Valuation of Pension for Retirement Planning

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Folks want to include the pensions in their net worth because it makes them feel richer and more able to keep up with the Joneses. It’s kind of pathetic.

Is it because you might be jealous of my inflation adjusted $140k annual pension with lifetime benefits?. I retired fours years ago at age 53. Do I count as part of NW? No I dont but my financial planner recently advised its “worth” about $3.5m ($140x25). Loser

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks want to include the pensions in their net worth because it makes them feel richer and more able to keep up with the Joneses. It’s kind of pathetic.

Is it because you might be jealous of my inflation adjusted $140k annual pension with lifetime benefits?. I retired fours years ago at age 53. Do I count as part of NW? No I dont but my financial planner recently advised its “worth” about $3.5m ($140x25). Loser

+1. I have an $90k local govt pension, with survivor benefits. I have always considered it a safety net. It’s a nice feeling to know the pension will alarm pass on the my beneficiary upon my death.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks want to include the pensions in their net worth because it makes them feel richer and more able to keep up with the Joneses. It’s kind of pathetic.

Is it because you might be jealous of my inflation adjusted $140k annual pension with lifetime benefits?. I retired fours years ago at age 53. Do I count as part of NW? No I dont but my financial planner recently advised its “worth” about $3.5m ($140x25). Loser

+1. I have an $90k local govt pension, with survivor benefits. I have always considered it a safety net. It’s a nice feeling to know the pension will alarm pass on the my beneficiary upon my death.

DP
I have two pensions (former teacher) and mine currently provide about $87,500. One has an annual COLA of 3% and the other is up to 5%, depending on the rate of inflation, so that’s a plus.

I’ve never really bothered figuring out net worth because I’ve never had a reason to do so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks want to include the pensions in their net worth because it makes them feel richer and more able to keep up with the Joneses. It’s kind of pathetic.

Is it because you might be jealous of my inflation adjusted $140k annual pension with lifetime benefits?. I retired fours years ago at age 53. Do I count as part of NW? No I dont but my financial planner recently advised its “worth” about $3.5m ($140x25). Loser

When you croak your heirs get nothing so it’s not an asset.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks want to include the pensions in their net worth because it makes them feel richer and more able to keep up with the Joneses. It’s kind of pathetic.

Is it because you might be jealous of my inflation adjusted $140k annual pension with lifetime benefits?. I retired fours years ago at age 53. Do I count as part of NW? No I dont but my financial planner recently advised its “worth” about $3.5m ($140x25). Loser

+1. I have an $90k local govt pension, with survivor benefits. I have always considered it a safety net. It’s a nice feeling to know the pension will alarm pass on the my beneficiary upon my death.

DP
I have two pensions (former teacher) and mine currently provide about $87,500. One has an annual COLA of 3% and the other is up to 5%, depending on the rate of inflation, so that’s a plus.

I’ve never really bothered figuring out net worth because I’ve never had a reason to do so.

I’m sitting on a $9 million nest egg and get social security of $50k year on top of that so not only do I win - my heirs do.

Pensions aren’t assets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks want to include the pensions in their net worth because it makes them feel richer and more able to keep up with the Joneses. It’s kind of pathetic.

Is it because you might be jealous of my inflation adjusted $140k annual pension with lifetime benefits?. I retired fours years ago at age 53. Do I count as part of NW? No I dont but my financial planner recently advised its “worth” about $3.5m ($140x25). Loser

+1. I have an $90k local govt pension, with survivor benefits. I have always considered it a safety net. It’s a nice feeling to know the pension will alarm pass on the my beneficiary upon my death.

DP
I have two pensions (former teacher) and mine currently provide about $87,500. One has an annual COLA of 3% and the other is up to 5%, depending on the rate of inflation, so that’s a plus.

I’ve never really bothered figuring out net worth because I’ve never had a reason to do so.

I’m sitting on a $9 million nest egg and get social security of $50k year on top of that so not only do I win - my heirs do.

Pensions aren’t assets.

What’s your point from above? Sounds so irrelevant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks want to include the pensions in their net worth because it makes them feel richer and more able to keep up with the Joneses. It’s kind of pathetic.

Is it because you might be jealous of my inflation adjusted $140k annual pension with lifetime benefits?. I retired fours years ago at age 53. Do I count as part of NW? No I dont but my financial planner recently advised its “worth” about $3.5m ($140x25). Loser

+1. I have an $90k local govt pension, with survivor benefits. I have always considered it a safety net. It’s a nice feeling to know the pension will alarm pass on the my beneficiary upon my death.

DP
I have two pensions (former teacher) and mine currently provide about $87,500. One has an annual COLA of 3% and the other is up to 5%, depending on the rate of inflation, so that’s a plus.

I’ve never really bothered figuring out net worth because I’ve never had a reason to do so.

I’m sitting on a $9 million nest egg and get social security of $50k year on top of that so not only do I win - my heirs do.

Pensions aren’t assets.

I didn’t say they are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks want to include the pensions in their net worth because it makes them feel richer and more able to keep up with the Joneses. It’s kind of pathetic.

Is it because you might be jealous of my inflation adjusted $140k annual pension with lifetime benefits?. I retired fours years ago at age 53. Do I count as part of NW? No I dont but my financial planner recently advised its “worth” about $3.5m ($140x25). Loser

When you croak your heirs get nothing so it’s not an asset.

Generally there are survivor benefits, typically for the spouse. My plan allows me to designate a non-spouse, so I am designating my child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks want to include the pensions in their net worth because it makes them feel richer and more able to keep up with the Joneses. It’s kind of pathetic.

Is it because you might be jealous of my inflation adjusted $140k annual pension with lifetime benefits?. I retired fours years ago at age 53. Do I count as part of NW? No I dont but my financial planner recently advised its “worth” about $3.5m ($140x25). Loser

When you croak your heirs get nothing so it’s not an asset.

Generally there are survivor benefits, typically for the spouse. My plan allows me to designate a non-spouse, so I am designating my child.

Your child does not get your pension for the rest of their life. No way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks want to include the pensions in their net worth because it makes them feel richer and more able to keep up with the Joneses. It’s kind of pathetic.

Is it because you might be jealous of my inflation adjusted $140k annual pension with lifetime benefits?. I retired fours years ago at age 53. Do I count as part of NW? No I dont but my financial planner recently advised its “worth” about $3.5m ($140x25). Loser

When you croak your heirs get nothing so it’s not an asset.

Generally there are survivor benefits, typically for the spouse. My plan allows me to designate a non-spouse, so I am designating my child.

Not true. I’m the pp with $140k pension. It comes with a designated survivor feature. If I croak, my spouse will get 85% of the $140k including the cola increases and healthcare subsidy - until their death

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks want to include the pensions in their net worth because it makes them feel richer and more able to keep up with the Joneses. It’s kind of pathetic.

Is it because you might be jealous of my inflation adjusted $140k annual pension with lifetime benefits?. I retired fours years ago at age 53. Do I count as part of NW? No I dont but my financial planner recently advised its “worth” about $3.5m ($140x25). Loser

When you croak your heirs get nothing so it’s not an asset.

Generally there are survivor benefits, typically for the spouse. My plan allows me to designate a non-spouse, so I am designating my child.

Your child does not get your pension for the rest of their life. No way.

One would think so but yes, child gets survivor benefits until they pass away. You can designate anyone and generally the younger they are, the less percentage they will receive

[Anonymous]

You people who say a pension is not an asset are idiots.

You can sell your pension if you want (Google it). It’s an income stream - and that has a real value!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks want to include the pensions in their net worth because it makes them feel richer and more able to keep up with the Joneses. It’s kind of pathetic.

Is it because you might be jealous of my inflation adjusted $140k annual pension with lifetime benefits?. I retired fours years ago at age 53. Do I count as part of NW? No I dont but my financial planner recently advised its “worth” about $3.5m ($140x25). Loser

+1. I have an $90k local govt pension, with survivor benefits. I have always considered it a safety net. It’s a nice feeling to know the pension will alarm pass on the my beneficiary upon my death.

DP
I have two pensions (former teacher) and mine currently provide about $87,500. One has an annual COLA of 3% and the other is up to 5%, depending on the rate of inflation, so that’s a plus.

I’ve never really bothered figuring out net worth because I’ve never had a reason to do so.

I’m sitting on a $9 million nest egg and get social security of $50k year on top of that so not only do I win - my heirs do.

Pensions aren’t assets.

My husband and I will each retire with ~100k cola adjusted pensions plus social security. To me knowing that we’ll always have that baseline security net, regardless of how long we live and what stock markets and real estate prices do is winning.

Plus it means we can afford to be more aggressive with/draw less from our other investments, so our heirs will likely win too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cash flow matters more than net worth. You might want to model out pension payments, future social security payments, RMDs, taxes, IRMAA penalties, etc.

This x100.

What you need to do is replace your salary. We’ve all been forced into a situation where we need to save a lump sum to generate a stream of income so we need ways to estimate how large a sum we need for a given level of income but its entirely backwards to take an income stream and convert it to a lump sum.

Most people don't need to replace their salary. Most people needed to use part of their salary to save for retirement, pay for child-related expenses, save for college, and pay a mortgage, and most retirees don't need to do any of that.

Of course, circumstances vary, so you need to figure out that your individual situation is. If you're still paying off the mortgage, helping kids, or taking lots of luxury vacations, then you'll need more money.

You may need to purchase your own health insurance

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks want to include the pensions in their net worth because it makes them feel richer and more able to keep up with the Joneses. It’s kind of pathetic.

Is it because you might be jealous of my inflation adjusted $140k annual pension with lifetime benefits?. I retired fours years ago at age 53. Do I count as part of NW? No I dont but my financial planner recently advised its “worth” about $3.5m ($140x25). Loser

+1. I have an $90k local govt pension, with survivor benefits. I have always considered it a safety net. It’s a nice feeling to know the pension will alarm pass on the my beneficiary upon my death.

DP
I have two pensions (former teacher) and mine currently provide about $87,500. One has an annual COLA of 3% and the other is up to 5%, depending on the rate of inflation, so that’s a plus.

I’ve never really bothered figuring out net worth because I’ve never had a reason to do so.

I’m sitting on a $9 million nest egg and get social security of $50k year on top of that so not only do I win - my heirs do.

Pensions aren’t assets.

My husband and I will each retire with ~100k cola adjusted pensions plus social security. To me knowing that we’ll always have that baseline security net, regardless of how long we live and what stock markets and real estate prices do is winning.

Plus it means we can afford to be more aggressive with/draw less from our other investments, so our heirs will likely win too.

Good for you. But your pensions aren’t assets. They’re a nice thing for middle class folks, sure. But they’re not assets.