Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:No one takes the time to study investing, so they have to slave away for decades. Most people don't know there are stocks yielding 10%+ dividends with minimal risk. If you can get a 7% overall withdrawal rate for the rest of your life, which is very doable, you check out at $2M - no one needs more than $140K income in retirement.
But since people are told to buy bonds and other nonsense, they can only safely withdraw 2.5% or 3% of their portfolio and so must slave away until they're 65.
This is half true and half nonsense.
Yes you should have a very equity heavy portfolio your whole life. Yes a safe withdrawal rate above 2.5% can be done.
No there is not minimal risk for any equity investment. Hopefully you build a portfolio that counters this.
In terms of no one needs more than 140k a year. What are you talking about. I spend 25-35 a month. Income is seven figures. I save a lot also. But I want 35k a month in retirement spend. For that you need a lot more than 2 million. Everyone is different.
PP is right that you don't need it, you want it.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:No one takes the time to study investing, so they have to slave away for decades. Most people don't know there are stocks yielding 10%+ dividends with minimal risk. If you can get a 7% overall withdrawal rate for the rest of your life, which is very doable, you check out at $2M - no one needs more than $140K income in retirement.
But since people are told to buy bonds and other nonsense, they can only safely withdraw 2.5% or 3% of their portfolio and so must slave away until they're 65.
This is half true and half nonsense.
Yes you should have a very equity heavy portfolio your whole life. Yes a safe withdrawal rate above 2.5% can be done.
No there is not minimal risk for any equity investment. Hopefully you build a portfolio that counters this.
In terms of no one needs more than 140k a year. What are you talking about. I spend 25-35 a month. Income is seven figures. I save a lot also. But I want 35k a month in retirement spend. For that you need a lot more than 2 million. Everyone is different.
Anonymous wrote:No one takes the time to study investing, so they have to slave away for decades. Most people don't know there are stocks yielding 10%+ dividends with minimal risk. If you can get a 7% overall withdrawal rate for the rest of your life, which is very doable, you check out at $2M - no one needs more than $140K income in retirement.
But since people are told to buy bonds and other nonsense, they can only safely withdraw 2.5% or 3% of their portfolio and so must slave away until they're 65.
Anonymous wrote:This is why I’m a SAHM, but most people on dcum would say I’m lazy and living off my DH. Oh well, you can’t please everyone. People who’ve checked out just keep to themselves more.
Anonymous wrote:I don’t feel that way about my job or my life. That’s why I work.
I am part of something I feel great about, like my colleagues, have good work life balance, and I feel productive and useful and know I have a purpose. And I don’t WFH either. Short commute.
Anonymous wrote:No one takes the time to study investing, so they have to slave away for decades. Most people don't know there are stocks yielding 10%+ dividends with minimal risk. If you can get a 7% overall withdrawal rate for the rest of your life, which is very doable, you check out at $2M - no one needs more than $140K income in retirement.
But since people are told to buy bonds and other nonsense, they can only safely withdraw 2.5% or 3% of their portfolio and so must slave away until they're 65.
Anonymous wrote:I used to wonder why older people neglect house maintenance. Turns out, house maintenance is expensive! Even if you buy a brand new home at 50, it will be 30 years old when you’re 80. Going into an older retiree’s home can be crazy, as it oftentimes has become a time capsule. Old folks stop updating almost everything. The point us, retirement is expensive and one way to save funds for basic survival is to neglect the house
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP, do you have kids? I think it's having very young kids that makes me feel it's not enough. I just don't know what life might bring.
This. It's different when you still have kids at home in your 40's or 50's vs. it's just the two of you in your 60's. Kids are very expensive. Plus you don't know what the stock market and economy might do. It's a better bet to work more now then retire permanently than retire early with the idea that you'll magically get a high-paying job at age 58 if the economy tanks and you need more money after leaving the workforce for 10 years.
But I hear you, OP. We couldn't wait to leave DC. DH's job went remote during the pandemic, so we moved to an area we really wanted to move to. We had a little over $3M in real estate assets, plus over $3M in other investments. Not enough for DH to stop working, but enough that we could comfortably survive on a lower salary if he ever loses his job. Kids are thriving in excellent public schools, we've made tons of friends, and the lifestyle is just so much more relaxed and fun.
If anyone is looking to do this, look at an area with a decent overall tax picture for your family, excellent public schools, and good, reasonably priced State universities. These things really impact your savings and lifestyle. After freaking out about saving for out of state/private college for our 3 kids (lived in DC), we realized we pretty much already met the 529 goals for in-state universities in the new location. I can't even begin to explain the relief and joy we felt. DC is really hard for families unless you have a high HHI.
Good luck to everyone and I hope you find the lifestyle that works well for your family, wherever that may be.