Anonymous wrote:Retirement Is Worst-Case-Scenario Insurance.

Retirement planning is like life insurance. It should be viewed as nothing more than a hedge against the
absolute worst-case scenario: in this case, becoming physically incapable of working and needing a
reservoir of capital to survive.

Retirement as a goal or final redemption is flawed for at least three solid reasons:

1. It is predicated on the assumption that you dislike what you are doing during the most physically
capable years of your life. This is a nonstarter—nothing can justify that sacrifice.

2. Most people will never be able to retire and maintain even a hotdogs-for-dinner standard of living.
Even one million is chump change in a world where traditional retirement could span 30 years and
inflation lowers your purchasing power 2–4% per year. The math doesn’t work.3The golden years
become lower-middle-class life revisited. That’s a bittersweet ending.

3. If the math does work, it means that you are one ambitious, hardworking machine. If that’s the
case, guess what? One week into retirement, you’ll be so damn bored that you’ll want to stick
bicycle spokes in your eyes. You’ll probably opt to look for a new job or start another company.
Kinda defeats the purpose of waiting, doesn’t it?

I’m not saying don’t plan for the worst case—I have maxed out 401(k)s and IRAs I use primarily for
tax purposes—but don’t mistake retirement for the goal.

Anonymous wrote:Retirement Is Worst-Case-Scenario Insurance.

Retirement planning is like life insurance. It should be viewed as nothing more than a hedge against the
absolute worst-case scenario: in this case, becoming physically incapable of working and needing a
reservoir of capital to survive.

Retirement as a goal or final redemption is flawed for at least three solid reasons:

1. It is predicated on the assumption that you dislike what you are doing during the most physically
capable years of your life. This is a nonstarter—nothing can justify that sacrifice.

2. Most people will never be able to retire and maintain even a hotdogs-for-dinner standard of living.
Even one million is chump change in a world where traditional retirement could span 30 years and
inflation lowers your purchasing power 2–4% per year. The math doesn’t work.3The golden years
become lower-middle-class life revisited. That’s a bittersweet ending.

3. If the math does work, it means that you are one ambitious, hardworking machine. If that’s the
case, guess what? One week into retirement, you’ll be so damn bored that you’ll want to stick
bicycle spokes in your eyes. You’ll probably opt to look for a new job or start another company.
Kinda defeats the purpose of waiting, doesn’t it?

I’m not saying don’t plan for the worst case—I have maxed out 401(k)s and IRAs I use primarily for
tax purposes—but don’t mistake retirement for the goal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Retirement Is Worst-Case-Scenario Insurance.

Retirement planning is like life insurance. It should be viewed as nothing more than a hedge against the
absolute worst-case scenario: in this case, becoming physically incapable of working and needing a
reservoir of capital to survive.

Retirement as a goal or final redemption is flawed for at least three solid reasons:

1. It is predicated on the assumption that you dislike what you are doing during the most physically
capable years of your life. This is a nonstarter—nothing can justify that sacrifice.

2. Most people will never be able to retire and maintain even a hotdogs-for-dinner standard of living.
Even one million is chump change in a world where traditional retirement could span 30 years and
inflation lowers your purchasing power 2–4% per year. The math doesn’t work.3The golden years
become lower-middle-class life revisited. That’s a bittersweet ending.

3. If the math does work, it means that you are one ambitious, hardworking machine. If that’s the
case, guess what? One week into retirement, you’ll be so damn bored that you’ll want to stick
bicycle spokes in your eyes. You’ll probably opt to look for a new job or start another company.
Kinda defeats the purpose of waiting, doesn’t it?

I’m not saying don’t plan for the worst case—I have maxed out 401(k)s and IRAs I use primarily for
tax purposes—but don’t mistake retirement for the goal.

How old are you?

And you may feel differently about your work when you are near retirement age even if you love it now.

Can you read?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Retirement Is Worst-Case-Scenario Insurance.

Retirement planning is like life insurance. It should be viewed as nothing more than a hedge against the
absolute worst-case scenario: in this case, becoming physically incapable of working and needing a
reservoir of capital to survive.

Retirement as a goal or final redemption is flawed for at least three solid reasons:

1. It is predicated on the assumption that you dislike what you are doing during the most physically
capable years of your life. This is a nonstarter—nothing can justify that sacrifice.

2. Most people will never be able to retire and maintain even a hotdogs-for-dinner standard of living.
Even one million is chump change in a world where traditional retirement could span 30 years and
inflation lowers your purchasing power 2–4% per year. The math doesn’t work.3The golden years
become lower-middle-class life revisited. That’s a bittersweet ending.

3. If the math does work, it means that you are one ambitious, hardworking machine. If that’s the
case, guess what? One week into retirement, you’ll be so damn bored that you’ll want to stick
bicycle spokes in your eyes. You’ll probably opt to look for a new job or start another company.
Kinda defeats the purpose of waiting, doesn’t it?

I’m not saying don’t plan for the worst case—I have maxed out 401(k)s and IRAs I use primarily for
tax purposes—but don’t mistake retirement for the goal.

How old are you?

And you may feel differently about your work when you are near retirement age even if you love it now.

Anonymous wrote:Retirement Is Worst-Case-Scenario Insurance.

Retirement planning is like life insurance. It should be viewed as nothing more than a hedge against the
absolute worst-case scenario: in this case, becoming physically incapable of working and needing a
reservoir of capital to survive.

Retirement as a goal or final redemption is flawed for at least three solid reasons:

1. It is predicated on the assumption that you dislike what you are doing during the most physically
capable years of your life. This is a nonstarter—nothing can justify that sacrifice.

2. Most people will never be able to retire and maintain even a hotdogs-for-dinner standard of living.
Even one million is chump change in a world where traditional retirement could span 30 years and
inflation lowers your purchasing power 2–4% per year. The math doesn’t work.3The golden years
become lower-middle-class life revisited. That’s a bittersweet ending.

3. If the math does work, it means that you are one ambitious, hardworking machine. If that’s the
case, guess what? One week into retirement, you’ll be so damn bored that you’ll want to stick
bicycle spokes in your eyes. You’ll probably opt to look for a new job or start another company.
Kinda defeats the purpose of waiting, doesn’t it?

I’m not saying don’t plan for the worst case—I have maxed out 401(k)s and IRAs I use primarily for
tax purposes—but don’t mistake retirement for the goal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why so snarky? Most people don't save *enough* for their old age. You have no idea what kind of health you'll be in, or your spouse, or your children. Some people are forced to take time off from working to care for a child or other relative. Many people plan to work for a lot longer than they actually are able to. Cancer, injury, disability, disease can all make it impossible to carry on working. Then what?

I've known a LOT of old people, some indigent and some wealthy, some completely with it, and some completely demented. NOBODY has said, wow, I wish I had saved less for retirement, and there are many, many who wish they had planned better. Having money at the end is a big, big help.

OP here. The snarky messages don't belong to me.

I understand making sure I'll be able to afford health care. I believe in great insurance and have savings to take care of medical issues. It seems like so many talk about retirement as a goal and save for it as though it is their lifelong dream but if you aren't planning to need money beyond healthcare and incidentals, why continue saving money? It may be entire naive but I think its worth discussing.

Stopping saving when you have $2 mil is a lot different than not saving for retirement. Everyone needs money to live one when you are not working. Many people have to stop working at some point unless they die prematurely or are one of the lucky few who can work into their 80's. Everyone else needs money.

My MIL was healthy and fit her whole life. At age 84 she was still volunteering, walking each day for exercise, living in her own home and driving. At age 85 she had a stroke and started to be forgetful. A few months later she had another stroke and we moved her into assisted living. One month after that she had a major stroke that almost cost her her life. But she survived and is now living in a nursing home hooked up to a feeding tube. Thankfully, she had money saved for assisted living. And thankful even more that she had long-term care insurance. We could have never predicted one year ago this vivacious, active woman would be dependent on others for her care. Her mother lived to age 93 in her own home until she died. One never knows.

This story sounds familiar...this has happened to a friend of mine. (if it is the friend, I am trying to get the family to to head down to visit you).

In my case, I am saving, not for myself, for for my family. I do not expect to live until retirement age...a combination of Cancer and heart disease makes that unlikely --but DW will need money, and DD needs college education. And I can't buy life insurance anymore (cancer and heard disease).

And not saving is betting on death...I would rather retire at 65 than die at 51

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you mean you don't plan to retire? Are you just going to die at 65?

In what world does a person have to either die or stop working at 65?

It means I plan on working until I'm dead or close to it.

Why would you do this? You do know there's little virtue in working, right?

Some people like their jobs

Poor, misguided souls. You know the adage about how the woman on her death bed declared, wistfully, "I really wished I had worked more." That never happens.

Yeah. It actually does happen if what you do is what you LOVE to do and it creates positive change in the world. I would argue if your work doesn't satisfy both those points, you should find a new line of work.

You don't know many old people do you? Many can't work b/c of health and old age.

What does that have to do with what I said?

The response was to the poster who said only misguided people want to work in their old age. Which is completely and totally untrue.

Well, good for you that you will want to work in your old age! That's great. Many people don't but it's not a choice b/c they don't have enough to retire on. Why do you think grandpa is there at the door saying,

"Welcome to Walmart!"

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you mean you don't plan to retire? Are you just going to die at 65?

In what world does a person have to either die or stop working at 65?

It means I plan on working until I'm dead or close to it.

Why would you do this? You do know there's little virtue in working, right?

Some people like their jobs

Poor, misguided souls. You know the adage about how the woman on her death bed declared, wistfully, "I really wished I had worked more." That never happens.

Yeah. It actually does happen if what you do is what you LOVE to do and it creates positive change in the world. I would argue if your work doesn't satisfy both those points, you should find a new line of work.

You don't know many old people do you? Many can't work b/c of health and old age.

What does that have to do with what I said?

The response was to the poster who said only misguided people want to work in their old age. Which is completely and totally untrue.