Author Topic: Sixty-Seven Year Old Millionaires Are Poor  (Read 2554 times)

kayvent

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 637
  • Location: Canada
Sixty-Seven Year Old Millionaires Are Poor
« on: December 03, 2017, 11:46:01 AM »
https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/finance-retirement/welcome-to-the-age-of-million-dollar-poverty/ar-BBG5yoY

The article starts out pretty bad but I like the later demonstration of inflation and COL.

Quote
A cool $1 million has long been considered the gold standard of retirement savings. These days, it's only a fraction of what you will really need.

For instance, a 67-year-old baby boomer retiring now with $1 million in the bank will generate $40,000 a year to live on adjusted for inflation and assuming a sustainable withdrawal rate of 4 percent.

(Note, they'd get ~12K/year in Canadian Pension.)

I wonder if the writer of the article realized that the medium working income in Canada is around 50K.
« Last Edit: December 03, 2017, 11:49:21 AM by kayvent »

YttriumNitrate

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 531
  • Location: Northwest Indiana
Re: Sixty-Seven Year Old Millionaires Are Poor
« Reply #1 on: December 03, 2017, 12:09:48 PM »
Copying my Boglehead's response to this article:

Looks to be some creative use of inflation numbers to come up with a click-bait headline. While it's probably true that retiring in 2052 with just $1 million (in 2052 dollars, assuming 3% inflation) will a bit tight, it's not much different than retiring in 2017 with $340k in the bank (in 2017 dollars).

If they wanted to be even more sensational, they could have talked about how BILLIONAIRES are going to be retiring in poverty (in 2290).

Just Joe

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2705
Re: Sixty-Seven Year Old Millionaires Are Poor
« Reply #2 on: December 05, 2017, 08:13:29 AM »
Could even be worse - what if the DC political circus wrecks the economy and our country goes the way of Zimbabwe? Might cost a trillion dollars to buy lunch...