I Can Never Retire

[Crash]

<p>I've been saving about 10% of my pre-tax salary for about 10 years. I have a job where my employer matches the first 4% I invest. Good deal, right?</p><p>Thought I was doing great. Nice little nest egg going and with compounding, the whole baby should snowball in about twenty years and I'm in good shape just in time for retirement.</p><p>So for a goof the other day, I ran the numbers out. Assuming I get a 5% raise every year,&nbsp;continue to invest 10% of my annual salary in my 401K, my employer continues to match 4%, the stock market returns an average of 6% every year, and I look to retire with an annual income similar to what I'm making today, well then I can retire when I'm</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><font size="5">97.</font></p><p><font size="1">This sucks.</font></p>

[Furtherman]

<p>Well that felt like a punch in the face.</p><p>Anybody want to start a caper?&nbsp; Gets some monies?</p>

[SinA]

<strong>Furtherman</strong> wrote:<br /><p>Well that felt like a punch in the face.</p><p>Anybody want to start a caper?&nbsp; Gets some monies?</p><p>don't i know you?&nbsp; were you in my pyramid scam?</p>

[reeshy]

Who the hell retires on an income close to what they're accustomed to earning?????<br />

[SatCam]

No offense, but weren't you the guy making minimum wage? If you're still making that, 97 sounds about right

[Crash]

<strong>SatCam</strong> wrote:<br />No offense, but weren't you the guy making minimum wage? If you're still making that, 97 sounds about right <p>No, I make a pretty good living. The problem is that I'm going to have to be earning that living until I'm about a hundred.</p><p>Whether you make $20K or $200K, though, I don't think it makes a difference. It's a matter of saving enough money to be able to maintain that lifestyle when you stop earning.</p>

[Billy Staples]

<p>let's start it right here&nbsp; a comedy pyramid scam</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>you write a joke, send it to me with 5 bucks and 3 other people with intructions on how these things work</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>great, now&nbsp; watch I get busted for mail fraud</p>

[EliSnow]

<strong>Crash</strong> wrote:<br />It's a matter of saving enough money to be able to maintain that lifestyle when you stop earning.<p><font face="arial,helvetica,sans-serif" size="3">I don't think you can maintain the exact lifestyle after retirement that you had before, but remember that when you retire, it may be cheaper to maintain your lifestyle.&nbsp; You will probably have no house payments, and you&nbsp;will be able to get the early bird special, and cheaper movie tickets because of your advanced age.</font></p>

[Crash]

<strong>Crash</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>SatCam</strong> wrote:<br />No offense, but weren't you the guy making minimum wage? If you're still making that, 97 sounds about right <p>No, I make a pretty good living. The problem is that I'm going to have to be earning that living until I'm about a hundred.</p><p>Whether you make $20K or $200K, though, I don't think it makes a difference. It's a matter of saving enough money to be able to maintain that lifestyle when you stop earning.</p><p>I just ran the numbers and actually it's exactly the same whether you make&nbsp;$20K or $200K.</p><p>If you save 14% of you salary a year (10% plus 4% matching), assume 5% raises, 6% return, 4% inflation, and want to retire making an inflation-adjusted salary equal to what you're making on day one, it takes 52 years to accumulate that much wealth.</p><p>The only difference is how much money you have to save. In 2057, $20K will actually be worth $147,819 (at 4% inflation/year). So you'll need $2.3 million invested and earning 6% to retire at that income level.&nbsp;At $200K&nbsp;that's $1,478,190&nbsp;by 2057 and $24 million in the bank. All depends on what you're used to.</p><p>Me? I'm getting used to working.</p><p>How the fuck does anybody retire?</p>

[Recyclerz]

<p>great, now&nbsp; watch I get busted for mail fraud</p><p></p><p>Wouldn't that give you the trifecta Billy? <img src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/wink.gif" border="0" /></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>And Crash, I think the model you're running is probably way too conservative in its assumptions.&nbsp; Even assuming that the 401(k) is your only asset, it is probably&nbsp;figuring you can only take 4%/year, which is kinda bullshit for reasons too lengthy to get into here.&nbsp; If you're in your 30's or early 40's, have been tucking away 14% of your pay for 10 years and have the biggest portion invested in a variety of stocks then you're going to be fine - or at least better off than 95% of the rest of the people out there not named Gates or Stern.</p>

[Earlshog]

<strong>Crash</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Crash</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>SatCam</strong> wrote:<br />No offense, but weren't you the guy making minimum wage? If you're still making that, 97 sounds about right <p>No, I make a pretty good living. The problem is that I'm going to have to be earning that living until I'm about a hundred.</p><p>Whether you make $20K or $200K, though, I don't think it makes a difference. It's a matter of saving enough money to be able to maintain that lifestyle when you stop earning.</p><p>I just ran the numbers and actually it's exactly the same whether you make&nbsp;$20K or $200K.</p><p>If you save 14% of you salary a year (10% plus 4% matching), assume 5% raises, 6% return, 4% inflation, and want to retire making an inflation-adjusted salary equal to what you're making on day one, it takes 52 years to accumulate that much wealth.</p><p>The only difference is how much money you have to save. In 2057, $20K will actually be worth $147,819 (at 4% inflation/year). So you'll need $2.3 million invested and earning 6% to retire at that income level.&nbsp;At $200K&nbsp;that's $1,478,190&nbsp;by 2057 and $24 million in the bank. All depends on what you're used to.</p><p>Me? I'm getting used to working.</p><p>How the fuck does anybody retire?</p><p><img height="431" src="http://www.du.edu/~zsinger/images/Brett%20Favre.jpg" width="332" border="0" /></p>

[Recyclerz]

<hr color="cococo" align="left"></font><strong>Crash</strong> wrote:<br><strong>Crash</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>SatCam</strong> wrote:<br />No offense, but weren't you the guy making minimum wage? If you're still making that, 97 sounds about right <p>No, I make a pretty good living. The problem is that I'm going to have to be earning that living until I'm about a hundred.</p><p>Whether you make $20K or $200K, though, I don't think it makes a difference. It's a matter of saving enough money to be able to maintain that lifestyle when you stop earning.</p><p>I just ran the numbers and actually it's exactly the same whether you makeÿ$20K or $200K.</p><p>If you save 14% of you salary a year (10% plus 4% matching), assume 5% raises, 6% return, 4% inflation, and want to retire making an inflation-adjusted salary equal to what you're making on day one, it takes 52 years to accumulate that much wealth.</p><p>The only difference is how much money you have to save. In 2057, $20K will actually be worth $147,819 (at 4% inflation/year). So you'll need $2.3 million invested and earning 6% to retire at that income level.ÿAt $200Kÿthat's $1,478,190ÿby 2057 and $24 million in the bank. All depends on what you're used to.</p><p>Me? I'm getting used to working.</p><p>How the fuck does anybody retire?</p><hr color="cococo" align="left"><p></p>

[Sheeplovr]

<p><span class="postbody">How the fuck does anybody retire?</span></p><p>With a Bullet <br />
</p>

[Bulldogcakes]

<p>&nbsp;</p><strong>Crash</strong> wrote:<p>Whether you make $20K or $200K, though, I don't think it makes a difference. It's a matter of saving enough money to be able to maintain that lifestyle when you stop earning.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>THats a bad formula. Assuming you buy and pay off a home during your working lifetime, you wont need as much cash as you do now, since you wont have a mortgage. Assuming you do that, you can retire on about half of what you earn now and live the same lifestyle. Of course, you'll be old and wont feel like doing anything then, so you could probably get away with less than half. </p><p>Dont forget to factor in the Senior discounts at the movie theaters and the early bird specials. You could live on about $80 a week. &nbsp; &nbsp;</p><blockquote /><p>&nbsp;</p>

[Crash]

<p><font size="3">Earlshog Wrote:</font></p><p><img height="431" src="http://www.du.edu/~zsinger/images/Brett%20Favre.jpg" width="332" border="0" /></p><p>YOU SEE??? THIS FUCKER JUST CAME BACK AS WELL!!! NOBODY CAN RETIRE!!</p><p>Seriously though, I spoke to a friend last night, and what Recyclerz and Bulldogcakes are saying is probably true. The model is a little too conservative and owning a house helps greatly.</p><p>So it's not ALL doom and gloom when you retire. But man there are some lifestyle changes ahead.</p><p>How am I gonna afford one of Eastside Dave's Meteor Hats?&nbsp;</p>

[Duke]

<p>&nbsp;</p><strong>Crash</strong> wrote:<br /><p>I've been saving about 10% of my pre-tax salary for about 10 years. I have a job where my employer matches the first 4% I invest. Good deal, right?</p><p>Thought I was doing great. Nice little nest egg going and with compounding, the whole baby should snowball in about twenty years and I'm in good shape just in time for retirement.</p><p>So for a goof the other day, I ran the numbers out. Assuming I get a 5% raise every year, continue to invest 10% of my annual salary in my 401K, my employer continues to match 4%, the stock market returns an average of 6% every year, and I look to retire with an annual income similar to what I'm making today, well then I can retire when I'm</p><p> </p><p><font size="5">97.</font></p><p><font size="1">This sucks.</font></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Maybe you should of done this little &quot;goof&quot; 7 years ago</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>loser....&nbsp;</p>