I plan retirement in Mexico. A house near the ocean, with maid service, and all the other amenities that would cost $100k a year in So Cal can be had for less than $15k a year in Mexico.

So instead of having to a mass a fortune of $2,000,000 and let it sit in a the bank (with a risk of losing it all for a 5% APR), I can sit comfortably with $400k in the bank in a nice FDIC account at 3%.

pbs911
Inflation historically 3.1%, Your money market is taxable at 3%.
In actuality, your purchasing power is decreasing at the "FDIC rate".
Also FDIC coverage is 100k, so I hope you are using 4 banks.
A good portfolio manger can earn you 7-8% in a flat equity market with minimal risk. PM me, and ask how I know.

Care to elaborate. I am considering selling a rental property. At the present rental rate, and the value of the home, I would need a net return of 7.8% to break even. My goal is to maintain income stream and some appreciation/growth.

Moneyguy1, I will try to reformat my spreadsheet so I can post it here, and we can discuss.
Jurgen

God, I wish there were more good portfolio managers. Do you advocate commission or fee-only advisors?

Actually, I plan on reinvesting in real estate and then just a little lower than FDIC insured amount in the bank. It is the "risk" portion of "minimal risk" I am not willing to undertake. it may just be me, but I know just as many people who lose money in non-insured investments than make money. And those who lose seem to lose big.

Until I can find a money manager who is willing to accept a commission / fee contingent upon my portfolio increasing at the "pitched" rate, I take the safe path. For a lose of potentially 2-3% had a pitched portfolio increased, that's worth piece of mind in my mind. I guess it's the old bird in the hand / 2 in the bush thing with me. . .

Yes. Don't get married. ;)

We had children after 15 years of marriage (another story). We went from highly paid DINKs to the other end of the spectrum. We are now a one-income, stay-home-wife, two kids, and college costs in the future, family. Ten years ago I never would have believed we could live off what we do. Having a family and a stay-home wife is EXPENSIVE.

The truth is having the spousal unit stay home is a choice we made. We made the choice because there is more to life than money. We make it work by living below our means. As a result, our net-worth is fairly good. Best of all our worth is not based on a real-estate bubble. We’re diversified.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Capt. Carrera
Yes. Don't get married. ;)

So not planning on it. Even given up on girlfriends. <br>

Just friends with benefits now. <br>
Me, my Porsches, and my trusty hound dog. Trying to simplify.

Cabo isn't Mexico. But your right, it is a funny story as it demonstrates how Californians have become brain washed into thinking a house is supposed to cost > $100,000.

Ha - its worse than that. Remember those are median figures, so half of people are below it...

I believe this is where a quote like "find out how the other half lives" is appropriate. Its statistics like those that make me a proponent of a sufficient level of welfare.

I used to work with a guy who was the sole income earner; wife was stay at home mom even though kids are in school. Wasn't putting anything away for retirement except for the company 401k, but was not adding any into that. No IRAs or anything. They spend their money on stupid things (ie he's got 5 digital cameras and is now looking at a new digital SLR) and go on expensive vacations every year. I asked him what he's going to do for retirement and he says he expects his kids to take care of him. He's pushing 50 now BTW. Hope he's right for his sake.

Can't find any credentials for Ms Pullam. Would take the info in there with a real large grain of salt. Every case is different and unique and no uniform set of answers applies. How about long term health care for example?

lol.

Harddrives REAL retirement plan:

1) Marry anesthesiologist (check, done in 1997)
2) Don't nail the baby sitter.
3) Retire at age 40.
4) Repeat step 2.

When the SS system was set up people didn't live very long after they retired...

A very dear friend of my Daddys from his Detroit days...1930's and 40's .......who BTW is 85...said that his Econ Teach back when he was a mere lad siad to his class, "The poor will always be with us."

He is against privatization because he thinks about 98% of the people are morons when it comes to finances...

Mother, her friend and I think that the Market is rumbling like a volcano and is about to go substantially higher...

Anyway her friend said something before a large group in Washington that I wish I had said, " If I seem unduly clear to you, you must have misunderstood what I said." Who says Bankers don't have a sense of humor.....translated that means stop bothering me with your moronic questions....and let me get on with business of the economy....

1st problem I see is that it is a survey of spending, not "prefered level of spending". The lower level of spending might be self-fulfilling if the older people surveyed have less money!

For instance, they could be getting money from family, because their 1980s nest egg (did anyone have one?) has run out or down...

tabs: One of my teachers in grad school had a saying that has stuck with me:

"Your friendly neighborhood banker is neither."