u/Parking-Banana-212

AI automates work, thus taking jobs. 70% of the us economy is consumer driven.

When people have less jobs, where will they get money to support that economy? UBI is not going to replace at least 80k median hh income in the US, because where would the government get that money from to fund UBI?

Any Trillionaire / billionaire saying that things will be so abundent in the future that we won't have to work is trying to sell us a future where they own everything.

Someone please explain where the money will come from in the future

I was a bit confused by some people citing 4% rule (or 4.7%), while others cite morningstar (3.9%) so I looked into what would fit my portfolio and understand which one seemed more realistic. Learned there are major differences between them (I listed the llm pull below, but recapping the key points)

1. Morningstar is using future investment returns to get to 3.9%, since valuations are unsually high right now, versus Bill Bengen's 4.7% is based on historical backwards looking data.

2.Morningstar uses a more conservative portfoio of 30-50% equities, whereas Bill B uses up to 70% equities

So in my case, I like Morningstar's method of using weighting for current valuations to come to a more conservative rate, but I think realistically, a 30-50% equities mix is way too low for me (probably 70%+)

So net net, it seems like somewhere between the two would make sense for myself, higher equities, but with a weighting for current valuations. I would estimate to use about a 4.3% (rough math). I have a 37 year time horizon in planning, so i'll call it 4% based on that.

The thing that confuses me is morningside says if you use guardrails, you can go from 3.9% to 5.2% + (seems like a big difference)
So if i split the difference, personally i would have 4% as my swr (back to the beginning), but utilizing guardrails, i would aim to shoot for higher knowing in bad markets i would scale back.

Curious if anyone else has dived into this rabbit hole and what do they think?

1. Predicting the Future vs. Looking at the Past

• Morningstar: They use a method called Monte Carlo simulations to look forward. Because current stock market prices are quite high and bond yields fluctuate, their computers predict that investment returns over the next 30 years might be lower than usual. They lower the safe rate to 3.9% to shield you from a future market drop. [1, 2, 3, 4]
• Bill Bengen: His 1994 research looked strictly at actual U.S. history. He wanted to find a number that would have survived the Great Depression and the severe inflation of the 1970s. Since his math assumes you just need to survive past historical disasters, his baseline starts higher. [1]

2. What Does "Safe" Mean?

• Morningstar: They define success as having at least $1 left over at the end of 30 years in 90% of their future guesses. This means a 10% risk of running out of cash is built into that 3.9% rule.
• Bill Bengen: His rule demands a 100% success rate against history. When he updated his research to include other asset classes like small-cap stocks, he found that the worst-case scenario in history could actually handle a 4.7% starting rate.

3. How Much Risk Should You Take?

• Morningstar: Surprisingly, Morningstar found that a lower stock portfolio (30% to 50% stocks, with the rest in safer bonds) gives you the highest chance of steady real spending. Too many stocks add too much volatile risk early in retirement.
• Bill Bengen: Bengen's math relies heavily on stocks to power long-term growth. He recommends a heavier stock portfolio to ensure your money beats inflation over 30 years.

How to Get More Money Out of Your Portfolio

Morningstar explicitly notes that you do not have to limit yourself to a rigid 3.9%. If you are willing to use a dynamic strategy—meaning you spend less when the stock market is crashing and give yourself a raise when the market is booming—Morningstar states you can safely push your starting withdrawal rate up to 5.2% or 5.7%. [1, 2]

For a VHCOL city, and a HCOL city?

Without the costs of kids, and for one person, I'm thinking 150k for vhcol, and 120k for hcol city. what do others think?

I'm trying to decide how to manage MAGI to get some aca subsidies (below 60k/year), and do roth conversions. Single person retiree

I have between 54 and 67 (SS) where I can make a dent in my 401k balance to do roth conversions (currently 1.6m 401k), but if i want to keep the aca subsidies, i can make fairly small amount of roth conversions every year.

How would one think of this to best optimize. i don have a decent amount of post tax / cash to pull from prior to 59.5

And another question is, after 59.5, i was thinking there's less need to do roth conversions as i can just pull out 401k spend and it would be the same thing?

I was just in thailand, vietnam, malaysia, japan, hong kong and all the hotels i stayed at were around 4 stars, and they were all so much better then the comparable hotels in the us, europe, and just about anywhere else i can think of.

price - much better in most places except japan. i chalk it up to lower labor costs

service - immaculate

food - 10/10 in most places, especially the breakfasts

How is this?

Most of the threads i've read are people firing with a spouse and usually kids.

I will be firing as a single person at 54, and wondering how many people on here are also firing as a single, what the differences for single firerer's that aren't talked about enough.

My current nw allows me to withdrawal my spend at 3.7% swr, and i rent so have a lot of flexibility on moving if i want to. How are singles feeling about firing, what are you worried about, what are the pros in your mind?

I was watching a show with Michael Kitses, and he mentioned how for FIRE people that end up with 2,3,4X their starting fire number when they die, really had no way of managing it any other way. Because in the beginning years (say 50-70, gogo years) when they want to spend money on travel etc, they couldn't forsee how markets will go, and would not have been wise to overspend on thoses years due to SORR, but later in life they have so much money and don't really have anywhere to spend it)

Thus the irony of fire, i would love to spend more then say 4-4.7% early and ball out when i have the energy, but it could mean consequenses later.

I'm going to be there for a few days, and with the indian influence would want at least one great indian meal. Where would you suggest? Dishes i usually love are Saag, goat or mutton, any kind of fish curries.

Thank you

Edit - banana leaf sounds like the move. is there consensus best banana leaf restaurant near buki bintang that servces good saag / fish curries etc?

Is it the utlimate hack for americans? I see that something like $500k could support a very nice retirement in great places like thailand, vietnam, mexico, whereas its borderline survival in the US.

Most people in the US retire with less then $300k, and I'm just wondering why most don't move away? I'm wondering what the real statistics of % of people over 50 that leave the US are. I know its not for everyone as most do not want to move away from their network or live in a place with a new language, but for the initiated, it seems like a no brainer

Yep, laid off at 53, been looking for the last 6 months and its been pretty tough, gotten interviews as i have a good experience, but nothing yet, and thinking of just calling it a career despite still wanting to do something "careerwise" with my life rather then flat out RE.

I'm single, live in a hcol area (don't want to move unfortunItely, unless its a few years of overseas living). With $2.6m of nw (renter, about $1.6m in pretax, $1m between brokerage and hysa). Will get about 45k in SS at age 67. I spend around $8k a month (includes rent, and likely aca, i may shoot for low magi next year so hope to reduce those healthcare costs).

I've been studying the guardrails method (which for a single person is much easier to rachet up and down, since i have ton of flexibility. i could go slow travel for a few years and probably half my spend). I also already have a modified buckets strategy in place, and plan on doing roth conversions from whenever my magi is low enough until SS.

I think the math works to just retire, although i have no idea what i would do with my time. I think my math works but wouldn't mind getting some feedback from the good folks here.

How many of you are actually aiming for your fire number based on your spend number (ie - 80k yearly spend, shooting for 2m fire numner?)

I feel like a lot of people i talk to are basing their fire number off of something other then their spend but am curious to ask

I have no desire to leave a large bequest when i die, nor do i want to run out of momey. (die with zero essentially).

I'm curious what success rate do you'all shoot for.

I shoot for 90% success rate, I'm thinking its quite conservative already, because when say I'm 10-20 years out from my 90's (my estimated death day), and I see the funds depleting faster then projected, i would start pulling my spend back by 10%, which would preserve the funds for the rest of my life.

At least that's my thinking, but curious to hear what others are planning on their success rate target?

I understand some younger FIRE adherents don't count SS into their retirement plans, but since i am in my late 40's, i'm pretty sure it will be around for me in some form (i calculate that i will take a haircut of 20% to be safe)

But wondering how other people calculate their SS benefit into their fire plans assuming you are calculating? the 4% rule is pretty straightforward but it doesn't include SS, would love to hear some thoughts on how people approach it?

Most people on here seem very conservative with their spend and swr (plus the market's been great). Wondering if people have stories of where people ran out of money and FIRE broke either because of overspending or some other cause?

I'm 53 years old and looking for 6 months. Put in 260 applications and got a 5% response rate from recruiters.

My resume isn't the problem, and I know the job market is bad, but wondering how my 5% response rate compares to other's experience in the current job market?

Edit - adding some background. I'm in ecommerce, worked in some well known companies. quite a bit of experience, but its also still a young person's game, although i look pretty young for my age.