Would you retire with a NW of $10m?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is a dumb question. If you can’t retire with that much money PLUS a pension (how much?) PLUS healthcare then no one can ever retire.

+100

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is PP who is retiring at 56 from federal government. My spouse and I both started our fed jobs straight out of college. We both invested the maximum in Thrift Savings Plan. We made full catch up contributions after turning 50. We both invested fully in the stock fund (C fund) and just let it ride. We never tried to time the market or play investment strategy games. Now at 56 and 55, we each have $2.5 million in each of our TSP accounts.

Oh I see - it’s a combined NW of 2 individuals. I’m at $2.8 NW at 46 as an individual. Somewhat concerned about “all stocks” investment

Your situation sounds reasonable and where you should be. But the OP seems to have $10mm so the numbers are just not adding up unless one of the spouses was much higher earner, or they invested in riskier assets or RE

Yes, makes a lot more sense and less impressive when you are counting two accounts lol. There is also quite a bit of luck involved if you were 100% C fund. And if you were able to start investing around the time Clinton was in office, you had the benefit of a great head start.

Agree, no big woop, if OP is counting two accounts. On this board, I usually assume they are talking about combined accounts. $5m for 30 years is not much to brag about. It can be done without inheritance.

[Anonymous]

Everyone's situation is different. With a net worth of 10m at age 50 I would, because that should bring in 300-400k/year, which is more than we live on now and we are actively saving for retirement and college. That being said, I would only do it if I really wanted to retire or had other things I wanted to do.

Our target number to retire is 3m in retirement accounts, plus 400k/per kid (we split between college and general investment account for them). We dont need as much in retirement because we have pensions and social security that will bring something like 185- 200k/year. Add in the money from retirement accounts and we should have more than enough. We are pretty close now, but will keep working for a variety of reasons (flexible interesting jobs) so I expect we will exceed our target, but who knows what life brings. We also made sure to get term life insurance so that would cover us until retirement/pensions kick in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can people just tell me how federal employees can amass 10mm by mid 50s??

Repeating the question: how can federal employees amass such brokerage accounts ? Did you all invest in crypto at the right time, or we’re living below means since age 20? Even two earners at the highest grade won’t get you there by mid 50s

Two income family plus some combination of income & stock options from private sector jobs before/after becoming a fed, living under your means & inheritances.

The cheat code is to become a Fed, rack up close to enough years to retire, go to the private sector and make $$ (but continue to live on your fed salary level), then go back to the federal government & retire with a pension and health benefits.

[Anonymous]

These posts are always interesting to me. My DH doesn’t care at all about money beyond what is sufficient to give his family a comfortable life. BUT he just works, every day, and never takes vacation. If we inherited 10 million (or 30 or 40 or 100 billion!), he would still not retire. I think for some men, work provides something so beyond money that these scenarios (“how much to retire?) are nonsensical.

[Anonymous]

i would have been retired already!!

[Anonymous]

We wouldn’t, at 50. I don’t trust our home values, which is a million of it or more—too many family members burned by RE crashes. They could expand a highway near us and we’d lose all that equity — even a school reasons could impact it. We have no pension and I’m not optimistic that SS will be there for us. I just feel like y 50 there are too many uncertainties — what if one of us gets cancer and we need to pay out of pocket for more aggressive treatment (happening to a friend). Why if one of the kids is struck with a chronic illness and can’t support themselves (happening to another friend). What if health insurance hosts increase more than anticipated (already happening and about to happen more due to all the regulation and litigation happening around prescription drug prices). The longer the timeline the wider the range of possible outcomes. And we are in fields where it would be hard to re enter once retired — if I were in a high demand field I would feel differently I think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No, not with kids that young as I believe it sets a bad example. I could have retired at 52 but I had two kids in HS and I had no desire to hand around the house or hang out with old people. So I worked until I was 60 and tripled my net worth.

And wasted eight years of your life working when you didn’t have to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We wouldn’t, at 50. I don’t trust our home values, which is a million of it or more—too many family members burned by RE crashes. They could expand a highway near us and we’d lose all that equity — even a school reasons could impact it. We have no pension and I’m not optimistic that SS will be there for us. I just feel like y 50 there are too many uncertainties — what if one of us gets cancer and we need to pay out of pocket for more aggressive treatment (happening to a friend). Why if one of the kids is struck with a chronic illness and can’t support themselves (happening to another friend). What if health insurance hosts increase more than anticipated (already happening and about to happen more due to all the regulation and litigation happening around prescription drug prices). The longer the timeline the wider the range of possible outcomes. And we are in fields where it would be hard to re enter once retired — if I were in a high demand field I would feel differently I think.

You can invent so many reasons to throw your life away. But you'll have a good many years hooked up to that feeding tube.

[Anonymous]

Early 50s is usually too young to retire with a pension plus health care.

[Anonymous]

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you have mortgage?

Do you have fully funded 529s?

OP here.

800k left on the mortgage, but I think I will be paying it down. Obviously, this does not affect NW.
Kids should have enough for instate (NW does not include their 529s)

None of this makes sense. Pay off your mortgage and save for college and grad school.

What is the interest rate on your mortgage? It may not make sense to pay it off early if the rate is low.

[Anonymous]

If you don’t think $10m is enough the problem is your scarcity mindset and anxiety, not your net worth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i would retire after the kids are through college. whatever your NW may be, I'd get them through that phase.

I don't understand this sentiment, nor do I understand the need to pay off mortgage before retirement. If you have a 529 for the kids plus $10M net worth (or even $5M), plus a pension, plus a government health care plan, how could you possibly be worried about not being able to pay for college or be able to pay your mortgage. You probably wouldn't even need to eat into any principle of your $10M to pay for those things.

I feel like people, especially in this area, are focused on amassing as much wealth as possible without thinking about what you will really need to have a comfortable and relaxing retirement.

Plus one. It makes no sense to work through your kids’ college if you can afford not to. That’s just an emotional strategy, not an economic one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Early 50s is usually too young to retire with a pension plus health care.

Huh? A pension plus health care makes early retirement more feasible.