Retire At 80?

[tsptalk]

Many of us won’t be able to retire until our 80s

You’ll probably have to work much longer than you anticipated

"Those who earned between $11,700 and $31,200 will need to work till age 76 to have a 50% chance of covering basic expenses in retirement. Those who earned between $31,200 and $72,500 will need to work to age 72 to have a 50% chance and those who earned more than $72,500, those in the highest income quartile, catch a break; they get stop working at age 65 to have a 50/50 chance of funding their retirement."

More

 

[Sensei]

I was just logged on to EBIS to bump up my TSP contribution, and stopped in to check out how my FERS retirement was looking. Based on my current high 3 average, if I were to claim a survivor benefit and retire at age 66, I'd receive only 33% of my annual salary. That's a bad retirement plan right there.

 

[alevin]

I was just logged on to EBIS to bump up my TSP contribution, and stopped in to check out how my FERS retirement was looking. Based on my current high 3 average, if I were to claim a survivor benefit and retire at age 66, I'd receive only 33% of my annual salary. That's a bad retirement plan right there.

Are you referring to the annuity part of the 3-legged stool, Sensei? If so, that's probably true for a lot of us, that leg of the 3 legged stool won't hold any of us, if that's the only leg we got to stand on at retirement. Me, without survivor benefit, it will be only about 33% of my retirement. with survivor benefit, it'd be quite a bit lower. TSP money management and personal savings are pretty crucial in this horserace.

 

[weatherweenie]

I was just logged on to EBIS to bump up my TSP contribution, and stopped in to check out how my FERS retirement was looking. Based on my current high 3 average, if I were to claim a survivor benefit and retire at age 66, I'd receive only 33% of my annual salary. That's a bad retirement plan right there.

I'm not sure it is a bad plan, when compared to the rest of the world.

 

[Sensei]

Are you referring to the annuity part of the 3-legged stool, Sensei? If so, that's probably true for a lot of us, that leg of the 3 legged stool won't hold any of us, if that's the only leg we got to stand on at retirement. Me, without survivor benefit, it will be only about 33% of my retirement. with survivor benefit, it'd be quite a bit lower. TSP money management and personal savings are pretty crucial in this horserace.

My understanding is we get FERS, TSP, and - ahem - Social Security. I don't expect squat from SS by the time I go out around 2040. I was referring to what FERS pays, separate from the TSP. In my opinion, a retirement plan that doesn't guarantee you to continue making at least half of what you made when you went out is less than satisfactory. I absolutely agree with your statement about TSP.

I'm not sure it is a bad plan, when compared to the rest of the world.

Sounds like the same attitude of people who say "be thankful you have a job". I've never understood that sentiment. I think every place that's ever employed me should be thankful they have me.

 

[Warrenlm]

2040? Stools will balance fine on two legs by then...new physics. And don't forget to check the RMB calculations method in EBIS.

 

[Dutchy]

I was just logged on to EBIS to bump up my TSP contribution, and stopped in to check out how my FERS retirement was looking. Based on my current high 3 average, if I were to claim a survivor benefit and retire at age 66, I'd receive only 33% of my annual salary. That's a bad retirement plan right there.

Don't forget, FEDS take out Health benefits, and income tax from your annuity also, further reducing it... With all the bad press Fed workers are getting, people are surprized when I tell them how little I'm collecting under FERS for 27 years service (22 FED and 5 years military).. They all think we raking in 80-100k a year or some ridiculous amount. CSRS retirement was much better, pre 1986, long past history now.

 

[Viva_La_Migra]

Many of us won’t be able to retire until our 80s

You’ll probably have to work much longer than you anticipated

"Those who earned between $11,700 and $31,200 will need to work till age 76 to have a 50% chance of covering basic expenses in retirement. Those who earned between $31,200 and $72,500 will need to work to age 72 to have a 50% chance and those who earned more than $72,500, those in the highest income quartile, catch a break; they get stop working at age 65 to have a 50/50 chance of funding their retirement."

More

Interesting article. This will become more true as inflation looms on the horizon. Whether one has paid off their mortgage and credit card debt will be a major factor in the equation.

 

[Frixxxx]

My understanding is we get FERS, TSP, and - ahem - Social Security. I don't expect squat from SS by the time I go out around 2040. I was referring to what FERS pays, separate from the TSP. In my opinion, a retirement plan that doesn't guarantee you to continue making at least half of what you made when you went out is less than satisfactory. I absolutely agree with your statement about TSP.

:nuts: I was told at 16 years of age, that SS was never going to be around when I was supposedly eligible for it. So I never have "planned" for it.

Sounds like the same attitude of people who say "be thankful you have a job". I've never understood that sentiment. I think every place that's ever employed me should be thankful they have me.

I agree with this statement, because I believe that employment is a trust issue.
1. Employer - has a need to be filled and hires an employee to meet the need. Evaluates the cost of filling that need, hires appropriately, and compensates at the level to retain the employee.
2. Employee - has a skill that meets the needs of an employer, markets this to the employer during selection process, sets parameters to be compensated at the level agreed upon.

It's a trust issue. Employees and employers have trust that fairness in the agreement to work is respected.

 

[Warrenlm]

CSRS retirement was much better, pre 1986, long past history now.

My father retired in '73 after 33 yrs at $18k in his first year's retirement and now receives $106k. That's before taxes and health insurance of course.

 

[Sensei]

Good discussion, folks. I really didn't mean to complain - more like posting while agitated (not PUI!) yesterday when I actually took the time to look at the numbers.

I knew 4 years ago, when I made the switch from California public schools to the Dept. of Defense school system, that CA offers a better base salary, health and retirement benefits. But the DOD offsets that with living quarters allowance and COLA - things I enjoy now, rather than later in life. When I made the switch 4 years ago, though, I didn't have the time to sit down and look at all the numbers - people I assumed knew what they're talking about gave me all sorts of misinformation regarding the benefits (like somehow the idea gets spread around that FERS will cover half of your high 3 when you go out). Just reinforces the idea of investigating everything on your own, and reading the fine print.

In retrospect, I have no regrets at all. Even knowing what FERS will pay, I'd still have made the decision to work where I am now. Great job, great place, and the TSP gives me the chance to chat with all of you! Good luck during this little correction!

 

[driz]

Looking at all this doom and gloom stuff reminds me that all this stuff has been done before over and over again. If you are in here actively managing your money you are already ahead of the game and can easily manage a nice retirement. The secret is you and your debt load. Drive an older car, keep your old smaller house and pay down all the debt you can before the banks suck you dry. If you aren't putting enough in your TSP to make the maximum matching then you are most likely not doing enough. I always jacked mine up by putting a percent more each year than the previous. Every time I got a step increase all or most of it went in and was never noticed. Today I stash 23% and at the end of the year will be leaving the government in the rear view mirror where it belongs. Saving / investing is the answer and it's all up to you. Spend less, save more and it all falls into place. My own personal claim to fame is keeping old cars. I fix them mostly myself and while it doesn't make sense for everyone there is always other places like dining out frequently that you can live without. It's all about habits. Try to work on the good ones and lessen the bad ones as best you can. Otherwise you can work till you are 80, I'll be done at 57 in December and you can find me out fishing or anywhere besides working...............................

 

[Buster]

Sounds like the same attitude of people who say "be thankful you have a job". I've never understood that sentiment. I think every place that's ever employed me should be thankful they have me.

Awesome..well said and I agree!

 

[PessOptimist]

Wow, it is a good discussion. I just opened TSP Talk and this is the first topic I saw.

I agree 100% that people think we will retire at 20 years on 50%. When I tell people I am looking at 20 or 22% (maybe) of my high three (five?) when I am 65 they usually call bullshit. Then of course I may be getting a 5% pay cut before then. (HR 5652, what's going on with that, no time to look this week)

I feel like whining a little too. I got home from work a few hours ago. Yeah, I get OT. Then I spent about two hours sorting notes and e-mailing my masters about a small crisis going on. At no extra charge. It is expected. I expect it from myself.

You either own your job or it owns you. The "grateful to have a job" people are owned. The first three levels in my chain are "thankful to have me". Above that...well once you make 12 your objectives seem to change. Most I know forgot about the "mission" and only think of 13-14-15-SES-$$$ and how to achieve those goals.

Driz, yeah OK. I drive an 11 year old vehicle. All the rest too.

 

[nnuut]

I like the one I have now, love my BOSS and am grateful that I had the opportunity.