What was your retirement savings at 50, 55, 60

[Major Tom]

I wonder if he really is a professor with a PhD? Such are the mysteries of the internet.......

 

[Mulligan]

I wonder if he really is a professor with a PhD? Such are the mysteries of the internet.......

I'm guessing he is...of the Piled Higher and Deeper variety...

 

[MuirWannabe]

I wonder if he really is a professor with a PhD? Such are the mysteries of the internet.......

Maybe he was the second coming of Emiritus.

 

[ERD50]

Maybe he was the second coming of Emiritus.

I guess I managed to push that screen name out of my memory!

-ERD50

 

[Gatordoc50]

When someone asks you how much you weigh, they're most likely not wanting to know if you are getting enough to eat. So I can understand that when someone asks how much money you have, they're not asking if you have enough to spend. IMO, a straightforward question deserves a straightforward answer. Like 3 million or None of your business.

 

[Calico]

.....This guy was really condescending. Oh, don't worry, your small minds can't understand what an advanced person like me can see, just answer the question you little soldiers, and I'll do the hard thinking.

-ERD50

This is (almost verbatim) what I wanted to post in response to him. I am relatively new here, and I find it to be one of the most civil and helpful forums I have ever encountered. For the life of me I'll never understand the folks who start off their first few posts by attacking and insulting the intelligence of the members of this forum. I avoid people like this in real life, and find them just as unpleasant in the virtual world. Fortunately they usually don't seem to stick around very long.

 

[nash031]

So I've decided to answer the question again in a different manner. My "data" begins at age 25 and continues at 5-year increments until age 50. I won't be 55 until 2014.

I know there are some similar posts earlier in this thread. Anyone else out want to post their multiples?

To the OP.... what do you think? Or, is this still to much inside the box?

Not sure I can go back that far, but I can speak to what we currently have:

I am 36, DW is 32. I'd like to be FI by age 42.

We are saving ~40% of our gross (so our expenses are 60% of our gross, includes mortgage payment and taxes). When we got married about two years ago, I would say we were closer to saving ~30% of gross.

At 36/32, we have 2.2X our gross annual salary saved in investment accounts, with roughly 1/3rd of that in taxable accounts. We also have about 2X gross annual salary locked up in home equity (if you want to consider that). NW(augmented) is then ~4.2X gross annual salary with expenses at ~60%, probably a little bit less, of GAS.

At age 30, I had about 1X my personal GAS saved in various accounts.

At age 25, I was about .5X GAS saved. GAS has at least tripled since age 25.

 

[nash031]

The OP has not been back for a while:



I fear we will never learn just what we are missing with our limited 'in-the-box' thinking. How will we ever sleep at night?

It's hard to imaging how a savings number, without the context of expected spend, SS and pensions can be meaningful, and how having a PhD could change that.

I'm wondering if his PhD was in computer science, and his intent was to hack into someone's retirement accounts and steal their money... and he was just looking for the best target?

Someone over the age of 50 may be less computer-security savvy than a younger person?

How's that for thinking outside the box?

 

[FIREd]

Anyone else out want to post their multiples?

Sure. Those are my multiples:

 

[MooreBonds]

We are saving ~40% of our gross (so our expenses are 60% of our gross, includes mortgage payment and taxes). When we got married about two years ago, I would say we were closer to saving ~30% of gross.

At 36/32, we have 2.2X our gross annual salary saved in investment accounts, with roughly 1/3rd of that in taxable accounts. We also have about 2X gross annual salary locked up in home equity (if you want to consider that). NW(augmented) is then ~4.2X gross annual salary with expenses at ~60%, probably a little bit less, of GAS.

I realize that your taxes are more now than when you're retired, but assuming your FIRE budget is 40% of GAS....what % WR were you looking at? At a 3.33% WR, with .4xGAS annual budget, you'd need 12xGAS.

At your current level of 4.2xGAS, you need to roughly triple your current stash.

Your current annual addition to savings is .4xGAS. Over 6 years, you'll add 2.4xGAS to your stash. That brings you up to 6.6xGAS from current levels plus additions. That means you need to roughly double your stash over the next 6 years, implying a roughly 12.2% annualized return over the next 6 years.

Were you shooting for a much lower multiple of GAS when you reach FI? Or a significantly larger WR than 3.33%?


As far as my situation is concerned, I'm 36 and still single (and still searching for "the one"). For being single, I could live a hell of a fun lifestyle on 1/2 of my current Gross Annual Salary, and I currently have a stash that's roughly 20xGAS (implying a 2.5% WR). However, the wildcard is the future (and presently unknown) Mrs. MooreBonds and MooreBonds Jr., which might increase that lifestyle up a bit to 0.75+ of GAS

 

[ERD50]

I'm wondering if his PhD was in computer science, and his intent was to hack into someone's retirement accounts and steal their money... and he was just looking for the best target?

Someone over the age of 50 may be less computer-security savvy than a younger person?

How's that for thinking outside the box?

That's about as good as I can come up with. It just smells fishy.

-ERD50

 

[WestLake]

I can see the value in the question, because I was planning to retire at 50. Now at almost 55 1/2, I have double the "savings" I had at 50 - went all out for stocks when the market crashed and my rental properties are in a neighborhood (East Dallas) which has now been "discovered" as I had hoped.

 

[mjgruber]

45 1.2mil 48 2.1 mil 50 ?

 

[nash031]

I realize that your taxes are more now than when you're retired, but assuming your FIRE budget is 40% of GAS....what % WR were you looking at? At a 3.33% WR, with .4xGAS annual budget, you'd need 12xGAS.

At your current level of 4.2xGAS, you need to roughly triple your current stash.

Your current annual addition to savings is .4xGAS. Over 6 years, you'll add 2.4xGAS to your stash. That brings you up to 6.6xGAS from current levels plus additions. That means you need to roughly double your stash over the next 6 years, implying a roughly 12.2% annualized return over the next 6 years.

Were you shooting for a much lower multiple of GAS when you reach FI? Or a significantly larger WR than 3.33%?

Good number crunching there. And you've hit it: I am shooting for a lower multiple of GAS than would be reflected by your WR calculations. In fact, my "call FI" number is between 6.5-7.0xcurrentGAS. This is possible largely because I will have a COLA'd pension that covers roughly half of our estimated (and it's a loose estimate at this point) expenses in retirement.

In addition, most of my number crunching does not account for SS at all.

All that said, being no closer than 6.5 years to ER (age 42.5 at the earilest), DW and I continue to build our savings and gear our AA towards the more aggressive side - benefit of having a pension in the works. I suspect DW will work longer than I - she enjoys what she does. If that's the case, she can fund the other half of our expenses, with a little bit left over to save, even if I am fully retired at 43 (which is probably unlikely - Semi-ER is more likely for me, I think). If she does work longer, we wouldn't need to touch our stash right off the bat.

But, for now, we've got an achievable, viable number in mind that we're gunning for. That number may even go up as our salaries go up in the future. We'll see.

To answer your other question, assuming things go as planned, and assuming DW and I don't work another second of our lives past 39 and 42.5 (respectively), our WR under our preliminary scenario would be 3.85%. I suspect it will be much lower than that in reality (she keeps working, I semi-retire, increased savings over the next 7 years, etc...).

 

[dvalley]

I don't know guys, I didn't think the guy asked you for your names, address and social security numbers along with your net worth. He may not have known the right questions to ask but he was curious and I noticed the way several of you guys dog piled on him was not very mature either. Maybe some of you are just getting grumpier with age, I know I am

The fact is that what he asked is already available in the 'Hi, I am...' section. I have my salary, my investments etc listed in my intro as do many others. I didn't see a big deal in answering and then letting him know that it may be more useful to ask xyz.

I did use the 'Thanks' button while reading this thread for those that provided useful information even if it was in different metrics.

Just my 2cents.

 

[jcretire77]

There's a Thanks button? Thanks!

 

[clifp]

The OP has not been back for a while:



I fear we will never learn just what we are missing with our limited 'in-the-box' thinking. How will we ever sleep at night?



-ERD50

I real pity he hasn't be back. As you can imagine I was agonizing on not being able to provide a more exact figure for my net worth. (I do a keep spreadsheet which update 1-3 times a year) But of course it didn't include important things like how much change I have in various containers and the value of the recycle cans I keep in the garage. But knowing OP is likely gone I can sleep soundly.

 

[brett]

The only thing that matters is the score at the end of the game.

My savings/investments increased very significantly from age 53 to age 59 when I retired three years ago. We never counted our home in the equation to be on the conservative side.

 

[ERD50]

I did use the 'Thanks' button while reading this thread for those that provided useful information even if it was in different metrics.

Just my 2cents.

And the question all along has been, how is this 'useful'?

Instead, he inferred we are too small thinking and stupid to understand if it wasn't immediately apparent. No thanks, not gonna play that game.

-ERD50

 

[dvalley]

And the question all along has been, how is this 'useful'?

Instead, he inferred we are too small thinking and stupid to understand if it wasn't immediately apparent. No thanks, not gonna play that game.

-ERD50

I get what you're saying but anyone is free to ask questions regardless of how 'useful' the info (to you). If one doesn't feel they can (or want to) contribute to the discussion then simply don't respond there's nothing wrong with that.

Realize too that respect goes both ways, he only became condescending after several people jumped on him and obviously he felt unwelcomed enough that he hasn't been back. It's too bad because there are quite a few helpful people here and some good information.