4% Retirement Funds Withdraw Proponents fighting about the Percentage

Don't remember which thread this came up in by for Bob's sanity just thought I should follow up with the latest ideas.

https://finance.yahoo.com/amphtml/news/suze-orman-slams-4-retirement-133000487.html#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=16876202446245&csi=0&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com

I'm sure confused.

Just die when you no longer provide value for your capitalist overlords and none of this is an issue.

Trapper Gus wrote:Don't remember which thread this came up in by for Bob's sanity just thought I should follow up with the latest ideas.

https://finance.yahoo.com/amphtml/news/suze-orman-slams-4-retirement-133000487.html#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=16876202446245&csi=0&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com

I'm sure confused.

I'm sure I'll get lectured about my retirement plans from "personal freedom" republicans/libertarians.

Orman is a hack. But if you can manage to do less than 4%, there’s no downside, I guess. I try to do between 2.5-3%, myself.

https://fortune.com/2023/06/25/early-retiree-fire-couple-financially-anxious-spending-habits/

Came across this reference to a life style choice called FIRE.  Back on TOB there was a poster who was an advocate of it.

It always seemed like too much a focus on living for money rather than using money to live a life to me, and this article seems to show it, like other life style choices, can warp ones values.

I haven't really thought about it. I'll probably retire a 401k "millionaire" in my mid 60s... might take trips when I can. Won't want to not too far after retirement cause im old and the fun will have been had by that point. Will probably die in my 80s. Whatever... I'm not looking for a penthouse in New York or 2-3 houses to maintain. Maybe sell my place and try to get on water somewhere... or not.

Actually, if I get to work from home... don't see any reason for retiring at all unless they ask me gone. I work with a guy who is in his 70s. Works at home 4 days a week. Takes a shit ton of time for medical days and vacations... if I can swing that, the kids might be living large after I croak.

AvgMSUJoe wrote:Actually, if I get to work from home... don't see any reason for retiring at all unless they ask me gone. I work with a guy who is in his 70s. Works at home 4 days a week. Takes a shit ton of time for medical days and vacations... if I can swing that, the kids might be living large after I croak.

Same here, currently working from home and they just gave me a nice raise and I have good health insurance. Not really much sense in retiring if I don't need to.

Jake from State Farm wrote:

AvgMSUJoe wrote:Actually, if I get to work from home... don't see any reason for retiring at all unless they ask me gone. I work with a guy who is in his 70s. Works at home 4 days a week. Takes a shit ton of time for medical days and vacations... if I can swing that, the kids might be living large after I croak.

Same here, currently working from home and they just gave me a nice raise and I have good health insurance. Not really much sense in retiring if I don't need to.

It will give me something to do. AND I work for a governmental unit so my paid time off can't be beat. Not like I'm forced to 2 weeks or whatever.

I work from home and would retire tomorrow in a heartbeat if it were feasible

TravelinMan wrote:Orman is a hack. But if you can manage to do less than 4%, there’s no downside, I guess. I try to do between 2.5-3%, myself.

Maybe, but she has made tons of money by being a hack.

I originally planned to work until I was 67, however when I got into my 60's I got senioritis and made it to 65.

Of course, work from home wasn't a thing, then. If I could have done that for the last few years, then maybe 70 would be okay.

Trapper Gus wrote:https://fortune.com/2023/06/25/early-retiree-fire-couple-financially-anxious-spending-habits/

Came across this reference to a life style choice called FIRE.  Back on TOB there was a poster who was an advocate of it.

It always seemed like too much a focus on living for money rather than using money to live a life to me, and this article seems to show it, like other life style choices, can warp ones values.

The FIRE community can be a little weird. The math and the mechanics of it all are really quite simple and straight forward. But a lot of folks become almost obsessive compulsive about the savings. They'll way over do it and never have any hobbies, never go out with friends, never take vacations, etc. See the writings of Peter Adeney, aka Mr. Money Mustache, a very weird and possibly hypocritical dude. But anyway, these guys get all wound up about savings, and then those that actually make it to retirement can't adjust. They have no hobbies or friends. They have no idea how to spend money. Kind of strange.

Extremism of any kind is never good. All things in moderation.

Trapper Gus wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:Orman is a hack. But if you can manage to do less than 4%, there’s no downside, I guess. I try to do between 2.5-3%, myself.

Maybe, but she has made tons of money by being a hack.

That can be said about a lot of unsavory people.

I’m just sitting here cashing my paychecks waiting to lose my job because no one needs a financial advisor.

Motown Spartan wrote:I’m just sitting here cashing my paychecks waiting to lose my job because no one needs a financial advisor.

Tons of people need financial advisors. Although I have to wonder if some enterprising AI is going to try to muscle in on your turf in the next few years. Seems like a lot of people would fall for that.

TravelinMan wrote:

Motown Spartan wrote:I’m just sitting here cashing my paychecks waiting to lose my job because no one needs a financial advisor.

Tons of people need financial advisors. Although I have to wonder if some enterprising AI is going to try to muscle in on your turf in the next few years. Seems like a lot of people would fall for that.

I’m not afraid of AI, as a matter of fact, I’m excited that it will make my job easier. The technical components of financial advising have already been commoditized, AI will just streamline that and make internal processes more efficient.

99% of my job is about the relationships, not finances.

AvgMSUJoe wrote:Actually, if I get to work from home... don't see any reason for retiring at all unless they ask me gone. I work with a guy who is in his 70s. Works at home 4 days a week. Takes a shit ton of time for medical days and vacations... if I can swing that, the kids might be living large after I croak.

as has been well documented, I've never worked hard a day in my life.

fully realizing not everyone is as fortunate as I am, I'd be bored out of my mind if I 'retired'.  I run, ride my bike as much as I want.. take naps, etc.  You can only run, ride, nap, do yard work, shovel snow, fiddle in the garden for so long. Working gives me something to do in between.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

AvgMSUJoe wrote:Actually, if I get to work from home... don't see any reason for retiring at all unless they ask me gone. I work with a guy who is in his 70s. Works at home 4 days a week. Takes a shit ton of time for medical days and vacations... if I can swing that, the kids might be living large after I croak.

as has been well documented, I've never worked hard a day in my life.

fully realizing not everyone is as fortunate as I am, I'd be bored out of my mind if I 'retired'.  I run, ride my bike as much as I want.. take naps, etc.  You can only run, ride, nap, do yard work, shovel snow, fiddle in the garden for so long. Working gives me something to do in between.

I'm disappointed in your lack of imagination.

TravelinMan wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:
as has been well documented, I've never worked hard a day in my life.

fully realizing not everyone is as fortunate as I am, I'd be bored out of my mind if I 'retired'.  I run, ride my bike as much as I want.. take naps, etc.  You can only run, ride, nap, do yard work, shovel snow, fiddle in the garden for so long. Working gives me something to do in between.

I'm disappointed in your lack of imagination.

I'm a simple dude. I truly don't need much.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:

I'm disappointed in your lack of imagination.

I'm a simple dude. I truly don't need much.

Yeah, I get it. But time is absolutely of a finite quantity in our lives. Time is one of the most difficult things to "buy" in society. And yet people claim, "Oh, I wouldn't know what to do if I retired. I'd get bored quickly." It amazes me.

TravelinMan wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote: I'm a simple dude. I truly don't need much.

Yeah, I get it.  But time is absolutely of a finite quantity in our lives.  Time is one of the most difficult things to "buy" in society.  And yet people claim, "Oh, I wouldn't know what to do if I retired.  I'd get bored quickly."  It amazes me.  

just as I don't understand yachts, country club memberships, fancy cars, etc

on the opposite side of materialistic consumerism, maybe some people enjoy their work, what they do, how it contributes to society, the positive impact they have on others.

so we're both equally amazed at what other people view as to what adds value to life. Different strokes, my dude.

genuine personal freedom.. not some political/religious definition of it inspired to control others.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:

Yeah, I get it.  But time is absolutely of a finite quantity in our lives.  Time is one of the most difficult things to "buy" in society.  And yet people claim, "Oh, I wouldn't know what to do if I retired.  I'd get bored quickly."  It amazes me.  

just as I don't understand yachts, country club memberships, fancy cars, etc

on the opposite side of materialistic consumerism, maybe some people enjoy their work, what they do, how it contributes to society, the positive impact they have on others.

so we're both equally amazed at what other people view as to what adds value to life. Different strokes, my dude.

genuine personal freedom.. not some political/religious definition of it inspired to control others.

Supporting someone's freedom to choose is not the same as understanding their choices. I fully support their choice to continue to work. I just don't understand how working could ever be better than the freedom of not working. But as you said, to each their own. Different strokes.

TravelinMan wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:
just as I don't understand yachts, country club memberships, fancy cars, etc

on the opposite side of materialistic consumerism, maybe some people enjoy their work, what they do, how it contributes to society, the positive impact they have on others.

so we're both equally amazed at what other people view as to what adds value to life. Different strokes, my dude.

genuine personal freedom.. not some political/religious definition of it inspired to control others.

Supporting someone's freedom to choose is not the same as understanding their choices. I fully support their choice to continue to work. I just don't understand how working could ever be better than the freedom of not working. But as you said, to each their own. Different strokes.

I'd be willing to say that I don't understand a majority of Americans and what they choose to do, what they spend their money on and how they spend their time, but I've never been one to fall into the line of best fit of the scatter plot of American society.

just got motivated to check my 401-K.

nah.. just kidding. I don't think I have a 401-K. Instead,  I rode my bike today for about 42 K.. (tried to dodge some raindrops).  Took a good nap.. watched "Maine Cabin Masters" - that's turned into my go-to show when all else fails. Put some tunes on, mute the TV, grab a book.

Good way to spend a rainy day in the ghetto of East Lansing.

Trapper Gus wrote:https://fortune.com/2023/06/25/early-retiree-fire-couple-financially-anxious-spending-habits/

Came across this reference to a life style choice called FIRE.  Back on TOB there was a poster who was an advocate of it.

It always seemed like too much a focus on living for money rather than using money to live a life to me, and this article seems to show it, like other life style choices, can warp ones values.

Finally read this article. So the couple retired with $4.3M and is unhappy? At a 3.5% SWR, they're knocking back $150K a year. I can see where after years and years of dreaming of retiring that would seem kind of lack luster. I feel like they should have worked for a higher number.

This sentence is weird


Carl focused on flipping real estate to get to where they are today, which helped them sock away $10,000 in savings, accumulate $925,000 in assets, and earn $4.2 million in investments (plus $910,000 in real estate debt). 


What does they “earned investments” mean in the context of they have 935k in assets? An investment is an asset, why are they listing it separate. 


Anyway given the 910 in real estate debt a solid chunk of there is almost certainly in real estate and not really earning them a traditional return. Especially if they are airbnb owning goobers which are falling off nationwide. 


I’m just going to assume that the 4.2 is entirely real estate. With the weird phrasing it seems likely. Travis’ official advice is to sell it, pay off the debt, stop working even as a landlord and go live fat and happy off of the 150-200k you can earn a year on that money.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:This sentence is weird


Carl focused on flipping real estate to get to where they are today, which helped them sock away $10,000 in savings, accumulate $925,000 in assets, and earn $4.2 million in investments (plus $910,000 in real estate debt). 


What does they “earned investments” mean in the context of they have 935k in assets? An investment is an asset, why are they listing it separate. 


Anyway given the 910 in real estate debt a solid chunk of there is almost certainly in real estate and not really earning them a traditional return. Especially if they are airbnb owning goobers which are falling off nationwide. 


I’m just going to assume that the 4.2 is entirely real estate. With the weird phrasing it seems likely. Travis’ official advice is to sell it, pay off the debt, stop working even as a landlord and go live fat and happy off of the 150-200k you can earn a year on that money.

I don't know.

Maybe the "investments" are stocks/bonds/RITs, the assets are real estate & the debt is mortages?

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:This sentence is weird


Carl focused on flipping real estate to get to where they are today, which helped them sock away $10,000 in savings, accumulate $925,000 in assets, and earn $4.2 million in investments (plus $910,000 in real estate debt). 


What does they “earned investments” mean in the context of they have 935k in assets? An investment is an asset, why are they listing it separate. 


Anyway given the 910 in real estate debt a solid chunk of there is almost certainly in real estate and not really earning them a traditional return. Especially if they are airbnb owning goobers which are falling off nationwide. 


I’m just going to assume that the 4.2 is entirely real estate. With the weird phrasing it seems likely. Travis’ official advice is to sell it, pay off the debt, stop working even as a landlord and go live fat and happy off of the 150-200k you can earn a year on that money.

That's a good point. The more you read it, the more questions it raises.

Trapper Gus wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:This sentence is weird


Carl focused on flipping real estate to get to where they are today, which helped them sock away $10,000 in savings, accumulate $925,000 in assets, and earn $4.2 million in investments (plus $910,000 in real estate debt). 


What does they “earned investments” mean in the context of they have 935k in assets? An investment is an asset, why are they listing it separate. 


Anyway given the 910 in real estate debt a solid chunk of there is almost certainly in real estate and not really earning them a traditional return. Especially if they are airbnb owning goobers which are falling off nationwide. 


I’m just going to assume that the 4.2 is entirely real estate. With the weird phrasing it seems likely. Travis’ official advice is to sell it, pay off the debt, stop working even as a landlord and go live fat and happy off of the 150-200k you can earn a year on that money.

I don't know.

Maybe the "investments" are stocks/bonds/RITs, the assets are real estate & the debt is mortages.

Maybe, but given the real estate market lately it seems unlikely that they have 925 in RE assets, 910 in mortgages. It seems most likely that they retired in their 50s with 935 in liquid assets and 4.2m in illiquid assets, and some debt tied to them, and are concerned about cash flow. Like yeah, that’s probably not enough, especially if that 4.2 million is like an office space that is hemorrhaging tenants and the income is drying up, and the 4.2 number is just what you put on a balance sheet and not really indicative of value. But we don’t really know what it is, other than there is some amount of real estate in there

But really what had my spidey sense up is “earn” 4.2 million in investments. What’s the distinction between earn and accumulate right before it? That’s a weird way to put it.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

I don't know.

Maybe the "investments" are stocks/bonds/RITs, the assets are real estate & the debt is mortages.

Maybe, but given the real estate market lately it seems unlikely that they have 925 in RE assets, 910 in mortgages. It seems most likely that they retired in their 50s with 935 in liquid assets and 4.2m in illiquid assets, and some debt tied to them, and are concerned about cash flow. Like yeah, that’s probably not enough, especially if that 4.2 million is like an office space that is hemorrhaging tenants and the income is drying up, and the 4.2 number is just what you put on a balance sheet and not really indicative of value. But we don’t really know what it is, other than there is some amount of real estate in there

But really what had my spidey sense up is “earn” 4.2 million in investments. What’s the distinction between earn and accumulate right before it? That’s a weird way to put it.

Well, I’ve learned here that no one “earns” anything. It’s just luck. /s

TravelinMan wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

Maybe, but given the real estate market lately it seems unlikely that they have 925 in RE assets, 910 in mortgages. It seems most likely that they retired in their 50s with 935 in liquid assets and 4.2m in illiquid assets, and some debt tied to them, and are concerned about cash flow. Like yeah, that’s probably not enough, especially if that 4.2 million is like an office space that is hemorrhaging tenants and the income is drying up, and the 4.2 number is just what you put on a balance sheet and not really indicative of value. But we don’t really know what it is, other than there is some amount of real estate in there

But really what had my spidey sense up is “earn” 4.2 million in investments. What’s the distinction between earn and accumulate right before it? That’s a weird way to put it.

Well, I’ve learned here that no one “earns” anything. It’s just luck. /s

Without the "/s" you have learned over the years that it is some combination of chance (or luck) and (hard) work. Each case is different. Sometimes it is mostly chance with very little work, other times it is mostly work with very little chance.

Trapper Gus wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:

Well, I’ve learned here that no one “earns” anything. It’s just luck. /s

Without the "/s" you have learned over the years that it is some combination of chance (or luck) and (hard) work. Each case is different. Sometimes it is mostly chance with very little work, other times it is mostly work with very little chance.

Shhhh! Don't tell Bob!

TravelinMan wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

Without the "/s" you have learned over the years that it is some combination of chance (or luck) and (hard) work.  Each case is different.  Sometimes it is mostly chance with very little work, other times it is mostly work with very little chance.

Shhhh!  Don't tell Bob!

I prefer not working hard and just enjoying life.

I suspect that upsets the white male power structure that would prefer that I "work hard" making money for them.