Save or YOLO?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Witnessing elderly people forced to live and die in pathetic conditions because they have no money is strong motivation to save as aggressively as possible.

Yes, i see this every day in my job in healthcare.
However, I still am of the YOLO bent. I'd rather enjoy my money/resources in my youth (i.e. <60) and risk poverty in old age.
We max two 401ks but otherwise pretty much spend every cent.

If you're doing two 401ks to the IRS max over much of your career, I don't think you're risking poverty. This strikes me as the right balance.

Yes, we save $36k + match (so about $50k yearly) and spend the rest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Witnessing elderly people forced to live and die in pathetic conditions because they have no money is strong motivation to save as aggressively as possible.

We're Yolo people, but so have long term care insurance , while of course maxing out 401k.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Witnessing elderly people forced to live and die in pathetic conditions because they have no money is strong motivation to save as aggressively as possible.

Yes, i see this every day in my job in healthcare.
However, I still am of the YOLO bent. I'd rather enjoy my money/resources in my youth (i.e. <60) and risk poverty in old age.
We max two 401ks but otherwise pretty much spend every cent.

If you're doing two 401ks to the IRS max over much of your career, I don't think you're risking poverty. This strikes me as the right balance.

Yes, we save $36k + match (so about $50k yearly) and spend the rest.

But is this enough? We also max out our 401ks and I'm not under the impression that will be enough in old age. I'm only comfortable because I have a pension and we will have our house paid off early.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Witnessing elderly people forced to live and die in pathetic conditions because they have no money is strong motivation to save as aggressively as possible.

Even prudent savers nest eggs can be quickly wiped out by the insane cost of assisted living.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What does your budget tell you? Do you have a budget?

+1 I don't live completely tied to my budget, but where I am in savings definitely determines the extent of my yolo splurges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Witnessing elderly people forced to live and die in pathetic conditions because they have no money is strong motivation to save as aggressively as possible.

Even prudent savers nest eggs can be quickly wiped out by the insane cost of assisted living.

In many cases whether you saved or not you will end up on Medicaid. It may be better to spend now on fun stuff or give the money wear when you retire and let Medicaid pay for home nursing care than to bankrupt yourself paying for it. Just be sure to live in a state with a good Medicaid program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Witnessing elderly people forced to live and die in pathetic conditions because they have no money is strong motivation to save as aggressively as possible.

Even prudent savers nest eggs can be quickly wiped out by the insane cost of assisted living.

I'm a Yolo person aND that's why we have 5 years of assisted living insurance. No way in hell will I be in a medicaid funded facility. I'd rather s bullet to the head.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Witnessing elderly people forced to live and die in pathetic conditions because they have no money is strong motivation to save as aggressively as possible.

Even prudent savers nest eggs can be quickly wiped out by the insane cost of assisted living.

In many cases whether you saved or not you will end up on Medicaid. It may be better to spend now on fun stuff or give the money wear when you retire and let Medicaid pay for home nursing care than to bankrupt yourself paying for it. Just be sure to live in a state with a good Medicaid program.

Have you been inside one of those places? Holy shit, I used to volunteer at hospice and those places are horrifying and thr people working there give zero fucks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Witnessing elderly people forced to live and die in pathetic conditions because they have no money is strong motivation to save as aggressively as possible.

Even prudent savers nest eggs can be quickly wiped out by the insane cost of assisted living.

In many cases whether you saved or not you will end up on Medicaid. It may be better to spend now on fun stuff or give the money wear when you retire and let Medicaid pay for home nursing care than to bankrupt yourself paying for it. Just be sure to live in a state with a good Medicaid program.

Have you been inside one of those places? Holy shit, I used to volunteer at hospice and those places are horrifying and thr people working there give zero fucks.

I have been in one - my grandparents were in a very good nursing home paid by medicaid with a good staff, lovely grounds and original Picasso's on the wall (sketches, not Guernica or anything). The place where they had problems was a fancy, private pay assisted living facility that had less gov't oversight because the gov't wasn't paying the bills. I do think you have to choose the state you live in and the facility carefully though.

[Anonymous]

I read some stuff on hedonic tilt a while back that made me think we may be over saving. The basic concept is that you will hit an age where you aren't really healthy/mobile enough to do much and lack the desire anyway so you generally tend to live cheaply. Most of the older folks I know (70s and above) seem to be like this regardless of financial position so I think there may be some merit to it. So with that in mind I think you can make a case for a bit of "YOLOing" here and there. The problem is that you can't really predict what will happen in your specific situation so anything you do isn't without risk and definitely has a potential downside later. I think we've decided to occasionally do some mild yoloing here and there, but focus on our savings goals until we hit our investible asset goals. We figure that using the generally accepted safe withdrawal rate (4% or so) with a few million in the bank and a paid off house that we should be fine. I think once we hit that then we'll be more open to some real yoloing. Until then we'll stick with packing lunches, driving old Hondas and passing Starbucks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Witnessing elderly people forced to live and die in pathetic conditions because they have no money is strong motivation to save as aggressively as possible.

Even prudent savers nest eggs can be quickly wiped out by the insane cost of assisted living.

In many cases whether you saved or not you will end up on Medicaid. It may be better to spend now on fun stuff or give the money wear when you retire and let Medicaid pay for home nursing care than to bankrupt yourself paying for it. Just be sure to live in a state with a good Medicaid program.

No one wants to go on Medicaid because you have to get rid of all your assets in order to qualify and you have to meet the level of care need for a nursing facility. A don't think most people can plan to run out of money the exact moment they need nursing care, so they either end up in poverty for several years living at home, or they have a period where they have to sell their house and spend down all of their assets before Medicaid starts paying the bills. If one person is in a nursing facility and the other isn't, you can keep your house (up to a certain dollar value) and a few hundred dollars a month, but if the at-home spouse dies the state can sell the house and keep the money to recoup the cost of caring for the institutionalized spouse. And almost all of your social security check will go to the nursing facility except a very small "personal needs" allowance (like $50/month) -- if you are "poor" enough to have Medicaid pay, then the government will either make you spend down all your assets or go after your home after you die and prevent you from keeping any income over a nominal amount. So, if that's the way you want to live in retirement, by all means go ahead and count on that.

[Anonymous]

I don't know the answer with this because we struggle with it too. As much as we try not to let our lifestyle increase when we get raises or big bonuses, they do creep up a little. The biggest area we spend in is probably travel followed by stuff for the house: new furniture and the like. We're thinking about doing a kitchen reno but that will be expensive and we wonder if/when it will be worth the money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Witnessing elderly people forced to live and die in pathetic conditions because they have no money is strong motivation to save as aggressively as possible.

Even prudent savers nest eggs can be quickly wiped out by the insane cost of assisted living.

In many cases whether you saved or not you will end up on Medicaid. It may be better to spend now on fun stuff or give the money wear when you retire and let Medicaid pay for home nursing care than to bankrupt yourself paying for it. Just be sure to live in a state with a good Medicaid program.

Have you been inside one of those places? Holy shit, I used to volunteer at hospice and those places are horrifying and thr people working there give zero fucks.

I have been in one - my grandparents were in a very good nursing home paid by medicaid with a good staff, lovely grounds and original Picasso's on the wall (sketches, not Guernica or anything). The place where they had problems was a fancy, private pay assisted living facility that had less gov't oversight because the gov't wasn't paying the bills. I do think you have to choose the state you live in and the facility carefully though.

I'm a nurse and I can assure you that your grandparents experience is not the norm. Thr poster is correct, those places are awful, abuses rampant, and many workers are on worker programs and much is stolen from the residents. Not pc, but true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Witnessing elderly people forced to live and die in pathetic conditions because they have no money is strong motivation to save as aggressively as possible.

Even prudent savers nest eggs can be quickly wiped out by the insane cost of assisted living.

In many cases whether you saved or not you will end up on Medicaid. It may be better to spend now on fun stuff or give the money wear when you retire and let Medicaid pay for home nursing care than to bankrupt yourself paying for it. Just be sure to live in a state with a good Medicaid program.

No one wants to go on Medicaid because you have to get rid of all your assets in order to qualify and you have to meet the level of care need for a nursing facility. A don't think most people can plan to run out of money the exact moment they need nursing care, so they either end up in poverty for several years living at home, or they have a period where they have to sell their house and spend down all of their assets before Medicaid starts paying the bills. If one person is in a nursing facility and the other isn't, you can keep your house (up to a certain dollar value) and a few hundred dollars a month, but if the at-home spouse dies the state can sell the house and keep the money to recoup the cost of caring for the institutionalized spouse. And almost all of your social security check will go to the nursing facility except a very small "personal needs" allowance (like $50/month) -- if you are "poor" enough to have Medicaid pay, then the government will either make you spend down all your assets or go after your home after you die and prevent you from keeping any income over a nominal amount. So, if that's the way you want to live in retirement, by all means go ahead and count on that.

Exactly. I have long term care insurance in place of life insurance. No way am I going down the medicaid path. No way is my mother either. I'll bring her in my home before I allow her to be subjected to the horrors of Medicare both physical horror and financial horrors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Witnessing elderly people forced to live and die in pathetic conditions because they have no money is strong motivation to save as aggressively as possible.

Even prudent savers nest eggs can be quickly wiped out by the insane cost of assisted living.

In many cases whether you saved or not you will end up on Medicaid. It may be better to spend now on fun stuff or give the money wear when you retire and let Medicaid pay for home nursing care than to bankrupt yourself paying for it. Just be sure to live in a state with a good Medicaid program.

No one wants to go on Medicaid because you have to get rid of all your assets in order to qualify and you have to meet the level of care need for a nursing facility. A don't think most people can plan to run out of money the exact moment they need nursing care, so they either end up in poverty for several years living at home, or they have a period where they have to sell their house and spend down all of their assets before Medicaid starts paying the bills. If one person is in a nursing facility and the other isn't, you can keep your house (up to a certain dollar value) and a few hundred dollars a month, but if the at-home spouse dies the state can sell the house and keep the money to recoup the cost of caring for the institutionalized spouse. And almost all of your social security check will go to the nursing facility except a very small "personal needs" allowance (like $50/month) -- if you are "poor" enough to have Medicaid pay, then the government will either make you spend down all your assets or go after your home after you die and prevent you from keeping any income over a nominal amount. So, if that's the way you want to live in retirement, by all means go ahead and count on that.

Exactly. I have long term care insurance in place of life insurance. No way am I going down the medicaid path. No way is my mother either. I'll bring her in my home before I allow her to be subjected to the horrors of Medicare both physical horror and financial horrors.

Two other things -- Medicare (health insurance for physician, hospital, and Rx) is available to everyone over age 65, Medicaid (which covers nursing homes) is for the poor. Lots of people get them confused and think because all old people get Medicare they will be covered for nursing homes. Not true AT ALL.

Also, I don't know that all Medicaid-covered nursing facilities are a horror. Many are well run and competently staffed. However, the patients are extremely vulnerable and the financial horrors are definitely true, so I don't know why anyone would PLAN on Medicaid being their retirement approach.