Retiring income will be about 12k monthly BEFORE TAXES

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole "my house is paid off" thing is so overrated and not necessary to a comfortable retirement.

It is to us.

Right. If you’re not working during “retirement,” a paid mortgage is very nice. Not only does it decrease cash flow needs, but it’s savings for a future need, like a nursing home. For a lot of retirees, they aren’t trying to pile-up big stock market returns and leave an oversized sum to their kids. Rather, they’re just trying to live a peaceful life without burdening their kids. Peace of mind is where it’s at.

That's a very narrow minded an unsophisticated way of looking at things. We, for example, own a $1.8 million rowhouse with a basement apartment and are retired. We have a $700,000 mortgage on the house that we could pay off tomorrow. Instead, we rent out the English basement apartment for almost exactly what the mortgage is. Why would we want to be sitting on $1.8 million in home equity that we can't touch?

Why pay a bank interest when you could be investing your monthly rental income and living debt free?

I thought good money management included a diverse portfolio or risky, and not so risky investments. If you have a paid off house, you can count it in the not so risky investments and use more of your other money in stocks and other more risky investments.

This may be true in the accumulation phase, but not when you are in the drawdown phase.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole "my house is paid off" thing is so overrated and not necessary to a comfortable retirement.

It is to us.

Right. If you’re not working during “retirement,” a paid mortgage is very nice. Not only does it decrease cash flow needs, but it’s savings for a future need, like a nursing home. For a lot of retirees, they aren’t trying to pile-up big stock market returns and leave an oversized sum to their kids. Rather, they’re just trying to live a peaceful life without burdening their kids. Peace of mind is where it’s at.

That's a very narrow minded an unsophisticated way of looking at things. We, for example, own a $1.8 million rowhouse with a basement apartment and are retired. We have a $700,000 mortgage on the house that we could pay off tomorrow. Instead, we rent out the English basement apartment for almost exactly what the mortgage is. Why would we want to be sitting on $1.8 million in home equity that we can't touch?

I bc would never want to be a landlord/have renters. Everyone’s different.

I see. So you'd prefer to have an empty and unused apartment under your feet? Ok.

YES!!!!! And privacy and autonomy. I wouldn't even live in a row house again. I did in that Europe and it was awful. I suppose it's all what you're used to. Growing up wealthy in a SFH and being able to afford a large SFH in the city is a luxury I'm not willing to give up when I get older for a few extra pennies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole "my house is paid off" thing is so overrated and not necessary to a comfortable retirement.

It is to us.

Right. If you’re not working during “retirement,” a paid mortgage is very nice. Not only does it decrease cash flow needs, but it’s savings for a future need, like a nursing home. For a lot of retirees, they aren’t trying to pile-up big stock market returns and leave an oversized sum to their kids. Rather, they’re just trying to live a peaceful life without burdening their kids. Peace of mind is where it’s at.

That's a very narrow minded an unsophisticated way of looking at things. We, for example, own a $1.8 million rowhouse with a basement apartment and are retired. We have a $700,000 mortgage on the house that we could pay off tomorrow. Instead, we rent out the English basement apartment for almost exactly what the mortgage is. Why would we want to be sitting on $1.8 million in home equity that we can't touch?

Good for you? I have had my primary home paid off since I was 41yrs old. I only carry mortgages on our investment properties.

DP, I'm the opposite. I carry a mortgage on my primary. It will be paid off by the time I'm 50.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole "my house is paid off" thing is so overrated and not necessary to a comfortable retirement.

It is to us.

Right. If you’re not working during “retirement,” a paid mortgage is very nice. Not only does it decrease cash flow needs, but it’s savings for a future need, like a nursing home. For a lot of retirees, they aren’t trying to pile-up big stock market returns and leave an oversized sum to their kids. Rather, they’re just trying to live a peaceful life without burdening their kids. Peace of mind is where it’s at.

That's a very narrow minded an unsophisticated way of looking at things. We, for example, own a $1.8 million rowhouse with a basement apartment and are retired. We have a $700,000 mortgage on the house that we could pay off tomorrow. Instead, we rent out the English basement apartment for almost exactly what the mortgage is. Why would we want to be sitting on $1.8 million in home equity that we can't touch?

Good for you? I have had my primary home paid off since I was 41yrs old. I only carry mortgages on our investment properties.

DP, I'm the opposite. I carry a mortgage on my primary. It will be paid off by the time I'm 50.

Cool?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If DH and I stay in our GS 15 fed jobs until 60, our pension will be just shy of 11k a month. We will take social security at 62, so that’s additional monthly income. We can keep our fed health insurance and our house is paid off. Our last kid graduated college when I turn 56, so I’m hoping this will leave us with plenty of money to travel and enjoy retirement.

Why do this? On paper, it makes no sense.

Not PP but we are considering something similar. I will take SS at 62 and my DW will wait. Based on my family history, I'm almost certain I will not be here when 80. My DW will outlive me by 20 years easy. Her parents (in mid 90s) are still kicking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If DH and I stay in our GS 15 fed jobs until 60, our pension will be just shy of 11k a month. We will take social security at 62, so that’s additional monthly income. We can keep our fed health insurance and our house is paid off. Our last kid graduated college when I turn 56, so I’m hoping this will leave us with plenty of money to travel and enjoy retirement.

Why do this? On paper, it makes no sense.

Not PP but we are considering something similar. I will take SS at 62 and my DW will wait. Based on my family history, I'm almost certain I will not be here when 80. My DW will outlive me by 20 years easy. Her parents (in mid 90s) are still kicking.

I'm the PP you responded to. I understand that strategy, and we're doing something similar. I am the higher earner, so my wife will take SS as soon as she's able, while I will wait until 70 to maximize her spousal benefits.

But absent both partners having shorter than typical life expectancies, I'm not familiar with circumstances that would make it advantageous for both to take SS at 62 when they have ample income otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole "my house is paid off" thing is so overrated and not necessary to a comfortable retirement.

It is to us.

Right. If you’re not working during “retirement,” a paid mortgage is very nice. Not only does it decrease cash flow needs, but it’s savings for a future need, like a nursing home. For a lot of retirees, they aren’t trying to pile-up big stock market returns and leave an oversized sum to their kids. Rather, they’re just trying to live a peaceful life without burdening their kids. Peace of mind is where it’s at.

That's a very narrow minded an unsophisticated way of looking at things. We, for example, own a $1.8 million rowhouse with a basement apartment and are retired. We have a $700,000 mortgage on the house that we could pay off tomorrow. Instead, we rent out the English basement apartment for almost exactly what the mortgage is. Why would we want to be sitting on $1.8 million in home equity that we can't touch?

I bc would never want to be a landlord/have renters. Everyone’s different.

I see. So you'd prefer to have an empty and unused apartment under your feet? Ok.

YES!!!!! And privacy and autonomy. I wouldn't even live in a row house again. I did in that Europe and it was awful. I suppose it's all what you're used to. Growing up wealthy in a SFH and being able to afford a large SFH in the city is a luxury I'm not willing to give up when I get older for a few extra pennies.

See, I'm not willing to give up walkability for a large SFH. Where in DC are there large SFHs in truly walkable neighborhoods?

[Anonymous]

if your house is paid off, chances are it's far and away your single biggest asset

That's not true. It's just one small piece

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole "my house is paid off" thing is so overrated and not necessary to a comfortable retirement.

It is to us.

Right. If you’re not working during “retirement,” a paid mortgage is very nice. Not only does it decrease cash flow needs, but it’s savings for a future need, like a nursing home. For a lot of retirees, they aren’t trying to pile-up big stock market returns and leave an oversized sum to their kids. Rather, they’re just trying to live a peaceful life without burdening their kids. Peace of mind is where it’s at.

That's a very narrow minded an unsophisticated way of looking at things. We, for example, own a $1.8 million rowhouse with a basement apartment and are retired. We have a $700,000 mortgage on the house that we could pay off tomorrow. Instead, we rent out the English basement apartment for almost exactly what the mortgage is. Why would we want to be sitting on $1.8 million in home equity that we can't touch?

I bc would never want to be a landlord/have renters. Everyone’s different.

I see. So you'd prefer to have an empty and unused apartment under your feet? Ok.

YES!!!!! And privacy and autonomy. I wouldn't even live in a row house again. I did in that Europe and it was awful. I suppose it's all what you're used to. Growing up wealthy in a SFH and being able to afford a large SFH in the city is a luxury I'm not willing to give up when I get older for a few extra pennies.

See, I'm not willing to give up walkability for a large SFH. Where in DC are there large SFHs in truly walkable neighborhoods?

Cleveland Park/Cathedral Heights area.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If DH and I stay in our GS 15 fed jobs until 60, our pension will be just shy of 11k a month. We will take social security at 62, so that’s additional monthly income. We can keep our fed health insurance and our house is paid off. Our last kid graduated college when I turn 56, so I’m hoping this will leave us with plenty of money to travel and enjoy retirement.

This is why people resent government workers. No pensions like that in the private sector. Just little probably tapped out 401k funds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If DH and I stay in our GS 15 fed jobs until 60, our pension will be just shy of 11k a month. We will take social security at 62, so that’s additional monthly income. We can keep our fed health insurance and our house is paid off. Our last kid graduated college when I turn 56, so I’m hoping this will leave us with plenty of money to travel and enjoy retirement.

This is why people resent government workers. No pensions like that in the private sector. Just little probably tapped out 401k funds.

If they delivered a good product for that pay I’d have no issue, but it’s like a gigantic jobs program full of lazy underachievers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If DH and I stay in our GS 15 fed jobs until 60, our pension will be just shy of 11k a month. We will take social security at 62, so that’s additional monthly income. We can keep our fed health insurance and our house is paid off. Our last kid graduated college when I turn 56, so I’m hoping this will leave us with plenty of money to travel and enjoy retirement.

This is why people resent government workers. No pensions like that in the private sector. Just little probably tapped out 401k funds.

That’s why you get higher pay than us while working. In return we get pension after we retire. Sounds fair to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If DH and I stay in our GS 15 fed jobs until 60, our pension will be just shy of 11k a month. We will take social security at 62, so that’s additional monthly income. We can keep our fed health insurance and our house is paid off. Our last kid graduated college when I turn 56, so I’m hoping this will leave us with plenty of money to travel and enjoy retirement.

This is why people resent government workers. No pensions like that in the private sector. Just little probably tapped out 401k funds.

If they delivered a good product for that pay I’d have no issue, but it’s like a gigantic jobs program full of lazy underachievers.

You will ALWAYS have issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole "my house is paid off" thing is so overrated and not necessary to a comfortable retirement.

It is to us.

Right. If you’re not working during “retirement,” a paid mortgage is very nice. Not only does it decrease cash flow needs, but it’s savings for a future need, like a nursing home. For a lot of retirees, they aren’t trying to pile-up big stock market returns and leave an oversized sum to their kids. Rather, they’re just trying to live a peaceful life without burdening their kids. Peace of mind is where it’s at.

That's a very narrow minded an unsophisticated way of looking at things. We, for example, own a $1.8 million rowhouse with a basement apartment and are retired. We have a $700,000 mortgage on the house that we could pay off tomorrow. Instead, we rent out the English basement apartment for almost exactly what the mortgage is. Why would we want to be sitting on $1.8 million in home equity that we can't touch?

I bc would never want to be a landlord/have renters. Everyone’s different.

I see. So you'd prefer to have an empty and unused apartment under your feet? Ok.

YES!!!!! And privacy and autonomy. I wouldn't even live in a row house again. I did in that Europe and it was awful. I suppose it's all what you're used to. Growing up wealthy in a SFH and being able to afford a large SFH in the city is a luxury I'm not willing to give up when I get older for a few extra pennies.

See, I'm not willing to give up walkability for a large SFH. Where in DC are there large SFHs in truly walkable neighborhoods?

Cleveland Park/Cathedral Heights area.

I said "truly walkable." Those neighborhoods both have walk scores of 77, and are ranked 26th and 27th among DC neighborhoods for walk scores. They're basically suburbs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole "my house is paid off" thing is so overrated and not necessary to a comfortable retirement.

It is to us.

Right. If you’re not working during “retirement,” a paid mortgage is very nice. Not only does it decrease cash flow needs, but it’s savings for a future need, like a nursing home. For a lot of retirees, they aren’t trying to pile-up big stock market returns and leave an oversized sum to their kids. Rather, they’re just trying to live a peaceful life without burdening their kids. Peace of mind is where it’s at.

That's a very narrow minded an unsophisticated way of looking at things. We, for example, own a $1.8 million rowhouse with a basement apartment and are retired. We have a $700,000 mortgage on the house that we could pay off tomorrow. Instead, we rent out the English basement apartment for almost exactly what the mortgage is. Why would we want to be sitting on $1.8 million in home equity that we can't touch?

No, they aren’t. I’ve lived there and am now in a real suburb. Totally different.

I bc would never want to be a landlord/have renters. Everyone’s different.

I see. So you'd prefer to have an empty and unused apartment under your feet? Ok.

YES!!!!! And privacy and autonomy. I wouldn't even live in a row house again. I did in that Europe and it was awful. I suppose it's all what you're used to. Growing up wealthy in a SFH and being able to afford a large SFH in the city is a luxury I'm not willing to give up when I get older for a few extra pennies.

See, I'm not willing to give up walkability for a large SFH. Where in DC are there large SFHs in truly walkable neighborhoods?

Cleveland Park/Cathedral Heights area.

I said "truly walkable." Those neighborhoods both have walk scores of 77, and are ranked 26th and 27th among DC neighborhoods for walk scores. They're basically suburbs.