Author Topic: yahoo finance article  (Read 2632 times)

AlanStache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1917
  • Age: 40
  • Location: South East Virginia
yahoo finance article
« on: December 10, 2013, 11:56:29 AM »
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/could-you-be-oversaving-for-retirement-155306366.html

So calculating retirement needs based on income does not work....  what else could we use...

And the assumption that you will work till 65 so you might as well save less before then - stupid.

the fixer

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1037
  • Location: Seattle, WA
Re: yahoo finance article
« Reply #1 on: December 10, 2013, 12:18:41 PM »
Four households is not a statistically significant sample. Morningstar needs to hire more people who can actually do math.

The guy does correctly point to expenses as the better measurement, though.

Cromacster

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1696
  • Location: Minnesnowta
Re: yahoo finance article
« Reply #2 on: December 10, 2013, 12:19:13 PM »
The whole principle behind "mustashianism" does not use income as part of the calculation either.  Its spending, which is what this article is beginning to touch on.  If you need less to "live", you don't need as much saved.

While a very misleading and ridiculous title to draw in readers, it starts to present what MMM is all about (though very loosely).  But it fails because it makes the assumption that you will work until at least 59.5 when you can draw from retirement.  But if they feel anyone is saving TOO much for retirement?  That's pretty damn silly to say the least.  Then ends with:

Quote
Most Americans arenít saving enough for retirement, and one of the most common regrets among retirees is that they didnít sock away more when they were younger and bringing home a steady paycheck.

Nullifying the entire article...

odput

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 414
  • Age: 34
  • "I reject your reality and substitute my own"
Re: yahoo finance article
« Reply #3 on: December 10, 2013, 01:21:47 PM »
Four households is not a statistically significant sample. Morningstar needs to hire more people who can actually do math.

Let's not forget the income range that those spanned...$37.5k-$225k, so that likely means one data point per income level, assuming that $37.5k was the lowest, $225k was the highest, and there were 2 points taken in the middle somewhere around $75k and $150k.

Its strange that you would lump such a large income disparity into one group and call it "average"

AlanStache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1917
  • Age: 40
  • Location: South East Virginia
Re: yahoo finance article
« Reply #4 on: December 10, 2013, 01:51:36 PM »
Quote
Four households is not a statistically significant sample.

And that might not be the worst part of the article.

cats

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1158
Re: yahoo finance article
« Reply #5 on: December 10, 2013, 09:57:25 PM »
I do love the headdesk header image.  Aside from that, nothing much to add :)