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: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.

But for each year they live and don’t take funds from their retirement accounts and invest those funds more aggressively because they don’t need them, their heirs win.

If the pension holder lives 25 years, those foregone withdrawals and higher investment rates will be worth way, way more than $3.5 million to their heirs.

For example, assuming a full investment in stock, just the first year of forgone withdrawal will be worth $1.516 million ($140k* 1.1^25) in 25 years.

LOL, ok. So now we're suggesting that typical pensioners are leaving millions and millions of dollars to their heirs? That's a good one.

Not sure who put the chip on your shoulder but you seem to have this idea of “pensioners” being exclusively lower class workers living hand to mouth off of their pension alone.


Im the pp who mentioned that my spouse and I will each be retiring with a ~100k pension each. We’ll also have roughly 4 million combined in 401ks /brokerage accounts and a paid off home and rental property.

Baring some catastrophe we expect to leave an inheritance in the millions to our children. We have many colleagues in similar circumstances.

You're gonna have to make some pretty hefty RMDs from those 401k, my friend,

Look, pensions are nice. They really are. But you don't hear me slobbering over my social security checks. It's basically the same thing. The appeal of a pension is that it makes up some for toiling away in a relatively low paying job for many years. People who make big money aren't offered and don't been pensions.

Except that the pension is more than 3x as much as a social security paycheck, I can start collecting in my early 50s and it comes with health insurance. But yeah otherwise exactly the same.

But how many years will you have had to work at your job to collect that pension and at what salary? And what happens should you decide you don't want to work at your low paying job long enough to qualify for the pension?

Nothing is free, my friend.

You’re right, I’m an oppressed proletariat working at slave wages. I’ll happily accept your contributions to better my plight. Just let me know where to direct the Venmo request.

I'm just saying. Geez. I get the appeal of a pension for someone who was never a high earner and couldn't comfortably retire without it. I do. It's just not an asset when calculating net worth.

What do you classify as a “high earner” and at what point does a pension become irrelevant? How much does one need for a comfortable retirement?

Well, we sorta got sidetracked.

OP asked how to "value" a pension for retirement planning. The answer is easy. First, you figure out how much money you think you'll need each month or year in retirement. Then you look at how you will come up with that money. If you have a pension, you start there. If you also expect social security, you add that. Then you look at your assets and how much money they can generate to come up with the rest.

It doesn't matter how someone "values" a pension. What matters is how much the pension pays.

Folk claim a pension is an "asset," but it isn't. For example, the SEC doesn't allow someone who can expect to receive a pension in retirement to qualify as a High Net Worth Individual on the basis that the pension is "worth" $1 million. That's not how it works.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

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

But for each year they live and don’t take funds from their retirement accounts and invest those funds more aggressively because they don’t need them, their heirs win.

If the pension holder lives 25 years, those foregone withdrawals and higher investment rates will be worth way, way more than $3.5 million to their heirs.

For example, assuming a full investment in stock, just the first year of forgone withdrawal will be worth $1.516 million ($140k* 1.1^25) in 25 years.

LOL, ok. So now we're suggesting that typical pensioners are leaving millions and millions of dollars to their heirs? That's a good one.

Not sure who put the chip on your shoulder but you seem to have this idea of “pensioners” being exclusively lower class workers living hand to mouth off of their pension alone.


Im the pp who mentioned that my spouse and I will each be retiring with a ~100k pension each. We’ll also have roughly 4 million combined in 401ks /brokerage accounts and a paid off home and rental property.

Baring some catastrophe we expect to leave an inheritance in the millions to our children. We have many colleagues in similar circumstances.

You're gonna have to make some pretty hefty RMDs from those 401k, my friend,

Look, pensions are nice. They really are. But you don't hear me slobbering over my social security checks. It's basically the same thing. The appeal of a pension is that it makes up some for toiling away in a relatively low paying job for many years. People who make big money aren't offered and don't been pensions.

Except that the pension is more than 3x as much as a social security paycheck, I can start collecting in my early 50s and it comes with health insurance. But yeah otherwise exactly the same.

But how many years will you have had to work at your job to collect that pension and at what salary? And what happens should you decide you don't want to work at your low paying job long enough to qualify for the pension?

Nothing is free, my friend.

You’re right, I’m an oppressed proletariat working at slave wages. I’ll happily accept your contributions to better my plight. Just let me know where to direct the Venmo request.

I'm just saying. Geez. I get the appeal of a pension for someone who was never a high earner and couldn't comfortably retire without it. I do. It's just not an asset when calculating net worth.

What do you classify as a “high earner” and at what point does a pension become irrelevant? How much does one need for a comfortable retirement?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

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

But for each year they live and don’t take funds from their retirement accounts and invest those funds more aggressively because they don’t need them, their heirs win.

If the pension holder lives 25 years, those foregone withdrawals and higher investment rates will be worth way, way more than $3.5 million to their heirs.

For example, assuming a full investment in stock, just the first year of forgone withdrawal will be worth $1.516 million ($140k* 1.1^25) in 25 years.

LOL, ok. So now we're suggesting that typical pensioners are leaving millions and millions of dollars to their heirs? That's a good one.

Not sure who put the chip on your shoulder but you seem to have this idea of “pensioners” being exclusively lower class workers living hand to mouth off of their pension alone.


Im the pp who mentioned that my spouse and I will each be retiring with a ~100k pension each. We’ll also have roughly 4 million combined in 401ks /brokerage accounts and a paid off home and rental property.

Baring some catastrophe we expect to leave an inheritance in the millions to our children. We have many colleagues in similar circumstances.

You're gonna have to make some pretty hefty RMDs from those 401k, my friend,

Look, pensions are nice. They really are. But you don't hear me slobbering over my social security checks. It's basically the same thing. The appeal of a pension is that it makes up some for toiling away in a relatively low paying job for many years. People who make big money aren't offered and don't been pensions.

Except that the pension is more than 3x as much as a social security paycheck, I can start collecting in my early 50s and it comes with health insurance. But yeah otherwise exactly the same.

But how many years will you have had to work at your job to collect that pension and at what salary? And what happens should you decide you don't want to work at your low paying job long enough to qualify for the pension?

Nothing is free, my friend.

You’re right, I’m an oppressed proletariat working at slave wages. I’ll happily accept your contributions to better my plight. Just let me know where to direct the Venmo request.

I'm just saying. Geez. I get the appeal of a pension for someone who was never a high earner and couldn't comfortably retire without it. I do. It's just not an asset when calculating net worth.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

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

But for each year they live and don’t take funds from their retirement accounts and invest those funds more aggressively because they don’t need them, their heirs win.

If the pension holder lives 25 years, those foregone withdrawals and higher investment rates will be worth way, way more than $3.5 million to their heirs.

For example, assuming a full investment in stock, just the first year of forgone withdrawal will be worth $1.516 million ($140k* 1.1^25) in 25 years.

LOL, ok. So now we're suggesting that typical pensioners are leaving millions and millions of dollars to their heirs? That's a good one.

Not sure who put the chip on your shoulder but you seem to have this idea of “pensioners” being exclusively lower class workers living hand to mouth off of their pension alone.


Im the pp who mentioned that my spouse and I will each be retiring with a ~100k pension each. We’ll also have roughly 4 million combined in 401ks /brokerage accounts and a paid off home and rental property.

Baring some catastrophe we expect to leave an inheritance in the millions to our children. We have many colleagues in similar circumstances.

You're gonna have to make some pretty hefty RMDs from those 401k, my friend,

Look, pensions are nice. They really are. But you don't hear me slobbering over my social security checks. It's basically the same thing. The appeal of a pension is that it makes up some for toiling away in a relatively low paying job for many years. People who make big money aren't offered and don't been pensions.

Except that the pension is more than 3x as much as a social security paycheck, I can start collecting in my early 50s and it comes with health insurance. But yeah otherwise exactly the same.

But how many years will you have had to work at your job to collect that pension and at what salary? And what happens should you decide you don't want to work at your low paying job long enough to qualify for the pension?

Nothing is free, my friend.

You’re right, I’m an oppressed proletariat working at slave wages. I’ll happily accept your contributions to better my plight. Just let me know where to direct the Venmo request.