2 ms·

"When she was in her mid 50s, Connie Gores got a wake-up call from a financial adviser. At the time, Ms. Gores had saved about $250,000. The adviser told her th

"When she was in her mid 50s, Connie Gores got a wake-up call from a financial adviser. At the time, Ms. Gores had saved about $250,000. The adviser told her that unless she started saving more, she would likely have to live on Social Security alone when she retired. The conversation shook her into action. By the time she did retire as a university president, she was socking away about 26% of her roughly $250,000 salary." She had 15 years of saving 26% of $250k to only have $250k??? Yikes. Should have been able to save more, that is insane, because the numbers don't match up.

Jtsummers 4y ago
No, she had $250k and was told it wouldn't be enough. So she then started saving more (up to 26% of her annual pay by the time she did retire).
- fbdab103 4y ago
  I agree with the parent's GP's interpretation. Woman was making $250k annual. Up to that point had only had a retirement account of $250k. Which strikes me as sheer bananas.
  - neogodless 4y ago
    > She had 15 years of saving 26% of $250k to only have $250k??? But that part is just... wrong. We don't know what the savings rate was before her "mid 50s" - clearly it was LESS than 26% of $250k, and yes, that is bananas. But GGP's text does not match what the article says. In reality, she started with $250k around 55, and then saved (up to) 26% of $250k for 10 years, retiring at 65 with about $1 million saved.
    - fbdab103 4y ago
      I think we were focusing on different parts. Yes, she was originally saving << 26% of her salary. My interest was strictly on her high salary and seemingly non-existent retirement strategy.
  - Jtsummers 4y ago
    Since it wasn't clear, I was responding to this part of their comment: > She had 15 years of saving 26% of $250k to only have $250k??? Yikes. Which was a gross misinterpretation of the text they had just quoted. Yes, it's bananas that making that much she only had $250k in savings for retirement. But that's not what I was responding to. She did not save 26% of $250k for a decade and only end up with $250k in savings.
neogodless 4y ago
Age 55 (says "mid 50s") Savings $250k Age 65 (retirement "about 3 years ago", now age 68) Savings $1m 10 years working while saving 26% of $250k = $650k $250k + $650k = $900k Add another 10% for investment returns.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
marcinzm 4y ago
She began with $250k and after 15 years of saving 26% ended up with somewhere over a million.

Jtsummers 4y ago

No, she had $250k and was told it wouldn't be enough. So she then started saving more (up to 26% of her annual pay by the time she did retire).

fbdab103 4y ago
I agree with the parent's GP's interpretation. Woman was making $250k annual. Up to that point had only had a retirement account of $250k. Which strikes me as sheer bananas.
- neogodless 4y ago
  > She had 15 years of saving 26% of $250k to only have $250k??? But that part is just... wrong. We don't know what the savings rate was before her "mid 50s" - clearly it was LESS than 26% of $250k, and yes, that is bananas. But GGP's text does not match what the article says. In reality, she started with $250k around 55, and then saved (up to) 26% of $250k for 10 years, retiring at 65 with about $1 million saved.
  - fbdab103 4y ago
    I think we were focusing on different parts. Yes, she was originally saving << 26% of her salary. My interest was strictly on her high salary and seemingly non-existent retirement strategy.
- Jtsummers 4y ago
  Since it wasn't clear, I was responding to this part of their comment: > She had 15 years of saving 26% of $250k to only have $250k??? Yikes. Which was a gross misinterpretation of the text they had just quoted. Yes, it's bananas that making that much she only had $250k in savings for retirement. But that's not what I was responding to. She did not save 26% of $250k for a decade and only end up with $250k in savings.

neogodless 4y ago

Age 55 (says "mid 50s") Savings $250k Age 65 (retirement "about 3 years ago", now age 68) Savings $1m 10 years working while saving 26% of $250k = $650k $250k + $650k = $900k Add another 10% for investment returns.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

marcinzm 4y ago

She began with $250k and after 15 years of saving 26% ended up with somewhere over a million.