The Stack Overflow podcast is back! Listen to an interview with our new CEO.

New answers tagged

3

Yes, sort of, unless Congress changes the laws. Currently, past earnings are adjusted by an "index factor" (to use the SSA term) which isn't precisely the inflation rate, but is similar. It is calculated from average wages for the past years compared to the current year. Here's a link to an example: https://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/retirebenefit1.html ...


1

Under the current rules, yes, benefits are indexed to inflation. However, note that if you have a government pension from work not covered by Social Security, you may face an offset that could reduce the benefits.


33

Not safe at all. A 4% withdrawal rate would require the US stock market in the 21st century to produce returns similar to those of the 20th century, i.e. in the vicinity of 7% in real (inflation-adjusted) terms. Fair estimates for stock returns going forward are not this high. Rick Ferri proposed a real 5% over a 30-year horizon in 2015. I recall Bernstein ...


9

I think you could answer this by looking at how the world market does on average compared to the US market. Essentially a comparison of VTSAX to VTWIX. This website will allow you to do exactly that. While VTWIX has a lower growth rate over a 10 year period (8.57% versus VTSAX's 13.09%) it's still higher than the ~7% annualized growth required to make the 4% ...


11

The 4% rule was created by looking at hypothetical retirees throughout all of the history of the stock market. 4% was found to always ensure that a retiree never ran out of money for at least 33 years regardless of what period of history you looked at. This includes a retiree going through any of the 30 year periods that intersected the Great Depression, ...


2

Fidelity charges zero account fees. I would move the Transamerica account to Fidelity and use that as a warehouse for your money. This new employer's 401K is less than ideal, but please don't let that preclude you from investing. Contribute, often, as much as you can, and early. While the fee will hinder you some, it will pale in comparison to just the ...


1

Years ago I wrote a brief discussion of a book titled The Number. In it, I link to a spreadsheet that will do exactly as you request. It opens looking like this I used a starting salary of 17338 as that's what was needed to get an age 62 salary of 60,000. The assumed raise was 3%. The 15% saved was (in my approach) 10% deposit and 5% company match. You can ...


2

Can someone please explain to me why a 401k administrator charges admin fees, while plenty of brokerages (Schwab, TDAm) don't charges admin fees for their non-retirement accounts Because there is paperwork involved, gobs and gobs of it, for a 401(k) account with multiple participants. As you mentioned you'll find non-retirement brokerage accounts, IRA ...


2

For comparison, my ex-employer (401(k) still there) charges a fee on their S&P fund of .016% . If the decimal and % sign seem confusing, it's $160 per year, per million dollars. No other fee. the .07% is reasonable, the .5% suggests depositing to get the full match, but no more than that. To the edit, why do they charge an admin fee? I suspect it’s ...


1

You're not missing anything obvious, but I would reduce the amount that you need to live somewhat. Your fictitious income is 60k (15% of 60k is 9k). You're contributing $9k to a 401k. You're calculating the money you need based on that 60k income to be 60k as if you were continuing the contributions after retirement. You should either include those 9k in ...


5

You've stopped the drawdown projection after 15 years, but you could easily live longer than that, and in just a few more years you'd run out of money. Your initial withdrawal rate of >7% is very high. You haven't considered the need to grow your withdrawals with inflation. As a result of the above, most people cannot rely purely on "conservative portfolios" ...


Top 50 recent answers are included