I read Scott Burns' latest article and my initial reaction was to shout BS. As I thought about the details, it seems to make sense. It also addresses many of the threads that bemoan there seriously reduced SWR.
Here's the link....
Sometimes, Down Is Up - Registered Investment Advisor
It is worth considering but goes against our nearly religous commitment to a 4% SWR. Like many things in this ER business, it requires a giant leap of faith to say when enough is truly enough.
I get a chuckle out of the people that are delaying or have delayed ER so they can get by on a 2% SWR. These people seem to be getting a deep satisfaction from their low target. Now that their portfolios are down are we going to see further delays and are people in this group returning to w*rk?
The 4% is based on all our historical financial records. Retiring with a 4% SWR should still be ok even if the next day 25% of a portfolio disappears. Of course, I don't see how anyone would be able to maintain their old level of spending in the face of the decline. Scott's column addresses this with an extensive but crude data review.
Any rebuttals? Thoughts? Anyone cheered up a little by this?
Here's the link....
Sometimes, Down Is Up - Registered Investment Advisor
It is worth considering but goes against our nearly religous commitment to a 4% SWR. Like many things in this ER business, it requires a giant leap of faith to say when enough is truly enough.
I get a chuckle out of the people that are delaying or have delayed ER so they can get by on a 2% SWR. These people seem to be getting a deep satisfaction from their low target. Now that their portfolios are down are we going to see further delays and are people in this group returning to w*rk?
The 4% is based on all our historical financial records. Retiring with a 4% SWR should still be ok even if the next day 25% of a portfolio disappears. Of course, I don't see how anyone would be able to maintain their old level of spending in the face of the decline. Scott's column addresses this with an extensive but crude data review.
Any rebuttals? Thoughts? Anyone cheered up a little by this?