Express didn't thrill me. Be interesting to see how we feel about the dive motels after this run of better quality places. Suspect it will be like butter vs. margarine, which is fine till you have butter and then...

One thing about the dives - they by far make for the best stories!

 

[Meadbh]

Hey, it amazes me, too. I can't imagine what on earth one would do with several million dollars other than give it to charity. Life is pretty doggone good from where I sit.

You can say that because you have a pension. Some of us have to be self sufficient.

 

[UnderTheRadar]

You don't sound very happy - you must be making <75K

No, I am fine. But put yourself in the shoes of a young family with two middle/elementary age kids living in a metro area - and tell them that any more $ than 75 will not make their life easier/enjoyable/fun. Yeah right.


Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum

 

[explanade]

I did a walk in San Francisco across Presidio Heights over to Land's End, passing "mansions" with great views of the bay and Golden Gate Bridge.

These properties go up to almost $20 million.

Now can the novelty of that view wear off? Does it lead to greater happiness than a home without sea views?

People who own these kind of properties are likely to own other prime properties in places like Hawaii.

I remember in Sydney, there were apts overlooking the harbor and the most expensive of them were said to be worth tens of millions. Honestly, I thought the homes to the NE of the harbor looked more appealing, overlooking a less busy part of the whole bay there. But presumably that view of the bridge and the Opera House was the "in" thing, a great or indicator of status.

 

[FIREd]

I did a walk in San Francisco across Presidio Heights over to Land's End, passing "mansions" with great views of the bay and Golden Gate Bridge.

These properties go up to almost $20 million.

Now can the novelty of that view wear off? Does it lead to greater happiness than a home without sea views?

People who own these kind of properties are likely to own other prime properties in places like Hawaii.

I remember in Sydney, there were apts overlooking the harbor and the most expensive of them were said to be worth tens of millions. Honestly, I thought the homes to the NE of the harbor looked more appealing, overlooking a less busy part of the whole bay there. But presumably that view of the bridge and the Opera House was the "in" thing, a great or indicator of status.

I walked through Land's End and the Sea Cliff neighborhood last weekend. The view was superb - when the fog finally lifted. But few houses in Sea Cliff actually have a wide open ocean view, so there must be other attractions - like a clean, quiet, and safe neighborhood.

As for the novelty of a nice view wearing off, I think it does to a certain extent. I am currently renting an apartment with sweeping views over San Francisco. After two and half years, I still enjoy the view but I am not as wonder-stricken by it as I was at the beginning. But it's still so much better than staring at a wooden fence or the back wall of the neighbor's house (been there done that).

 

[explanade]

You see some listings in SF with walk ability scores.

Some people value being able to walk to most of the places they'd need to go to regularly while others want to be away from the hubbub.

Good points for both though a big pat of city appeal is being in the middle of everything.

Some residents of Sea Cliff probably have the help go pick up groceries.

Rode the muni back from around there back to the embarcadero. Bus was empty but became packed and took 40 minutes or so on Saturday afternoon.

You'd have to live in a self sufficient neighborhood.

 

[pb4uski]

I think it is all relative. We visited Charleston, SC a little over a year ago and took the boat tour of the beautiful harbor. We were cruising past some incredible waterfront mansions and DW remarked on how they must be "rich". I responded yes, perhaps, but the couple cruising by our waterfront home in a fishing boat probably say the same thing about us. And the couple fishing from shore have similar thoughts about the couple in the fishing boat.

 

[FIREd]

You see some listings in SF with walk ability scores.

Some people value being able to walk to most of the places they'd need to go to regularly while others want to be away from the hubbub.

Good points for both though a big pat of city appeal is being in the middle of everything.

Some residents of Sea Cliff probably have the help go pick up groceries.

Rode the muni back from around there back to the embarcadero. Bus was empty but became packed and took 40 minutes or so on Saturday afternoon.

You'd have to live in a self sufficient neighborhood.

I don't think that the residents of those neighborhood worry much about the lack of access to public transportation and groceries. In fact, it keeps the riff raff out. The multimillionaires who want city life and walkability can live in luxury high rise condos near downtown.

 

[Andre1969]

I
Now can the novelty of that view wear off? Does it lead to greater happiness than a home without sea views?

People who own these kind of properties are likely to own other prime properties in places like Hawaii.

I remember in Sydney, there were apts overlooking the harbor and the most expensive of them were said to be worth tens of millions. Honestly, I thought the homes to the NE of the harbor looked more appealing, overlooking a less busy part of the whole bay there. But presumably that view of the bridge and the Opera House was the "in" thing, a great or indicator of status.

I can see the allure of having oceanfront property with a nice view, because it's a nice feeling knowing that nobody will ever build behind you, so that view will always be there. At least, as long as Mother Nature cooperates!

Personally, I like the view from my house. I can see Park Avenue from my deck. At least, until my housemate goes to work.

I know it's not everybody's thang, but I do enjoy the seclusion. And knowing my next door neighbor (you can barely see his house through the trees) is about 300 feet away!

As for the novelty of a view, it does definitely wear off, but I think what happens is you simply become used to it, and don't appreciate what you have anymore. But, take it away, and you'll start to miss it! In my case, it's not this view, specifically that I like, but the seclusion and privacy. And anywhere I moved to, I would still want that.

 

[Major Tom]

No, I am fine. But put yourself in the shoes of a young family with two middle/elementary age kids living in a metro area - and tell them that any more $ than 75 will not make their life easier/enjoyable/fun. Yeah right.

I was just having a bit of fun. I pay little serious attention to these types of surveys as they don't apply to me, being merely a statistical derivative of the group surveyed. IMO, they're good mainly for entertainment. However, I do agree with you - there can be a sizable difference in income requirements between, say, a single person living alone and a couple with kids.

 

[Mulligan]

I was just having a bit of fun. I pay little serious attention to these types of surveys as they don't apply to me, being merely a statistical derivative of the group surveyed. IMO, they're good mainly for entertainment. However, I do agree with you - there can be a sizable difference in income requirements between, say, a single person living alone and a couple with kids.

I'm just a bit north of 75k in retirement income and it's plenty for me, but I'm single and not raising a family... An even bigger satisfier though for my income lifestyle is I hang out with people with less disposable income than I have... So I don't have to "keep up with the Jones".


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Lsbcal]

I'm just a bit north of 75k in retirement income and it's plenty for me, but I'm single and not raising a family... An even bigger satisfier though for my income lifestyle is I hang out with people with less disposable income than I have... So I don't have to "keep up with the Jones".

Maybe I'm missing something but don't most "talking point" items have fairly modest costs? Like "look at this new smartphone app", or "what kind of beers do you like?" or "that movie really sucks but I liked this one".

Keeping up with the Jone's can be painful, but all the talk doesn't have to center around the next European adventure. If that's all they are interested in then I agree one should move on to other friends.

 

[Mulligan]

Maybe I'm missing something but don't most "talking point" items have fairly modest costs? Like "look at this new smartphone app", or "what kind of beers do you like?" or "that movie really sucks but I liked this one".

Keeping up with the Jone's can be painful, but all the talk doesn't have to center around the next European adventure. If that's all they are interested in then I agree one should move on to other friends.

My friends and I are more into doing things...but on the cheap.. For example we all golf together regularly and go on deeply discounted days through 18Golf website... We go to Vegas 5-6 times a year, but hit the cheap flights and the cheap rooms, cheap food, and free beer. Those types of things, Vegas for example, that can be the difference between a $500 trip and a $2000 dollar trip.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Walt34]

I hear you. I have fantasies of riding in the front of the plane for a transatlantic flight. I'd need to be seriously rich to justify that expense.

I hate to bust your bubble, but seriously rich is when you own the transatlantic airplane. BTW, used, one can be had for an average of a mere $4,720,000. Figure ~10% of that per year for maintenance/insurance.

 

[Lsbcal]

I think it is all relative. We visited Charleston, SC a little over a year ago and took the boat tour of the beautiful harbor. We were cruising past some incredible waterfront mansions and DW remarked on how they must be "rich". I responded yes, perhaps, but the couple cruising by our waterfront home in a fishing boat probably say the same thing about us. And the couple fishing from shore have similar thoughts about the couple in the fishing boat.

We don't have a water view except for the bird bath.

We do get to see the oak studded foothills and fog rolling in from the ocean.

 

[Debinnov a]

Its funny, as far as hotels go - during my early and mid career, we always stayed in Omni, Marriott, Hilton, etc. Several years ago we stayed at a Hampton Inn as there were no other choices. Now, I look for Hampton Inns. I couldn't believe I got a clean quiet modern nicely decorated room (where the duvet is washed for each new guest, with fridge and microwave, nice large bathroom, and great AC. ALL $89 to $120 per night (except major city centers).

I guess I was somewhat of a hotel snob, now I'm more flexible and stretching my nest egg.

Funny how your view changes as you get closer to retirement!

Deb

Sent from my KFJWI using Tapatalk HD

 

[Calico]

You can say that because you have a pension. Some of us have to be self sufficient.

Wow - that's pretty harsh.

1. People who do have/will have pensions in retirement often earn lower salaries over their career in exchange for the security of the pension income in retirement.

2. IIRC, W2R's pension income constitutes only a small fraction of her retirement income. Years of LBYM and frugality contributed to her ability to RE, and if I am not mistaken, the larger percentage of her retirement income comes from self-funded investments.

3. As far as having to be self-sufficient, some of us have to pay a large portion of the cost of medical care in retirement, and don't live in a society where care is provided at little to no cost.

People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

 

[explanade]

I hear you. I have fantasies of riding in the front of the plane for a transatlantic flight. I'd need to be seriously rich to justify that expense.

I bought a "low" business class fare for Thanksgiving week, to Vienna and Prague, for $3600.

First time I've purchased it rather than redeeming miles for business class.

UA then offered upgrades to first class for 1700-1800 each way. Bigger lie flat beds, maybe better meals. Not worth it.

Only reason I bought business class is that I'm trying to maintain my status and haven't been able to take trips on paid flights -- have had two trips on award tickets earlier this year.

Premium cabin tickets vary a lot though. Sometimes they have sales and you can get a transatlantic business class for under $3000. Other times, it approaches $10k. Really only makes sense to use award tickets.

 

[Walt34]

1. People who do have/will have pensions in retirement often earn lower salaries over their career in exchange for the security of the pension income in retirement.

Agreed it's a bit harsh.

I've posted on this topic before. Yes, I have a COLA'd government pension which is about as reliable and secure as one can find outside federal government. But during the inflation of the '70's and '80's when private industry annual raises pretty much tracked inflation my raises were in the range of at best 3% and more often than not, less than that. And I paid 7.5% of pay to the pension plan plus SS.

Not to mention that 20-25% of my coworkers went out on permanent disability, not easy to get since they kept a tight rein on that. And I went to eight job-related funerals.

So for anyone to imply that I got a "free ride on the backs of the taxpayers" is, frankly, an insult. In 1973 the County made an offer and I accepted it. I met my end of the deal and I expect them to meet theirs. Why do some people take issue with that?

All that said, the pension plan that I'm under stopped being offered in the early 1980's for the obvious reason that it is not sustainable. It was born from the euphoria of the post-WWII economic expansion and the end of the Great Depression. They thought the party would never end and they corrected that mistake.

I got lucky. So did a lot of others on the board.

 

[W2R]

Wow - that's pretty harsh.

1. People who do have/will have pensions in retirement often earn lower salaries over their career in exchange for the security of the pension income in retirement.

2. IIRC, W2R's pension income constitutes only a small fraction of her retirement income. Years of LBYM and frugality contributed to her ability to RE, and if I am not mistaken, the larger percentage of her retirement income comes from self-funded investments.

3. As far as having to be self-sufficient, some of us have to pay a large portion of the cost of medical care in retirement, and don't live in a society where care is provided at little to no cost.

People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

Sorry! I was away from the forum for a while. Yes, almost all of my retirement income is from my investments. When I said in post #157, "No, I am not a multi-millionaire by any definition that I can think of", that included methods of computing values for both my pension and my social security too, since it just started this month. Sometimes it's hard to remember where various members' income is coming from, I know.

 

[Fermion]

my coworkers went out on permanent disability, not easy to get since they kept a tight rein on that. And I went to eight job-related funerals.

My brother worked as a logger for 4 years and went to three job related funerals. (two from one accident). He mostly was digging firebreaks and made about $13/hr in the 1980s.

Not saying your job was not risky or that you don't deserve a pension promised you but just pointing out there are plenty of low paying jobs with no real retirement benefits and high risk.

As to which job was more important to society, hard to say. A forest fire can do a heck of a lot of damage and loss of life.

 

[pb4uski]

....In 1973 the County made an offer and I accepted it. I met my end of the deal and I expect them to meet theirs. Why do some people take issue with that?

All that said, the pension plan that I'm under stopped being offered in the early 1980's for the obvious reason that it is not sustainable. It was born from the euphoria of the post-WWII economic expansion and the end of the Great Depression. They thought the party would never end and they corrected that mistake....

I don't take any issue with that at all - they offered you something and you accepted it, did what you were obligated to do and expect them to live up to their obligation.

What I do take issue with (and it has nothing to do with you) is the politicians and municipal managers who agreed to these deals without really understanding what the ultimate cost or financial implications would be or if they did, ignored them knowing that they would be long gone by the time the problems came home to roost. I also fault union leaders who knew, or should have known, that these deals would put these municipalities at financial risk in the future but proceeded with them anyway.

It sounds like your county later say the light and corrected their mistake, but unfortunately many municipalities were not so smart.

 

[Meadbh]

Wow - that's pretty harsh.

1. People who do have/will have pensions in retirement often earn lower salaries over their career in exchange for the security of the pension income in retirement.

2. IIRC, W2R's pension income constitutes only a small fraction of her retirement income. Years of LBYM and frugality contributed to her ability to RE, and if I am not mistaken, the larger percentage of her retirement income comes from self-funded investments.

3. As far as having to be self-sufficient, some of us have to pay a large portion of the cost of medical care in retirement, and don't live in a society where care is provided at little to no cost.

People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

Thank you for that comment, Calico. I see that it has been edited while the thread was temporarily removed. No hard feelings.

Regarding item #3, health care in Canada is not provided "at little or no cost". The average family is paying over $11,000 in taxes for it. Health care in Canada is not free, think tank says, claiming average family will pay $11K this year | CTV News

 

[Live And Learn]

Your budget is $37k for health insurance premiums and total out-of-pocket costs per year? Is that what the ACA insurance will cost you? Crazy to think that the median household income is $53k or so in the U.S. and your health insurance in retirement will cost you $28k-$37k per year.

37K =
28k HI premium + OOP max per ACA with zero subsidy
6k Income Tax
3k Property tax

 

[anethum]

Wow - that's pretty harsh.

1. People who do have/will have pensions in retirement often earn lower salaries over their career in exchange for the security of the pension income in retirement.

2. IIRC, W2R's pension income constitutes only a small fraction of her retirement income. Years of LBYM and frugality contributed to her ability to RE, and if I am not mistaken, the larger percentage of her retirement income comes from self-funded investments.

3. As far as having to be self-sufficient, some of us have to pay a large portion of the cost of medical care in retirement, and don't live in a society where care is provided at little to no cost.

People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

I don't think that Meadbh's comment was harsh at all. Planning for ER knowing that there will be no pension whatsoever is a totally different animal compared to ER with a pension, and entails greater risk. Americans seeking to ER without a pension typically have to plan for purchasing health insurance, as well. Many (most?) Americans who will get a pension qualify for subsidized health insurance when they retire.

People with pensions don't necessarily earn less pre-retirement, and they typically have FAR more job security than non-pension careers.