The “I want to retire soon” thread (1 Viewer)

[SFBayDuck]

My in-laws retired in Mexico 25 years ago (in their early 50s), largely on the promise of an inheritance that was already in a trust that they've since received. They now hold that over us at times as it's just part of his mindset, but I just honestly don't consider it in my planning at all. I have plugged it in a few times just to see what a difference it might make (we're likely talking low-mid six figures so not insignificant but not like winning the lottery or anything), but it's not in my actual plan. And they could very well spend most of it down, there is no guarantee there will be anything left if they live long enough.

My parents have saved well, have some pensions that have kept their withdrawal rates in check, and equity in two homes. Like many retirees their account balances continue to go up despite being in RMDs for several years now. So it's likely there will be something left over, but again I'm not counting on it. I also have an essentially disabled sister that they're already helping, they'll sometimes bring that up with me concerned I'll consider that "unfair", but I just encourage them to help her even more if she needs it. And I always tell them when they bring the inheritance topic up that I truly hope they spend their last dollar on their last day. The only thing I'm really hoping to get is the little one bedroom, one bath cabin at the Oregon coast that just has special meaning to me having spent my summers there growing up. But if they need to sell it at some point, and I'm not in a position to buy it, so be it!

The topic takes me back to the Die with Zero book. For those that do want to leave a legacy for their kids, how impactful will it really be to give them whatever you have left when you pass, when they'll (hopefully for your sake) be in their 50s-60s-70s? If you truly want to make a difference in their lives, give it to them when it will be most impactful - college tuition, funding a Roth in their early career, down payment assistance, 529s for their kids, building memories with big family vacations, that kind of thing.

 

[-OZ-]

Are there people who do that?

My wife works with a woman whose in laws allegedly are worth $90 million.
They already have a trust fund and have their house, cars, health insurance, etc paid for by her in laws. They’re absolutely planning on “their share” of that $90 million.
Frankly, they’re pitiful in many ways.

 

[General Malaise]

My in-laws retired in Mexico 25 years ago (in their early 50s), largely on the promise of an inheritance that was already in a trust that they've since received. They now hold that over us at times as it's just part of his mindset, but I just honestly don't consider it in my planning at all. I have plugged it in a few times just to see what a difference it might make (we're likely talking low-mid six figures so not insignificant but not like winning the lottery or anything), but it's not in my actual plan. And they could very well spend most of it down, there is no guarantee there will be anything left if they live long enough.

My parents have saved well, have some pensions that have kept their withdrawal rates in check, and equity in two homes. Like many retirees their account balances continue to go up despite being in RMDs for several years now. So it's likely there will be something left over, but again I'm not counting on it. I also have an essentially disabled sister that they're already helping, they'll sometimes bring that up with me concerned I'll consider that "unfair", but I just encourage them to help her even more if she needs it. And I always tell them when they bring the inheritance topic up that I truly hope they spend their last dollar on their last day. The only thing I'm really hoping to get is the little one bedroom, one bath cabin at the Oregon coast that just has special meaning to me having spent my summers there growing up. But if they need to sell it at some point, and I'm not in a position to buy it, so be it!

The topic takes me back to the Die with Zero book. For those that do want to leave a legacy for their kids, how impactful will it really be to give them whatever you have left when you pass, when they'll (hopefully for your sake) be in their 50s-60s-70s? If you truly want to make a difference in their lives, give it to them when it will be most impactful - college tuition, funding a Roth in their early career, down payment assistance, 529s for their kids, building memories with big family vacations, that kind of thing.

What if you formed an LLC with a fellow FBG and we both bought it? Or something.....

 

[fruity pebbles]

Are there people who do that?

My wife works with a woman whose in laws allegedly are worth $90 million.
They already have a trust fund and have their house, cars, health insurance, etc paid for by her in laws. They’re absolutely planning on “their share” of that $90 million.
Frankly, they’re pitiful in many ways.

My 8 year old son’s best friend’s parents have a trust from the father. They’ve actually spoken about it. They can draw up to 500k a year but any single purchases over 25k have to be approved by the family’s financial planner. Father fishes all day and the mother works on her art. I find them both a little pathetic…….maybe I’m just jealous.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Completely agree with everyone that you should not factor in any inheritance into a retirement plan. Your parents may decide to leave it all to that preacher they saw on TV.

However in our case, we will likely to get a pretty large inheritance in the next 10-20 years.

So what we have done is take a risk by recently stopping the addition of money to our retirement plans, other than the company match level in a 401k. Instead we take some of the money that would go into retirement coffers (not all because we're human and do like to do some fun stuff with extra money) and invest that in taxable accounts.

Our idea is that we want to try to get enough to retire by the mid-late 50s (so 4-6 years from now) and make it as long as possible without tapping retirement money.

We do have enough saved to make a good retirement from a normal mid-60s retirement time frame. We just need to try to not tap that as long as we can, just in case we don't get an inheritance down the road. Health expenses will be the toughest thing to handle of course, so we will see if one of us needs to work part time a little longer just to get reasonable healthcare.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Are there people who do that?

My wife works with a woman whose in laws allegedly are worth $90 million.
They already have a trust fund and have their house, cars, health insurance, etc paid for by her in laws. They’re absolutely planning on “their share” of that $90 million.
Frankly, they’re pitiful in many ways.

My 8 year old son’s best friend’s parents have a trust from the father. They’ve actually spoken about it. They can draw up to 500k a year but any single purchases over 25k have to be approved by the family’s financial planner. Father fishes all day and the mother works on her art. I find them both a little pathetic…….maybe I’m just jealous.

Probably a little of both. Have they ever worked? We do want to share more (if we get it) with our kids early on in their lives, as Duck mentioned, but at the same time, not spoil them to never need to work or anything like that.

 

[fruity pebbles]

Are there people who do that?

My wife works with a woman whose in laws allegedly are worth $90 million.
They already have a trust fund and have their house, cars, health insurance, etc paid for by her in laws. They’re absolutely planning on “their share” of that $90 million.
Frankly, they’re pitiful in many ways.

My 8 year old son’s best friend’s parents have a trust from the father. They’ve actually spoken about it. They can draw up to 500k a year but any single purchases over 25k have to be approved by the family’s financial planner. Father fishes all day and the mother works on her art. I find them both a little pathetic…….maybe I’m just jealous.

Probably a little of both. Have they ever worked? We do want to share more (if we get it) with our kids early on in their lives, as Duck mentioned, but at the same time, not spoil them to never working or anything like that.

I don’t think so. She may have before they got married. But it’s a been a long time for either.

 

[dgreen]

The topic takes me back to the Die with Zero book. For those that do want to leave a legacy for their kids, how impactful will it really be to give them whatever you have left when you pass, when they'll (hopefully for your sake) be in their 50s-60s-70s? If you truly want to make a difference in their lives, give it to them when it will be most impactful - college tuition, funding a Roth in their early career, down payment assistance, 529s for their kids, building memories with big family vacations, that kind of thing.

I think all of those things are possible at some point, but the way I think about it is that I need to get to a particular point where I'm confident in what I can and can't do. I'd like to get to retirement and, as has been discussed in this thread, make sure I'm not hitting a big downturn in those first few years of retirement before I know what everything might look like. I'd hate to spend heavy on them early and then risk them having to take care of me later in life. I'd rather get them help later and have more confidence they won't be financially responsible for me.

My youngest is a HS senior, so I do think it will be interesting to see how our spending can change as it becomes just the two of us at home. As my kids grow older and become more independent, that should open chunks of money to do some of the stuff you mention while also feeling confident in retirement. I definitely want to do the vacation thing. We haven't done very many great family vacations, so that's something I'd really like to do for them/us.

 

[Peggy]

Parents already passed. Got about 180k all told several years back after already being a self made millionaire.

Biggest thing my dad left me was his frugality. Blue collar worked for every dime and never went into debt, never bought anything he couldn't pay for. Drank powdered milk when I was a kid. Always turning down the thermostat when mom wasn't looking. He didn't know anything about investing, lost inflation value on his money every single year. It worked though, I've never been in debt other than a mortgage or 0% loan for a short term.

 

[-OZ-]

We haven't done very many great family vacations, so that's something I'd really like to do for them/us.

That’s one thing we’ve been doing well lately. We don’t fly, but we take 4 vacations each year. March with most of the kids and the wife one week, then my oldest the next week. After school gets out we’ll hit the Gulf, then a month later visit my family. Fall break is HHI.
I’ll happily work another year or two if I continue to take multiple breaks every year.

 

[SFBayDuck]

Great thread! I need to Hipple this thing to pick up a lot of detail and insight, but based on the last couple pages I am curious if those of you looking at the ability for full income replacement are modifying your target starting number based on the 'windfalls' that will come later.

For example, my initial hope is to be ready to retire between 55-60 with full income replacement. Based on the large disparity in my lifetime income compared to my wife's, I am planning for her to take SS at 62 and I will wait until 70. That way (IIUC), she can replace her payment with mine in the likely event I expire before her. If we aren't able to pay it off first, we have a Home Equity loan that will expire around the same time as her SS kicks in. Switching from Obamacare to Medicare, paying off the first mortgage and finally taking my SS payment will reduce our outflows over the first 5-15 years by over 50%.

So in theory, I assume I don't need as large of a nest egg and can spend down over the first 15 years instead of planning to maintain it.

This thread went in the direction of inheritances, but it seems your initial topic was more about SS and how that factors into planning. It's another reason why the straight 4% rule is too simple, as it doesn't take into account any changes in spending (other than inflation) or other sources of income that may become available later in life (like SS).

SS is it's own topic, with lots of thoughts on how to handle. There are real concerns about the future of SS, we all know that. Something will have to change, and a cut in benefits could be a part of that. So I do think if you aren't already on the doorstep of receiving it, it might make sense to be a little conservative. I'm 18 years away from 70 so I personally use an estimate of 70% what their calculator shows me, hoping that will be conservative enough. I've thought about pushing it out to 72 as well, as a buffer against a possible shift in the full retirement age. And some people (like most in the FIRE movement) are just more comfortable not including it at all in their planning.

I also don't think about "income replacement", but rather try to focus on what my expected expenses will be. Trying to match your current income, which has to cover things like employment taxes, saving for retirement, kids expenses, etc, might leave you overshooting the bogey. So if you do go that route, be sure to back those things out. Expenses can admittedly be tough to project, especially over 30-40 years. And there are different models - constant CPI increase, Blanchett's retirement spending smile, Firecalc has their "reality retirement plan", etc. I'm currently using a version of the spending smile in my planning, with an additional spike with LTC tacked on for the last three years.

To your last point, yes that's essentially correct, although unless your guaranteed income sources will cover all of your projected expenses you obviously wouldn't want to spend down your whole portfolio in those early years. This is the "distribution hatchet" with withdrawals largest at the beginning then dropping as pensions or SS are added to the mix. There is software out there that allows you to plug in multi-stage retirement plans, even starting while still working, that can then spit out probability of success based on Monte Carlo simulations or historical data. So in your case you could plug in expected continued savings between now and 55-60, what you'll need to withdraw to cover expenses from then until SS, and then continue to model from there. The FInancial Goals section on Portfolio Visualizer is one I've used, and I like that as you can also plug in your specific portfolio allocations (even changing them over time). You can also just plug in a simple 60/40 allocation (or whatever) on the Starting and Ending portfolio and spend the bulk of your time in the Financial Goals tab to set up those various time periods.

 

[SFBayDuck]

I think all of those things are possible at some point, but the way I think about it is that I need to get to a particular point where I'm confident in what I can and can't do. I'd like to get to retirement and, as has been discussed in this thread, make sure I'm not hitting a big downturn in those first few years of retirement before I know what everything might look like. I'd hate to spend heavy on them early and then risk them having to take care of me later in life. I'd rather get them help later and have more confidence they won't be financially responsible for me.

My youngest is a HS senior, so I do think it will be interesting to see how our spending can change as it becomes just the two of us at home. As my kids grow older and become more independent, that should open chunks of money to do some of the stuff you mention while also feeling confident in retirement. I definitely want to do the vacation thing. We haven't done very many great family vacations, so that's something I'd really like to do for them/us.

Yup, it's a balance. You can borrow for your kids education, you can't borrow for retirement. And the greatest gift you can give your kids just might be not having to rely on them to take care of you.

 

[Sand]

Great thread! I need to Hipple this thing to pick up a lot of detail and insight, but based on the last couple pages I am curious if those of you looking at the ability for full income replacement are modifying your target starting number based on the 'windfalls' that will come later.

For example, my initial hope is to be ready to retire between 55-60 with full income replacement. Based on the large disparity in my lifetime income compared to my wife's, I am planning for her to take SS at 62 and I will wait until 70. That way (IIUC), she can replace her payment with mine in the likely event I expire before her. If we aren't able to pay it off first, we have a Home Equity loan that will expire around the same time as her SS kicks in. Switching from Obamacare to Medicare, paying off the first mortgage and finally taking my SS payment will reduce our outflows over the first 5-15 years by over 50%.

So in theory, I assume I don't need as large of a nest egg and can spend down over the first 15 years instead of planning to maintain it.

The inheritance thing has been beaten pretty good, so let me comment on SS. We also plan on 62/70 as my lifetime earnings are significantly higher. The chances of my wife outliving me are super high, so I really just want longevity insurance for her. I'll work as long as needed to fill in savings needed before that.

I definitely don't plan on full income replacement - for the last 5 years we've saved close to 55% of income. (And we live just fine wanting for nothing - we definitely are not frugal extremists or anything; just did a big Alaska trip, etc.). I am actually trying to spend more as we don't need to save that much now. But my income keeps going up, so se la vie. I have a very good record of expenses going back a ways and have good estimates of what drops off and what gets added (medical insurance) when I do tell my work that I'm gone. Right now I'm at a three year rolling average of 35x expenses and total expenses probably don't change much once I'm out. So definitely working with expense covering with some lagniappe, not bothering with thinking about income replacement.

Retirement income will be guided by VPW dynamic withdrawals as static rules make no sense. Even then I find the recommendations to be high, so will use it as a cap rather than a set rule.

 

[djmich]

Damn you guys and your inheritances!

 

[Sand]

Are there people who do that?

My wife works with a woman whose in laws allegedly are worth $90 million.
They already have a trust fund and have their house, cars, health insurance, etc paid for by her in laws. They’re absolutely planning on “their share” of that $90 million.
Frankly, they’re pitiful in many ways.

My 8 year old son’s best friend’s parents have a trust from the father. They’ve actually spoken about it. They can draw up to 500k a year but any single purchases over 25k have to be approved by the family’s financial planner. Father fishes all day and the mother works on her art. I find them both a little pathetic…….maybe I’m just jealous.

I don't think so. My uncle, as much as I loved him, spent his life in a bedroom of my grandfather's house. Not a life well lived. I'd like to go out on the "life well lived" side of things and preach to my kids about the value of that. But maybe I'm a nutcase in that line of thought.

 

[Peggy]

Great thread! I need to Hipple this thing to pick up a lot of detail and insight, but based on the last couple pages I am curious if those of you looking at the ability for full income replacement are modifying your target starting number based on the 'windfalls' that will come later.

For example, my initial hope is to be ready to retire between 55-60 with full income replacement. Based on the large disparity in my lifetime income compared to my wife's, I am planning for her to take SS at 62 and I will wait until 70. That way (IIUC), she can replace her payment with mine in the likely event I expire before her. If we aren't able to pay it off first, we have a Home Equity loan that will expire around the same time as her SS kicks in. Switching from Obamacare to Medicare, paying off the first mortgage and finally taking my SS payment will reduce our outflows over the first 5-15 years by over 50%.

So in theory, I assume I don't need as large of a nest egg and can spend down over the first 15 years instead of planning to maintain it.

The inheritance thing has been beaten pretty good, so let me comment on SS. We also plan on 62/70 as my lifetime earnings are significantly higher. The chances of my wife outliving me are super high, so I really just want longevity insurance for her. I'll work as long as needed to fill in savings needed before that.

I definitely don't plan on full income replacement - for the last 5 years we've saved close to 55% of income. (And we live just fine wanting for nothing - we definitely are not frugal extremists or anything; just did a big Alaska trip, etc.). I am actually trying to spend more as we don't need to save that much now. But my income keeps going up, so se la vie. I have a very good record of expenses going back a ways and have good estimates of what drops off and what gets added (medical insurance) when I do tell my work that I'm gone. Right now I'm at a three year rolling average of 35x expenses and total expenses probably don't change much once I'm out. So definitely working with expense covering with some lagniappe, not bothering with thinking about income replacement.

Retirement income will be guided by VPW dynamic withdrawals as static rules make no sense. Even then I find the recommendations to be high, so will use it as a cap rather than a set rule.

Yeah I don't think of it as income replacement at all. I think of it as covering the spend which I too have been tracking for years so I know what we spend per year. I definitely don't need to replace my paycheck, hopefully I'm paying very little tax, and yeah only living off half income after investments as is. Much easier for my brain to call it spend. Track your spending, that's what you need, not your paycheck.

 

[SFBayDuck]

lagniappe

had to look this one up, I've literally never seen this word before!

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Great thread! I need to Hipple this thing to pick up a lot of detail and insight, but based on the last couple pages I am curious if those of you looking at the ability for full income replacement are modifying your target starting number based on the 'windfalls' that will come later.

For example, my initial hope is to be ready to retire between 55-60 with full income replacement. Based on the large disparity in my lifetime income compared to my wife's, I am planning for her to take SS at 62 and I will wait until 70. That way (IIUC), she can replace her payment with mine in the likely event I expire before her. If we aren't able to pay it off first, we have a Home Equity loan that will expire around the same time as her SS kicks in. Switching from Obamacare to Medicare, paying off the first mortgage and finally taking my SS payment will reduce our outflows over the first 5-15 years by over 50%.

So in theory, I assume I don't need as large of a nest egg and can spend down over the first 15 years instead of planning to maintain it.

The inheritance thing has been beaten pretty good, so let me comment on SS. We also plan on 62/70 as my lifetime earnings are significantly higher. The chances of my wife outliving me are super high, so I really just want longevity insurance for her. I'll work as long as needed to fill in savings needed before that.

I definitely don't plan on full income replacement - for the last 5 years we've saved close to 55% of income. (And we live just fine wanting for nothing - we definitely are not frugal extremists or anything; just did a big Alaska trip, etc.). I am actually trying to spend more as we don't need to save that much now. But my income keeps going up, so se la vie. I have a very good record of expenses going back a ways and have good estimates of what drops off and what gets added (medical insurance) when I do tell my work that I'm gone. Right now I'm at a three year rolling average of 35x expenses and total expenses probably don't change much once I'm out. So definitely working with expense covering with some lagniappe, not bothering with thinking about income replacement.

Retirement income will be guided by VPW dynamic withdrawals as static rules make no sense. Even then I find the recommendations to be high, so will use it as a cap rather than a set rule.

Yeah I don't think of it as income replacement at all. I think of it as covering the spend which I too have been tracking for years so I know what we spend per year. I definitely don't need to replace my paycheck, hopefully I'm paying very little tax, and yeah only living off half income after investments as is. Much easier for my brain to call it spend. Track your spending, that's what you need, not your paycheck.

Appreciate the thoughts on this. Just discussed it with my CPA wife (who tracks all of our spend) and it took way too long to explain. I finally just said “trust me on this.”

 

[Sand]

lagniappe

had to look this one up, I've literally never seen this word before!

Aa a consequence of growing up in New Orleans I have a number of French words rattling around in my head.

 

[SFBayDuck]

The FInancial Goals section on Portfolio Visualizer is one I've used, and I like that as you can also plug in your specific portfolio allocations (even changing them over time). You can also just plug in a simple 60/40 allocation (or whatever) on the Starting and Ending portfolio and spend the bulk of your time in the Financial Goals tab to set up those various time periods.

Worked up an example, because it's fun to play with this thing and tweak the variables on a Friday afternoon going into a three day weekend! These aren't my exact numbers, just an example based on my current age and retiring in 3 years. But it's multistage covering a few more years of working, a bridge to 59 1/2 (so I can tweak this number and reduce withdrawals if I work part time), from 60-70 when I'd claim SS, reduced withdrawal from 70-80 due to that SS, reduced spending from 80-92 during the no-go years, and then a big spike from ages 92-95 for LTC. And it's all inflation adjusted (historic rates and standard deviation).

What's fun is to play with the portfolio makeup. With a more diversified portfolio with Large cap growth, small cap value, long term treasuries, short term treasuries, and gold, 79% of the time the portfolio survived the 10,000 simulations. If I change it to a standard 60/40, that drops to 58%! Speaks to the importance of portfolio construction in a drawdown portfolio. It's also pretty enlightening to see the final portfolio values if you experience above 50th percentile returns (log scale is easier to read).

For those of you here into that kind of thing (you know who you are!), you can also force a bad sequence of returns in there to see what would happen if you got a bad first 1-2-3-10 years, or change the inflation. So if you're trying to make your plan bulletproof for years of economic pain and misery, you could say the first 10 years were horrible, you could increase inflation to 10%, and you'd see you'd need 10x more money/$10M at the start to have a portfolio survival rate of 80% at those same spending levels. Also, in that scenario LTC costs over $5M in the last year of life. Fun.

Is this calculator infallible and to be used as the final source of truth? Of course not, but it's a good tool to put in the belt along with others to analyze and model your plans, and it's much more flexible than something like firecalc. I'm planning on checking out New Retirement and a few others to see how they compare to each other, both from a usability/flexibility perspective but also in terms of the range of outputs they generate.

 

[NutterButter]

The FInancial Goals section on Portfolio Visualizer is one I've used, and I like that as you can also plug in your specific portfolio allocations (even changing them over time). You can also just plug in a simple 60/40 allocation (or whatever) on the Starting and Ending portfolio and spend the bulk of your time in the Financial Goals tab to set up those various time periods.

Worked up an example, because it's fun to play with this thing and tweak the variables on a Friday afternoon going into a three day weekend! These aren't my exact numbers, just an example based on my current age and retiring in 3 years. But it's multistage covering a few more years of working, a bridge to 59 1/2 (so I can tweak this number and reduce withdrawals if I work part time), from 60-70 when I'd claim SS, reduced withdrawal from 70-80 due to that SS, reduced spending from 80-92 during the no-go years, and then a big spike from ages 92-95 for LTC. And it's all inflation adjusted (historic rates and standard deviation).

What's fun is to play with the portfolio makeup. With a more diversified portfolio with Large cap growth, small cap value, long term treasuries, short term treasuries, and gold, 79% of the time the portfolio survived the 10,000 simulations. If I change it to a standard 60/40, that drops to 58%! Speaks to the importance of portfolio construction in a drawdown portfolio. It's also pretty enlightening to see the final portfolio values if you experience above 50th percentile returns (log scale is easier to read).

For those of you here into that kind of thing (you know who you are!), you can also force a bad sequence of returns in there to see what would happen if you got a bad first 1-2-3-10 years, or change the inflation. So if you're trying to make your plan bulletproof for years of economic pain and misery, you could say the first 10 years were horrible, you could increase inflation to 10%, and you'd see you'd need 10x more money/$10M at the start to have a portfolio survival rate of 80% at those same spending levels. Also, in that scenario LTC costs over $5M in the last year of life. Fun.

Is this calculator infallible and to be used as the final source of truth? Of course not, but it's a good tool to put in the belt along with others to analyze and model your plans, and it's much more flexible than something like firecalc. I'm planning on checking out New Retirement and a few others to see how they compare to each other, both from a usability/flexibility perspective but also in terms of the range of outputs they generate.

That tool looks amazing. I'm gonna invest a lot of hours into it over time. Its crazy how much you can configure. Briefly looked for something like that the other day when i was asking about cash bucket strategies. It should give anyone an appreciation of how a diversified portfolio can mitigate risk. THANK YOU!

 

[SFBayDuck]

That tool looks amazing. I'm gonna invest a lot of hours into it over time. Its crazy how much you can configure. Briefly looked for something like that the other day when i was asking about cash bucket strategies. It should give anyone an appreciation of how a diversified portfolio can mitigate risk. THANK YOU!

Enjoy!!! That site used to be even better, but in the last year they locked much of the data behind a paywall. I've considered paying because it has so many great tools.

It's interesting comparing these types of models relying on monte carlo simulations. They consistently come up with withdrawal rates much higher than 4%. I did something similar on firecalc this afternoon customizing as much as I could to get close to that Portfolio Visualizer scenario, and with an 8.1% withdrawal rate (with consistent spending across time and including SS), I got a 94% success rate - as long as I customized the portfolio. If I leave it as the standard "total market" default, the success rate is only 66%! That's been the biggest a-ha moment for me this year since listening to Risk Parity Radio and better understanding those concepts *- we can do better with portfolio construction, and it isn't hard. I used to just leave the default portfolios (usually 60/40) in these tools, and it's consistently a 15-25% lower success rate than optimizing with just a basic, actually diversified portfolio. As I've said before, the original author of the 4% study himself has said that 4.8% is way more appropriate with just a little improvement on the portfolio than the 50/50 he originally used.

This again speaks to what 4% actually solves for - surviving the worst sequence of returns that's ever happened. That said, while I'm totally comfortable with 5% as a safe number and 6% as a realistic one (as long as you have some spending flexibility), I have a hard time mentally getting too far past that point, despite the data and these models. But if you can get comfortable with an 85% or 90% "success rate", it sure opens up a lot of possibilities to spend a lot more money in retirement. I think the key is, especially if early retiring, having a plan to pivot either your spending or income if you do get hit with a poor early sequence of returns.

*anyone who is interested, Frank from that podcast was a guest on another podcast just this week that gives a decent overview of the idea. They don't get into some key concepts like the higher than you'd think correlation of a total bond fund to a total equity fund, or how international funds aren't very diversified from domestic funds, but it hits the basics.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

That tool looks amazing. I'm gonna invest a lot of hours into it over time. Its crazy how much you can configure. Briefly looked for something like that the other day when i was asking about cash bucket strategies. It should give anyone an appreciation of how a diversified portfolio can mitigate risk. THANK YOU!

Enjoy!!! That site used to be even better, but in the last year they locked much of the data behind a paywall. I've considered paying because it has so many great tools.

It's interesting comparing these types of models relying on monte carlo simulations. They consistently come up with withdrawal rates much higher than 4%. I did something similar on firecalc this afternoon customizing as much as I could to get close to that Portfolio Visualizer scenario, and with an 8.1% withdrawal rate (with consistent spending across time and including SS), I got a 94% success rate - as long as I customized the portfolio. If I leave it as the standard "total market" default, the success rate is only 66%! That's been the biggest a-ha moment for me this year since listening to Risk Parity Radio and better understanding those concepts *- we can do better with portfolio construction, and it isn't hard. I used to just leave the default portfolios (usually 60/40) in these tools, and it's consistently a 15-25% lower success rate than optimizing with just a basic, actually diversified portfolio. As I've said before, the original author of the 4% study himself has said that 4.8% is way more appropriate with just a little improvement on the portfolio than the 50/50 he originally used.

This again speaks to what 4% actually solves for - surviving the worst sequence of returns that's ever happened. That said, while I'm totally comfortable with 5% as a safe number and 6% as a realistic one (as long as you have some spending flexibility), I have a hard time mentally getting too far past that point, despite the data and these models. But if you can get comfortable with an 85% or 90% "success rate", it sure opens up a lot of possibilities to spend a lot more money in retirement. I think the key is, especially if early retiring, having a plan to pivot either your spending or income if you do get hit with a poor early sequence of returns.

*anyone who is interested, Frank from that podcast was a guest on another podcast just this week that gives a decent overview of the idea. They don't get into some key concepts like the higher than you'd think correlation of a total bond fund to a total equity fund, or how international funds aren't very diversified from domestic funds, but it hits the basics.

This is really interesting, thanks for sharing. As someone who works in insurance and digests reams of analysis from risk models on a monthly basis, your overall takeaways make sense. A lot of the discussion in here is about scenarios that embed so many layers of conservatism into the analyses that you are basically talking about extreme tail events in the distribution of possible outcomes. But the idea that the 4% rule could look more like 6, 7 or even 8%……well, it comes down to risk tolerance. Can you handle a 1-in-10 chance that you run out of money? Or to one of your points, do you have a plan that allows you to pivot your spending or income if you have a sequence of poor returns early on?

 

[Peggy]

Talking with my old retired neighbor - looking ahead a few years to medicare, it's not as complicated as it's made out to be A+B and D LNMOP. You just get a medicare advantage plan and that has A+B and usually D with vision and dental all included. He pays $175 a month with very little out of pocket expense after that. medicare.gov website even lays it out like that where the advantage plan is your first choice. You really have to hunt around to find a place to buy A, B and D separately.

According to him though, the difference is you have to make sure to find doctors in your area that are in plan where traditional medicare plans have to be accepted anywhere.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

This is a stellar thread. Great reminder of why this place is such a helpful community. @Joe Bryant

 

[matttyl]

Talking with my old retired neighbor - looking ahead a few years to medicare, it's not as complicated as it's made out to be A+B and D LNMOP. You just get a medicare advantage plan and that has A+B and usually D with vision and dental all included. He pays $175 a month with very little out of pocket expense after that. medicare.gov website even lays it out like that where the advantage plan is your first choice. You really have to hunt around to find a place to buy A, B and D separately.

According to him though, the difference is you have to make sure to find doctors in your area that are in plan where traditional medicare plans have to be accepted anywhere.

I would highly recommend NOT getting a Medicare advantage. It replaces parts A and B, but does so with a private insurance company with their insurance network. If a doctor you need to see isn’t in network, you’re out of luck - and most (especially in VA where you will be) will have limited HMO type networks. You may want to get traditional A and B from the government with a Medicare supplement (aka medigap plan).

 

[SFBayDuck]

Did some light reading over the weekend. I knocked out a book called How Much Money Do I Need To Retire - decent book, nothing earth-shattering. He talks a lot about the limitations of Monte Carlo and other retirement calculators, while also pitching how his is much better. But it's actually not nearly as good as the Portfolio Visualizer tool I linked above, so nothing too helpful there on that front. In the end his conclusion seems to that there are too many unknown variables to model out what may happen, so you should reduce your spend (because you can control that) and that a Cash Flow Model (rental income, annuities, business income, dividends, etc) is superior to an Asset Based (stocks/bonds) Model. Not too controversial, I suppose - we all would love to have multiple streams of income during retirement, but we also don't all want to be landlords or run a business.

He is also a believer in a valuation-based approach to estimating future returns - if PE/CAPE ratios are high, forward returns will be lower so your SWR would be as well. Earlyretirementnow.com has also talked about this in his SWR series. What I'm trying to better understand is whether PE/CAPE ratios are actually changing over time. Do they really have a mean to revert to? Or are companies just more efficient and productive now than in the past, so valuations should be higher? If you look at the charts of historical PE ratios for the S&P, the last 35 years sure don't look like the prior 140. If you scroll down a little and look at the Shiller PE ratio, other than a dip below it during the GFC, we've been above the historical mean for almost 35 years now. And that makes sense to me - tech companies at scale are just way more profitable than the manufacturing and finance heavy markets of the past. So while there is still likely a correlation of valuation to forward returns, perhaps we should reconsider what is low vs normal vs high? Or maybe it actually will all revert back to much lower valuations and market returns for the next decade or two are just going to be much lower than what we've seen the past few decades.


I also read a paper from Pfau and Kitces called Reducing Retirement Risk with a Rising Equity Glidepath. The conclusion (which goes against the standard of falling equity allocations going into and through retirement):

....for those households looking to maximize their level of sustainable retirement income, and/or to reduce the potential magnitude of any shortfalls in adverse scenarios, portfolios that start off in the vicinity of 20 percent to 40 percent in equities and rise to the level of 60 percent to 80 percent in equities generally perform better than static rebalanced portfolios or declining equity glide paths.

A common theme in both is that they each talked about the importance of the initial 7-15 years or so to your outcome (running out of money or not). It's pretty much the whole ballgame. From the study:

As Kitces (2008) showed, in the case of a 30-year time horizon, the outcome of a withdrawal scenario is dictated almost entirely by the real returns of the portfolio for the first 15 years. If the returns are good, the retiree is so far ahead relative to the original goal that a subsequent bear market in the second half of retirement has little impact. Although it is true that final wealth may be highly volatile in the end, the initial spending goal will not be threatened. By contrast, if the returns are bad in the first half of retirement, the portfolio is so stressed that the good returns that follow are absolutely crucial to carry the portfolio through to the end........

......In other words, in the scenarios where equity returns are bad early on, rising equity glide paths are crucial. In scenarios where equity returns are good early on, the retiree is so far ahead it doesn’t matter (relative to achieving the original goal). Rising equity glide paths create a “heads you win, tails you don’t lose” outcome in securing a starting goal.

My own tl/dr summary: for those looking to push the SWR a bit (5%+) having a flexible plan (income/expenses) in the crucial first decade or so of retirement, along with a rising equity glidepath, seems like a good way to combat a poor sequence of returns.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

A common theme in both is that they each talked about the importance of the initial 7-15 years or so to your outcome (running out of money or not). It's pretty much the whole ballgame. From the study:

As Kitces (2008) showed, in the case of a 30-year time horizon, the outcome of a withdrawal scenario is dictated almost entirely by the real returns of the portfolio for the first 15 years. If the returns are good, the retiree is so far ahead relative to the original goal that a subsequent bear market in the second half of retirement has little impact. Although it is true that final wealth may be highly volatile in the end, the initial spending goal will not be threatened. By contrast, if the returns are bad in the first half of retirement, the portfolio is so stressed that the good returns that follow are absolutely crucial to carry the portfolio through to the end........

......In other words, in the scenarios where equity returns are bad early on, rising equity glide paths are crucial. In scenarios where equity returns are good early on, the retiree is so far ahead it doesn’t matter (relative to achieving the original goal). Rising equity glide paths create a “heads you win, tails you don’t lose” outcome in securing a starting goal.

My own tl/dr summary: for those looking to push the SWR a bit (5%+) having a flexible plan (income/expenses) in the crucial first decade or so of retirement, along with a rising equity glidepath, seems like a good way to combat a poor sequence of returns.

Great stuff. Like Kitces stuff. Regarding the bold, the beauty of this approach, IMO, is that the first decade of retirement is when it is easiest to adjust spending since it's the Go-Go years and most people are generally healthy and just knocking stuff off their bucket list. You may plan to spend 3 weeks in Italy and Australia every year but if you start getting a poor sequence of returns, just dial that back for a few years and hope to do it later in retirement when you still can. But I've always thought that most people do the opposite, spending way too conservatively during the first decade of so with average to above average market return and then realizing they missed the best time to spend the extra money.

 

[SFBayDuck]

But I've always thought that most people do the opposite, spending way too conservatively during the first decade of so with average to above average market return and then realizing they missed the best time to spend the extra money.

Agreed. First, some of us won't make it past that first decade, and we can't know if we'll be in that group or not.

And for the larger majority of us that do live into their 80s and beyond, most aren't doing much at that point. If you missed those early years when you could be active and travel and do what you really want to do, you don't get them back. Unfortunately my parents are in that bucket, they were planning a couple more big trips but it's pretty obvious that just isn't happening now (of course Covid shutdowns had something to do with that, as it basically happened during their last "good window").

 

[Gatorade]

Talking with my old retired neighbor - looking ahead a few years to medicare, it's not as complicated as it's made out to be A+B and D LNMOP. You just get a medicare advantage plan and that has A+B and usually D with vision and dental all included. He pays $175 a month with very little out of pocket expense after that. medicare.gov website even lays it out like that where the advantage plan is your first choice. You really have to hunt around to find a place to buy A, B and D separately.

According to him though, the difference is you have to make sure to find doctors in your area that are in plan where traditional medicare plans have to be accepted anywhere.

I would highly recommend NOT getting a Medicare advantage. It replaces parts A and B, but does so with a private insurance company with their insurance network. If a doctor you need to see isn’t in network, you’re out of luck - and most (especially in VA where you will be) will have limited HMO type networks. You may want to get traditional A and B from the government with a Medicare supplement (aka medigap plan).

I have a Medicare advantage plan from Humana. Any out of network visits only cost me a $5 copay. The best part is it cost me nothing. They actually deposit $174 in my bank account every month. Not sure why. I don't ask stupid questions.

 

[matttyl]

Talking with my old retired neighbor - looking ahead a few years to medicare, it's not as complicated as it's made out to be A+B and D LNMOP. You just get a medicare advantage plan and that has A+B and usually D with vision and dental all included. He pays $175 a month with very little out of pocket expense after that. medicare.gov website even lays it out like that where the advantage plan is your first choice. You really have to hunt around to find a place to buy A, B and D separately.

According to him though, the difference is you have to make sure to find doctors in your area that are in plan where traditional medicare plans have to be accepted anywhere.

I would highly recommend NOT getting a Medicare advantage. It replaces parts A and B, but does so with a private insurance company with their insurance network. If a doctor you need to see isn’t in network, you’re out of luck - and most (especially in VA where you will be) will have limited HMO type networks. You may want to get traditional A and B from the government with a Medicare supplement (aka medigap plan).

I have a Medicare advantage plan from Humana. Any out of network visits only cost me a $5 copay. The best part is it cost me nothing. They actually deposit $174 in my bank account every month. Not sure why. I don't ask stupid questions.

Because they have acquired a promise off the books of the federal government. Instead of the government promising to cover you with “premium free” part A (hospital coverage) and likely low premium part B (doctor coverage), which would obviously cost them money - that promise has been shifted to a private insurance company who now take over that responsibility, and the federal government pays them to do so. Humana in your case purchased it and are being paid to do it, and they give you some of what they are being paid to do it. So instead of you having little to no out of pocket medical expenses as you would with traditional Medicare with a supplement, you pay a copay when you have a doctor visit, and you likely have a deductible and a max out of pocket that for most med advantage plans is a few thousand dollars, and to get the best benefits you have to see in network participating doctors, which can be tough in more rural areas. Really it makes your coverage when you’re 65+ look and act more like the coverage you likely had before you were 65.

 

[Desert_Power]

But I've always thought that most people do the opposite, spending way too conservatively during the first decade of so with average to above average market return and then realizing they missed the best time to spend the extra money.

Agreed. First, some of us won't make it past that first decade, and we can't know if we'll be in that group or not.

And for the larger majority of us that do live into their 80s and beyond, most aren't doing much at that point. If you missed those early years when you could be active and travel and do what you really want to do, you don't get them back.

This is another place where the "experience dividend" comes in handy. At least until memory loss gets you...

 

[Peggy]

Talking with my old retired neighbor - looking ahead a few years to medicare, it's not as complicated as it's made out to be A+B and D LNMOP. You just get a medicare advantage plan and that has A+B and usually D with vision and dental all included. He pays $175 a month with very little out of pocket expense after that. medicare.gov website even lays it out like that where the advantage plan is your first choice. You really have to hunt around to find a place to buy A, B and D separately.

According to him though, the difference is you have to make sure to find doctors in your area that are in plan where traditional medicare plans have to be accepted anywhere.

I would highly recommend NOT getting a Medicare advantage. It replaces parts A and B, but does so with a private insurance company with their insurance network. If a doctor you need to see isn’t in network, you’re out of luck - and most (especially in VA where you will be) will have limited HMO type networks. You may want to get traditional A and B from the government with a Medicare supplement (aka medigap plan).

Are you sure because the website spits out 24 different plans for me in VA (compared to my neighbor in a highly populated city in the PNW shows 49). So half as much but still plenty. It lists PPO with in and out of network maximums. Like @Gatorade said it's only $174 a month. My neighbor gets all kinds of benefits from free gym memberships to free golf. Does sound like a house of cards tho.

HumanaChoice H5216-271 (PPO)​

UHC Medicare Advantage TC-0001 (PPO)​

HumanaChoice R1390-001 (Regional PPO)​

Humana USAA Honor (Regional PPO)​

Cigna True Choice Medicare (PPO)​

That's just the first few PPOs. There are a lot of HMOs too, I'd say about half and half.

And if what you say is true it bothers me that the website is designed to guide you towards Medicare Advantage.

 

[SFBayDuck]

But I've always thought that most people do the opposite, spending way too conservatively during the first decade of so with average to above average market return and then realizing they missed the best time to spend the extra money.

Agreed. First, some of us won't make it past that first decade, and we can't know if we'll be in that group or not.

And for the larger majority of us that do live into their 80s and beyond, most aren't doing much at that point. If you missed those early years when you could be active and travel and do what you really want to do, you don't get them back.

This is another place where the "experience dividend" comes in handy. At least until memory loss gets you...

Yup, probably my favorite concept from Die With Zero.

 

[matttyl]

Talking with my old retired neighbor - looking ahead a few years to medicare, it's not as complicated as it's made out to be A+B and D LNMOP. You just get a medicare advantage plan and that has A+B and usually D with vision and dental all included. He pays $175 a month with very little out of pocket expense after that. medicare.gov website even lays it out like that where the advantage plan is your first choice. You really have to hunt around to find a place to buy A, B and D separately.

According to him though, the difference is you have to make sure to find doctors in your area that are in plan where traditional medicare plans have to be accepted anywhere.

I would highly recommend NOT getting a Medicare advantage. It replaces parts A and B, but does so with a private insurance company with their insurance network. If a doctor you need to see isn’t in network, you’re out of luck - and most (especially in VA where you will be) will have limited HMO type networks. You may want to get traditional A and B from the government with a Medicare supplement (aka medigap plan).

Are you sure because the website spits out 24 different plans for me in VA (compared to my neighbor in a highly populated city in the PNW shows 49). So half as much but still plenty. It lists PPO with in and out of network maximums. Like @Gatorade said it's only $174 a month. My neighbor gets all kinds of benefits from free gym memberships to free golf. Does sound like a house of cards tho.

HumanaChoice H5216-271 (PPO)​

UHC Medicare Advantage TC-0001 (PPO)​

HumanaChoice R1390-001 (Regional PPO)​

Humana USAA Honor (Regional PPO)​

Cigna True Choice Medicare (PPO)​

That's just the first few PPOs. There are a lot of HMOs too, I'd say about half and half.

And if what you say is true it bothers me that the website is designed to guide you towards Medicare Advantage.

Honestly surprised with that many PPOs available in that area of Virginia. Medicare advantage is still relatively new, so a growing marketplace for sure. I just have a lot of folks calling me asking if they can go back to traditional Medicare with a supplement because they’ve discovered that a few of their doctors don’t participate with the coverage they have (and they can’t find one policy/carrier that all of their docs would be in network with).

And correct, it may be inexpensive at $175 a month, but will come with copays and deductibles and out of pockets (some of which can be over $8k), and the potential for large out of network costs. In a good health year with little claims your total spend could be $5k ($2k in premiums, $3k in medical bills), but in a bad year where you’re hospitalized once or twice, you can easily hit that max OOP of $8k, so your total medical spend is $10k.

With traditional Medicare with a supplement, your cost is (depending on IRMAA) $175 a month for part B (part A free with 40 quarters of work history) and $100-200 a month for a supplement plan (plan G), and maybe another $10-20 for a part D plan. So yeah, $4k all in - but no real out of pocket costs to worry about as Medicare with a good supplement covers everything, and something like 95% of all doctors take traditional Medicare.

 

[OrganizedChaos]

Talking with my old retired neighbor - looking ahead a few years to medicare, it's not as complicated as it's made out to be A+B and D LNMOP. You just get a medicare advantage plan and that has A+B and usually D with vision and dental all included. He pays $175 a month with very little out of pocket expense after that. medicare.gov website even lays it out like that where the advantage plan is your first choice. You really have to hunt around to find a place to buy A, B and D separately.

According to him though, the difference is you have to make sure to find doctors in your area that are in plan where traditional medicare plans have to be accepted anywhere.

I would highly recommend NOT getting a Medicare advantage. It replaces parts A and B, but does so with a private insurance company with their insurance network. If a doctor you need to see isn’t in network, you’re out of luck - and most (especially in VA where you will be) will have limited HMO type networks. You may want to get traditional A and B from the government with a Medicare supplement (aka medigap plan).

Are you sure because the website spits out 24 different plans for me in VA (compared to my neighbor in a highly populated city in the PNW shows 49). So half as much but still plenty. It lists PPO with in and out of network maximums. Like @Gatorade said it's only $174 a month. My neighbor gets all kinds of benefits from free gym memberships to free golf. Does sound like a house of cards tho.

HumanaChoice H5216-271 (PPO)​

UHC Medicare Advantage TC-0001 (PPO)​

HumanaChoice R1390-001 (Regional PPO)​

Humana USAA Honor (Regional PPO)​

Cigna True Choice Medicare (PPO)​

That's just the first few PPOs. There are a lot of HMOs too, I'd say about half and half.

And if what you say is true it bothers me that the website is designed to guide you towards Medicare Advantage.

Honestly surprised with that many PPOs available in that area of Virginia. Medicare advantage is still relatively new, so a growing marketplace for sure. I just have a lot of folks calling me asking if they can go back to traditional Medicare with a supplement because they’ve discovered that a few of their doctors don’t participate with the coverage they have (and they can’t find one policy/carrier that all of their docs would be in network with).

And correct, it may be inexpensive at $175 a month, but will come with copays and deductibles and out of pockets (some of which can be over $8k), and the potential for large out of network costs. In a good health year with little claims your total spend could be $5k ($2k in premiums, $3k in medical bills), but in a bad year where you’re hospitalized once or twice, you can easily hit that max OOP of $8k, so your total medical spend is $10k.

With traditional Medicare with a supplement, your cost is (depending on IRMAA) $175 a month for part B (part A free with 40 quarters of work history) and $100-200 a month for a supplement plan (plan G), and maybe another $10-20 for a part D plan. So yeah, $4k all in - but no real out of pocket costs to worry about as Medicare with a good supplement covers everything, and something like 95% of all doctors take traditional Medicare.

Thank you for this fantastic information. I have been doing some research for my in laws as they are about to be migrated to a new plan (not an Advantage plan) by the Postal Service (and they already pay Medicare A and B). I think they'll be fine but I am trying to make sure I understand everything possible before their open season. I also have Medicare staring me in the face in less than 2 years so taking this time to make sure I understand it for myself as well. I have been struggling trying to understand the Advantage plans vs. other options. Your info is very helpful. Have to admit its been eye opening looking over their doctor/hospital/prescription charges and seeing its almost nothing (even hitting the emergency room twice).

 

[matttyl]

Talking with my old retired neighbor - looking ahead a few years to medicare, it's not as complicated as it's made out to be A+B and D LNMOP. You just get a medicare advantage plan and that has A+B and usually D with vision and dental all included. He pays $175 a month with very little out of pocket expense after that. medicare.gov website even lays it out like that where the advantage plan is your first choice. You really have to hunt around to find a place to buy A, B and D separately.

According to him though, the difference is you have to make sure to find doctors in your area that are in plan where traditional medicare plans have to be accepted anywhere.

I would highly recommend NOT getting a Medicare advantage. It replaces parts A and B, but does so with a private insurance company with their insurance network. If a doctor you need to see isn’t in network, you’re out of luck - and most (especially in VA where you will be) will have limited HMO type networks. You may want to get traditional A and B from the government with a Medicare supplement (aka medigap plan).

Are you sure because the website spits out 24 different plans for me in VA (compared to my neighbor in a highly populated city in the PNW shows 49). So half as much but still plenty. It lists PPO with in and out of network maximums. Like @Gatorade said it's only $174 a month. My neighbor gets all kinds of benefits from free gym memberships to free golf. Does sound like a house of cards tho.

HumanaChoice H5216-271 (PPO)​

UHC Medicare Advantage TC-0001 (PPO)​

HumanaChoice R1390-001 (Regional PPO)​

Humana USAA Honor (Regional PPO)​

Cigna True Choice Medicare (PPO)​

That's just the first few PPOs. There are a lot of HMOs too, I'd say about half and half.

And if what you say is true it bothers me that the website is designed to guide you towards Medicare Advantage.

Honestly surprised with that many PPOs available in that area of Virginia. Medicare advantage is still relatively new, so a growing marketplace for sure. I just have a lot of folks calling me asking if they can go back to traditional Medicare with a supplement because they’ve discovered that a few of their doctors don’t participate with the coverage they have (and they can’t find one policy/carrier that all of their docs would be in network with).

And correct, it may be inexpensive at $175 a month, but will come with copays and deductibles and out of pockets (some of which can be over $8k), and the potential for large out of network costs. In a good health year with little claims your total spend could be $5k ($2k in premiums, $3k in medical bills), but in a bad year where you’re hospitalized once or twice, you can easily hit that max OOP of $8k, so your total medical spend is $10k.

With traditional Medicare with a supplement, your cost is (depending on IRMAA) $175 a month for part B (part A free with 40 quarters of work history) and $100-200 a month for a supplement plan (plan G), and maybe another $10-20 for a part D plan. So yeah, $4k all in - but no real out of pocket costs to worry about as Medicare with a good supplement covers everything, and something like 95% of all doctors take traditional Medicare.

Thank you for this fantastic information. I have been doing some research for my in laws as they are about to be migrated to a new plan (not an Advantage plan) by the Postal Service (and they already pay Medicare A and B). I think they'll be fine but I am trying to make sure I understand everything possible before their open season. I also have Medicare staring me in the face in less than 2 years so taking this time to make sure I understand it for myself as well. I have been struggling trying to understand the Advantage plans vs. other options. Your info is very helpful. Have to admit its been eye opening looking over their doctor/hospital/prescription charges and seeing its almost nothing (even hitting the emergency room twice).

They shouldn’t be paying for A, just B. If they have those two with a good Medicare supplement, you virtually eliminate out of pocket medical expenses.

 

[OrganizedChaos]

Talking with my old retired neighbor - looking ahead a few years to medicare, it's not as complicated as it's made out to be A+B and D LNMOP. You just get a medicare advantage plan and that has A+B and usually D with vision and dental all included. He pays $175 a month with very little out of pocket expense after that. medicare.gov website even lays it out like that where the advantage plan is your first choice. You really have to hunt around to find a place to buy A, B and D separately.

According to him though, the difference is you have to make sure to find doctors in your area that are in plan where traditional medicare plans have to be accepted anywhere.

I would highly recommend NOT getting a Medicare advantage. It replaces parts A and B, but does so with a private insurance company with their insurance network. If a doctor you need to see isn’t in network, you’re out of luck - and most (especially in VA where you will be) will have limited HMO type networks. You may want to get traditional A and B from the government with a Medicare supplement (aka medigap plan).

Are you sure because the website spits out 24 different plans for me in VA (compared to my neighbor in a highly populated city in the PNW shows 49). So half as much but still plenty. It lists PPO with in and out of network maximums. Like @Gatorade said it's only $174 a month. My neighbor gets all kinds of benefits from free gym memberships to free golf. Does sound like a house of cards tho.

HumanaChoice H5216-271 (PPO)​

UHC Medicare Advantage TC-0001 (PPO)​

HumanaChoice R1390-001 (Regional PPO)​

Humana USAA Honor (Regional PPO)​

Cigna True Choice Medicare (PPO)​

That's just the first few PPOs. There are a lot of HMOs too, I'd say about half and half.

And if what you say is true it bothers me that the website is designed to guide you towards Medicare Advantage.

Honestly surprised with that many PPOs available in that area of Virginia. Medicare advantage is still relatively new, so a growing marketplace for sure. I just have a lot of folks calling me asking if they can go back to traditional Medicare with a supplement because they’ve discovered that a few of their doctors don’t participate with the coverage they have (and they can’t find one policy/carrier that all of their docs would be in network with).

And correct, it may be inexpensive at $175 a month, but will come with copays and deductibles and out of pockets (some of which can be over $8k), and the potential for large out of network costs. In a good health year with little claims your total spend could be $5k ($2k in premiums, $3k in medical bills), but in a bad year where you’re hospitalized once or twice, you can easily hit that max OOP of $8k, so your total medical spend is $10k.

With traditional Medicare with a supplement, your cost is (depending on IRMAA) $175 a month for part B (part A free with 40 quarters of work history) and $100-200 a month for a supplement plan (plan G), and maybe another $10-20 for a part D plan. So yeah, $4k all in - but no real out of pocket costs to worry about as Medicare with a good supplement covers everything, and something like 95% of all doctors take traditional Medicare.

Thank you for this fantastic information. I have been doing some research for my in laws as they are about to be migrated to a new plan (not an Advantage plan) by the Postal Service (and they already pay Medicare A and B). I think they'll be fine but I am trying to make sure I understand everything possible before their open season. I also have Medicare staring me in the face in less than 2 years so taking this time to make sure I understand it for myself as well. I have been struggling trying to understand the Advantage plans vs. other options. Your info is very helpful. Have to admit its been eye opening looking over their doctor/hospital/prescription charges and seeing its almost nothing (even hitting the emergency room twice).

They shouldn’t be paying for A, just B. If they have those two with a good Medicare supplement, you virtually eliminate out of pocket medical expenses.

Sorry you are correct. They have A and B (and just paying for B). Yea with the supplement plan they also have they pay almost zero for hospital, doctor visits, and prescriptions.

 

[Peggy]

Talking with my old retired neighbor - looking ahead a few years to medicare, it's not as complicated as it's made out to be A+B and D LNMOP. You just get a medicare advantage plan and that has A+B and usually D with vision and dental all included. He pays $175 a month with very little out of pocket expense after that. medicare.gov website even lays it out like that where the advantage plan is your first choice. You really have to hunt around to find a place to buy A, B and D separately.

According to him though, the difference is you have to make sure to find doctors in your area that are in plan where traditional medicare plans have to be accepted anywhere.

I would highly recommend NOT getting a Medicare advantage. It replaces parts A and B, but does so with a private insurance company with their insurance network. If a doctor you need to see isn’t in network, you’re out of luck - and most (especially in VA where you will be) will have limited HMO type networks. You may want to get traditional A and B from the government with a Medicare supplement (aka medigap plan).

Are you sure because the website spits out 24 different plans for me in VA (compared to my neighbor in a highly populated city in the PNW shows 49). So half as much but still plenty. It lists PPO with in and out of network maximums. Like @Gatorade said it's only $174 a month. My neighbor gets all kinds of benefits from free gym memberships to free golf. Does sound like a house of cards tho.

HumanaChoice H5216-271 (PPO)​

UHC Medicare Advantage TC-0001 (PPO)​

HumanaChoice R1390-001 (Regional PPO)​

Humana USAA Honor (Regional PPO)​

Cigna True Choice Medicare (PPO)​

That's just the first few PPOs. There are a lot of HMOs too, I'd say about half and half.

And if what you say is true it bothers me that the website is designed to guide you towards Medicare Advantage.

Honestly surprised with that many PPOs available in that area of Virginia. Medicare advantage is still relatively new, so a growing marketplace for sure. I just have a lot of folks calling me asking if they can go back to traditional Medicare with a supplement because they’ve discovered that a few of their doctors don’t participate with the coverage they have (and they can’t find one policy/carrier that all of their docs would be in network with).

And correct, it may be inexpensive at $175 a month, but will come with copays and deductibles and out of pockets (some of which can be over $8k), and the potential for large out of network costs. In a good health year with little claims your total spend could be $5k ($2k in premiums, $3k in medical bills), but in a bad year where you’re hospitalized once or twice, you can easily hit that max OOP of $8k, so your total medical spend is $10k.

With traditional Medicare with a supplement, your cost is (depending on IRMAA) $175 a month for part B (part A free with 40 quarters of work history) and $100-200 a month for a supplement plan (plan G), and maybe another $10-20 for a part D plan. So yeah, $4k all in - but no real out of pocket costs to worry about as Medicare with a good supplement covers everything, and something like 95% of all doctors take traditional Medicare.

Thanks! I'll be discussing doctors with the fellas at the country club over the next few years!

 

[matttyl]

Talking with my old retired neighbor - looking ahead a few years to medicare, it's not as complicated as it's made out to be A+B and D LNMOP. You just get a medicare advantage plan and that has A+B and usually D with vision and dental all included. He pays $175 a month with very little out of pocket expense after that. medicare.gov website even lays it out like that where the advantage plan is your first choice. You really have to hunt around to find a place to buy A, B and D separately.

According to him though, the difference is you have to make sure to find doctors in your area that are in plan where traditional medicare plans have to be accepted anywhere.

I would highly recommend NOT getting a Medicare advantage. It replaces parts A and B, but does so with a private insurance company with their insurance network. If a doctor you need to see isn’t in network, you’re out of luck - and most (especially in VA where you will be) will have limited HMO type networks. You may want to get traditional A and B from the government with a Medicare supplement (aka medigap plan).

Are you sure because the website spits out 24 different plans for me in VA (compared to my neighbor in a highly populated city in the PNW shows 49). So half as much but still plenty. It lists PPO with in and out of network maximums. Like @Gatorade said it's only $174 a month. My neighbor gets all kinds of benefits from free gym memberships to free golf. Does sound like a house of cards tho.

HumanaChoice H5216-271 (PPO)​

UHC Medicare Advantage TC-0001 (PPO)​

HumanaChoice R1390-001 (Regional PPO)​

Humana USAA Honor (Regional PPO)​

Cigna True Choice Medicare (PPO)​

That's just the first few PPOs. There are a lot of HMOs too, I'd say about half and half.

And if what you say is true it bothers me that the website is designed to guide you towards Medicare Advantage.

Honestly surprised with that many PPOs available in that area of Virginia. Medicare advantage is still relatively new, so a growing marketplace for sure. I just have a lot of folks calling me asking if they can go back to traditional Medicare with a supplement because they’ve discovered that a few of their doctors don’t participate with the coverage they have (and they can’t find one policy/carrier that all of their docs would be in network with).

And correct, it may be inexpensive at $175 a month, but will come with copays and deductibles and out of pockets (some of which can be over $8k), and the potential for large out of network costs. In a good health year with little claims your total spend could be $5k ($2k in premiums, $3k in medical bills), but in a bad year where you’re hospitalized once or twice, you can easily hit that max OOP of $8k, so your total medical spend is $10k.

With traditional Medicare with a supplement, your cost is (depending on IRMAA) $175 a month for part B (part A free with 40 quarters of work history) and $100-200 a month for a supplement plan (plan G), and maybe another $10-20 for a part D plan. So yeah, $4k all in - but no real out of pocket costs to worry about as Medicare with a good supplement covers everything, and something like 95% of all doctors take traditional Medicare.

Thank you for this fantastic information. I have been doing some research for my in laws as they are about to be migrated to a new plan (not an Advantage plan) by the Postal Service (and they already pay Medicare A and B). I think they'll be fine but I am trying to make sure I understand everything possible before their open season. I also have Medicare staring me in the face in less than 2 years so taking this time to make sure I understand it for myself as well. I have been struggling trying to understand the Advantage plans vs. other options. Your info is very helpful. Have to admit its been eye opening looking over their doctor/hospital/prescription charges and seeing its almost nothing (even hitting the emergency room twice).

They shouldn’t be paying for A, just B. If they have those two with a good Medicare supplement, you virtually eliminate out of pocket medical expenses.

Sorry you are correct. They have A and B (and just paying for B). Yea with the supplement plan they also have they pay almost zero for hospital, doctor visits, and prescriptions.

That’s why I tell folks just to get traditional Medicare with a supplement and don’t worry about Medicare advantage at all. You can always go from that to a Medicare advantage later pretty easily at open enrollment, but you can’t go the other way around without medical underwriting (generally).

 

[Gatorade]

Talking with my old retired neighbor - looking ahead a few years to medicare, it's not as complicated as it's made out to be A+B and D LNMOP. You just get a medicare advantage plan and that has A+B and usually D with vision and dental all included. He pays $175 a month with very little out of pocket expense after that. medicare.gov website even lays it out like that where the advantage plan is your first choice. You really have to hunt around to find a place to buy A, B and D separately.

According to him though, the difference is you have to make sure to find doctors in your area that are in plan where traditional medicare plans have to be accepted anywhere.

I would highly recommend NOT getting a Medicare advantage. It replaces parts A and B, but does so with a private insurance company with their insurance network. If a doctor you need to see isn’t in network, you’re out of luck - and most (especially in VA where you will be) will have limited HMO type networks. You may want to get traditional A and B from the government with a Medicare supplement (aka medigap plan).

Are you sure because the website spits out 24 different plans for me in VA (compared to my neighbor in a highly populated city in the PNW shows 49). So half as much but still plenty. It lists PPO with in and out of network maximums. Like @Gatorade said it's only $174 a month. My neighbor gets all kinds of benefits from free gym memberships to free golf. Does sound like a house of cards tho.

HumanaChoice H5216-271 (PPO)​

UHC Medicare Advantage TC-0001 (PPO)​

HumanaChoice R1390-001 (Regional PPO)​

Humana USAA Honor (Regional PPO)​

Cigna True Choice Medicare (PPO)​

That's just the first few PPOs. There are a lot of HMOs too, I'd say about half and half.

And if what you say is true it bothers me that the website is designed to guide you towards Medicare Advantage.

I don't pay $174 a month. They pay me that amount. My deductable is $750 a year. To see an out of network doctor I only pay a $5 copay. I am in South Carolina and it is HumanaChoice.

 

[Gatorade]

Talking with my old retired neighbor - looking ahead a few years to medicare, it's not as complicated as it's made out to be A+B and D LNMOP. You just get a medicare advantage plan and that has A+B and usually D with vision and dental all included. He pays $175 a month with very little out of pocket expense after that. medicare.gov website even lays it out like that where the advantage plan is your first choice. You really have to hunt around to find a place to buy A, B and D separately.

According to him though, the difference is you have to make sure to find doctors in your area that are in plan where traditional medicare plans have to be accepted anywhere.

I would highly recommend NOT getting a Medicare advantage. It replaces parts A and B, but does so with a private insurance company with their insurance network. If a doctor you need to see isn’t in network, you’re out of luck - and most (especially in VA where you will be) will have limited HMO type networks. You may want to get traditional A and B from the government with a Medicare supplement (aka medigap plan).

Are you sure because the website spits out 24 different plans for me in VA (compared to my neighbor in a highly populated city in the PNW shows 49). So half as much but still plenty. It lists PPO with in and out of network maximums. Like @Gatorade said it's only $174 a month. My neighbor gets all kinds of benefits from free gym memberships to free golf. Does sound like a house of cards tho.

HumanaChoice H5216-271 (PPO)​

UHC Medicare Advantage TC-0001 (PPO)​

HumanaChoice R1390-001 (Regional PPO)​

Humana USAA Honor (Regional PPO)​

Cigna True Choice Medicare (PPO)​

That's just the first few PPOs. There are a lot of HMOs too, I'd say about half and half.

And if what you say is true it bothers me that the website is designed to guide you towards Medicare Advantage.

I don't pay $174 a month. They pay me that amount. My deductable is $750 a year. To see an out of network doctor I only pay a $5 copay. I am in South Carolina and it is HumanaChoice.

Of course everyone is different. I am blessed to be in good health. That had a lot to do with my choice of plans. If I had medical problems and took lots of medication, I would want lower deductable and max amounts.

 

[NutterButter]

Talking with my old retired neighbor - looking ahead a few years to medicare, it's not as complicated as it's made out to be A+B and D LNMOP. You just get a medicare advantage plan and that has A+B and usually D with vision and dental all included. He pays $175 a month with very little out of pocket expense after that. medicare.gov website even lays it out like that where the advantage plan is your first choice. You really have to hunt around to find a place to buy A, B and D separately.

According to him though, the difference is you have to make sure to find doctors in your area that are in plan where traditional medicare plans have to be accepted anywhere.

I would highly recommend NOT getting a Medicare advantage. It replaces parts A and B, but does so with a private insurance company with their insurance network. If a doctor you need to see isn’t in network, you’re out of luck - and most (especially in VA where you will be) will have limited HMO type networks. You may want to get traditional A and B from the government with a Medicare supplement (aka medigap plan).

Are you sure because the website spits out 24 different plans for me in VA (compared to my neighbor in a highly populated city in the PNW shows 49). So half as much but still plenty. It lists PPO with in and out of network maximums. Like @Gatorade said it's only $174 a month. My neighbor gets all kinds of benefits from free gym memberships to free golf. Does sound like a house of cards tho.

HumanaChoice H5216-271 (PPO)​

UHC Medicare Advantage TC-0001 (PPO)​

HumanaChoice R1390-001 (Regional PPO)​

Humana USAA Honor (Regional PPO)​

Cigna True Choice Medicare (PPO)​

That's just the first few PPOs. There are a lot of HMOs too, I'd say about half and half.

And if what you say is true it bothers me that the website is designed to guide you towards Medicare Advantage.

I don't pay $174 a month. They pay me that amount. My deductable is $750 a year. To see an out of network doctor I only pay a $5 copay. I am in South Carolina and it is HumanaChoice.

Of course everyone is different. I am blessed to be in good health. That had a lot to do with my choice of plans. If I had medical problems and took lots of medication, I would want lower deductable and max amounts.

$750 is a prety low deductible already. So do you pay anything each month for the premium? What's your coinsurance and max out of pocket?

 

[Peggy]

Talking with my old retired neighbor - looking ahead a few years to medicare, it's not as complicated as it's made out to be A+B and D LNMOP. You just get a medicare advantage plan and that has A+B and usually D with vision and dental all included. He pays $175 a month with very little out of pocket expense after that. medicare.gov website even lays it out like that where the advantage plan is your first choice. You really have to hunt around to find a place to buy A, B and D separately.

According to him though, the difference is you have to make sure to find doctors in your area that are in plan where traditional medicare plans have to be accepted anywhere.

I would highly recommend NOT getting a Medicare advantage. It replaces parts A and B, but does so with a private insurance company with their insurance network. If a doctor you need to see isn’t in network, you’re out of luck - and most (especially in VA where you will be) will have limited HMO type networks. You may want to get traditional A and B from the government with a Medicare supplement (aka medigap plan).

Are you sure because the website spits out 24 different plans for me in VA (compared to my neighbor in a highly populated city in the PNW shows 49). So half as much but still plenty. It lists PPO with in and out of network maximums. Like @Gatorade said it's only $174 a month. My neighbor gets all kinds of benefits from free gym memberships to free golf. Does sound like a house of cards tho.

HumanaChoice H5216-271 (PPO)​

UHC Medicare Advantage TC-0001 (PPO)​

HumanaChoice R1390-001 (Regional PPO)​

Humana USAA Honor (Regional PPO)​

Cigna True Choice Medicare (PPO)​

That's just the first few PPOs. There are a lot of HMOs too, I'd say about half and half.

And if what you say is true it bothers me that the website is designed to guide you towards Medicare Advantage.

I don't pay $174 a month. They pay me that amount. My deductable is $750 a year. To see an out of network doctor I only pay a $5 copay. I am in South Carolina and it is HumanaChoice.

Who is they? $174 is exactly the Part B premium cost. Are you sure you're not just getting reimbursed from a Medicare Savings program for the amount taken from your SS check or something? It sounds like someone is paying your for what they think you need to pay or have already paid.

I guessed on your zip code and this is the only one that had a $750 deductible:

HumanaChoice H5216-279 (PPO)​

Humana | Plan ID: H5216-279-0
Star rating:
4.5 stars

Monthly Premium​

$0.00
Includes: Health & drug coverage
Doesn't include: $174.70 Standard Part B premium <---------****

Total Drug & Premium Cost (for the rest of 2024)​

$0.00
Only includes premiums for the months left in this year when you don't enter any drugs

Other Costs​

$750 annual deductible
Health deductible
$0.00
Drug deductible
$3,450 In and Out-of-network
$3,450 In-network
Maximum you pay for health services

 

[matttyl]

Talking with my old retired neighbor - looking ahead a few years to medicare, it's not as complicated as it's made out to be A+B and D LNMOP. You just get a medicare advantage plan and that has A+B and usually D with vision and dental all included. He pays $175 a month with very little out of pocket expense after that. medicare.gov website even lays it out like that where the advantage plan is your first choice. You really have to hunt around to find a place to buy A, B and D separately.

According to him though, the difference is you have to make sure to find doctors in your area that are in plan where traditional medicare plans have to be accepted anywhere.

I would highly recommend NOT getting a Medicare advantage. It replaces parts A and B, but does so with a private insurance company with their insurance network. If a doctor you need to see isn’t in network, you’re out of luck - and most (especially in VA where you will be) will have limited HMO type networks. You may want to get traditional A and B from the government with a Medicare supplement (aka medigap plan).

Are you sure because the website spits out 24 different plans for me in VA (compared to my neighbor in a highly populated city in the PNW shows 49). So half as much but still plenty. It lists PPO with in and out of network maximums. Like @Gatorade said it's only $174 a month. My neighbor gets all kinds of benefits from free gym memberships to free golf. Does sound like a house of cards tho.

HumanaChoice H5216-271 (PPO)​

UHC Medicare Advantage TC-0001 (PPO)​

HumanaChoice R1390-001 (Regional PPO)​

Humana USAA Honor (Regional PPO)​

Cigna True Choice Medicare (PPO)​

That's just the first few PPOs. There are a lot of HMOs too, I'd say about half and half.

And if what you say is true it bothers me that the website is designed to guide you towards Medicare Advantage.

I don't pay $174 a month. They pay me that amount. My deductable is $750 a year. To see an out of network doctor I only pay a $5 copay. I am in South Carolina and it is HumanaChoice.

They pay you 174 a month to offset the 174 you’re paying to the federal government for part B. When you’re in a Medicare advantage plan you still pay the monthly part B premium (and possibly irmaa), as well as the plans premium (which could be $0). Some plans (like apparently yours) can help pay some or all of your part b premium.

ETA - and I don’t want to be a doomsayer or anything, but keep in mind that Medicare advantage plans are all year to year plans. There is no guarantee that Humana carrier will remain in every county where they are now, they’ve already publicly stated that they plan to drop certain plans as well as certain counties. If they drop your plan, or your county, you can go to another Medicare advantage plan with another carrier - but if you don’t like those options what are you left with? You can go back to traditional Medicare, but might not be able to get a supplement plan (you’ll need to likely pass medical underwriting).

 

[Gatorade]

Talking with my old retired neighbor - looking ahead a few years to medicare, it's not as complicated as it's made out to be A+B and D LNMOP. You just get a medicare advantage plan and that has A+B and usually D with vision and dental all included. He pays $175 a month with very little out of pocket expense after that. medicare.gov website even lays it out like that where the advantage plan is your first choice. You really have to hunt around to find a place to buy A, B and D separately.

According to him though, the difference is you have to make sure to find doctors in your area that are in plan where traditional medicare plans have to be accepted anywhere.

I would highly recommend NOT getting a Medicare advantage. It replaces parts A and B, but does so with a private insurance company with their insurance network. If a doctor you need to see isn’t in network, you’re out of luck - and most (especially in VA where you will be) will have limited HMO type networks. You may want to get traditional A and B from the government with a Medicare supplement (aka medigap plan).

Are you sure because the website spits out 24 different plans for me in VA (compared to my neighbor in a highly populated city in the PNW shows 49). So half as much but still plenty. It lists PPO with in and out of network maximums. Like @Gatorade said it's only $174 a month. My neighbor gets all kinds of benefits from free gym memberships to free golf. Does sound like a house of cards tho.

HumanaChoice H5216-271 (PPO)​

UHC Medicare Advantage TC-0001 (PPO)​

HumanaChoice R1390-001 (Regional PPO)​

Humana USAA Honor (Regional PPO)​

Cigna True Choice Medicare (PPO)​

That's just the first few PPOs. There are a lot of HMOs too, I'd say about half and half.

And if what you say is true it bothers me that the website is designed to guide you towards Medicare Advantage.

I don't pay $174 a month. They pay me that amount. My deductable is $750 a year. To see an out of network doctor I only pay a $5 copay. I am in South Carolina and it is HumanaChoice.

They pay you 174 a month to offset the 174 you’re paying to the federal government for part B. When you’re in a Medicare advantage plan you still pay the monthly part B premium (and possibly irmaa), as well as the plans premium (which could be $0). Some plans (like apparently yours) can help pay some or all of your part b premium.

ETA - and I don’t want to be a doomsayer or anything, but keep in mind that Medicare advantage plans are all year to year plans. There is no guarantee that Humana carrier will remain in every county where they are now, they’ve already publicly stated that they plan to drop certain plans as well as certain counties. If they drop your plan, or your county, you can go to another Medicare advantage plan with another carrier - but if you don’t like those options what are you left with? You can go back to traditional Medicare, but might not be able to get a supplement plan (you’ll need to likely pass medical underwriting).

Humana deposits $174 in my bank account every month. I guess that reimburses me for what is taken out of SS. But, I have NO premium. I pay nothing. Those figures in the previous post look accurate to my coverage. Sad to here that these plans are disappearing. I will keep that in mind for the future. So far so good, but as I said earlier, up to this point I have been very healthy. Guess I will find out how good coverage is since I am scheduled for minor surgery tomorrow. That will cause me to meet my deductable for the first time.

 

[matttyl]

Talking with my old retired neighbor - looking ahead a few years to medicare, it's not as complicated as it's made out to be A+B and D LNMOP. You just get a medicare advantage plan and that has A+B and usually D with vision and dental all included. He pays $175 a month with very little out of pocket expense after that. medicare.gov website even lays it out like that where the advantage plan is your first choice. You really have to hunt around to find a place to buy A, B and D separately.

According to him though, the difference is you have to make sure to find doctors in your area that are in plan where traditional medicare plans have to be accepted anywhere.

I would highly recommend NOT getting a Medicare advantage. It replaces parts A and B, but does so with a private insurance company with their insurance network. If a doctor you need to see isn’t in network, you’re out of luck - and most (especially in VA where you will be) will have limited HMO type networks. You may want to get traditional A and B from the government with a Medicare supplement (aka medigap plan).

Are you sure because the website spits out 24 different plans for me in VA (compared to my neighbor in a highly populated city in the PNW shows 49). So half as much but still plenty. It lists PPO with in and out of network maximums. Like @Gatorade said it's only $174 a month. My neighbor gets all kinds of benefits from free gym memberships to free golf. Does sound like a house of cards tho.

HumanaChoice H5216-271 (PPO)​

UHC Medicare Advantage TC-0001 (PPO)​

HumanaChoice R1390-001 (Regional PPO)​

Humana USAA Honor (Regional PPO)​

Cigna True Choice Medicare (PPO)​

That's just the first few PPOs. There are a lot of HMOs too, I'd say about half and half.

And if what you say is true it bothers me that the website is designed to guide you towards Medicare Advantage.

I don't pay $174 a month. They pay me that amount. My deductable is $750 a year. To see an out of network doctor I only pay a $5 copay. I am in South Carolina and it is HumanaChoice.

They pay you 174 a month to offset the 174 you’re paying to the federal government for part B. When you’re in a Medicare advantage plan you still pay the monthly part B premium (and possibly irmaa), as well as the plans premium (which could be $0). Some plans (like apparently yours) can help pay some or all of your part b premium.

ETA - and I don’t want to be a doomsayer or anything, but keep in mind that Medicare advantage plans are all year to year plans. There is no guarantee that Humana carrier will remain in every county where they are now, they’ve already publicly stated that they plan to drop certain plans as well as certain counties. If they drop your plan, or your county, you can go to another Medicare advantage plan with another carrier - but if you don’t like those options what are you left with? You can go back to traditional Medicare, but might not be able to get a supplement plan (you’ll need to likely pass medical underwriting).

Humana deposits $174 in my bank account every month. I guess that reimburses me for what is taken out of SS. But, I have NO premium. I pay nothing. Those figures in the previous post look accurate to my coverage. Sad to here that these plans are disappearing. I will keep that in mind for the future. So far so good, but as I said earlier, up to this point I have been very healthy. Guess I will find out how good coverage is since I am scheduled for minor surgery tomorrow. That will cause me to meet my deductable for the first time.

Good luck with the surgery.

 

[SFBayDuck]

Only 11% of American workers don’t plan to work at all after they retire

The next generation of retirement savers seems less eager to relax once they leave their 9-to-5. Just 11% of would-be retirees surveyed by CNBC say they don’t plan to work in any capacity after they retire. More than a third of respondents — 36% — say they’re not sure, while the majority, 53%, anticipate working, either because they’ll want to or to supplement their income.

My plan is to continue to earn some money once I retire from my career, but I also plan on retiring in my 50s. This article is more focused on those in their 60s, so I was kind of surprised at the number of people who still plan to work.

 

[Nugget]

Only 11% of American workers don’t plan to work at all after they retire

The next generation of retirement savers seems less eager to relax once they leave their 9-to-5. Just 11% of would-be retirees surveyed by CNBC say they don’t plan to work in any capacity after they retire. More than a third of respondents — 36% — say they’re not sure, while the majority, 53%, anticipate working, either because they’ll want to or to supplement their income.

My plan is to continue to earn some money once I retire from my career, but I also plan on retiring in my 50s. This article is more focused on those in their 60s, so I was kind of surprised the number of people who plan to still work.

I’m going to work on my golf game. I could see working some as a consultant or trainer, but I think travel and kids/grandkids would absorb that time.

 

[matttyl]

Once “retired” - would love to own a bike shop, but more realistically would love to work part time in the bike shop wrenching on bikes and getting an employee discount.