3 ms·
This doesn't know the important part. Will I live to 62 as the earliest of my ancestors died, or 98 as the latest? My family history is about average for lifesp
by bluGill 2mo ago
This doesn't know the important part. Will I live to 62 as the earliest of my ancestors died, or 98 as the latest? My family history is about average for lifespan but that is a big difference. If I live to 62 I should retire at 50 - or perhaps I shouldn't have bothered saving at all since the growth isn't there. Of medical advances make me love to 150 I should save until I'm 80 which will be a nice income to really enjoy the rest of my life.
I want more defined benefit accounts, but they are hard to find
- karmakurtisaani 2mo agoSo the thing is that no one knows that part.
- Eddy_Viscosity2 2mo agoCan't we just get AI to tell us? I'm sure it will confidently give an answer.
- bluGill 2mo agoThe latest AI is a lot better at not being over confident. There is still an issue but not as good as it used to be
- karmakurtisaani 2mo agoBut how can you trust anything it says if it doesn't have confidence? I tell even my children that the most important aspect of applying a job is a confident, firm handshake.
- bluGill 2mo agoFor me no, but for a few thousand people it isn't to hard. Which is why I look for defined benefit plans that are not scams, and in frustrated that I can't fibd them
- nhootan 2mo agoThat's in the full planner, just not the Quick Check. Horizons are sampled per person from actuarial mortality tables, so you get a distribution of lifespans rather than one guessed end age. You can also pin a fixed age and run your 62 and your 98 separately, which given that spread is probably worth doing.