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

[stbugs]

Social Security Administration: https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html
Males 73.54 years; Females 79.30 years

This isn't quite right - this is probably from birth. A 65 year old dude, on average, lives to 82. A woman to 84.

No, I was just saying the extra 8% you get from waiting is based upon the government’s “nest egg” rather than getting less SS 8 years earlier where the nest egg is now in your pocket and it’s been growing in those 8 years as well. My argument was that if you invested the early SS or spent the early SS to avoid pulling invested money out, you can have a rather large nest egg that could get you more per month than you lose out by getting the SS early and that nest egg making up the difference is your money.

I think a lot of the calculation web sites don’t take that nest egg into consideration and certainly don’t acknowledge that the nest egg can grow in those 8 years.

The vast, vast majority of people who take SS early spend it so that calculation usually isn't part of it. I'm sure you can find a calculator out there that handles this. If you're single these are pretty easy calcs to make. Married is much more complex. At least for my situation I look at SS as longevity insurance for my wife, who I'm 99% sure will outlive me. So we'll probably do the "she claims early, I claim late" strategy to get her the best survivor benefits possible.

Agreed. That’s why I always preface my posts with “for me” or “if invested.” I do assume that people posting in hear aren’t taking SS early because they have to do so.

I need to understand the survivor benefits because I think my wife and I will likely be getting very similar payments. Would hers increase more if I drop before she does or vice versa or is that benefit for someone who wouldn’t be getting anywhere close to the benefit of someone who’s worked the 35 years?

 

[Steeler]

I'm new to this thread; I'm 57 and the current plan is to retire in ~8 years at 65. My wife is a few years younger and plans to retire at the same time (no way she is working while I"m retired ). Anyway, my question is related to someone being able to get 1/2 of your SS benefits in addition to your own payments (not sure i'm saying that correctly but I thiink you know what I mean). We have a special needs daughter who is going to live with us for as long as possible and the plan is for her to be the person who gets 1/2 my benefit. Question: is that limited to one person? Or could both my wife and daughter get 1/2 of payment? Or in this scenario, is my wife "stuck" with whatever she will get from SS?

 

[Peggy]

Found a pretty good SS calculator for married couples that take into account both of your ages. It will chart what they recommend versus what scenario you're thinking about doing for both spouses.

Social Security Retirement Benefit Calculator - Married Couples

As some of you know I've been a proponent of taking SS early. I had posted before a bar napkin calculation for my break even point being at age 89, but, I made a mistake. I didn't take into account that SS gets adjusted for inflation. If inflation is high your SS payments can be substantially larger (of course stuff you buy cost substantially more too). But redoing my bar napkin math and double checking it with some of the online calculators with inflation at 2.5 or 3% my break even point is really at age 79.

Every book I've read, including a new chapter of a new one last night, says WAIT, WAIT, WAIT. And they are right, there probably isn't a better investment option than a guaranteed 8% that is protected and adjusted for inflation.

Using the calculator above the recommendation is for both of us to wait until 70. Depending on the exact numbers sometimes it's better for her to start her own at 67 then jump on my spousal at 70. But in all cases it's better to wait because at age 90 we net about $325,000 versus us both collecting starting at age 62.

BUT

Looking at the data the calculator spits out when taking the SS early at 62 - at age 70 (her 76) we are ahead $250,000. So, the question becomes is it be better to have an extra quarter million dollars in our 70s versus betting that we live past break even (ages 79/85) and eventually die at age 90 with an extra 325K?



- leaving an inheritance isn't really important to us
- having extra money in our 70s and being able to enjoy it versus in our 80s when less active
- larger payments in 80s and possibly 90s would be beneficial for health and long term care if needed

I’ve said it for my situation and just using say $3k for my wife and me (both should have enough credits) gives you enough of a nest egg from 62-70 that a decent return of 6-8% each year would have us making up the 62 to 70 monthly difference and still be way ahead with that huge nest egg.

Part of the reason why many of these sites recommend 70 is because most people get SS at 62 because they need it not because they thought about investing the difference. Those sites A) don’t even mention the nest egg and B) if they have the nest egg they don’t mention that you are investing that nest egg amount over the 8 years. The average time each year of $$$s has is 4 years. 4 years at 6-8% return makes that nest egg a lot bigger at age 70.

For example, my nest egg above would be $72k * 8 years or $576k. Using just 6% return with simple math (average of 4 years of compounding) and that nest egg is $727k.

All that said, there are other factors like the reduction of SS due to income before full retirement age. If my wife or I are still working or if we are trying to do Roth rollovers, it won’t make sense to get SS early when you get half of it.

I think what you're saying is that SS is simple 8% interest, not compounded, and 6% compounded interest beats that with the unknown being inflation?

No, I was just saying the extra 8% you get from waiting is based upon the government’s “nest egg” rather than getting less SS 8 years earlier where the nest egg is now in your pocket and it’s been growing in those 8 years as well. My argument was that if you invested the early SS or spent the early SS to avoid pulling invested money out, you can have a rather large nest egg that could get you more per month than you lose out by getting the SS early and that nest egg making up the difference is your money.

I think a lot of the calculation web sites don’t take that nest egg into consideration and certainly don’t acknowledge that the nest egg can grow in those 8 years.

I still think we are saying the same thing. And I agree the calculators do not take into account investing that money, it's simply the total amount of SS dollars received over time in two different scenarios.

Sure 8% plus adjustment for inflation is beatable, but, I'd take it all day long guaranteed right now in all my retirement accounts It's the time that runs out in that model which is the more compelling argument for taking it early, and spending it.

 

[Riffraff]

This isn't quite right - this is from birth. A 65 year old dude, on average, lives to 82. A woman to 84.

Unsure why you cut out the line immediately above that literally says 'from birth' and also cut out the lines below that say if one makes it to 65, they last to 82ish / 86ish.
One can also use the link and scroll down to age 65 to do the math of the added estimated years. So it's pretty accurate.

 

[Peggy]

I'm new to this thread; I'm 57 and the current plan is to retire in ~8 years at 65. My wife is a few years younger and plans to retire at the same time (no way she is working while I"m retired ). Anyway, my question is related to someone being able to get 1/2 of your SS benefits in addition to your own payments (not sure i'm saying that correctly but I thiink you know what I mean). We have a special needs daughter who is going to live with us for as long as possible and the plan is for her to be the person who gets 1/2 my benefit. Question: is that limited to one person? Or could both my wife and daughter get 1/2 of payment? Or in this scenario, is my wife "stuck" with whatever she will get from SS?

Your wife's is hers or 1/2 of yours, whichever is higher. And if she's the same age or younger she can start on hers at 62 and you can push yours later, then she jumps up to 1/2 yours when you start taking. The daughter may also qualify, but, there are limits to how much a family can get and I haven't researched that much. This might help: https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10085.pdf

 

[Sand]

This isn't quite right - this is from birth. A 65 year old dude, on average, lives to 82. A woman to 84.

Unsure why you cut out the line immediately above that literally says 'from birth' and also cut out the lines below that say if one makes it to 65, they last to 82ish / 86ish.
One can also use the link and scroll down to age 65 to do the math of the added estimated years. So it's pretty accurate.

Probably because I skim half and gloss over half of the other half I read. Sorry, GB.

 

[Judge Smails]

I'm new to this thread; I'm 57 and the current plan is to retire in ~8 years at 65. My wife is a few years younger and plans to retire at the same time (no way she is working while I"m retired ). Anyway, my question is related to someone being able to get 1/2 of your SS benefits in addition to your own payments (not sure i'm saying that correctly but I thiink you know what I mean). We have a special needs daughter who is going to live with us for as long as possible and the plan is for her to be the person who gets 1/2 my benefit. Question: is that limited to one person? Or could both my wife and daughter get 1/2 of payment? Or in this scenario, is my wife "stuck" with whatever she will get from SS?

Your wife's is hers or 1/2 of yours, whichever is higher. And if she's the same age or younger she can start on hers at 62 and you can push yours later, then she jumps up to 1/2 yours when you start taking. The daughter may also qualify, but, there are limits to how much a family can get and I haven't researched that much. This might help: https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10085.pdf

how is the "1/2 of yours" calculated? She'll claim at 62 in 2 years. I may wait another 8 to claim at 70 to get the max

 

[Peggy]

I'm new to this thread; I'm 57 and the current plan is to retire in ~8 years at 65. My wife is a few years younger and plans to retire at the same time (no way she is working while I"m retired ). Anyway, my question is related to someone being able to get 1/2 of your SS benefits in addition to your own payments (not sure i'm saying that correctly but I thiink you know what I mean). We have a special needs daughter who is going to live with us for as long as possible and the plan is for her to be the person who gets 1/2 my benefit. Question: is that limited to one person? Or could both my wife and daughter get 1/2 of payment? Or in this scenario, is my wife "stuck" with whatever she will get from SS?

Your wife's is hers or 1/2 of yours, whichever is higher. And if she's the same age or younger she can start on hers at 62 and you can push yours later, then she jumps up to 1/2 yours when you start taking. The daughter may also qualify, but, there are limits to how much a family can get and I haven't researched that much. This might help: https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10085.pdf

how is the "1/2 of yours" calculated? She'll claim at 62 in 2 years. I may wait another 8 to claim at 70 to get the max

When you start claiming the max she can switch to 1/2 yours (1/2 max). Then when you die she'll get your max. If you're equal age or she's younger I think that's the way to go.

My wife is several years older so if she waited she can claim her max for those years before I get to my max. According to the calculators that's better in the end (having the most money when you die) than her starting to claim at 62 even though she'd be collecting that lower amount many more years than in your scenario.

But again, the break even is around my age 80. So I'm probably still following the her collecting at 62 model and me playing it by ear.

 

[Buckna]

Last year my company sent out early retirement offers, if you were 62 or older and made over 100k they would give 2 weeks for every year of service up to one year, and pay COBRA for that same amount of time as well. They just sent the same offer out today and expanded it to anyone 57 or older. I'm still a long way away but wish they didn't have the age restriction. 9 months of severance plus insurance would be a great way to Jumpstart a 2nd career... :kicks rock:

 

[Peggy]

Today is the last day I ever have to wake up at 5:30am if I don't want to. I currently have PTO scheduled starting tomorrow all the way through my end date in February. I may fly in and help out for a week or two before then, but, if I do I'll make sure I don't show up first thing in the morning.

 

[matttyl]

I'm new to this thread; I'm 57 and the current plan is to retire in ~8 years at 65. My wife is a few years younger and plans to retire at the same time (no way she is working while I"m retired ). Anyway, my question is related to someone being able to get 1/2 of your SS benefits in addition to your own payments (not sure i'm saying that correctly but I thiink you know what I mean). We have a special needs daughter who is going to live with us for as long as possible and the plan is for her to be the person who gets 1/2 my benefit. Question: is that limited to one person? Or could both my wife and daughter get 1/2 of payment? Or in this scenario, is my wife "stuck" with whatever she will get from SS?

Your wife's is hers or 1/2 of yours, whichever is higher. And if she's the same age or younger she can start on hers at 62 and you can push yours later, then she jumps up to 1/2 yours when you start taking. The daughter may also qualify, but, there are limits to how much a family can get and I haven't researched that much. This might help: https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10085.pdf

how is the "1/2 of yours" calculated? She'll claim at 62 in 2 years. I may wait another 8 to claim at 70 to get the max

This is the part that I can never quite wrap my head around. Of course the rules may very well be different by the time it matters, but I’ve always thought that SS decisions would be made on me collecting mine at a certain point, and my wife collecting hers at a certain point - with both of us likely delaying to get a higher benefit later. We both work and will each have a decent benefit amount, and she’s roughly 4 years younger than me.

What benefit, if any, is there in either of us collecting half of the others earlier?

 

[Peggy]

I'm new to this thread; I'm 57 and the current plan is to retire in ~8 years at 65. My wife is a few years younger and plans to retire at the same time (no way she is working while I"m retired ). Anyway, my question is related to someone being able to get 1/2 of your SS benefits in addition to your own payments (not sure i'm saying that correctly but I thiink you know what I mean). We have a special needs daughter who is going to live with us for as long as possible and the plan is for her to be the person who gets 1/2 my benefit. Question: is that limited to one person? Or could both my wife and daughter get 1/2 of payment? Or in this scenario, is my wife "stuck" with whatever she will get from SS?

Your wife's is hers or 1/2 of yours, whichever is higher. And if she's the same age or younger she can start on hers at 62 and you can push yours later, then she jumps up to 1/2 yours when you start taking. The daughter may also qualify, but, there are limits to how much a family can get and I haven't researched that much. This might help: https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10085.pdf

how is the "1/2 of yours" calculated? She'll claim at 62 in 2 years. I may wait another 8 to claim at 70 to get the max

This is the part that I can never quite wrap my head around. Of course the rules may very well be different by the time it matters, but I’ve always thought that SS decisions would be made on me collecting mine at a certain point, and my wife collecting hers at a certain point - with both of us likely delaying to get a higher benefit later. We both work and will each have a decent benefit amount, and she’s roughly 4 years younger than me.

What benefit, if any, is there in either of us collecting half of the others earlier?

If you both have a decent amount then the person with the lowest amount is likely higher than 1/2 the other. In that case there is no benefit, you never would, and they wouldn't let you.

 

[SFBayDuck]

I'm new to this thread; I'm 57 and the current plan is to retire in ~8 years at 65. My wife is a few years younger and plans to retire at the same time (no way she is working while I"m retired ). Anyway, my question is related to someone being able to get 1/2 of your SS benefits in addition to your own payments (not sure i'm saying that correctly but I thiink you know what I mean). We have a special needs daughter who is going to live with us for as long as possible and the plan is for her to be the person who gets 1/2 my benefit. Question: is that limited to one person? Or could both my wife and daughter get 1/2 of payment? Or in this scenario, is my wife "stuck" with whatever she will get from SS?

Your wife's is hers or 1/2 of yours, whichever is higher. And if she's the same age or younger she can start on hers at 62 and you can push yours later, then she jumps up to 1/2 yours when you start taking. The daughter may also qualify, but, there are limits to how much a family can get and I haven't researched that much. This might help: https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10085.pdf

how is the "1/2 of yours" calculated? She'll claim at 62 in 2 years. I may wait another 8 to claim at 70 to get the max

This is the part that I can never quite wrap my head around. Of course the rules may very well be different by the time it matters, but I’ve always thought that SS decisions would be made on me collecting mine at a certain point, and my wife collecting hers at a certain point - with both of us likely delaying to get a higher benefit later. We both work and will each have a decent benefit amount, and she’s roughly 4 years younger than me.

What benefit, if any, is there in either of us collecting half of the others earlier?

This comes into play if the benefit amounts are significantly different. If they aren't, as it sounds like is the case with you, then thinking about this strategy won't apply.

 

[Judge Smails]

Last year my company sent out early retirement offers, if you were 62 or older and made over 100k they would give 2 weeks for every year of service up to one year, and pay COBRA for that same amount of time as well. They just sent the same offer out today and expanded it to anyone 57 or older. I'm still a long way away but wish they didn't have the age restriction. 9 months of severance plus insurance would be a great way to Jumpstart a 2nd career... :kicks rock:

That’s pretty much what I have now. Have 7 months severance and paid insurance starting Dec 1. Going to do multiple things 1) start a job search within my network. But will only take something that meets my criteria. Great leadership. Product/market fit. Right timing. I want something I would enjoy. Nothing super stressful. I won’t work for a holes at this stage in my life. 2) started a management umbrella company that has sales consulting, golf travel and other opps within it. Already set up - now need to flesh them out 3) do a trial retirement. Going to establish what I envision in retirement. Working out, golf at the club, more travel, reading, taking cooking to the next level, volunteering, spending as much time as I can with grandkids, etc. Am I ready for this?

The severance will run a few months after I turn 63. I know I can retire now, but do I want to? Still have plenty of game. My house will be paid off in the year I turn 65. And Medicare would kick in. Not having to draw down has me thinking of one more gig, as does wanting to help kids with down payments on first home. I’ve just been so focused on the accumulation phase that the spend down phase is difficult for me to imagine. Have to conquer that. I should be embracing it but I’m not.

 

[Sand]

I'm new to this thread; I'm 57 and the current plan is to retire in ~8 years at 65. My wife is a few years younger and plans to retire at the same time (no way she is working while I"m retired ). Anyway, my question is related to someone being able to get 1/2 of your SS benefits in addition to your own payments (not sure i'm saying that correctly but I thiink you know what I mean). We have a special needs daughter who is going to live with us for as long as possible and the plan is for her to be the person who gets 1/2 my benefit. Question: is that limited to one person? Or could both my wife and daughter get 1/2 of payment? Or in this scenario, is my wife "stuck" with whatever she will get from SS?

Your wife's is hers or 1/2 of yours, whichever is higher. And if she's the same age or younger she can start on hers at 62 and you can push yours later, then she jumps up to 1/2 yours when you start taking. The daughter may also qualify, but, there are limits to how much a family can get and I haven't researched that much. This might help: https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10085.pdf

how is the "1/2 of yours" calculated? She'll claim at 62 in 2 years. I may wait another 8 to claim at 70 to get the max

This is the part that I can never quite wrap my head around. Of course the rules may very well be different by the time it matters, but I’ve always thought that SS decisions would be made on me collecting mine at a certain point, and my wife collecting hers at a certain point - with both of us likely delaying to get a higher benefit later. We both work and will each have a decent benefit amount, and she’s roughly 4 years younger than me.

What benefit, if any, is there in either of us collecting half of the others earlier?

Get access to yours and the wife's SS accounts through SSA.gov. Then you can paste in your earning records into ssa.tools and see how the claiming ages change your income coming in. ssa.tools is anonymous and free (and it's a great calculator). If you're still not sure you can hire someone to lay this stuff out. For the two player game it's money well spent, IMO. Your choices can make a huge difference in income down the line.

 

[Judge Smails]

Found this in my feed today. "Retire without Regrets" published in the Harvard Business Review

https://hbr.org/2024/11/retire-with...ign=mtod_Active&deliveryName=NL_MTOD_20241025

 

[-OZ-]

I'm new to this thread; I'm 57 and the current plan is to retire in ~8 years at 65. My wife is a few years younger and plans to retire at the same time (no way she is working while I"m retired ). Anyway, my question is related to someone being able to get 1/2 of your SS benefits in addition to your own payments (not sure i'm saying that correctly but I thiink you know what I mean). We have a special needs daughter who is going to live with us for as long as possible and the plan is for her to be the person who gets 1/2 my benefit. Question: is that limited to one person? Or could both my wife and daughter get 1/2 of payment? Or in this scenario, is my wife "stuck" with whatever she will get from SS?

Your wife's is hers or 1/2 of yours, whichever is higher. And if she's the same age or younger she can start on hers at 62 and you can push yours later, then she jumps up to 1/2 yours when you start taking. The daughter may also qualify, but, there are limits to how much a family can get and I haven't researched that much. This might help: https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10085.pdf

how is the "1/2 of yours" calculated? She'll claim at 62 in 2 years. I may wait another 8 to claim at 70 to get the max

This is the part that I can never quite wrap my head around. Of course the rules may very well be different by the time it matters, but I’ve always thought that SS decisions would be made on me collecting mine at a certain point, and my wife collecting hers at a certain point - with both of us likely delaying to get a higher benefit later. We both work and will each have a decent benefit amount, and she’s roughly 4 years younger than me.

What benefit, if any, is there in either of us collecting half of the others earlier?

This comes into play if the benefit amounts are significantly different. If they aren't, as it sounds like is the case with you, then thinking about this strategy won't apply.

Right. Mywife will claim hers at the earliest opportunity but she’ll get a lot less then than she will when she claims half of mine.

 

[Peggy]

Today is the last day I ever have to wake up at 5:30am if I don't want to. I currently have PTO scheduled starting tomorrow all the way through my end date in February. I may fly in and help out for a week or two before then, but, if I do I'll make sure I don't show up first thing in the morning.

Delegated everything that was left in my inbox. Thinking about stripping down naked and running through the office hallways.

 

[Gatorade]

Today is the last day I ever have to wake up at 5:30am if I don't want to. I currently have PTO scheduled starting tomorrow all the way through my end date in February. I may fly in and help out for a week or two before then, but, if I do I'll make sure I don't show up first thing in the morning.

Delegated everything that was left in my inbox. Thinking about stripping down naked and running through the office hallways.

 

[Yo Mama]

Today is the last day I ever have to wake up at 5:30am if I don't want to. I currently have PTO scheduled starting tomorrow all the way through my end date in February. I may fly in and help out for a week or two before then, but, if I do I'll make sure I don't show up first thing in the morning.

Delegated everything that was left in my inbox. Thinking about stripping down naked and running through the office hallways.

Getting your butt back in the office?

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Today is the last day I ever have to wake up at 5:30am if I don't want to. I currently have PTO scheduled starting tomorrow all the way through my end date in February. I may fly in and help out for a week or two before then, but, if I do I'll make sure I don't show up first thing in the morning.

Delegated everything that was left in my inbox. Thinking about stripping down naked and running through the office hallways.

Getting your butt back in the office?

You, Sir, win the Internet today

 

[SFBayDuck]

Great podcast with Bill Bengen, the guy behind the “4% rule”. Sounds like he’s got a new book coming out, can’t wait to read that. But a few key takeaways:

• We already knew this but people keep missing it - the “4% rule” is based on looking at the data since the 1920s, and determining the safe withdrawal rate that covers the very worst case scenario, which turns out to be retiring in late 1968. It’s actually the 4.2% rule, and every other cohort historically could have withdrawn more than that, some up into the double digits, without running out of money over 30 years.
• What was a little newer to me was his emphasis that inflation is the real enemy, at least more important, than bear markets. That’s what made that 1968 time so bad was that it was two bear markets followed by a decade of high inflation. On the flip side, those who retired into The Great Depression who saw an over 80% drawdown had a higher SWR because there was actually deflation.
• With this in mind, it really emphasizes the need for a diversified portfolio of uncorrelated assets that do well in different economic environments, including extended high inflation.
• They don’t really talk about this, but it seems to make obvious what doesn’t work during periods of high inflation - a big bucket of cash. This seems to be the thing so many people turn to in an effort to combat the sequence of returns risk. But it’d be pretty much the worst thing to have 15-20% of your assets sitting in.
• Also has me thinking that the term “sequence of return risk” isn’t capturing all of the real risks to your drawdown portfolio, as it’s focused on the market performance and not inflation. I’ll have to noodle on that one a bit.
• They do call out that inflation rates are individual, so you shouldn’t just be using CPI if, for example, you have a fixed mortgage or no mortgage at all.

Those are just my some initial thoughts after listening to this during a long dog walk, typed up on my phone while having breakfast and watching football at a local pub with the pup. I might listen to this one again.

 

[SFBayDuck]

Forgot to add that his research now shows with a slightly more diversified portfolio, mostly within the equity portion, it’s more like a 5% SWR. He’s talked about this over the past year or two, and I hope his book coming out gets some buzz and coverage from financial and even main stream media so people start to shift their overly-conservative thinking on this just a bit. But doom and gloom and worst case scenarios get way more clicks, so my hope is muted on this. Probably part of why I’m so interested in and passionate about talking about it.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Met a guy yesterday who's father passed in his early 60's. His mother encouraged him to live life more like he wanted sooner than later.

Quit his job as an engineer and moved to Panama. For 15 years, he and his wife have been teaching ball room dancing on cruise ships. Gets free room and board in return for working about an hour per day on the days they're not at port. Loves it.

 

[-OZ-]

What was a little newer to me was his emphasis that inflation is the real enemy, at least more important, than bear markets.

I forget which podcasts discussed this before, probably Wade Pfau’s retire with style https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/retire-with-style/id1611091157
I’m trying to keep this simple but It’s the primary reason I think TIPS and I bonds are still worth buying.
Keep in mind of course that CPI doesn’t have to equal any person’s personal inflation rate.

Agree with the point about cash taking up 15-20% of a portfolio, we’ll have like 5% - one year’s worth.

Forgot to add that his research now shows with a slightly more diversified portfolio, mostly within the equity portion, it’s more like a 5% SWR

I mentioned it in the FB group, sort of joking but not really, I might actually aim for a flexible 8%.

On a different note, I hope to have a tough choice to make in the next few months. I like my job right now, It’s a good balance of challenge and comfort, good people and adding value to the organization I care about. Plus I have some time to do extra things like recruiting, running the wellness program, and taking whatever time I want off.
But the one job I’d consider leaving for just opened up. It would be the last job I take before retiring. If I don’t get it I’ll probably retire from this job eventually. It’s an extra $1k a month roughly, we wouldn’t move and I have a good relationship with many people in the other office. I’m not entirely sure I want it. Mostly because I like my current flexibility and can’t guarantee the same there. I have no doubt I’m qualified, but so are at least a few others.

 

[SFBayDuck]

I forget which podcasts discussed this before, probably Wade Pfau’s retire with style https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/retire-with-style/id1611091157
I’m trying to keep this simple but It’s the primary reason I think TIPS and I bonds are still worth buying.
Keep in mind of course that CPI doesn’t have to equal any person’s personal inflation rate.

Agree with the point about cash taking up 15-20% of a portfolio, we’ll have like 5% - one year’s worth.

Yeah they talk about personal rate of inflation a little as well.

TIPS gets a lot of play in this world, in fact if you dig into what several of the "gurus" actually do in their retirement, it seems a lot of them have something like a 2-3% withdrawal rate with TIPS ladders.

And I'm with you on the 5%. I think actually my goal will be around 6% which ties into....

I mentioned it in the FB group, sort of joking but not really, I might actually aim for a flexible 8%.

I don't think it's really that crazy at all, especially for someone like you with pensions coming that will provide an income floor. I don't have that, but I think 6% with a risk-parity style portfolio and with some spending guardrails should be totally reasonable. So one year in cash seems about right.

Still trying to figure out if the bond tent/rising equity glidepath should be part of my plan. I actually asked Frank that and he used the question on his podcast last month, but he didn't explicitly answer other than to say to start with portfolio construction and then add on portfolio management (like a glidepath), which is exactly what I'd be doing. I've played around with Portfolio Visualizer and even setting the worst sequence of returns first, starting with only 40% or so equities and having that get up to 70% or more over a 10 year period, it seems to perform worse than just having more equities from the start. Want to try it in some other tools though and keep playing around with the idea.

 

[-OZ-]

actually asked Frank that and he used the question on his podcast last month,

Speaking of Frank, today’s episode might be the best thing I’ve heard in this area.

Episode 381: Retirement Account Basics, Some Cool New Podcasts, And Portfolio Reviews As Of November 22, 2024

Podcast Episode · Risk Parity Radio · 11/24/2024 · 57m

podcasts.apple.com

 

[Peggy]

Why tips ladders instead of keeping it simple with vtip etf?

 

[SFBayDuck]

actually asked Frank that and he used the question on his podcast last month,

Speaking of Frank, today’s episode might be the best thing I’ve heard in this area.

Episode 381: Retirement Account Basics, Some Cool New Podcasts, And Portfolio Reviews As Of November 22, 2024

Podcast Episode · Risk Parity Radio · 11/24/2024 · 57m

podcasts.apple.com

Yeah that was the podcast I listened to this morning before the Bengen one (it was a long walk with the pup!). Great overview of how to think about and prioritize contributions during various stages of life.

 

[-OZ-]

Why tips ladders instead of keeping it simple with vtip etf?

You could use the ETF but it changes in value. Individual bonds don’t, assuming you hold to maturity. With I bonds that’s not an issue either, although you lose 3 months of interest if you sell before 5 years.

 

[Peggy]

Why tips ladders instead of keeping it simple with vtip etf?

You could use the ETF but it changes in value. Individual bonds don’t, assuming you hold to maturity. With I bonds that’s not an issue either, although you lose 3 months of interest if you sell before 5 years.

I'm still wrapping my head around how bonds work but...

Ignoring the price fluctuations because of live trading of an ETF versus the NAV price of a mutual fund, the price of the ETF should be the price of the average bond and duration of the ETF's portfolio right?

And doesn't the value of bonds change at maturity depending on internet rates rising or falling? Isn't that what distinguishes them from CDs?

 

[Sand]

And doesn't the value of bonds change at maturity depending on internet rates rising or falling? Isn't that what distinguishes them from CDs?

The value of bonds change due to interest rates while they exist - if you sell a 10 year bond on the open market 3 years in the value will definitely fluctuate. As the maturity date approaches the value tightens back in on the face value. Once at maturity it is redeemed at face value.

As long as a bond doesn't default you should get back face value (plus all the interest payments over the life of the bond) at the end of its lifespan.

 

[-OZ-]

And doesn't the value of bonds change at maturity depending on internet rates rising or falling? Isn't that what distinguishes them from CDs?

This is a reason I like I bonds. You just sell back to the government, no chance of a loss.

 

[Sand]

And doesn't the value of bonds change at maturity depending on internet rates rising or falling? Isn't that what distinguishes them from CDs?

This is a reason I like I bonds. You just sell back to the government, no chance of a loss.

That goes for all US treasuries. If any of those default you should have been investing in guns, ammo, and whiskey.

 

[-OZ-]

whiskey

I like to stay liquid.

 

[FairWarning]

I got the news today that my 30 years of distribution services will be no longer needed after the Super Bowl. That will not help in the goal to slow down in two years. Kind of a big FU from me to corporate America today.

 

[-OZ-]

I got the news today that my 30 years of distribution services will be no longer needed after the Super Bowl. That will not help in the goal to slow down in two years. Kind of a big FU from me to corporate America today.

Could it be the push you take to retire or do something you enjoy more?

 

[FairWarning]

I got the news today that my 30 years of distribution services will be no longer needed after the Super Bowl. That will not help in the goal to slow down in two years. Kind of a big FU from me to corporate America today.

Could it be the push you take to retire or do something you enjoy more?

Can’t afford to retire, especially with health insurance. It’s just me, no spouse to get coverage from.

 

[-OZ-]

I got the news today that my 30 years of distribution services will be no longer needed after the Super Bowl. That will not help in the goal to slow down in two years. Kind of a big FU from me to corporate America today.

Could it be the push you take to retire or do something you enjoy more?

Can’t afford to retire, especially with health insurance. It’s just me, no spouse to get coverage from.

Ah. Best of luck finding something that works well for you.
My father in law was let go a few years before he was ready, or would get his pension. He was able to find something that worked better for him, being let go turned out to be the best thing for him.
Hopefully you will say the same thing in a couple years. But yeah I’m sure it’s tough now.

 

[fruity pebbles]

I got the news today that my 30 years of distribution services will be no longer needed after the Super Bowl. That will not help in the goal to slow down in two years. Kind of a big FU from me to corporate America today.

Think I’d be tempted to tell them to F off now.

 

[coopersdad]

as I posted in the get your butt back in the office thread, we got notice that our HQ would be relocating a long way away in May, so about 90% of our office will be out of a job. 5% will probably make the move (Directors and above who are from other brands in the parent portfolio), and a few (maybe 15-20) of us will get to WFH for another year or 18 months implementing a new supply chain / finance / etc. ERP.

Been there 22+ years and while not mad (sort of understand the financial decision which was basically created the last 3 years by corporate directives), but certainly disappointed in the severance "package" that was offered to everyone else (and I'd expect me at some point in the 12-months).

Happy holidays, and I was just thinking that I had my retirement plans going well...............

 

[fruity pebbles]

as I posted in the get your butt back in the office thread, we got notice that our HQ would be relocating a long way away in May, so about 90% of our office will be out of a job. 5% will probably make the move (Directors and above who are from other brands in the parent portfolio), and a few (maybe 15-20) of us will get to WFH for another year or 18 months implementing a new supply chain / finance / etc. ERP.

Been there 22+ years and while not mad (sort of understand the financial decision which was basically created the last 3 years by corporate directives), but certainly disappointed in the severance "package" that was offered to everyone else (and I'd expect me at some point in the 12-months).

Happy holidays, and I was just thinking that I had my retirement plans going well...............

I think things like this are going to be a common theme over the next couple years. Are they expecting to just hire an entirely new staff where they move to? I’m honestly glad I’m in my 50s and have a limited work shelf life left. I can’t even imagine the pains the younger generations are going to go through in the future.

 

[SFBayDuck]

I can’t even imagine the pains the younger generations are going to go through in the future.

Curious what you mean by this, can you expand?

Of course we're in this transition where we went from pretty much everybody in office to mostly remote back to mostly in office, and that's caused pain for many, including some here in the thread. But that's not likely to reoccur on the scale we've seen the past year or two.

Companies do this all the time, though, it's not new. When I was at IBM they made all of the marketing teams centralize in one of two offices, when before they were spread out all over various offices and a few remotes. That was 10-12 years ago.

 

[fruity pebbles]

I can’t even imagine the pains the younger generations are going to go through in the future.

Curious what you mean by this, can you expand?

Of course we're in this transition where we went from pretty much everybody in office to mostly remote back to mostly in office, and that's caused pain for many, including some here in the thread. But that's not likely to reoccur on the scale we've seen the past year or two.

Companies do this all the time, though, it's not new. When I was at IBM they made all of the marketing teams centralize in one of two offices, when before they were spread out all over various offices and a few remotes. That was 10-12 years ago.

Sure. Not the wfh or in office, the coming shift to more automation, layoffs and get work done with less staff. I’ve seen it in healthcare, which has largely been sheltered, so I’m sure it’s happening to a greater extent across all industries. There’s been no loyalty for awhile now, from employer to worker and vice versa but it seems even worse the last couple years and I don’t expect it to get any better.

 

[-OZ-]

I can’t even imagine the pains the younger generations are going to go through in the future.

Every generation could say the same, at least since the development of the assembly line.
But yeah, I’m glad that I could retire soon if we wanted, could stay where I’m at, and have a reasonable chance at the next promotion.

 

[fruity pebbles]

I can’t even imagine the pains the younger generations are going to go through in the future.

Every generation could say the same, at least since the development of the assembly line.
But yeah, I’m glad that I could retire soon if we wanted, could stay where I’m at, and have a reasonable chance at the next promotion.

True. I’m just glad I’m at an age and have been able to save enough that I’m not reliant upon a particular job anymore.Have several friends in tech who were laid off from $150,000 jobs who are now having trouble finding work at even significantly less money. I’d be very nervous if I was in an industry or area where my job is essentially irreplaceable, ie I get laid off and I’ve got no real backup plan for similar money.

 

[SFBayDuck]

I can’t even imagine the pains the younger generations are going to go through in the future.

Curious what you mean by this, can you expand?

Of course we're in this transition where we went from pretty much everybody in office to mostly remote back to mostly in office, and that's caused pain for many, including some here in the thread. But that's not likely to reoccur on the scale we've seen the past year or two.

Companies do this all the time, though, it's not new. When I was at IBM they made all of the marketing teams centralize in one of two offices, when before they were spread out all over various offices and a few remotes. That was 10-12 years ago.

Sure. Not the wfh or in office, the coming shift to more automation, layoffs and get work done with less staff. I’ve seen it in healthcare, which has largely been sheltered, so I’m sure it’s happening to a greater extent across all industries. There’s been no loyalty for awhile now, from employer to worker and vice versa but it seems even worse the last couple years and I don’t expect it to get any better.

Appreciate the response!

The economy, and humankind, marches forward. Hunter gatherer to farming. Farming to manufacturing. Assembly lines then made manufacturing more productive than before. Automation, which has been around for decades now, accelerating that even further. Starting in the 80s software and computers doing what it used to take millions of people to accomplish.

Productivity keeps improving, and yet unemployment is still at historic lows. Basically the only time it's been lower in the past 75 years is right after wars. Workers adjust, the economy adjusts, new jobs are created that never existed before. Hell, I've spent the past 15 years of my career selling something that literally didn't exist when I was in college.

To tie it back to the thread (we should pick this up in the economy thread instead) many of us may be feeling like Roger Murtaugh. We don't want to learn new tricks. Or we are aging out of our industries (I'm only 52, and that's me!). It's part of why I'm so hyper-focused on figuring out how to pull off retiring in the next couple of years. But I'm actually excited for my 21 year old daughter, who will graduate from college next year. She'll likely have jobs I never dreamed of, or be doing existing jobs in completely new ways. Doesn't mean it will be easy getting started, it wasn't for me and I'm sure it wasn't for many of you. But there will be lots of opportunity, of that I am sure.

 

[fruity pebbles]

I can’t even imagine the pains the younger generations are going to go through in the future.

Curious what you mean by this, can you expand?

Of course we're in this transition where we went from pretty much everybody in office to mostly remote back to mostly in office, and that's caused pain for many, including some here in the thread. But that's not likely to reoccur on the scale we've seen the past year or two.

Companies do this all the time, though, it's not new. When I was at IBM they made all of the marketing teams centralize in one of two offices, when before they were spread out all over various offices and a few remotes. That was 10-12 years ago.

Sure. Not the wfh or in office, the coming shift to more automation, layoffs and get work done with less staff. I’ve seen it in healthcare, which has largely been sheltered, so I’m sure it’s happening to a greater extent across all industries. There’s been no loyalty for awhile now, from employer to worker and vice versa but it seems even worse the last couple years and I don’t expect it to get any better.

Appreciate the response!

The economy, and humankind, marches forward. Hunter gatherer to farming. Farming to manufacturing. Assembly lines then made manufacturing more productive than before. Automation, which has been around for decades now, accelerating that even further. Starting in the 80s software and computers doing what it used to take millions of people to accomplish.

Productivity keeps improving, and yet unemployment is still at historic lows. Basically the only time it's been lower in the past 75 years is right after wars. Workers adjust, the economy adjusts, new jobs are created that never existed before. Hell, I've spent the past 15 years of my career selling something that literally didn't exist when I was in college.

To tie it back to the thread (we should pick this up in the economy thread instead) many of us may be feeling like Roger Murtaugh. We don't want to learn new tricks. Or we are aging out of our industries (I'm only 52, and that's me!). It's part of why I'm so hyper-focused on figuring out how to pull off retiring in the next couple of years. But I'm actually excited for my 21 year old daughter, who will graduate from college next year. She'll likely have jobs I never dreamed of, or be doing existing jobs in completely new ways. Doesn't mean it will be easy getting started, it wasn't for me and I'm sure it wasn't for many of you. But there will be lots of opportunity, of that I am sure.

I certainly could be looking at it from my old man bubble.

 

[SFBayDuck]

I certainly could be looking at it from my old man bubble.

Hey man we've all got our bubbles, and everything outside of them looks all blurry from the inside!

 

[coopersdad]

as I posted in the get your butt back in the office thread, we got notice that our HQ would be relocating a long way away in May, so about 90% of our office will be out of a job. 5% will probably make the move (Directors and above who are from other brands in the parent portfolio), and a few (maybe 15-20) of us will get to WFH for another year or 18 months implementing a new supply chain / finance / etc. ERP.

Been there 22+ years and while not mad (sort of understand the financial decision which was basically created the last 3 years by corporate directives), but certainly disappointed in the severance "package" that was offered to everyone else (and I'd expect me at some point in the 12-months).

Happy holidays, and I was just thinking that I had my retirement plans going well...............

I think things like this are going to be a common theme over the next couple years. Are they expecting to just hire an entirely new staff where they move to? I’m honestly glad I’m in my 50s and have a limited work shelf life left. I can’t even imagine the pains the younger generations are going to go through in the future.

yes, they are going to hire basically a new staff, or get other brands/corporate to absorb some of our functions.

I'm 59. And just the thought of a job search at age 61 is kind of something I really don't want to think about.

1st job - 8 years
2nd job - 8 years
This job 22+ years

If I was 40ish I'd be in in really high demand and would probably have a pick of jobs. Not sure how people view hiring someone my age.