30 year retirement

Discuss all general (i.e. non-personal) investing questions and issues, investing news, and theory.
User avatar
willthrill81
Posts: 26167
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 3:17 pm
Location: USA

Re: 30 year retirement

Post by willthrill81 »

secondopinion wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 9:08 pm My guess is that I will live at least as long as my second to oldest great-grandparent (death in the 90s). So I have to figure for 100 as the run-out age (my medical is equal or better). At that point, I am either dead or I have secured someone to care for me.
Those with good family longevity who take good care of their bodies and are free of serious chronic ailments probably stand at least a decent shot of making it to 95 or even 100. That's part of the reason why I plan to defer SS benefits to age 70, not due to any break-even business but to provide for maximum longevity insurance.
“Good and ill have not changed since yesteryear; nor are they one thing among Elves and Dwarves and another among Men.” J.R.R. Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings
invest4
Posts: 604
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2019 2:19 am

Re: 30 year retirement

Post by invest4 »

AlohaBill wrote: Fri Oct 08, 2021 11:26 am I just don’t see why a 30 year retirement should be the assumption. At most 25 years. I asked how many bogleheads have had a 30 year retirement and two people responded. Also, life expectancy in the us has been falling since the drug epidemic and current pandemic. Very, very few people make it to 90.
One other thing, has the 4% rule ever failed in the past?
JoeRetire wrote: Fri Oct 08, 2021 2:45 pm
AlohaBill wrote: Fri Oct 08, 2021 2:16 pm It was this forum and Taylor Larimore was one. I use his method of withdrawal. It is just as good as all the others. We’re all just whistling in the dark as it is when it comes to withdrawal methods. We don’t know what the stock market will give us and we don’t know the allotted time we have left.
And yet still we must plan...
+1 Everyone must make their bets / choices...then we see how it all shakes out.
User avatar
FiveK
Posts: 12124
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2014 2:43 pm

Re: 30 year retirement

Post by FiveK »

AlohaBill wrote: Fri Oct 08, 2021 11:26 am I just don’t see why a 30 year retirement should be the assumption.
It's an assumption. Doesn't have to be the assumption everyone uses. Whatever assumption one person chooses, someone else can say "but that doesn't apply to me...."
One other thing, has the 4% rule ever failed in the past?
That answer can be either yes or no - depending on what assumptions one makes about asset allocation, type of bonds, etc.
User avatar
JoeRetire
Posts: 9591
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 2:44 pm

Re: 30 year retirement

Post by JoeRetire »

tennisplyr wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 7:19 pm
JoeRetire wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 7:13 pm
tennisplyr wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 7:09 pm
AlohaBill wrote: Fri Oct 08, 2021 11:26 am I just don’t see why a 30 year retirement should be the assumption. At most 25 years. I asked how many bogleheads have had a 30 year retirement and two people responded. Also, life expectancy in the us has been falling since the drug epidemic and current pandemic. Very, very few people make it to 90.
One other thing, has the 4% rule ever failed in the past?

I agree the average years in retirement is ~18 years, why focus on the minority, why not the majority?
Because dying before you run out of money isn't a problem.
Running out of money before you die is.
Put another way, if I'm way more likely to die than live long enough to run out of money, I'm not worrying about running out of money!!
Planning for the average means you are equally as likely to die after the 18 years as you are to die before then.
Just remember: it's not a lie if you believe it.
User avatar
JoeRetire
Posts: 9591
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 2:44 pm

Re: 30 year retirement

Post by JoeRetire »

invest4 wrote: Tue Oct 12, 2021 3:03 am
AlohaBill wrote: Fri Oct 08, 2021 11:26 am I just don’t see why a 30 year retirement should be the assumption. At most 25 years. I asked how many bogleheads have had a 30 year retirement and two people responded. Also, life expectancy in the us has been falling since the drug epidemic and current pandemic. Very, very few people make it to 90.
One other thing, has the 4% rule ever failed in the past?
JoeRetire wrote: Fri Oct 08, 2021 2:45 pm
AlohaBill wrote: Fri Oct 08, 2021 2:16 pm It was this forum and Taylor Larimore was one. I use his method of withdrawal. It is just as good as all the others. We’re all just whistling in the dark as it is when it comes to withdrawal methods. We don’t know what the stock market will give us and we don’t know the allotted time we have left.
And yet still we must plan...
+1 Everyone must make their bets / choices...then we see how it all shakes out.
You pays your money and you takes your chances.

Me, I would never want to be a burden on my family. Perhaps others don't care as much.
Just remember: it's not a lie if you believe it.
Wannaretireearly
Posts: 2013
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:39 pm

Re: 30 year retirement

Post by Wannaretireearly »

I've seen 33X to 40X seem good expense multiples for a roughly 40 year retirement period. I'll go with that target for now (retirement time period and liquid assets).
On the flip side, age 55 is likely the latest I want to retire. Hopefully closer to 50.

I think with some of us here, none of this factors SS or inheritance, which will give an additional longevity safety net.
Death and taxes. Only one is under your control!
secondopinion
Posts: 1380
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2020 1:18 pm

Re: 30 year retirement

Post by secondopinion »

willthrill81 wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 10:37 pm
secondopinion wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 9:08 pm My guess is that I will live at least as long as my second to oldest great-grandparent (death in the 90s). So I have to figure for 100 as the run-out age (my medical is equal or better). At that point, I am either dead or I have secured someone to care for me.
Those with good family longevity who take good care of their bodies and are free of serious chronic ailments probably stand at least a decent shot of making it to 95 or even 100. That's part of the reason why I plan to defer SS benefits to age 70, not due to any break-even business but to provide for maximum longevity insurance.
Agreed. The worst case for too late is not gaining much out of it, which is not a major problem as long as the income is not relied on until that age. If one does retire late, then it will pretty much ensure that they have the best case against long life (which is good but a liability to one's finances)
seajay
Posts: 389
Joined: Sat May 01, 2021 3:26 pm

Re: 30 year retirement

Post by seajay »

Early 60's and increasingly leaning to targeting a higher 20 year 5% or 6% SWR go-large type lifestyle, with maybe just occupational and state pensions along with home value to fund 85+ age 'care home' type lifestyle (but with reasonable prospects that even 5% or 6% SWR might still have residual capital available at/after 20 years).

Better that (having more fun when younger/able), than having the most expensive tombstone in the graveyard and/or deathbed regrets of having been too frugal.
User avatar
willthrill81
Posts: 26167
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 3:17 pm
Location: USA

Re: 30 year retirement

Post by willthrill81 »

seajay wrote: Tue Oct 12, 2021 10:57 am Early 60's and increasingly leaning to targeting a higher 20 year 5% or 6% SWR go-large type lifestyle, with maybe just occupational and state pensions along with home value to fund 85+ age 'care home' type lifestyle (but with reasonable prospects that even 5% or 6% SWR might still have residual capital available at/after 20 years).

Better that (having more fun when younger/able), than having the most expensive tombstone in the graveyard and/or deathbed regrets of having been too frugal.
Another option is to use something like the ABW withdrawal method (discussed on the Wiki and numerous threads) in conjunction with a higher rate of return than what you believe is likely (e.g., use 4% instead of the 3% implied by stock valuations and bond yields). This front-loads your withdrawals, which is what it sounds like you want to do, while still preventing you from prematurely depleting your portfolio.
“Good and ill have not changed since yesteryear; nor are they one thing among Elves and Dwarves and another among Men.” J.R.R. Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings
Stormbringer
Posts: 1057
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2015 7:07 am

Re: 30 year retirement

Post by Stormbringer »

This whole discussion is a reminder of why annuities (at least as a concept, if not as a product) are so efficient. Without them, people need to save for how long they might live, which is longer than the average person will live. Therefore as a group, it forces us to over-save. Annuities allow people to pool their longevity risk such that members of the pool need only fund the annuity to the average life expectancy of the pool.
“The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function.” - Albert Allen Bartlett
User avatar
willthrill81
Posts: 26167
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 3:17 pm
Location: USA

Re: 30 year retirement

Post by willthrill81 »

Stormbringer wrote: Tue Oct 12, 2021 5:28 pm This whole discussion is a reminder of why annuities (at least as a concept, if not as a product) are so efficient. Without them, people need to save for how long they might live, which is longer than the average person will live. Therefore as a group, it forces us to over-save. Annuities allow people to pool their longevity risk such that members of the pool need only fund the annuity to the average life expectancy of the pool.
Absolutely. SPIAs are a fantastic concept. But they have practical problems that are not insignificant to most retirees. Permanently relinquishing all control of the annuitized funds in return for the promise of future payment is a big hurdle for many, especially in knowing that their heirs will not receive those funds either (unless a rider is purchased to change this provision). Foregoing all upside potential is another big hurdle for many.
Last edited by willthrill81 on Wed Oct 13, 2021 1:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
“Good and ill have not changed since yesteryear; nor are they one thing among Elves and Dwarves and another among Men.” J.R.R. Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings
delamer
Posts: 12458
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 6:13 pm

Re: 30 year retirement

Post by delamer »

JoeRetire wrote: Tue Oct 12, 2021 5:56 am
tennisplyr wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 7:19 pm
JoeRetire wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 7:13 pm
tennisplyr wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 7:09 pm
AlohaBill wrote: Fri Oct 08, 2021 11:26 am I just don’t see why a 30 year retirement should be the assumption. At most 25 years. I asked how many bogleheads have had a 30 year retirement and two people responded. Also, life expectancy in the us has been falling since the drug epidemic and current pandemic. Very, very few people make it to 90.
One other thing, has the 4% rule ever failed in the past?

I agree the average years in retirement is ~18 years, why focus on the minority, why not the majority?
Because dying before you run out of money isn't a problem.
Running out of money before you die is.
Put another way, if I'm way more likely to die than live long enough to run out of money, I'm not worrying about running out of money!!
Planning for the average means you are equally as likely to die after the 18 years as you are to die before then.
If 18 years is the median average, that’s true.

Mean or mode, that may not be true.
One thing that humbles me deeply is to see that human genius has its limits while human stupidity does not. | | Alexandre Dumas, fils
User avatar
JoeRetire
Posts: 9591
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 2:44 pm

Re: 30 year retirement

Post by JoeRetire »

delamer wrote: Tue Oct 12, 2021 9:28 pm
JoeRetire wrote: Tue Oct 12, 2021 5:56 am
tennisplyr wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 7:19 pm
JoeRetire wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 7:13 pm
tennisplyr wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 7:09 pm


I agree the average years in retirement is ~18 years, why focus on the minority, why not the majority?
Because dying before you run out of money isn't a problem.
Running out of money before you die is.
Put another way, if I'm way more likely to die than live long enough to run out of money, I'm not worrying about running out of money!!
Planning for the average means you are equally as likely to die after the 18 years as you are to die before then.
If 18 years is the median average, that’s true.

Mean or mode, that may not be true.
Sure.
Just remember: it's not a lie if you believe it.
Post Reply