The Money Mustache Community

Around the Internet => Antimustachian Wall of Shame and Comedy => Topic started by: BuffaloStache on November 27, 2017, 09:41:45 PM

Title: The "Best" places to retire, says US News
Post by: BuffaloStache on November 27, 2017, 09:41:45 PM
https://money.usnews.com/money/retirement/baby-boomers/slideshows/the-best-places-to-retire-in-2018?slide=2 (https://money.usnews.com/money/retirement/baby-boomers/slideshows/the-best-places-to-retire-in-2018?slide=2)

Some of the cities on this list aren't that bad, but the fact that many HCOL areas (San Diego, DC, Philly, Honolulu) are on this list seems odd to me
Title: Re: The "Best" places to retire, says US News
Post by: CCCA on November 27, 2017, 10:12:31 PM
https://money.usnews.com/money/retirement/baby-boomers/slideshows/the-best-places-to-retire-in-2018?slide=2 (https://money.usnews.com/money/retirement/baby-boomers/slideshows/the-best-places-to-retire-in-2018?slide=2)

Some of the cities on this list aren't that bad, but the fact that many HCOL areas (San Diego, DC, Philly, Honolulu) are on this list seems odd to me


Well I guess it depends on how you define "Best".  Certainly, housing costs are going to have an impact on how much you need for retirement and thus when you can retire, but if you had the choice of retiring with enough money in San Diego or McAllen Tx, I think many/most people would choose San Diego. 


If your total cost of living is 40% higher in one city vs another.  In order to grow your stache by 40% to retire in the more expensive city might only take an extra 4 years.  My simple spreadsheet calc assumes $1M vs $1.4M needed in city 1 vs 2.  at 7% overall market returns and saving $25k/yr while working.  The extra $400k needed after reaching $1M in retirement savings will take less than 4 years more. 


That's the power of one more year (OMY).  Even if you choose not to retire in a HCOL area, you can have a much more cushy retirement if you work a few extra years.  I'm not saying that's desirable but that is a real thing.   
Title: Re: The "Best" places to retire, says US News
Post by: Laura33 on November 28, 2017, 07:57:53 AM
https://money.usnews.com/money/retirement/baby-boomers/slideshows/the-best-places-to-retire-in-2018?slide=2 (https://money.usnews.com/money/retirement/baby-boomers/slideshows/the-best-places-to-retire-in-2018?slide=2)

Some of the cities on this list aren't that bad, but the fact that many HCOL areas (San Diego, DC, Philly, Honolulu) are on this list seems odd to me

I suspect they are on the list for the same reasons they are HCOL, e.g., outstanding weather, great local amenities to enjoy, etc.  And to be fair, many of the options listed were much lower-cost.

Remember, the average American doesn't think much about saving money, much less about the delta between the size of 'stache needed in San Diego vs. rural Alabama.  So why should we expect a magazine (not to mention one that isn't finance-focused) to focus heavily on the money angle when its readers don't?
Title: Re: The "Best" places to retire, says US News
Post by: BuffaloStache on November 28, 2017, 09:26:11 AM
Fair points all, I just thought the choices were seemingly all over the place and didn't have a real theme as to why they were chosen.
Title: Re: The "Best" places to retire, says US News
Post by: jinga nation on November 28, 2017, 10:16:40 AM
<rant>

TL;DR: Jerking off the elephant while standing on your dick.

I believe real, actual retirement is out of reach for the ordinary American, so articles like this are feel-good puff pieces designed to make Average Joe and Jane feel good while stuck in the vicious cycle of media, prepared/junk/frozen foods, and consumerism.

Medicare is being constantly fucked. Millennials and probably Gen-Ys may witness it's demise in their lifetime.
Universal healthcare is getting proper fucked. I'm blaming both sides, for not implementing it properly as a single-payer system, to concessions to BigPharma and BigInsurance, to "Let's strangle the damn thing slowly".
Retirement age keeps on going up in the name of longevity in order to tax us for a little longer.

The one thing every American needs in retirement is access to affordable healthcare. Chances are slim-to-none that anyone under 40 will get any in ~2065.

We've voted to get ourselves fucked up the ass and in the mouth, we deserve every fucking we get, BYO lube. Every candidate is corrupt or will be as soon as the results are validated. And corporations are people, so we're getting fucked by 800 lb gorillas and blue whales.

So let's stop with the fantasy of retirement for the masses and live in the moment, constructive or destructive behavior is up to the individual.

Mustachians are statistical outliers whose opinions don't count or are ridiculed by the masses. Stay the course, stay healthy, grab the popcorn and watch from the sidelines.

</rant>
Title: Re: The "Best" places to retire, says US News
Post by: Just Joe on November 28, 2017, 11:00:45 AM
Who wants to live in a major metro area and try to drive at age 75? I'd think some sort of smallish city would be a better choice.
Title: Re: The "Best" places to retire, says US News
Post by: paddedhat on November 28, 2017, 11:27:16 AM
The wife and I retired to the #2 rated city in the article, Lancaster (county)PA. After spending time in many different cities and regions, in the eastern and southern 2/3rd of the country, we found this to be the best fit. Hopefully, the article doesn't impact the area too negatively. A few years back, another source named one of our local small towns, "the coolest small town in America". Wow, talk about a way to make a town explode, it's still a great place, but houses sell in days, and weekend traffic is ugly. Being pretty familiar with several of the winning locations, I'm struck by the huge disparities in COL, and (subjectively) desirability. I'm not going to offend anybody, but I've been to a few of them that I would move to without a second thought, if my COL wouldn't double, and others that I think, "who would ever want to deliberately move to that shit show?"










Title: Re: The "Best" places to retire, says US News
Post by: dougules on November 30, 2017, 10:13:59 AM
These things are always so subjective.  Some people like to be way out in the country, some people in a big city. Some people like the beach, and others want good skiing.  Some people really want nice weather, and others don't mind sweating it out or shoveling snow.  Then, everybody has different numbers for what constitutes HCOL vs LCOL.
Title: Re: The "Best" places to retire, says US News
Post by: dougules on November 30, 2017, 10:16:43 AM
Who wants to live in a major metro area and try to drive at age 75? I'd think some sort of smallish city would be a better choice.

The point of living in a major metro area to me would be not having to drive at all. 
Title: Re: The "Best" places to retire, says US News
Post by: Laura33 on November 30, 2017, 10:17:31 AM
Who wants to live in a major metro area and try to drive at age 75? I'd think some sort of smallish city would be a better choice.

The point of living in a major metro area to me would be not having to drive at all.

+1. 
Title: Re: The "Best" places to retire, says US News
Post by: Just Joe on November 30, 2017, 10:58:21 AM
My version of big city is suburban living and your version is urban living. I get it. Not sure I'd want to do either. ;)
Title: Re: The "Best" places to retire, says US News
Post by: dougules on November 30, 2017, 11:32:22 AM
My version of big city is suburban living and your version is urban living. I get it. Not sure I'd want to do either. ;)

I don't think I'd personally want to live in the burbs or the boonies.  One of the few things I firmly believe is that everybody is different. 
Title: Re: The "Best" places to retire, says US News
Post by: Just Joe on November 30, 2017, 03:36:52 PM
I'm not really neighborhood compatible. ;)

(Noisy hobbies. Can't paint a car when the neighbor's house is 15 ft away. Can't run a tablesaw in a condo garage.)

Maybe at a later time of our life being downtown will work for DW and I.
Title: Re: The "Best" places to retire, says US News
Post by: dougules on December 01, 2017, 11:26:21 AM
I'm not really neighborhood compatible. ;)

(Noisy hobbies. Can't paint a car when the neighbor's house is 15 ft away. Can't run a tablesaw in a condo garage.)

Maybe at a later time of our life being downtown will work for DW and I.

You living somewhere smaller keeps downtowns cheaper for me.  :)
Title: Re: The "Best" places to retire, says US News
Post by: Hula Hoop on December 02, 2017, 05:17:24 AM
My version of big city is suburban living and your version is urban living. I get it. Not sure I'd want to do either. ;)

My 80 year old dad lives right in the center of a major US city and walks almost everywhere.  Almost everything is a few blocks from home - supermarket and restaurants, doctor, friends.  It's great as it keeps him fit and youthful and he can continue to walk way beyond the age when most people can drive.  I can't imagine anything worse than being an old person who can't drive trapped in the suburbs or out in the country.  Cities are great for old people IMO.
Title: Re: The "Best" places to retire, says US News
Post by: Just Joe on December 02, 2017, 06:47:05 PM
I'm not really neighborhood compatible. ;)

(Noisy hobbies. Can't paint a car when the neighbor's house is 15 ft away. Can't run a tablesaw in a condo garage.)

Maybe at a later time of our life being downtown will work for DW and I.

You living somewhere smaller keeps downtowns cheaper for me.  :)

Prob works in my favor too to have you in the city. ;)
Title: Re: The "Best" places to retire, says US News
Post by: BuffaloStache on December 03, 2017, 09:37:50 AM
My version of big city is suburban living and your version is urban living. I get it. Not sure I'd want to do either. ;)

My 80 year old dad lives right in the center of a major US city and walks almost everywhere.  Almost everything is a few blocks from home - supermarket and restaurants, doctor, friends.  It's great as it keeps him fit and youthful and he can continue to walk way beyond the age when most people can drive.  I can't imagine anything worse than being an old person who can't drive trapped in the suburbs or out in the country.  Cities are great for old people IMO.

I agree with this as long as they can afford housing in the city, or at least somehow get into a rent-controlled housing situation. If a city brings in a large industry base suddenly (I'm thinking of Seattle throughout the 90's-00's, or similar), then average rent prices can skyrocket and leave a retiree (ER or regular) needing additional funds.
Title: Re: The "Best" places to retire, says US News
Post by: Hula Hoop on December 03, 2017, 10:36:27 AM
My version of big city is suburban living and your version is urban living. I get it. Not sure I'd want to do either. ;)

My 80 year old dad lives right in the center of a major US city and walks almost everywhere.  Almost everything is a few blocks from home - supermarket and restaurants, doctor, friends.  It's great as it keeps him fit and youthful and he can continue to walk way beyond the age when most people can drive.  I can't imagine anything worse than being an old person who can't drive trapped in the suburbs or out in the country.  Cities are great for old people IMO.

I agree with this as long as they can afford housing in the city, or at least somehow get into a rent-controlled housing situation. If a city brings in a large industry base suddenly (I'm thinking of Seattle throughout the 90's-00's, or similar), then average rent prices can skyrocket and leave a retiree (ER or regular) needing additional funds.

My dad bought back in the 70s so he's one of the lucky ones. 
Title: Re: The "Best" places to retire, says US News
Post by: facepalm on December 03, 2017, 10:43:55 AM
<rant>

TL;DR: Jerking off the elephant while standing on your dick.

I believe real, actual retirement is out of reach for the ordinary American, so articles like this are feel-good puff pieces designed to make Average Joe and Jane feel good while stuck in the vicious cycle of media, prepared/junk/frozen foods, and consumerism.

Medicare is being constantly fucked. Millennials and probably Gen-Ys may witness it's demise in their lifetime.
Universal healthcare is getting proper fucked. I'm blaming both sides, for not implementing it properly as a single-payer system, to concessions to BigPharma and BigInsurance, to "Let's strangle the damn thing slowly".
Retirement age keeps on going up in the name of longevity in order to tax us for a little longer.

The one thing every American needs in retirement is access to affordable healthcare. Chances are slim-to-none that anyone under 40 will get any in ~2065.

We've voted to get ourselves fucked up the ass and in the mouth, we deserve every fucking we get, BYO lube. Every candidate is corrupt or will be as soon as the results are validated. And corporations are people, so we're getting fucked by 800 lb gorillas and blue whales.

So let's stop with the fantasy of retirement for the masses and live in the moment, constructive or destructive behavior is up to the individual.

Mustachians are statistical outliers whose opinions don't count or are ridiculed by the masses. Stay the course, stay healthy, grab the popcorn and watch from the sidelines.

</rant>

So much to like here.

I think the article is a bit of feel good puffery. If the authors were honest, the top two considerations would be taxes and health care, followed by cost of living, followed by amenities. Not "Retire here because we have lots of cool shit to spend money on." Though to be fair, taxes in FL and TX are not bad. While your average American thinks they will be able to retire to Portland or Palm Beach, the reality is that most won't even be able to afford Elko, NV.
Title: Re: The "Best" places to retire, says US News
Post by: dougules on December 04, 2017, 11:12:29 AM
I'm not really neighborhood compatible. ;)

(Noisy hobbies. Can't paint a car when the neighbor's house is 15 ft away. Can't run a tablesaw in a condo garage.)

Maybe at a later time of our life being downtown will work for DW and I.

You living somewhere smaller keeps downtowns cheaper for me.  :)

Prob works in my favor too to have you in the city. ;)

There are only 5 acres of land per person in the world.  That includes not only your yard, but the land that grows your food, the roads you drive on, the place you work and the parking spaces you park on.  It also includes the Sahara, Antarctica, Siberia, and the Amazon.  People in high rises definitely help you. 


My version of big city is suburban living and your version is urban living. I get it. Not sure I'd want to do either. ;)

My 80 year old dad lives right in the center of a major US city and walks almost everywhere.  Almost everything is a few blocks from home - supermarket and restaurants, doctor, friends.  It's great as it keeps him fit and youthful and he can continue to walk way beyond the age when most people can drive.  I can't imagine anything worse than being an old person who can't drive trapped in the suburbs or out in the country.  Cities are great for old people IMO.

I agree with this as long as they can afford housing in the city, or at least somehow get into a rent-controlled housing situation. If a city brings in a large industry base suddenly (I'm thinking of Seattle throughout the 90's-00's, or similar), then average rent prices can skyrocket and leave a retiree (ER or regular) needing additional funds.

My dad bought back in the 70s so he's one of the lucky ones.

Cities are an intrinsically cheap place to live.  You don't need as much land, as much road, as many cars.  Even the post office and UPS don't have to have as long a route to distribute their items.  It's just that demand in the US has far exceeded supply.  Nobody's really allowing the inner suburbs to be reconfigured to be more urban.  The cities are also subsidizing the suburbs and the countryside. 
Title: Re: The "Best" places to retire, says US News
Post by: oldtoyota on December 04, 2017, 11:23:25 AM
<rant>

TL;DR: Jerking off the elephant while standing on your dick.

I believe real, actual retirement is out of reach for the ordinary American, so articles like this are feel-good puff pieces designed to make Average Joe and Jane feel good while stuck in the vicious cycle of media, prepared/junk/frozen foods, and consumerism.

Medicare is being constantly fucked. Millennials and probably Gen-Ys may witness it's demise in their lifetime.
Universal healthcare is getting proper fucked. I'm blaming both sides, for not implementing it properly as a single-payer system, to concessions to BigPharma and BigInsurance, to "Let's strangle the damn thing slowly".
Retirement age keeps on going up in the name of longevity in order to tax us for a little longer.

The one thing every American needs in retirement is access to affordable healthcare. Chances are slim-to-none that anyone under 40 will get any in ~2065.

We've voted to get ourselves fucked up the ass and in the mouth, we deserve every fucking we get, BYO lube. Every candidate is corrupt or will be as soon as the results are validated. And corporations are people, so we're getting fucked by 800 lb gorillas and blue whales.

So let's stop with the fantasy of retirement for the masses and live in the moment, constructive or destructive behavior is up to the individual.

Mustachians are statistical outliers whose opinions don't count or are ridiculed by the masses. Stay the course, stay healthy, grab the popcorn and watch from the sidelines.

</rant>

So much to like here.

I think the article is a bit of feel good puffery. If the authors were honest, the top two considerations would be taxes and health care, followed by cost of living, followed by amenities. Not "Retire here because we have lots of cool shit to spend money on." Though to be fair, taxes in FL and TX are not bad. While your average American thinks they will be able to retire to Portland or Palm Beach, the reality is that most won't even be able to afford Elko, NV.

And not to mention Florida is sinking into the ocean. But nothing to see here, people! It's just "problem water."