- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Married - retirement
Posted on 10/26/19 at 3:53 pm
Posted on 10/26/19 at 3:53 pm
This is not for an evaluation of our standing. We are both mid 30s, each have 401k's and an ira, totaling 490k. Also outright own 180k in property. Have 100k equity in our house. These are unrelated properties (not owned land with a constructed home).
I feel we are on the right course for 35 year olds... my question is what should we have, combine, in retirement accounts for retirement. Everything I see is single source income, meaning drawing from 1-401k and is not really clear if they are for married, dual income couples. Since we would not have duplicated common expenses (ex, mortgage, if we have one in retirement... we should not), I feel, maybe incorrectly, that we do not 2x what the "calculators" are saying.
Any input?
I feel we are on the right course for 35 year olds... my question is what should we have, combine, in retirement accounts for retirement. Everything I see is single source income, meaning drawing from 1-401k and is not really clear if they are for married, dual income couples. Since we would not have duplicated common expenses (ex, mortgage, if we have one in retirement... we should not), I feel, maybe incorrectly, that we do not 2x what the "calculators" are saying.
Any input?
6
Posted on 10/26/19 at 4:39 pm to littlePNdaB
At 35 you should have 1.8x income saved for retirement.
At 45, 3-4x.
At 45, 3-4x.
Posted on 10/26/19 at 5:29 pm to littlePNdaB
quote:
my question is what should we have, combine, in retirement accounts for retirement.
For a Boglehead retirement you need 28x expenses at 65 to retire with a horizon of 30 years.
Posted on 10/26/19 at 6:00 pm to littlePNdaB
My input: you and your spouse are not both guaranteed a long life. So you can’t assume that you’ll have the other person’s contributions for the next 30 years to bolster your own. If you both save as individuals would, you’ll be in great shape even with the loss of the other income.
Or consider divorce: if you’re not saving fully, your retirement may be cut in half should the marriage dissolve.
Or consider divorce: if you’re not saving fully, your retirement may be cut in half should the marriage dissolve.
Posted on 10/27/19 at 1:33 pm to Shepherd88
Right now, we are about 3x our combine income with the property and equity in the home.
We both have stand alone, individual 401k's. We max the contributions each year.
Thanks to all for the input
We both have stand alone, individual 401k's. We max the contributions each year.
Thanks to all for the input
This post was edited on 10/27/19 at 1:34 pm
Posted on 10/27/19 at 2:46 pm to littlePNdaB
American Funds has a pretty comprehensive tool to use for dual earners. It's been helpful for me trying to quantify my wife's pension and two pre-tax accounts. It even allows me to speculate on taxable investing increasing for say when nanny's time is done with us.
LINK
LINK
Posted on 10/28/19 at 8:17 am to littlePNdaB
You first need to decide at what age you want to retire. Then, you need to decide what lifestyle and budget you want to have in retirement.
Everything after that is fairly easy to calculate/determine.
Everything after that is fairly easy to calculate/determine.
Posted on 10/28/19 at 8:55 am to littlePNdaB
quote:
We are both mid 30s, each have 401k's and an ira, totaling 490k.
For our purposes here, I'm ignoring any asset or equity that is not going to generate income. Using an expense based model or an earnings based model is merely picking your poison. If you focus on replacing 100% of your pre-retirement income, most folks are going to work until they die. Focusing on projected lower expenses in retirement (house paid off, slower lifestyle) often ignores either increased healthcare expenses, increased spending commensurate to available leisure time (either hobbies, travel, etc., all of that gets expensive quickly), inflation or all of them.
As a matter of caution, I would not do a married analysis. There are two of you - that's two vehicles, two healthcare expenses, a whole range of things. The one thing that you really combine on is the home, utilities, etc., which I'm not dismissing. So, if it makes you feel better, do the analysis separately, but halve (or pro-rate) the housing expenses in each analysis.
I still like a target of % of pre-retirement income versus expenses because the former is aspirational and the latter feels more subsistence level to me.
Ideally, I will make more from 70 to 90 than I do between now and 70. Might not get there, but that's a better target for me than trying to predict how little I can get by with in a, perhaps, earlier retirement and then be stuck with that forever.
Back to your original question - if it was me and you are targeting, say, 60 in retirement (you're in better shape than I was at 35, that's for damned sure), I would get as close to 100% of pre-retirement income, adjusted for inflation, as I could. If that is 25x your income, so be it.
This post was edited on 10/28/19 at 8:56 am
Posted on 10/29/19 at 7:21 pm to Ace Midnight
My honest answer is idk how old I want to be for retirement. I dealt with cancer a few years back, clean bill of health after 12 weeks of chemo. My goals shifted so fast. The same year my 1st child arrived. Number two is here now. Note, we are done having kids, those turds (love them so much) are expensive... I need to open a daycare, but I digress.
Given my health history, insurance is a big unknown factor.
We max our 401k contributions yearly. I am starting to dabble in independent stock investments (learning now).
The health scare resulted in splurging on "toys" now, instead of holding until older. This includes the property (hunting and outdoor activities were important to me as a kid and I wanted that for my children), a track car (which is insanely fun, but now a budgeted hobby), ... I'd love to be able to retire in my mid 50s... but we are not on that trajectory right now. It would take some serious reworking of what we are doing to accomplish that.
By retire at 55, it would not be full retirement, more like part timing it somewhere, in a consulting fashion.
Thanks all for the input.
Given my health history, insurance is a big unknown factor.
We max our 401k contributions yearly. I am starting to dabble in independent stock investments (learning now).
The health scare resulted in splurging on "toys" now, instead of holding until older. This includes the property (hunting and outdoor activities were important to me as a kid and I wanted that for my children), a track car (which is insanely fun, but now a budgeted hobby), ... I'd love to be able to retire in my mid 50s... but we are not on that trajectory right now. It would take some serious reworking of what we are doing to accomplish that.
By retire at 55, it would not be full retirement, more like part timing it somewhere, in a consulting fashion.
Thanks all for the input.
Posted on 10/30/19 at 7:55 am to littlePNdaB
quote:
... I'd love to be able to retire in my mid 50s... but we are not on that trajectory right now. It would take some serious reworking of what we are doing to accomplish that.
By retire at 55, it would not be full retirement, more like part timing it somewhere, in a consulting fashion.
Thanks all for the input.
I don't think that is a bad target date and I think you are probably closer to being capable of that than you think. All you really need to do to meet that goal if you are going to "retire" into part time work would be to not have a mortgage, car notes, any other significant loan, and possibly have a part time job that has health insurance.
Adjustments required to meet target retirement dates don't have to include investing more, it can also mean planning on being able to live happily on less.
This post was edited on 10/30/19 at 7:56 am
Posted on 10/30/19 at 4:21 pm to notsince98
Thanks for additional perspective but, today, I had a followup scope... they found 3 masses in my bladder, so my 3 years clear are gone. Surgery is planned next week and to get an idea of staging if cancer. If is small in this case as it is likely cancer.
I live close MD Anderson, where I took prior treatment. Back to them for consultation and see what is next. If early, seems like an easy process compared to testicular cancer. If advanced, quality if life will be significantly reduced when I kick its arse once again.
I live close MD Anderson, where I took prior treatment. Back to them for consultation and see what is next. If early, seems like an easy process compared to testicular cancer. If advanced, quality if life will be significantly reduced when I kick its arse once again.
Posted on 10/30/19 at 5:03 pm to littlePNdaB
quote:
today, I had a followup scope... they found 3 masses in my bladder, so my 3 years clear are gone. Surgery is planned next week and to get an idea of staging if cancer. If is small in this case as it is likely cancer.
I kind of skipped to the end. Just want to say, God be with you however the results come back.
Posted on 10/30/19 at 5:52 pm to littlePNdaB
quote:Sorry to hear this man.
Thanks for additional perspective but, today, I had a followup scope... they found 3 masses in my bladder, so my 3 years clear are gone. Surgery is planned next week and to get an idea of staging if cancer. If is small in this case as it is likely cancer.
Posted on 10/31/19 at 7:55 pm to bayoubengals88
Saying a prayer...Godspeed!
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News