I hit a wall about then in my career. I basically started mailing it in, I did what was necessary, not an iota more, for probably 15 years. It was a "hunker down" situation for me, I had three kids to put through college etc. I despised work, and many of my coworkers (some were OK). When 2008 hit, I figured I'd have to work another 5 years over my "plan" to make up for it, but things came back quicker than I thought.I'm not going to stop working, I'd just spend more time building my company. As I stated, my health insurance will be expensive, even with a high deductible plan. $1200 a month, and will 100% increase every year but my pension/benefits will not.
Before that, I felt like I had a "career" with some incentives for working, after that, it was just work. I couldn't quit, I couldn't find another job, I was just stuck.
In 2013 they came out with retirement packages for folks at my level, but excluded those of us on the technical side of things as we were "too valuable". I was PO'd. My buddy told me to stick around and it would happen for us, and it did six months later. I was glad to be done of it. I should write a book.
P.S. Every year you work is a year you don't have to "cover" with your retirement. And you'll likely need some health insurance, I'm lucky to have retiree insurance and now Medicare.
I don't mind corporate America. It's been good to me.I also own rental real estate and my wife manages it (no super expensive properties, just a bunch of small to medium ones). Not enough to live on, but enough to help pay for stuff if needed.
I did my time working for a small startup during the initial Dot Com boom. It was an interesting adventure, I'm glad I did it, but my startup was part of the 99% of those businesses that failed instead of "making it."
I did make some fortunate moves and invested in real estate, keeping our first home and turning it into a rental, and then buying my way into a couple more rental units. It resulted in some super lean years when we bought our new home without any money coming from the sale of the prior home, but we managed it and I'm glad we did it.
I now have a great work-life balance with a super-flexible job at an employer where I need to map out another ten years of career moves, and that should be very do-able. I'm there for my kids, I'm there for my wife, and I'm there for my parents who aren't getting any younger or healthier.
Ten years from now the kids are done with college and I'm trading the way-too-big suburban house for some remote property, and a Class A motorhome. I'll let you all know when I'm near you, and I'll buy you a beer when I see you.
Or maybe I move to tiny beachfront town somewhere in the Caribbean. That would do, too.
I also own rental real estate and my wife manages it (no super expensive properties, just a bunch of small to medium ones). Not enough to live on, but enough to help pay for stuff if needed.
I really don't mind my corporate life, and I am now blessed to have a good work-life balance. My job is OK, I don't despise going to work but just like everybody else sometimes I get tired of updating spreadsheets and making sure the TPS report is tidied up.
But what I'm really asking about is what kind of benefits do you have in retirement? I looked at mine, and while I do have some, they're not great. So I really am not sure what I'm staying for. I always thought I'd retire in my mid to late 50's, but even if I stayed and did that I don't think the benefits would be all that great. #1 is health insurance until I make it to Medicare.
But what I'm really asking about is what kind of benefits do you have in retirement?I work for the state and have a pension. It has reduced payouts for early retirement, which means I'm probably not thinking about it for another 15 years or so.
The penalty for cashing out our retirement early is substantial. As in you'd get like 25% of the actual money that's sitting in it at the moment.Get deferred payments for sure rather than one lump sum. The assholes could at least have the common decency of waving a gun in your face 1st before takiing a 1/3 rd
I understand some penalty, but jesus christ.
I didn't know state workers don't get SS. Found that out about 6 months ago.Where did you hear this? Do you a line that says FICA in your pacycheck stub?
State and Local Government Employees Without Social Security Coverage: What Percentage Will Earn Pension Benefits That Fall Short of Social Security Equivalence? (ssa.gov) (https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/v82n3/v82n3p1.html)YUP that is a fact
Apparently, if you get a state pension, you may not be covered by SS.
I didn't know state workers don't get SS. Found that out about 6 months ago.Question for you, and I'm not trying to be an asshole. Did you pay the FICA taxes?
Would have been nice to know 20 years ago.
We'll teach you calculus and French literature, but nothing about how to navigate the actual real life society you'll enter into.
I actually have no issues with SS as a whole. I don't think congress should be allowed to raid the fund and replace it with IOU's.The SS Trust Fund has to be invested in something. I can't think of a better option than special Treasury bonds.
Posts like this is why I made this topic. Thank you for sharing your story.Sorry to hear about your friend. The most difficult part of getting older has been losing people or watching people struggle medically that i've been close with. It has lead me to appreciate every day more than I did in the past, but losing good people in life is never easy.
The medical benefits thing scares me. But then I think about my friend who sat next to me (we have cubicles, desk thingy's). He died of cancer last January. All the best insurance in the world and he lasted 4 months.
At the same time you realize that even if you work your 30 years (or whatever) the insurance you have until Medicaid kicks in sucks and it's expensive.
Since you started your own business, how do you handle medical insurance for your employees, if at all?
Since you started your own business, how do you handle medical insurance for your employees, if at all?I started in late 2000. We offered full medical, dental, eye and life to employees and their families, free of charge to them. We grew to about 20 people pretty quickly. Then 2008 came, and since our business is so closely tied to housing, that was a gut shot. We were at 28 people at the time, and it did not take long for us to trim that to 6. We had no choice.
I am reminded a bit of this old geezer at work. He hit 65 and was at the top rank of the technical ladder. He was from eastern Europe. I got to know him a bit, I really didn't think that much of him, his approach was entirely Edisonian. Anyway, he had to retire at 65, but he kept coming to work. They let him keep his lab, and he came every day, I'd see him at lunch. I don't know how long he "worked", but a friend told me he just had no "life" elsewhere. He would have had a ton of money at his level, millions.Goes to the old adage, do you live to work or work to live? Personally I work to live. Work has always been a means to an end. Provide for my family. Allow me to do the things I want to do. Give generously to causes and organization I support. Now that I don't need to work anymore to live, I gladly put it away and move on.
I felt a bit sad for him.
There was another fellow with office next to mine who was at the same top level, to the point they created another level above that just for him. He seemed pretty reasonable, we chatted pretty often, it was funny seeing all the young sycophants coming to see him. He told me he'd come to work as long as they let him.
I understand feeling the "status" at his level, OK fine, but it's work, and that status isn't going to get you anything but some sense of being important. You're not. You're a big fish in a small pond at best.
It is great in your career if you did a few things to be proud of of course, employing others is great, getting a business running is great. The things I'd say I was proud of are all things for which I got zero recognition. It happens.
P.S. Every year you work is a year you don't have to "cover" with your retirement. And you'll likely need some health insurance, I'm lucky to have retiree insurance and now Medicare.I do generally think that "betting on you" as others have put it is probably a good idea and worth at least seriously considering but, being the resident accountant/pessimist I'll give some devil's advocate thoughts. I'm doing this largely because a lot of people have already said "go for it" so me being another one of those wouldn't really help you so I'll take the opposite side.
You are my age (late 40's) so you have ~30 years to the average life expectancy.Just one point here. The average life expectancy of 78 is from birth. The average life expectancy for a male who reaches age 65 is another 18 years, or 83:
It is great in your career if you did a few things to be proud of of courseOddly enough, this document (https://documents.westerndigital.com/content/dam/doc-library/en_us/assets/public/western-digital/collateral/white-paper/white-paper-ssd-endurance-and-hdd-workloads.pdf) is one of the things I'm most proud of since switching to my new role. It came out of a blogger/review site reviewing one of our products and making it clear that he didn't understand anything about certain specifications common in our industry and what they meant. I looked around at anything we'd produced, anything our competitors had produced, and realized there wasn't a single document available in our entire industry that could adequately explain the relationship. So I wrote it.
The things I'd say I was proud of are all things for which I got zero recognition.
Just one point here. The average life expectancy of 78 is from birth. The average life expectancy for a male who reaches age 65 is another 18 years, or 83:You are right. I actually pulled up that document before I did my post but thought it would overcomplicate it so I left it out.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/factsheets/factsheet_nvss.pdf
The life expectancy from birth takes into account infant mortality, accidental/criminal deaths, and all sorts of other things that might lead to lower lifespan. But given that the goal is saving for retirement, the idea should be to plan for at or beyond the life expectancy at age 65.
I do generally think that "betting on you" as others have put it is probably a good idea and worth at least seriously considering but, being the resident accountant/pessimist I'll give some devil's advocate thoughts. I'm doing this largely because a lot of people have already said "go for it" so me being another one of those wouldn't really help you so I'll take the opposite side.Couple of points:
The item I quoted from @Cincydawg (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=870) is an important consideration. You are my age (late 40's) so you have ~30 years to the average life expectancy. IIRC you said your 401k had around $1/2 Million. If you can add $33k/yr and you stay three more years you get to $600k plus you have three less years to cover.
Math:That is WAY oversimplified as it doesn't account for investment returns either while you are working or after you are retired but what I am illustrating here is that three extra years can make a VERY substantial difference.
- $500k/30 = $16,667/yr
- $600k/27 = $22,222/yr
- $5,555/yr difference 33%
A second consideration:
How cyclical is your business? Badge mentioned being heavily involved in housing and having to trim his company from 28 employees to 6. Housing is hyper-cyclical because it can more-or-less always be deferred so in a recession it tends to plummet. OTOH, if you are selling low-cost food that tends not to be cyclical at all because everybody has to eat. Some businesses are even counter-cyclical as demand grows for lower-cost items when recession worries peak.
Personally, I think we are headed for at least a slow-down. That said, there is an old joke that most economists have predicted 5 out of the last 3 recessions because they always tend to predict recessions, LoL.
I didn't predict the 2020 Pandemic. I didn't predict the 2008 credit crunch/recession. I didn't predict the early-2000's dot-com bubble burst. Thus, I'm not going to pretend that I can predict the next calamity. That said, I can predict with absolute certainty that there WILL BE a calamity. It might be just a garden-variety recession or it might be some weird credit-thing or it might be some weird pandemic but whatever it is, there WILL BE a calamity.
If your business is hyper-cyclical, I wouldn't want to depend on it until I got to the point where I could comfortably live without it.
A third consideration:
How hard would it be to get back into employment if your side business went sideways? You mentioned making low $100's and considering that to be bad. You also said you don't have a degree. That is fine if you are a certified underwater basketweaver or whatever and your profession is in demand and you could either stay certified or easily get recertified and return to that line of work if you had to. If not, the salary for non-degreed labor around here is nowhere close to $100k. If you had to jump back in, where would you realistically be jumping in?
I don't have a lot of faith in SS and frankly, at our age I don't consider $500k to be anywhere close to enough to live on for the rest of our lives. Assuming a 10% return and 30 years of remaining lifespan that $500k is enough to get you around $53k/yr. Is that enough for you to live on? Furthermore, that rate may be optimistic and even if you hit it, you'd be flat broke at 78. If you stretch that out to 40 years the annual drops to $51k, is that enough? If you stretch it out to 40 years and think you need $100k, you need almost $1M.
At this point in your life and using my 10% assumed return, you need to add $2,763,26 to add one more year to your retirement "coverage". So if you work one more year and put $2,763.26 in your account, you are effectively adding two years. (That relationship isn't linear just FYI).
Just food for thought and I'm (mostly) just playing devil's advocate.
Just one point here. The average life expectancy of 78 is from birth. The average life expectancy for a male who reaches age 65 is another 18 years, or 83:More on life expectancy:
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/factsheets/factsheet_nvss.pdf
The life expectancy from birth takes into account infant mortality, accidental/criminal deaths, and all sorts of other things that might lead to lower lifespan. But given that the goal is saving for retirement, the idea should be to plan for at or beyond the life expectancy at age 65.
I wanted to add that I don't really think that making low $100's sucks, but with a one income family it's not that much money. It's definitely a good living, but not a great one and I think I can just do better with my own business and I don't want to wait until I'm in my 50's to really kick this thing off.I get that. When I was in college I thought $100k/yr was a TON of money. It really was a lot more then than it is now but the other difference is that I'm not a single guy with no kids anymore. For a single guy with no kids, $100k can pay rent, make the payments on a cool car, and buy a LOT of beer.
So there is a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of this thread by a couple of people. I'm not looking to retire and NOT work. I'm looking to leave my current job/career early to pursue ramping up my business.I just think the basic math suggests leaving is good. The pension can't get higher and will cover your health insurance and probably whatever 401K match they are doing. So it's really just whether you can live based on your business, and you suggested earlier I think as much as a 500K increase in revenue if you are doing it full time, which far outstrips your current salary. But even if you are wrong and growth is only 100K, you are still even. And if it goes sideways you can likely get your job back. Am I missing something? Seem like a pretty easy decision.
I just think the basic math suggests leaving is good. The pension can't get higher and will cover your health insurance and probably whatever 401K match they are doing. So it's really just whether you can live based on your business, and you suggested earlier I think as much as a 500K increase in revenue if you are doing it full time, which far outstrips your current salary. But even if you are wrong and growth is only 100K, you are still even. And if it goes sideways you can likely get your job back. Am I missing something? Seem like a pretty easy decision.A 500K increase in revenue doesn't help if it results in a 480K increase in costs...
A 500K increase in revenue doesn't help if it results in a 480K increase in costs...BART has it right. As we’ve increased our revenue our costs go up in unison. Which is why I need to be more involved in daily ops.
A 500K increase in revenue doesn't help if it results in a 480K increase in costs...Well that's not the healthiest margin to quit your job over
BART has it right. As we’ve increased our revenue our costs go up in unison. Which is why I need to be more involved in daily ops.beta rho alpha delta = Brad
beta rho alpha delta = BradThanks Bart
Bart = beta alpha rho tau
I don't mean this in a nosy way, but out of genuine curosity....you guys who started/own your own businesses, if you don't mind getting into it....what are they, specifically?Civil Engineering - Land Surveying - Land Planning
I'm always curious to find out what needs people saw and what business they started in order to fill it, how they structured it, etc.
beta rho alpha delta = BradMy apologies Brad. When I see your name my brain spells out Bart first, or Bert.
Bart = beta alpha rho tau
My side business is portions of pennies on the dollar of these other guys.Question: what do you think is your limit on growth? Potential market size, or lack of customer knowledge that your product exists?
Drew has made it a reality with the website upkeep and what-not. Hopefully, we'll be creating a good football game field apparatus that will sell well by itself.
I average about $10K gross and net $7500-8000 per year.
https://whoanelliecollegefootball.com/ (https://whoanelliecollegefootball.com/)
I'd have to "bet on myself" to increase that. I'm capped out as doing it on the side while teaching full-time.
If I had time and an employee, I could expand it quite a bit, but no idea how much.
The plus of keeping it small and on the side is I don't NEED a penny of the income and there is no pressure.
The plus of expanding it would be unknown additional monies, BUT pressure and risk.
Peanuts, for now and for the foreseeable future.
Cincy,I have retiree medical insurance. I had no "pension" as such, but we had stock put into a retirement account each year. It got to be a chunk, but it initially was entirely in the company's stock. That changed a bit down the road and I could invest some of it in some mutual funds run by JP Morgan (who are not in my view very good at this for the customer). When I retired, we devised a plan to dump all the company stock over time and diversify. That worked out well for me. The stock options were a relative pittance in comparison, but a nice little bump each year for ten years. I don't have any now.
I take it you’re in your 60’s. The world was probably much different for you and your retirement. Did you have retiree medical insurance? What about pension? You mentioned stock options.
Cincy,He's 104 years young.
I take it you’re in your 60’s. The world was probably much different for you and your retirement. Did you have retiree medical insurance? What about pension? You mentioned stock options.
These things are in the past for most companies. I’m right on the edge of what was, and what will be. They cut most of my benefits. I can still get retiree insurance if I make 50, but it’s expensive and marginally better than what I can buy on my own. They stopped our pensions right when I’m on the cusp of making the best returns ( my pension would have grown the most in my 50’s).
I didn't catch this thread the first time around and just read through the whole thing.
I'm still working my regular job, it gets harder by the week to juggle. I really don't want to leave this job yet, it's the best job I've ever had and it's not hard. I suspect that as soon as we have our first "profitable" month I'll start very seriously considering leaving. What I mean by that is when we pay all our bills and have a very good surplus. We had to buy so much equipment to get started that it sucked a lot of resources away last year, but our capital expenditures should be far less this year. I say that, but I'm already eyeing other equipment to supplement what we've got. There's always something you "need" to make things easier/faster/better. It's definitely a balancing act.
The gist of the story is, if you're going to go all in, I suggest having a solid plan to compensate yourself. A good book on the subject is Profit First, by Mike Michalowicz. It is over simplistic at times, so consider it more a loose guide than turnkey game plan.I didn't read that book (or any other books other than cookbooks) but what I always said was:
I didn't read that book (or any other books other than cookbooks) but what I always said was:The book is targeted toward Gigem's situation; business owners with good revenue but can't find a way to actually pay themselves. It addresses the mentality that you must throw all profit back into the company for the sake of growth while you're personally trying to keep your head above water.
"If you aren't making a profit, your work is a hobby".
Does anyone really want work to be a hobby? Maybe artists or musicians, I guess?
Thankfully my wife was making big bank when I started out.
I'm making a profit as an author. I reported $16 in income on my taxes last year. Sales are up so far this year.What does that work out to as an hourly wage? :57:
The book is targeted toward Gigem's situation; business owners with good revenue but can't find a way to actually pay themselves. It addresses the mentality that you must throw all profit back into the company for the sake of growth while you're personally trying to keep your head above water.Yep. My company started making a profit at about 6 months. I had 4 people at the time. Never missed a payroll.
I left my job at the end of 2011 (age 32) due to massive corporate BS and our (wife and I) company had just broken into profitability (not ramen profitable, like barely above breakeven profitable). I cashed in my 401K (less than $100K) and "bet on myself" with the belief I could replace my salary within a year (about $45K at that time). We, in fact, did not replace my salary within the first year. Or the second year. I had two daughters under 5 years old. In retrospect, it was an insanely reckless decision.I had a very good opportunity to buy a business when my daughters were the same age.
I had a very good opportunity to buy a business when my daughters were the same age.Everything worked out, so I don't regret it, but it was very risky. I had a college degree and a CDL so I knew I could always go get a job if it came to that. I have reflected on it often, I'm glad I committed to building something, but I would have approached my exit differently.
My wife was a dental hygienist and had no benefits.
That was too much risk for me.
I passed on the opportunity.
I don't regret the decision.
Yep. My company started making a profit at about 6 months. I had 4 people at the time. Never missed a payroll.Yeah, "our" company is technically set up as an S-Corp with my wife holding 100% ownership. I was a stay-at-home dad on paper for a couple years until our accountant convinced me that not taking a salary was going to become a problem sooner or later. I've taken a "reasonable" salary since and my wife takes a very minimal salary with a year-end max employee deferral W2 that gets her up into the "reasonable" range. Everything else comes through monthly / quarterly distributions.
I didn't start taking a check until about 7 months, and at year end I took a distribution based on my stock basis. You pay FAR less taxes on distributions than you do on payroll. But you cannot do all distributions and no payroll. SSA and Medicare don't like it and it's actually not legal.
So, at year end, I'd take what I could and then loan the company money at prime +2% interest. Collections are always slow in January and February so there was no choice in the matter.
You need to have zero in the checkbook at year end, otherwise the owners have to claim the pass-through income on the K-1.
It's not easy and it's not for everyone. 23-24 years of personal experience tells me that.
Everything worked out, so I don't regret it, but it was very risky. I had a college degree and a CDL so I knew I could always go get a job if it came to that. I have reflected on it often, I'm glad I committed to building something, but I would have approached my exit differently.What have you done about it?
What have you done about it?I don't think I understand the question. I was speaking about how I left my job for self-employment. Are you wanting to know what would I have done differently? Or are you asking how I plan to exit our current business?
Current, really.Our current exit plan is non-existent. Two person company, no SOP's or process documentation. I can't hold our licenses without her qualifications, she can't run the company without my technical knowledge.
Did you have a rough exit from your old employer? I've had one and it was not fun.
Our current exit plan is non-existent. Two person company, no SOP's or process documentation. I can't hold our licenses without her qualifications, she can't run the company without my technical knowledge.Do you have an operating agreement and shareholder agreement?
I lost a good friend to a work accident last month and it set off some alarm bells for getting our shit together.
We have a portfolio of five websites that could be sold off for roughly 1.5 million, but the company as a whole would not currently be an attractive acquisition target.
Work exit was rough, but not personal. PepsiCo bought our corporate distributorship then gutted pay and benefits over a period of 18 months. I made it less than a year after that.
I started work with noble intentions, I suppose, and enthusiasm and drive and whatever else, and ended the last decade or so "Get me through this so I can retire." I viewed work solely as a means to an end, comfortable retirement.I agree with both of your sentiments
I admire you folks who can go out on your own taking risks and hopefully doing well with what you want to do.
How is the new endeavor coming along?Early part of this year almost killed us, I had to put several tens of thousands into the business just to pay bills. March was good, April was OK, and we're getting better all the time. My son will be home from college this week and will take a good amount of the load off me, and my other son will be out for the summer to help as well. We need to get more efficient at what we do, and we need to get prices up ASAP. I have some employees that are getting more experience all the time and getting more efficient. So it's up and down overall, but trending up.
As I've often stated, I just wish the politicians would do something, instead of kicking the can down the road. Cut spending, raise taxes, shrink the gov't, whatever it takes. I personally think some measure of all three could be combined, especially shrinking the gov't and cutting spending. I think we could cut so much wasteful spending (Ukraine $$$ and other bullshit) it would go a long way, and be smart about what taxes to raise and when.No need to raise taxes, but everything else, yeah. The Government is FAR too big, and it's at most all levels in most all places. Municipal. County. State. Federal.
No need to raise taxes, but everything else, yeah. The Government is FAR too big, and it's at most all levels in most all places. Municipal. County. State. Federal.(https://i.imgur.com/niVglHf.png)
The town I moved from in Illinois has a Village Manager making $300K+/-, with a retirement income that will be the same (base pay) as his last day of employment - for life. He is now 57 and is one year away from full retirement. This is not sustainable.
(https://i.imgur.com/AZNKSui.png)
The SSTF now is projected to run dry in 2035. IF nothing is done, it would cut payments by about 25%, folks would still get a check.and there's literally no way congress will let SSTF run dry or cut payments by 25%
I EXPECT a series of bandaids from Congress. They show no inclination NOW to do anything in any bipartisan manner. Any suggestion of any charge is the third rail thing.
similar to the idea that we will ALL be driving electric vehicles powered by windmills in 2035 - kick the can down the road another decadeThis of course isn't the "plan", such as there is a plan.
This of course isn't the "plan", such as there is a plan.It's the "plan" in California, set in place by a Governor who won't be Governor in 2035, so...
It's the "plan" in California, set in place by a Governor who won't be Governor in 2035, so...No, it isn't, even there. They won't all be driving EVs in California in 2035 at all, even if the rule stands. They won't even be at 50%.
...it'll change sometime between now and 2035 when they realize the "plan" is unworkable.
No, it isn't, even there. They won't all be driving EVs in California in 2035 at all, even if the rule stands. They won't even be at 50%.Ahh, sorry. I sorta misread it. That "plan" or "rule" says that only EVs will be sold in CA starting 2035.
Politicians often set some kind of plan or goal or something that takes effect long after they leave office.Well it comes down to different things. This isn't a plan or a goal; it's a rule. Assuming the rule is legal (i.e. it'll withstand a lawsuit), it is now in place that only zero emission vehicles are legal to sell starting in 2035.
I suspect many Californians think they will have no choice in 2035 but to drive an EV.
Yup, some "rule", which is akin to a notional aspirational attempt to sounds fancy.Right, but there's still a big difference between a goal and a rule.
It's 11 years out. Can the infrastructure change that rapidly by then? I think we all think not, but it's possible. And maybe "they" ram it through but I suspect, as you note, it will be very unpopular when it hits the fan.
We're in agreement, it's a "rule" which likely will get changed.Fair, we're in agreement.
It might as well be a goal or plan or notional aspiration.
What are your plans for retirement, if you're not already?We will probably use our boat a lot more than we do, and I'll be golfing (!). Probably more travel than now.
If you are, what do you do to fill your time?
Obviously, I know a lot of retired people here and they mostly keep very busy.
What are your plans for retirement, if you're not already?a round of golf a day, weather permitting
What are your plans for retirement, if you're not already?
If you are, what do you do to fill your time?
Obviously, I know a lot of retired people here and they mostly keep very busy.
What are your plans for retirement, if you're not already?Right now on a 30 day combo cruise and touring Europe. After that a few weeks home then mexican riveria. Then 3 weeks home and on to Alaska. And then a similar vein for the next year and a half to 2 years. Getting the travel in while I am healthy and mobile.
If you are, what do you do to fill your time?
Obviously, I know a lot of retired people here and they mostly keep very busy.
Right now on a 30 day combo cruise and touring Europe. After that a few weeks home then mexican riveria. Then 3 weeks home and on to Alaska. And then a similar vein for the next year and a half to 2 years. Getting the travel in while I am healthy and mobile.Huge key there.
Getting the travel in while I am healthy and mobile.I got a long time to be retired, but I guess I'm putting in the work now to make sure that I'm still going to be healthy and mobile when I retire, unlike my parents.
I got a long time to be retired, but I guess I'm putting in the work now to make sure that I'm still going to be healthy and mobile when I retire, unlike my parents.That's what I'm working on as well, although I'm not as far along as you are.
yup, my plan to play a round of golf per day weather permitting, might be more often limited by my health than weatherYou should move to Florida, "weather-permitting" means you can play every day over there. It's paradise!
Sometimes it's too windy to play. But you can tee off from here to some course in Miami, if driving distance is your goal.Too windy?
Meh. Sustained 155 MPH with 225+ gusts for 8 hours. The Scots got nothing on that.That, and you have literal dinosaurs waddling around?
"If it stings, crawls, flies and bites, it lives here, 365/24/7."At least in Australia, where everything in the entire continent is literally trying to kill you, you get to hear a cool accent.
- Florida Man
At least in Australia, where everything in the entire continent is literally trying to kill you, you get to hear a cool accent.Ha! No Shyt 5 of the deadliest creatures(sans man) living there.Salt water crocs,bullsharks,box jellyfish,some deadly spider,some deadly snake. Plus it's at least as hot as Austin - they're prolly sister cities.Oh and if you do go don't drink the Foster's
"If it stings, crawls, flies and bites, it lives here, 365/24/7."And he's just talking about relatives...
- Florida Man
You should move to Florida, "weather-permitting" means you can play every day over there. It's paradise!Phoenix much better no humidity and year around holf
If you can derive some sense of accomplishment in your work, that is fantastic.The thing I feel best about as I get into my waning years is that I've provided a good job and good living for a lot of people, for a long time.
Phoenix much better no humidity and year around holfWha!!!Friends moved there 2 yrs ago to be closer to family.But he comes back and stays in N.Ohio for much of the summer/fall.His adult daughters stay with mom one is finishing her 2nd yr at ASU. He hates the heat he'd email us how many days in a row were over 110°. He's a holf whore to and likes the greens and greenery up here
Wha!!!Friends moved there 2 yrs ago to be closer to family.But he comes back and stays in N.Ohio for much of the summer/fall.His adult daughters stay with mom one is finishing her 2nd yr at ASU. He hates the heat he'd email us how many days in a row were over 110°. He's a holf whore to and likes the greens and greenery up hereThey will run out of water eventually.
yup, my boss before the current one caused me to plan to retire early at 59 1/2HA! not all violence amongst employees is the work of a mad man.Some problematic piss ants with position kept pushing the wrong buttons
miserable
They will run out of water eventually.Not if - when
I would just reprocess waste water, maybe they do it. A waste treatment plant can produce potable water at some additional expense (tertiary).They do some, for irrigation, and more recently (10 years or so), they use reclaimed water for flushing toilets. Adds a lot to the construction costs (double the pipe/install), but there is not much of a choice to be made out there.
I know they lose a lot to evaporation and leakage.
It's obvious that spending needs to be cut. Where?
How about defense?
How about not forgiving massive debts?
Wasteful Government agencies. Pick from this list:
A-Z index of U.S. government departments and agencies | USAGov (https://www.usa.gov/agency-index)
**********************************
It's also obvious that revenues need to go up. I'd like to see a feasible plan to achieve this.
A larger contribution to Medicare and Social Security would help.
A 0.8 percent increase on SS, from 6.2 to 7 percent (14 percent total).
Take Medicare from 1.45 to 2 percent (4 percent total).
Then there is all this BS on taxing the wealthy more. Show me how and show me why.
Higher corporate taxes? If your goal is to cut jobs, have at it. I don't condone this at all.
We need more jobs, which leads to more people paying taxes. Duh.
As Social Security faces insolvency, these are key factors to watch (cnbc.com) (https://www.cnbc.com/2024/05/08/as-social-security-faces-insolvency-these-are-key-factors-to-watch.html)At which point I have to mention, yet again and as always, that Social Security is ALREADY insolvent. It now, and has for several years, been paying out more money than it takes in.
I think the SSTF is a real thing, personally. They invest in special T bills just like other people and corporations, and that "money" there has real value.It's a "real thing", sure. It contains Treasury Bills.
They have no authority to borrow.
There aren't many actual piles of money anywhere, certainly not trillions. It's all invested in something.Perhaps I shouldn't have said "insolvent". I retract that.
And dollar bills are not more substantial than Treasury bills.
Insolvent, to me, means they can't pay current bills, and they can, and do. But I suppose all this is just terminology. The main thing is they can still pay about 75% of their obligations even if nothing is done, and nearly everyone expects Congress to "do something" somewhere along the line.
Again, we really agree aside from some terminology of no real import.Right.
So long as the government can borrow as it does huge amounts with relatively little problem, it will. And when it can no longer do so, well, it'll be largely over.
I don't see any viable solution or prospect of real change. Elected officials who really started to do what is needed would be quickly voted out of office.
Pass a law that prevents any of that money from ever being touched, for any reason, period.That law already exists, and has existed since its inception.
That law already exists, and has existed since its inception.Please cite this law, because if it exists, it is clearly faulty and not enforceable.
Raise the SS contributions and Medicare contributions.Problem is that you're mentally sticking with this stupid "trust fund" idea. It's unnecessary. The government doesn't need to save for a rainy day. It needs to set tax rates that fund its current obligations.
Pass a law that prevents any of that money from ever being touched, for any reason, period.
Problem is that you're mentally sticking with this stupid "trust fund" idea. It's unnecessary. The government doesn't need to save for a rainy day. It needs to set tax rates that fund its current obligations.And you trust the government to accomplish this? With all due respect, and I mean that whole-heartedly, dream on.
The simple fact is that the SS/MC tax rates should be actuarially set based upon the demographic mix necessary to raise revenue and then pay recipients. I say jettison that the idea that you need to "save ahead" for the future of the program entirely.
Set a process that every 5 years, the government determines the projected outlays for SS/MC, and sets the SS/MC taxes necessary for the next 5 years to meet that level of revenue. Any extra goes to the general fund. Any shortfall is made up by the general fund. Repeat. Perhaps you can put in kickers such that if for a 5 year period they were incorrect about the balance between the two, the taxes for the next 5 year period are maybe higher or lower based on the percentage shortfall or overage to try to make it a self-correcting mechanism (and not play politics with the tax rates).
But we don't need a trust fund... And we don't need what you're suggesting, a lock box (hmm, where have I heard that one before?)...
And you trust the government to accomplish this? With all due respect, and I mean that whole-heartedly, dream on.Well it's better than running a program in massive deficits and saying "hey, there's no actual problem here; look at this nifty trust fund!"
Well it's better than running a program in massive deficits and saying "hey, there's no actual problem here; look at this nifty trust fund!"Well, I didn't come up with the idea, so there's that. The fact that it was stolen from, to me, is criminal.
You come up with an idea "don't let anyone touch that money"--which is essentially what happened. The money was parked in the absolute safest possible investment it could have been. T Bills. As safe as cash (since the only way it would fail is a Treasury default and in that case the cash itself would be worthless), and even earning interest!
Well, I didn't come up with the idea, so there's that. The fact that it was stolen from, to me, is criminal.Sorry. Based on your response, I realize that the way I phrased that made it likely that it would be interpreted exactly opposite to my meaning.
The money was not stolen, and by law, can only be invested in special T bills. Nobody stole the money.OK, so they borrowed from it.
The reason the TF is going under is unrelated to any of that.
OK, so they borrowed from it.Or more accurately, the SSTF invested in safe interest-bearing bonds instead of trying to hold their money in cash and watching its value erode due to inflation.
I only use somewhat different verbiage.I dunno...
And you trust the government to accomplish this? With all due respect, and I mean that whole-heartedly, dream on.Ed Zachery,great insight by Bwarb but this government has turned into the fuedal lords and their fiefdom's that this country fought/opposed/detested
The SSTF invests in special Treasury bills, by law. As noted, there is no safer investment in the world, and they get interest on it. It would be silly to hold it in cash somewhere, somehow.well can I invest in them and if so how bad will they hammer me at maturity and take their cut,err - I mean tax
I should probably convert just enough to keep me from bumpin the next tax bracketThat's probably what we will do too.
that wouldn't be a lot, but otherwise I wait until I retire
hopefully, that's in a few years
| [th]Tax Rate[/th] [th]For Single Filers[/th] [th]For Married Individuals Filing Joint Returns[/th] [th]For Heads of Households[/th] | |||
| 10% | $0 to $11,600 | $0 to $23,200 | $0 to $16,550 |
| 12% | $11,600 to $47,150 | $23,200 to $94,300 | $16,550 to $63,100 |
| 22% | $47,150 to $100,525 | $94,300 to $201,050 | $63,100 to $100,500 |
| 24% | $100,525 to $191,950 | $201,050 to $383,900 | $100,500 to $191,950 |
| 32% | $191,950 to $243,725 | $383,900 to $487,450 | $191,950 to $243,700 |
| 35% | $243,725 to $609,350 | $487,450 to $731,200 | $243,700 to $609,350 |
| 37% | $609,350 or more | $731,200 or more | $609,350 or more |
going from 24% to 32% would suckIf you just barely edged into it, it would hardly matter.
I think
going from 24% to 32% would suckDepends on how far and deep you dip in.
I think
If you just barely edged into it, it would hardly matter.Correct.
going from 24% to 32% would suckNot really. You understand the concept that if you're single and you make $200K, that not the entire $200K is taxed at 32%, right? The first 191,950 is taxed at the lower rates shown there. Only the $8050 between $191,950 and $200,000 is taxed at 32%.
I think
Depends on how far and deep you dip in.
We would have to get well into the 37% bracket to convert everything and that is NOT happening on my watch.
We will go right up to the top of the 24% barrier and will keep doing so until we are done.
going from 24% to 32% would suckThe proper comparison of Badge's situation would be something like this... I think you're in sales, right?
I think
It's also important to consider your earning power.True, but if you have the same tax rate, if you wait and do the conversion on $1.2M next year after you've made that gain, they'll take that exact same $240K in taxes.
Let's say you have a $1 million in an IRA. Let's say you're making 20 percent on that. So, in a year, you'd have $1.2 million.
If you do a conversion and say lose $200K to taxes, now you have $800K to invest. In a year, at 20 percent, you'd have $960K.
You are short $240K.
It's a tough balance.
Let's say you have a $1 million in an IRA. Let's say you're making 20 percent on that. So, in a year, you'd have $1.2 million.I've got that under the rugs in the house and some sealed in the the zip locks up on the garage gutters. Problem is I seem to be 800K short