suze orman says....

[Trex]

I've heard Suze say this. But how is someone who is *clearly* financially ready to retire before the "usual" age putting people before money if they keep working when (a) they don't need to and (b) they'd rather not? Seems like they are putting money first.

Mr 29.....

I have always said that if you like what you're doing...keep doing it! But if you would rather be enjoying life...thru camping, hunting, traveling, or volunteering, etc. Than save & invest your money at a young age, so you have options at age 50-60.

I have known people in the Fire Service who didn't want to retire, but were forced out because of their age. They didn't have hobbies or a life outside of the Fire Service, and were "Lost" after retirement. Many die within a year or two after they retire.

I have also noticed that many of them are working part-time fire jobs at the local Airtanker base, or work as "call when needed fireman" on large fires, which is great, if that is what you need in your life. Its hard for some firemen to "Let Go" of what they were...and I think that is true in many professions.

So, my point is.... it's not always the money thing, that keeps people in the workforce... It's that Position in life, that makes them feel good about themselves. I think Suze "Feels good about herself."

Enjoying a cup of Joe in Rita...my Airstream
​

 

[ziggy29]

So, my point is.... it's not always the money thing, that keeps people in the workforce... It's that Position in life, that makes them feel good about themselves. I think Suze "Feels good about herself."

I agree. But note that I referred not only to people who have the financial means to retire, but ALSO had no desire to do it any more. If someone really loves what they do, sure, keep doing it. But if you are ONLY doing it for the money (which you may not need) and you'd rather not be doing it, that's when I say you're putting money ahead of people.

 

[Trex]

I agree. But note that I referred not only to people who have the financial means to retire, but ALSO had no desire to do it any more. If someone really loves what they do, sure, keep doing it. But if you are ONLY doing it for the money (which you may not need) and you'd rather not be doing it, that's when I say you're putting money ahead of people.

Mr 29... Ok, I can agree with your statement. I thought you're saying that Suze keeps working because of money...I think she likes being on OWN and other TV shows, she likes "Her position in Life" ...that is all I was trying to say.

There's lots on Type "A's" in the fire sevice also, who would be lost without their management postion as a Chief. Like my old boss Don, who died one year after retiring...age 58. He was forced into retirement at age 57.

 

[52andout]

Should I have copied the entire blog post for everybody?

The military pension has a COLA. So next January it'll go up roughly 3.5% to $4165 and she'll have over $1300 of monthly positive cash flow. And Jan 2013 it'll probably go up again.

The woman is not only letting her investments compound on their own, she's saving an additional $16K/year. So 40 years from now, in inflation-adjusted 2012 dollars, her $320K will have been boosted by another $640K. (Unless, of course, she hedonistically and foolishly blows it on a Steinway and piano tuners.) Plus the $124K that will have compounded faster than inflation, which Suze doesn't count because the woman can't even spell 72(t).

Look up poster "Boxkicker". He retired from the Navy on much much less than Jane, with savings much lower than her, and is using the GI bill to get a master's degree while living frugally. His pension and his part-time earnings are still less than her income yet he's doing just fine, and possibly adding to his stash.

Let's not forget, either, that both of these people will be collecting Social Security, too-- at the Suze-endorsed age of 70, no doubt.

I was thinking about this more today and you know what, her pension alone is what the median income was for a family per the 2010 census. Nothing to turn your nose up at. Certainly a very acceptable amount for many early retirees, especially with money in the bank and ss in the future.

 

[haha]

I really do not understand the appeal of these threads knocking Suze's position, or her person. You want to retire early, OK, retire early. You don't want to retire early, OK don't retire early.

You want to advise others to retire early, OK, advise others to retire early. You think people would be better off working longer as Suze does, OK, advise people to keep working.

It's like religion, isn't it? There are things to be said for either course. I would say that there is no one on this board who cannot figure out their rough position with respect to going a long time with no earned income. It is relatively certain for a government worker retiring from a good jurisdiction with a nice pension. It is harder for someone who expects to largely live from capital, and pay unknowable sums for medical care.

Frankly, unless one is very well off, I think it is actually impossible to have much real insight as to what might befall you. You leap, or you don't.

I do understand when people have established a venture, either like Suze, with a message to be careful and hang on their jobs. Or like some others, who have established ventures telling people to retire early. Once telling people what to do becomes a role in life, you are going to tell people what to do, for big money, or small money, or no money at all. Like Trex said, it helps pass the time.

Ha

 

[skyvue]

I really do not understand the appeal of these threads knocking Suze's position, or her person. You want to retire early, OK, retire early. You don't want to retire early, OK don't retire early.

You want to advise others to retire early, OK, advise others to retire early. You think people would be better off working longer as Suze does, OK, advise people to keep working.

It's like religion, isn't it? There are things to be said for either course. I would say that there is no one on this board who cannot figure out their rough position with respect to going a long time with no earned income. It is relatively certain for a government worker retiring from a good jurisdiction with a nice pension. It is harder for someone who expects to largely live from capital, and pay unknowable sums for medical care.

Frankly, unless one is very well off, I think it is actually impossible to have much real insight as to what might befall you. You leap, or you don't.

I do understand when people have established a venture, either like Suze, with a message to be careful and hang on their jobs. Or like some others, who have established ventures telling people to retire early. Once telling people what to do becomes a role in life, you are going to tell people what to do, for big money, or small money, or no money at all. Like Trex said, it helps pass the time.

Ha

I think it's pretty simple why people get upset. There are people who clearly have done a good job of savings money, eliminating debt and are in a position to retire early from their jobs and get on to enjoying life. Suze has begun telling these people that they should work till 67 anyway! With no real good reasons behind such a stance nor explaining to them that her plan (based on her math) is you should be able to live off interest income and pension alone, without touching principal.

This is the Early Retirment forum. This thinking is 180 degrees opposite of the typical person on here, thus people get upset with her. I feel sorry for some couple who takes her advice and slaves away for another 8-10 years when they could have been traveling, spending time with grandkids or doing whatever else they would enjoy more than working.

 

[MichaelB]

I really do not understand the appeal of these threads knocking Suze's position, or her person. You want to retire early, OK, retire early. You don't want to retire early, OK don't retire early.

You want to advise others to retire early, OK, advise others to retire early. You think people would be better off working longer as Suze does, OK, advise people to keep working.

It's like religion, isn't it? There are things to be said for either course. I would say that there is no one on this board who cannot figure out their rough position with respect to going a long time with no earned income. It is relatively certain for a government worker retiring from a good jurisdiction with a nice pension. It is harder for someone who expects to largely live from capital, and pay unknowable sums for medical care.

Frankly, unless one is very well off, I think it is actually impossible to have much real insight as to what might befall you. You leap, or you don't.

I do understand when people have established a venture, either like Suze, with a message to be careful and hang on their jobs. Or like some others, who have established ventures telling people to retire early. Once telling people what to do becomes a role in life, you are going to tell people what to do, for big money, or small money, or no money at all. Like Trex said, it helps pass the time.

Ha

Suzie has a message and a target audience, her message works for that audience. We are not part of the target audience so her message does not apply to us. That does not stop some people from reacting as if it did. Maybe they're looking for a fight, or perhaps they are insecure about their own FIRE situation. Or bored. This thread is over 200 posts - it helps get the post count up.

 

[slazenger]

We are not part of the target audience so her message does not apply to us. That does not stop some people from reacting as if it did. Maybe they're looking for a fight, or perhaps they are insecure about their own FIRE situation. Or bored.

I'd probably opt for choice C - that people here are upset and annoyed that she doesn't teach young people how they can live a life of frugality so that they don't have to work until they are 66 or 67.

If she is aware, as you imply, that her advice doesn't apply to "some people", why not go that extra step and teach people how to become this exception too?

When people speak of her "target audience", I would certainly hope they don't mean anyone in their 20s, or probably 30-35 even. Anyone that young has more than enough time to not necessarily be destined to work until 66 or 67!

 

[Trex]

quote?

Like Trex said, it helps pass the time.

Ha

Did I say that? Maybe on another thread? I'm remodeling my bedroom today, so I most go. Let me know if you find that quote of me.....

 

[haha]

Did I say that? Maybe on another thread? I'm remodeling my bedroom today, so I most go. Let me know if you find that quote of me.....

Perhaps I mistakenly credited that statement to you. Anyway, it was a compliment.

I am clear that I am not god. Therefore it is no part of my mission to be sure that everyone behaves according to the way that I have behaved. Maybe I have been mistaken; I won't know until later.

Ha

 

[Trex]

Perhaps I mistakenly credited that statement to you. Anyway, it was a compliment.

I am clear that I am not god. Therefore it is no part of my mission to be sure that everyone behaves according to the way that I have behaved. Maybe I have been mistaken; I won't know until later.

Ha

Mr. Ha... no offence taken my friend. I was just wondering if that was something I may have said somewhere on this Forum. So, thanks for the compliment...and sorry for the type-O's... sometimes I studder when I type!

 

[misawashogun]

Grain of salt

You have to take Suze with a grain of salt. I still watch from time to time if it's a topic that I'm interested in. I do get tired of her preaching.

 

[Walt34]

When people speak of her "target audience", I would certainly hope they don't mean anyone in their 20s, or probably 30-35 even. Anyone that young has more than enough time to not necessarily be destined to work until 66 or 67!

That probably means most people. I believe the ones on this board are by far the exception since ER usually requires the ability to defer immediate gratification for long-term gain. During my short stint as a car salesman it was emphasized over and over that people don't look at the cost of the loan, only at whether they can afford to make the payments. People here either don't buy new cars or if they do they (like me) keep them "forever".

I look at several relatives who are Suzie's target audience. They are in their early or mid-fifties, still living paycheck-to-paycheck, and for whatever reason seem unable to save more than a couple hundred $ at a time. Those are the ones she's talking to and they need the talk.

And when they eventually have to stop working SS will be all they have.

 

[steelyman]

You have to take Suze with a grain of salt. I still watch from time to time if it's a topic that I'm interested in. I do get tired of her preaching.

I agree. Or... you don't have to take Suze at all if you don't want. That's what I'm leaning more and more towards these days as I see the latest segments. A couple of years ago, I set my DVR to record the show, but that might get cut.

 

[Beryl]

I enjoyed her last show because it was all 'Can I Afford it?'. I tend to agree with all of her rulings. Some folks are so dumb when it comes to buying things. I always wonder if they actually take her advice when they are 'Denied'.

 

[Zantastic]

I miss her "How Am I Doing?" segments even though she probably would have given me an F for pulling the trigger to FIRE at 53 earlier this year. I enjoyed seeing how I compare to others in similar situations.

I wonder why she's no longer doing that segment?

 

[veremchuka]

I miss her "How Am I Doing?" segments even though she probably would have given me an F for pulling the trigger to FIRE at 53 earlier this year. I enjoyed seeing how I compare to others in similar situations.

I wonder why she's no longer doing that segment?

I miss that too, it was the only part of her show worth watching.

I was listening to Ric Edelman this weekend and he said that Suze has announced that she is retiring in 3 years and will become a sail boat captain and sail around the world. I was unable to find anything via Google to prove this. So she is NOT following her own advise to work to FRA or 70, oh you are so denied girl friend!

 

[W2R]

Interesting, Verumchuka! I am beginning to think she might be more of a hypocrite than I had thought. After reading your post I did a Google search on "Suze Orman sail around the world", and stumbled across this:

Financial wizard Suze Orman already has her retirement plans laid out. She told us at the recent Friars Club testimonial dinner for Larry King that she plans to end “The Suze Orman Show” in three years and sail around the world: “Unless something wacky happens, I’m 60 now, and I always had a date of 63 that that would be that.” Orman said that on her last day of work, her Web site’s home page will simply say, “Gone Fishing.” The author of “Nine Steps to Financial Freedom” says she’s taking “captain’s classes” in Florida, and has already picked out her boat. “It’s a big boat,” she noted. And, we assume, already paid for

Suze Orman planning retirement in three years - NYPOST.com

I managed to retire at 61, two years younger than Suze Orman's planned retirement age despite her relatively huge net worth. Who would have thought?

 

[Nords]

I miss her "How Am I Doing?" segments even though she probably would have given me an F for pulling the trigger to FIRE at 53 earlier this year. I enjoyed seeing how I compare to others in similar situations.
I wonder why she's no longer doing that segment?

She probably gave up and folded the segment because she was getting too much (richly deserved) criticism from personal-finance bloggers...

 

[tmm99]

She probably gave up and folded the segment because she was getting too much (richly deserved) criticism from personal-finance bloggers...

That's EXACTLY what I was thinking!

 

[steelyman]

I'd recorded her show last night, but ended up turning it off after about fifteen minutes because it seems to me she increasingly believes her purpose is to be an amateur psychiatrist. I would much prefer listening to pure financial discussion.

 

[Nords]

I'd recorded her show last night, but ended up turning it off after about fifteen minutes because it seems to me she increasingly believes her purpose is to be an amateur psychiatrist. I would much prefer listening to pure financial discussion.

Spouse mentioned today that Suze has been stopping shoppers in the street (I think she asks them to stop, not physically halts them) and asking them what they received for Christmas last year.

Admittedly Suze's editing the video, but it's amazing how many people can't remember last year's holiday.

And then they resume shopping for this one.

 

[heirloom]

We used to get Dave Ramsey on one of our tv channels, but they cut his show. I have to credit him too for helping people realize they were living too far beyond their means and they would follow his advice about selling or downsizing. I truly think his show may be one reason so many people stopped buying more than they needed and quit using cards so much. CNBC has been talking for the last year how personal savings have been going up and debt decreasing. I think it may be because of the help from these shows.

I loved Friday nights when he would play a clip of different ways people would get rid of their credit cards after they were "debt free". My favorite was when a man lined all his cards on a fence beside each other and shot them one at a time with his gun.

 

[Walt34]

My favorite was when a man lined all his cards on a fence beside each other and shot them one at a time with his gun.

That's just weird! And ammunition is expensive nowadays. I don't suppose just putting the cards in a drawer would work.

I saw on Suze's show a couple of weeks ago she is now preaching LBYM. She actually used the words "live below your means. You can't afford not to".

Wow. What a concept.

 

[Andre1969]

Suze gave some advice the other day to someone that I didn't agree with, and I was curious as to what everyone here thinks about this situation? It involved a 64 year old woman who wanted to take a $3,000 road trip with her daughter. As I recall, the specifics were something like:
Monthly net income: $1800
Monthly expenses: $3800
Savings/Investments/Retirement: $630K total (can't remember the breakdown though)
Debt: she assumed her daughter's student loans of $54K.

Anyway, Suze denied her because she was spending $2000 per month more than what she was bringing in. The lady tried to argue saying that some months her investments go up, but Suze wouldn't hear it.

But, assuming her portfolio keeps up with inflation, at a burn rate of $2,000 per month, shouldn't that $630,000 portfolio last her about 26 years? That would put her to 90, and she very well might not make it to that age.

FWIW, a 4% withdrawal rate would come out to $25,200, or $2100 per month, on $630K. Personally I think this lady should go for it, take that road trip, and enjoy the time she has. But, I could be missing something?

Seems like sometimes Suze wants everybody to die with millions of dollars left in the bank.