Anonymous wrote:There is a cost to over-saving that most don’t want to acknowledge. You lose experiences that you will never get back. Money has more value when you are younger. Even at middle age, if you have kids you will lose experiences you can never do again by over-saving. Yes you can put them off, but going to Spain in your 20s is unique from in your 40s which is unique from in your 60s.
A gold plated nursing home sure is nice but at what cost. If you want an extra 1M to ensure the best nursing home, what if you took half of that and went to an average nursing. What experiences does that buy over the years….hint….it’s significant.
Now some have a goal to leave a large inheritance, which is fine if that is your top goal go for it. This advise would not be for you.
Anonymous wrote:I max out now for two reasons.
1. Time in the market is the ultimate advantage for investing. A front-loaded investment strategy will (nearly) always result in a far higher end-balance as compared to a long-term DCA strategy even if the invested funds are equal in amount.
2. I know I have investable funds now; I don't know if I will tomorrow.
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.
Anonymous wrote:OP here. After writing my post I went and tried the Vanguard calculator and my estimate became less than half 😒, probably without SS. I was using the calculator that comes with the investment company from work, Voya, which didn’t have me input any number, so not sure what wild assumptions they made 😝
I get I may need to reconsider my financial picture after using other calculator and thinking about current and future priorities. The reason I think I am in good shape for now is that we are south European expat and will probably retire back there, where even a 2k monthly pension is considered not bad. We would have that already from SS.. Am I missing something? Things may get more complicated and expensive if children stay here and we have to travel back and forth..
Anonymous wrote:There is a cost to over-saving that most don’t want to acknowledge. You lose experiences that you will never get back. Money has more value when you are younger. Even at middle age, if you have kids you will lose experiences you can never do again by over-saving. Yes you can put them off, but going to Spain in your 20s is unique from in your 40s which is unique from in your 60s.
A gold plated nursing home sure is nice but at what cost. If you want an extra 1M to ensure the best nursing home, what if you took half of that and went to an average nursing. What experiences does that buy over the years….hint….it’s significant.
Now some have a goal to leave a large inheritance, which is fine if that is your top goal go for it. This advise would not be for you.
Anonymous wrote:It has not been easy to save for retirement and college, with a SAHM and with maintaining a life style which includes travel, tutors, outsourcing etc.
My kids got generous merit scholarship in state schools and so they now have some seed money from what we did not spend on college.
We are still cautious about money, even though we don't stop living in today. You can do both, make good financial decisions as well as have fun in the present. It is not one or the other.
Anonymous wrote:A question from another poster here: I have a business and solo 401k. My gross annual income before write offs is 350K, net after tax and depreciation write offs is around 180K. Someone said that tax advisors recommend 10-15% of your income deferred for 401k. Shall I save 10% from 350K or 10% from 180K/net income?
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.
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.
Anonymous wrote:I max mine because it’s one of the limited ways to reduce my currently taxable income. I assume my tax rate at retirement will be lower.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP here. After writing my post I went and tried the Vanguard calculator and my estimate became less than half 😒, probably without SS. I was using the calculator that comes with the investment company from work, Voya, which didn’t have me input any number, so not sure what wild assumptions they made 😝
I get I may need to reconsider my financial picture after using other calculator and thinking about current and future priorities. The reason I think I am in good shape for now is that we are south European expat and will probably retire back there, where even a 2k monthly pension is considered not bad. We would have that already from SS.. Am I missing something? Things may get more complicated and expensive if children stay here and we have to travel back and forth..
Also, Putin could take over Europe? Is it too much of a stretch to max the 401K?