4 ms·
> it seems to me a better strategy is to enjoy more free time now by reducing work hours than to bet on an uncertain future I've always thought this way, uncer
by brundolf 5y ago
> it seems to me a better strategy is to enjoy more free time now by reducing work hours than to bet on an uncertain future
I've always thought this way, uncertainty or not. Why wait until you're old and frail to enjoy life?
I've always put the matched contribution into my retirement accounts, because it's free money, but no more than that. The rest of my savings go into places where I don't have to wait until my life is nearly over to access them.
- brubois 5y agoIt's not about delaying enjoyment to old age but to be sure to have basic needs met and some comfort when old.
- nly 5y agoInvesting for retirement for me is a hedge against being old, infirm and still having to work just to survive and live with stress and anxiety. You should do the math on how much you'll likely actually have in retirement, and see how you feel about it, before it's too late to change your strategy. I put almost 20% of my net salary in to my pension, and my employer another 8%, and it's still unlikely that I'll be able to retire particularly early or will live a particularly comfortable life in retirement. For one thing, if I'm still renting when I retire I'll likely be barely scraping by. Doing the math can be a shock.
- brundolf 5y agoMaybe I should actually do the math; I guess I just assumed that with the full matching contributions on what should be decent 401k's, I should already be getting set up for that "basic comfort, not having to worry about working to survive" baseline. Not that I'm burning the rest of the money I make. My basic view is that I don't want to be rich when I'm old so that I can make "dream purchases" or live on a cruise ship for the rest of my days or whatever; I want to be living comfortably and fully for my whole life.
- nly 5y agoThe basic rule of thumb advocated is to assume a 3-4% safe withdrawal rate in retirement. So for example, if you want a $30,000/yr (inflation adjusted) income in retirement you need to save yourself a $1M (inflation adjusted) pot. Over a 30 year career with a 5% (real, above inflation) investment return that takes $1,200/month. Lots of people think saving a couple of hundred bucks per month will leave them super comfortable. The math tells the scary reality.
- SCNP 5y agoI have this "fun" slider on my retirement account's website that shows different values for different retirement ages. In order to hit my minimum, I had to slide it all the way to age 85. "FUN"
- bluGill 5y agoThe match is different for everyone, as is timeframe. If at 20 you put in 10000 per year for 10 years and nothing at 65 you will have more than someone who starting at 30 put in 10000 every year. However in the real world you start out after college with less income, student loans, and needing to get a place to live so few do this. That doesn't even get into inflation which is also a factor.
- nly 5y agoMath: - 1 unit/mo for 10 years at 7%/yr => 172 units. - 172 units @ 7%/yr for 35 years => 1,836 units vs. - 1 unit/mo for 35 years at 7%/yr => 1,721 units Depends on rates though who comes out in front.
- KptMarchewa 5y ago>For one thing, if I'm still renting when I retire I'll likely be barely scraping by. Maybe some of that 28% should be put towards property? I'm pretty sure that cases where mortgage is more expensive than renting through 30+ years are very, very rare.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]