Poll:Is $1 Million still a relevant number nowadays for 2 retirees?

[Dtail]

It can be relevant as hitting a milestone and stating one is a millionaire. However, one's expenses do come into play as to whether 1m is enough to FIRE.

 

[SloHan]

What’s relevant is the OP income needs. 1 million is certainly a great savings goal and you can’t get to 2 million or more without the first million.

 

[cyber888]

You have totally misunderstood my question. I never ask this as my own personal question, and I never asked for help. This thread is not about me at all. I was asking a general question whether the $1 million marker it still relevant for 2021 as a retirement goal. Just as I explained - it is a milestone for many in the Dreamer thread. Well, if it's not relevant for you, then great. I'm fully aware that some people will be happy with $100,000 or less.

If I were so strongly convinced that I already knew the answer, as you seem to be, I probably would not have asked the question and posted a poll in the first place (you are the OP, if I am not mistaken). Nobody is saying that accumulating $1 million is not a great milestone -- one of which you can be quite proud. Heck, as has been pointed out, most people in this country will never have that much money and most have retired and will retire with much less.

I'd always prefer to have a million dollars than not, but whether that is "relevant" to your particular situation is a question only you can answer. It might be too much, not enough or just right. I'll use my own situation as an example. For the young wife and me, our two pensions plus social security more than pays for our spending, and we live with exactly the same standard of living that we enjoyed prior to retirement. So no amount of savings - whether it be $10 million, $1 million or zero -- is "relevant". Nice to have? Sure, but not necessary.

So if I told you that $1 million is not relevant, how would that help you? It's not relevant for me, but it might be for you. The point I was trying to make at the start of this thread is that you should decide for yourself, based on your own situation. My opinion, based on my situation, is really and truly irrelevant to that decision.

 

[Gumby]

$1 million is not a relevant retirement goal for you or for anyone else. The relevant retirement goal for anyone is to have enough to cover the amount they will spend that is not covered by other sources, whatever that number turns out to be. There is no shortcut to figuring that out for yourself. And your number is not the same as Joe's, whose is not the same as Jane's, whose is not the same as Antoine's.

I don't understand what you want. Is a million dollars good to have? Yes, yes it is. But what in the world does that have to do with the price of tea in China? Do you just want people to agree with you? Do you want to know how much people will spend? how much they will have in pension or social security? What do you really want to know that can possibly be of use to you or anyone else? If you figure that out, ask THAT question. The one you have asked is unanswerable.

If you just want to know if other people (not yet retired) are shooting for $1 million dollars, then ask it that way. It is irrelevant, but it might be possible to answer. If you want good answers, you need to ask good questions.


Edit to Add: I just went back to look at your very first post on this board, seven years ago. You asked almost exactly the same question and got the same type of answers, which you rejected. https://www.early-retirement.org/fo...-savings-at-50-55-60-a-67902.html#post1347742 If you are not trolling us, what are you doing?

 

[NW-Bound]

Given that people have different needs and different sources of retirement incomes, I guess the OP wants to see the distribution of the size of their stash.

I have not answered the poll yet. I think I am sufficiently frugal to retire with less money if I hated my job and wanted to retire really early. But as I liked what I was doing, and also liked to have more money to count (on the Quicken screen), I hung on for longer.

So, I might not need that much money, but I wanted it. The poll asks about "need", not about "want".

 

[Gumby]

Given that people have different needs and different sources of retirement incomes, I guess the OP wants to see the distribution of the size of their stash.

Then he should ask that question - How much do you plan to have in your portfolio when you retire? (or, for those already retired, how much did you have?) Useless without knowing the particulars of the posters' individual situations, but it is a question that actually can be answered.

 

[RobbieB]

Yup. Needs are very small compared to wants.

I don't need fresh white truffles, but I want them -

 

[flyingaway]

We could retire with $1M if forced to, but we would like to have $3~4M to retire voluntarily and comfortably.

 

[Andre1969]

When I started getting serious about retirement planning, $1M was my goal. However, to clarify, it was actually $1M in investible assets, and a free-and-clear house with no mortgage payment. And, that was around 1999-2000.

Adjusting for inflation, that would be around $1.51-1.56M in today's dollars. So, my original goal might still be somewhat applicable. I'm actually around the $1.93M mark, but have about $467K on the mortgage.

I could pay off the mortgage, and still be around the $1.46M mark, which isn't too far from my original goal. However, I was only 29-30 when I first set that goal. I'm 50 now, and I'd like to think, a bit more knowledgeable. So, I want to get a bit more financial padding, before I retire.

Admittedly though, if I got laid off today, I probably wouldn't look too hard for a new job.

 

[JoeWras]

If this pandemic keeps up, we'll need less and less. Spending way down this year.

 

[pb4uski]

We could retire with $1M if forced to, but we would like to have $3~4M to retire voluntarily and comfortably.

You must live large and/or spend a lot.... which is fine if that is what you want.

We have many early retirees here who retired voluntarily and comfortably on a lot less than $3-4M.

 

[Koolau]

For some reason, the poll question reminds me of those in the throes of remodeling. "What's another $1000?" Between helping my parents remodel and the half dozen remodels we've done, that mantra became a "throw away" line on numerous occasions.

I think it's because I can recall when $1000 was real money. Now, if my kid needs money, it's not going to be $50 for a tune up or $100 to get through the month. It's gonna be at least a $grand for the Dentist or the 529 for the new grand baby.

So, I've seen the same inflation with a $million. Anyone old enough to remember the TV show, THE MILLIONAIRE (Mike Anthony, working for philanthropist John Bearsford Tipton)? In doz days, a million was a fortune. Now, it's sort of an "opening bid" for Financial Independence. Yeah, you could live on it, but it wouldn't be fun. With my modest pension and SS for two, a million is probably good enough - Two would be better.

 

[cyber888]

Now, you seem to be erked that I ask a question 7 years ago. There is a big difference. Today is not the same as 7 years ago in terms of the value of money. Clearly, everyone knows that.
So, I don't know why you bring that up at all. Obviously, the value of money 7 years ago is not the same today.

But looking back at my question, I never asked the same question as you alluded to .. I just asked retirement goals at various ages. That is clearly not the same as this new question. Anyway, you're entitled to your own opinion and you will never understand my question, but I did my best to explain that your comparison 7 years ago and today makes absolutely no sense in terms of the value of money.

And I'm no troll. I've been here participating and helping people here for 7 years. Cheers.

$1 million is not a relevant retirement goal for you or for anyone else. The relevant retirement goal for anyone is to have enough to cover the amount they will spend that is not covered by other sources, whatever that number turns out to be. There is no shortcut to figuring that out for yourself. And your number is not the same as Joe's, whose is not the same as Jane's, whose is not the same as Antoine's.

I don't understand what you want. Is a million dollars good to have? Yes, yes it is. But what in the world does that have to do with the price of tea in China? Do you just want people to agree with you? Do you want to know how much people will spend? how much they will have in pension or social security? What do you really want to know that can possibly be of use to you or anyone else? If you figure that out, ask THAT question. The one you have asked is unanswerable.

If you just want to know if other people (not yet retired) are shooting for $1 million dollars, then ask it that way. It is irrelevant, but it might be possible to answer. If you want good answers, you need to ask good questions.


Edit to Add: I just went back to look at your very first post on this board, seven years ago. You asked almost exactly the same question and got the same type of answers, which you rejected. https://www.early-retirement.org/fo...-savings-at-50-55-60-a-67902.html#post1347742 If you are not trolling us, what are you doing?

 

[Dynaflash]

The majority of the US would love to retire with $1 million.

Yep

 

[NW-Bound]

Given that people have different needs and different sources of retirement incomes, I guess the OP wants to see the distribution of the size of their stash.

I have not answered the poll yet. I think I am sufficiently frugal to retire with less money if I hated my job and wanted to retire really early. But as I liked what I was doing, and also liked to have more money to count (on the Quicken screen), I hung on for longer.

So, I might not need that much money, but I wanted it. The poll asks about "need", not about "want".

Yup. Needs are very small compared to wants.

I don't need fresh white truffles, but I want them -

Do you still want XO Cognac, or has it been elevated to a need?

I find myself needing less and less with time. My wants also withered.

But I still like to have a lot of money. I am an active investor, and find it fun. And the number at the bottom left corner of the Quicken screen is my score, for me to see if I am doing well or not.

 

[JustKickItForward]

How much will you spend per year, minus the amount provided by social security or pension income? That's the critical number. Multiply it by 25 (or 33 to be conservative). What other people consider necessary is irrelevant.

So, here are my ballpark numbers -

Income: Pensions - 2100/mo + SS's - 2400/mo = 4500/mo = 54000/yr
Expenses: 7500/mo = 90000/yr

Income Needed = 90000 - 54000 = 36000/yr

Math (conservative): 36000 x 33 = $1.2mil

First, this takes into account $1000/person each mo x2 people for medical (insurance + spending). This amount should drop once we get onto Medicare. Second, I can tighten my belt a little, plus my spending likely will go DOWN as I age, plus I can maybe work part time at a low key job so $1mil should be a-OK !

 

[JustKickItForward]

They do not retire early though. My parents retired only when they were eligible for full SS in addition to their pension.

Only one of my parents made it to full SS - one passed way before SS-eligibility. This is one reason I am targeting FIRE.

 

[RobbieB]

Haven't bought XO in a year. But I do buy Don Julio 1942 which costs the same -

Just gotta have that good stuff every so often!

 

[Perryinva]

It’s still a relevant number. Just not AS relevant. The OP asked for someone retiring in 3-5 years, not what others retired on 10-15 years ago. In 3-5 years, the number of people retiring with a private pension will be dropping almost exponentially. Fed/state pensions will be less generous as well for sure. That plus inflation, as low as it has been for the last 8 years and the next few, and increased health care costs before Medicare, are what make it less relevant. The fact that few people saved a million in years long gone and got along fine is almost irrelevant. It is and will continue to be harder to have a decent, much less nice, retirement in the years to come without stepping up your saving/investing game. I’m only about 63, and if we use the $20k -SS & $40k 4% rule on $1MM, for a $60k income, I know I wouldn’t want to do it, today and certainly harder in the future, but I clearly remember even 15 years ago when a $60k salary was doing just fine.

My parents retired in their early 50’s in early 1990’s to middle cost FLA, with less than $1MM (barely) but no mortgage, but did own rentals for added income. Their HC costs were negligible, and they rarely traveled except economy in the US occasionally. After they divorced at 65, and split remaining proceeds, they both had mortgage free homes, but cheap, ($150k range) after selling their $500k home. DM passed at 69, but would have been broke except for the house & SS as only income in a few years, while DF passed at 81 with maybe $300k AFTER already selling his house. They thought they retired young & rich, and as relatively young and stupid as we all were, we thought they had, too. It wasn’t until I was almost 45 before I realized the reality of purposely addressing retirement savings & investing if I wanted to retire at the lifestyle I wanted, and dumb luck & hard work made it possible. Without both, I’d still be working until 65, as planned, and living on far less.

 

[kgtest]

If yoy retire early. 1million. If you retire FRA and then snag SS less than a million is fine. All depends on your hudget. No debts. 1million can work.

 

[euro]

How much will you spend per year, minus the amount provided by social security or pension income? That's the critical number. Multiply it by 25 (or 33 to be conservative). What other people consider necessary is irrelevant.

I agree - if you just want to be sure you can survive, then absolute,y: two people CAN easily survive on what 1 million provides. Billions of people get by on less. The question is: do you WANT (need) more to be happy.

 

[mickeyd]

If necessary we could live with $1M in the "bank", however that necessity does not reflect our situation. SS and pensions pay all of the bills at our CCRC, with quite a bit left over to blow, err invest in, top shelf liquor and Shiner Bock.

 

[5Miler]

It is heavily dependent on your expense level. This thread compelled me to examine spending this year for DGF and myself which showed much lower expenses as most did due to limited travel. We only got in one cruise in January before the covid hammer fell.

I have an automatic monthly transfer from my IRA along with my laughable monthly pension (won't cover electric bill) which gets me $31K gross for the year. Sometimes I'll grab an extra $5K or so if we do extra travel. This year I have about $12K of my annual withdrawal sitting in my checking account earning nothing for me since travel has been curtailed. If I started SS today at 67 I would get over $34K per year. At 70 I should draw $40K.

DGF has to contend with ACA so we manage her income to keep her on Silver cost sharing which is enormously beneficial. She is a frequent flyer at Kaiser it seems. I try to keep her taxable (for ACA) income at $18K and grab another $12K or more from non-taxable sources to keep the cost sharing and subsidy. She usually clocks in at about $30K to $35K. This year it was about $29K due to minimal travel with some of hers banked as well. She will probably start SS next year at 62 (she's so impatient) unless I can convince her otherwise. She'll be over $20K in SS which will complicate the ACA. First world problems.

These numbers tell me we could easily live as we do now with $1M and our SS with money to spare. All made possible by no mortgage, car payments or liabilities of any kind. We are actually north of $2.5M in retirement savings together. We have already upped travel to First Class on most flights and aft balconies or suites on cruises. Guess we need to up our game further.

 

[aleabo]

Yes and a large percentage retire on less then that.

Not to according this article
https://money.yahoo.com/boomers-sav...even-years-in-ideal-retirement-160528666.html

Boomers on average have $920,400 saved for retirement, the Charles Schwab survey of 2,000 Americans aged 55 to 75 with at least $100,000 in investable assets found. But they expect to spend $135,100 per year to sustain their ideal lifestyle in retirement, meaning their savings would run out after seven years.

 

[Dtail]

Not to according this article
https://money.yahoo.com/boomers-sav...even-years-in-ideal-retirement-160528666.html

Boomers on average have $920,400 saved for retirement, the Charles Schwab survey of 2,000 Americans aged 55 to 75 with at least $100,000 in investable assets found. But they expect to spend $135,100 per year to sustain their ideal lifestyle in retirement, meaning their savings would run out after seven years.

You are assuming zero growth in the assets and no SS.