What retirement strategy other than SS?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Mr Nice
The only negative to an IRA (traditional or Roth) is that the maximum yearly limits are very low.

It should be 3-4 times that amount set by the IRS.


That's why you first max out the 401k, then the Roth/IRA, then stick money in regular savings.
 
Originally Posted By: supton
Originally Posted By: ArrestMeRedZ
Originally Posted By: supton
My understanding about 401k vs Roth was if you were in a higher tax bracket in retirement then the Roth makes sense--but if you were going to be in a lower one, then just 401k was better. Pay taxes when it's lower.


What this does not take into account is the tax on gains from years of investment. What you put into a Roth or ordinary plan in the first year of a 30-year investment cycle may easily go up 10 times in investment gains before you withdraw. When you take it out of a Roth It's all tax free. It's all fully taxable as regular income when you take it out of a ordinary 401k or IRA. Even capital gains from those accounts are taxed at the higher ordinary income rate.



I see what you are saying, but most any internet advisor advice I've seen doesn't indicate that. I don't know if they assume one only has a certain dollar amount to put forward to savings; and as such, a 401k would be that full amount, but a Roth would be that amount minus their marginal tax rate? thus lowering what would be accumulating.


Everyone's situation is different, but running the numbers I would have been much better off putting as much as possible into the Roth, and rolling from regular to Roth when possible. Don't forget, financial advisors make money based upon the total amount in your account and it doesn't make a hill of beans difference to them if it's taxable or not. With time to grow, I'd prefer $80k in a Roth to $100k in a regular IRA. Even in a low cost index fund, they make more with the larger amount in the tax deferred regular IRA.

I did not believe this until about 2-3 years ago. A buddy of mine whose wife is a accountant and an Enrolled Agent makes him put his 401k money into a Roth 401k. His income puts him into the 28% bracket. His telling me that forced me to do some research.

In my case, with a 20 year career, and small investments for the first 5 years (paying off a divorce), moderate for the next 10 years, and close to max over the last 5 years, I would estimate my contributions and company match were maybe 35% of the total of my current account balance. My tax bracket while working would have to have been almost 3 times what it is now for a regular 401k to have been a better choice. Fortunately or unfortunately, my bracket hasn't changed much in retirement.

Of course, if you don't have enough available funds to contribute enough to get the maximum company match and pay the taxes, that changes the equation in favor of regular over Roth. Always always always contribute enough to get any available matching funds.
 
It's really very simple.
Social Security was originally intended to supplement one's own savings.
You can only set aside what you can afford to although those savings invested will add up nicely over time.
Me?
Both wife and I have defined benefit plans and wife will get a decent SS benefit as well.
We of course have our own savings as well as funds sitting in various prior employer plans.
We raised and educated two sons and are now sitting on well into seven figures of near cash assets.
If you have been fortunate enough to have enjoyed decent family income over time and you don't blow it all on expensive toys, like new high end cars, your net worth shouldn't be too awful, especially if you adhere to SOJ's mantra of keeping things simple, which I happen to agree with.
 
SOJ ?
21.gif


Basically you have to plan today for your future 30 years down the road.
 
Interesting conversations and advice.

Many would rather live in the now, enjoy life with vacations, toys etc. Who knows if you will live to retirement?
 
Originally Posted By: ZZman
Interesting conversations and advice.

Many would rather live in the now, enjoy life with vacations, toys etc. Who knows if you will live to retirement?


I think you have to do both because you are right, no one is guaranteed tomorrow. I've know people who have saved and invested all of their life but really didn't live and enjoy life but had a big pile of money at the end which they never used and left to their kids.

While I love my kids, I don't feel the need to leave them a huge payoff when I die. I plan on using a lot of my retirement funds on enjoying life in retirement. I want my kids to make it on their own and not expect to have a huge windfall when I die.
 
Originally Posted By: Mr Nice


A million dollar nest egg is easy to save for over a 30 year timeframe.


Easy? Not for most Americans as statics show. Really depends on your income level.
 
Originally Posted By: ZZman
Originally Posted By: Mr Nice


A million dollar nest egg is easy to save for over a 30 year timeframe.


Easy? Not for most Americans as statics show. Really depends on your income level.


ZZMan,

I would not consider you into the "most Americans" camp, just by looking at your signature....(just the fact you got that Sebring at 10 years old.....)
And I'm going to think you handle your finances the same...

I think what Mr.Nice is saying (and you already know) is "don't be the sheep"...

Me, I still have a lot of work to do....
For me , for now, the most returns was the RE investments (With all the second job, time and headaches, TTT,.... troubles)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top