**** off.

We could retire right now and we are late 40s. I already retired once and part-time consulted for a couple of years. I did not enjoy that so now that I know that I've written off doing that again. I enjoyed leadership too much so being a mercenary doesn't suit me.

I have no desire to work until I die and was perfectly content not working full-time. However, an opportunity came up that was interesting enough to pull me back in so I'm full-time again. I also just felt kind of dumb retiring so early, frankly.

Wife has since retired. Not sure what she's going to do but I'm totally cool with her not working again. She isn't wired for retirement though because she's a female and therefore crazy. Idle hands makes that worse. She is damn sure not working corporate again come hell or high water and neither am I. I'm fine with her getting a low paying retail job to help cover the property taxes which would be cool. My guess is she ends up doing something in the non-profit world.

My current thought is that I put 2 more years max into my current gig and then I retire permanently. That would put me at 51 or 52. I've had some random health **** for the last few years so that has heightened my awareness of my mortality. That will change your outlook, immediately, and my stuff is not even all that serious in the grand scheme of things.

edit: I guess for context we are 16x our final year where we were both in corporate. My current total comp is about 20% less than my former gig which I'm fine with because the discount of not having to deal with corporate America is probably worth at least 25% less. Maybe more.

JobSecurity said:

---

How are you all estimating COL at retirement? Inflation adjust a current estimate based on a certain standard of living? What's the "new normal" inflation estimate you're using?

---

The commonly used 7% return rate of the s&p500 is already inflation adjusted so a lot of planners use current expenses and decay the projected growth to account for increased expenses.

YouBet said:

---

We could retire right now and we are late 40s. I already retired once and part-time consulted for a couple of years. I did not enjoy that so now that I know that I've written off doing that again. I enjoyed leadership too much so being a mercenary doesn't suit me.

I have no desire to work until I die and was perfectly content not working full-time. However, an opportunity came up that was interesting enough to pull me back in so I'm full-time again. I also just felt kind of dumb retiring so early, frankly.

Wife has since retired. Not sure what she's going to do but I'm totally cool with her not working again. She isn't wired for retirement though because she's a female and therefore crazy. Idle hands makes that worse. She is damn sure not working corporate again come hell or high water and neither am I. I'm fine with her getting a low paying retail job to help cover the property taxes which would be cool. My guess is she ends up doing something in the non-profit world.

My current thought is that I put 2 more years max into my current gig and then I retire permanently. That would put me at 51 or 52. I've had some random health **** for the last few years so that has heightened my awareness of my mortality. That will change your outlook, immediately, and my stuff is not even all that serious in the grand scheme of things.

edit: I guess for context we are 16x our final year where we were both in corporate. My current total comp is about 20% less than my former gig which I'm fine with because the discount of not having to deal with corporate America is probably worth at least 25% less. Maybe more.

---

My wife "retired" from the corporate world a few years ago. Started her own business and decided it was more work than she wanted. She got into golf and made a connection with someone that runs a non-profit and now she helps out with that some. If your wife is a good networker she will come across something that interests her.

CuriousAg said:

---

How did you come up with your number? I don't know what to shoot for and have time to plan.

---

I'll be honest. No methodology here. It's probably a net worth of $10mm. It's seems like a safe amount and if someone told me I need less, I'd probably shoot for that amount anyway.

HouAggie said:

---

CuriousAg said:

---

How did you come up with your number? I don't know what to shoot for and have time to plan.

---

It's probably a net income of $10mm.

---

are u El Chapo?

Just keep in mind retiring mid 50s you still have 30-40 years to live. That $5M will go fast if you have kids and grandkids.

I agree. I think people retiring early (55 or less) need to realistically think of a second career just to have some income offset.

It's so subjective - too many things to consider that differ from person to person.

That said, we are "retired" but still own rental properties. We were self employed and we stockpiled while working knowing that was all we were getting - except maybe some SS for a few years but we've never counted on that. We've never pulled from our investments & just live off the rental income. That was our plan when we started buying back in 2015 & it's worked out pretty well. We bring in plenty to live on & are still buying if the price is right - granted, that is near impossible in the current market.

We've always lived within our budget - keep our cars for 10+, buy used when we want another car, our house is small compared to new ones but we just renovated the whole thing & we are content to stay in it. We buy what we need/want and have never felt deprived. That said, we never seem to need the absolute best & do our research on big purchases.

The next phase of our "plan" is to eventually sell one property a year if we need to at any point and that should get us thru several years if things go to crap.

Durkin Nowitzki said:

---

Just keep in mind retiring mid 50s you still have 30-40 years to live. That $5M will go fast if you have kids and grandkids.

---

I could still live off of $200k which is 4% of $5MM, even with kids and grandkids. Not to mention Social Security will kick in.

But point taken, I dont know if I will ever fully retire. I would still want to do some part time consulting, or some kind of work to bring in additional income. When I say retire, I mean just retire from my full-time corporate grind career.

I think 4% is aggressive if retiring early. Atleast imo.

Cyp0111 said:

---

I think 4% is aggressive if retiring early. Atleast imo.

---

Yeah, isn't the timeframe behind the original intent of the 4% rule age 65?

From what I've seen, but I have not spent too much time on the background.

For my own planning, I'm using a 3% safe withdraw rate for retirement projects at 50 or probably more practically, 2nd career/downcycle.

ea1060 said:

---

Durkin Nowitzki said:

---

Just keep in mind retiring mid 50s you still have 30-40 years to live. That $5M will go fast if you have kids and grandkids.

---

I could still live off of $200k which is 4% of $5MM, even with kids and grandkids. Not to mention Social Security will kick in.

But point taken, I dont know if I will ever fully retire. I would still want to do some part time consulting, or some kind of work to bring in additional income. When I say retire, I mean just retire from my full-time corporate grind career.

---

Same here. We're aiming for a number where we feel comfortable/confident stepping back from the full-time corporate gig. But may still do some consulting or contracting work, or work at the local beer shop or for the local minor league team.

Was just watching CNBC and they reported news that some CEO had passed away at age 62. He was set to retire next month.

That's what scares the **** out of me. Assuming if they are reporting it on CNBC this guy probably had plenty of money to retire earlier and he never got to fully enjoy it.

I'm not working a day over 55.

I'm hopeful to pull the plug at 50, that is what we are working towards.

EliteZags said:

---

HouAggie said:

---

CuriousAg said:

---

How did you come up with your number? I don't know what to shoot for and have time to plan.

---

It's probably a net income of $10mm.

---

are u El Chapo?

---

Whoops! Net WORTH.

htxag09 said:

---

Cyp0111 said:

---

I think 4% is aggressive if retiring early. Atleast imo.

---

Yeah, isn't the timeframe behind the original intent of the 4% rule age 65?

---

Just to add a bit of quantification.

I ran our numbers through FIRECalc (https://firecalc.com/) at various durations:

• 20 year retirement: 100% success rate
• 30 year retirement: 95.1% success rate
• 40 year retirement: 85.8% success rate
• 50 year retirement: 75.7% success rate

Assumptions: 4% withdrawl rate (3% CPI inflation) and no additional income (SS, W2).

Sake of comparison, upping the portfolio (+$400k) to match the same expenses, but at 3.5% withdrawal. Ball park another 2-3 years of working for the man if the market is good (8% return assumption).

• 20 year retirement: 100% success rate
• 30 year retirement: 100% success rate
• 40 year retirement: 99.1% success rate
• 50 year retirement: 95.1% success rate

I think the trade-off of an extra few years of work for a 3.5% withdrawal rate make sense.

One thing to consider is these success rates mean you never have to lower your expenses. Failure only means you run out of money if you blindly keep spending as if it's a bull market even if you run into an unfortunate sequence of years that decimates your portfolio. If we really run into stretch like that the entire economy will be suffering and your expenses will likely naturally go down anyway.

I know. This is in a vacuum to explain how a .5% difference means a lot over multiple decades.

Rule of Thumbs are just that. In reality, we'll all have different inputs / outputs to model out: SS, pensions, flexibility of spending, cycle we retire into (SOR), mortgage or not, and the list goes on.

Agree there are a ton of variables, however, not something you really want to cut too close imo.

Cyp0111 said:

---

Agree there are a ton of variables, however, not something you really want to cut too close imo.

---

That's what the MAN tells you to keep you working forever

With me at max social security…that $3600 at 66.5, I think….plus the dinky amount the wife will get.

The about $3M should last about 31 years assuming the 4% rule and inflation each year of 5% and that assumes a conservative 4% return each year.

$120K to live on net out the $45k ish for SS….so $75K out of the $3M in year 1 assuming no COLA on SS in the calcs. Of course if I want Cadillac healthcare vs Medicare….will have to work until 72.

Will also probably move to a cheaper/smaller place, home equity would at another $500k or so….which will be eaten up by assisted living etc.

Bleh

40 year wealth manager here - Don't just look at retirement accounts , look at net worth .

Cyp0111 said:

---

Agree there are a ton of variables, however, not something you really want to cut too close imo.

---

Now say this, but instead of money replace it with time…

topher06 said:

---

I don't think this is achievable for the average person on TexAgs, you simply cannot get enough into any retirement account to reach 6x the typical salary of $2MM/year before 50.

---

should be pretty easy to make 12x with a $2million salary by age 65

it's only 24 million dollars in savings.

pretty simple for most americans.

fka ftc said:

---

One caveat in planning those future outflows in retirement is to consider your spending pattern during those years.

For instance, let's say you retire at 60. Those first 5-10 years are going to be travel, grandkids, hobbies, golf, hookers / blow, etc.

The next 10 are going to be about declining movement, maybe being close to the grandkids, little travel, no more golf, cutting back on other fun things.

I've been fortunate to have flexibility at a much younger age and our spending these next few years will be much higher than in planned full retirement.

So your planned outflows may be 1.2x to 1.5x of salary / income those first few years, then a few years at 1x (adjusted for inflation) followed by .0.8x, then 0.6x, and so on.

Just more food for thought.

---

this is an important point by FKA here

which is why I am going for early semi retirement in my latter 50s (56/57)

because who knows how long you can remain mobile and active both physically and mentally

and your expenses should be going down each year as you age (if you are single without kids)

A former boss told me once: there is only a small window of time when you have time, energy, and money. Don't waste it in the office.

Of course, he had just retired in his mid 50's with an 8 figure NW.

I think that sweet spot is probably 60-75 years old. I won't have enough money for 60 but hopefully plenty of all three by 65-75.

just played golf with a guy at Snowmass Club on Monday. 70 years old, has lived in Aspen since 1979. when he moved there straight from college as a pharmacist. Now owns a high-end realty firm. Plays golf five days a week, skis five days a week in the winter. Dude is living a great life and looks like he's easily ten years younger than he is. But even he said after 70 it's all a crap shoot. Do all the great athletic stuff you want to do right now.

My dad turns 70 next year, he's generally pretty healthy but time take a toll. Knee replacement last year, back coming up soon. Stuff starts breaking and travel less frequent. I really think finding an optimal downshift in the 50s is the ticket.

Cyp0111 said:

---

My dad turns 70 next year, he's generally pretty healthy but time take a toll. Knee replacement last year, back coming up soon. Stuff starts breaking and travel less frequent. I really think finding an optimal downshift in the 50s is the ticket.

---

When I first started there was an older coworker I made my mentor. She put off all her traveling until she retired at 65. First trip she took her legs swelled up and she couldn't walk/leave the hotel for 4 days.....

Luckily, my dad spent a decent chunk and we traveled as a family so he didnt defer that. However, you quickly realize that time is undefeated.

GoAgs92 said:

---

With me at max social security…that $3600 at 66.5, I think….plus the dinky amount the wife will get.

The about $3M should last about 31 years assuming the 4% rule and inflation each year of 5% and that assumes a conservative 4% return each year.

$120K to live on net out the $45k ish for SS….so $75K out of the $3M in year 1 assuming no COLA on SS in the calcs. Of course if I want Cadillac healthcare vs Medicare….will have to work until 72.

Will also probably move to a cheaper/smaller place, home equity would at another $500k or so….which will be eaten up by assisted living etc.

Bleh

---

I believe your wife is eligible to receive social security benefits equal to as much as half what your retirement benefit will be when you retire at age 66.5. So she could receive $1800 per month.

Cyp0111 said:

---

My dad turns 70 next year, he's generally pretty healthy but time take a toll. Knee replacement last year, back coming up soon. Stuff starts breaking and travel less frequent. I really think finding an optimal downshift in the 50s is the ticket.

---

As I turn 50 this year, I wholly agree with this if you can figure it out. My pre-established DNA is kicking in with joints breaking down and whatnot.

I've already had two surgeries (shoulder and back) and I'm very dialed in on maintaining movement and flexibility because it's going to be an issue for me sooner than most as I age. Just luck of the draw, largely.

Got most of my major physical accomplishments done in my 30s so no ragrats there. Just want to make sure I can do moderate stuff going forward.