Author Topic: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough  (Read 10546 times)

slappy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1299
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #50 on: November 20, 2019, 12:25:16 PM »
I totally agree with not getting married if you arenít having kids. Having kids is a much bigger commitment than marriage.

Which has nothing to do with the discussion. They have been together 15 years which is longer than many, many marriages where children are produced.

But they don't live together. I'm not sure how that would impact the relationship. It's different for everyone. Moving in together for the first time at the same time as having a kid could be a huge stressor.

slappy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1299
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #51 on: November 20, 2019, 12:29:20 PM »
I'm a little confused. He is the reason you live in the city, but his condo is a two hour commute to your job?  Sorry if i missed it. Could you move in with him and find a job there? I know a studio is small, but I'm assuming you are currently not pregnant. If that is the case, my advice would be to move in with him. Once you are pregnant, you can figure out something else, keeping in mind that babies are small and don't need much. So for at least the first year, I don't see why you couldn't stay in the studio. I know it's not glamorous, but financially it makes the most sense. Just make sure to be aware of the stress that could be put on the relationship between moving in together, small space, baby etc.

Mgmny

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 945
  • Age: 30
  • Location: East Side of MSP
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #52 on: November 20, 2019, 12:33:56 PM »

I just plugged in some of your numbers at the When Can I Retire calculator at Networthify.com. https://networthify.com/calculator/earlyretirement?income=138600&initialBalance=299000&expenses=55440&annualPct=5&withdrawalRate=4


Whenever i see this calculator, i start to get upset. It's so bogus because it doesn't count taxes. When taxes account for 25% of your income, that's not something we can just disregard. Basically, my savings and expenses need to add up to my income. It uses the expenses to plan the amount needed, but if i assume that 25% of my income is taxes, i will likely NOT have that expense in retirement (or at least not to the same extent).

If i have a 100k salary, and I'm taxed at ~25%, then my tax bill is 25k. If I save 40k, then I am left with a budget of 35k a year to live on. However, the calculator would say my expenses are ACTUALLY 35+25 = 60k.

BUT, if i really only live off of 35k a year, then when I fire I will be taxed like $2k a year - NOT 25k a year.

I hate that calculator.

mozar

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3462
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #53 on: November 20, 2019, 12:34:39 PM »
If OP has genetic children with this man he'll have to pay child support if they split up anyway. I'm more concerned about his lack of savings. If I read this correctly he only has 50k and a 100k loan from mom that may or may not come due.

I agree with slappy, If I were the boyfriend in this circumstance I would wait until a live birth and then have you come live with me in the studio and you retire from your job and whatever you have saved up either save it for retirement for the both of us or 4% of it be your yearly household contribution. If it doesn't matter to you either way why not get married? You have some really complicated life events coming up.

spartana

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2267
  • FIREd at 36 ...sort of.
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #54 on: November 20, 2019, 12:49:14 PM »
If OP has genetic children with this man he'll have to pay child support if they split up anyway. I'm more concerned about his lack of savings. If I read this correctly he only has 50k and a 100k loan from mom that may or may not come due.

I agree with slappy, If I were the boyfriend in this circumstance I would wait until a live birth and then have you come live with me in the studio and you retire from your job and whatever you have saved up either save it for retirement for the both of us or 4% of it be your yearly household contribution. If it doesn't matter to you either way why not get married? You have some really complicated life events coming up.
Or she may likely end up paying him child support if she's still working and his income is lower than hers. Even without marriage he has legal rights for custody of any kids.

spartana

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2267
  • FIREd at 36 ...sort of.
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #55 on: November 20, 2019, 01:01:55 PM »
I guess my main thought would be:

-  What are your expenses (combined) projected to be after a child and buying a house?  How much will you save until 47 combined?

Just do the basic math and project that out and multiply it by 25 for the 4% rule.  You really need to add in his income and expenses  to get a realistic picture.

 What's his is yours right?  It's all one pot, so figure out what that FIRE number is for both of you combined and then do your projection.  You'll obviously need a smaller amount due to his pension but you have to figure out what combined expenses and savings project to be once you've settled into family life in a home.  Not sure if healthcare was factored in or not for the family in retirement.
I think the OP and her SO don't plan to have one pot but rather have separate finances. That means they will each have differing amounts of passive income at FIRE and that's what she is trying to reconcile by saving more herself so they will have similar amounts. I assume they will split expenses for home, kids, etc 50/50 or based on some percentage. Lots of people here, whether married or not, do that and it works for them but makes it more complicated if try I g to FIRE at the same time with different income and savings levels.

FatFI2025

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 366
  • Location: California
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #56 on: November 20, 2019, 01:07:46 PM »
Deduction    Pre-tax    Current    YTD
401(k)   Yes   $0.00    $19,000.00
DMO Pre   Yes   $10.54    $221.34
FSA Health   Yes   $25.00    $525.00
Group Term Life   No   $3.69    $77.49
Grp Life   Yes   $0.00    $0.00
Gym NYSC   No   $0.00    $120.84
LTD Premium   No   $29.15    $612.15
Med Pre   Yes   $67.00    $1,407.00
Vision Pre   Yes   $2.87    $60.27

Taxes    Current    YTD
Employee Medicare   $78.70    $1,604.80
Federal Income Tax   $979.85    $15,384.87
NY Paid Family Leave Employee   $0.00    $107.97
NY Income Tax   $325.20    $5,179.12
Social Security Employee Tax   $336.50    $6,861.91

That is about $41,300 in taxes/SS per year off the top.  $138,500 - $41,300 = $97,200.

Less my pre-tax deductions which equal about $3000 or so a year = $94,200

That leaves me with about $7,850 a month to work with to save $80,000.

$7,850 - $6,666 a month  =$1,183 month of spending money to save at that rate.  That does seem a bit unrealistic.

I would encourage you to model some of this out on your own and run a few different scenarios. In the example above, $80K savings would include your $19K + $6.6K employer contribution. If an HSA is an option for you, that's another $3.5K pre-tax (incl. FICA). So then after those auto-contributions you'd have to sock away $50.9K/yr or $4.2K/mo. Let's say the HSA drops your take home to $7.5K per month, $7.5K - $4.2K would leave you with $3.3K to spend.

For me that would still be way to low. So the question is what's going to be enough for you?

I save $68,473/yr. That comes from a series of probably 1,000 little tradeoff decisions over the years. I make those decisions knowing the exact financial impact and weighing my feelings on the relative value. Cutting $50K off my salary for more free time -- worth the FIRE tradeoff. Spending an un-mustachian $750/mo on restaurants -- worth the FIRE tradeoff. Upsizing to a 2 BR apt. -- not worth the FIRE tradeoff.

Let's say you can get to $60K per year savings. With your current $350K, if you achieve 6% returns, a super simple FV calculation shows you'll have $1.152M in 8 years.

Let's say you can get to $40K....then $0.953M in 8 years.

I think you've done a great job so far and are definitely in range to FIRE at 45. By modeling out some scenarios, you will see what you need to do to get there and can make the right decisions to meet your goals. S*it happens though so you might have to adjust course, but at least for me financial modeling makes the picture crystal clear and helps guide my decisions.

Chris @ Saturday Financial

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 170
  • Age: 35
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #57 on: November 20, 2019, 01:09:32 PM »

I just plugged in some of your numbers at the When Can I Retire calculator at Networthify.com. https://networthify.com/calculator/earlyretirement?income=138600&initialBalance=299000&expenses=55440&annualPct=5&withdrawalRate=4


Whenever i see this calculator, i start to get upset. It's so bogus because it doesn't count taxes. When taxes account for 25% of your income, that's not something we can just disregard. Basically, my savings and expenses need to add up to my income. It uses the expenses to plan the amount needed, but if i assume that 25% of my income is taxes, i will likely NOT have that expense in retirement (or at least not to the same extent).

If i have a 100k salary, and I'm taxed at ~25%, then my tax bill is 25k. If I save 40k, then I am left with a budget of 35k a year to live on. However, the calculator would say my expenses are ACTUALLY 35+25 = 60k.

BUT, if i really only live off of 35k a year, then when I fire I will be taxed like $2k a year - NOT 25k a year.

I hate that calculator.

True - the calculator is a rough estimate. If you plug in your actual income and include taxes in your expenses, then the calculator is overly conservative.

Opening the case study spreadsheet and filling in all of the relevant info will provide a much more accurate estimate. For anyone wanting a detailed breakdown, I highly recommend it. It also helps tremendously with tax planning.

The case study spreadsheet can be found here: https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/forum-information-faqs/case-study-spreadsheet-updates/
« Last Edit: November 20, 2019, 01:12:14 PM by Chris @ Saturday Financial »

Hula Hoop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1593
  • Location: Italy
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #58 on: November 20, 2019, 02:52:59 PM »
I totally agree with not getting married if you arenít having kids. Having kids is a much bigger commitment than marriage.

Which has nothing to do with the discussion. They have been together 15 years which is longer than many, many marriages where children are produced.

Yes, exactly.  And in what way does marriage protect women and children?  It sounds like OP is the higher earner here and whether they get married or not both parents will be obligated to support him or her until 18.  As we have already established, they've been together a lot longer than many married people so they obviously are very committed to each other whether or not they marry.

The only thing that I can think of is that OP's partner dies, she might be entitled to part of his pension if they were to get married but that hardly seems like a huge issue since she obviously has her own income and career.
« Last Edit: November 20, 2019, 02:54:33 PM by Hula Hoop »

mozar

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3462
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #59 on: November 20, 2019, 03:32:55 PM »
I wouldn't personally do this but the OP and her boyfriend can choose to live separately until 45 then move in together somewhere else in the country. One million dollars for the OP and the boyfriends pension would be enough to live anywhere. The cost of childcare might put a damper on savings though. I expect that would be split 50/50. Though it might be tough to shuttle the kid(s) between 2 locations. Personally I wouldn't last in a relationship for 15 years where we live 2 hours apart. Maybe a year or two but this situation is basically long distance.

mm1970

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9022
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #60 on: November 20, 2019, 04:35:47 PM »
I think you are doing just fine.  Keep on keepin' on at work, and save that $.
I don't think expenses will go up greatly after you have kids, except HOUSING and DAYCARE.

So that's the only concern I have for you.  You do not live with your boyfriend.  How are you going to have children if you aren't living together?

I don't see the need for you to get married, specifically, but I would NOT recommend raising children together without cohabitation.  And at 37, you certainly don't want to wait until you are 45 (assuming you want bio kids).

So to me, that's what you need to work out.

ChpBstrd

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3221
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #61 on: November 21, 2019, 08:17:21 AM »
In any case, now is the time to make a move!

With unemployment at, what, 3.7%? The OP should be able to find a promotion* that allows her and the BF to try cohabitation, cut the brutal commute, and move on with their life plans. If you wait until a recession, the job move could become harder.

Be aware that cohabitation is arguably the hardest part. Living with another personís habits, messes, smells, clutter, sleep disturbances, and style is VERY hard when one has been living on oneís own terms for a decade or more. Many LT relationships break up due to the thousands of little annoyances they discover upon moving in. But take the plunge, itís now or never.

*why settle for just another job ;)

slappy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1299
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #62 on: November 21, 2019, 09:32:02 AM »
In any case, now is the time to make a move!

With unemployment at, what, 3.7%? The OP should be able to find a promotion* that allows her and the BF to try cohabitation, cut the brutal commute, and move on with their life plans. If you wait until a recession, the job move could become harder.

Be aware that cohabitation is arguably the hardest part. Living with another personís habits, messes, smells, clutter, sleep disturbances, and style is VERY hard when one has been living on oneís own terms for a decade or more. Many LT relationships break up due to the thousands of little annoyances they discover upon moving in. But take the plunge, itís now or never.

*why settle for just another job ;)

This is what I think people are missing when they say that 15 years is longer than a lot of marriages. Long distance is hard, but living together is hard too. After 15 years, it seems there must be a reason they don't live together. I'm sure OP didn't come here for life advice or questions about her romantic situation, but we all know that FIRE is about more than just numbers sometimes.

frugaldrummer

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 842
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #63 on: November 21, 2019, 10:39:22 AM »
I'll chime in again on recommending marriage if you're going to have kids. Marriage protects the woman in that scenario.

Examples of what could happen if you're not married:
You have children and develop a disabling condition due to pregnancy or childbearing and are unable to work. Partner dumps you. All you get is child support (which is usually meager) and no alimony.

You both discover that having children and two full time working parents isn't working for you and your child, or your child has special needs which requires one of you to be home with them.  A few years later partner runs off with his secretary, leaving you again with just child support (which might be zero if he wins 50:50 custody) and no alimony.

While the sex roles could be reversed in some scenarios, most of the time it is the woman who ends up taking a big financial hit when the relationship breaks up, where kids are concerned. Marriage protects you somewhat from that.  (Not completely, as studies show divorced single moms still take a bigger financial hit than the dads.)

A prenuptial agreement could take care of any concerns he might have about preserving his assets (such as condo). But I wouldn't have a child with someone without having the security of being eligible for alimony if things blow up. (Take this from a woman who was married 24 years until my ex had a midlife crisis. With three kids I had mommy-tracked my career so that he could excel in his, even with alimony I'm in a much lower income bracket than he is). 



honeybbq

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1435
  • Location: Seattle
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #64 on: November 21, 2019, 11:03:30 AM »
Alimony is not a given; even when married. Particularly if the partners both work and make similar salaries.
These scenarios you've listed, while obviously happened to you, do not happen to everyone. It's good to consider the "what ifs" but even marriage will not prevent these things depending on the circumstances.

Daisyedwards800

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 313
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #65 on: November 21, 2019, 11:41:18 AM »
If OP has genetic children with this man he'll have to pay child support if they split up anyway. I'm more concerned about his lack of savings. If I read this correctly he only has 50k and a 100k loan from mom that may or may not come due.

I agree with slappy, If I were the boyfriend in this circumstance I would wait until a live birth and then have you come live with me in the studio and you retire from your job and whatever you have saved up either save it for retirement for the both of us or 4% of it be your yearly household contribution. If it doesn't matter to you either way why not get married? You have some really complicated life events coming up.

I wrote that he has the equivalent of what I do in retirement savings, approximately $320k plus another $50k emergency fund.  Plus his equity.

Daisyedwards800

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 313
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #66 on: November 21, 2019, 11:42:07 AM »
I guess my main thought would be:

-  What are your expenses (combined) projected to be after a child and buying a house?  How much will you save until 47 combined?

Just do the basic math and project that out and multiply it by 25 for the 4% rule.  You really need to add in his income and expenses  to get a realistic picture.

 What's his is yours right?  It's all one pot, so figure out what that FIRE number is for both of you combined and then do your projection.  You'll obviously need a smaller amount due to his pension but you have to figure out what combined expenses and savings project to be once you've settled into family life in a home.  Not sure if healthcare was factored in or not for the family in retirement.
I think the OP and her SO don't plan to have one pot but rather have separate finances. That means they will each have differing amounts of passive income at FIRE and that's what she is trying to reconcile by saving more herself so they will have similar amounts. I assume they will split expenses for home, kids, etc 50/50 or based on some percentage. Lots of people here, whether married or not, do that and it works for them but makes it more complicated if try I g to FIRE at the same time with different income and savings levels.

Exactly!

Daisyedwards800

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 313
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #67 on: November 21, 2019, 11:43:23 AM »
Deduction    Pre-tax    Current    YTD
401(k)   Yes   $0.00    $19,000.00
DMO Pre   Yes   $10.54    $221.34
FSA Health   Yes   $25.00    $525.00
Group Term Life   No   $3.69    $77.49
Grp Life   Yes   $0.00    $0.00
Gym NYSC   No   $0.00    $120.84
LTD Premium   No   $29.15    $612.15
Med Pre   Yes   $67.00    $1,407.00
Vision Pre   Yes   $2.87    $60.27

Taxes    Current    YTD
Employee Medicare   $78.70    $1,604.80
Federal Income Tax   $979.85    $15,384.87
NY Paid Family Leave Employee   $0.00    $107.97
NY Income Tax   $325.20    $5,179.12
Social Security Employee Tax   $336.50    $6,861.91

That is about $41,300 in taxes/SS per year off the top.  $138,500 - $41,300 = $97,200.

Less my pre-tax deductions which equal about $3000 or so a year = $94,200

That leaves me with about $7,850 a month to work with to save $80,000.

$7,850 - $6,666 a month  =$1,183 month of spending money to save at that rate.  That does seem a bit unrealistic.

I would encourage you to model some of this out on your own and run a few different scenarios. In the example above, $80K savings would include your $19K + $6.6K employer contribution. If an HSA is an option for you, that's another $3.5K pre-tax (incl. FICA). So then after those auto-contributions you'd have to sock away $50.9K/yr or $4.2K/mo. Let's say the HSA drops your take home to $7.5K per month, $7.5K - $4.2K would leave you with $3.3K to spend.

For me that would still be way to low. So the question is what's going to be enough for you?

I save $68,473/yr. That comes from a series of probably 1,000 little tradeoff decisions over the years. I make those decisions knowing the exact financial impact and weighing my feelings on the relative value. Cutting $50K off my salary for more free time -- worth the FIRE tradeoff. Spending an un-mustachian $750/mo on restaurants -- worth the FIRE tradeoff. Upsizing to a 2 BR apt. -- not worth the FIRE tradeoff.

Let's say you can get to $60K per year savings. With your current $350K, if you achieve 6% returns, a super simple FV calculation shows you'll have $1.152M in 8 years.

Let's say you can get to $40K....then $0.953M in 8 years.

I think you've done a great job so far and are definitely in range to FIRE at 45. By modeling out some scenarios, you will see what you need to do to get there and can make the right decisions to meet your goals. S*it happens though so you might have to adjust course, but at least for me financial modeling makes the picture crystal clear and helps guide my decisions.

My take-home is $7800ish per month without contributing to a 401k.  My 401k contributions bring that down by a lot.

Daisyedwards800

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 313
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #68 on: November 21, 2019, 11:48:40 AM »
He's not going to run off with anyone.  We are committed.  That could easily happen in a marriage too and it's just not going to. 

Total assets if I were to combine us:
Me:  $300-320k in retirement depending on market today
Him:  $300-320k in retirement depending "
His condo:  $200-250k equity ($100k of which may go back to his mother)
Him:  $50k in cash savings
3 cars none of which are very new.

We lived together for 4 years when it was convenient for both of us to get to work (in the studio).  He doesn't mind commuting the 1-2 hours because a) he drives and it's easy for him to park and b) he only goes into work 2-3 days a week (shifts).  I am going in during rush hour and so it's a nightmare.

ChpBstrd

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3221
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #69 on: November 21, 2019, 12:20:51 PM »
I guess my main thought would be:

-  What are your expenses (combined) projected to be after a child and buying a house?  How much will you save until 47 combined?

Just do the basic math and project that out and multiply it by 25 for the 4% rule.  You really need to add in his income and expenses  to get a realistic picture.

 What's his is yours right?  It's all one pot, so figure out what that FIRE number is for both of you combined and then do your projection.  You'll obviously need a smaller amount due to his pension but you have to figure out what combined expenses and savings project to be once you've settled into family life in a home.  Not sure if healthcare was factored in or not for the family in retirement.
I think the OP and her SO don't plan to have one pot but rather have separate finances. That means they will each have differing amounts of passive income at FIRE and that's what she is trying to reconcile by saving more herself so they will have similar amounts. I assume they will split expenses for home, kids, etc 50/50 or based on some percentage. Lots of people here, whether married or not, do that and it works for them but makes it more complicated if try I g to FIRE at the same time with different income and savings levels.

Exactly!

This is a more complicated FIRE scenario than the typical married-couple-working-together-to-FIRE blog story. Should each person have a separate FIRE number, and if so is it based upon the assumption of shared expenses? Does it matter if one is on a 4% WR and the other on 3%? Is the WR a percentage of each personís half of the shared living costs, or of their costs to live solo? In theory, one could in the event of a breakup/divorce replace most of the savings of living with a SO with having a roommate, but lose the significant tax breaks for married people. However, in that contingency @Daisyedwards800 could take her stash to someplace cheap and FIRE even earlier and more securely. I think most FIREíd married couples would be back to work if they separated, yet they donít plan for such contingencies so should @Daisyedwards800?

All this complexity and all these stifled life plans to FIRE and have kids stem from boyfriend being tied to NYC for several more years. Is the vesting schedule all-or-nothing at 45 or something? Also, I assume the pension is of sufficient size to justify orienting 2 peopleís lives around it, right?

For perspective, your current assets not including the pension add up very close to what MMM retired with (about $600k invested, a paid off $200k house, and one rental which was leveraged if I recall). By his standard, you as a couple could be 2-3 years away if you moved to a LCOL area and were frugal. Hence my questioning the boyfriendís golden handcuffs.

spartana

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2267
  • FIREd at 36 ...sort of.
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #70 on: November 21, 2019, 12:54:04 PM »
^ He might be able to retire earlier and get a reduced pension once he reaches his pension plans lowest retirement age but he may have to work years longer in order to receive retiree (and family) medical for life.  This was my situation as a state government employee. I could quit at any age once vested, and once I was 50 could start collecting whatever pension amount I was entitled to at 50. However I would have had to work 13 or 14 more years if I wanted to get retiree medical. I weighed those options and opted to quit earlier instead and just forgo the medical benefit.

This is another thing marriage is probably helpful compared to just"shacking up"  - retiree healthcare benefits for life for the spouse of a public employee. As well as continuation of pension if he dies.
« Last Edit: November 21, 2019, 01:02:36 PM by spartana »

spartana

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2267
  • FIREd at 36 ...sort of.
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #71 on: November 21, 2019, 01:12:11 PM »
He's not going to run off with anyone.  We are committed.  That could easily happen in a marriage too and it's just not going to. 

Total assets if I were to combine us:
Me:  $300-320k in retirement depending on market today
Him:  $300-320k in retirement depending "
His condo:  $200-250k equity ($100k of which may go back to his mother)
Him:  $50k in cash savings
3 cars none of which are very new.

We lived together for 4 years when it was convenient for both of us to get to work (in the studio).  He doesn't mind commuting the 1-2 hours because a) he drives and it's easy for him to park and b) he only goes into work 2-3 days a week (shifts).  I am going in during rush hour and so it's a nightmare.
Would he be willing to sell or rent out his condo now and move in to your place? If he only needs to commute a couple of days a week during off times it probably isn't too bad for him.

The other thing is that once he gets closer to being able to retire, OMY (like my ex-DH ) might hit him. Especially if you guys have kids. Its very common and can often throw a wrench into FIRE plans if retirement goals change and the other isn't onboard.
« Last Edit: November 21, 2019, 01:19:28 PM by spartana »

robartsd

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3348
  • Location: Sacramento, CA
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #72 on: November 21, 2019, 02:47:53 PM »
My pension plan is like the one spartana describes. I'm vested and can take a pension as early as age 50. I can get the pension even if I quit before age 50 (of course it increases with age and years of service); however, to get any medical benefits in retirement I have to work until I start taking the pension.

slappy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1299
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #73 on: November 22, 2019, 06:55:58 AM »
I guess my main thought would be:

-  What are your expenses (combined) projected to be after a child and buying a house?  How much will you save until 47 combined?

Just do the basic math and project that out and multiply it by 25 for the 4% rule.  You really need to add in his income and expenses  to get a realistic picture.

 What's his is yours right?  It's all one pot, so figure out what that FIRE number is for both of you combined and then do your projection.  You'll obviously need a smaller amount due to his pension but you have to figure out what combined expenses and savings project to be once you've settled into family life in a home.  Not sure if healthcare was factored in or not for the family in retirement.
I think the OP and her SO don't plan to have one pot but rather have separate finances. That means they will each have differing amounts of passive income at FIRE and that's what she is trying to reconcile by saving more herself so they will have similar amounts. I assume they will split expenses for home, kids, etc 50/50 or based on some percentage. Lots of people here, whether married or not, do that and it works for them but makes it more complicated if try I g to FIRE at the same time with different income and savings levels.

Exactly!

This is a more complicated FIRE scenario than the typical married-couple-working-together-to-FIRE blog story. Should each person have a separate FIRE number, and if so is it based upon the assumption of shared expenses? Does it matter if one is on a 4% WR and the other on 3%? Is the WR a percentage of each personís half of the shared living costs, or of their costs to live solo? In theory, one could in the event of a breakup/divorce replace most of the savings of living with a SO with having a roommate, but lose the significant tax breaks for married people. However, in that contingency @Daisyedwards800 could take her stash to someplace cheap and FIRE even earlier and more securely. I think most FIREíd married couples would be back to work if they separated, yet they donít plan for such contingencies so should @Daisyedwards800?

All this complexity and all these stifled life plans to FIRE and have kids stem from boyfriend being tied to NYC for several more years. Is the vesting schedule all-or-nothing at 45 or something? Also, I assume the pension is of sufficient size to justify orienting 2 peopleís lives around it, right?

For perspective, your current assets not including the pension add up very close to what MMM retired with (about $600k invested, a paid off $200k house, and one rental which was leveraged if I recall). By his standard, you as a couple could be 2-3 years away if you moved to a LCOL area and were frugal. Hence my questioning the boyfriendís golden handcuffs.

With a child involved, i would not advise a back up plan that involves moving across state lines. A parenting plan/custody agreement could easily prevent that.

OP does believe she needs a back up plan, anyway, which is fine. It almost sounds like the boyfriend could be the SAHD at some point, anyway, if he is planning to FIRE before her. In which case, he might be the one who needs the protections of marriage.

FatFI2025

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 366
  • Location: California
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #74 on: November 22, 2019, 10:14:24 AM »
Deduction    Pre-tax    Current    YTD
401(k)   Yes   $0.00    $19,000.00
DMO Pre   Yes   $10.54    $221.34
FSA Health   Yes   $25.00    $525.00
Group Term Life   No   $3.69    $77.49
Grp Life   Yes   $0.00    $0.00
Gym NYSC   No   $0.00    $120.84
LTD Premium   No   $29.15    $612.15
Med Pre   Yes   $67.00    $1,407.00
Vision Pre   Yes   $2.87    $60.27

Taxes    Current    YTD
Employee Medicare   $78.70    $1,604.80
Federal Income Tax   $979.85    $15,384.87
NY Paid Family Leave Employee   $0.00    $107.97
NY Income Tax   $325.20    $5,179.12
Social Security Employee Tax   $336.50    $6,861.91

That is about $41,300 in taxes/SS per year off the top.  $138,500 - $41,300 = $97,200.

Less my pre-tax deductions which equal about $3000 or so a year = $94,200

That leaves me with about $7,850 a month to work with to save $80,000.

$7,850 - $6,666 a month  =$1,183 month of spending money to save at that rate.  That does seem a bit unrealistic.

I would encourage you to model some of this out on your own and run a few different scenarios. In the example above, $80K savings would include your $19K + $6.6K employer contribution. If an HSA is an option for you, that's another $3.5K pre-tax (incl. FICA). So then after those auto-contributions you'd have to sock away $50.9K/yr or $4.2K/mo. Let's say the HSA drops your take home to $7.5K per month, $7.5K - $4.2K would leave you with $3.3K to spend.

For me that would still be way to low. So the question is what's going to be enough for you?

I save $68,473/yr. That comes from a series of probably 1,000 little tradeoff decisions over the years. I make those decisions knowing the exact financial impact and weighing my feelings on the relative value. Cutting $50K off my salary for more free time -- worth the FIRE tradeoff. Spending an un-mustachian $750/mo on restaurants -- worth the FIRE tradeoff. Upsizing to a 2 BR apt. -- not worth the FIRE tradeoff.

Let's say you can get to $60K per year savings. With your current $350K, if you achieve 6% returns, a super simple FV calculation shows you'll have $1.152M in 8 years.

Let's say you can get to $40K....then $0.953M in 8 years.

I think you've done a great job so far and are definitely in range to FIRE at 45. By modeling out some scenarios, you will see what you need to do to get there and can make the right decisions to meet your goals. S*it happens though so you might have to adjust course, but at least for me financial modeling makes the picture crystal clear and helps guide my decisions.

My take-home is $7800ish per month without contributing to a 401k.  My 401k contributions bring that down by a lot.

I clearly didn't get my point across well. Your posts indicate that you haven't done any projections. Maybe more of a big picture person who doesn't love math? You should be able to easily tell us "if I cut my housing costs by $1000/mo then I'll reach FI X months earlier." Or, in your response to my post, "actually if I contribute $19K per year to my 401k and $3.4K to HSA then my take-home pay would be $X/mo."

If you don't know where to start, I'd recommend a case study. YMMV but for me seeing numbers makes financial goal setting and decision making a whole lot easier.

Daisyedwards800

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 313
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #75 on: November 22, 2019, 10:53:14 AM »
He's not going to run off with anyone.  We are committed.  That could easily happen in a marriage too and it's just not going to. 

Total assets if I were to combine us:
Me:  $300-320k in retirement depending on market today
Him:  $300-320k in retirement depending "
His condo:  $200-250k equity ($100k of which may go back to his mother)
Him:  $50k in cash savings
3 cars none of which are very new.

We lived together for 4 years when it was convenient for both of us to get to work (in the studio).  He doesn't mind commuting the 1-2 hours because a) he drives and it's easy for him to park and b) he only goes into work 2-3 days a week (shifts).  I am going in during rush hour and so it's a nightmare.
Would he be willing to sell or rent out his condo now and move in to your place? If he only needs to commute a couple of days a week during off times it probably isn't too bad for him.

The other thing is that once he gets closer to being able to retire, OMY (like my ex-DH ) might hit him. Especially if you guys have kids. Its very common and can often throw a wrench into FIRE plans if retirement goals change and the other isn't onboard.

What's OMY?

Daisyedwards800

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 313
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #76 on: November 22, 2019, 10:54:54 AM »
Deduction    Pre-tax    Current    YTD
401(k)   Yes   $0.00    $19,000.00
DMO Pre   Yes   $10.54    $221.34
FSA Health   Yes   $25.00    $525.00
Group Term Life   No   $3.69    $77.49
Grp Life   Yes   $0.00    $0.00
Gym NYSC   No   $0.00    $120.84
LTD Premium   No   $29.15    $612.15
Med Pre   Yes   $67.00    $1,407.00
Vision Pre   Yes   $2.87    $60.27

Taxes    Current    YTD
Employee Medicare   $78.70    $1,604.80
Federal Income Tax   $979.85    $15,384.87
NY Paid Family Leave Employee   $0.00    $107.97
NY Income Tax   $325.20    $5,179.12
Social Security Employee Tax   $336.50    $6,861.91

That is about $41,300 in taxes/SS per year off the top.  $138,500 - $41,300 = $97,200.

Less my pre-tax deductions which equal about $3000 or so a year = $94,200

That leaves me with about $7,850 a month to work with to save $80,000.

$7,850 - $6,666 a month  =$1,183 month of spending money to save at that rate.  That does seem a bit unrealistic.

I would encourage you to model some of this out on your own and run a few different scenarios. In the example above, $80K savings would include your $19K + $6.6K employer contribution. If an HSA is an option for you, that's another $3.5K pre-tax (incl. FICA). So then after those auto-contributions you'd have to sock away $50.9K/yr or $4.2K/mo. Let's say the HSA drops your take home to $7.5K per month, $7.5K - $4.2K would leave you with $3.3K to spend.

For me that would still be way to low. So the question is what's going to be enough for you?

I save $68,473/yr. That comes from a series of probably 1,000 little tradeoff decisions over the years. I make those decisions knowing the exact financial impact and weighing my feelings on the relative value. Cutting $50K off my salary for more free time -- worth the FIRE tradeoff. Spending an un-mustachian $750/mo on restaurants -- worth the FIRE tradeoff. Upsizing to a 2 BR apt. -- not worth the FIRE tradeoff.

Let's say you can get to $60K per year savings. With your current $350K, if you achieve 6% returns, a super simple FV calculation shows you'll have $1.152M in 8 years.

Let's say you can get to $40K....then $0.953M in 8 years.

I think you've done a great job so far and are definitely in range to FIRE at 45. By modeling out some scenarios, you will see what you need to do to get there and can make the right decisions to meet your goals. S*it happens though so you might have to adjust course, but at least for me financial modeling makes the picture crystal clear and helps guide my decisions.

My take-home is $7800ish per month without contributing to a 401k.  My 401k contributions bring that down by a lot.

I clearly didn't get my point across well. Your posts indicate that you haven't done any projections. Maybe more of a big picture person who doesn't love math? You should be able to easily tell us "if I cut my housing costs by $1000/mo then I'll reach FI X months earlier." Or, in your response to my post, "actually if I contribute $19K per year to my 401k and $3.4K to HSA then my take-home pay would be $X/mo."

If you don't know where to start, I'd recommend a case study. YMMV but for me seeing numbers makes financial goal setting and decision making a whole lot easier.

I put my take-home pay up above without 401k contributions.  Do you want me to write it with?  It's difficult to project when I will FI if I don't know what my expenses will be.

robartsd

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3348
  • Location: Sacramento, CA
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #77 on: November 22, 2019, 11:03:09 AM »
What's OMY?
One More Year - the syndrome of working longer than needed due to the fear of switching income sources from paycheck to investments.

FatFI2025

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 366
  • Location: California
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #78 on: November 22, 2019, 11:43:56 AM »

It's difficult to project when I will FI if I don't know what my expenses will be.

Right, it's actually impossible, so you need to start with some reasonable projections. Then you look at your earnings sources and expenses, set reasonable financial goals, and optimize. It just makes your financial decision making clearer.


I put my take-home pay up above without 401k contributions.  Do you want me to write it with?

No I think you should do a case study. Trust me in two years you will be so happy you took the time!

Daisyedwards800

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 313
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #79 on: November 22, 2019, 02:36:18 PM »

It's difficult to project when I will FI if I don't know what my expenses will be.

Right, it's actually impossible, so you need to start with some reasonable projections. Then you look at your earnings sources and expenses, set reasonable financial goals, and optimize. It just makes your financial decision making clearer.


I put my take-home pay up above without 401k contributions.  Do you want me to write it with?

No I think you should do a case study. Trust me in two years you will be so happy you took the time!

I will do one but my expenses are really what I listed above. 

Daisyedwards800

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 313
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #80 on: November 22, 2019, 03:03:33 PM »
@FatFI2025 I posted a case study in that area

spartana

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2267
  • FIREd at 36 ...sort of.
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #81 on: November 22, 2019, 11:08:19 PM »
What's OMY?
One More Year - the syndrome of working longer than needed due to the fear of switching income sources from paycheck to investments.
Or in the case of my ex it was loving what he did and deciding he never wanted to quit. His OMY is likely to end up as 30MYs. In his case he wasn't motivated at all by money but by his career.  There are a lot of people around the MMM forum who, for a variety of reasons, work much longer then they need to.

Malcat

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6982
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #82 on: November 23, 2019, 07:20:48 AM »
What's OMY?
One More Year - the syndrome of working longer than needed due to the fear of switching income sources from paycheck to investments.
Or in the case of my ex it was loving what he did and deciding he never wanted to quit. His OMY is likely to end up as 30MYs. In his case he wasn't motivated at all by money but by his career.  There are a lot of people around the MMM forum who, for a variety of reasons, work much longer then they need to.

But do we call that OMY?
I'm one of those posters with no interest in ever totally retiring, but I never thought OMY applied to me, I always saw it as described above.

mistymoney

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 825
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #83 on: November 24, 2019, 05:57:23 AM »
I'll chime in again on recommending marriage if you're going to have kids. Marriage protects the woman in that scenario.

Examples of what could happen if you're not married:
You have children and develop a disabling condition due to pregnancy or childbearing and are unable to work. Partner dumps you. All you get is child support (which is usually meager) and no alimony.

You both discover that having children and two full time working parents isn't working for you and your child, or your child has special needs which requires one of you to be home with them.  A few years later partner runs off with his secretary, leaving you again with just child support (which might be zero if he wins 50:50 custody) and no alimony.

While the sex roles could be reversed in some scenarios, most of the time it is the woman who ends up taking a big financial hit when the relationship breaks up, where kids are concerned. Marriage protects you somewhat from that.  (Not completely, as studies show divorced single moms still take a bigger financial hit than the dads.)

A prenuptial agreement could take care of any concerns he might have about preserving his assets (such as condo). But I wouldn't have a child with someone without having the security of being eligible for alimony if things blow up. (Take this from a woman who was married 24 years until my ex had a midlife crisis. With three kids I had mommy-tracked my career so that he could excel in his, even with alimony I'm in a much lower income bracket than he is).

so - how exactly did marriage protect you?

Sounds like you relied on the spouses income to your own detriment and then paid the price.

In the OP's case - she is not relying on her partners money for anything, and focusing on her own FIRE number. That is the ultimate 'protection'.

spartana

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2267
  • FIREd at 36 ...sort of.
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #84 on: November 25, 2019, 12:03:17 AM »
What's OMY?
One More Year - the syndrome of working longer than needed due to the fear of switching income sources from paycheck to investments.
Or in the case of my ex it was loving what he did and deciding he never wanted to quit. His OMY is likely to end up as 30MYs. In his case he wasn't motivated at all by money but by his career.  There are a lot of people around the MMM forum who, for a variety of reasons, work much longer then they need to.

But do we call that OMY?
I'm one of those posters with no interest in ever totally retiring, but I never thought OMY applied to me, I always saw it as described above.
No we call that crazy ;-). Just kidding. In your case you know you always want to work but my ex-DH (and I) had always planned to FIRE at 38. But a bit before that he literally started doing OMY. As in "I know we have been planning to retire next year and go off on grand adventures but I have this great opportunity to go to (insert massively remote place - alone) to do this awesome thing for 2 years then I'll retire as we planned." That went on a few times before we eventually broke up. He is still working andikely will forever while I FIREd asap.
« Last Edit: November 25, 2019, 12:10:03 AM by spartana »

Hula Hoop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1593
  • Location: Italy
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #85 on: November 25, 2019, 03:37:27 AM »
I'll chime in again on recommending marriage if you're going to have kids. Marriage protects the woman in that scenario.

Examples of what could happen if you're not married:
You have children and develop a disabling condition due to pregnancy or childbearing and are unable to work. Partner dumps you. All you get is child support (which is usually meager) and no alimony.

You both discover that having children and two full time working parents isn't working for you and your child, or your child has special needs which requires one of you to be home with them.  A few years later partner runs off with his secretary, leaving you again with just child support (which might be zero if he wins 50:50 custody) and no alimony.

While the sex roles could be reversed in some scenarios, most of the time it is the woman who ends up taking a big financial hit when the relationship breaks up, where kids are concerned. Marriage protects you somewhat from that.  (Not completely, as studies show divorced single moms still take a bigger financial hit than the dads.)

A prenuptial agreement could take care of any concerns he might have about preserving his assets (such as condo). But I wouldn't have a child with someone without having the security of being eligible for alimony if things blow up. (Take this from a woman who was married 24 years until my ex had a midlife crisis. With three kids I had mommy-tracked my career so that he could excel in his, even with alimony I'm in a much lower income bracket than he is).

so - how exactly did marriage protect you?

Sounds like you relied on the spouses income to your own detriment and then paid the price.

In the OP's case - she is not relying on her partners money for anything, and focusing on her own FIRE number. That is the ultimate 'protection'.

Exactly.  In my own case, we both work full time but I earn more than my husband.  If we ever divorced, I'd be the one paying alimony to him not the other way around.  So I don't see how marriage protects "the woman" at least nowadays when most women work outside the home.  And it doesn't sound like the OP has a "traditional" relationship where her partner brings home the bacon and she stays home.  Quite the contrary.  And of course, children are protected whether they get married or not through child support laws.

I think it's a really bad idea to expect alimony to protect you if something happens to your marriage in any case for all the reasons you mentioned above. 
« Last Edit: November 25, 2019, 03:40:42 AM by Hula Hoop »

mistymoney

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 825
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #86 on: November 25, 2019, 07:46:12 AM »
I'll chime in again on recommending marriage if you're going to have kids. Marriage protects the woman in that scenario.

Examples of what could happen if you're not married:
You have children and develop a disabling condition due to pregnancy or childbearing and are unable to work. Partner dumps you. All you get is child support (which is usually meager) and no alimony.

You both discover that having children and two full time working parents isn't working for you and your child, or your child has special needs which requires one of you to be home with them.  A few years later partner runs off with his secretary, leaving you again with just child support (which might be zero if he wins 50:50 custody) and no alimony.

While the sex roles could be reversed in some scenarios, most of the time it is the woman who ends up taking a big financial hit when the relationship breaks up, where kids are concerned. Marriage protects you somewhat from that.  (Not completely, as studies show divorced single moms still take a bigger financial hit than the dads.)

A prenuptial agreement could take care of any concerns he might have about preserving his assets (such as condo). But I wouldn't have a child with someone without having the security of being eligible for alimony if things blow up. (Take this from a woman who was married 24 years until my ex had a midlife crisis. With three kids I had mommy-tracked my career so that he could excel in his, even with alimony I'm in a much lower income bracket than he is).

so - how exactly did marriage protect you?

Sounds like you relied on the spouses income to your own detriment and then paid the price.

In the OP's case - she is not relying on her partners money for anything, and focusing on her own FIRE number. That is the ultimate 'protection'.

Exactly.  In my own case, we both work full time but I earn more than my husband.  If we ever divorced, I'd be the one paying alimony to him not the other way around.  So I don't see how marriage protects "the woman" at least nowadays when most women work outside the home.  And it doesn't sound like the OP has a "traditional" relationship where her partner brings home the bacon and she stays home.  Quite the contrary.  And of course, children are protected whether they get married or not through child support laws.

I think it's a really bad idea to expect alimony to protect you if something happens to your marriage in any case for all the reasons you mentioned above.

Thinking more about this - My opinion is marriage provides a false sense of security - and we need to see this more clearly.

While it may be financially beneficial in some ways - sharing insurance, SS, and any benefits if the spouse passes away, etc. But when people (women in particular) are willing to sideline their own earning potential for another person's career - that is a huge risk - married or not. And it needs to be addressed in the moment those decisions occur, not I'll just do this for the family/spouse and it'll all be okay.

I think that it is a rare case in which alimony will compensate completely for that. And that is only the financial side of it, not the fulfillment side of it. Again - for those of us who do find satisfaction and pride in their career accomplishments! Another point is I think it is more difficult to get to that point in your career if you are sidelining yourself.

Hula Hoop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1593
  • Location: Italy
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #87 on: November 25, 2019, 09:26:23 AM »
I agree, misty.  It's a whole different thing if someone is financially independent and wants to stay home with kids or work part time etc.  But relying on someone else financially seems like a bad idea in this day and age.

Cassie

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6982
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #88 on: November 25, 2019, 11:19:50 AM »
Panda, you are right and people benefit when they are old enough for SS and one partner dies.  Also many times you can only add someone on your HI if married. Some offer it to domestic partners but the rates can be significantly higher. If you have a pension you can leave all or part of it to a spouse. You become disabled and canít work that alimony will look pretty good if you get dumped.  People that lose their ability to work from a disability often find that their spouse dumps them. I worked in that field for much of my career. I am not old fashioned and think everyone should get married for moral reasons. But people having kids are smart to want the legal protections.

honeybbq

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1435
  • Location: Seattle
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #89 on: November 25, 2019, 12:48:23 PM »
I wouldnít have kids with someone unless I was married.

That was uncalled for.  Not everyone has the same view of marriage and people can be just as committed as a married couple without the piece of paper.
Remember that, baring religious ceremonies, marriage is a legal contact that offers the couple a lot of joint privileges and protections that are very useful if you are going to raise children together. Just a quick example, but things can get really complicated if you travel internationally aren't married and need to get emergency medical attention or the like. So yes, if people want to have children together they really should talk about getting legally married for the legal contract that comes with it.

If I'm traveling in China and I say I'm married to my partner and I'm not, how on earth are they going to figure that out? Do you carry around a copy of your marriage license? Of course not. Same sex couples may have more issues than heterosexual couples, however. Additionally, Medical power of attorneys and other legal documents are perfectly fine for this purpose.

spartana

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2267
  • FIREd at 36 ...sort of.
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #90 on: November 25, 2019, 01:59:03 PM »
^ Maybe if they require a passport? Although even someone like me who was married long ago at 23 kept my own name - no hyphen or anything.  I can't remember having any problems but I'm sure some countries would require a marriage license if you have different last names.


I'm divorced now and won't remarry because of financial reasons. There are lots of pros and cons to legal marriage but a lot of it depend on.where you are at in your life.
« Last Edit: November 25, 2019, 02:02:52 PM by spartana »

Hula Hoop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1593
  • Location: Italy
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #91 on: November 26, 2019, 03:31:08 AM »
^ Maybe if they require a passport? Although even someone like me who was married long ago at 23 kept my own name - no hyphen or anything.  I can't remember having any problems but I'm sure some countries would require a marriage license if you have different last names.


I'm divorced now and won't remarry because of financial reasons. There are lots of pros and cons to legal marriage but a lot of it depend on.where you are at in your life.

Neither my passport not my husband's says anything in it about our marital status.  How on earth would anyone know if we are married or not while we're traveling in a foreign country?  OK maybe as Panda says in some Islamic countries?  I have numerous friends who aren't married to their partners (with or without children) and who have traveled and lived all over the world and they have never mentioned any problems at all. 

I agree that marriage would be good at some point in order to get social security and/or a pension if the other partner died. I have friends who have been together for 20+ years and have two kids who recently got married secretly for precisely this reason (OK not so secretly since I know about it I guess but no one in their family knows).  In this case, it sounds like the OP's partner has a pension through his job so maybe they should consider marriage at some point.  But this is hardly a reason that they have to absolutely have to get married before having a child as many posters in this thread seem to believe.

Cassie

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6982
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #92 on: November 26, 2019, 10:26:19 PM »
Hula, you do you and hopefully it works out. Donít advise others.

Malcat

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6982
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #93 on: November 27, 2019, 06:05:42 AM »
Hula, you do you and hopefully it works out. Donít advise others.

Did I miss something?
Why is Hula not allowed to offer advice? That's what we do here.

KBecks

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2350
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #94 on: November 27, 2019, 06:43:40 AM »
OP, 37 is not that old.  You still have years and years of compounding ahead of you.  Don't despair, OK?

Keep saving.  Work on your budget.

As for the boyfriend, I would plan separate expenses and make sure that you have it figured out for yourself and your future children so you are stable.

Cassie

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6982
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #95 on: November 27, 2019, 12:26:59 PM »
I am just feeling grumpy because of her scolding me for my advice earlier. Frankly, I think in this case her advice sucks.

Hula Hoop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1593
  • Location: Italy
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #96 on: November 27, 2019, 03:16:18 PM »
I am just feeling grumpy because of her scolding me for my advice earlier. Frankly, I think in this case her advice sucks.

I wasn't scolding you.  Everyone has the right to offer their opinion on these types of boards and I was just offering mine which is different from yours.  You may think my advice "sucks" and that's fine - feel free to disagree and live your life according to your values and beliefs.  But questioning conventional social and societal norms  (like you HAVE TO get married before having a child) is pretty much what MMM is all about - and I was just doing that. 

Cassie

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6982
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #97 on: November 27, 2019, 03:58:11 PM »
Daisy, I wish you all the best in whatever you decide to do.

beltim

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2961
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #98 on: November 27, 2019, 05:39:21 PM »
^ Maybe if they require a passport? Although even someone like me who was married long ago at 23 kept my own name - no hyphen or anything.  I can't remember having any problems but I'm sure some countries would require a marriage license if you have different last names.


I'm divorced now and won't remarry because of financial reasons. There are lots of pros and cons to legal marriage but a lot of it depend on.where you are at in your life.

Neither my passport not my husband's says anything in it about our marital status.  How on earth would anyone know if we are married or not while we're traveling in a foreign country?  OK maybe as Panda says in some Islamic countries?  I have numerous friends who aren't married to their partners (with or without children) and who have traveled and lived all over the world and they have never mentioned any problems at all. 

I agree that marriage would be good at some point in order to get social security and/or a pension if the other partner died. I have friends who have been together for 20+ years and have two kids who recently got married secretly for precisely this reason (OK not so secretly since I know about it I guess but no one in their family knows).  In this case, it sounds like the OP's partner has a pension through his job so maybe they should consider marriage at some point.  But this is hardly a reason that they have to absolutely have to get married before having a child as many posters in this thread seem to believe.

I know many people who had to be married in order to move with their partner to another country - including both the US and Italy. And yes, marriage certificates or licenses were required - original ones.

Hula Hoop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1593
  • Location: Italy
Re: I thought I was doing really well saving, but it's not enough
« Reply #99 on: November 27, 2019, 09:51:17 PM »
^ Maybe if they require a passport? Although even someone like me who was married long ago at 23 kept my own name - no hyphen or anything.  I can't remember having any problems but I'm sure some countries would require a marriage license if you have different last names.


I'm divorced now and won't remarry because of financial reasons. There are lots of pros and cons to legal marriage but a lot of it depend on.where you are at in your life.

Neither my passport not my husband's says anything in it about our marital status.  How on earth would anyone know if we are married or not while we're traveling in a foreign country?  OK maybe as Panda says in some Islamic countries?  I have numerous friends who aren't married to their partners (with or without children) and who have traveled and lived all over the world and they have never mentioned any problems at all. 

I agree that marriage would be good at some point in order to get social security and/or a pension if the other partner died. I have friends who have been together for 20+ years and have two kids who recently got married secretly for precisely this reason (OK not so secretly since I know about it I guess but no one in their family knows).  In this case, it sounds like the OP's partner has a pension through his job so maybe they should consider marriage at some point.  But this is hardly a reason that they have to absolutely have to get married before having a child as many posters in this thread seem to believe.

I know many people who had to be married in order to move with their partner to another country - including both the US and Italy. And yes, marriage certificates or licenses were required - original ones.

I know several people like this too but I don't get the impression that OP has any interest in moving to a foreign country and it appears from her post that both are American and they live in the US.