Why max out 401k?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am in my mid-40 and currently save 10% of my salary towards 401k. My salary is 120k and have ~500k so far. I know these are small numbers compared to what most people post on this board but not bad realistically!

When I run a retirement calculator, it seems like I am on track for retirement and, including SS, I will have around 9k in monthly income. That sounds good to me. I don’t know how accurate the calculator I used is but, supposed it is, if I am on track, why would I want to max out my retirement savings? to have more money when I am old?

I have 2 children, but somehow the thought of a bigger inheritance to them doesn’t feel like a great motivation. I would rather enjoy my time with them now than passing them on money after I am dead! My husband also has his own fund with approximately the same balance and contribution.

Curious the numbers you used to get to 9k income. If you retire at 62, you'll get maybe 2500 in SS pretax. To get to 9k monthly, (and this is still pretax), you would need to have 2.6m in your 401k to get the remainder (6500) from four 401k. You aren't getting to 2.6 in 20 years if you are currently at 500k.

Compound interest would get her almost exactly to 2.6M in 20 years.

Exactly. don't know why people were questioning this.

Math is hard. They probably aren't factoring in future contributions, matches and raises.

And you are not factoring in inflation and market corrections. Losers have been staggering in the last 2 years. Go ask a retiree.

That has zero to do with the question of how does $500k + 10% of income + company match + 20 years compounded interest get someone to
$2.6M. Also, most people use 6% as the average rate over time and that takes into account market corrections.

You are correct that what people cannot do is treat $2.6M in future dollars as equal to $2.6M in today’s dollars due to inflation (I was the poster that previously pointed that out). But that had nothing to do with the actual math involved in determining what $500K will equal in the future based on a certain set of assumptions.

6% is VERY generous.

Sheesh, there are some crazy people on this forum. 6% is not very generous. You have no idea what you are talking about. You can get a 2yr treasury paying nearly 4% right now. Do you really think the risk premium in stocks will be less than 2% of risk free assets?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nothing wrong with max tax advantage(retirement) accounts. But once you get past saving gross 25% of income might makes sense start putting money into a brokerage instead. This will give flexibility concerning taxes and forced withdrawals from retirement accounts at age 72.

+1. Minimum withdrawals can push you into a higher tax bracket faster than you think. Especially if you think you will have enough to leave $$ for your heirs — non-qualified accounts can be much preferable from a long-term tax perspective. They can be inherited with a stepped up basis and no withdrawal requirements (unlike qualified funds).

I wouldn’t leave any employer match in the table, but we always contributed the amount that would get an employer match and then put the rest of our savings in non-qualified funds, and we have still ended up with a higher RMD than we need to live on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am in my mid-40 and currently save 10% of my salary towards 401k. My salary is 120k and have ~500k so far. I know these are small numbers compared to what most people post on this board but not bad realistically!

When I run a retirement calculator, it seems like I am on track for retirement and, including SS, I will have around 9k in monthly income. That sounds good to me. I don’t know how accurate the calculator I used is but, supposed it is, if I am on track, why would I want to max out my retirement savings? to have more money when I am old?

I have 2 children, but somehow the thought of a bigger inheritance to them doesn’t feel like a great motivation. I would rather enjoy my time with them now than passing them on money after I am dead! My husband also has his own fund with approximately the same balance and contribution.

Curious the numbers you used to get to 9k income. If you retire at 62, you'll get maybe 2500 in SS pretax. To get to 9k monthly, (and this is still pretax), you would need to have 2.6m in your 401k to get the remainder (6500) from four 401k. You aren't getting to 2.6 in 20 years if you are currently at 500k.

Compound interest would get her almost exactly to 2.6M in 20 years.

Exactly. don't know why people were questioning this.

Math is hard. They probably aren't factoring in future contributions, matches and raises.

And you are not factoring in inflation and market corrections. Losers have been staggering in the last 2 years. Go ask a retiree.

That has zero to do with the question of how does $500k + 10% of income + company match + 20 years compounded interest get someone to
$2.6M. Also, most people use 6% as the average rate over time and that takes into account market corrections.

You are correct that what people cannot do is treat $2.6M in future dollars as equal to $2.6M in today’s dollars due to inflation (I was the poster that previously pointed that out). But that had nothing to do with the actual math involved in determining what $500K will equal in the future based on a certain set of assumptions.

6% is VERY generous.

Sheesh, there are some crazy people on this forum. 6% is not very generous. You have no idea what you are talking about. You can get a 2yr treasury paying nearly 4% right now. Do you really think the risk premium in stocks will be less than 2% of risk free assets?

+1

SP500 long-term annualized return is 11.88% from 1957 through end of 2021. 6% is fine for an assumption in your retirement calculator.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am in my mid-40 and currently save 10% of my salary towards 401k. My salary is 120k and have ~500k so far. I know these are small numbers compared to what most people post on this board but not bad realistically!

When I run a retirement calculator, it seems like I am on track for retirement and, including SS, I will have around 9k in monthly income. That sounds good to me. I don’t know how accurate the calculator I used is but, supposed it is, if I am on track, why would I want to max out my retirement savings? to have more money when I am old?

I have 2 children, but somehow the thought of a bigger inheritance to them doesn’t feel like a great motivation. I would rather enjoy my time with them now than passing them on money after I am dead! My husband also has his own fund with approximately the same balance and contribution.

Curious the numbers you used to get to 9k income. If you retire at 62, you'll get maybe 2500 in SS pretax. To get to 9k monthly, (and this is still pretax), you would need to have 2.6m in your 401k to get the remainder (6500) from four 401k. You aren't getting to 2.6 in 20 years if you are currently at 500k.

Compound interest would get her almost exactly to 2.6M in 20 years.

Exactly. don't know why people were questioning this.

Math is hard. They probably aren't factoring in future contributions, matches and raises.

And you are not factoring in inflation and market corrections. Losers have been staggering in the last 2 years. Go ask a retiree.

That has zero to do with the question of how does $500k + 10% of income + company match + 20 years compounded interest get someone to
$2.6M. Also, most people use 6% as the average rate over time and that takes into account market corrections.

You are correct that what people cannot do is treat $2.6M in future dollars as equal to $2.6M in today’s dollars due to inflation (I was the poster that previously pointed that out). But that had nothing to do with the actual math involved in determining what $500K will equal in the future based on a certain set of assumptions.

DP. The point is that a lot of economists are questioning whether the 6% return rate over time is a good number. I saw a paper the other day that extended the data window that was covered by the economists that made that calculation back just a few years and the average rate of return dropped significantly. Plus, even if the 6% return # is good over say, a 100 years, there could be 30 year windows in which the return is much lower. It’s why financial advisors will give you a range of probabilities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am in my mid-40 and currently save 10% of my salary towards 401k. My salary is 120k and have ~500k so far. I know these are small numbers compared to what most people post on this board but not bad realistically!

When I run a retirement calculator, it seems like I am on track for retirement and, including SS, I will have around 9k in monthly income. That sounds good to me. I don’t know how accurate the calculator I used is but, supposed it is, if I am on track, why would I want to max out my retirement savings? to have more money when I am old?

I have 2 children, but somehow the thought of a bigger inheritance to them doesn’t feel like a great motivation. I would rather enjoy my time with them now than passing them on money after I am dead! My husband also has his own fund with approximately the same balance and contribution.

Curious the numbers you used to get to 9k income. If you retire at 62, you'll get maybe 2500 in SS pretax. To get to 9k monthly, (and this is still pretax), you would need to have 2.6m in your 401k to get the remainder (6500) from four 401k. You aren't getting to 2.6 in 20 years if you are currently at 500k.

Compound interest would get her almost exactly to 2.6M in 20 years.

Exactly. don't know why people were questioning this.

Math is hard. They probably aren't factoring in future contributions, matches and raises.

And you are not factoring in inflation and market corrections. Losers have been staggering in the last 2 years. Go ask a retiree.

That has zero to do with the question of how does $500k + 10% of income + company match + 20 years compounded interest get someone to
$2.6M. Also, most people use 6% as the average rate over time and that takes into account market corrections.

You are correct that what people cannot do is treat $2.6M in future dollars as equal to $2.6M in today’s dollars due to inflation (I was the poster that previously pointed that out). But that had nothing to do with the actual math involved in determining what $500K will equal in the future based on a certain set of assumptions.

6% is VERY generous.

Sheesh, there are some crazy people on this forum. 6% is not very generous. You have no idea what you are talking about. You can get a 2yr treasury paying nearly 4% right now. Do you really think the risk premium in stocks will be less than 2% of risk free assets?

+1

SP500 long-term annualized return is 11.88% from 1957 through end of 2021. 6% is fine for an assumption in your retirement calculator.

Sure. If you ignore the Great Depression and the recession that preceded the “Roaring 20’s” (which really started in 1925 and the 6% number does). If you start the calculation in the late teens/1920 6% is too high.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am in my mid-40 and currently save 10% of my salary towards 401k. My salary is 120k and have ~500k so far. I know these are small numbers compared to what most people post on this board but not bad realistically!

When I run a retirement calculator, it seems like I am on track for retirement and, including SS, I will have around 9k in monthly income. That sounds good to me. I don’t know how accurate the calculator I used is but, supposed it is, if I am on track, why would I want to max out my retirement savings? to have more money when I am old?

I have 2 children, but somehow the thought of a bigger inheritance to them doesn’t feel like a great motivation. I would rather enjoy my time with them now than passing them on money after I am dead! My husband also has his own fund with approximately the same balance and contribution.

Curious the numbers you used to get to 9k income. If you retire at 62, you'll get maybe 2500 in SS pretax. To get to 9k monthly, (and this is still pretax), you would need to have 2.6m in your 401k to get the remainder (6500) from four 401k. You aren't getting to 2.6 in 20 years if you are currently at 500k.

Compound interest would get her almost exactly to 2.6M in 20 years.

Exactly. don't know why people were questioning this.

Math is hard. They probably aren't factoring in future contributions, matches and raises.

And you are not factoring in inflation and market corrections. Losers have been staggering in the last 2 years. Go ask a retiree.

That has zero to do with the question of how does $500k + 10% of income + company match + 20 years compounded interest get someone to
$2.6M. Also, most people use 6% as the average rate over time and that takes into account market corrections.

You are correct that what people cannot do is treat $2.6M in future dollars as equal to $2.6M in today’s dollars due to inflation (I was the poster that previously pointed that out). But that had nothing to do with the actual math involved in determining what $500K will equal in the future based on a certain set of assumptions.

6% is VERY generous.

Sheesh, there are some crazy people on this forum. 6% is not very generous. You have no idea what you are talking about. You can get a 2yr treasury paying nearly 4% right now. Do you really think the risk premium in stocks will be less than 2% of risk free assets?

+1

SP500 long-term annualized return is 11.88% from 1957 through end of 2021. 6% is fine for an assumption in your retirement calculator.

Sure. If you ignore the Great Depression and the recession that preceded the “Roaring 20’s” (which really started in 1925 and the 6% number does). If you start the calculation in the late teens/1920 6% is too high.

The S&P500 didn't exist before 1957. If you are referring to the DOW, the average, including those periods, is 7.75%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am in my mid-40 and currently save 10% of my salary towards 401k. My salary is 120k and have ~500k so far. I know these are small numbers compared to what most people post on this board but not bad realistically!

When I run a retirement calculator, it seems like I am on track for retirement and, including SS, I will have around 9k in monthly income. That sounds good to me. I don’t know how accurate the calculator I used is but, supposed it is, if I am on track, why would I want to max out my retirement savings? to have more money when I am old?

I have 2 children, but somehow the thought of a bigger inheritance to them doesn’t feel like a great motivation. I would rather enjoy my time with them now than passing them on money after I am dead! My husband also has his own fund with approximately the same balance and contribution.

Curious the numbers you used to get to 9k income. If you retire at 62, you'll get maybe 2500 in SS pretax. To get to 9k monthly, (and this is still pretax), you would need to have 2.6m in your 401k to get the remainder (6500) from four 401k. You aren't getting to 2.6 in 20 years if you are currently at 500k.

I am 61.

Compound interest would get her almost exactly to 2.6M in 20 years.

Exactly. don't know why people were questioning this.

Math is hard. They probably aren't factoring in future contributions, matches and raises.

And you are not factoring in inflation and market corrections. Losers have been staggering in the last 2 years. Go ask a retiree.

You do not factor these in. They happen. Market comes back. Losses have not been staggering as you put it. Market is still up on 2016. Gain is what is lost. All normal.

Lololol! Ok young buck.

I am 61 and have seen it all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am in my mid-40 and currently save 10% of my salary towards 401k. My salary is 120k and have ~500k so far. I know these are small numbers compared to what most people post on this board but not bad realistically!

When I run a retirement calculator, it seems like I am on track for retirement and, including SS, I will have around 9k in monthly income. That sounds good to me. I don’t know how accurate the calculator I used is but, supposed it is, if I am on track, why would I want to max out my retirement savings? to have more money when I am old?

I have 2 children, but somehow the thought of a bigger inheritance to them doesn’t feel like a great motivation. I would rather enjoy my time with them now than passing them on money after I am dead! My husband also has his own fund with approximately the same balance and contribution.

Curious the numbers you used to get to 9k income. If you retire at 62, you'll get maybe 2500 in SS pretax. To get to 9k monthly, (and this is still pretax), you would need to have 2.6m in your 401k to get the remainder (6500) from four 401k. You aren't getting to 2.6 in 20 years if you are currently at 500k.

Compound interest would get her almost exactly to 2.6M in 20 years.

Exactly. don't know why people were questioning this.

Math is hard. They probably aren't factoring in future contributions, matches and raises.

And you are not factoring in inflation and market corrections. Losers have been staggering in the last 2 years. Go ask a retiree.

That has zero to do with the question of how does $500k + 10% of income + company match + 20 years compounded interest get someone to
$2.6M. Also, most people use 6% as the average rate over time and that takes into account market corrections.

You are correct that what people cannot do is treat $2.6M in future dollars as equal to $2.6M in today’s dollars due to inflation (I was the poster that previously pointed that out). But that had nothing to do with the actual math involved in determining what $500K will equal in the future based on a certain set of assumptions.

6% is VERY generous.

Sheesh, there are some crazy people on this forum. 6% is not very generous. You have no idea what you are talking about. You can get a 2yr treasury paying nearly 4% right now. Do you really think the risk premium in stocks will be less than 2% of risk free assets?

+1

SP500 long-term annualized return is 11.88% from 1957 through end of 2021. 6% is fine for an assumption in your retirement calculator.

Sure. If you ignore the Great Depression and the recession that preceded the “Roaring 20’s” (which really started in 1925 and the 6% number does). If you start the calculation in the late teens/1920 6% is too high.

The S&P500 didn't exist before 1957. If you are referring to the DOW, the average, including those periods, is 7.75%

You’re still cherry picking your window. That number is 1921 to present. The Dow dropped 32% in 1920.

[Anonymous]

I save a lot because I want to retire early. I don't plan on waiting til 65. I'll definitely retire by 50 (42 now), and I'm only waiting that long because I still have kids at home, so I might as well work while I'm here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am in my mid-40 and currently save 10% of my salary towards 401k. My salary is 120k and have ~500k so far. I know these are small numbers compared to what most people post on this board but not bad realistically!

When I run a retirement calculator, it seems like I am on track for retirement and, including SS, I will have around 9k in monthly income. That sounds good to me. I don’t know how accurate the calculator I used is but, supposed it is, if I am on track, why would I want to max out my retirement savings? to have more money when I am old?

I have 2 children, but somehow the thought of a bigger inheritance to them doesn’t feel like a great motivation. I would rather enjoy my time with them now than passing them on money after I am dead! My husband also has his own fund with approximately the same balance and contribution.

Curious the numbers you used to get to 9k income. If you retire at 62, you'll get maybe 2500 in SS pretax. To get to 9k monthly, (and this is still pretax), you would need to have 2.6m in your 401k to get the remainder (6500) from four 401k. You aren't getting to 2.6 in 20 years if you are currently at 500k.

Compound interest would get her almost exactly to 2.6M in 20 years.

Exactly. don't know why people were questioning this.

Math is hard. They probably aren't factoring in future contributions, matches and raises.

And you are not factoring in inflation and market corrections. Losers have been staggering in the last 2 years. Go ask a retiree.

That has zero to do with the question of how does $500k + 10% of income + company match + 20 years compounded interest get someone to
$2.6M. Also, most people use 6% as the average rate over time and that takes into account market corrections.

You are correct that what people cannot do is treat $2.6M in future dollars as equal to $2.6M in today’s dollars due to inflation (I was the poster that previously pointed that out). But that had nothing to do with the actual math involved in determining what $500K will equal in the future based on a certain set of assumptions.

6% is VERY generous.

Sheesh, there are some crazy people on this forum. 6% is not very generous. You have no idea what you are talking about. You can get a 2yr treasury paying nearly 4% right now. Do you really think the risk premium in stocks will be less than 2% of risk free assets?

+1

SP500 long-term annualized return is 11.88% from 1957 through end of 2021. 6% is fine for an assumption in your retirement calculator.

Sure. If you ignore the Great Depression and the recession that preceded the “Roaring 20’s” (which really started in 1925 and the 6% number does). If you start the calculation in the late teens/1920 6% is too high.

The S&P500 didn't exist before 1957. If you are referring to the DOW, the average, including those periods, is 7.75%

You’re still cherry picking your window. That number is 1921 to present. The Dow dropped 32% in 1920.

Markets are much deeper/liquid today relative to 1921. We have a central bank that is willing to take unconventional actions to maintain financial stability. 1921 didn't have circuit breakers.

My point? 6% assumption of annualized returns is a pretty good benchmark over the lifetime of a portfolio. It's not "conservative" but it's also not wildly optimistic. It's just a solid assumption. I certainly did not predict 25% annualized return in 2020-2021 time period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing wrong with max tax advantage(retirement) accounts. But once you get past saving gross 25% of income might makes sense start putting money into a brokerage instead. This will give flexibility concerning taxes and forced withdrawals from retirement accounts at age 72.

+1. Minimum withdrawals can push you into a higher tax bracket faster than you think. Especially if you think you will have enough to leave $$ for your heirs — non-qualified accounts can be much preferable from a long-term tax perspective. They can be inherited with a stepped up basis and no withdrawal requirements (unlike qualified funds).

I wouldn’t leave any employer match in the table, but we always contributed the amount that would get an employer match and then put the rest of our savings in non-qualified funds, and we have still ended up with a higher RMD than we need to live on.

I agree with this. Those who think they will be in a significantly lower tax bracket in retirement are deluded, or will have very low mandatory withrawals. 2022 tax brackets are 22% for MFJ incomes of $83,551 to $178,150 and 24% for MFJ incomes of $178,151 to $340,100. Unless your SS plus RMD are less than $83k combined, you will not see a significant change in your tax rate. DIVIDENDS on the other hand are taxed at only 15% for those whose income is between $83,551 and $517,200. Dividends that accrue in a 401k are taxed at income tax rates upon withdrawal. I also wouldn't be surprised with an overall tax rate increase in the next 20 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am in my mid-40 and currently save 10% of my salary towards 401k. My salary is 120k and have ~500k so far. I know these are small numbers compared to what most people post on this board but not bad realistically!

When I run a retirement calculator, it seems like I am on track for retirement and, including SS, I will have around 9k in monthly income. That sounds good to me. I don’t know how accurate the calculator I used is but, supposed it is, if I am on track, why would I want to max out my retirement savings? to have more money when I am old?

I have 2 children, but somehow the thought of a bigger inheritance to them doesn’t feel like a great motivation. I would rather enjoy my time with them now than passing them on money after I am dead! My husband also has his own fund with approximately the same balance and contribution.

Curious the numbers you used to get to 9k income. If you retire at 62, you'll get maybe 2500 in SS pretax. To get to 9k monthly, (and this is still pretax), you would need to have 2.6m in your 401k to get the remainder (6500) from four 401k. You aren't getting to 2.6 in 20 years if you are currently at 500k.

Compound interest would get her almost exactly to 2.6M in 20 years.

Exactly. don't know why people were questioning this.

Math is hard. They probably aren't factoring in future contributions, matches and raises.

And you are not factoring in inflation and market corrections. Losers have been staggering in the last 2 years. Go ask a retiree.

That has zero to do with the question of how does $500k + 10% of income + company match + 20 years compounded interest get someone to
$2.6M. Also, most people use 6% as the average rate over time and that takes into account market corrections.

You are correct that what people cannot do is treat $2.6M in future dollars as equal to $2.6M in today’s dollars due to inflation (I was the poster that previously pointed that out). But that had nothing to do with the actual math involved in determining what $500K will equal in the future based on a certain set of assumptions.

6% is VERY generous.

Sheesh, there are some crazy people on this forum. 6% is not very generous. You have no idea what you are talking about. You can get a 2yr treasury paying nearly 4% right now. Do you really think the risk premium in stocks will be less than 2% of risk free assets?

Over the last 6 months, absolutely. Yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What you should do is map out scenarios, then back into what our savings would need to be based on them.

Worst case: major health catastrophe, need to stay in high COLA area with access to best doctors and family member caretakers. May need assisted living (price these out) -- wildly expensive

Best case: excellent health, can move back to Europe or wherever and then fly back/forth to see family that may stay in the US

Keep in mind that what sounds feasible at 40 is not feasible at 60 or 70. International moves are hard emotionally with grandchildren in the home country. Impossible with major health conditions.

High COLA areas are not necessarily the only ones with great health care, though. I disagree strongly with that assertion, actually. There are fantastic hospitals in Cincinnati, Nashville, Indianapolis, many, many university towns, Minnesota, etc etc. In fact, high COLA areas like DC have the worst of all worlds. Good hospital, but all the good doctors don't take insurance and you have to pay SO much out of pocket. I'm in Chicago now, and it's night and day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am in my mid-40 and currently save 10% of my salary towards 401k. My salary is 120k and have ~500k so far. I know these are small numbers compared to what most people post on this board but not bad realistically!

When I run a retirement calculator, it seems like I am on track for retirement and, including SS, I will have around 9k in monthly income. That sounds good to me. I don’t know how accurate the calculator I used is but, supposed it is, if I am on track, why would I want to max out my retirement savings? to have more money when I am old?

I have 2 children, but somehow the thought of a bigger inheritance to them doesn’t feel like a great motivation. I would rather enjoy my time with them now than passing them on money after I am dead! My husband also has his own fund with approximately the same balance and contribution.

Curious the numbers you used to get to 9k income. If you retire at 62, you'll get maybe 2500 in SS pretax. To get to 9k monthly, (and this is still pretax), you would need to have 2.6m in your 401k to get the remainder (6500) from four 401k. You aren't getting to 2.6 in 20 years if you are currently at 500k.

Compound interest would get her almost exactly to 2.6M in 20 years.

Exactly. don't know why people were questioning this.

Math is hard. They probably aren't factoring in future contributions, matches and raises.

And you are not factoring in inflation and market corrections. Losers have been staggering in the last 2 years. Go ask a retiree.

That has zero to do with the question of how does $500k + 10% of income + company match + 20 years compounded interest get someone to
$2.6M. Also, most people use 6% as the average rate over time and that takes into account market corrections.

You are correct that what people cannot do is treat $2.6M in future dollars as equal to $2.6M in today’s dollars due to inflation (I was the poster that previously pointed that out). But that had nothing to do with the actual math involved in determining what $500K will equal in the future based on a certain set of assumptions.

6% is VERY generous.

Sheesh, there are some crazy people on this forum. 6% is not very generous. You have no idea what you are talking about. You can get a 2yr treasury paying nearly 4% right now. Do you really think the risk premium in stocks will be less than 2% of risk free assets?

+1

SP500 long-term annualized return is 11.88% from 1957 through end of 2021. 6% is fine for an assumption in your retirement calculator.

Sure. If you ignore the Great Depression and the recession that preceded the “Roaring 20’s” (which really started in 1925 and the 6% number does). If you start the calculation in the late teens/1920 6% is too high.

The S&P500 didn't exist before 1957. If you are referring to the DOW, the average, including those periods, is 7.75%

You’re still cherry picking your window. That number is 1921 to present. The Dow dropped 32% in 1920.

We can include the S&P90 to the S&P500 for 150 years of data - the average is still over 6%.

I am not cherry picking the window - I just looked up the average over 100 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am in my mid-40 and currently save 10% of my salary towards 401k. My salary is 120k and have ~500k so far. I know these are small numbers compared to what most people post on this board but not bad realistically!

When I run a retirement calculator, it seems like I am on track for retirement and, including SS, I will have around 9k in monthly income. That sounds good to me. I don’t know how accurate the calculator I used is but, supposed it is, if I am on track, why would I want to max out my retirement savings? to have more money when I am old?

I have 2 children, but somehow the thought of a bigger inheritance to them doesn’t feel like a great motivation. I would rather enjoy my time with them now than passing them on money after I am dead! My husband also has his own fund with approximately the same balance and contribution.

Curious the numbers you used to get to 9k income. If you retire at 62, you'll get maybe 2500 in SS pretax. To get to 9k monthly, (and this is still pretax), you would need to have 2.6m in your 401k to get the remainder (6500) from four 401k. You aren't getting to 2.6 in 20 years if you are currently at 500k.

Compound interest would get her almost exactly to 2.6M in 20 years.

Exactly. don't know why people were questioning this.

Math is hard. They probably aren't factoring in future contributions, matches and raises.

And you are not factoring in inflation and market corrections. Losers have been staggering in the last 2 years. Go ask a retiree.

That has zero to do with the question of how does $500k + 10% of income + company match + 20 years compounded interest get someone to
$2.6M. Also, most people use 6% as the average rate over time and that takes into account market corrections.

You are correct that what people cannot do is treat $2.6M in future dollars as equal to $2.6M in today’s dollars due to inflation (I was the poster that previously pointed that out). But that had nothing to do with the actual math involved in determining what $500K will equal in the future based on a certain set of assumptions.

6% is VERY generous.

Sheesh, there are some crazy people on this forum. 6% is not very generous. You have no idea what you are talking about. You can get a 2yr treasury paying nearly 4% right now. Do you really think the risk premium in stocks will be less than 2% of risk free assets?

+1

SP500 long-term annualized return is 11.88% from 1957 through end of 2021. 6% is fine for an assumption in your retirement calculator.

Sure. If you ignore the Great Depression and the recession that preceded the “Roaring 20’s” (which really started in 1925 and the 6% number does). If you start the calculation in the late teens/1920 6% is too high.

The S&P500 didn't exist before 1957. If you are referring to the DOW, the average, including those periods, is 7.75%

You’re still cherry picking your window. That number is 1921 to present. The Dow dropped 32% in 1920.

We can include the S&P90 to the S&P500 for 150 years of data - the average is still over 6%.

I am not cherry picking the window - I just looked up the average over 100 years.

Or we can do the DOW from 1916 - 2022, and purposefully exclude 1915 because the returns were high that year. That also gets us over 7%.