Retirement Reality

[Moneygrubber]

You left off the most compelling person, which summarizes the problem: Jesus Christ. He was dead at 33, but resurrected days later only to be immortal. Try running FireCalc on that scenario...


Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum

Lol!


Sent from my iPhone using Early Retirement Forum

 

[Big_Hitter]

beware of false prophets (and armchair statisticians)

 

[papadad111]

I think Moneygrubber has a point and it is something I have thought about. How many of us have run FIRECALC over and over again looking to be sure we 100% probability of success with various scenarios taking us all the way out to age 95?

According to the CDC, from data that is 10 years old, a white 50 year old male has a 5.4% chance of living to 95. A 60 year old white male making it to 85m only 35% chance. Odds of living to or past age 85 for a while make are not good. It's kind of sobering to read, calculate and contemplate.

As far as having the money for a balcony suite in a nursing home. My experience with all my relatives who have entered such facilities is that either due to pain, immobility or dementia they were no longer able to enjoy the smallest things in life. If your lucky you might still enjoy the taste of food or a conversation with a friend or loved one.

So, whether we admit it or not it seems many of us, myself included are very afraid of running out of money. A fear some say is stronger than death. Does it really make sense to have a plan with 100% probability of success for a less than 20% chance of surviving to that age. Or should we lighten up a little and use 90 to 85%?

Of course if one of our goals is to leave an inheritance for children then planning a 100% to age 95 or even 100 makes sense.

Here is where I found the stats for probability of surviving to a particular age.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr58/nvsr58_21.pdf

Well stated and I agree. The point is that the running out of money or not is somehow controllable or at least more so than the day the grim reaper pays his visit.

It's the desire to control the environment that mankind, since the beginning of time, has attempted.

What's interesting is that the financial future is actually no more predictable than the day the grim reaper visits...

Our financial paradigms are most often based on myopic USA view of life and markets and economy. Hyper inflation of Germany or Argentina etc are not often considered. Nor are lost decades ala Japan. Nor are asset bubbles like tulips of holland. Nor are calamities such as Ebola epidemics, or a super virus wiping out the population. Those all actually happened. To think they can't happen here is burying our heads.

The moral in my mind is yes planning is ok but don't spend your entire life planning for life. Go out and live it. Every day.

 

[ChrisC]

Plan for the worse, hope for the best, and spend somewhere in between.

 

[Moneygrubber]

Well stated and I agree. The point is that the running out of money or not is somehow controllable or at least more so than the day the grim reaper pays his visit.

It's the desire to control the environment that mankind, since the beginning of time, has attempted.

What's interesting is that the financial future is actually no more predictable than the day the grim reaper visits...

Our financial paradigms are most often based on myopic USA view of life and markets and economy. Hyper inflation of Germany or Argentina etc are not often considered. Nor are lost decades ala Japan. Nor are asset bubbles like tulips of holland. Nor are calamities such as Ebola epidemics, or a super virus wiping out the population. Those all actually happened. To think they can't happen here is burying our heads.

The moral in my mind is yes planning is ok but don't spend your entire life planning for life. Go out and live it. Every day.

Nor for that dopey 17 year old texting while you cross the street...


Sent from my iPhone using Early Retirement Forum

 

[ChicagoGal]

Mom died at 38 (cancer). Dad is still going strong at 78. Grandparents passed at 80 (cancer), 91, 93 and 95.

I'm not in as good physical condition, so doubt that I will be among the longest lived, but can't really afford not to assume it couldn't happen.

You left off the most compelling person, which summarizes the problem: Jesus Christ. He was dead at 33, but resurrected days later only to be immortal. Try running FireCalc on that scenario...

What would you put in for annual expenses on that one?

 

[Big_Hitter]

Nor for that dopey 17 year old texting while you cross the street...


Sent from my iPhone using Early Retirement Forum

driverless cars should fix that in the near future

 

[cyber888]

Those are the 1% exceptions. Consider yourself a god if you reach 120

George Burns, Bob Hope, and Queen Elizabeth (the Queen Mother) all lived past 100.


The plural of anecdote is not data.

 

[Big_Hitter]

Those are the 1% exceptions. Consider yourself a god if you reach 120

those are 1% exceptions today, not 30 years from now

 

[cyber888]

Actors and Actresses who died young

http://www.lifebuzz.com/child-actors/

I can play, too!

77 Actors & Actresses who died over the age of 90

 

[cyber888]

No way ! There's a zombie apocalypse coming and you'd be lucky to hit 30 and be alive in 30 years. jk

those are 1% exceptions today, not 30 years from now

 

[Which Roger]

I think Moneygrubber has a point and it is something I have thought about. How many of us have run FIRECALC over and over again looking to be sure we 100% probability of success with various scenarios taking us all the way out to age 95?

According to the CDC, from data that is 10 years old, a white 50 year old male has a 5.4% chance of living to 95. A 60 year old white male making it to 85m only 35% chance. Odds of living to or past age 85 for a while make are not good. It's kind of sobering to read, calculate and contemplate.

As far as having the money for a balcony suite in a nursing home. My experience with all my relatives who have entered such facilities is that either due to pain, immobility or dementia they were no longer able to enjoy the smallest things in life. If your lucky you might still enjoy the taste of food or a conversation with a friend or loved one.

So, whether we admit it or not it seems many of us, myself included are very afraid of running out of money. A fear some say is stronger than death. Does it really make sense to have a plan with 100% probability of success for a less than 20% chance of surviving to that age. Or should we lighten up a little and use 90 to 85%?

Of course if one of our goals is to leave an inheritance for children then planning a 100% to age 95 or even 100 makes sense.

Here is where I found the stats for probability of surviving to a particular age.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr58/nvsr58_21.pdf

I've seen wide range of risk tolerances on this forum. Also, remember that what you refer to as "100% probability of success" is actually less than 100%. A stricter definition is "100% probability of success assuming the future is no worse than the worst of the past". If the future is worse, all bets are off.

 

[Big_Hitter]

the cdc data is very old and not updated to take into account future mortality improvements


plus it's well....cdc data

 

[misshathaway]

So, whether we admit it or not it seems many of us, myself included are very afraid of running out of money. A fear some say is stronger than death.

This is true for me. The other day I was reading about an updated average life-span for my demographic that is lower than what I had been using, and my first thought was "Great, less years that the portfolio has to last".

Has anybody ever thought, as a last line of defense after the other sensible ones, that if you got to the eating-cat-food stage that you could always commit suicide?That is, if you were still sentient enough to be able to do it. I am a usually happy person, but I find that thought oddly comforting.

 

[Big_Hitter]

Has anybody ever thought, as a last line of defense after the other sensible ones, that if you got to the eating-cat-food stage that you could always commit suicide?

that's never crossed my mind, actually


although suicide is one of the causes of death that make up mortality tables

 

[samclem]

Has anybody ever thought, as a last line of defense after the other sensible ones, that if you got to the eating-cat-food stage that you could always commit suicide?.

I suppose having the option is valuable, but I can't see ever getting to that point. It wouldn't want to cause the pain and guilt that such a suicide often brings to family and friends. People can and do endure living in want, I think I can do the same, and would choose it over killing myself.
But, that's from my present POV. I'll get back to you later when I'm pouring out the kibble.

 

[hnzw_rui]

Plan for the worse, hope for the best, and spend somewhere in between.

+1. This pretty much.

What would you put in for annual expenses on that one?

He was able to feed thousands with five loaves of bread and two fish and he can heal the sick. No house and cheap travel (by foot). Sounds like very low overhead and recurring expenses to me.

Has anybody ever thought, as a last line of defense after the other sensible ones, that if you got to the eating-cat-food stage that you could always commit suicide? That is, if you were still sentient enough to be able to do it. I am a usually happy person, but I find that thought oddly comforting.

In the US, there's Social Security and welfare programs to help the most needy so I honestly don't see things ever becoming that bad. As much as people complain about the US government, the system actually works fairly well. At the very least, there are more safeguards here than if you're living in a third world country.

No way ! There's a zombie apocalypse coming and you'd be lucky to hit 30 and be alive in 30 years. jk

I thought the asteroid was gonna take care of that?

 

[LARS]

Has anybody ever thought, as a last line of defense after the other sensible ones, that if you got to the eating-cat-food stage that you could always commit suicide?That is, if you were still sentient enough to be able to do it. I am a usually happy person, but I find that thought oddly comforting.

Very few of us have the mindset to do a "Hunter" as I like to call it after Hunter Thompson, who ended his life (with a shotgun) in anticipation of his failing health. The problem with doing a Hunter is that you have to be willing to leave something on the table (whether it be one day, a week or months).

Now if the motivation is purely lack of funds that is an entirely different kettle of fish. I would hope lifestyle adjustments made well in advance (and societal assistance) would never cause anyone to contemplate a "financial suicide” as oppose to a "health suicide".


Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum

 

[wyecrabber1]

This is true for me. The other day I was reading about an updated average life-span for my demographic that is lower than what I had been using, and my first thought was "Great, less years that the portfolio has to last".

Has anybody ever thought, as a last line of defense after the other sensible ones, that if you got to the eating-cat-food stage that you could always commit suicide?That is, if you were still sentient enough to be able to do it. I am a usually happy person, but I find that thought oddly comforting.

Having cared for my high school sweetheart and wife as she battled breast cancer for 8 years -- I hopefully can decide when to check-out. It doesn't have to be painful or ugly. God has given me a gift with another lady to love after my first loved died and we were married 18 months ago. I have all the reasons in the world to live and enjoy a long and fulfilling life and will do that to the best of my ability.

Currently, my mom is in an assisted living facility with comorbidities; a train wreck waiting to happen, very unhappy -- just existing, so sad. Hopefully, the attitudes around physician assisted end of life will be come more main stream.

You can reference Final Exit, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_Exit_Network. My wife and I have given a great deal of thought to this. In our world, there would be a huge crab feast with family and friends -- and then at some point within weeks the helium tank will be bedside. After giving her a kiss goodbye, I'll be gone.

 

[Bestwifeever]

Man wonders but God decides when to kill the Prince of Tides.

--Pat Conroy

 

[timo2]

for more morbidity, what are you likely to die from?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...e-ways-youre-most-likely-to-die-at-every-age/

 

[highlow65]

This is true for me. The other day I was reading about an updated average life-span for my demographic that is lower than what I had been using, and my first thought was "Great, less years that the portfolio has to last".

Has anybody ever thought, as a last line of defense after the other sensible ones, that if you got to the eating-cat-food stage that you could always commit suicide?That is, if you were still sentient enough to be able to do it. I am a usually happy person, but I find that thought oddly comforting.

I am a strong believer in the right to assisted suicide if life is intolerable due to advanced disease, but not because I have a portfolio shortage

 

[shotgunner]

I am sure this will stir up the debate about annuities but I remember reading an investment/retirement article some time ago about using annuities to establish a floor of income at some older age. This was written by a respected name in the business if my recall is correct. The idea is your money would not dwindle to zero, you would just hit a floor for annual income with only a COLA on your social security at an advanced age. If our plans were failing and we are too old to work it might be something to consider. Does anyone remember this article?

 

[FIREd]

All my grand parents and several great grand-parents, who did not die in wars or the Spanish flu pandemic, died between the ages of 76 and 90. My parents are nearing 70 and my aunts and uncle are well in their 70s. They are all still very active (traveling internationally, skiing, hiking, even mountain biking, etc...). On my wife's side, the picture is not so clear. Her grandfather died in his 40s of a heart attack, while her grandmother died at 90. Her mom is in her mid-70s and still very healthy. She works out 5 times a week, and she climbed those San Francisco hills like a champ when she came to visit at Christmas. We have no idea what's lurking on her father's side of the family. At any rate, it does not mean I won't get run over by a bus tomorrow, but the potential for longevity is there and I am planning accordingly.

 

[RunningBum]

What a stupid premise for a thread. I don't see anyone talking with any certainty that they will live to be 95. I see many talking that plan for 95 or older, just in case they live that long. There is a huge difference between the two. I have fire insurance for my house. I guess that means I am certain my house will burn, right? Same logic.

Why is it that we get a few people who come on here criticizing people for planning for very old age? It's none of your damn business if I want to work an extra year or two to handle that possibility. You want to plan for 75 or 80, go right ahead, just don't come asking me for any money if you outlive yours.

Go find one (serious) post where someone has said with certainty that they will live to 95.