Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

unblock

(56,247 posts)
12. the point is that even those at the top end of the 99% worry about the same thing
Sun Feb 5, 2012, 05:17 PM
Feb 2012

we all worry about outliving whatever retirement savings we've managed to save in our working years.

you have to be REMARKABLY rich in order to have enough to not really worry about that -- they're putting the peg at $4 million. i'm used to hearing the peg at $2 million, but with interest rates so low they may have a point.

if you have no savings, you're stuck living on social security.
if you have a bit of savings, you can supplement it by drawing down your savings, "hoping" to die before you run out, or at least, if you do survive, you drop down to living on just social security.

but even $1 million in the bank isn't nearly as much as it sounds. with interest rates negligible, taking out an extra $50,000 per year will run out in 20 years. that can make the different between living on about $30,000 (at max benefits) per year to $80,000 per year. certainly a nice jump, but hardly ridiculous. plus it runs out in 20 years. if you're used to making that kind of money or more, it's "not enough".


the real point is that most of us are in the same boat, worrying about largely the same things. having enough to maintain a familiar lifestyle in our golden years. those starting out retirement with even a million or two in savings should be seen as ON *OUR* SIDE, as opposed to those with vastly more savings. THOSE are the ones living on a very different planet.




Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

One of the up sides of global warming.. Fumesucker Feb 2012 #1
I won't need all $4 million to pay for my cardboard box LiberalEsto Feb 2012 #2
Seriously. Those "financial experts" are vapid. Matariki Feb 2012 #3
I'm planning on 3 million... JSnuffy Feb 2012 #4
The only appropriate response is "well bully for you" Matariki Feb 2012 #18
Why golly.. thanks... JSnuffy Feb 2012 #19
I don't think you are a "fat cat" burning $100 bills. Matariki Feb 2012 #20
no you miss the point backwoodsbob Feb 2012 #21
Sorry to break the news to you Matariki Feb 2012 #22
Ok.... JSnuffy Feb 2012 #24
I don't think you have time ... GeorgeGist Feb 2012 #23
Damn...I'm just the teensiest bit short of that... abq e streeter Feb 2012 #5
sorry, i only read your headline.. but ldf Feb 2012 #6
I wonder what "No Money" magazine thinks... MineralMan Feb 2012 #7
Sure, retirement is fun. Vounltary or otherwise. Nuts! 4 Million? Paper Roses Feb 2012 #8
Crap! Time to max out those Wall St investments raouldukelives Feb 2012 #9
I finally got some numbers to work hfojvt Feb 2012 #10
The one that gave me the biggest laugh Warpy Feb 2012 #11
the point is that even those at the top end of the 99% worry about the same thing unblock Feb 2012 #12
How many of us will have that? Or even need that much? LiberalFighter Feb 2012 #13
How? Simple, save $50k a year for 40 years - that's $2 million. Fool Count Feb 2012 #14
Heh, and that's SAVING 50k a year; which, improbably, means the person has to MAKE 200k plus. HughBeaumont Feb 2012 #16
$5 million is the point where you (probably) don't have to worry about money ever again taught_me_patience Feb 2012 #15
We're just a little short Worried senior Feb 2012 #17
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Money Magazine: "Ret...»Reply #12