3 ms·

If you save a non-trivial amount of your income, you can retire by 50.

mulmen 8y ago
What is this non-trivial amount? And what happens the next time we have a global financial meltdown? With life expectancy on the rise and the cadence of global economic catastrophe what it is someone retiring at 50 has to expect to face at least one financial crisis in retirement. I don't see how a person can feel secure into their 90s when retiring at 50.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- Spooky23 8y ago
  20-25% if you rent or expect the same income. You can go a little less if you own your home and pay it off.
  - jesseb 8y ago
    Let me give you an example of where I live. I make (for here, not in general) reasonable money; most of my friends make considerably less than I do. I also happen to be lucky and live with room mates which drastically reduces my cost of living. As it stands, if I wanted to rent my own apartment, 50% of my monthly income would be gone right there. That's not including utilities, internet, or food, and that's not a "nice" place - it's just what you can find. With those other expenses factored in, I'd be looking at roughly another 15% gone on top of that. So as it is, just to keep a roof over my head, and keep myself fed and minimally entertained, it would cost 65% of my monthly income. I don't drive, but my transit pass is another almost 5%, so that brings it up to 70%; if I did drive it'd be another 10-15% on top of that for fuel and maintenance. So somehow 30% of my income needs to be spread out for ALL of life (clothing, surprise bills, travel for visiting family, actually doing things you enjoy, etc.). On top of that, now there's saving for my retirement; you say 20-25% should go into savings. Being conservative and using the 20% figure, that leaves 10% of my monthly income to live off of. This also doesn't take into account any sort of savings for a mortgage or car, "Rainy-day Fund", or even allow for the remote possibility of ever traveling in your life.
    - war1025 8y ago
      Married with 3 kids, turning 30 this week, paid cash for a house last year. After tax, I make about $50k / year. My wife stays home. Since Jan 1st I've put $15k into savings, which translates to 30% post-tax (closer to 20% pre-tax). So I'd say it's definitely doable. Probably depends a lot on living in the right part of the country / world.
      - EADGBE 8y ago
        > Probably depends a lot on living in the right part of the country / world. It isn't probably. It's most certainly. However, your scenario is ideal but not possible for many. Financial literacy and responsibility goes a long way in being able to live without working (one day).
    - mmirate 8y ago
      > As it stands, if I wanted to rent my own apartment, 50% of my monthly income would be gone right there. That's not including utilities, internet, or food, and that's not a "nice" place - it's just what you can find. With those other expenses factored in, I'd be looking at roughly another 15% gone on top of that. Then you're looking in the wrong town or at the wrong job-offers. Conventional wisdom has it that you should spend at most 25% of monthly net income on housing.
      - jesseb 8y ago
        I'm doing fine, I have slowly growing savings and spend a small portion of my income on housing. As I mentioned, this is mostly because I opted to live with other people and I do not own a vehicle. I am definitely underpaid but willingly take that in exchange for the freedom my job grants me. Unfortunately for the majority of people in this city (or even province in general, BC is expensive), housing is often >50% of income. A one bedroom apartment where I live goes for about $800-1200 on average right now (and are in extremely short supply), and minimum wage is $10.50. There are not a lot of high paying jobs here either; a large number of people are forced to work multiple jobs. Our entire province is struggling with a housing crisis right now. Things are complicated unfortunately and conventional wisdom doesn't always match up with reality.
- tspike 8y ago
  Have a look at firecalc.com, it simulates scenarios throughout history (including the Great Depression) and tells you if your resources would've been depleted.

What is this non-trivial amount? And what happens the next time we have a global financial meltdown? With life expectancy on the rise and the cadence of global economic catastrophe what it is someone retiring at 50 has to expect to face at least one financial crisis in retirement. I don't see how a person can feel secure into their 90s when retiring at 50.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
Spooky23 8y ago
20-25% if you rent or expect the same income. You can go a little less if you own your home and pay it off.
- jesseb 8y ago
  Let me give you an example of where I live. I make (for here, not in general) reasonable money; most of my friends make considerably less than I do. I also happen to be lucky and live with room mates which drastically reduces my cost of living. As it stands, if I wanted to rent my own apartment, 50% of my monthly income would be gone right there. That's not including utilities, internet, or food, and that's not a "nice" place - it's just what you can find. With those other expenses factored in, I'd be looking at roughly another 15% gone on top of that. So as it is, just to keep a roof over my head, and keep myself fed and minimally entertained, it would cost 65% of my monthly income. I don't drive, but my transit pass is another almost 5%, so that brings it up to 70%; if I did drive it'd be another 10-15% on top of that for fuel and maintenance. So somehow 30% of my income needs to be spread out for ALL of life (clothing, surprise bills, travel for visiting family, actually doing things you enjoy, etc.). On top of that, now there's saving for my retirement; you say 20-25% should go into savings. Being conservative and using the 20% figure, that leaves 10% of my monthly income to live off of. This also doesn't take into account any sort of savings for a mortgage or car, "Rainy-day Fund", or even allow for the remote possibility of ever traveling in your life.
  - war1025 8y ago
    Married with 3 kids, turning 30 this week, paid cash for a house last year. After tax, I make about $50k / year. My wife stays home. Since Jan 1st I've put $15k into savings, which translates to 30% post-tax (closer to 20% pre-tax). So I'd say it's definitely doable. Probably depends a lot on living in the right part of the country / world.
    - EADGBE 8y ago
      > Probably depends a lot on living in the right part of the country / world. It isn't probably. It's most certainly. However, your scenario is ideal but not possible for many. Financial literacy and responsibility goes a long way in being able to live without working (one day).
  - mmirate 8y ago
    > As it stands, if I wanted to rent my own apartment, 50% of my monthly income would be gone right there. That's not including utilities, internet, or food, and that's not a "nice" place - it's just what you can find. With those other expenses factored in, I'd be looking at roughly another 15% gone on top of that. Then you're looking in the wrong town or at the wrong job-offers. Conventional wisdom has it that you should spend at most 25% of monthly net income on housing.
    - jesseb 8y ago
      I'm doing fine, I have slowly growing savings and spend a small portion of my income on housing. As I mentioned, this is mostly because I opted to live with other people and I do not own a vehicle. I am definitely underpaid but willingly take that in exchange for the freedom my job grants me. Unfortunately for the majority of people in this city (or even province in general, BC is expensive), housing is often >50% of income. A one bedroom apartment where I live goes for about $800-1200 on average right now (and are in extremely short supply), and minimum wage is $10.50. There are not a lot of high paying jobs here either; a large number of people are forced to work multiple jobs. Our entire province is struggling with a housing crisis right now. Things are complicated unfortunately and conventional wisdom doesn't always match up with reality.
tspike 8y ago
Have a look at firecalc.com, it simulates scenarios throughout history (including the Great Depression) and tells you if your resources would've been depleted.