Do you have $1 Million Dollars

It's not enough!

Yes, barely. I agree with r1.

It feels like security. My husband and I would qualify as worth over $1 million, but it isn't all liquid, so it's not like we buy anything we want, whenever we want. But we have the resources to cover those types of unexpected expenses that happen too often in life (car repair, new appliance, etc.), so that definitely takes the pressure off.

I do but I have no cash flow and struggle to pay my bills every month. I live in NYC.

I don't live in NYC and I am just fine financially.

I agree with r3. I have over 700K in stocks/bonds/ira etc and around 800k in real estate that I rent out. So I live nicely. Not rich at all. Just enough not to work for the man anymore.

Yes but I don't feel rich because I'm not. If it were 1957 I would be. Yet I know it's an unimaginable amount to 80% of the populace. What's more important to my lifestyle is my 6 figure income. The other assets just sit there waiting for my old age.

Yes. It feels nice like the poster upthread said -- and lucky. My time is my own, and money is one thing I don't have to worry about, other than how to invest it.

One million seems like a lot but it's really not. My net worth is just above that and I have a beautiful home on view acreage and ready cash available for investing. However, I still need monthly income to support both. My goal is to keep the above and still have enough capital to live off the interest should I so choose.

One needs around 5 mil to really be secure and financially independent.

R9, I think that $5 mil figure is too high. If you have $2 million, and earn 5% on your investments, that comes to $100,000 per year. After taxes, you can spend this however you please. Plus, in retirement, you'll also have Social Security income and Medicare,p.

Furthermore, your future life expectancy should be considered, too. The longer it is between today and the date of your death makes a difference. At some point, you can live on your SS and investment income, and also start drawing down your principle, unless you are determined to leave your wealth to your heirs. Just be careful you don't outlive your funds.

100000 per year is nothing. I'm barely living off of 420k at the moment.

^ you're high maintenance R11. $1 billion wouldn't be enough for you, I bet.

I have about $4,000,000. I think it’s enough

I agree, it's not enough. Probably 75% of ours is tied up in property. I am the financial person and we are diversified; stocks, bonds, regular savings, property. I have a 401(k), husband is contributing to a good pension. We've still got 15 years, give or take to retirement. Lots of work to do between now and then.

For many people who are "worth" $1M, probably half if not more is illiquid real estate (equity in the home in which they reside). Unless you are over 70 or 75 you shouldn't be be drawing down principal in your portfolio. So a 5% distribution on 500k is only 25k annually, before tax, not even enough to pay rent on a decent 1 bedroom apt. in Manhattan. Max SS is no more than about $18k a year

For someone around 60 to live "comfortably" in NYC the income generating portfolio (excluding primary residence) would need to be about $2M

Yes. It doesn't feel like very much even though I know it's crazy to say that. But all my friends and siblings have more so I feel not rich.

Hubby and I have about $9 million, including a fully-paid-for house. Other than having more free time than I ever dreamed of, life hasn't changed much. Retired 5 years ago at 51. Drive a 16-year-old pickup truck. Wear shorts and T-shirts instead of "business casual.". It is nice not to have to worry about money. It's just not an issue any longer.

R12 tax eats up a lot of it. Plus, saving, then just normal stuff like bills.

$1 million means very little these days.

We never have enough!

In my head I do...

I have $1.7 million in cash/stock. Hubby has a bit more. We owe $330K on our $1.7 million house. We're OK financially - but we have 2 kids that we are trying to make sure have something after we're gone. We don't live extravagantly - and we keep saving for them.

I'm single have 2.3 million net worth. No debt. Nice home etc. I'm doing ok.

Yes.

I was just as happy when I had $50 a week to feed myself and get to work as I am now., but having money makes me feel much safer.

Anyone want to get married??

I have nearly $ 700K and am going to be 54 in January. I am feeling okay. That doesn't include what I will get with my social security, if I is still around. That will be around $ 2500 per month before taxes.

As If !! If it is still around, it won't be as much as my yearly estimate sheet now says.

Do any of you rich DLers donate to charity?

We have a little over a million in investments 401k, stocks etc. we also have 2 kids to put through college , 3 rental properties that should be paid off by the time we retire. My husband hopes to be able to retire in 8 years or so.

My assets add up to over one million but it's not liquid. I own three properties (residence and two investments), have retirement accounts and some cash on hand from an inheritance. I am not a spendthrift, drive a 10 year old Honda Civic, and worry about the future because bad health has plagued old people in my family. Dementia, macular degeneration, and heart disease at the forefront. Once you get ill as an elder and have to be in a care home or require in-home care, things get really expensive and you drain your money fast. Buying property was one of the smartest things I've done and I didn't even start to do that until my late 30s. If I had bought earlier than that I'd be swimming in equity because I live in the SF Bay Area.

So, my advice to the youngsters is to buy property if you can, and even if you can't, open a Roth IRA and start saving now. Anything you can deposit each month is better than nothing and it will grow over the years.

Yes, R27. Always have. I also do volunteer work (don't shoot me!)

Yes I, r11, donate to charity. I also help out people that I know that are having financial problems. I try to do it in a way that they won't know that it's me paying for it. I don't like people feeling like they owe me anything.

We are like r17. We are able to help friends and strangers plus we travel a lot. I plan to pay for my great nieces college.

I worry about our country and other people. I'm very concerned for others about health care and wages.

No, but I live in the Midwest, so I don't really need the same amount some of you do to retire. My Financial Advisor assures me I can retire at 60, although I'm holding out for 65, because of uncertainty in Health Care laws.

We're worth around 1.4 million now. I own three nice rental homes without mortgages, which account for a decent chunk of those assets. They bring in good rents for my area, and should until I die, and having that income is a great comfort. We have about a hundred and fifty grand in liquid reach now. By modern standards, we're not rich by any stretch, but we have a cushion to fall on if needed.

It meant that when I got stranded with a broken-down car about three-hundred miles from home, and ended up spending over three grand at multiple repairs shops and in hotel and car rental costs, before I finally got that older-model Honda (that's barely worth that much, and that I wasn't intending to keep for more than another month or two) home a full two weeks later for what ultimately turned out to be a $100 part, I just felt really pissed off.

Not financially dazed and in dread

No. I have around $450K in my retirement. But my apartment is rent controlled and I will retire with a pension and full medical. Very few people I know have assets of $1 million or more.

I only have one tenth of that. I'm doomed. I'll never be able to retire.

Yes. Hubby and I have a house that is worth $2mm (essentially debt free) and I have a portfolio of stocks of about $1.2mm after deducting margin debt.

We both earn decent incomes and while I don't consider us to be rich inI answer to your question r-27 I gave just over $30K to charity. My parents insisted that we had a obligation to society to help out, so even when I worked part time going to uni, there was a similar expectation.

I have a stash of valium as my retirement

No, I don't and am not sure about the future. Somehow, I'm not so worried.

Yes, I donate to charity. Food banks are my particular charity of choice. I think it's awful people can't afford to food shop and children go hungry.

A million dollars is not wealth today.

Your the type of a leach everyone in NYC hates, R35. Rent controlled apartments are not meant for people like you with half-a-million bucks in the bank.

I'll be lucky if I'm not living under a bridge by the time I retire. Plan 'B' is to step in front a train.

Probably 1.5 million in assets but not a ton of liquidity. Maybe $150 K liquidity. Most of my equity is in the house.

Here in LA if you own a house you're technically a millionaire. Most worthwhile homes here are now over 1 million. While def an asset, I wouldn't consider that as part of my own wealth. Liquidity is king in terms of determining wealth, imo.

For those who have 1 million or more, what percentage of the amount was inherited?

R42, People who rent apartments are entitled to have savings. And in this instance, it's retirement savings that I can't touch for several more years. If it turns into millions of dollars I will be happy to buy a house.

Generally, real estate isn't considered as "net worth" for these purposes.

MAy I borrow 10 bucks from one of you, please?

Me too, R43, me too. I had dibs on the Bridge of the Gods in the Columbia gorge, but it's still burning right now.

My partner and I are both 51 and have a joint net worth of about $1.1 million. We're comfortable and get to do things we like to do, like travel and eat out a lot, without much worry, but we don't act or feel rich because we're not. 95% of our assets are in retirement accounts and in the value of our paid off condo. Our incomes are what enable our lifestyle, not our net worth. Any interruption there and our lives are are less comfortable.. If everything plays out the right way, we can retire comfortably, but when that happens is an open question. We both have aging parents who aren't completely set financially themselves. My partner is now shelling out $1000 a month for elder care services for his mother. My mom is 10 years younger, so as soon as the expenses for one mother go away, expenses for another could start. We could end up with overlapping expenses for both. We're fortunate to be in a position to afford to help both of them, but these obligations diminish any feelings of being well off.

R46, about 18% was inherited and half of that went into a real estate investment and home improvements (which increased my home value).

To answer R46's question, a grand total of $7000 of our 1.1 million came from an inheritance. I received it 8 years ago after my father died. It put a small dent in the $80,000 I borrowed for college and law school. Unlike several people I know, no one gave me money for the down payment on the condo we now own outright; I borrowed money from my 401k for that. My partner didn't have to borrow for college, but he also never finished. He never inherited anything and his prospects of doing so are zilch.

Your the type of a leach everyone in NYC hates, [R35]. Rent controlled apartments are not meant for people like you with half-a-million bucks in the bank.

—Anonymous

Oh Dear! please be careful who you are calling a "leach"

What did you say?

Thanks, R51, R52. I know many who post have worked hard and invested wisely. I just wondered if an inheritance jump-started your investments.

1 million is nothing?

Wow. I wish I had the luxury to say that. 100,000 is sadly more than I've ever seen

The only significant way it has changed my life is I don't have to stress as much as others about losing my job.

I have $2 million in assets, stocks, retirement accounts and property. I don't feel rich. No mortgage, car or home equity payments. My company asked me to come back after I retired so I said I would work part time, 3 days a week. It's enough cash to cover all expenses so I don't touch any income from my investments. There is no stress about money but as I said I don't feel rich just comfortable.

$2 million apart from principal place of residence is good comfort. Anything is is icing the cake. But the idea that you should start drawing down on it if you have no dependents is risky. I know several cases of people who needed High Care in the last 10 or 20 years of their life and that can cost $100k a year plus. I hate the thought of not being able to blow and enjoy savings, just in case the worst happens, but that could be the case.

Net worth of about $2.8m, of which less than $150k is home equity. I don't have a spectacular income, but I do try to live fairly frugally and save most of what I earn. I am 100% convinced that Congress is going to slash Social Security, and so I don't want to be caught out.

Husband and I are 7 to 10 years away from retirement and own a paid-for $450K house in the south, have 6 months income in bank savings and 1.6 million in retirement/401K investments. We live and dress modestly, drive older cars and are in blue/pink-collar jobs so no one would ever regard us as being rich. We feel a little more secure with these assets but not rich.

We just pray we can continue working in jobs providing benefits as we approach retirement. The market discriminates terribly against elders, no matter how nice your resume is, so we are now trying to live on one income and save the rest--just in case things go awry. And sometimes things do take a turn for the worse. Example: I recently met someone who lost a 15-year job at age 55. It took him 19 months to get another job. Unemployment ran out at 3 months, so he lived on savings until he finally found a job paying less than half of what he previously earned. He feels lucky!

I'm in a stressful job and started looking at want ads for the first time in years. I'm shocked at how limited the job market is compared to 10 years ago. Salaries in my field have dropped and are now where they were 10-15 years ago! More contracting out and less permanency...... I worry about my Millennial nieces and nephews. I tell them they have a short window of market viability --ages 25 to 45 --and it goes by fast. Save and invest as aggressively as possible during that time, particularly before robotics starts disrupting the job market for everyone.

So you're worth over $2M grand total, R61, and you're "not rich"? That puts you in the top 5% of the U.S. You may not be a 1 percenter but you are definitely a 5 percenter. So yes, when Bernie etal are talking about the "rich", they are talking about YOU.

Yes, lived well and well within my needs all my working life and took advantage of ways to save. Meanwhile, status-conscious friends were traveling all the time, buying cars they could barely afford, plus all the other crap that screams 'status' and now they are worried about retirement, and more short-term, how they are gonna put the kids they have spoiled beyond belief through an Ivy League school. More keeping-up-with-the Joneses 'status'.

I don't have a fancy house and I live pretty simply and comfortably. I was able to retire when my spouse died nearly nine years ago. While that's a big loss I live with every day, I am thankful and happy that I don't have to take part in the rat race any more.

[quote]I know several cases of people who needed High Care in the last 10 or 20 years of their life and that can cost $100k a year plus.

Well, that's not for me. If I get to the point that I need such intensive care, I'd rather die.

This thread illustrates pretty clearly what's going on in America. 75 percent of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck, and another 15 percent are getting by. About 10 percent have enough money to feel relatively secure re unexpected medical bills (and then there's that .1 percent that are fabulously wealthy... but whatever).

But on this thread, being in the top 5 percent still means, oh gosh, I'm not really rich, I'm struggling because I can't buy a new car every year and my house only has four bedrooms when it would be so nice to have a fifth one for wrapping presents.

No wonder why Donald Trump won.

R64, for your protection, make sure you put that in writing.

You're right R65

R66 -- I have. DNR, no artificial means, etc.

Where are you getting 5% these days r10?

I have a duck, I hear some of them are worth a million

A $1.5 million portfolio, a $55,000 pension, and no mortgage on my $300,000 house. Like my roommate in college said, if money doesn't buy happiness, you're shopping at the wrong store. And I'd rather be unhappy and rich than unhappy and poor.

I earn 3% - 4% with the bank taking a 1% (mostly tax deductible) management fee on total account value each month.

1% annual over 12 months not 12% total!

[quote]Very few people I know have assets of $1 million or more.

Well welcome to Datalounge! Where everyone's a millionaire!

R58 here I earn 5% on stock dividends and the max tax rate is 15%. I have a good accountant who gets my overall tax rate down to 11%.

R46 - virtually nothing came from inheritance. My husband took some real chances in the stock market a few years ago and they paid off. We may see a little bit of money from his mom (who is 94 and still going strong) - but she also may burn through it all. I think we got a few thousand bucks when my dad died a few years ago - but it wasn't much and we already had a pretty decent nest egg. The only reason we have any money at all is because my hubby made us save and we both worked hard.

R65 It sounds like you are implying that the people on this thread didn't work hard, save hard, make sacrifices. That it all fell into place easily. As if most of the posters are trust fund babies or something....?

There's a theme if you read the posts carefully. I started working at 16 and had 2 jobs. Both my husband and I went to state universities with no special reputation (read cheaper tuition). My husband's parents paid for his college, mine helped me. We worked (and still work) hard, live below our means and save like crazy. We're not extravagant, we don't spend in places where lesser will do - we drive Toyotas not status cars. We bought a smaller house that we could easily afford. I set a budget and we live within its means.

It's not magic and it's not trust funds. It's taking the long view, understanding that instant gratification disappears quickly and is mostly worthless. Things like retirement or financial security need to be started in your 20s, not your 40s or 50s. Count me among the crowd that has been saying since 1991 (college graduation year, BS in Finance) that there would be no Social Security around by the time I retire around 2034.

no inheritance, (at least not yet) a lot of hard work, but a lot of luck also. falling into a good job with long term pension benefits, getting good advice from friends about investments, buying and selling real estate at the right time..

also eldergays grew up at a time when there was much more economic expansion and mobility than there are now. a lot of boomers will do ok, gen x not so much, and millenials are likely fucked.

[R77] According to the SS trustee update for 2017, benefits will drop to 77% during 2034.

even without a reduction, anyone thinking of retiring solely on ss will be eating catfood. The average monthly benefit is $1,342, monthly, before taxes.

I'm "worth" $1.5 mil on paper, but I'll only feel rich if I'm holding it in my hand in cash!

if you count your primary residence, you would be rich, but homeless

[80] I'm not average. If I were 66 this year and filed for SS benefits, it would be $2,597. It'll be a bit more in 3 years when I actually file. Also have $550k+ in liquid assets today. I think I'll do ok.

the higher the ss benefits, means the higher your income, which also means higher taxes withheld and deductions for medicare premiums if you trigger the "means test". I get gross benefits of $2500, after taxes and medicare premium, the net deposited monthly is around $1100

R82 But with money to pay rent. Of course, I'm not going to liquidate everything, but I don't feel rich when I don't have access to cash.

Of course I do.

R84 your math is off my ss benefit is $2400 a month after deductions for taxes an Medicare I get a little over $1700.

there is an additional penalty if your earnings exceed a certain level. part of "the rich don't need ss philosophy"

Up until I was about 32, I contributed as much as I needed to in my 401k to get my employer matching funds, 6% of my salary. Then I figured that I was never going to get rich that way, so I increased my contribution to 10%. After another ten years, I realized that I had too much money in my 401k, so at that point, I reduced my contributions back down to 6% again.

What do I mean by having too much money in a 401k, 403b, or pretax IRA? The reason is that this money, upon withdrawl, is taxed at regular state & federal income tax rates; and, the government [italic] requires [/italic]you to start drawing down the balance in those accounts when you reach age 70.5. The rate of required withdraw is the balance each year divided by your remaining life expectancy.

So, if you have $1 million in a 401k, and are age 70.5, you might be required to withdraw, say, $120,000. The $120,000 is your years' investment gains, plus 1/20 of the principle (roughly calculated). Couple this with Social Security and other income you have, and that puts you in a very high tax bracket.

So, it's always smart to contribute to a 401k to get the employer matching funds, if they do a match, but it might not be smart to contribute more than that. The point that constitutes "too much" varies. Usually, the younger you are, the lower the point is, since your balance has more time to grow.

For a 30 year old, the point might be around $200,000. For a fifty year old, the point might be $400,000. I don't think you ever want to have over $500,000 in a 401k, for this reason. There are too many variables to calculate an exact point that fits everyone. But, if you have done well, you might want to consider this within your entire wealth management plan.

This is the kind of thing most people don't know about until it's too late to do anything about it.

[R87] Exactly what I was about to say. It's unlikely I'll trigger the "means test" nor exceed allowed deductions to pay any taxes. I have enough tax free investments to tap if needed. Not worried.

But not liking 77% of what would be my normal benefit in 2034. Stupid fucking congresscritters need to get off their asses and fix both SS and Medicare funding, pronto.

[quote]Count me among the crowd that has been saying since 1991 (college graduation year, BS in Finance) that there would be no Social Security around by the time I retire around 2034.

Out of curiosity, why are you bragging that you've been wrong for 26 years?

[quote]Where are you getting 5% these days R10?

I'm not a particularly savvy investor, putting most of my money into stock and bond index funds, but I'm averaging about 8% on my investments, and that includes the downturns in 2000, 2001, and 2007/2008. A more aggressive and/or knowledgeable investor could easily have gotten over 10% these past several years.

No

Mine was pretty much inheritance. I worked for 25 years in advertising. With the inheritance and what I saved, I have 7 houses (one which I live in). Of the 7, 5 are paid off. I also have 600K in investments which earns 3K/month. So I feel blessed to be out of the rat race. I manage my properties and my portfolio, and spend lots of time with my hubs at the beach.

[quote]No wonder why Donald Trump won.

*sigh* Can we retire this meme, please? The voters who were most concerned about the economy went to Clinton, not Trump.

Including my house (which is paid for), I have a bit over 700K in savings and investments. With my IRAs, I have both 401K funds and Roth IRA funds, to cover the bases for when I retire. And I'm an hourly worker with only a high school education (some college courses, too, but no degree). But I've saved and invested, even when I was still struggling to get out of debt. If you wait to save or invest when you're out of debt, you'll probably never get there.

"So, if you have $1 million in a 401k, and are age 70.5, you might be required to withdraw, say, $120,000. The $120,000 is your years' investment gains, plus 1/20 of the principle (roughly calculated). Couple this with Social Security and other income you have, and that puts you in a very high tax bracket."

This doesn't sound right (R89) I have $1.6M in 401k, and had to start deductions last year at age 70.5. My minimum distributions are about $60k.

Also, anyone fortunate enough to work for a company these days that matches 401 contributions is an idiot not to exploit it to the max.

R91. I'm not wrong yet. If there's SS in 2034 and I get it, then I'm wrong. Until then I'm planning on it not existing, at least not for me.

401k required minimum distribution rules.

[quote]The required minimum distribution for any year is the account balance as of the end of the immediately preceding calendar year divided by a distribution period from the IRS’s “Uniform Lifetime Table.”

There's a lot of good life choices associated with this thread. I made a few bad ones and currently only have slightly less than $1m in net worth, but I should be well over by the time I get to retirement.

[quote]I'm not wrong yet.

Yeah, you really are. Even if nothing changes, the Social Security system will still have sufficient funds to generate three quarters of the expected benefits. There is no scenario where Social Security will give you zero funds.

[quote] R69: Where are you getting 5% these days [R10]?

I probably used 5% to make the math easier, r69. My 5 year return was actually 11% per year. I had been invested in Fidelity's FOCPX fund, which heavily weighted Apple, Google, Facebook, Tesla, Amazon, etc. It's 5 year return averaged 20% per year.

I own about $11,000,000 in real estate, most of it income producing. We got lucky and bought almost worthless brownstones which are worth millions 20 years later. We aren't rich and don't live extravagantly. The income will ensure us a comfortable retirement. I was able to buy my children expensive educations.

if you have a short time horizon, then fixed income is best as a market downturn cannot be recovered, hence you may not get 5%. if you have a longer timeframe and can weather a dip, then 5%+ should be easily attainable with equities

I have $1.2 million in a 401(k), an IRA, and an investment account. ( have $600k equity in an $800k home. I'm aiming at $2 million in the various accounts plus a paid-for home, at which point I'll retire.

None of this was from inheritance. I did not handle my finances well when I was younger and didn't get seriously going on retirement planning until my mid-30s. I'm very lucky that I work in the high-tech field, so I was able to recover and start building up the equity I need.

The advice about starting early and taking it seriously when you're in your 20s is right on the mark. Had I done so, I'd be retired right now.

[quote] R79: [[R77]] According to the SS trustee update for 2017, benefits will drop to 77% during 2034

Only if Congress does nothing to rectify this. Right now, only the first $120,000 or so of income is subject to the SS tax. If Congress raised that cap to, say, $250,000 or higher, then SS would be able to pay benefits in full in perpetuity. This is a simple fix. Reagan & Tip O'Neil tweeted SS funding in the 1980s to address a similar complaint at that time. As long as people value SS, it will be fixed and last forever.

worrying about how much ss might be reduced is worrying about whether you will eat cat food or spam

I would say around that amount, if I include my 401k and property. The property was willed to me by my grandmother when she died, and It's worth around $350,000 to $400,000. The 401k has about $500,000. I don't have any bills really to speak of. I guess I'm doing okay.

[quote]The voters who were most concerned about the economy went to Clinton, not Trump.

Clinton voters should reject or give away all the money they have made on the Trumpian stock market boom, so as not to hypocritical.

Well, if there were, in fact, a "Trumpian stock market boom," r109, you might have a point. Since the boom began with Obama and Trump hasn't actually passed any legislation or rules that affect this, I'll give credit to Obama where it belongs Since that's the case, are you planning on returning that money you've made?

[quote] I own about $11,000,000 in real estate.... We aren't rich

Surely this is a joke.

One of the best things I've done was years ago I invest1/2 of my IRA assets in a ROTH IRA. You pay taxes on the amount you put in after that the money and the income it generates will never be taxed. ROTHs are not subject to the rules of minimum withdrawals at 70 1/2 years of age and they are not counted when the calculation is computed for the minimum withdrawal. My ROTH account has tripled in value.

[R107] You're full of catfood and spam. I live very comfortably off $29k/yr right now. The majority of that, even after inflation, will be covered by SS benefits. The rest comes from investments, both tax-deferred and tax-free. Stop being a pretentious asswipe.

i wish! i have very little in savings! i'm never gonna be able to retire!

R65, reading the responses I don't think anyone is taking the attitude of "I'm struggling because I can't buy a new car every year". You may be reading in some preconceived notions. On the contrary, most people seem to have become millionaires by living cheaply, they are aware of it, and I would bet most continue to live below their means.

R97, at age 70, your IRS-provided remaining life expectancy is 14 more years (for a male). If you have $1.6 million in a 401k, then your required minimum distribution is $1.6M/14 = $114,285. Am I calculating this incorrectly?

If you make 7% on you 401k investments, that comes to $112,000 in gains. This suggests that your future minimum required withdrawals will actually increase for a period of time, until you put a dent in the principle..

I don't know how this is calculated in the first year. Perhaps in the first year, you only are subject to half of the yearly required withdrawal? I can't explain why your number was so much smaller than I expect.

Let me know if any of you can find a mistake in my calculation.

Oh, R97, I agree with you that people should always contribute enough to get the employer match, and wrote so in R89.

[R116] see below

If your 401k is strong but your Roth is weak, should you put more money into the Roth?

Here is another IRA/401k minimum distribution calculator (a link). But this one shows you the estimated yearly distributions over a person's life expectancy.

Put in $1,600,000 for account balance

Age: 70

Rate of Return (anything, really, but 5% will do)

(No spouse)

First year distribution is $58,000+ with a life expectancy of 27.4 years.

But look at what the distribution is at age 93. ($131,000+)

Nearing retirement. $3 million house that we'll probably sell, but we're in NYC and will have to buy another smaller place, so deduct at least $1 million. Add $750k in 401s and investments. Will inherit about $2 million within 10 years. Anything could happen, but definitely feel safer than I did a few years back.

So much of how much you will need in future years depends on your health and insurance status. The money I have now will have to last the rest of my life. I am a conservative investor because I'm afraid of losing. Right now I own my home and I have two people paying me 5% interest on mortgages I gave them. Both are extremely reliable payers. The stock market scares me to death right now. I know I have lost out, but ever since Trump was elected, I keep thinking a big crash is coming.

[R122] Dunno about a "big crash", but a market correction (defined as at least 10% drop) is certainly overdue.

When the correction happens, I'm a buyer.

No

Thanks, R120. I was going to create a spreadsheet, and you saved me the effort.

If your returns is 7% instead of 5%, your required minimum distribution (RMD) first exceeds $100,000 at age 78. It maxes at about $220,000 at age 97. You also have 85% of your Social Security income that is also taxed, plus you're likely to have other income, if you've been this successful with your 401k. So, your taxable income in retirement might be quite high.

So, this is what I was warning about, though my calculation was more simplified than the calculator at R120.

Vivian Vance, R11

R46, I inherited $300K in 1996. My husband and I got a fee-only financial advisor, invested the money very conservatively and let it grow. The inheritance has more than doubled since then and now represents about 28% of our total net worth (assuming that our paid-for house in San Francisco is worth about $1 mil). My husband and I are both retired, and since our house is paid off we're able to live reasonably well on an income from SS, retirement accounts and pensions of about $80K.

Getting an inheritance helped a lot, of course, but I think the real trick to acquiring wealth is to develop good financial habits when you're young. Live beneath your means and put something aside from every paycheck. Drive an old car, buy whatever house or apartment you can afford even if it's a small, modest one that needs fixing, and then save and invest like crazy. You have to not care that you're not keeping up with the Joneses. You'll have the last laugh later. They'll still be working in their 70s because they're up to their eyeballs in debt and can't afford to quit, while you'll be enjoying a comfortable, stress-free retirement.

must i really buy a house?

yes r16, you are calculating it incorrectly. you need to follow the minimum distribution worksheet referenced earlier in the thread.

[quote] R119: If your 401k is strong but your Roth is weak, should you put more money into the Roth?

to;dr Yes, you should.

Well, R119, you should ask a pro, but here's what I know. I already covered what I think about large 401k balances.

A Roth allows you to make yearly contributions under certain rules that must be scrupulously followed. Much simplified: your income must be below around $117,000, and you can't be covered by an employer 401k, IIRC. You'll have to research this yourself. You could simply ask the financial rep with whom you have the Roth account about the rules. That's easy and should suffice.

There is another way to fund a Roth that I've been doing. I rolled over part of my 401k into a pretax IRA. This is a non-taxable event. Then each year, I move part of my pretax IRA balance into the Roth. I pay income taxes on this conversion to the Roth. My income is low, so I only pay the federal rate of 15% on the conversion. This is called a backdoor Roth conversion.

I think it is useful to diversify your investments across different kinds of investment products, such as 401k, Roth, and a brokerage account, that all have different tax treatment. That way, if they change the tax rules that you'd been relying on, you might not be totally ruined. (I read that Trump has entertained the idea of a tax on 401k balances, though I can't believe Congress would approve that.)

When nothing houses in the suburbs are selling for $456,000- it ain't much anymore.

Thanks, R130. I used the wrong table for life expectancy used to calculate the RMD. The denominator should be 27.4, not 14. (I thought that seemed too low!) The correct table is at the link. Aside from that, my calculation is simplified, but as R120 points out, my point is nonetheless still correct, that a very large 401k balance can force you into a very high tax bracket due to the RMD requirement.

lol, i'll worry about that when i'm 93

R129, a large benefit from buying a house is that you build equity in your property while eliminating the cost of rent.

And, when your property acrues value, for example, suppose it increases its value by 5% one year, you earn 5% on the entire value of the house. Not just on your equity. It would be like using a margin account where your investments are 20% principle and 80% margin.

I'm working min wage job. Can I open RothIRA account? I have $5000 in saving from xmas gifts, my grandparents usually gives me cash.

R136, I think you probably could open a Roth. You might call Fidelity (800-343-3548) tomorrow to ask. They'll have a specialist who can talk with you about the rules.

Roth contributions can't be withdrawn in the first 5 years after the account is opened, without a 10% penalty, so it's best to pretend that a Roth deposit is gone for good. Don't put anything in that you might need to withdraw if your car breaks down.

It's basically a 2-step process. First you open an account, and then choose an investment. For investments, I like the Fidelity FBALX mutual fund for people who are new to this. It's reasonably diversified, and less volatile than some more aggressive investments. Though, the aggressive investments make better returns, when/if all goes well.

If you're daring, I also like the FOCPX mutual fund. It's a collection of mostly high tech stocks. It's been doing great. If we have a downturn, it will fall hard, though.

It's important to remember that you can always lose money, though you can't lose more than you've invested. It's reasonable to assume that in most cases, the riskier an investment. The better the returns if all goes well. And vice-versa .

Good luck!

My family is long lived, so I have to assume that I'll live to be 100.

Thank you so much for your reply! very helpful!

R137, thank you for your reply! much appreciated!

I believe you can donate up to $5500 ($6500 if over 50) each year to a Roth. It doesn't matter if you also have a 401k. Most places will let you open a Roth with $2k or maybe even $1k. And I am sorry but any system that makes you take money at 70 is a good thing. The average life expectancy for men is 75

the 401k's were supposed to be for retirement, not estate planning, hence the requirement that funds be withdrawn during the contributors' lifetimes. although any remaining at the contributor's death goes to the heirs.

I have about $1.2 million, approximately 10% of which was inherited… I'm 47 and in NYC and hope I'm doing okay financially?

The joke is on you when you get run over by a bus tomorrow while you have millions in the bank

assuming you have a decent job and continue to provide for retirement, and have health insurance, you should be fine

I am not sure people are being realistic about what their assets would really be if they suddenly had to liquidate everything. With taxes, etc. you end up with much less than you think you have

you should never have to "liquidate" your assets, you live off them until either you die or they're gone gradually

All I know is that we never have to work

I have about $1.3 million in the stock market and about $900,000 equity in my home. I hope to stay here until I'm older, maybe another 10 years, then sell and rent for the remainder of my life. I've been earning more than I spend, so even though I'm retired, I'm doing better each year.

[quote] R144: The joke is on you when you get run over by a bus tomorrow while you have millions in the bank

That is a bitch. But I'd rather die with a million dollars in the bank, than run out of money at age 80 and live another decade in abject poverty but unable to work due to age.

I have a plan to leave my money to family and friends. I wish I could be there, it'll be like Christmas.

If you run out of money, you take a long swim in the ocean. Easy peasy

I'm 53, I make 60K a year and I have about 15K. I know I'm fucked.

head down to palm springs and find a sugar daddy....that would be my advice

No one has any guarantees. You will be fine. It's that crapshoot we call life

I totally agree with the poster upthread who said the window of employment for most people has narrowed to a cut off date of 45-50. Good luck with getting employment after that if you're not in a secure position. The market has definitely changed: it's got infinitely more competitive than even 10 years ago, and at 40 plus do you really want to be living your life stuck in a noisy open plan office with millennials? So you really really need to be socking cash away hard in your 30s. It's a really awful paradigm, given those are your best years, but it's the way of things.

And the posters grumbling about those who've achieved it: don't think we didn't sacrifice: the endless cold mornings getting up at 7.30 or earlier, and having to swallow endless shit to stay employed.

For you girls worried about forced living on $100k in your 70's. Get a grip! Save it or donate it if you don't need it

worry about stroking out and ending up in an "assisted living" facility. assets burn up at a ferocious rate.

and once the rethugs kill medicare to make the rich richer, it's bedsores and shitty diapers for the elders

Thanks for all of the insights. I came from a workingclass family, so my main problem right now is student loans. I believe I have about 500k in my TIAA account. Is this safe? (My father had a great pension from Bethlehem Steel, but it went bankrupt). I can't recall what my husband has in his, but it is less. We bought our house from HUD. Just before the housing collapse it was worth $385k, and we got it for a fraction of that. We are doing the remodeling & updates ourselves (husband is amazing). We live simply as well. We have a small classic car collection, but that is actually gaining value and classic car insurance is very cheap. The key to our retirement is to sell the house when the market is up and retire to a low expense of living area.

Aright guys, spill it. Since the average job with a 4 year degree will never bring in 1 Million unless you saved every penny for a life time and didn't eat food or pay rent, you all made your money in unconventional ways or high paying careers. Tell us how you did it. Give us real tips. Straight Bros do this all the time with their other bros. Gays are left to defend themselves. Pay it forward to your gay brothers. Well?

It's called leverage R159.

No one can accumulate wealth to any degree without it.

Most people do it unwittingly via a mortgage on their house.

After having done that, smarter people use the equity built up to invest in further assets, be they property, shares, etc.

Oh, and I provided that lifetip despite you employing the pathetic ghettospeak.

[quote]Since the average job with a 4 year degree will never bring in 1 Million unless you saved every penny for a life time and didn't eat food or pay rent, you all made your money in unconventional ways or high paying careers.

I don't have a super high paying job, but by putting the maximum amount allowed in 401k each year, plus maximizing Roth IRA and HSA, building equity in a moderately priced home, and spending less each month than my net pay, it wasn't hard to get close to $1m. I still travel and buy myself discretionary items, so I'm not doing without. I could have had more by now, but I'm very conservative in investing and I like to keep several years worth of net pay in cash in the bank. I know should have invested the cash, but I don't like having earnings that are taxable and handing more money to the government. I would invest more if there were more non-taxable options.

[quote]I don't have a super high paying job

That's a very relative term to someone with over a million dollars in the bank. The average salary in the US with a 4 year degree is 48,000 a year. With taxes, rent, food, auto, there is no way you are "easily" putting enough money away in a 401K or Roth to meat that 1 million mark.

I have to roll my eyes at people with million dollar accounts saying they don't have that much or that they're just getting by. It reminds me of Hillary saying she was "dead broke" after Bill left office.

R159, I inherited some money when my parents passed away, but I still had 350K saved and invested before that happened, and I work an hourly job, and don't have a degree. When I first went to work for my current employer, a little over 25 years ago, I had over 30K in credit card debt. My Dad would have paid it off for me, if I had told him about it, but it was important to me to take responsibility for my own actions, so I plugged away, and eventually got out of debt. But that took 7 years, and I was paying interest the whole time. But, as soon as my company offered "matching funds" when it rolled out a 401K, I took advantage of it. Back then, my hair was black (it's now grey). I see people who spend $20 every week buying lottery tickets, in the hope of getting rich. Lotteries have been (rightly) called a "tax on the poor". If those same people would put $20/week into a savings or investment account, they might actually accumulate some savings at some point. I grew up with 5 (free) channels on TV, so it's never occurred to me to subscribe to a premium channel. I can get just about anything I want to watch on DVDs from the Library for free. When I was really, really broke, I had to decide on what I needed to survive, and it wasn't all that much. I've lived through some real hardship, so I know how to prioritize. One saying I kept running into, when I started studying how to become financially secure, was to "pay yourself first". In other words, invest some money, every single paycheck, even though you have debts. You'll never have any savings if you wait until you're out of debt to start saving.

I have close to $2 million in cash and a little over $3 million in property assets and $3 million in whole life insurance. Very comfortable, but far from rich. It feels very little different than if I simply had enough money to cover my obligations and have some left over for some niceties every month. I guess it would feel differently if I had nothing and struggled daily and suddenly came into that kind of money. The thing it provides is security and peace of mind, but that's not something I dwell on or even think about every once in a while. I have pretty much all I need or want and I don't spend lavishly, although I do spend a fair amount on my car (I like a nice ride). Everything else is paid for. At this point in life I'm keeping it all safe for my 2 godchildren after I croak.

[quote]I have close to $2 million in cash and a little over $3 million in property assets and $3 million in whole life insurance. Very comfortable, but far from rich.

No, sweetie. You're R.I.C.H.

$2mill is Middle Class. You're definitely Upper Middle Class, and probably count as Lower Upper Class.

R26 lmao you're such a stereotypical Capricorn my dude. I admire that. Keep on keepin' on.

I wish people here would be more careful. this is like posting on Facebook that you aren't home and you will be on vacation for 2 weeks. you think you are anonymous here but I am sure those experienced in computers could locate you in a NY minute.

Haha, sorta R169. Us kids don't have to worry about it, no-one's gonna want pocket-change. Hey, you Eldergays, make sure your intercoms and laser-detection alarms are working! And the CCTV is on!

As a future childless gay I worry about this a lot, R157. No-one is going to take care of me in my dotage, and I don't make any money right now (and who knows how/when that will change). So how do I keep safe and secure in case of failing health or old age? (and I'm not sure if I'm fucked to get past 60 tbh).

R160 that's a great tip, any more pragmatic wisdom like that he you can share could save gay lives.

[quote]you think you are anonymous here but I am sure those experienced in computers could locate you in a NY minute.

*sigh* No, they couldn't. You'd have to be a web administrator for this site or hack the site. We truly are anonymous in all other circumstances. And even then all you could do is determine an IP address, which would give you the general vicinity, not a street address.

Doesn't the leverage give you more access to loans? Be careful you don't build a house of cards

[quote] R158: I believe I have about 500k in my TIAA account. Is this safe?

I have no idea but the big boys, like TIAA, should all be insured. They all group together and form a self-insurance conglomerate, I think. All I did is ask my firm, Fidelity, if they were insured, because I was afraid of internet theft. They are, provided I have anti virus software and maybe some more which I forget. If there's a crash and many of them go under, maybe they'll pay 75¢ on the dollar, but there's little chance of that.

I'm sure Bernie Madoff told his clients that he was insured, too, so there's that.

[quote] R159: Aright guys, spill it.

What I did is stay in the same home for 25 years. I refinanced maybe 5 times to get a lower rate and take cash out. I payed 8.5% in 1992, but 4.75% now on my mortgage. I put the money I took out of my house in, mostly, aggressive mutual funds and did very well, except during the dot com crash and Great Recession. But I stuck with it, and have more money now that ever.

I'm also frugal and have lived below my means. I drive a twelve year old car that I bought used, but I do live in an East Coast city where cars are not valued like they are in, for example, Los Angeles.

I pay my bills. Mostly as an aside, my credit score is very good so I get great credit card offers. I usually make $2000 or so each year from credit card cash-back. Or I fly free when I fly. Only in the last few years have I upgraded from coach to better seating.

Here's my advice: treat your wealth like a second job. Attend to it, and it could pay off even better than your first job. I was smart about it, and very lucky.

Oh, I had no kids. Once you have kids, you never have enough money ever again. The comment is for what that's worth.

I occasionally watch "American Greed" on CNBC, and I have a small worry that I'll lose my wealth in my old age to a con man. Or, I have a litigious neighbor, and I'm afraid he'll take it through some swindly-lawsuit. (I think I have to move.) That TV show features normal people, and also some savvy, wealthy people, getting swindled by con men. It's terrible what these psychopaths do to innocent people.

Good for you R174. My finances were a mess until my 40's. Then I eliminated all debt and went on a rigorous savings plan. Now I don't worry about retirement. $1 million cash is not attainable for many people so I always encourage people to come up with a game plan. Having no plan is too stressful.

I have a million dollar smile.

Nice post, r174!!!

I can't remember the post number but here is a quote:

[quote]Right now I own my home and I have two people paying me 5% interest on mortgages I gave them. Both are extremely reliable payers.

If the people you have loaned money to are so reliable, why are they getting a mortgage through a bank at a much lower interest rate?

Thank you R177. Having a plan is an excellent idea. Back around the turn of the century I was flat out broke, but I did come up with a tough, but not impossible, savings plan. Now that I am close to retirement I am glad I did so.

Most people just drift.

From your very first day at work, start planning for your last day at work.

Every payday, without exception, siphon off 20% of your salary for investment. More if you can afford it.

If you want to retire at 40, put that goal in your minds eye, and go for it with the investment commitment you can muster.

For those who feel discouraged and wonder how it's done, here's my story. 15 years ago, at 36, I was at a particularly low point financially. I hadn't worked in 17 months and had racked up $12K in cash advances to cover living expenses. At the point that I started working again, I had just missed a mortgage payment, which tanked my credit score for several years to come. I also still owed $33K on student loans that I had to start paying again after several years of deferral. My only assets were about $40K in retirement accounts.

As close as I was to the brink, I never touched the retirement money. Since I started working again, I've maxed out all retirement savings opportunities, even when that was putting $3K in an IRA account in a year when my gross income was $33K. I took in a roommate in my mid 30's to save money on expenses. I've lived by the mantra of being generous with others, but cheap with myself. This means never scrimping on gifts and outright assistance to my family when I was able to do it, but taking my lunch to work, shopping sales for everything, living without a car even when I could afford one ( I live in Chicago), and otherwise living below my means 50 weeks a year. My reward to myself Is two weeks of vacation each year when I don't watch every dime.

In the 30 years since I finished college, I made over $100K only four of those years, and three of those were the most recent three years. So it's not about having an extremely high income. I also have no special investment knowledge; I bought a condo in an up and coming neighborhood and have kept it for 18 years instead of spending money trading up, even though it's far from my dream home. I focused on paying off the mortgage, which I did earlier this year. Thus, an asset worth $300k. My retirement savings are invested in mutual funds -- a no brainer. It's just about committing to saving and doing it.

When you are young work hard while you are physically able. Get the best education you can afford, and get a solid job with some sort of pension plan. Or learn a trade-the economy has shifted and you must have skills.

[quote]living below my means 50 weeks a year. My reward to myself Is two weeks of vacation each year when I don't watch every dime.

Ironically, the richest person I know, my boss never skimps on what she wants or how much she spends. But then, she married well and now has divorce money. Hasn't worked a day in her life and gets more money in one month than most people do in a year. Sometimes its just good luck.

R182 Good advice, I went though a few periods of unemployment but I never touched the income from my stock investments and retirement funds. I did without and ate cheap meals I made at home. I paid the important things first, mortgage, taxes and put away the credit cards. It was tough but I made it through those periods which set me up with a good income investment portfolio and retirement funds. I live in a good real estate market near NYC which is now very hot so my condo which I bought for $250K is now worth $900K.

R185, may I ask where you bought your condo? I don't have much money but I am thinking of buying an apt in a few years time, when I save up enough money. I live in nyc right now and it's so expensive.

r182, nicely done!

I stumbled upon the retire early board on the old Motley Fool website back in the 90s. Before that it had not dawned on me that I could retire early. That kicked me into an obsession of learning how to budget, save and invest. Fortunately my spouse is frugal so there was no problem there. We maxed out our 401ks, Roth IRAs and put additional money into after tax accounts. We paid off our (inexpensive) home in 12 years.

We retired at age 56. We each have pensions of about $23k per year and I have us covered for health care from my former job. We each also inherited about $1 million that has grown with the stock market surge.

So for us, it is a combination of factors that got us here.

[quote]Max SS is no more than about $18k a year...

Nope. It's actually around $30k a year. I'm not sure where you got that number.

I have personal assets in excess of 3 1/2 million, all inherited recently. I have no children, and my husband is very successful, so I plan to leave my entire estate to charity when I croak.

R189, have you considered your local society of punctuation professionals?

R186 I'm on the waterfront in Jersey City the prices used to be reasonable but many people have been priced out of Manhattan and Brooklyn are buying in JC sending the prices up. There are other sections of JC that have not gotten so hot yet, the prices are reasonable for now.

R191, where in Jersey City is it reasonable now? I ask because in the 80's I had a brownstown on Hamilton Park. I stupidly sold it in the mid '90's. I'd really like to get back to JC. TIA!

Jersey City Heights is starting a slow gentrification, Journal Square which is developing fast, Bergen Lafayette is a few years off from development.

while the maximum ss benefit can theoretical exceed $30k, very few people qualify for that amount and most should not be delusional to think they will:

"qualifying for the maximum Social Security benefit is very difficult—it's the equivalent of winning a benefits Powerball. To get the highest benefit possible at your full retirement age (FRA), your income needs to have been at or above the Social Security earnings ceiling (the amount of income subject to payroll tax) each year for at least 35 years since age 22. The payroll earnings cap is $127,200 in 2017; in 1982, 35 years ago, it was $32,400. Only about 6% of workers earn above the maximum in any given year.

For someone who racked up maximum taxable earnings each year, and who reaches the FRA of 66 in 2017, the maximum benefit would be $2,687 a month, or $32,244 a year. By contrast, the average monthly benefit is just $1,342 a month."

NOYFB.

So only high earners that don't need Social Security qualify for the highest possible benefit? The USA is so fucked up

yes, yes

R196, it's not a charity. It's insurance that we've paid into. There are other forms of charity.

It makes sense that if you pay more, you get more. It’s not welfare.

You freak the fuck out if your portfolio goes under a million whereas before it hit a million there was just this feeling if "oh well, maybe we'll hit a million next time." Now the only money we have is the money over a million. The rest is untouchable principal. Get jealous of people who have enough cash to not be affected by market fluctuations.

R200 everyone is affected by market fluctuations it doesn't matter how much you have. The more you have the greater the loss which hurts the same as one who has less.

I live in Europe and have 1700 euro net in pension . My husband still works . We have 400.000 euro in cash in savings and retirement funds . I'm not rich as to speak but I don't have to worry about bills either .

Eldergays remember "The Millionaire" with Mar in Mueller from the "Leave it to Beaver" era.

Each week a secretive wealthy guy (JB Tipton) gave an unimaginable fortune- $1,000,000 tax free - to an unsuspecting but deserving nobody.

Lessons in humility followed.

Today, you'd need $9,000,000 to suffer as richly.

R179 I'm the person who has two people paying mortgages to me. They are just people who needed to borrow more money than the bank would lend them for expensive properties. I gave them a second mortgage for the excess. They both autodeposit their payments directly into my account each month. It's been several years and there has never been a problem. When their balloon payment comes due, I will probably make them pay another lump sum of principal and then refinance another mortgage for the remaining amount. An interest rate of 5% is a good enough return for me. I hate the risk of the stock market so I would invest conservatively anyway. It provides monthly income for me that is mostly interest, while most of the principle will still be collected at the end. If they were ever to default, I would still own the property and could resell it. They would have to pay the court costs.

[quote] An interest rate of 5% is a good enough return for me. I hate the risk of the stock market...

It appears to be working out well for you. But understand that you ARE taking some significant risk. The people you've lent money to have been reliable, but the risk is some life event happens to them that endangers the repayment: devastating illness, job loss, etc. And that risk isn't spread out over 1,000 people paying you, it's over 2 (or so.)

I'm not posting this to upset you. I'm just saying that you are taking a risk over a very small, non diversified group of people. It's not just the stock market that is risky.

That's true, R205. I insisted that they make me beneficiary of their life ins policies, so that's some protection. There is always the court option as a last resort to enforce the contract or recover the property in case of default.

If you want to feel like you have a million dollars one thing I have learned is to pay off all your bills ASAP. When you don't have any significant debt it changes you outlook on life.

[quote]everyone is affected by market fluctuations it doesn't matter how much you have. The more you have the greater the loss which hurts the same as one who has less.

I disagree. The market could take a huge hit, but I am quite sure I could still pay my bills including the grocery bills. Someone with less may not be as fortunate.

I do, and it was pure dumb luck. I started to invest in 1987 after Black Friday. I stopped investing as the tech stocks were going crazy from 1996 to 2000. Started buying again after the crash of 2000/2001. Then my father became terminal, and I cashed out my house to go live with him and assist with care, and sold my house at the top of the market in late 2005/2006. Also, because I'd quit working, I wasn't buying high from 2006 to 2010. Then he died, and I got his house that was worth about $300K. Then with the stock market gains after the recession and the increase in the house property value, it happened. I became a millionaire with the recent gains in the market after the election. My peak earning year was $50K when I was working two jobs. Usually it was in the high $20Ks.

However, I don't feel rich because so much of the money is the value of the house and the carrying costs consume pretty much all my income. I understand the mindset of the people that have wealth but low incomes. Currently, I've only been able to find a part-time job, and make less than $15K/yr, and I'm on Medicaid.

I'm sure it's a problem that others would welcome to have. I do worry that another set up circumstances that happened in the great recession will happen again. Where I get hit with a job loss, a tanking stock market and falling home values, and I have to liquate on the cheap, and lose what I gained..

I just don't have the earning capacity to protect myself during a perfect storm. I never saw the recession coming, and I under estimated how taking time off to care for my dad would cause me to become so stale that I'm probably always second (maybe even last) choice for being hired, and can't even get myself back to where I was job wise in 2006.

r209 I am you. We have very similar circumstances.

r210 How old are you? My friends think I'm set, but in my mind, I'm faced with making the resources last for probably the next 25 years. When you divide the liquid investments by 25 (because it's not like you can efficiently use your house as an ATM), the numbers don't lend themselves to leading a rich person's lifestyle.

[quote] ...because it's not like you can efficiently use your house as an ATM

I'm planning on selling my house of 25 years, as of now, at some point. Then I hope to rent somewhere in my dotage. Can anyone find a hole in my plan? Ty.

you can use your house as an atm, via "reverse mortgages" but those have pitfalls and their are a lot of scammers out there.

can make sense for someone with no heirs (or with no desire to have anything left in the estate at time of death

Can anyone find a hole in my plan? Ty

yes big hole, the proceeds from the sale of the house may not be enough if you live a long time after the sale and rents where you want to live increase a lot.

solution: die earlier

R208 I never said you couldn't pay your bills if the market dropped I only said that it would hurt, psychically.

R212 If you sell your house depending on the value you will lose a lot of the value to taxes, RE commissions and other fees that your locality may impose.

R212, ok, I get that, but what's the alternative? I have no heirs that I care enough to sacrifice that much for, to stay here until I die, (or move, but keep the property and rent it).

Thanks, R214. I have thought of that.

I have a million spandex leotards.

I'm still anxious. I'm always anxious about money and planning for retirement.

My dad had zero money sense. He worked for a large aircraft manufacturer (cough cough). After 35 years, he got talked into some bullshit notion he'd be better off just taking social security instead of the pension he'd earned. Of course he'd get both. Good god.

He was nowhere near max on social security and wound up in a ratty single wide trailer within shouting distance of an airport. He didn't have a penny put away, and it came back to bite him as he got older and had a lot of health issues.

Having assets I can convert to cash for retirement is huge for me, and having ridden our idiot system repeatedly through boom and bust gives me no confidence we have a stable financial system that won't leave us all in ruin.

I'm single in my early 50s and have about 1.2m in cash/investments/IRAs, and gross >200k/yr, but rent in a costly metro ("only" about 2k) and telecommute. I 've been thinking alot about how sustainable living in LA will be vs. moving.

Yes. But it's not wealth, it's a good job. Still putting everything I can afford into the mortgage on my primary home and my 401K and hoping to be with my current employer long enough to keep my current health insurance into my retirement. I came from working class and have worked hard, but know I'm very fortunate to have some lucky turns and (knock wood) no major setbacks. I will always appreciate how hard it is to make it in this country, and with greedy asshole billionaires hoarding money like they can take it with them, the wealth imbalance is unconscionable.

If Trump doesn't fuck us all, something has to change. I will never vote GOP, and if the Dems don't show us something, they can fuck right off too.