Home  Finance Articles  Discussion  Our Blog / Member Blogs           
SavingAdvice.com Logo The SavingAdvice.com millionaire calculator is a fun way to see how long it will take for YOU to become a millionaire.
Teaching you to Save Money

Go Back   Personal Finance Forums > Financial Chit Chat > Personal Finance

Personal Finance Credit cards, home loans, retirement plans and taxes. The place for all your personal finance questions.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 06-03-2008, 11:19 AM
disneysteve's Avatar
disneysteve disneysteve is online now
$ Saving Professor
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 6,689
Last Blog Entry: 11/30 Home Equity Loan Update
Points: 48246.30
Donate
Default How much would it take for you to retire now?

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweeps View Post
That would make for a good thread topic. How much would it take for you to retire right this minute. I think it would be $3 million for me.
This question came up in another thread. Assuming you would want to retire early, how much would you need to have right now in order to do so?

I said $4 million. Retiring at 43, I would want to be conservative and not draw more than 3% from my portfolio, at least in the early years. That would give me $120,000 which should be just fine. This assumes that my wife would stop working as well.
__________________
Steve
* Why should I pay for my daughter's education when she already knows everything?
* There are no shortcuts to anywhere worth going.
* The world is a book and those who don't travel read only one page.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 06-03-2008, 11:32 AM
moneybags moneybags is offline
$ Saving HS Junior
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 219
Last Blog Entry: My free money from Office Max
Points: 1160.00
Donate
Default

I'd consider it at $2.5 million, but that would have to be after the 2 kids finish college and the house is paid for.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 06-03-2008, 11:34 AM
gamecock43 gamecock43 is offline
$ Saving HS Senior
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 304
Last Blog Entry: a message for all of you
Points: 1685.00
Donate
Default

I have no idea. Or to phrase it better~ I have no idea of the amount of millions I would need.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 06-03-2008, 12:06 PM
Caoineag's Avatar
Caoineag Caoineag is offline
$ Saving HS Senior
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 305
Last Blog Entry: Spend Spend Spend (on the new house)
Points: 1580.00
Donate
Default

Right now, at the ripe age of 26, I think 3 million would be enough to support my husband and I (excluding health coverage). BUT, being this young, I am pretty sure I would have to find something else to do like starting a business of my own.

Including health coverage, well, I am not sure I am insureable. Or for that matter, I am not sure my husband is either. We both have a strong family history of multiple cancers. So that would probably raise the real number to more like 8 million to be on the safe side.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 06-03-2008, 12:12 PM
jIM_Ohio jIM_Ohio is offline
$ Saving Post Graduate
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Milford, OH
Posts: 2,913
Last Blog Entry: 2008- a time to be truly thankful
Points: 15017.63
Donate
Default

2.3 million

300k to pay off house
2 mil is a 60k income on 3% withdraw rate. I could probably retire on less, but 60k would make me pull the trigger and not look back.
__________________
Light travels faster than sound. That is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.

One person's stupidity is another person's job security.

I give investment advice and financial advice. Nothing I do or don't do replaces the poster researching and double checking what I suggest. The poster taking my advice is responsible for their own actions.

http://jim.savingadvice.com/
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 06-03-2008, 01:28 PM
mom-from-missouri mom-from-missouri is offline
$ Saving College Junior
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Northern Missouri
Posts: 1,318
Last Blog Entry: I think it is sad
Points: 21310.30
Donate
Default

4 mil. So, we are about 1/2 there now. As soon as the houses are paid off, the mortgages amounts will go to the retirement funds.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 06-03-2008, 01:40 PM
tripods68 tripods68 is offline
$ Saving College Freshman
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 711
Last Blog Entry: Enjoy my days off last week...
Points: 3890.00
Donate
Default

We can't imagine retiring at 39 and DW 33. We're just too young! But that doesn't stop us from buying lotto!
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 06-03-2008, 01:51 PM
Snave Snave is offline
$ Saving HS Senior
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: ohio
Posts: 340
Points: 1875.00
Donate
Default

I would probably be in that 4 million mark area. I am 33 and my wife is 30, so we also would need to find something to do. I would take a year and screw around and play golf and have fun, but then it would be back to work for me - at least part-time.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 06-03-2008, 01:57 PM
KellyB KellyB is offline
$ Saving Fifth Grader
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: DE
Posts: 35
Points: 210.00
Donate
Default

I'd need about $80K annually, so at a 3% drawdown I guess that's about $2.7 million? Plus paying off the house up front another $150K, so a total of $2.85 million. Wow.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 06-03-2008, 04:20 PM
maat55 maat55 is offline
$ Saving College Senior
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,621
Points: 8725.00
Donate
Default

I would give it a crack at 2 million. I would have to split it in half, with one half being a little more aggressively invested.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 06-03-2008, 08:24 PM
Daylily Daylily is offline
$ Saving HS Senior
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 298
Last Blog Entry: THE Vacation Fund
Points: 2064.50
Donate
Default

That is a difficult question to answer without knowing how much health insurance will cost in coming years. I was recently on Cobra continuation and it was $800 a month for two people.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 06-03-2008, 10:00 PM
Reldon Reldon is offline
$ Saving HS Junior
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 231
Last Blog Entry: No Spend Monday and Tuesday
Points: 2559.90
Donate
Default

I don't think I want to retire right now. It would be a little boring. My plan is also to move to a different country where the expenses are lower so I would probably be 2-3 Million if I was to retire right now.
__________________
Goal of Financial Freedom
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 06-03-2008, 10:43 PM
yellow heel yellow heel is offline
$ Saving HS Freshman
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 108
Points: 1460.70
Donate
Default

Since we are young. I'd say 6 mils. 1 mil for a house in san diego and 5 mils to live off of. I am conservative.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 06-04-2008, 07:00 AM
MonkeyMama MonkeyMama is online now
$ Saving College Junior
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Northern California
Posts: 1,303
Last Blog Entry: Financial Update
Points: 6657.40
Donate
Default

Since I am 30 I have to go with the "no idea." I haven't really run the #s.

I think one of the biggest unknown factors for the young folk is longevity. A lot of my family has lived to 100 (like in the 80s) and now you hear life expectancy is going up at a rapid pace.

Then there is inflation and everything.

It would have to be many millions. Mostly I am way to risk adverse to retire so young. If I was on the brink of being able to, financially, I'd wait it out a bit.

I really haven't run the #s though. When I figure retirement #s I usually assume I'd live 40 years after retirement. I am not sure how the numbers change if the years significantly increase.

I wouldn't need much to live on today, but I'd want to make sure I was prepared for inflation for the next 100 years, just in case. I still have kids to put through college and all that too... So all that leads me to the conclusion that I would need many millions.

Yeah, I would have no desire to retire so young anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 06-04-2008, 07:09 AM
LivingAlmostLarge LivingAlmostLarge is offline
$ Saving College Senior
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,640
Points: 12411.50
Donate
Default

$6M at least. I'm under 30 so I need a lot, but worse, what the heck would I do? I have no kids, I guess get to having a few?
__________________
LivingAlmostLarge Blog
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 06-04-2008, 07:19 AM
Merch Merch is offline
$ Saving Jr. High Schooler
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 90
Last Blog Entry: Mid November Update
Points: 475.00
Donate
Default

I would say $5 million that would need to be liquid. In otherword, not including the house, cars, etc.

Why so much? Well, I see my expenses after retirement going up. I would want a lake or beach house before I retire. I would also like to try things like flying and real estate venture. All pretty expensive.

But then, I don’t plan to sit in the backyard sipping ice tea in the cool breeze of the oak trees.

So $5 million would be enough to for me to stop working for the man, with no worries,
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 06-04-2008, 08:22 AM
jIM_Ohio jIM_Ohio is offline
$ Saving Post Graduate
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Milford, OH
Posts: 2,913
Last Blog Entry: 2008- a time to be truly thankful
Points: 15017.63
Donate
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MonkeyMama View Post
Since I am 30 I have to go with the "no idea." I haven't really run the #s.

I think one of the biggest unknown factors for the young folk is longevity. A lot of my family has lived to 100 (like in the 80s) and now you hear life expectancy is going up at a rapid pace.

Then there is inflation and everything.

It would have to be many millions. Mostly I am way to risk adverse to retire so young. If I was on the brink of being able to, financially, I'd wait it out a bit.

I really haven't run the #s though. When I figure retirement #s I usually assume I'd live 40 years after retirement. I am not sure how the numbers change if the years significantly increase.

I wouldn't need much to live on today, but I'd want to make sure I was prepared for inflation for the next 100 years, just in case. I still have kids to put through college and all that too... So all that leads me to the conclusion that I would need many millions.

Yeah, I would have no desire to retire so young anyway.
I would suggest looking up the trinity study. This will educate you on the longevity of portfolio's. That is where the 4% rule generally comes from.

A 60-40 equity/bond mix can last 30-40 years (based on past market performance) if 4% of portfolio is withdrawn per year (increased each year for inflation).

A 100% equity portfolio takes on more principal risk. If that porfolio had a 3% yield, it would be worth more at death than it would during withdraw. Lowest withdraw rate needed is 3%, assuming you could find a 3% yield (S&P 500 yields 2.2%, so slightly more yield is needed than the market itself). Even if the principal dropped 30% in a year, the dividend payout would probably not change (dividend paid per share).
__________________
Light travels faster than sound. That is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.

One person's stupidity is another person's job security.

I give investment advice and financial advice. Nothing I do or don't do replaces the poster researching and double checking what I suggest. The poster taking my advice is responsible for their own actions.

http://jim.savingadvice.com/
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 06-04-2008, 09:09 AM
noppenbd noppenbd is offline
$ Saving College Freshman
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 666
Points: 1020.00
Donate
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jIM_Ohio View Post
I would suggest looking up the trinity study. This will educate you on the longevity of portfolio's. That is where the 4% rule generally comes from.

A 60-40 equity/bond mix can last 30-40 years (based on past market performance) if 4% of portfolio is withdrawn per year (increased each year for inflation).
To follow up on this, the Trinity study assumed you pick an initial withdrawal rate of 4% and adjusted the dollar amount upward each year for inflation (not the 4%). So as an example, say you had a portfolio of $2M at retirement. The first year you could take out $80K (4%). If inflation for that year runs at 3.5%, then the 2nd year you could take out $82.8K ($80K * 1.035), regardless of your portfolio value at the time of withdrawal. So if your portfolio performed poorly and lost 10% of its value, you would end up drawing a lot more than just 4.14% (which is 4% * 1.035). In this example, your actual draw for year 2 would be 4.8% of the total portfolio value.

In the Trinity study, this strategy had something like a 90% chance of success after 30-40 years. In reality, anything more than a 90% chance of success is probably just noise anyway.

A more conservative strategy is to index the percentage of withdrawal to inflation, which means you withdraw lower amounts in years when your portfolio has not done so hot, and more when it is doing well. To incorporate this strategy you would need to be able to adjust your standard of living in lean years.
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 06-04-2008, 11:41 AM
MonkeyMama MonkeyMama is online now
$ Saving College Junior
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Northern California
Posts: 1,303
Last Blog Entry: Financial Update
Points: 6657.40
Donate
Default

Okay so where does this leave someone with a 100-year time horizon?

IT doesn't really answer my question.

Not that it matters. I wouldn't bother running the #s because I really have no desire to retire in the near term. In a decade I may be more curious about the answer to this question.
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 06-04-2008, 01:16 PM
jIM_Ohio jIM_Ohio is offline
$ Saving Post Graduate
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Milford, OH
Posts: 2,913
Last Blog Entry: 2008- a time to be truly thankful
Points: 15017.63
Donate
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MonkeyMama View Post
Okay so where does this leave someone with a 100-year time horizon?

IT doesn't really answer my question.

Not that it matters. I wouldn't bother running the #s because I really have no desire to retire in the near term. In a decade I may be more curious about the answer to this question.
If you can live off dividend yield from a 100% allocation to dividend paying stocks, history shows a 99.9% chance of never running out of money (and probably having more money at death than you did when you decided to retire).
__________________
Light travels faster than sound. That is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.

One person's stupidity is another person's job security.

I give investment advice and financial advice. Nothing I do or don't do replaces the poster researching and double checking what I suggest. The poster taking my advice is responsible for their own actions.

http://jim.savingadvice.com/
Reply With Quote
Reply



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:23 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.0.0 RC6 © 2006, Crawlability, Inc.
More Links Debt Consolidation Loans | Finance Options

About Us | Advertising | Privacy Policy | Link To Us | Related Resources | Webmasters | Media | Site Map | Contact Us

Copyright ©2002-2008 SavingAdvice.com. All rights reserved.

Please read our Disclaimer

 

Featured Sponsors
IVA uk definitive guide
Bad Credit Loans
IVA Forum
IVA Book
Private Student Loans