# Here Are 27 Reality Checks About Retirement



## OneEyedDiva (Dec 24, 2021)

Actually the Yahoo Article is titled 27 Ugly Truths About Retirement. All of these may not apply to everyone and some deserve consideration. Included are
#8 You might regret skipping Roth IRA contributions
#12 Most people will need long term care
#14 Inflation can eat away at your nest egg
#22 & 23 Your adult children could derail your retirement plans & as could your aging parents
#25 You'll have to talk to your children about your end of life care decisions
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/27-ugly-truths-retirement-200001549.html


----------



## dseag2 (Dec 24, 2021)

Thank you for sharing.  Very informative.  I have no children, so at least I can eliminate 22 and 25.  I know how much it cost to keep my mother in assisted living, so I'm not looking forward to it!


----------



## CarolfromTX (Jan 16, 2022)

#14 is a biggie right now.  Thanks, elected officials.


----------



## palides2021 (Jan 16, 2022)

OneEyedDiva said:


> Actually the Yahoo Article is titled 27 Ugly Truths About Retirement. All of these may not apply to everyone and some deserve consideration. Included are
> #8 You might regret skipping Roth IRA contributions
> #12 Most people will need long term care
> #14 Inflation can eat away at your nest egg
> ...


Thanks for this informative article! So much to think about as we age!


----------



## horseless carriage (Jan 16, 2022)

OneEyedDiva said:


> Actually the Yahoo Article is titled 27 Ugly Truths About Retirement. All of these may not apply to everyone and some deserve consideration. Included are
> #8 You might regret skipping Roth IRA contributions
> #12 Most people will need long term care
> #14 Inflation can eat away at your nest egg
> ...


Or you might miss the buzz that you enjoyed at work so much, you went back to the daily grind. That and the fact that you were offered a salary that made you change your ideas of retiring. ££££££££


----------



## Alligatorob (Jan 16, 2022)

OneEyedDiva said:


> #14 Inflation can eat away at your nest egg


Sounds like a good reason to spend it now!!


----------



## Liberty (Jan 17, 2022)

This data is very interesting, too:

Age 90 isn't some wild outlier. The SOA's data suggests that a 65-year-old male today, in average health, has *a 35% chance of living to 90*; for a woman the odds are 46%. If our two 65-year-olds live together, there is a 50% chance both will still be alive 16 years later, and that one will survive 27 years.Jun 28, 2019


----------



## Aunt Bea (Jan 17, 2022)

Lots of things for young people to consider, but it's already too late for most of us old folks to make significant changes in our retirement resources.

Number 26. You'll Need To Discuss Your Wealth Transfer Plans mixed in amongst all of the doom and gloom made me laugh.

_"Do what you can, with what you have, where you are."_ - Theodore Roosevelt


----------



## Packerjohn (Jan 17, 2022)

I dispute #12.  Here in Canada, less than 20% of the population end up in long term care.  That means that the chances of you living indepently in a home or apartment are pretty good.  People who end in long term care are those that live to a ripe old age or are those who have multi health issues.  Remember most of us die way before reaching the age of 90.  Right now apparently 75% of the people dying from "Covid19" issues are obese or are diabetic.


----------



## David777 (Jan 17, 2022)

I'm not part of their head down in a hole target audience though, "*14. Inflation Can Eat Away at Your Nest Egg*", applies since I do have money in the bank even though I didn't make much effort to save a nest egg until my last career decade.  Never much interested in money beyond supporting my frugal active adventurous outdoor lifestyle.  Before the 2001 Dot Com implosion had several hundred k accrued in stock options that all went underwater.  

To that list a huge missing add would be that many retirees have so poorly maintained health and fitness after passing 40 years that by time they reach 65, have far less options on being able to actively enjoy their lives.  Something mere money cannot buy.


----------



## OneEyedDiva (Jan 18, 2022)

horseless carriage said:


> Or you might miss the buzz that you enjoyed at work so much, you went back to the daily grind. That and the fact that you were offered a salary that made you change your ideas of retiring. ££££££££


A lot of people do miss working. In that case, going back will enhance the benefits and income received during "retirement".  
@palides2021  I'm glad you found the article useful.
@Alligatorob Nothing worse than being old and poor, so I don't advise spending it all now. 
@Packerjohn I've seen so many articles over the past few years stating that 65% of us will wind up needing long term care. That's a scary number; I like Canada's stats better. But I wonder if the 65% includes people who need rehabilitation in a facility, in which case it wouldn't necessarily be long term.
@Liberty, You are right. My (non biological) parents..mother lived to be 97, father to 84. One of his brothers (my grand uncle) to age 90 and their sister, who was actually my grandmother...to 85. My great grandfather lived to be 99.


----------



## mathjak107 (Jan 18, 2022)

Packerjohn said:


> I dispute #12.  Here in Canada, less than 20% of the population end up in long term care.  That means that the chances of you living indepently in a home or apartment are pretty good.  People who end in long term care are those that live to a ripe old age or are those who have multi health issues.  Remember most of us die way before reaching the age of 90.  Right now apparently 75% of the people dying from "Covid19" issues are obese or are diabetic.


Except are you then one on the wrong side of the statistic?  My dad was …

he needed care for 5 years impoverishing his 2nd wife .

odds of dying young are minuscule yet many have life insurance when raising a family …

statistics mean little to us humans …we only have to two outcomes.

its us bad stuff happened to or it isn’t.

insurers can tell us how many of us will die each year , but they can’t tell us who


----------



## mathjak107 (Jan 18, 2022)

Liberty said:


> This data is very interesting, too:
> 
> Age 90 isn't some wild outlier. The SOA's data suggests that a 65-year-old male today, in average health, has *a 35% chance of living to 90*; for a woman the odds are 46%. If our two 65-year-olds live together, there is a 50% chance both will still be alive 16 years later, and that one will survive 27 years.Jun 28, 2019


Yep , people make the mistake of looking at life expectancy from birth which is like 79 …

that does not apply to older ages where the weak and sickly are  already gone so life expectancy goes out way more .

it is also increased for couples since you have two horses in the race with one bet and either can outrun the other


----------



## old medic (Jan 18, 2022)

horseless carriage said:


> and the fact that you were offered a salary that made you change your ideas of retiring. ££££££££


I was offered the opportunity to work 24 hours yesterday for nearly  $1300.... thought hard about it for nearly 30 seconds...

Good read Diva


----------



## OneEyedDiva (Jan 18, 2022)

old medic said:


> I was offered the opportunity to work 24 hours yesterday for nearly  $1300.... thought hard about it for nearly 30 seconds...
> 
> Good read Diva


Thanks Old Medic...glad you think so. And you chose.......? My guess is not to.  (Cause that's how long it takes me to say Naaaaah, when thinking about getting a PT job).


----------



## old medic (Jan 19, 2022)

OneEyedDiva said:


> Thanks Old Medic...glad you think so. And you chose.......? My guess is not to.  (Cause that's how long it takes me to say Naaaaah, when thinking about getting a PT job).


NO.... but for several reasons....
1st is I'm in a window before my pension starts, and working would have cancelled it and I would need to start over... 3-4 months
2nd It was right after the winter storm... worked enough of that BS over the years... 
I'm seriously considering going back part time some.....  Basically just to add max money into a tIRA and Health Saving Account Tax deferred.
We also plan on rolling max money within our tax bracket from our 401K to a Roth account each year.


----------



## Leann (Jan 28, 2022)

@OneEyedDiva, thank you for posting this. It's very informative.

I have a detailed budget on an Excel spreadsheet on which I have tried to capture my expenses and income for the next 15 years (God willing I live that long or even longer). There are a few realities for me. 

*Social Security*: Because of my health history, I don't feel comfortable waiting until 70 to draw SS. So I plan on taking it at my full retirement age (which is this year).
*Investments*: I am extremely risk-adverse when it comes to investing which means my investments earn modest (think 'very little') interest.
*Housing:* Cost of home ownership and maintenance is more than I anticipated but I love my house so much and feel so blessed to have it that I'm willing to cut out other things
*Inflation:* That one speaks for itself. It's a budget buster.

I hope to grow gracefully into old age and not be poor. It will take constant vigilance on my part to achieve this.


----------



## OneEyedDiva (Jan 28, 2022)

Leann said:


> @OneEyedDiva, thank you for posting this. It's very informative.
> 
> I have a detailed budget on an Excel spreadsheet on which I have tried to capture my expenses and income for the next 15 years (God willing I live that long or even longer). There are a few realities for me.
> 
> ...


Leann I'm glad you found the article helpful, so you're welcome of course. Congratulations on having a handle on what's important to you and your how to manage your spending. I'm the somewhat the opposite of risk adverse and guess, but that's because I don't need to touch my investment.  I can be considered moderately aggressive leaning more to the aggressive side. 

With a history of health issues, it's understandable that you wouldn't want to wait that long. I hope you *will* live a good, long life. During the decades I suffered with atrial fibrillation (from age 28 to 69), I honestly didn't think I'd live this long and certainly never expected to outlive my husband. Since your investments earn very little interest, it may be hard to keep pace with inflation. You are wise to make the cuts necessary to balance your budget.


----------



## Leann (Jan 31, 2022)

OneEyedDiva said:


> Leann I'm glad you found the article helpful, so you're welcome of course. Congratulations on having a handle on what's important to you and your how to manage your spending. I'm the somewhat the opposite of risk adverse and guess, but that's because I don't need to touch my investment.  I can be considered moderately aggressive leaning more to the aggressive side.
> 
> With a history of health issues, it's understandable that you wouldn't want to wait that long. I hope you *will* live a good, long life. During the decades I suffered with atrial fibrillation (from age 28 to 69), I honestly didn't think I'd live this long and certainly never expected to outlive my husband. Since your investments earn very little interest, it may be hard to keep pace with inflation. You are wise to make the cuts necessary to balance your budget.


Thanks so much. I wish I could be a little more aggressive with my investments but I'm walking a fine line. I probably invested too much in renovating my house which means I depleted some accounts much faster than I had planned and I have some health issues that could wind up costing more in the future if additional treatments and meds are needed. So, with what I have left in my investments, I have to be careful which makes me risk adverse. And, as you mention, inflation is difficult to keep pace with.


----------



## oldmontana (Jan 31, 2022)

OneEyedDiva said:


> Actually the Yahoo Article is titled 27 Ugly Truths About Retirement. All of these may not apply to everyone and some deserve consideration. Included are
> #8 You might regret skipping Roth IRA contributions
> #12 Most people will need long term care
> #14 Inflation can eat away at your nest egg
> ...



#12 Most people will need long term care

If you have assets you want to protect LTC insurance is a good thing, in my opinion.


----------



## OneEyedDiva (Jan 31, 2022)

Leann said:


> Thanks so much. I wish I could be a little more aggressive with my investments but I'm walking a fine line. I probably invested too much in renovating my house which means I depleted some accounts much faster than I had planned and I have some health issues that could wind up costing more in the future if additional treatments and meds are needed. So, with what I have left in my investments, I have to be careful which makes me risk adverse. And, as you mention, inflation is difficult to keep pace with.


I think everyone has to do what allows them to be able to sleep at night when it comes to investing and risk. Under your circumstances, I can understand you not wanting to take on too much risk.


----------



## bowmore (Jan 31, 2022)

I would never go back to work. By the time they take out Federal, State and FICA taxes ,plus SDI. I would be making 50 cents on the dollar.


----------



## ronaldj (Jan 31, 2022)

ten years in .... like the guy falling off a ten story building, as he passed each floor people asked, how's it going.  
so far so good.


----------



## chrislind2 (Feb 11, 2022)

I hate the stock market. Almost 6 months of retirement and everything looks good, and the stock market takes a big dump. I am careful with my money, but after watching the stock market, I am eating beans and rice and rice and beans. The IRA I have is a mutual fund and there is nearly nothing I can do with it. The only option would be to take it out of the stock market. Can't do that now until it recovers my lost money which could be a long time. My financial guy had to talk me off the ledge. He calmed me down, but to save my sanity I don't look at it as often now. I could survive without the money in the market, but it would be more difficult.


----------



## mathjak107 (Feb 11, 2022)

chrislind2 said:


> I hate the stock market. Almost 6 months of retirement and everything looks good, and the stock market takes a big dump. I am careful with my money, but after watching the stock market, I am eating beans and rice and rice and beans. The IRA I have is a mutual fund and there is nearly nothing I can do with it. The only option would be to take it out of the stock market. Can't do that now until it recovers my lost money which could be a long time. My financial guy had to talk me off the ledge. He calmed me down, but to save my sanity I don't look at it as often now. I could survive without the money in the market, but it would be more difficult.


No one knows how long to recover ..2008 was almost recovered in a year ….2000 adjusted for inflation was 12 years ….

but so what .,,even at 65 there is money that won’t be used to eat for 20-30 years …that is the money that goes in to equities .

a 60/40 portfolio has more then a decade in bonds and cash.

are you saying all your retirement money is in equities late in the game ?  That is not a market issue if that is the case it’s a poor planning issue …

I suggest you read kitces article on the red zone…

if one is a few year out from retirement then 100% equities is likely not a good idea

https://www.kitces.com/blog/managing-portfolio-size-effect-with-bond-tent-in-retirement-red-zone/


----------



## rwb (Jul 17, 2022)

Never cared for these kinds of lists.  Dated information which is misleading. For instance Medicare Advantage plans include Dental and Vision coverage often with $0 monthly premiums.  Some plans even return a portion of your part B premium.  Scare tactics - what is the point!!


----------



## Don M. (Jul 17, 2022)

Perhaps the best "reality check" is planning for retirement when you are still young enough to build up a nice "cushion".  If a person realizes that they, too, will get old, fairly early in their working career, and they begin to set a modest amount aside for that day, retirement can be quite good.  However, if they don't do anything until they are well into their '50's, they may find themselves trying to get by with little more than SS.


----------



## garyt1957 (Jul 17, 2022)

oldmontana said:


> #12 Most people will need long term care
> 
> If you have assets you want to protect LTC insurance is a good thing, in my opinion.


LTC insurance is outrageously expensive  now if you can even get it.


----------



## OneEyedDiva (Jul 17, 2022)

rwb said:


> Never cared for these kinds of lists.  Dated information which is misleading. For instance Medicare Advantage plans include Dental and Vision coverage often with $0 monthly premiums.  Some plans even return a portion of your part B premium.  Scare tactics - what is the point!!


Hmmmm...yet you still read the article.   Some things may be "dated" but other points in the article remain relevant.

@Don M. A retirement planning site actually offered an app that would allow users to age themselves. They rationale was that if they saw odler versions of themselves it would motivate them to start saving (or saving more) for retirement.
@garyt1957  Yes, LTC policies will most likely continue to escalate in price. I'm kind of glad I couldn't get a policy.


----------



## chrislind2 (Jul 18, 2022)

mathjak107 said:


> No one knows how long to recover ..2008 was almost recovered in a year ….2000 adjusted for inflation was 12 years ….
> 
> but so what .,,even at 65 there is money that won’t be used to eat for 20-30 years …that is the money that goes in to equities .
> 
> ...


This was my company retirement. My mistake was not to start my own separate retirement. I did not realize it was a "closed" account until I was a few years away from retirement and there was a lot of money in it. Two guys I worked with started separate accounts and I should have looked into doing that when they did. I will start drawing on it next month. Mutual funds are somewhat safer than just buying separate stocks, but there is a good chunk of my money gone. I have been tempted to just cash it out even with the high tax burden at least I won't loose it all. At this point the mutual fund is about 55% of my total retirement money. Like I said before I can survive without the mutual fund, but I will be  much more secure with it.


----------



## Alligatorob (Jul 18, 2022)

garyt1957 said:


> LTC insurance is outrageously expensive now if you can even get it.


Yep it is, the reason is long term care is expensive and as @OneEyedDiva 's list says most of us will need it.

Insurance companies need to make a profit, so they have to charge more than they pay out.  The reason for buying insurance is to avoid financial devastation from some event, and we have to pay a premium for that.  It works pretty well for things that are low consequence but high impact, like home fire.  But not so well for long term care.  I believe we are better off saving for that inevitability than buying insurance.  It will work out better financially in the long run.


----------



## Don M. (Jul 18, 2022)

chrislind2 said:


> This was my company retirement. My mistake was not to start my own separate retirement. I did not realize it was a "closed" account until I was a few years away from retirement and there was a lot of money in it. Two guys I worked with started separate accounts and I should have looked into doing that when they did. I will start drawing on it next month. Mutual funds are somewhat safer than just buying separate stocks, but there is a good chunk of my money gone. I have been tempted to just cash it out even with the high tax burden at least I won't loose it all. At this point the mutual fund is about 55% of my total retirement money. Like I said before I can survive without the mutual fund, but I will be  much more secure with it.


Cashing it out is probably Not a good idea.  If it's money you don't need right now, let it ride....the stock markets always seem to recover. It may take some time...no one knows how long it takes to make a recovery, but that's better than stressing over the "short term".


----------



## Teacher Terry (Jul 18, 2022)

If you look at the statistics most people don’t need long term care.


----------



## Don M. (Jul 18, 2022)

Teacher Terry said:


> If you look at the statistics most people don’t need long term care.


I hope that's the case with us.  We took out a LTC policy about 20 years ago, and have paid thousands in premiums....which go up a little more each year.  The cost of good elder care....at home, or in a facility is getting ridiculous....unless you just go to a State Medicaid facility...where the care is minimal.  
Personally, I hope this is just money down the drain, and we go quickly....but, if not, at least we won't have to receive bad care, or become a burden to the kids.


----------



## Teacher Terry (Jul 18, 2022)

The only people that I have known to need it had dementia or very disabling strokes. My mom died from cancer and lived alone until a week before she died.


----------



## oldmontana (Jul 18, 2022)

Teacher Terry said:


> If you look at the statistics most people don’t need long term care.


But if you need it, like all Insurance you need it.


----------



## oldmontana (Jul 18, 2022)

Don M. said:


> I hope that's the case with us.  We took out a LTC policy about 20 years ago, and have paid thousands in premiums....which go up a little more each year.  The cost of good elder care....at home, or in a facility is getting ridiculous....unless you just go to a State Medicaid facility...where the care is minimal.
> Personally, I hope this is just money down the drain, and we go quickly....but, if not, at least we won't have to receive bad care, or become a burden to the kids.


We took out a LTC policy over 20 years ago with Transamerica it started at $100 a day with 5% increase each year.    2 years for me and 3 for my wife in 2014 it had gone to paying $208 a day.
Then the increase came.  From $425.77 each 6 months for me to $745.09 each 6 months with the 5% annual increase....for my wife it went from $358.75 each 6 months to $663.67 each 6 months.

The good thing we had a choice.  Leave the premium as is and live with the $208 a day.  We stayed with the $208 a day.  

Hope we do not need it.


----------



## mathjak107 (Jul 18, 2022)

Teacher Terry said:


> If you look at the statistics most people don’t need long term care.


Statistics mean something to insurers ..in fact they can tell you in a normal year how many of us will die .

but they can’t tell us who .

as humans we only have two outcomes

its us crap happens to or it isn’t .

my dad was on the wrong side of the statistic since someone has to be …he impoverished his wife after spending 5 years in a facility after a stroke left him paralyzed.


which side of the statistic  are you Going to be ?


----------



## OneEyedDiva (Jul 18, 2022)

chrislind2 said:


> This was my company retirement. My mistake was not to start my own separate retirement. I did not realize it was a "closed" account until I was a few years away from retirement and there was a lot of money in it. Two guys I worked with started separate accounts and I should have looked into doing that when they did. I will start drawing on it next month. Mutual funds are somewhat safer than just buying separate stocks, but there is a good chunk of my money gone. I have been tempted to just cash it out even with the high tax burden at least I won't loose it all. At this point the mutual fund is about 55% of my total retirement money. Like I said before I can survive without the mutual fund, but I will be  much more secure with it.


As @Don M. pointed out..cashing out now is probably not a good idea, especially if you don't really need the money now. It's the classic, buy high sell low scenario, which is a way many people wind up losing money in the market. It *is* unfortunate that you didn't start your own individual account. Right now, even if you had, chances are that portfolio would be down too. The market is down...period. Been there...done that more than once and I just wait for it to rebound.


----------



## garyt1957 (Jul 19, 2022)

mathjak107 said:


> Statistics mean something to insurers ..in fact they can tell you in a normal year how many of us will die .
> 
> but they can’t tell us who .
> 
> ...


It's not like LTC insurance pays everything or forever.


----------



## mathjak107 (Jul 20, 2022)

garyt1957 said:


> It's not like LTC insurance pays everything or forever.


Ours does .

we have a New York State partnership plan .

we get 3 years skilled nursing facility coverage and can go to any facility of our choice ..we get six years of in home care .

when the insurance is up a special version of medicaid kicks in and pays all the bills .

our assets are 100% protected with no spend down , look back or anything else .

even the stay at home spouse has no income restrictions.

there plans are golden .

The last  two years there are no insurers writing partnership plans here .

if you have one you are grandfathered in .

usage is way higher then insurers predicted .

their stats were a generation old and incomplete as far as recording usage .

insurers are realizing those stats about usage were way off.

right off the state website


New York State Partnership for Long-Term Care​


*This website is intended to provide educational materials and resources for individuals or their representatives who currently own a New York State Partnership policy.  For licensed agents, the Partnership training and certification is available for those who wish to refresh their knowledge of the NYS Partnership requirements as well as gain 6 CE credits toward their licensure.

IMPORTANT: As of January 1, 2021, there are no insurance companies currently offering new policy purchases of Partnership qualified products in New York State.  This means that there are no new Partnership policies available for purchase at this time.  This does not affect current, active insureds who are Partnership qualified.  *


----------



## mathjak107 (Jul 20, 2022)

Most states offer partnership plans for long term care .

however most states are not total asset protection plans .

they are called dollar for dollar .

that means if  say 300k is spent on your care 300k in assets is protected .

these plans are so so and my opinion is without having 100% asset protection they are not that good .

the most costliest way to get coverage are these hybrid plans …for what you get they are very expensive …

kitces took a look at them and they are way to expensive .

people are fooled because  they revert to life insurance .

https://www.kitces.com/blog/is-the-...-annuityltc-insurance-policies-just-a-mirage/


----------



## Aunt Bea (Jul 20, 2022)

When it comes to end-of-life care, I'm content to self-insure.


----------



## mathjak107 (Jul 20, 2022)

As long as you don’t have a stay at home spouse to keep from impoverishing no problem self insuring .
The problem is most don’t really self insure .

to self insure you need to be fully funded day one and need to invest like an insurer in safe secure investments .

that means long term low returns .

we were going to self insure until I realized if I don’t segregate this money and act like an insurance company then I am only saying I am self insuring but really not .

for just a tiny piece of my average long term gains leaving that money invested in the risk pool I can pay for a real protective policy

self insuring gets worse when a stay at home spouse is involved and she realizes she can be impoverished.

our attorney says the bulk of his clients are the self insurers


----------



## ronaldj (Jul 20, 2022)

we stumbled into retirement,  everything I read says we cannot make it. after  10 years we still have more than enough. my said the other day, "it's because our needs are small."


----------



## OneEyedDiva (Jul 20, 2022)

ronaldj said:


> we stumbled into retirement,  everything I read says we cannot make it. after  10 years we still have more than enough. my said the other day, "it's because our needs are small."


RJ...that's the ticket. For so many years financial analysts scared people into thinking they had to have a least a million dollars to retire comfortably. More recently I've seen articles that are more realistic mentioning the possibilities for those of us who don't have that much. One is living at, or if possible, below your means. Another change is they used to preach that the best retirement move was that you had to wait until full retirement age to take social security. I'm seeing more articles lately in which analysts admit that isn't always true and in some instances taking SS early can be more beneficial. 

Even though I did plan for retirement, I had several thousand dollars less than I had anticipated when I retired, partly because I retired a year earlier than I had planned and I had loaned money to a loved one. Like you,  (after 24 years for me) I have more than enough to cover my needs and wants. BTW, requiring less and being happy with what we have is one of the keys to a happy life.


----------



## mathjak107 (Jul 20, 2022)

Most people back in to retirement.

they see what they have to work with and build a lifestyle around it .

it usually works fine .

one may have to golden girl it in some areas but  somehow everyone makes what they have work


----------



## mathjak107 (Jul 23, 2022)

OneEyedDiva said:


> RJ...that's the ticket. For so many years financial analysts scared people into thinking they had to have a least a million dollars to retire comfortably. More recently I've seen articles that are more realistic mentioning the possibilities for those of us who don't have that much. One is living at, or if possible, below your means. Another change is they used to preach that the best retirement move was that you had to wait until full retirement age to take social security. I'm seeing more articles lately in which analysts admit that isn't always true and in some instances taking SS early can be more beneficial.
> 
> Even though I did plan for retirement, I had several thousand dollars less than I had anticipated when I retired, partly because I retired a year earlier than I had planned and I had loaned money to a loved one. Like you,  (after 24 years for me) I have more than enough to cover my needs and wants. BTW, requiring less and being happy with what we have is one of the keys to a happy life.




I don’t know of one reputable advisor or even company that ever said you need a million dollars or more .

The proper way is to use a retirement calculator which simply stress tests the amount you have based on how it will be invested like fire calc or the fidelity planner .

Then it simply adds to it any other income like ss , rental income or pension .

It tells you what a safe assumption is for that level of pay check .

What you need or how you spend it is up to you. ,no different then your check when working.

there is no magical number needed .

There is only the safe capability of a given portfolio size and allocation.

how you spend it is up to you


----------



## OneEyedDiva (Aug 1, 2022)

mathjak107 said:


> I don’t know of one reputable advisor or even company that ever said you need a million dollars or more .
> 
> The proper way is to use a retirement calculator which simply stress tests the amount you have based on how it will be invested like fire calc or the fidelity planner .
> 
> ...


When I first started reading investment magazines like Money and Kiplinger, which I subscribed to decades ago, the million dollar figure was used often, either by outright saying that's what people needed *or *using that figure as an example when giving sample calculations. Then when I started reading various articles online I found the same thing until fairly recently. I always felt that those types of articles could act to discourage, rather than motivate people who felt there is no way they can ever attain that figure. I do remember once that Money did an article on people who managed to have comfortable retirements on a lot less than the 80% of final salary figure, also often recommended. I never personally spoke with an advisor about how much I would need because I'm a self taught investor and manage my own portfolio. I'm also a perfect example of not needing a million. 

Just as analysts have stopped pushing the million dollar thing, there are more of them who admit that in certain instances, taking social security early is beneficial.  Until about 3 years ago, I only saw that advice once and it was decades ago. Now I feel more realistic advice and figures are mentioned in many financial articles as well as directing people to retirement calculators so they can figure out what's best for themselves.


----------



## HarryHawk (Aug 2, 2022)

Don M. said:


> Cashing it out is probably Not a good idea.  If it's money you don't need right now, let it ride....the stock markets always seem to recover. It may take some time...no one knows how long it takes to make a recovery, but that's better than stressing over the "short term".


I think the key phrase is - "if you don't need it".  

Stock markets always recover, until some day when they don't.   When they do recover, it sometimes takes years and years, which is ok if you are 25, not so ok when you are 75. The market may be as likely to go down another 20% as it is to go up 20%, some think maybe more likely (i.e. high inflation, high energy costs, during a recession (of course no one knows for sure))  

I think as with any risk/reward analysis, is the cost of the risk worth the benefit of the reward? At this point in time, will having my investments go up 20% make a significant difference in my life?  If my investments go down 20%, will it make a significant difference in my life?  Each of us have our own answers to those questions,

I personally think the concept of buy and hold is a young person's game.


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 2, 2022)

We have never ever had a 10 or 20 year period where a 50/50 portfolio lost money with diversified funds

sure it could , but odds are very low .

the bigger risk is trying to draw 4% or so off a portfolio,inflation adjused  to live on ,without investing in equities .

that has failed already to last 64% of the last 129 -30 year rolling periods we had . Anything  more than  a 10% failure rate is considered to risky

which seems the bigger risk ?

even at 65 we still have money we won’t need to eat with for 20 to 30  years god willing and that is still long term money.

there are all weather portfolios that over the long term.are designed to be bullet proof for those who are very conservative .

fixed income without equities is a guaranteed loss after inflation and taxes.

sure , one can take a draw rate so low they can stuff it in a mattress but to make such inefficient use of the money one scrimped and saved their whole lives makes no sense to me.

there  are enough low ulcer portfolios out there that are lower risk that taking the risk of NOT investing is the largest risk


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 2, 2022)

OneEyedDiva said:


> When I first started reading investment magazines like Money and Kiplinger, which I subscribed to decades ago, the million dollar figure was used often, either by outright saying that's what people needed *or *using that figure as an example when giving sample calculations. Then when I started reading various articles online I found the same thing until fairly recently. I always felt that those types of articles could act to discourage, rather than motivate people who felt there is no way they can ever attain that figure. I do remember once that Money did an article on people who managed to have comfortable retirements on a lot less than the 80% of final salary figure, also often recommended. I never personally spoke with an advisor about how much I would need because I'm a self taught investor and manage my own portfolio. I'm also a perfect example of not needing a million.
> 
> Just as analysts have stopped pushing the million dollar thing, there are more of them who admit that in certain instances, taking social security early is beneficial.  Until about 3 years ago, I only saw that advice once and it was decades ago. Now I feel more realistic advice and figures are mentioned in many financial articles as well as directing people to retirement calculators so they can figure out what's best for themselves.


There is no such thing as a magic number …we all make what we have work , whether relocating or golden girling it .

it is like asking how long is a rope and anyone who suggests there is a magic number needed knows nothing about retirement planning and is either a writer of click bait or just Financially ignorant


----------



## Aunt Bea (Aug 2, 2022)

IMO a target amount is a mistake.

I think it’s better to save with an eye towards the income it will take to support a certain lifestyle 10, 20, 30 years in the future and save with an eye towards creating that income stream.

Savings and investments are only a part of that income stream for most people.

I’m also content to be a buy and hold investor.

When I die, tomorrow or in thirty years I plan to leave the portfolio that has generated my income behind.

We are all different and it’s interesting for me to understand the different ways that people fund their retirement.


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 2, 2022)

Aunt Bea said:


> IMO a target amount is a mistake.
> 
> I think it’s better to save with an eye towards the income it will take to support a certain lifestyle 10, 20, 30 years in the future and save with an eye towards creating that income stream.
> 
> ...


Exactly .

once retired it doesn’t matter what our incomes were when a pay check or two were coming in and now are gone .

it doesn’t matter what we THOUGHT we would have based on our predictions of growth .
..
all that matters is what we have to work with when the day comes.

what matters is that we pick an allocation that can safely support the spending level we want to achieve .


----------



## Liberty (Aug 2, 2022)

Well, the way we like to weather the downturns is to move money over into a great "defensive" fund we own.  Just sit and wait it out. Of course each time is different and if the market crashes no where in the market is safe.  

The irony is the defensive fund has beat the S & P 500 for many years so its like "why not leave it there"...lol.

I know some that think they can time the market...maybe they can. Others like to have skin in the game and be part of the volatility index...lol.


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 2, 2022)

Liberty said:


> Well, the way we like to weather the downturns is to move money over into a great "defensive" fund we own.  Just sit and wait it out. Of course each time is different and if the market crashes no where in the market is safe.
> 
> The irony is the defensive fund has beat the S & P 500 for many years so its like "why not leave it there"...lol.
> 
> I know some that think they can time the market...maybe they can. Others like to have skin in the game and be part of the volatility index...lol.


What fund is this that you speak of ?


----------



## HarryHawk (Aug 2, 2022)

mathjak107 said:


> We have never ever had a 10 or 20 year period where a 50/50 portfolio lost money with diversified funds
> 
> sure it could , but odds are very low .
> 
> ...


Of course, some of us don't have the luxury of waiting 20 years.  Personally speaking, I've been heavily invested for the vast majority of my adult life.  I personally think the current state of the economy is not particularly conducive towards a rising investment environment.  I would rather sit on the sidelines for a bit to see how things play out.  I'd much rather miss out on a 20% run up than participate in a 20% drop.  If investments do take off, it's not going to happen in a single day, I can always get back in at anytime.  If it does take a 20% drop, and I am fully in, I will see the full drop.

Of course, inflation acts on one's account value whether one is gaining, staying even or losing.


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 2, 2022)

HarryHawk said:


> Of course, some of us don't have the luxury of waiting 20 years.  Personally speaking, I've been heavily invested for the vast majority of my adult life.  I personally think the current state of the economy is not particularly conducive towards a rising investment environment.  I would rather sit on the sidelines for a bit to see how things play out.  I'd much rather miss out on a 20% run up than participate in a 20% drop.  If investments do take off, it's not going to happen in a single day, I can always get back in at anytime.  If it does take a 20% drop, and I am fully in, I will see the full drop.
> 
> Of course, inflation acts on one's account value whether one is gaining, staying even or losing.


A good plan first of all usually plans for 25-30 years of money..

so that being the case we tend to have money for eating now , money needed for the intermediate term and money for the long term .

ifone  does not have that then they seriously need to look at how they are going to live  decades from now .

as time goes on that long term money migrates over to the other buckets as one is 15-30 years out from spending it or needing it .

so in a decent plan there is long term money that needs to be invested as such or one either needs a very low draw or they are talking big risks with only fixed income


----------



## HarryHawk (Aug 2, 2022)

mathjak107 said:


> A good plan first of all usually plans for 25-30 years of money..
> 
> so that being the case we tend to have money for eating now , money needed for the intermediate term and money for the long term .
> 
> ...


Different strokes for different folks.  I agree money needs to be invested for the long term, but I worked too hard to earn the money to just put it someplace and come back 30 years later to see what has become of it.  I like to keep at least an occasional eye on my money, and money that has been invested, and will be invested, doesn't necessarily have to be invested at every point along the way.


----------



## Aunt Bea (Aug 3, 2022)

HarryHawk said:


> Different strokes for different folks.  I agree money needs to be invested for the long term, but I worked too hard to earn the money to just put it someplace and come back 30 years later to see what has become of it.  I like to keep at least an occasional eye on my money, and money that has been invested, and will be invested, doesn't necessarily have to be invested at every point along the way.


Do what feels right for you and your situation, but keep in mind that Investing doesn’t have to be an all or nothing proposition.


"I can't sleep" answered the nervous one.
"Why not?" asked the friend.
"I am carrying so much cotton that I can't sleep thinking about. It is wearing me out. What can I do?"
*"Sell down to the sleeping point"*, answered the friend. - Jesse Livermore


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 3, 2022)

Trying to time when to be in or out of markets is a losing game for most people .

University of Michigan Professor H. Nejat Seyhun analyzed 7,802 trading days for the 31 years from 1963 to 1993 and concluded that just 90 days generated 95% of all the years’ market gains — an average of just three days per year. miss those few days and you hurt your return .

It is near impossible to not only reliably miss the worst days but it is just as hard to miss the worst time…

catching the best days is easy as pie ... just be invested . NO PREDICTING NEEDED .


----------



## Aunt Bea (Aug 3, 2022)

mathjak107 said:


> Trying to time when to be in or out of markets is a losing game for most people .
> 
> University of Michigan Professor H. Nejat Seyhun analyzed 7,802 trading days for the 31 years from 1963 to 1993 and concluded that just 90 days generated 95% of all the years’ market gains — an average of just three days per year. miss those few days and you hurt your return .
> 
> ...


I feel the same way about stock picking.

I don’t have the skills to reliably predict the next big winner.

I’m content to invest in balanced funds and broad based index funds.

They may not always outperform Wall Street, but they usually outperform Main Street.

_“Don’t look for the needle in the haystack. Just buy the haystack!” -_ John C. Bogle


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 3, 2022)

ever see morningstars small investor returns vs the actual fund returns ?

investors shoot  themselves in the  foot over  and over as they lag the funds returns as they try to time when to be in or out .

the more volatile the market the worse the investor returns get compared to the fund itself .

one does not need to sit in the same portfolio forever.

but one does need to stay invested ..

as an example:

i run the fidelity insight income portfolio which is 25% equities for money under 5 years .

i use the fidelity insight growth and income portfolio  for money 5-10 years out , that is a balanced portfolio .

i use the fidelity insight  unique opportunity portfolio for long term money   and that is 100% equities .

how ever half our money is invested in the bullet proof permanent portfolio  where it exceeds inflation over time and should never be devastated by any event .

i have been using fidelity insight models  since 1987.

if I wasn’t so nervous about things I may have not used Harry browns permanent portfolio and just stayed with the insight models .

but the point is laddering portfolios like one would do fixed income can optimize the money over a specified time frame without bailing to cash thinking your are going to time your way back in 


https://www.fmandi.com/about/models.php


----------



## OneEyedDiva (Aug 3, 2022)

mathjak107 said:


> There is no such thing as a magic number …we all make what we have work , whether relocating or golden girling it .
> 
> it is like asking how long is a rope and anyone who suggests there is a magic number needed knows nothing about retirement planning and is either a writer of click bait or just Financially ignorant


I absolutely agree, which was my point. And truth be told, there are too many who don't know nor are willing to learn about retirement planning until it's too close to their retirement and they start to panic.


----------



## OneEyedDiva (Aug 3, 2022)

Aunt Bea said:


> IMO a target amount is a mistake.
> 
> I think it’s better to save with an eye towards the income it will take to support a certain lifestyle 10, 20, 30 years in the future and save with an eye towards creating that income stream.
> 
> ...


_"I think it’s better to save with an eye towards the income it will take to support a certain lifestyle 10, 20, 30 years in the future and save with an eye towards creating that income stream."_ I just read an article the other day that made that very same point Aunt Bea.


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 3, 2022)

It is the power of good compounding over longer periods of time that takes the little bits we save and grows it into meaningful amounts …

that remains true even retirement where long term money still need to grow so it can become our short and intermediate term money later on .

the failed retirement graveyard is filled with those who failed to realize that having growth is important to the success rate of their income stream .

129 rolling 30 year  cycles have demonstrated that trying to go with fixed income alone has been the riskiest choice with the highest rate of failures


----------



## Liberty (Aug 3, 2022)

mathjak107 said:


> What fund is this that you speak of ?


Its a really good dividend growth fund.  If you don't like the idea of dividends you probably wouldn't care for the fund...lol.  Reinvesting the larger dividends plus the matrix of the fund's investing parameters have yielded a fine result.  Everyone has their own views of investing, of course.


----------



## HarryHawk (Aug 3, 2022)

mathjak107 said:


> Trying to time when to be in or out of markets is a losing game for most people .
> 
> University of Michigan Professor H. Nejat Seyhun analyzed 7,802 trading days for the 31 years from 1963 to 1993 and concluded that just 90 days generated 95% of all the years’ market gains — an average of just three days per year. miss those few days and you hurt your return .
> 
> ...


That is a very interesting statistic, I can't help but wonder why I never see the same analysis done on loses.  Even the statistic you quote is based on 30 year old data, nothing more recent?  Just my personal perception, but today's market is very different than the market 30 years ago,

I don't necessarily disagree with most of your basic assumptions.  I just happen to feel that uncertainty is the name of the game with today's economy.  The market tends not to like uncertainty and I choose to take most of my chips off the table until some of that uncertainty settles out.  As I've said before if I miss out on a sudden, explosive rise in the market, it's not going to make alot of difference to my lifestyle.  The same can't be said for a sudden explosive drop in the market, which I happen to think is at least a possibility.

For me, it's a no brainer, sounds like not so much for others.

The best advice I can share - Don't get your investment advice from random strangers on the internet (especially me).


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 3, 2022)

HarryHawk said:


> That is a very interesting statistic, I can't help but wonder why I never see the same analysis done on loses.  Even the statistic you quote is based on 30 year old data, nothing more recent?  Just my personal perception, but today's market is very different than the market 30 years ago,
> 
> I don't necessarily disagree with most of your basic assumptions.  I just happen to feel that uncertainty is the name of the game with today's economy.  The market tends not to like uncertainty and I choose to take most of my chips off the table until some of that uncertainty settles out.  As I've said before if I miss out on a sudden, explosive rise in the market, it's not going to make alot of difference to my lifestyle.  The same can't be said for a sudden explosive drop in the market, which I happen to think is at least a possibility.
> 
> ...


He did the same look at losses . If one could avoid The biggest down days they would have an incredible return .

but not only has there been no way of knowing when we will have the worst down days , few are successful at even avoiding the worst broader time frames.

not missing the best is easy


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 3, 2022)

Liberty said:


> Its a really good dividend growth fund.  If you don't like the idea of dividends you probably wouldn't care for the fund...lol.  Reinvesting the larger dividends plus the matrix of the fund's investing parameters have yielded a fine result.  Everyone has their own views of investing, of course.


Which fund ?


----------



## Aunt Bea (Aug 3, 2022)

It sounds like one of the consumer staple funds or ETFs.


----------



## HarryHawk (Aug 3, 2022)

mathjak107 said:


> not missing the best is easy


No doubt, of course, making sure you participate in every down day is equally easy.


----------



## garyt1957 (Aug 3, 2022)

HarryHawk said:


> I would rather sit on the sidelines for a bit to see how things play out.  I'd much rather miss out on a 20% run up than participate in a 20% drop.  If investments do take off, it's not going to happen in a single day, I can always get back in at anytime.


That's the thing, how will you know when to get back in? And actually the big gains do happen quickly (although not in one day). There's stats out there that show if you miss just the best 4-5 days of gains a year it kills your portfolio. You're very likely to miss those gains if you try timing the market. Maybe you can do it, but the vast majority of people will be poorer for it.


----------



## garyt1957 (Aug 3, 2022)

I have 3 years of expenses in non equities that I can use in a market downturn without selling anything. I'm not smart enough to time the market and statistics show that the vast majority of people aren't either, including the so called experts.


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 3, 2022)

Not only is it hard to time but anyone who bailed isn’t throwing back in early on what they pulled out .

rather they dip their toes thinking it is a suckers rally

markets make their biggest moves long before there are signs anything changed .

by the time they get it all back in if they even do , they are way behind…


----------



## HarryHawk (Aug 3, 2022)

That's the good thing about living in America, you pay your dime, and take your chance.  You folks are certainly more optimistic than I am about the near term outlook for investments,  I see rampant inflation staring over the edge of an impending recession.  I honestly hope I'm wrong and hope y'all make a killing over the course of the next few months.  I'll be the first in line to congratulate you for your insight.

As of now, I'm glad I got out when I did.  When I do get back in, I'll be starting at ground zero rather than in a hole, so I have some room for error when things do start to improve.  If I miss the first 10 - 15% I'm no worse off than had I stayed the course.

Best of luck to everyone.


----------



## Aunt Bea (Aug 3, 2022)

HarryHawk said:


> That's the good thing about living in America, you pay your dime, and take your chance.  You folks are certainly more optimistic than I am about the near term outlook for investments,  I see rampant inflation staring over the edge of an impending recession.  I honestly hope I'm wrong and hope y'all make a killing over the course of the next few months.  I'll be the first in line to congratulate you for your insight.
> 
> As of now, I'm glad I got out when I did.  When I do get back in, I'll be starting at ground zero rather than in a hole, so I have some room for error when things do start to improve.  If I miss the first 10 - 15% I'm no worse off than had I stayed the course.
> 
> Best of luck to everyone.


Good luck, Harry!

See you on the other side!


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 4, 2022)

Liberty said:


> Well, the way we like to weather the downturns is to move money over into a great "defensive" fund we own.  Just sit and wait it out. Of course each time is different and if the market crashes no where in the market is safe.
> 
> The irony is the defensive fund has beat the S & P 500 for many years so its like "why not leave it there"...lol.
> 
> I know some that think they can time the market...maybe they can. Others like to have skin in the game and be part of the volatility index...lol.


You still have not told us what fund it is that has beaten the S&P for years


----------



## garyt1957 (Aug 4, 2022)

mathjak107 said:


> Which fund ?


That question doesn't seem too difficult


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 4, 2022)

garyt1957 said:


> That question doesn't seem too difficult


Except for the fact if we look it likely may have outperformed over an exceptional period like the lost decade ..any bets if that’s the case a simple 30 year bond beat that fund over the same time frame.

in fact equities and gold have beaten equities and bonds over almost all time frames for the last two decades


----------



## Liberty (Aug 5, 2022)

mathjak107 said:


> You still have not told us what fund it is that has beaten the S&P for years




If anyone wants to PM me I'll be happy to share the specific name of the fund which I was talking about -will ask you not to publish it on this forum - as I mentioned "its simply a good dividend growth fund". There are other dividend growth funds of course. Please don't think I'm promoting it. Personal investment choices are just that - personal...lol.


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 6, 2022)

Liberty said:


> If anyone wants to PM me I'll be happy to share the specific name of the fund which I was talking about -will ask you not to publish it on this forum - as I mentioned "its simply a good dividend growth fund". There are other dividend growth funds of course. Please don't think I'm promoting it. Personal investment choices are just that - personal...lol.


That makes zero sense …we talk about Stocks and funds all the time.

i don’t even know how to pm on here , so pm me with the name then


----------



## Liberty (Aug 6, 2022)

mathjak107 said:


> That makes zero sense …we talk about Stocks and funds all the time.
> 
> i don’t even know how to pm on here , so pm me with the name then


If you think I make zero sense, then I doubt you'd care about any fund I own.
Honestly, do your own homework mathjak - you are well versed in the stock market - get on the web and find it if you care so much about dividend funds.  I'm sure fidelity has several.

I don't want to promote any investment advice here on the forum. Past performance does not guarantee future performance and I'm guessing people here have hard earned money they may be wanting to invest and  are trying to keep up with inflation with.  I am not a financial advisor.  However, if anyone wants to check it out, I'd be happy to give them the information, as we've been very happy with this fund.


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 6, 2022)

Liberty said:


> If you think I make zero sense, then I doubt you'd care about any fund I own.
> Honestly, do your own homework mathjak - you are well versed in the stock market - get on the web and find it if you care so much about dividend funds.  I'm sure fidelity has several.
> 
> I don't want to promote any investment advice here on the forum. Past performance does not guarantee future performance and I'm guessing people here have hard earned money they may be wanting to invest and  are trying to keep up with inflation with.  I am not a financial advisor.  However, if anyone wants to check it out, I'd be happy to give them the information, as we've been very happy with this fund.


all we want to do is verify your claim that this defensive fund beat the s&p over most time frames .

it has nothing to do with investment advice .  this is what financial forums do , we discuss funds and investments.

if someone is going to make a claim about performance , we should be able to verify that claim .


----------



## Liberty (Aug 6, 2022)

mathjak107 said:


> all we want to do is verify your claim that this defensive fund beat the s&p over most time frames .
> 
> it has nothing to do with investment advice .  this is what financial forums do , we discuss funds and investments.
> 
> if someone is going to make a claim about performance , we should be able to verify that claim .


You are free to go to Fidelity and ask them.  Also if you look on the web you will find several references to Dividend funds that have beaten the S & P 500 over specific years or even a decade  with reams of data to prove it.  I'm sure the one we own isn't the only one, its just a really good one that is way less volatile than the typical index funds.

That's what the financial discussion was about - dividend funds in general.


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 6, 2022)

Liberty said:


> You are free to go to Fidelity and ask them.  Also if you look on the web you will find several references to Dividend funds that have beaten the S & P 500 over specific years or even a decade  with reams of data to prove it.  I'm sure the one we own isn't the only one, its just a really good one that is way less volatile than the typical index funds.
> 
> That's what the financial discussion was about - dividend funds in general.


this was a waste of all our time to be frank

and a dividend fund is not the same thing as a defensive fund .

you would have to struggle to find a time frame fidelity fsdix which is strategic dividend and income  beat the s&p as an example.

as well as 80% of the s&p pays dividends , that doesnt mean it is a defensive fund by your definition above about dividend funds being defensive.

just being less volatile does not mean it is a defensive fund and  funds that are  playing the sector game and calling themselves defensive funds are not really . they are a overly risky bet on a sector being the correct one to be in at the moment

at the end of the day being defensive over any meaningful time frame is rarely going to beat the s&p 500


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 6, 2022)

When it comes to being defensive or not , it usually isn’t decided by a fund ..it is decided by the allocations and portfolio that fund is used with .

here is a list of the most defensive portfolios that are highest on the ulcer index …higher meaning more defensive .

info on each is available here

https://portfoliocharts.com/portfolios/


----------



## garyt1957 (Aug 8, 2022)

mathjak107 said:


> That makes zero sense …we talk about Stocks and funds all the time.
> 
> i don’t even know how to pm on here , so pm me with the name then


Me too


----------



## chrislind2 (Aug 31, 2022)

mathjak107 said:


> No one knows how long to recover ..2008 was almost recovered in a year ….2000 adjusted for inflation was 12 years ….
> 
> but so what .,,even at 65 there is money that won’t be used to eat for 20-30 years …that is the money that goes in to equities .
> 
> ...


Oh, it's been poor planning from the beginning. Had nothing saved until after I took out bankruptcy in my 50's. It was only then that I could start saving money and the company I worked for had a plan. They made it sound really good because of the tax advantages. I was ignorant about any details or long time disadvantages.  All I knew was the amount was increasing and that was exciting to me. By the time I realized what kind of plan it was, I was kind of stuck. I started taking Social Security at 66 and was able to put all of that away each month so I continued to work until I retired at 71. I have no debt and except for high rent which is a problem shared around the country, my expenses are pretty low. The mutual fund has stabilized and I will be drawing out some of it soon. I have started liquidating a hobby I have and that will boost the savings a little. I think I can make it, but like much of my life, my financial history is yet just one more big regret.


----------

