End goal / How much do you need?

[no1g8r]

You are correct and that is already in the works. It is why BlackRock, Vanguard and other whores are pressing for the government to take over everyone's retirement accounts so they can introduce a government annuity for all, where you have no say, you get what you get and those whores get gazillions in commissions and fees.

I believe you, but can you provide a link to where Vanguard has done this? I may have to rethink having accounts with them.

 

[Concrete Helmet]

You are correct and that is already in the works. It is why BlackRock, Vanguard and other whores are pressing for the government to take over everyone's retirement accounts so they can introduce a government annuity for all, where you have no say, you get what you get and those whores get gazillions in commissions and fees

Thank God for Gold, Mason jars,real estate and ammo...If I run out of ammo I guess the Government can search for the rest..

 

[g8r.tom]

Can’t take it with you.

Really? I was not aware of that. Well then, my kids will be happy.

 

[Gator-Don]

Thank God for Gold, Mason jars,real estate and ammo...If I run out of ammo I guess the Government can search for the rest..

Gotta have at least enough gold to bribe the border guards.

 

[FireFoley]

I believe you, but can you provide a link to where Vanguard has done this? I may have to rethink having accounts with them.

It has not happened yet as you are aware, but if you listen to the CEO of BlackRock he has proposed the idea of allowing his company and others to "manage" all retirement accounts for others as to be able to "guarantee" the so called income for life, which is another term for annuity. It is also a misnomer b/c as most of us know, an annuity payment is mostly return of your own capital and very little taxable income, in most cases.

 

[78]

It has not happened yet as you are aware, but if you listen to the CEO of BlackRock he has proposed the idea of allowing his company and others to "manage" all retirement accounts for others as to be able to "guarantee" the so called income for life, which is another term for annuity. It is also a misnomer b/c as most of us know, an annuity payment is mostly return of your own capital and very little taxable income, in most cases.

Fink has been vocal about the obvious, the death of the defined benefit plan. Not seeing media coverage of him as part of this conspiracy you allude to.

Annuities are all about risk transfer as are pensions, which are annuities. Where's the beef, FF?

 

[GatorInGeorgia]

I find it interesting how many folks are planning their retirements with the idea they’ll get nothing from social security. (Count me in this camp by the way.) Is it because you think it will be broke or because Congress will decide to means test it or something else? Personally, I’m guessing means testing. I’m already preparing to be super pissed when this day comes (for all the good it will do me).

Either/or but something has to give. The system is so underfunded that they’ll have to keep adjusting it. Keep bumping up the retirement age, reduce the payouts across the board in some fashion, means test it, etc. Bottom line is that decades of mismanagement will necessitate change. If I get SS, great...but I’m not counting on it.

 

[GatorInGeorgia]

Yup, and the "401K/IRAs will be confiscated (at some level) and wrapped into the 'New Improved SS for the People, Child Safety, and Greater Good Tax Reform Act' talk doesn't sound so crazy anymore. Congress salivates at the trillions just sitting there waiting for the stroke of a pen.

True that. The other thing to keep in mind is will Congress fcvk over the holders of Roth accounts by changing the tax free withdrawal provision? I wouldn’t put it up past them to implement some tax on these accounts...maybe not the same tax rates as those on tax deferred 401(k) & IRAs, but something nonetheless.

 

[GatorInGeorgia]

You are correct and that is already in the works. It is why BlackRock, Vanguard and other whores are pressing for the government to take over everyone's retirement accounts so they can introduce a government annuity for all, where you have no say, you get what you get and those whores get gazillions in commissions and fees.

Or, even better, is Uncle Sam forcing government bonds to be purchased by IRA account owners. Can’t get the Chinese to buy US Treasuries anymore....that’s okay, we’ll stuff that worthless paper into the retirement accounts of our citizens. Can anybody say MyRA?

And just because it was recently phased out, don’t forget the gubbmint can bring it back anytime they want.

 

[bradgator2]

One of the few real articles that I have read that specifically hits home on the "no-debt in retirement" situation:

Can $180,000 really last 65-year-old, soon-to-be retiree until 100? It depends.

 

[Detroitgator]

One of the few real articles that I have read that specifically hits home on the "no-debt in retirement" situation:

Can $180,000 really last 65-year-old, soon-to-be retiree until 100? It depends.

Translation: if you live within your means (whether large or small) and nothing catastrophic happens, you'll be fine, or did I miss something? It's not hard.

 

[Concrete Helmet]

and nothing catastrophic happens,

Explain this "nothing catastrophic" thing to me...... Is it something that happens when you get older?

 

[bradgator2]

As someone who has never studied finance, I have never understood this stocks/bond ratio relationship. I can see when you are getting in your 60s or something. But why would you have a 20-30-40% of your savings in bonds when you are in your 20/30/40s?

‘I’m 100% in equities. … You’re never going to make enough money if you have 40% of your money in bonds,’ says CNBC anchor

 

[Detroitgator]

As someone who has never studied finance, I have never understood this stocks/bond ratio relationship. I can see when you are getting in your 60s or something. But why would you have a 20-30-40% of your savings in bonds when you are in your 20/30/40s?

‘I’m 100% in equities. … You’re never going to make enough money if you have 40% of your money in bonds,’ says CNBC anchor

It worked... until 20-25 years ago, but people still stuck in same paradigm that worked before that. Same is true with education, career, retirement planning, healthcare... the rules/game changed, the majority of the people still have not... I tried telling this to lboy for.... almost 20 years now. He refused to believe that... even when it proved true in his own case.

 

[daytonacane]

I initially retired @ age 60 as a widow & received 71 1/2% of my late husband's social security, but I retired from full time work and only worked part-time. I fully retired @ age65 in 2003 w/full SS benefits on my account which was in excess of $2,000/mo. net. I had no debts as home/car, etc. paid off & had an employer-funded lucrative pension which I rolled over into Morgan-Stanley nor have I ever touched the principle.

From 2003 to date, I have enjoyed double-digit gains on my pension investments as my portfolio was initially somewhat aggressive with 70% stock/30% fixed. I reduced this to 60/40 four years ago and on my 80th birthday further reduced to 40/60%. "Money" magazine states you should not be invested in percentage of stock more than your age, less one hundred which means I should have no more than 20% in stock. I am not willing to go that low in this current economy. I think counting on an average of around 3.5 to 4% is a bit more realistic than 6%, but as long as the economy is doing so great, I would be more aggressive until there is a downturn. In essence, stockpile it while you can.

Obviously if I see the worm turning toward a (God forbid) Democratic president in 2020, I would greatly reduce stock investment percentage. Regardless, retirement is somewhat scarey and you hope not to outlive your money & to be able to handle the unexpected expenses.

 

[GatorFL]

Interesting reading. We have a lot of 401k investments and a couple of pensions and just began working with a CFP. For our age I think we are pretty set. We're 75% to the goal of 401k savings. I think we should be work optional by age 60.

 

[Concrete Helmet]

I am not willing to go that low in this current economy. I think counting on an average of around 3.5 to 4% is a bit more realistic than 6%, but as long as the economy is doing so great, I would be more aggressive until there is a downturn. In essence, stockpile it while you can.

I wish my 85 year old Mom would give in to this some. Her and my Father were ultra conservative with their retirement accounts and were almost exclusively invested in bonds and gobs of CD's from many years ago because they were getting 7-10% from those sources. Now as those bonds and such have been coming due she stubbornly reinvest into CD's which are paying 2% and less and complains everytime we talk about not being able to find bonds that are even paying 4.5-5.0.

I've tried talking to her about taking some and going into a balanced dividend paying fund with no success. She's hard headed about not getting stuck with stocks at her age. I've tried telling her that most index funds are relatively safe as long as the expense is low....she is at least starting to get curious to I'm planning on showing her how to set up a Vanguard account in the next week or so.

 

[Pablos Tunnel]

To not drain the thrown income. Why touch it if you don't need to.

Why not spend it all then let the kids have the property and life insurance? Run the numbers and you will have a far better income stream and enjoyable retirement.

 

[Pablos Tunnel]

I wish my 85 year old Mom would give in to this some. Her and my Father were ultra conservative with their retirement accounts and were almost exclusively invested in bonds and gobs of CD's from many years ago because they were getting 7-10% from those sources. Now as those bonds and such have been coming due she stubbornly reinvest into CD's which are paying 2% and less and complains everytime we talk about not being able to find bonds that are even paying 4.5-5.0.

I've tried talking to her about taking some and going into a balanced dividend paying fund with no success. She's hard headed about not getting stuck with stocks at her age. I've tried telling her that most index funds are relatively safe as long as the expense is low....she is at least starting to get curious to I'm planning on showing her how to set up a Vanguard account in the next week or so.

Index funds (stock and bond) are far from being relatively safe. They are appropriate for investors with a long a term horizon and a stomach for volatility. They are static (unmanaged) investments. Most have forgotten 2001 and 2008 because of the bull run equities have made. You should test your portfolio versus your lifestyle income with a 10 year run of zero or negative returns. DO NOT put all your eggs in an equity basket for retirement.

 

[Concrete Helmet]

Index funds (stock and bond) are far from being relatively safe. They are appropriate for investors with a long a term horizon and a stomach for volatility. They are static (unmanaged) investments. Most have forgotten 2001 and 2008 because of the bull run equities have made. You should test your portfolio versus your lifestyle income with a 10 year run of zero or negative returns. DO NOT put all your eggs in an equity basket for retirement.

No, no one is saying that. In my Mothers case she is pretty well off due to returns from investments that were based on bonds(my Dad's IRA, 401K, Pension fund and more CD's and individual bonds than one could shake a stick at). Her concerns lie with losing anything at all when in fact she is losing returns by being WAY too conservative....

In my case I have my retirement based in R.E.,both residential and commercial, and of course traditional means such as PSP, IRA and on my own with index funds, retirement CD's......Funny thing is my index funds out perform my actively managed funds, PSP & IRA, on a pretty consistent basis....