| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 66172 | 2006-02-13 21:32:00 | Retirement planning - boring but necessary! | Tony (4941) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 430086 | 2006-02-13 21:32:00 | My wife and I are coming up to retirement age and are looking at our financial needs (as you do!). We are fortunate enough to have a reasonable nest-egg, and so our main area of uncertainty is not whether we will have enough to live on, but how much we can afford to spend and not be destitute in 25 years time. It would be very useful to have some insight as to how, in general, people's spending patterns change with increasing age. For instance, if we are now spending $x p.a, in 25 years we are likely to be spending x-20% (for instance). I realize that there are huge number of variables involved here, but I find it difficult to believe that someone hasn't earned a PhD by doing this sort of research. I've seen a Department of Statistics spreadsheet that does exactly what I want, except it stops at age 65 and lumps everyone else into "over 65" - which is where I want the analysis! Can anyone point me to anything that could help in this regard? |
Tony (4941) | ||
| 430087 | 2006-02-13 22:48:00 | So, you are both planning to live until 90? Good on you :thumbs: I think there are just too many variables and individual differences and lifestyles, eg whether you want to spend 6 months of each year travelling around the world, I'd say only you can plan sensibly, knowing your own circumstances and current income/spending patterns, and how able you are to 'cut cloth accordingly'. If you listen to financial people with vested interests, like the insurance industry, investment 'consultants' etc etc, then they will tell you that you need 'millions' saved for retirement, way beyond what average Joe Bloggs would ever be able to aspire to. There may well be retirement seminars available, your local CAB may know. |
Terry Porritt (14) | ||
| 430088 | 2006-02-14 01:31:00 | Not to mention there are peopl without nest eggs and without any change for savings who aren't planning this stuff cause its not possible. And some people who at the age of 74 are still working.... |
pctek (84) | ||
| 430089 | 2006-02-14 01:34:00 | Terry, I think you are being a bit hard on the consultants, what they ARE saying is that you aim for $xxxxx income and you may need $xxxxxxxx invested to generate that income . Many people have final salary based pensions which reduce the need but not eliminate the need for a nest egg . You are right in saying there's no one size fits all . We live on roughly 70% of our preritirement income spend lot less on eating out and entertainment but a hell of a lot more on travel! |
bonzo29 (2348) | ||
| 430090 | 2006-02-14 02:28:00 | You are right in saying there's no one size fits all. We live on roughly 70% of our preritirement income spend lot less on eating out and entertainment but a hell of a lot more on travel!But will you still be living on 70% in 5 (10,15) years time? I am guessing probably less - but the question is, how much less? That's the question I am trying to answer. |
Tony (4941) | ||
| 430091 | 2006-02-14 02:47:00 | But will you still be living on 70% in 5 (10,15) years time? I am guessing probably less - but the question is, how much less? That's the question I am trying to answer. Can't answer that I'm afraid. I suppose the ideal situation is to die on the day you've reduced your assets to nil! All I know is we are still living on around 70% after 17 years and my feeling is it won't drop until I'm completely senile! The Gov Super is inflation adjusted but my company pension is not regularly adjusted although I think public service ones are. Our total income(inflation adjusted) remains about the same with a top up from my investments |
bonzo29 (2348) | ||
| 430092 | 2006-02-14 03:33:00 | Can't answer that I'm afraid. I suppose the ideal situation is to die on the day you've reduced your assets to nil!Preferably by being shot by a jealous lover! :D All I know is we are still living on around 70% after 17 yearsThat is interesting. Is that because you are spending what is available, or is that what you find necessary to survive? |
Tony (4941) | ||
| 430093 | 2006-02-14 04:03:00 | You can consume some of your house,if you own it,via a reverse mortgage. I have have looked at it,the longer you can leave it the better,10%compounding soon eats through it. |
Cicero (40) | ||
| 430094 | 2006-02-14 04:17:00 | Not to mention there are peopl without nest eggs and without any change for savings who aren't planning this stuff cause its not possible. And some people who at the age of 74 are still working....Don't worry, we realize how lucky we are.:) |
Tony (4941) | ||
| 430095 | 2006-02-14 07:38:00 | I have been semi retired for 8 years and budget $26-28000 per year for day to day living expenses for 2. This gives us a living standard somewhat similar to when we were both working. This excludes such things as replacement cars, overseas trips etc. We don't qualify for a community services card and the one item that is most likely to blow our budget is medical and dental expenses, which seem to go up exponentially each year as we get older. Hopefully when I become eligible for national super in a couple of years, the super will cover these increases. | tutaenui (1724) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 | |||||