This is similar to how my pension will work here in Norway. I will be 62 at the end of the year and I will be able to start taking my pension (regardless of whether I work) but I could also delay taking it indefinitely. The total amount is fixed and predicated on the average age at death. So if I take it early I spread it more thinly. If I take it later I get more per year while taking it but risk missing out altoget…
if I want to give some away it's best to start early Right, if it's the same net present value why would anyone ever start later? If you're still working just take the money and save or invest it.
Investing it (or even storing it in a bank, if above the insurance limit) comes with an extra risk.
I stil don't understand how this guy did it. Can someone explain in a few words?
If you can live on $1500/month, you only need to save up $450K-$600K and live off the 3-4% real returns in perpetuity. This quantity of savings is easily reachable within a decade by tech workers paid $100K+/yr. In general, just take (monthly spending) * 12 * [25 or 33] to get bounds on required savings. The only other useful observation is that reducing spending is much more effective for reaching financial independ…
Make sure you take into account taxes.
Retirement investment plans such as 401ks and IRAs have significant tax benefits. The catch is that they can't be withdrawn from before age 59 without huge penalties.
So if the goal is to retire early, one needs to use regular investment vehicles, which are subject to capital gains (15%),
They don't need an income; they have paid-off houses worth $1.2m that they picked up in 1972 for $100k.
But now who can buy that house for $1.2m, and in 30 years will it have increased in value by 10x again? I feel like this is why an increasing number of people are locked out of the housing market. But as we learned, prices don't increase forever...
I stil don't understand how this guy did it. Can someone explain in a few words?
If you can live on $1500/month, you only need to save up $450K-$600K and live off the 3-4% real returns in perpetuity. This quantity of savings is easily reachable within a decade by tech workers paid $100K+/yr. In general, just take (monthly spending) * 12 * [25 or 33] to get bounds on required savings. The only other useful observation is that reducing spending is much more effective for reaching financial independ…
Or much simpler: Own your property.
Once you own your place, you don't have to pay rent, you can live on $500 a month. That may be covered by the unemployment help, so you don't have to work either and don't pay taxes.
Bonus: if there is a spare room in your place, you can rent it and you'll make enough to cover a lot of expenses and save much money.
They don't need an income; they have paid-off houses worth $1.2m that they picked up in 1972 for $100k.
But now who can buy that house for $1.2m, and in 30 years will it have increased in value by 10x again? I feel like this is why an increasing number of people are locked out of the housing market. But as we learned, prices don't increase forever...
>who can but the houses?
Rich people from other countries. Especially places where money isn't made cleanly?
I'm currently writing a list of things to consider when creating a UBI scheme (concerns that I often don't see addressed), and this is an easy way to illustrate one of them. One simple way to implement "single payer" healthcare in the US would be to slowly expand the medicare (US program for people 65 and older) coverage by moving the age lower every year. Very similarly, a simple way to incrementally implement UBI w…
>> In 2010, British women got their state pension at 60 and men got theirs at 65. By October 2020, both sexes will have to wait until they are 66. By 2028, the age will rise again, to 67.
>How do people who think a feasible UBI future is possible square with this?
Because this was done to calm down the markets. The debt is approaching 100%.
Your suggesting that white people in the UK are simply going to stop having children? Or, that in 70 years there simply will be no white people left in the UK? I'm feel pretty confident that the chart doesn't suggest what you're saying - but then, I'm not entirely sure what exactly you're saying.
Demographics are destiny and if the population of a country is replaced, then it seems a tautology that the new country will resemble the replacements rather than the replaced in many ways. I wasn't being facetious that there is in fact a retirement program in Zimbabwe, and listening to Rhodesians in the 1950s talking about their Rhodesian retirement plan for the then very distant 2010s is likely to be as pointless o…
"demographics are destiny", what is that? i believe i've heard it a few times recently. sounds like a new-fashioned "white is right", with the benefit of sounding like something intelligent to an imbecile. but if demographics is destiny, then it's good more brown people are moving into europe. twice in the last century, with so many white people on the subcontinent, europe dissolved into mass barbarism and pulled much of the world into it as well. if demographics are destiny then the migrants flowing in are a blessing. if demographics are destiny, which why the fuck someone should believe that, i don't know.
I'm currently writing a list of things to consider when creating a UBI scheme (concerns that I often don't see addressed), and this is an easy way to illustrate one of them. One simple way to implement "single payer" healthcare in the US would be to slowly expand the medicare (US program for people 65 and older) coverage by moving the age lower every year. Very similarly, a simple way to incrementally implement UBI w…
"Very similarly, a simple way to incrementally implement UBI would be to lower the "retirement age" every year." I suspect when many (not all) of the supporters of UBI consider it to be the most basic of subsistence payments, not something we would want seniors to retire with. Think of the difference in amounts between SS and unemployment insurance currently.
Well a) SS is barely livable and b) unemployment insurance would actually be a much better proposition if people paid into it.
If you can live on $1500/month, you only need to save up $450K-$600K and live off the 3-4% real returns in perpetuity. This quantity of savings is easily reachable within a decade by tech workers paid $100K+/yr. In general, just take (monthly spending) * 12 * [25 or 33] to get bounds on required savings. The only other useful observation is that reducing spending is much more effective for reaching financial independ…
Make sure you take into account taxes. Retirement investment plans such as 401ks and IRAs have significant tax benefits. The catch is that they can't be withdrawn from before age 59 without huge penalties. So if the goal is to retire early, one needs to use regular investment vehicles, which are subject to capital gains (15%),
You can transfer the money from 401k to IRA to Roth IRA then withdraw it after five years. You have to pay income tax during the IRA to Roth IRA conversion, but if you're retiring early your tax bracket is likely very low. Similarly, you'll be in the 0% bracket for long term capital gains.