Posted on 10/16/2006 4:26:06 AM PDT by shrinkermd
But who knows what's really "enough"?
Exactly correct!!!! There are those who absolutely can not live on $1,000,000 a year, forget $1,000,000 for the rest of your life. They'd consider you poor yet some of the happiest folks I know live on SS and a small pension or small savings. What do you need? What do you expect? What makes you happy? Enough to me is the ability to live happily within my means with as little outside help as possible. I did save however. That does make a difference.
PLAN AHEAD
Hmmm...well I think they had reasons to get out of bed in the morning.
My reason for getting out of bed religiously every morning is a spoiled Chihuahua who will not tolerate being fed late.
You are clearly over qualified.
I don't compare myself to those who can't live on $1m/year, because I've personally done it. What I really mean is, I find it difficult to calculate what I'm likely to need in the future, since I don't know what inflation will do, what investments will do, what today's dollars should be translated into for 20 or 30 years down the road. Those are all imponderables to me.
Today's average family is paying a much bigger tax bill than in the 1950s, and they are also carrying a lot more consumer and mortgage debt. They are also borrowing money to buy cars, instead of buying what they can afford to pay for with cash, and also paying for collision insurance on late-model cars. Many people pay more in car insurance each year than I've ever spent to buy a car. Many also spent a colossal sum of their parent's money (and in some cases their own) on a wedding -- many parents are now footing the bill for these extravagant weddings, instead of giving the gift of a downpayment on a modest home. The average home is filled with unnecessary electronic entertainment stuff -- big TVs with monthly cable bills, DVD players, stereos, etc. They enjoy a much higher material standard of living.
A now-deceased great-aunt and uncle of mine were a pretty typical 1950s family. He was a football coach and later a high school principal. She was a full-time homemaker and they lived on his income. They only had one car, which wasn't a problem since she never learned to drive. Their house was no more than 1000 square feet, with one tiny bathroom for all to share. No separate dining room, just and eat-in kitchen off the living room. There was never any thought of moving to a larger house or "better" neighborhood. In later years they had a color TV. I never heard them talk about going to movies, but assume they probably did occasionally before they had a TV. They went out to dinner rarely, only when company was visiting from out of town, and then to very inexpensive restaurants. He did all the maintenance work on the house and small yard himself. They didn't have a checking account; once a month she'd take the bus into town to pay the utility and mortgage bills in person. They didn't have any other bills. Her days were spent cooking meals from scratch, doing housecleaning and laundry, and looking after their one daughter. She underwent electroshock therapy for depression -- not surprising to me, though on paper she was living the perfect 1950s life. They seemed perfectly content, though when I knew them it was after the electroshock therapy, which per her daughter (who was old enough to remember her before the electroshock), seemed to fix the depression, but left her rather "dull". Once every summer, they'd drive to their old hometown in Iowa to visit relatives, and that was it for vacations. It would not be the least bit difficult to maintain this sort of lifestyle on one income today, but very few people want to.
Not really, since we're still on daylight time, not standard time.
My cat wants Fancy Feast....at 4:00 am...even on weekends. :)
Did not know that. Interesting and curious. Hazardous pay uplift? :o)
For one thing, we have more "stuff" out there to buy, more services to subscribe to..and everyone wants it!
But I can recall when the Husband's salary ALONE was what the mortgage company considered when we applied for a loan. They refused to factor in the wife's income. That changed..so now, we have two income families buying bigger homes and all the bells and whistles that go along with it..
Families get used to a duel incomes, and when one of them is out of work for whatever reason, their standard of living suffers.
As for retirement and part time jobs..well, those part-time jobs still come with commitment. And it's difficult for an old timer to get "time off" to go to Dr. appointments, trips, etc. You're still tied down to a job..even if it's part-time.
sw
401k $37,195 (Assumes 6% return and drawing 6% per year)
Defined benefit pension $37,548 (29 years, no future raises of changes in plan.)
$18,744 - Social Security @ 62 from SSA worksheet.
Grand total: $93,487
I don't make the rules, but I am frugal and deliberately chose employment with a company with a defined benefits program, but lower annual salary.
probably...lol
"But I can recall when the Husband's salary ALONE was what the mortgage company considered when we applied for a loan. They refused to factor in the wife's income. That changed..so now, we have two income families buying bigger homes and all the bells and whistles that go along with it.."
You say that like it was the "good old days" when a wife's income did not count. My mother had a career, and I remember how it infuriated her to live under that system. She made nearly half of my father's salary. I make about 90% of my husband's salary, and our generation wouldn't tolerate such discrimination.
It's still up to people how much house they buy; we've always been double income and will be, but we have always bought houses we COULD afford one one of our incomes alone. Having the wife's income count does not automatically mean overindulgence. It's just the right thing to do.
Scary. I plan to have the ability to retire and live the lifestyle of my choice by age 40 (16 years out). I doubt that I actually will do so, but my goal is that neither my family nor I will require me to produce active income after that point to live the way we want to live. I'm taking some big risks now (and living extremely frugally) to get to that point. If it doesn't pan out, I'll have no one to blame but myself.
I do get to write nice large checks to SS every now and then (taking income from a small business reveals the true 15.3% rate, and not the fictional 7.65% rate that the government pretends to be charging you). But I have known since the day I got my first real paycheck at age 14 that I will never see one cent of that money back, and factor it appropriately as a wealth transfer tax and not the ludicrous "government savings plan" that the feds pretend it is.
God Bless America.
That's what I fear. I really got on the ball with my retirement savings in my 30's. (I'm 45 now and don't want to work until SS age - 67. As if that will exist.)
I see myself being forced to pay for the "live for today, the guvmint'll take care of us tomorrow" attitude of some of my peers.
It's like the grasshopper and the ant fable. Or was that the tortoise and the hare?
Of course, the new book by The Donald and the "Rich Dad, Poor Dad" guy tells us we are fools to be piddling with our live-beneath-your-means philosophies anyway.
This book was taken to task by the WSJ personal finance columnist (Jonathan Clement?). I don't have a link since I read it at work.
I got my Class A CDL last year and made it past the 1 year mark without any major problems. If I can make it another 15 years driving OTR, I will be in demand during my so called golden years.
Don't worry, you won't have to "tolerate such discrimination"...LOL. But yes, they WERE the good ole days.
You might be an exception, rather than the rule, as far as being "maxed out" in debt..for your generation.
The one income "rule" served a good purpose. Most women ended up getting pregnant, and stayed home to raise their kids, and mortgage companies realized this was going to occur..But today, Day care is ultra expensive..so many working Mom's are making the sacrifice and staying home anyway..(not a bad thing)..
I don't see why your Mother was so angry? If her salary was that special, then she could have SAVED a good deal of it for a nice down payment on a larger home..I'm sure she contributed financially to many things in your family..including your education which allows you to brag you make "90% of your husband's salary"..
sw
Grasshopper and ant.
yeah, it's that and the fact that guvmint keeps ripping the fund off whenever they want. SS is just another 12% tax on working people.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.