Would you retire @ 90% probability of success?

[corn18]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gumby You'll probably be just fine. My young wife's spending on clothing so far in 2020 has been $363.88. Mine has been $36.75. We are finding that we simply have no need for new or additional clothes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NW-Bound Clothes? Unless I pick up some new underwear before the year end, my clothing spending will be $0 this year. Hmmm... Maybe I should look to see if I have some holey socks that need replacement too.

I hear ya. We (and by we, I mean my wife) spent $10,100 on clothes in 2019 and $13,420 in 2018. YGTBSM!

[Dtail]

We spent $1,066 so far on clothes this year.

[RunningBum]

Quote:

Originally Posted by corn18 I hear ya. We (and by we, I mean my wife) spent $10,100 on clothes in 2019 and $13,420 in 2018. YGTBSM!

So is she on board with going from that to $2400 or $6000 (the two numbers you put in plans posted here), if need be? I assume the difference is the $33K pure fluff.

[braumeister]

If it helps any, that spending category will most likely go down quite a bit over time.

We've been retired for a long time and our 2018 clothing expenditures were 1.15% of total spending. 2019 was 1.57%. The only reason it was so high was because we really couldn't resist some expensive sweaters and stuff in places like Stockholm, Oslo, Edinburgh, London, etc.

[corn18]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RunningBum So is she on board with going from that to $2400 or $6000 (the two numbers you put in plans posted here), if need be? I assume the difference is the $33K pure fluff.

She is because we have the fluff money. I like this approach because then she has to decide if spending $6k of our fluff money is worth it to buy clothes vs. maybe going on an extra vacation or buying a nicer car.

[NW-Bound]

Even when we were still working and had to buy clothes, we never tracked how much we spent. It could not have been that much.

In fact, I never tracked any spending on anything until I was thinking about early retirement, went on this forum, and learned that one needed to know some details about expenses, not simply that "Income > Expenses".

Once I started to use Quicken, it's all very simple to have transactions downloaded and categorized broadly. And I do not categorize things as finely as some people do. What we spend at Costco, it's food because that's what it is mostly. The occasional flannel shirt or a jacket I bought is insignificant, and did not need itemizing. Or the socks.

But I am quite certain that I have bought no shirt, nor socks, nor underwear this year.

PS. When the money is spent at Men's Wearhouse, then it is definitely clothes. However, the last time that happened was the tux plus a new suit I bought for the occasion of my daughter's wedding. And that's 5 years ago.

[Koolau]

Quote:

Originally Posted by corn18 She is because we have the fluff money. I like this approach because then she has to decide if spending $6k of our fluff money is worth it to buy clothes vs. maybe going on an extra vacation or buying a nicer car.

It's unfortunate that immediate gratification often wins out over future pleasure. For whatever reason, I seem to have been "born" with the delayed-gratification gene. I know so many folks who have the immediate-gratification gene. I have tried to council my good friend (the one who owes $500K) that if ONLY he would wait, he could have MORE. He understands my logic. NOT spending all that interest would mean more to spend on toys - eventually. BUT, he just can not wait. That's why I think it must be genetic - but I could be wrong 'cause YMMV.

[LRDave]

This is obviously a FIRECALC result - there are other calculators. Find one that gives you the answer you want or tweak the parameters until you get the answer you want.

I am with Old Shooter on this point: 90% vs 95% vs 85% are all about the same if you ask me in terms of what your particular future will look like.

[corn18]

Quote:

Originally Posted by LRDave This is obviously a FIRECALC result - there are other calculators. Find one that gives you the answer you want or tweak the parameters until you get the answer you want. I am with Old Shooter on this point: 90% vs 95% vs 85% are all about the same if you ask me in terms of what your particular future will look like.

I actually use The Flexible Retirement Planner for my Monte Carlo sims. It tells me what I need and Ps. My real planner is my giant spreadsheet. That's where I do all of my what if's.

[Koolau]

Quote:

Originally Posted by LRDave This is obviously a FIRECALC result - there are other calculators. Find one that gives you the answer you want or tweak the parameters until you get the answer you want. I am with Old Shooter on this point: 90% vs 95% vs 85% are all about the same if you ask me in terms of what your particular future will look like.

I don't know the inner workings of FIRECalc. My gut tells me there IS quite a difference between - especially the upper-numbered "survival" percentages. Sort of like 50% chance of rain is pretty nebulous. You can't loose. But if you say 100% or 0% chance of rain, you are staking your weatherman reputation on the outcome.

SWAG: The difference between 50% survivability and 55% isn't much difference in stash. BUT difference between 90% and 95% is a fairly large difference in stash. (Even bigger "stash" difference from 95% to 100%) I very much doubt it is linear - BUT I DO NOT KNOW so YMMV.

[badatmath]

Yes, because the next RIF offer (if there is one) will likely be less or nothing at all.

[Dtail]

Quote:

Originally Posted by badatmath Yes, because the next RIF offer (if there is one) will likely be less or nothing at all.

True in general the 1st RIF offer tends to be the highest.

[tb001]

Quote:

Originally Posted by corn18 I hear ya. We (and by we, I mean my wife) spent $10,100 on clothes in 2019 and $13,420 in 2018. YGTBSM!

I’m sure you probably covered this earlier but is she still working? I needed a pretty nice work wardrobe and spent about that every year on clothes. I cut it to 6k for retirement and so far this year that’s a big over estimation based on what I need.

[corn18]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tb001 I’m sure you probably covered this earlier but is she still working? I needed a pretty nice work wardrobe and spent about that every year on clothes. I cut it to 6k for retirement and so far this year that’s a big over estimation based on what I need.

Stay at home mom.

[sandlapper]

If you have health care covered, I think you be fine. I waited on retiring until ACA was passed.

[tenant13]

Since this thread focuses on numbers, you could take a closer look at how much your time is worth and decide whether you're selling it at a good price: https://jamesclear.com/value-of-time# This should factor in your decision.
Another good link that helped me make a jump is here: https://www.early-retirement.org/for...ork-42328.html

[FLSUnFIRE]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dtail We spent $1,066 so far on clothes this year.

Interesting to see how people spend, my GF is into fashion. She LBHM but our priorities are different, I asked her how much she thought I spent on clothing last year (was a typical year for me) and she guessed $2K, the correct answer was about $200 (and a good portion of that was running shoes)! I laughed but then thought a bit more and realized I must be doing something right if I can spend $200 and give the impression of a $2K budget! I don't think I want to know what she spends if she thinks I spend that much!



I have a very full closet and unless I gain a bunch of weight (I'm stocked if I'm lucky disciplined and get leaner) so I expect to only buy shoes/socks/undewear for the next few years.

[sandlapper]

Another area of retirement is enjoying your free time. The first time in eight years of retirement I ever thought of returning to work was the COVID 19 Quarantine. Financial security is very important but it is not everything.

Best of luck whatever path you choose.

[MarieIG]

For me, no, not at 55 unless there were health reasons. I would want 100%+

Retiring at 55 vs. 58 was a consideration for DH. DH - would receive 90% of his pension at 55, and 100% at 58 (in addition to the extra pension and annuity credits) and social security. Since his pension would also be reduced, based upon the 100% joint and survivor, option we decided that he would work until at least 58. (He ended up retiring at 60).

I would also look at your plan after the go-go years. There can be a spike in costs for at home care; or - if you (or spouse if she survives you - she) may want to move into a high quality CCRC.

[Nords]

Quote:

Originally Posted by corn18 Would you retire @ 90% Ps?

Yes, if you're referring to FIRECalc and the 4% SWR... along with an inflation-fighting pension and cheap healthcare.

Imagine yourself 10 years from now. Will you look back on today and think "Wow, I'm glad I retired at 90% instead of working the extra years for 95%?"

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDARNELL I think you become wealthier when the Fog of Work lifts. Do a google search for that phrase with Nords. It’s a good article that will speak to you as a BD guy.

https://www.early-retirement.org/for...ork-42328.html