Author Topic: Actually, 2 out of 3 ARE bad....  (Read 2823 times)

The Guru

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 214
  • Age: 64
  • Location: Great Lakes
Actually, 2 out of 3 ARE bad....
« on: September 12, 2018, 06:09:14 PM »
...when you're talking about these tips to "push your retirement savings strategy into overdrive."

https://smartasset.com/retirement/3-quick-retirement-tips?utm_source=msn&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=msn__falc_sept_0912&utm_content=3quicktips

1. Getting a high-interest savings account isn't a bad idea in itself, though it isn't going to fund anyone's retirement by itself either- especially if one uses the money saved to...

2. Hire a professional advisor- at a cost of 1.xx%, or coincidentally, about what one saves by doing #1

dandarc

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3469
  • Age: 36
Re: Actually, 2 out of 3 ARE bad....
« Reply #1 on: September 12, 2018, 06:25:52 PM »
Don't know about #3 either - default is showing "save 1.024 million to $106,350 in retirement income" Surely they aren't advocating a >10% withdrawal rate?

Wexler

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 393
Re: Actually, 2 out of 3 ARE bad....
« Reply #2 on: September 12, 2018, 09:34:03 PM »
That calculator is insane.  It was spitting out 96,000 on 900,000 of savings.  I'm all for playing around with the 4% rule, but I was thinking more like trying some modeling at 4.3%...

DS

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 678
Re: Actually, 2 out of 3 ARE bad....
« Reply #3 on: September 13, 2018, 09:07:58 AM »
That calculator is insane.  It was spitting out 96,000 on 900,000 of savings.  I'm all for playing around with the 4% rule, but I was thinking more like trying some modeling at 4.3%...

It maxes out at 40% savings too.

"Monthly savings amount should be at most 40% of your monthly income. We have updated your savings amount to 40%."

partdopy

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 126
Re: Actually, 2 out of 3 ARE bad....
« Reply #4 on: September 13, 2018, 09:33:08 AM »
That calculator is insane.  It was spitting out 96,000 on 900,000 of savings.  I'm all for playing around with the 4% rule, but I was thinking more like trying some modeling at 4.3%...

Is it including social security at full SS age too though?  If it's using like 70 as a retirement age it kind of seems reasonable, based on life expectancy you would only have to plan for like 15 years max.

Nederstash

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 376
Re: Actually, 2 out of 3 ARE bad....
« Reply #5 on: September 15, 2018, 12:45:52 PM »
That calculator is insane.  It was spitting out 96,000 on 900,000 of savings.  I'm all for playing around with the 4% rule, but I was thinking more like trying some modeling at 4.3%...

It maxes out at 40% savings too.

"Monthly savings amount should be at most 40% of your monthly income. We have updated your savings amount to 40%."

... What

DS

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 678
Re: Actually, 2 out of 3 ARE bad....
« Reply #6 on: September 17, 2018, 02:23:33 PM »
That calculator is insane.  It was spitting out 96,000 on 900,000 of savings.  I'm all for playing around with the 4% rule, but I was thinking more like trying some modeling at 4.3%...

It maxes out at 40% savings too.

"Monthly savings amount should be at most 40% of your monthly income. We have updated your savings amount to 40%."

... What

Don't wanna save too much. Gotta live a little!! Haha.