# 6 Tips For Do-It-Yourself Retirement Investors



## MULTIZ321 (Jan 20, 2019)

6 Tips For Do-It-Yourself Retirement Investors
By Craig Stephens/ Money/ Retirement/ On Retirement/ USNews/ money.usnews.com

*"Investing in retirement requires strategy and mindset changes.*

*INVESTING IN RETIREMENT is different than investing during your working years. Since you are counting on your assets for your retirement income, preserving your savings becomes more important than asset growth.

This strategy adjustment can be a challenge for do-it-yourself retirement investors who have invested the same way for decades. Investing in retirement requires a new way of thinking and some changes to your asset allocations. Here are six tips to help protect the nest egg it took decades to save....."





Managing your own investments becomes more challenging in retirement.(GETTY IMAGES)


Richard

*


----------



## WinniWoman (Jan 20, 2019)

We are at this point now. I get overwhelmed thinking about it.

I looked into a financial planner a while ago and it just seemed too crazy expensive to me, though we could do some hourly consults with him instead.

I am currently speaking with one from Rick Edelman Financial Engines- and it is the same with them- high fee. The company is supposedly highly recommended by Consumer Reports- but I still don't like the high fee for ongoing management. I don't mind a one time fee and maybe a smaller fee for each year there after- but not the same high fee year after year. He also had some wrong info. on taking Medicare Part B and D, saying my husband had to register for both when he turned 65. Ummm- no. He is still working. He applied for Medicare Part A only, which is premium free. I have another free zoom meeting with him this week. Have filled in some questionnaires and sending him our excel sheet with our finances on it. He is in South Carolina, so I don't like that either. I don't know...supposedly there is no one else from their company here in NY. Hard to believe.He did a lot of talking and I wasn't that impressed really. But I am trying to remain open minded.

I am also considering a CPA group that also does financial planning and can help with estate planning as well. I kind of like this idea better. I will probably set up an appt. with them after tax season is over.

And I have a few other names of financial planners I can call as well.

But for now- I am a do it your selfer. Just kind of winging it.


----------



## Luvtoride (Jan 20, 2019)

Thanks for the article, Richard.  Nothing too specific or insightful but good general guidelines.  This is something most of us will worry about and struggle with as we reach retirement age.  I think that finding a good and trusted (and reasonably priced) advisor is key to managing this phase of our investing life.  
Start talking to people, friends etc and interviewing potential advisors (if you don’t already have one).  
No matter how large your retirement nest egg is we are all dealing with the uncertainty of “how long does our money have to last”.  Unfortunately that’s a question none of us can answer. 
Good luck. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## VacationForever (Jan 20, 2019)

We pay crazy amount to our financial advisor's firm for on-going management.  It is enough to support my son who is struggling to find work.  The financial advisor said one thing that resonates with me, it is his job to make sure we are not poor and he won't make us rich.  It makes sense.


----------



## am1 (Jan 20, 2019)

VacationForever said:


> We pay crazy amount to our financial advisor's firm for on-going management.  It is enough to support my son who is struggling to find work.  The financial advisor said one thing that resonates with me, it is his job to make sure we are not poor and he won't make us rich.  It makes sense.



I can make sure I am not poor but Im trying to get rich as well.  

Hi job is to take as much money as you let him from you.  Also to get referrals to do the same.  The better the return the happier you are with him.  Which helps both his goals.


----------



## VacationForever (Jan 20, 2019)

am1 said:


> I can make sure I am not poor but Im trying to get rich as well.
> 
> Hi job is to take as much money as you let him from you.  Also to get referrals to do the same.  The better the return the happier you are with him.  Which helps both his goals.


 We are happy to make him rich.


----------



## Talent312 (Jan 20, 2019)

I've done well-enuff managing our portfolio for ~ 30 years.
In that time, I've made a few bonehead plays and had tuff years,
but overall, I'm satisfied with where we're at.

Now recently retired, I'm finding it hard to get my mind around
the idea our go-go days are over, and conservation is a priority.
.


----------



## VacationForever (Jan 21, 2019)

We are now only concerned with when do we take our RMD, do we do dollar averaging by taking out 1/12th every month, 1/4 every 3 months or once a year, with the latter to try to "time" the market.  We all know how well (not) timing the market generally works.


----------



## Steve Fatula (Jan 21, 2019)

In <6 months, when I am 59.5, I will be talking one months living expenses out each month, would never try timing of course. We've simply kept a cash pile for these withdrawals, i.e., uninvested in their money market funds. Don't care if they don't go up, and they certainly won't go down. The rest is invested. Due to this, we can take a lot of market down since we have many years of cash, plus a pension and SS of course. So, pretty conservative now that we are retired. The time to be more aggressive was long ago for us.


----------



## pedro47 (Jan 21, 2019)

I feel tip #1...should be as follows:  you should start planning for retirement and actually start a retirement account on your first day of employment. Do not wait to start your retirement account years down the road of your employment....Start ASAP. Start  saving with an index mutual fund or any good mutual fund account with no hidden  fees, no fees or very low fees and increase your monthly saving contribution  over the years. It is called saving monthly  dollars averaging.   The more you earn the more you contribute to your retirement accounts.

Todays employers do not offer great pension plans liked they did twenty or thirty years ago.
So you much have your own retirement plan in order.

Tip#2, when you received a pay raise half of it; should go directly into your retirement account.  Setup of an account for direct deposit into your retirement plan. IMHO.

There is a huge difference in a pay raise and a bonus check.
Give me a 1 or 2% percent pay raise and you can keep that one time $500 or $1000 bonus check.


----------



## vacationhopeful (Jan 21, 2019)

pedro47 said:


> ,,,,
> Todays employers do not offer great pension plans liked they did twenty or thirty years ago.
> .....



Pension plans DIED OUT on Dec 31, 1982. *37 years ago.* That was the day before when the vesting rules changed from 10 years to 5 years. And I feel the main reason for the layoffs in late 1982. And "defined pension" plans died off for most companies.


----------



## WinniWoman (Jan 21, 2019)

And the next issue is many people are not high earners. So even if they do manage to save some money religiously, it is not going to support them for 20 or 30 years when they retire- even with SS. 

This is my worry for our son who is in that category.

We always saved and invested from in our 20's and even bought a handyman house at age 21, but were not high earners. We did ok despite a lot of mistakes and just some bad luck.

BUT-The one thing that really helped us was an inheritance from my parents in 2011 that I split with my brother which was the sale of my parents home and my mom's IRA and leftover savings (and a small life insurance policy- $25,000, which is how I bought my CRV in 2013.).

It's funny, because my parents always wanted to leave that house to us when they died. They refused to sell it when they retired.

I am thinking of starting to play the lottery- one ticket once per month. That's where I am at now. LOL!


----------



## Brett (Jan 21, 2019)

vacationhopeful said:


> Pension plans DIED OUT on Dec 31, 1982. *37 years ago.* That was the day before when the vesting rules changed from 10 years to 5 years. And I feel the main reason for the layoffs in late 1982. And "defined pension" plans died off for most companies.



good pensions still exist for the military.    And pensions for most state employees and municipalities especially police and fire.   The federal government and government agencies like the post office still have fairly good retirement plans


----------



## bluehende (Jan 21, 2019)

Brett said:


> good pensions still exist for the military.    And pensions for most state employees and municipalities especially police and fire.   The federal government and government agencies like the post office still have fairly good retirement plans



I wonder how long it will be before even those are dropped.  I am actually surprised my oldest works for a company that still has a pension.  Think the largest oil company in the world that is going public soon.  My other son works for a large engineering firm and has no pension.  The youngest has a little better 401k but not night and day.  They both are in high paying jobs that get head hunter calls almost weakly.  Pensions are not needed any more for retention.


----------



## bluehende (Jan 21, 2019)

pedro47 said:


> I feel tip #1...should be as follows:  you should start planning for retirement and actually start a retirement account on your first day of employment. Do not wait to start your retirement account years down the road of your employment....Start ASAP. Start  saving with an index mutual fund or any good mutual fund account with no hidden  fees, no fees or very low fees and increase your monthly saving contribution  over the years. It is called saving monthly  dollars averaging.   The more you earn the more you contribute to your retirement accounts.
> 
> Todays employers do not offer great pension plans liked they did twenty or thirty years ago.
> So you much have your own retirement plan in order.
> ...



When I was working I always tried to get people that thought they could not participate in the 401K to use your tip 2.  I could not understand how a 6% raise could not be put away completely as you lived off it yesterday.  Why not today.  Half should have been a no brainer unless there was some unique circumstances.  It always seemed that new toy was always too alluring.


----------



## bogey21 (Jan 21, 2019)

I screwed up this post.  Check the following post...

George


----------



## bogey21 (Jan 21, 2019)

Some 10-12 years before reaching retirement age I and about 10 other long term employees at our Bank proactively went to our Board of Directors which was in the process of planning a phase out of Bank's Defined Benefit Plan and replacing it with a Defined Contribution Plan.  We made them a proposal - They keep the DB Plan for existing employees and enhance its annual COLA percentage and we would forego raises for the rest of our careers.  They went along with it and the rest is history.  I have a great Pension.  The moral of this story is think long term, plan ahead and don't be afraid to ask...

George


----------



## chalee94 (Jan 21, 2019)

Brett said:


> And pensions for most state employees and municipalities especially police and fire.   The federal government and government agencies like the post office still have fairly good retirement plans



https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2017-state-pension-funding-ratios/



> The news continues to worsen for America’s public pensions and for the people who depend on them. The median funding ratio—the percentage of assets states have available for future payments to retirees—declined to 71.1 percent in 2016, from 74.5 percent in 2015 and 75.6 percent in 2014. Only six states and the District of Columbia have narrowed their funding gaps; New York did best, going from 90.6 percent to 94.5 percent. D.C. is now overfunded.
> 
> By contrast, New Jersey, Kentucky and Illinois continue to lose ground and now have only about one third of the money they need to pay retirement benefits. And three states had double-digit declines in their pension funding ratios in the past year: Colorado, Oregon and Minnesota—though some of this can be attributed to actuarial changes in the way pension liabilities are calculated.



some of even these numbers are optimistic as states choose actuarial rates of return that are higher than they have any real hope of achieving...


----------



## Passepartout (Jan 21, 2019)

Its always something! Either we worry that we haven't saved 'enough' to satisfy the monthly magazine's recommendation. Or that the Brother-in-Law makes/saves more. Or that so and so did something different when applying for SS.

After you've saved and retired and traveled as much as this bunch of TUGgers (do you appreciate how damn lucky we are?) Have and will, the only unknown is how to stay healthy enough to enjoy it as long as it will last. What I retired with is a pittance of what remains in the 'well'. May your experience be as positive. Problem is, I've always been a tightwad, and those purse strings are still tied up tight.

Jim


----------



## am1 (Jan 21, 2019)

And yet a lot of low earners end up being multi millionaires by retirement age.  It's possible.  But one has to invest wisely and spend less then they make.


----------



## WinniWoman (Jan 21, 2019)

Brett said:


> good pensions still exist for the military.    And pensions for most state employees and municipalities especially police and fire.   The federal government and government agencies like the post office still have fairly good retirement plans



Right. But not in the private sector. Heck- in the private sector you are lucky they pay you for your work!


----------



## cgeidl (Jan 21, 2019)

There are hourly fee only CFP's available in most major population areas. I was a CFP for about 15 years way in the past. I was on commissions and tried my best to look at what was best for the client and not my pocketbook.I knew of some CFP's looking at commissions before clients and even boasting about their high pay.The difference in fees of one to two percent ayear i fees makes a huge difference long term. I am not surprised to hear your advisor did not know medicare rules. And probably not a good social security advisor either. You need a specialist for these areas and to read information yourself as most CFP's are not knowledgeable in all areas.I would highly recommend you look at a very sophisticated software free program called Personal Finance. We use it and a lay person can use their services free. They have over 100 billion dollars using the program and are rapidly increasing each year. They compare their recommended plan with what you have and do have paid professional advice. So far I have been aslightly ahead for three years with their plan. If we switched there is a yearly percentage base fee that would make a significant difference. However many have switched and are happy to pay the fee.


----------



## WinniWoman (Jan 21, 2019)

am1 said:


> And yet a lot of low earners end up being multi millionaires by retirement age.  It's possible.  But one has to invest wisely and spend less then they make.




Sure- they could stumble upon some fantastic, legitimate investment where they put $50 per month in for 30 years-and nothing bad ever happens to them and they are the smartest people on earth and don't make any mistakes- and end up with 5 million dollars at age 70 if they are still alive- but come on! Are you kidding me? The average person will not be able to do that.

The cost of living is so damn high. Rents, health insurance and health care, cars, etc.


----------



## Brett (Jan 21, 2019)

chalee94 said:


> https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2017-state-pension-funding-ratios/
> 
> 
> 
> some of even these numbers are optimistic as states choose actuarial rates of return that are higher than they have any real hope of achieving...



right,  the underfunding of the "funding ratio".
Municipalities, state governments and the military continue to offer good pensions but they have to keep borrowing more and more to 'fund' current payments


----------



## geekette (Jan 21, 2019)

It will be a fairly easy transition for me - simply uncheck the 'reinvest dividends' box and let cash accumulate in the money market account, transfer what I need to checking/bill pay each month.  No market timing or clever forecasting needed, just extracting the amount of div income I need for expenses and planned frivolity and returning the excess to the market for further reinvestment.

It's really not what you make, it's what you spend.  True while working, true while retired.  I intentionally set out to make this easy so I didn't have to care what was happening in the market, and no big adjustment needed to simply retire and reverse course to Living Off It from Squirrelling It Away.  Sure, it's weird to think about not socking it away, but, that was always For Later, and sure enough, Later is Here!     I would call myself semi-retired at this point, we'll see what happens in 2019 to seal that or thrash it.


----------



## geekette (Jan 21, 2019)

Perhaps this will sound strange, but I am thankful to not be reliant on a pension at this point.  Too many have gone/will go blukey, and then what?  It's best that I didn't mature with a false sense of security.  401k kids know, or should thoroughly understand, that it is entirely On Them to fund retirement, nobody else is going to do it.  Bypassing any amount of employer match is foolish in the extreme, akin to turning down a cash bonus per paycheck, tho the bonus goes to a long term account in your name vs into wallet immediately.   It is not possible at this point to determine how much my first dollar of match is worth today, but well more than the original dollar.

People that say they can't afford to save in their 401ks don't understand that they can't afford Not To.  I realize 401k loans are something people get freaked out about, but to me it is far better that someone that thinks they can't save plows it into 401k and takes a loan later than to have never saved.  Let them know It's Their Money, can be gotten to "in an emergency" via loan.  It's not money their employer holds for decades, it doesn't go into the cloud to hide until they are retirement age.  I think a lot of people don't understand the 401k and I have been trying to spread knowledge for decades.  Broke my heart that a 55ish coworker wasn't in the 401k (with 100% match to 6% salary) because they "have some bills", then they bought a new house, still not in 401k...   All I can do is show the horse the water.


----------



## DancingWaters (Jan 21, 2019)

It sounds like a lot of us are in the same pre/retired boat.   3 years ago I got interested in dividend stocks and wish I would have 20 years ago.   To date I only have 3 dividend paying stocks but it’s been exciting to see the potential with them.  Geekette, what are some of your dividend stocks that are strong, safety ones?


----------



## Sugarcubesea (Jan 21, 2019)

I want to start buying dividend stocks now so when I retire in 2027, I will have some green backs to rely on


----------



## Luvtoride (Jan 21, 2019)

Passepartout said:


> Its always something! Either we worry that we haven't saved 'enough' to satisfy the monthly magazine's recommendation. Or that the Brother-in-Law makes/saves more. Or that so and so did something different when applying for SS.
> 
> After you've saved and retired and traveled as much as this bunch of TUGgers (do you appreciate how damn lucky we are?) Have and will, the only unknown is how to stay healthy enough to enjoy it as long as it will last. What I retired with is a pittance of what remains in the 'well'. May your experience be as positive. Problem is, I've always been a tightwad, and those purse strings are still tied up tight.
> 
> Jim



Amen Jim, without your health nothing else matters.  Good for you that you’ve always been frugal and continue to be today.  Unfortunately that is something my DW and I have never achieved.   It will be hard in retirement to change the mindset to live more frugally.  


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## bogey21 (Jan 21, 2019)

geekette said:


> Perhaps this will sound strange, but I am thankful to not be reliant on a pension at this point.



I'm in the opposite camp.  I chose pension payments for life (with 50% survivor payments for my ex-wife) rather than a lump sum.  Three fears - (1) I would become a market watcher; (2) I (and more likely my ex-wife) would blow our lump sum payouts and (3) I would be forever fearful of running out of money...

George


----------



## Steve Fatula (Jan 21, 2019)

bluehende said:


> I wonder how long it will be before even those are dropped.  I am actually surprised my oldest works for a company that still has a pension.  Think the largest oil company in the world that is going public soon.  My other son works for a large engineering firm and has no pension.  The youngest has a little better 401k but not night and day.  They both are in high paying jobs that get head hunter calls almost weakly.  Pensions are not needed any more for retention.



My pension plan started after the change in rules mentioned many posts ago, and continues to this day. But this is a private family owned company, perhaps that's why they still have the plan for new employees. So, there are still some, but agree there are less and less every day. It most certainly is fully funded, I count myself as lucky though it was one of the draws to working there.

I am very glad I have it to supplement SS and a lot of savings from IRAs, 401ks, etc. I like having 3 sources of income.

If you are working, and your company has a 401k and they match, it's free money, take it and max it. Find a way to cut expenses if need be.


----------



## Talent312 (Jan 21, 2019)

bogey21 said:


> I'm in the opposite camp.  I chose pension payments for life (with 50% survivor payments for my ex-wife) rather than a lump sum.  Three fears - (1) I would become a market watcher; (2) I (and more likely my ex-wife) would blow our lump sum payouts and (3) I would be forever fearful of running out of money.


I concur.
A pension (and 2 SS pmts) means I can reserve my portfolio for special projects...
Like paying off my mortgage, remodeling the kitchen, etc.
IOW, its part candy-store, but mostly a rainy-day fund.

.


----------



## Bailey#1 (Jan 21, 2019)

Luvtoride said:


> Amen Jim, without your health nothing else matters.  Good for you that you’ve always been frugal and continue to be today.  Unfortunately that is something my DW and I have never achieved.   It will be hard in retirement to change the mindset to live more frugally.
> 
> Even though we are in fairly good shape for our retirement, your health is your most important aspect in retirement. If you can cut down on stress it will solve a lot of problems later in life.
> 
> ...


----------



## VacationForever (Jan 21, 2019)

What we learned in retirement is that our expenses do not get reduced.  Our entertainment expenses have doubled pre-retirement level and fortunately so far we have managed to "find" money to pay for it.  In reality I should redo our budget to show an increase but I am reluctant to do so as it means that we will likely spend beyond the new budget.  At least I can hold on to the "old" budget and we can make some tough decisions to not spend on something.   So much time... so little money...


----------



## Steve Fatula (Jan 21, 2019)

Frugally does not necessarily mean living without though! Just a little smarter, find the same things for less, etc. For example, phones, cable, satellite, internet, cell plans can all be had for less for most people.


----------



## Steve Fatula (Jan 21, 2019)

VacationForever said:


> What we learned in retirement is that our expenses do not get reduced.  Our entertainment expenses have doubled pre-retirement level and fortunately so far we have managed to "find" money to pay for it.  In reality I should redo our budget to show an increase but I am reluctant to do so as it means that we will likely spend beyond the new budget.  At least I can hold on to the "old" budget and we can make some tough decisions to not spend on something.   So much time... so little money...



Surely some things have as they give old folks like me a break on many things. Movies tickets are cheaper, gyms are cheaper, restaurants give us 2 for 1, etc. 

But yes, while some things may go down, we are instead enjoying things like travel, so, travel is most certainly up!


----------



## VacationForever (Jan 21, 2019)

Steve Fatula said:


> Surely some things have as they give old folks like me a break on many things. Movies tickets are cheaper, gyms are cheaper, restaurants give us 2 for 1, etc.
> 
> But yes, while some things may go down, we are instead enjoying things like travel, so, travel is most certainly up!


I am amazed that you can afford so much travel!  Our biggest downfall is cruising.  That was not in our pre-retirement expenses.  We had 2 cruises last year, one this year and 4 booked for next year, which we plan on only making at most 2 of them and pushing the other 2-3 out.  At least we finally figured out that we should do more timesharing and less cruising.  We will have 21K (some will be banked from 2019) MVC points in 2020 which we have not figured out how to use them.  We also have several weeks deposited into II and Vistana StarOptions that have no plans attached.  We have toyed with renting the DC points out but on the other hand if we skip cruising and just use the DC points for timesharing, we will have lots of nice vacations.  We can afford the $9K MF but not $9K MF + $14K+ for cruising.


----------



## WinniWoman (Jan 21, 2019)

bluehende said:


> When I was working I always tried to get people that thought they could not participate in the 401K to use your tip 2.  I could not understand how a 6% raise could not be put away completely as you lived off it yesterday.  Why not today.  Half should have been a no brainer unless there was some unique circumstances.  It always seemed that new toy was always too alluring.



I get what you are saying but who gets a 6% raise? They have been like 2% for a very long time. And how about you couldn't put it all away because your school and property taxes went up; your oil bill went up; your garbage pick up bill went up; gas went up; you needed a car; your hot water tank needed to be replaced; all your insurances went up, your utilities went up. I could go on and on.....


----------



## WinniWoman (Jan 21, 2019)

geekette said:


> It will be a fairly easy transition for me - simply uncheck the 'reinvest dividends' box and let cash accumulate in the money market account, transfer what I need to checking/bill pay each month.  No market timing or clever forecasting needed, just extracting the amount of div income I need for expenses and planned frivolity and returning the excess to the market for further reinvestment.
> 
> It's really not what you make, it's what you spend.  True while working, true while retired.  I intentionally set out to make this easy so I didn't have to care what was happening in the market, and no big adjustment needed to simply retire and reverse course to Living Off It from Squirrelling It Away.  Sure, it's weird to think about not socking it away, but, that was always For Later, and sure enough, Later is Here!     I would call myself semi-retired at this point, we'll see what happens in 2019 to seal that or thrash it.




I agree for the most part, but it is what you make also. It is not realistic to assume that it is only a matter of what you spend. If you are making $25,000 per year and save some of it- which you surely should try to- great. But you are not going to be all set for life with just getting 2% raises each year and trying to keep your spending down because a lot of it you have no control over- your monthly bills like utilities, rent, gas, etc.. Sure, you can shop around for better prices. You can cut any discretionary expenses you may have. But at some point you would have to try to get a better paying job to bring in more income; hence it IS what you make also. Not just what you spend.

So you can't make a blanket statement that it is not what you make, but what you spend.


----------



## WinniWoman (Jan 21, 2019)

bogey21 said:


> Some 10-12 years before reaching retirement age I and about 10 other long term employees at our Bank proactively went to our Board of Directors which was in the process of planning a phase out of Bank's Defined Benefit Plan and replacing it with a Defined Contribution Plan.  We made them a proposal - They keep the DB Plan for existing employees and enhance its annual COLA percentage and we would forego raises for the rest of our careers.  They went along with it and the rest is history.  I have a great Pension.  The moral of this story is think long term, plan ahead and don't be afraid to ask...
> 
> George




Try doing that today with a major fortune 500 company that employs like 30,000 people. Good luck with that. LOL!


----------



## Brett (Jan 21, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> I agree for the most part, but it is what you make also. It is not realistic to assume that it is only a matter of what you spend. If you are making $25,000 per year and save some of it- which you surely should try to- great. But you are not going to be all set for life with just getting 2% raises each year and trying to keep your spending down because a lot of it you have no control over- your monthly bills like utilities, rent, gas, etc.. Sure, you can shop around for better prices. You can cut any discretionary expenses you may have. But at some point you would have to try to get a better paying job to bring in more income; hence it IS what you make also. Not just what you spend.
> So you can't make a blanket statement that it is not what you make, but what you spend.



yes, it would be difficult to save and invest on $25,000 per year with a minimum wage.
but with just a little education and more income, for example, I know RN's that made $100,000 a year and with investments they say they can retire comfortably.
 it's a combination of income, spending, savings and investing.  not being smart or necessarily lucky


----------



## WinniWoman (Jan 21, 2019)

Steve Fatula said:


> Surely some things have as they give old folks like me a break on many things. Movies tickets are cheaper, gyms are cheaper, restaurants give us 2 for 1, etc.
> 
> But yes, while some things may go down, we are instead enjoying things like travel, so, travel is most certainly up!




I know we will have the time but unfortunately we definitely will not have the money to travel more than we do now. In fact, I am sure it will be less. (and we only travel our 3 drive to home resort timeshares and maybe one more one week vacation somewhere else if we can.) We will probably eventually get rid of at least our 2 week ownership at one resort. I will consider ourselves lucky if we can someday go to Italy/Switzerland on one vacation and maybe one more National Park - like maybe in South Dakota. But hey- I can dream, can't I? LOL!

And we do not go out to eat or to movies or go to gyms or any of that so senior discounts won't help us that much.


----------



## WinniWoman (Jan 21, 2019)

Brett said:


> yes, it would be difficult to save and invest on $25,000 per year with a minimum wage.
> but with just a little education and more income, for example, I know RN's that made $100,000 a year and with investments they say can retire comfortably.
> it's a combination of income, spending, savings and investing.  not being smart or necessarily lucky



You do need to be smart about things. I know a lot of people at my former job who were in low level jobs and started taking classes to become radiology techs and just could not cut the academics, for example.

I just used $25,000 as an example. I would think even making $35,000 or $40,000 it would still be tough depending on where you live and other circumstances.

As for RN's- I worked with nurses all my life and yes they make good money and have good benefits and pensions in many cases. But- again- not everyone can cut taking those classes or maybe do not have the temperament to be nurses. But- sure- the world is wide open and there are lots of choices people can make to earn a living.

But back to my point- if you earn a lot of money it is easier to save if you are smart about it and don't blow it, than if you do not make a lot of money. Plain and simple.


----------



## applepie (Jan 21, 2019)

Many years ago -- I started my career in human resources doing benefits and personnel actions.  I was a Federal Employee, and we had Thrift Savings Plan. They had just changed from the old retirement system to FERS and TSP.  I was making $14,079 a year -- $6.74 per hour.  I thought I was rich after coming from high school fast food jobs.  They told us that we should tell people that say they can't afford to invest to put in a half percent or 1%.  Then, each raise -- we would get within-grade-increases and Federal Cost of Living raises, you bump it up by another half percent or 1%.  You have to at least get to the government 6% match (or whatever it was at the time).  When I left that job over 20 years ago, my 401K was at $7,000ish after working there for about 6 years.  I was invested with a lot in the bond fund, so it didn't grow.  For the next 15 years or so, it went up to $18,000 until I rolled it into a 401K.  If I would have left it in the aggressive fund, it might have tripled or more by then. 

There is no reason folks out there (especially the 55 year olds) shouldn't contribute 1% per paycheck.  The way it was explained was that you wouldn't even miss it.  You get a 4% raise, and you take 1% off the top. 

I try to max out now, but my husband doesn't.  I'll be 50, so I'll have to figure out how to budget the catch up funds while trying to have more fun experiences with timeshare and vacations.


----------



## Steve Fatula (Jan 21, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> I know we will have the time but unfortunately we definitely will not have the money to travel more than we do now. In fact, I am sure it will be less. (and we only travel our 3 drive to home resort timeshares and maybe one more one week vacation somewhere else if we can.) We will probably eventually get rid of at least our 2 week ownership at one resort. I will consider ourselves lucky if we can someday go to Italy/Switzerland on one vacation and maybe one more National Park - like maybe in South Dakota. But hey- I can dream, can't I? LOL!
> 
> And we do not go out to eat or to movies or go to gyms or any of that so senior discounts won't help us that much.



Those were just examples, that's the etc part. There are numerous other ones, including, cheaper health insurance (Medicare) and prescriptions, here in my state a freeze (which isn't a reduction) of property taxes the rest of your life, discounts at Bealls, Belk, and many other retailers, some grocery stores, sometimes airfare discounts, lifetime national park pass, and many many more. Maybe you do none of those too, but, we are finding quite a large number of savings. It is my hope you will be able to find a way to use your ownerships so you can continue to travel.


----------



## bluehende (Jan 21, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> I get what you are saying but who gets a 6% raise? They have been like 2% for a very long time. And how about you couldn't put it all away because your school and property taxes went up; your oil bill went up; your garbage pick up bill went up; gas went up; you needed a car; your hot water tank needed to be replaced; all your insurances went up, your utilities went up. I could go on and on.....



This was in the 70's and 80's.  Wasn't that uncommon then.  I picked 6 because that is what we needed for full match.


----------



## WinniWoman (Jan 21, 2019)

Steve Fatula said:


> Those were just examples, that's the etc part. There are numerous other ones, including, cheaper health insurance (Medicare) and prescriptions, here in my state a freeze (which isn't a reduction) of property taxes the rest of your life, discounts at Bealls, Belk, and many other retailers, some grocery stores, sometimes airfare discounts, lifetime national park pass, and many many more. Maybe you do none of those too, but, we are finding quite a large number of savings. It is my hope you will be able to find a way to use your ownerships so you can continue to travel.



We have the national park pass- my husband does. But we have been to a lot of parks already when we were younger. We live in tax hell hole NY so our property and school taxes are outrageous.


----------



## bogey21 (Jan 22, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> Try doing that today with a major fortune 500 company that employs like 30,000 people. Good luck with that. LOL!


The secret is not to work for such a company.  Pick whom you work for and control your destiny.  That's what I did and it worked...

George


----------



## WinniWoman (Jan 22, 2019)

bogey21 said:


> The secret is not to work for such a company.  Pick whom you work for and control your destiny.  That's what I did and it worked...
> 
> George



Yes - well easier said than done. You have to have a company like that within commuting distance and you have to hope to get the job. If not- you take what you can to survive. Heck- if I had to wait to find the perfect job I would have been unemployed a long time. In areas like I live in it is slim pickin's. Plus, George, this is a different era than when you worked. Most companies today stink- even the giant ones like my husband works at. Each year they take back from you instead of give.


----------



## bogey21 (Jan 22, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> Most companies today stink- even the giant ones like my husband works at. Each year they take back from you instead of give.



I agree that companies aren't as benevolent as they used to be.  Where I think people go wrong is the way they look at the interview process.  It is a two way street.  They are looking at me and I am looking at them.  I never went into an interview with the hope that I would get an offer.  I went in wanting to understand the job and the company.  A couple of times I withdrew myself from consideration during the interview process when it was apparent to me that the company or the job was not the right fit for me.  I resigned after 8 years with a Fortune 500 Company when I saw their culture changing.  Commute distance was never a consideration.  The best move I ever made was uprooting my family and moving from St Louis to Dallas for the right job.  One has to choose his/her destiny...

George


----------



## WinniWoman (Jan 22, 2019)

bogey21 said:


> I agree that companies aren't as benevolent as they used to be.  Where I think people go wrong is the way they look at the interview process.  It is a two way street.  They are looking at me and I am looking at them.  I never went into an interview with the hope that I would get an offer.  I went in wanting to understand the job and the company.  A couple of times I withdrew myself from consideration during the interview process when it was apparent to me that the company or the job was not the right fit for me.  I resigned after 8 years with a Fortune 500 Company when I saw their culture changing.  Commute distance was never a consideration.  The best move I ever made was uprooting my family and moving from St Louis to Dallas for the right job.  One has to choose his/her destiny...
> 
> George




Well- when the two of you work- you just can't uproot. You have to take the other person's job into consideration, as well as family.

You probably were more in demand than people like me or my husband. We were just peons.


----------



## Shankilicious (Jan 22, 2019)

Dave Ramsey.
There's so much I could say and want to say but it'd be better to look him up and take his advice. For investing, long term care, retirement planing, 401k/pension, all of it. 
I'm employed by a town so I've got a pension and a 457b (gov't 401k) with 3% match. 
The biggest thing for anyone who feels overwhelmed by money in any way, is to make a 0 dollar budget. Every net dollar that comes in, has an assignment and stay away from credit cards.


----------



## pedro47 (Jan 22, 2019)

This is a retirement question. Those federal workers that have not work or been paid since December 2018; will this affect their retirement plans or dates. They are not on annual or sick leave; they are not laid off and they are not on other paid leave ????


----------



## VacationForever (Jan 22, 2019)

Shankilicious said:


> Every net dollar that comes in, has an assignment and stay away from credit cards.


Credit cards are the best with the caveat that one pays off in full off every month.  The cash back and reward points help pay for our business and first class air tickets.   When I met my husband, he was an all cash guy.  When I explained and showed him how we could use credit cards to work for us, he became a convert.  We use credit cards everywhere that accepts them.


----------



## WinniWoman (Jan 22, 2019)

VacationForever said:


> Credit cards are the best with the caveat that one pays off in full off every month.  The cash back and reward points help pay for our business and first class air tickets.   When I met my husband, he was an all cash guy.  When I explained and showed him how we could use credit cards to work for us, he became a convert.  We use credit cards everywhere that accepts them.




Absolutely! I taught our son this as well. The cash back we get each year we use for our vacation pocket/spending money!


----------



## Brett (Jan 22, 2019)

VacationForever said:


> Credit cards are the best with the caveat that one pays off in full off every month.  The cash back and reward points help pay for our business and first class air tickets.   When I met my husband, he was an all cash guy.  When I explained and showed him how we could use credit cards to work for us, he became a convert.  We use credit cards everywhere that accepts them.



I too always use rewards cards but I think the CC "cash back" perk may eventually go away.


----------



## VacationForever (Jan 22, 2019)

Brett said:


> I too always use rewards cards but I think the CC "cash back" perk may eventually go away.


It is a good ride up until then!


----------



## WinniWoman (Jan 22, 2019)

We have the "Blue" American Express card with 6% back on groceries and 3% back on gas and 1% everything else. Being food and gas are our big expenses- next to taxes and insurance-this is a big savings.  

But right now my Citi World Mastercard has 5% back on gas for a few months, so we are using that card for gas for the next few months. Discover More has 5% back on groceries for the next few months also, but we are still better with our American Express card at 6% cash back for food.

We do juggle them around when appropriate.


----------



## CalGalTraveler (Jan 22, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> We are at this point now. I get overwhelmed thinking about it.
> 
> I looked into a financial planner a while ago and it just seemed too crazy expensive to me, though we could do some hourly consults with him instead.
> 
> ...



I find that most investment managers are more interested in their commission than our money. Plus they are very expensive.

You can do it yourself. Unlike what the financial advisors would like you to believe, it is not hard or complicated with today's total stock market and S&P 500 Index funds and equivalent ETFs.

We follow Bob Brinker www.bobbrinker.com, a former financial radio host, and have found his advice to be spot on over the last 25 years; he predicted the bottoms of the market for the 2008 and 2002 cycles accurately for a buy signal.  He has a monthly newsletter with investment portfolio recommendations (mainly Vanguard no load low cost Index Fund but you can invest at similar with Schwab or Fidelity.) We invest along the lines of his recommendations and have been doing very well.

His newsletter is $185 a year - best money we ever spent and much less costly than a financial adviser who would recommend the same investments (or will sell you high cost investments that eat your return in fees).  You can get a sample back-issue on his site to check it out. Save that money you spend on expensive advisors and invest it in your retirement fund - you earned it.

Good luck!


----------



## WinniWoman (Jan 22, 2019)

CalGalTraveler said:


> I find that most investment managers are more interested in their commission than our money. Plus they are very expensive.
> 
> You can do it yourself. Unlike what the financial advisors would like you to believe, it is not hard or complicated with today's total stock market and S&P 500 Index funds and equivalent ETFs.
> 
> ...




Oh- I am not  looking for someone to take our money and invest it. I am looking for someone to look at what we have - our investments and cash-and tell me- "keep this"- or "exchange that" - but keep our money with OUR company that we have used for many years.

I want someone to holistically look at our overall financial picture and make suggestions on when to take SS, how to draw down our assets and when and how much, how to pay for my health insurance if need be, how to manage a move from the sale of our home, what we can or cannot do, etc.


----------



## CalGalTraveler (Jan 22, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> Oh- I am not  looking for someone to take our money and invest it. I am looking for someone to look at what we have - our investments and cash-and tell me- "keep this"- or "exchange that" - but keep our money with OUR company that we have used for many years.
> 
> I want someone to holistically look at our overall financial picture and make suggestions on when to take SS, how to draw down our assets and when and how much, how to pay for my health insurance if need be, how to manage a move from the sale of our home, what we can or cannot do, etc.



Okay, sounds like you want a one-time review with a certified financial planner etc. We were able to get something similar for free from Chase Bank Retirements and Schwab for an account and retirement review.  Of course they wanted to invest our money but we declined.  (kind of like a timeshare presentation.) 

Basically they use computer models where you give them info on how much income you want/need in retirement, when you want to retire and your current investments and it spits it out into a thick notebook full of colorful graphs. Some good insights on when could reasonably retire and I believe the Chase one had when we should draw Social Security (answer for everyone: as late as possible unless you have a family history of early death) of but nothing specific on retirement funds to invest (that's what they wanted to sell us.) We find the Bob Brinker newsletter with specific investments and fund mixes helpful for this.

For Social Security, 4% retirement drawdown etc. if you are inclined to read financial publications (I am a bit of a geek this way - plus I have an MBA), then you can research this yourself, build a spreadsheet with your investment percentages, and modify your portfolio along the newsletter guidelines, but if you are not wired for this, then by all means hire someone for a second opinion with a step by step plan.


----------



## Shankilicious (Jan 22, 2019)

If you're disciplined enough to pay off your credit card every month, they do have some decent perks. However, over 1/3 of Americans don't have that discipline:
"According to a separate study from ValuePenguin (which found a similar average credit card debt of *$5,700* per household), only 38.1% of all American households carry any credit card debt at all. This implies that the average household that carries a balance owes a whopping $16,048"
Those same households carry an average of $30k in auto loans and $50k in student loans..... 


pedro47 said:


> This is a retirement question. Those federal workers that have not work or been paid since December 2018; will this affect their retirement plans or dates. They are not on annual or sick leave; they are not laid off and they are not on other paid leave ????


As for this, my brother is a federal employee and once the shutdown is over, he'll get backpay for the shutdown time. I'm sure that includes any 401k or pension program as well.


----------



## MULTIZ321 (Jan 22, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> Oh- I am not  looking for someone to take our money and invest it. I am looking for someone to look at what we have - our investments and cash-and tell me- "keep this"- or "exchange that" - but keep our money with OUR company that we have used for many years.
> 
> I want someone to holistically look at our overall financial picture and make suggestions on when to take SS, how to draw down our assets and when and how much, how to pay for my health insurance if need be, how to manage a move from the sale of our home, what we can or cannot do, etc.


Hi Mary Ann,

Have you looked at the recent Tug Thread "Hightlights from Barron's 2018 Top 1,200 Financial Ranking" ?   If not, once you open the thread, scroll down to "Select a State", enter
New York to get the list of New York Advisors that were highly ranked.  There's probably someone on that list that can accomplish what you need.

see: https://www.tugbbs.com/forums/index...-top-1-200-financial-advisors-ranking.284730/


Richard


----------



## bluehende (Jan 22, 2019)

Shankilicious said:


> If you're disciplined enough to pay off your credit card every month, they do have some decent perks. However, over 1/3 of Americans don't have that discipline:
> "According to a separate study from ValuePenguin (which found a similar average credit card debt of *$5,700* per household), only 38.1% of all American households carry any credit card debt at all. This implies that the average household that carries a balance owes a whopping $16,048"
> Those same households carry an average of $30k in auto loans and $50k in student loans.....
> 
> As for this, my brother is a federal employee and once the shutdown is over, he'll get backpay for the shutdown time. I'm sure that includes any 401k or pension program as well.



I think that amount is why rewards may be around for a long time.  I think over time the CC companies will try to decrease them , but with that potential profit they will always be on the look out for new customers.  I wonder if by average credit card debt it excludes those without any.


----------



## Shankilicious (Jan 22, 2019)

Those stats were taken from Value Penguin and another survey done by the federal reserve. 
And we have a very old CC that we've had for 9 years, and gives us %5 back on gas. They're finally cutting it off and changing it to a rotating rewards program, which is BS......


----------



## am1 (Jan 22, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> Oh- I am not  looking for someone to take our money and invest it. I am looking for someone to look at what we have - our investments and cash-and tell me- "keep this"- or "exchange that" - but keep our money with OUR company that we have used for many years.
> 
> I want someone to holistically look at our overall financial picture and make suggestions on when to take SS, how to draw down our assets and when and how much, how to pay for my health insurance if need be, how to manage a move from the sale of our home, what we can or cannot do, etc.



A problem with that is they make less money.  Also what if they consider what you have to be fine?  Are they going to tell you that or get you to change stuff tu justify their fee.  

Unless one has millions and wa ya in on private deals, stock should not be that hard.


----------



## VacationForever (Jan 22, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> Oh- I am not  looking for someone to take our money and invest it. I am looking for someone to look at what we have - our investments and cash-and tell me- "keep this"- or "exchange that" - but keep our money with OUR company that we have used for many years.
> 
> I want someone to holistically look at our overall financial picture and make suggestions on when to take SS, how to draw down our assets and when and how much, how to pay for my health insurance if need be, how to manage a move from the sale of our home, what we can or cannot do, etc.


Mary Ann, you are plenty smart and doubt you are missing much.  The biggest deal is to project your expenses and then look at how you are going to fund it.  Everyone has a different approach, including whether you can afford to go the conservative route or whether you need to be a little more aggressive.  A couple whom we go out with regularly have alot of money and go very conservative. They keep 3 buckets.  First 10 years are all savings and CDs.  The following 10 years are all laddered bonds.  The 3rd bucket are all stocks which will ride with market ups and downs and they won't worry about it for 2 decades.  Another couple who are also well to do, relies on regular IRA withdrawal.  They bought a deferred income annuity that starts when he is 75 (this year) and pays 45K a year for the rest of their lives.  Only you know what your comfort level is.

If you need help, CFP is the route to go.


----------



## CalGalTraveler (Jan 22, 2019)

bluehende said:


> I think that amount is why rewards may be around for a long time.  I think over time the CC companies will try to decrease them , but with that potential profit they will always be on the look out for new customers.  I wonder if by average credit card debt it excludes those without any.



With all of that outstanding credit card debt...And we thought timeshares were the devil...


----------



## WinniWoman (Jan 22, 2019)

MULTIZ321 said:


> Hi Mary Ann,
> 
> Have you looked at the recent Tug Thread "Hightlights from Barron's 2018 Top 1,200 Financial Ranking" ?   If not, once you open the thread, scroll down to "Select a State", enter
> New York to get the list of New York Advisors that were highly ranked.  There's probably someone on that list that can accomplish what you need.
> ...




Thanks, Richard! I didn't realize that! I will check it out!


----------



## geekette (Jan 22, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> I agree for the most part, but it is what you make also. It is not realistic to assume that it is only a matter of what you spend. If you are making $25,000 per year and save some of it- which you surely should try to- great. But you are not going to be all set for life with just getting 2% raises each year and trying to keep your spending down because a lot of it you have no control over- your monthly bills like utilities, rent, gas, etc.. Sure, you can shop around for better prices. You can cut any discretionary expenses you may have. But at some point you would have to try to get a better paying job to bring in more income; hence it IS what you make also. Not just what you spend.
> 
> So you can't make a blanket statement that it is not what you make, but what you spend.


I think that it is that simple all through life.  People make choices.  Bring in roommates, move to cheaper city, study at night for career advancement, side gigs, be a job hopper, start a business, etc.   It IS that simple.  I was in my 20s when I started my first $25/mo drip and I was making far less than 25k.  I could have instead bought trendy clothes or gone out to eat or lived with my parents.  I made choices and still do.  My lifestyle has changed because I made choices.  And some not my choice.   Cutting spending is something I've done time and again when life changed to either less income or more expense, or, like now, Both.   

In my post, I was mostly referring to retirement living.  The whole idea of "how much can I have every year", is, to me, the wrong question.  How much do I need is a much easier goal for me to envision and work towards.   The idea of being able to time your demise or estimate how many years or what kind of care are just wasted time exercises for me.  So much is impossible to know, but, it's not that hard to estimate normal living expenses. Easy for me since I've been in this house a long time but not impossible to reasonably noodle out for a planned move.  

Curve ball came, I handled it by cutting frills and continuing to cut frills.  I expect curve balls in retirement so if some big drama needs 10k to solve, then I will fetch 10k from my nest egg and move on down the road.   Part of the reason that I am eyeballs deep in stocks is that this sudden 10k need could come from a lot of different sources, including dividend stream.  I don't have a reason to worry about it and certainly not well before the sudden expense shows up.  I know there will be curve balls. Life is full of surprises and many are costly.  Sock away what you can and leave it alone for as long as possible, I don't know how that could only apply to certain people.  

None of us have a crystal ball but we do have control over our spending and saving, and much less control over our income.   I never expected to make much money so I started saving early and left it alone to be there for me later.  Anyone can do that, it is not dependent on a certain income level, only choices.


----------



## geekette (Jan 22, 2019)

DancingWaters said:


> It sounds like a lot of us are in the same pre/retired boat.   3 years ago I got interested in dividend stocks and wish I would have 20 years ago.   To date I only have 3 dividend paying stocks but it’s been exciting to see the potential with them.  Geekette, what are some of your dividend stocks that are strong, safety ones?


Dancing, I have many favorites but I don't bother with safety ratings.  There is a Simply Safe Dividends site (something like that) and some folks rely on his work.  

For strength, look to earnings reports.  Lots of companies are guiding ever upwards.  I do not recommend specific stocks to others, especially if I haven't recently run a make on them, but I would say to check out the Champions list here   http://www.dripinvesting.org/tools/tools.asp

That should give you ideas in many sectors.  I like utilities and consumer staples as the most durable industries for my long haul purposes.


----------



## geekette (Jan 22, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> But back to my point- if you earn a lot of money it is easier to save if you are smart about it and don't blow it, than if you do not make a lot of money. Plain and simple.


I agree completely.  the farther away one gets from paycheck-to-paycheck living, the more available dollars to invest.


----------



## geekette (Jan 22, 2019)

bogey21 said:


> The secret is not to work for such a company.  Pick whom you work for and control your destiny.  That's what I did and it worked...



It's a different world today.  Workers are not seen as assets, and the few companies that do value humans do not hire enough people to make that a reality for most workers.  Shareholders are the bosses now and the idea is to maximize profits, not employee loyalty.  The incentive to reward or even value employees is gone, the C Suite is looking after themselves and the golden exit parachute if something goes wrong.

Another reason to own stock.  I am replacing toiling at one company for money for cash flow (via dividends) from many.  This boss can sit on the couch and watch their money come to me.  Too many people do not share in the stock gains that execs bathe in.  I'm getting a piece of the action and voting on the exec compensation whenever it is on the ballot.   I'm ready to stop subjecting myself to the blood-from-a-turnip 24x7 demands as an employee.  The stress is not worth it.  I'm glad I'm close enough to retirement to Just Do It and stop the madness.   

~reformed unappreciated workaholic


----------



## DancingWaters (Jan 22, 2019)

Thanks you Geekette for this link.   I’ve already viewed it and there is tons of great numbers to study.
I had stumbled across Simply Safe a few months back and found the information very clear to understand.  I’m finding that buying stock is as much fun as shopping!  I would like to add more companies and am searching for my next buy
Enjoy the journey to your retirement!


----------



## pedro47 (Jan 23, 2019)

Knowledge is Power and this website can share Knowledge and Power about excellent Retirement and Investment suggestions. IMHO.

With out a cost.


----------



## bogey21 (Jan 23, 2019)

Shankilicious said:


> And we have a very old CC that we've had for 9 years, and gives us %5 back on gas. They're finally cutting it off and changing it to a rotating rewards program, which is BS......



It is today's world.  Companies suck you in then change the rules.  When they do this I usually vote with my feet.  Two examples.  I was with Marriott from when they first went into TimeShares (Sabal Palms pre-construction).  When they changed a bunch of stuff I sold (at a profit no less).  The day Southwest Airlines switched their Frequent Flyer Program from segments to miles I stopped flying them.  

If I were you, I'd close out that old Credit Card and find a new one...

George


----------



## bogey21 (Jan 23, 2019)

geekette said:


> I think that it is that simple all through life.  People make choices.  Bring in roommates, move to cheaper city, study at night for career advancement, side gigs, be a job hopper, start a business, etc.   It IS that simple.



I agree 100%.  Too many are uncomfortable with their present situation but do nothing about it but bitch...

George


----------



## am1 (Jan 23, 2019)

bogey21 said:


> I agree 100%.  Too many are uncomfortable with their present situation but do nothing about it but bitch...
> 
> George



100% true.  But you forgot to add spend money they do not have.  

Very little sympathy for these people.  

But it does keep a lot of people employed and caught in their situation.


----------



## geekette (Jan 23, 2019)

DancingWaters said:


> Thanks you Geekette for this link.   I’ve already viewed it and there is tons of great numbers to study.
> I had stumbled across Simply Safe a few months back and found the information very clear to understand.  I’m finding that buying stock is as much fun as shopping!  I would like to add more companies and am searching for my next buy
> Enjoy the journey to your retirement!


Oh yes, buying is fun, but watching the divs get higher each and every time is even better!  I do reinvest divs so it is always higher for me, and some serious juice from raises.   I recently deployed a rollover.  Definitely FUN, but more fun when I see the impact of that buy in the next dividend.  

SeekingAlpha dot com has a dividend investor section.  Screen name Chowder has some blogs that many like us discuss many aspects of div stocks, including some "what I'm buying right now" and why, but many good authors there.  We all have our own styles, which makes it very interesting, and thought-provoking.  It is mostly a peaceful discussion group, like Tug, but there can be some massive sassy egos to ignore.  

One feature I like is entering your companies into portfolios and being able to go to one place to get earnings reports, headlines, etc.  I don't bother with entering my buys and sells, I just enter the company and don't update it again since I only want the news vs a tracker.  The portfolio section has a tab for dividends, the site has accommodated us quite well, imo.   

PM me if you want to take this offline.


----------



## DancingWaters (Jan 24, 2019)

Thank you, I will look at these websites some more first


----------



## Steve Fatula (Jan 24, 2019)

VacationForever said:


> Credit cards are the best with the caveat that one pays off in full off every month.  The cash back and reward points help pay for our business and first class air tickets.   When I met my husband, he was an all cash guy.  When I explained and showed him how we could use credit cards to work for us, he became a convert.  We use credit cards everywhere that accepts them.



Yes, as long as you have discipline, which many Americans do not. Totally agree, my wife was an all cash girl. Now she can't stand cash, she sees all those points, miles, whatever and we definitely take advantage. Heck, now it's almost complicated (minor). Tonight we'll be going to Kroger, we have to remember this quarter that Discover has 5% for groceries instead of using our normal grocery card!


----------



## Sugarcubesea (Jan 24, 2019)

VacationForever said:


> Credit cards are the best with the caveat that one pays off in full off every month.  The cash back and reward points help pay for our business and first class air tickets.   When I met my husband, he was an all cash guy.  When I explained and showed him how we could use credit cards to work for us, he became a convert.  We use credit cards everywhere that accepts them.



I’m a” Cash is King” kind of gal.  I just last year started using the rewards cards and it’s been a cost save to use the Delta CC and my reward cards bring me extra money for my business trips


----------



## Sugarcubesea (Jan 24, 2019)

I remember back in 2010, when I was still with Ford and they had us take multiple pay cuts, reduced our 401K company match. Everyone was crabbing non stop.  Me I stated to look for a new job. If your going to treat me like a number or entity, I leave and move on.  

I started looking for a new opportunity.  I’m at my 3rd opportunity since that time.  Each time I left it was because I was trying to better my salary and working conditions.   My goal is to have the ability to retire with as much as I can save till that date.  

I actually had former colleagues tell me how brave I was to leave and how they could never leave the security of FORD.  Those same folks today have been downsized curtesy of Ford.  I never wait to have someone else steer my career.  

I researched the company I’m with, determined that they respect and honor the mature worker and that they had a 5% match.  Which in the automotive industry is rare.  

The job isn’t perfect but nothing is.


----------



## rapmarks (Jan 24, 2019)

I just came home from a retirement seminar
Among the things the speaker said, or hinted at:
A safe harbor provision can allow you to move your traditional Ira into a Roth IRA with no tax consequences when you convert.
You can buy a life insurance policy that will let you have eighty percent of the death benefit for nursing home expenses, no longer need nursing home insurance, and if you didn’t use, you would get the entire death benefit.  He claims ten thousand annual premium for million dollar policy with this provision.
An index fund that gives you ninety percent of the investment gains, but zero loss.  You will always have at least what it was worth on jan 1 of the year.

I subscribe to the if it sounds too good to be true theory, so that is one reason I won’t follow up for it,  the second is that he came across loud and clear that women make less and know less,  and won’t know what to do when spouse passes away.  And finally he decided to blame our previous president for a surcharge that existed before he was in office.


----------



## WinniWoman (Jan 24, 2019)

Steve Fatula said:


> Yes, as long as you have discipline, which many Americans do not. Totally agree, my wife was an all cash girl. Now she can't stand cash, she sees all those points, miles, whatever and we definitely take advantage. Heck, now it's almost complicated (minor). Tonight we'll be going to Kroger, we have to remember this quarter that Discover has 5% for groceries instead of using our normal grocery card!




I actually put sticky notes on my credit cards to remind me which ones have the best cash back on what for the quarter! Drives my husband nuts when I tell him, for example- "Don't use this card for gas for the next 3 months- use the other card"  LOL!


----------



## bogey21 (Jan 24, 2019)

rapmarks said:


> I just came home from a retirement seminar.  Among the things the speaker said, or hinted at:
> 
> You can buy a life insurance policy that will let you have eighty percent of the death benefit for nursing home expenses, no longer need nursing home insurance, and if you didn’t use, you would get the entire death benefit.  He claims ten thousand annual premium for million dollar policy with this provision.



This one sounds interesting.  I would check and see if such a policy exists.  If it does and it makes sense for you, find another agent. There is no need to buy it from the jerk who put on the seminar...

George


----------



## VacationForever (Jan 24, 2019)

rapmarks said:


> You can buy a life insurance policy that will let you have eighty percent of the death benefit for nursing home expenses, no longer need nursing home insurance, and if you didn’t use, you would get the entire death benefit.  He claims ten thousand annual premium for million dollar policy with this provision.
> An index fund that gives you ninety percent of the investment gains, but zero loss.  You will always have at least what it was worth on jan 1 of the year.
> 
> I subscribe to the if it sounds too good to be true theory, so that is one reason I won’t follow up for it,  the second is that he came across loud and clear that women make less and know less,  and won’t know what to do when spouse passes away.  And finally he decided to blame our previous president for a surcharge that existed before he was in office.


Something similar exist.  

Look at Lincoln Moneyguard II.  Lump sum payment, covers LTC with an inflation rider.  If LTC benefit is unused, you get back from 140%-110% of amount or balance of the amount if used.

Look at Merrill Lynch packaged/sold 5-year step up notes, backed by the institution that is behind it.  HSBC, BOA are some of them.  Get all index gains, plus certain percentage above it, with 20% downward protection.

I am very familiar with both.


----------



## Steve Fatula (Jan 24, 2019)

VacationForever said:


> Something similar exist.
> 
> Look at Lincoln Moneyguard II.  Lump sum payment, covers LTC with an inflation rider.  If LTC benefit is unused, you get back from 140%-110% of amount or balance of the amount if used.
> 
> ...



But that's more than zero loss, potentially at least. A 20% downward protection could still lose 80%, but that's only in theory of course. Or, are the ones you are speaking of somehow different? I am not sure about the  *zero* loss quoted at his seminar?


----------



## Talent312 (Jan 24, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> Drives my husband nuts when I tell him, for example: "Don't use this card for gas for the next 3 months- use the other card."



My DW goes nuts when I say: "Please wait three days to order those shoes. Our CC bill closes in two."

.


----------



## VacationForever (Jan 25, 2019)

Steve Fatula said:


> But that's more than zero loss, potentially at least. A 20% downward protection could still lose 80%, but that's only in theory of course. Or, are the ones you are speaking of somehow different? I am not sure about the  *zero* loss quoted at his seminar?


Correct.  Not zero loss, but on maturity, you can always buy another 5-year note.  When that happens, you are already at a 20% advantage over current price.  You keep on investing and you are always going to do better than the stock indices.  Make sure you buy S&P 500 or Dow Jones and not a commodity index.


----------



## Steve Fatula (Jan 25, 2019)

VacationForever said:


> Correct.  Not zero loss, but on maturity, you can always buy another 5-year note.  When that happens, you are already at a 20% advantage over current price.  You keep on investing and you are always going to do better than the stock indices.  Make sure you buy S&P 500 or Dow Jones and not a commodity index.



Obviously the odds are slim to exceed a 20% downfall except in a "crash" year. But also correct, after you absorb whatever the excess loss was, you can buy back in and you'll get it back sooner. Yes, you do not want to pick some far more risky index, agree for sure. 

More than likely in your scenario you lose any dividend yield of the index, and, liquidity. The key is not to use them for money you may need before the term. What kind of underwriting discount does the Merrill Lynch have (if you know off hand)? Generally, a step up note such you are talking about will work best in a relatively flat market assuming my assumptions about dividends and underwriting discount are correct. 

I have researched these before but have never purchased one. Am I on target with the observations and assumptions?


----------



## rapmarks (Jan 25, 2019)

After thinking a little bit about what amounted to scaring everyone about how illness was going to take away your entire nest egg, I realized he never mentioned having enough of a nest egg so that the dividends would produce enough to cover expenses without touching principal.


----------



## Bucky (Jan 25, 2019)

Steve Fatula said:


> Yes, as long as you have discipline, which many Americans do not. Totally agree, my wife was an all cash girl. Now she can't stand cash, she sees all those points, miles, whatever and we definitely take advantage. Heck, now it's almost complicated (minor). Tonight we'll be going to Kroger, we have to remember this quarter that Discover has 5% for groceries instead of using our normal grocery card!



The nice thing about retirement is the ability to not have to keep track of what day of the week it is. We have mastered this very well! We use our Chase Amazon CC for everything. 5% back on purchases sold by them and I believe 2% on all other purchases. Makes it very simple. Pay the bill in full when it arrives and then rinse and repeat. Always nice to use the points for “free” purchases! LOL.


----------



## AnnaS (Jan 25, 2019)

For many years, I was an all cash girl myself.  Now, everything is on cc for protection and rewards.  Paid in full even before I get my statement (I pay as I go along a few times a month on-line).  Hate balances.  My motto is, if you don't have the money to pay for it today, you won't have it tomorrow.  Don't count on money that you think you might get, might come, expect tomorrow, next year, etc.  When you have it, then it's yours.  

I charge everything and anything I can charge without a "fee".  I know I can get better cards and "invest" for better returns.  I am comfortable with what I have been doing.  Hubby would take more chances/change.

I am also the one that takes care of the finances - might not know or always make the best financial decisions but we have done well so far.  (not a stock market player).

Since hubby's disability - his two life insurance policies do not require him to pay the premiums - that turned out to be a good (however small) "investment"/decision to buy when we did (even though many advise against it).  

Ever since my youngest finished with school/college, I have no clue what day of the week it is half the time  - I have to keep track because we babysit the grandchildren here and there and I still work p/t - working won't be much longer (so I keep saying the last two years ).

We should all live within our means and hopefully "stay healthy" - yes, this can take a nice chunk out of your income/savings (we experienced it and we were young).  As we get older, experiencing more "doctor bills/hospital bills".


----------



## VacationForever (Jan 25, 2019)

Steve Fatula said:


> More than likely in your scenario you lose any dividend yield of the index, and, liquidity. The key is not to use them for money you may need before the term. What kind of underwriting discount does the Merrill Lynch have (if you know off hand)? Generally, a step up note such you are talking about will work best in a relatively flat market assuming my assumptions about dividends and underwriting discount are correct.
> 
> I have researched these before but have never purchased one. Am I on target with the observations and assumptions?



You are not.

There are many Step Up notes to choose from.  Some offer a multiplier of index of say 15% to 20% of the final index.  That is sufficient to cover loss of dividends.  Merrill Lynch gets an underwriting fee from the issuers so it does not impact the buyer of the notes.  The biggest downside is that it is unsecured and if the institution (HSBC etc...) goes belly up you lose the entire investment.  The other thing is the lack of liquidity until maturity.  While there is a private market before maturity, you won't get current value on that note.

It works in all markets, better in a bear or bull market.  If it is flat market, you might as well hold CDs.


----------



## Steve Fatula (Jan 25, 2019)

VacationForever said:


> You are not.
> 
> There are many Step Up notes to choose from.  Some offer a multiplier of index of say 15% to 20% of the final index.  That is sufficient to cover loss of dividends.  Merrill Lynch gets an underwriting fee from the issuers so it does not impact the buyer of the notes.  The biggest downside is that it is unsecured and if the institution (HSBC etc...) goes belly up you lose the entire investment.  The other thing is the lack of liquidity until maturity.  While there is a private market before maturity, you won't get current value on that note.
> 
> It works in all markets, better in a bear or bull market.  If it is flat market, you might as well hold CDs.



I see, did not realize there were many different kinds. Thanks for the tutorial!


----------



## Elan (Jan 25, 2019)

I just saw this info the other day.  Avg 401K balance by age.  Pretty frightening.

https://www.wptv.com/article/the-average-401k-balance-by-age

The numbers:

Age 20-29 $11.6k
Age 30-39 $43.6k
Age 40-49 $106.2k
Age 50-59 $179.1k
Age 60-69 $198.6k


----------



## Brett (Jan 25, 2019)

Elan said:


> I just saw this info the other day.  Avg 401K balance by age.  Pretty frightening.
> 
> https://www.wptv.com/article/the-average-401k-balance-by-age
> 
> ...



those 401k balances don't compare to the prior generation that got a good pension


----------



## am1 (Jan 25, 2019)

I never have concerned myself with the average/median.  It really does not matter as the goal is as much as possible or on a projection to be able to retire comfortably.  There will be a lot of competition to be a Walmart greeter in years to come.


----------



## WinniWoman (Jan 25, 2019)

Elan said:


> I just saw this info the other day.  Avg 401K balance by age.  Pretty frightening.
> 
> https://www.wptv.com/article/the-average-401k-balance-by-age
> 
> ...




You have to realize, however, that those people might have money in other types of retirement accounts, like IRA's and taxable accounts. 

If you looked at our 401k accounts you would say- not good. But it would not tell the story of all the money in our IRA accounts, banks and brokerage accounts.


----------



## Steve Fatula (Jan 25, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> You have to realize, however, that those people might have money in other types of retirement accounts, like IRA's and taxable accounts.
> 
> If you looked at our 401k accounts you would say- not good. But it would not tell the story of all the money in our IRA accounts, banks and brokerage accounts.



Very true, many years ago we rolled over all our 401k's into a rollover IRA, so I guess we have no 401k, we are $0!


----------



## capjak (Jan 25, 2019)

Did not read all the replies but you can learn so much more by join boglehead forum.  You can even get an assessment of your investments/retirement withdrawal etc.. from members that are finacial planners and several that wrote credited books on the subject.


----------



## WinniWoman (Jan 25, 2019)

capjak said:


> Did not read all the replies but you can learn so much more by join boglehead forum.  You can even get an assessment of your investments/retirement withdrawal etc.. from members that are finacial planners and several that wrote credited books on the subject.


 

Funny you should say that. I belonged to that forum years ago and haven't been on it  in quite awhile and someone on the Early Retirement forum just suggested I go back on at this stage of my life, so I intend to do that today.


----------



## Elan (Jan 25, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> You have to realize, however, that those people might have money in other types of retirement accounts, like IRA's and taxable accounts.
> 
> If you looked at our 401k accounts you would say- not good. But it would not tell the story of all the money in our IRA accounts, banks and brokerage accounts.


Of course.  Might be lots of other sources of retirement income.  Data would be much more meaningful if it could be filtered.  Nonetheless, those numbers are still shockingly low, IMO.  

Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk


----------



## Brett (Jan 25, 2019)

Elan said:


> Of course.  Might be lots of other sources of retirement income.  Data would be much more meaningful if it could be filtered.  Nonetheless, those numbers are still shockingly low, IMO.



I've also converted my 401k's to IRAs and my after tax investment accounts are larger than the IRA's but those statistics may indicate a retirement shortfall for some people.


----------



## VacationForever (Jan 25, 2019)

I have zero in 401K and zero in Rollover IRA.  I spent all my IRA money to buy deferred income annuities.


----------



## Talent312 (Jan 26, 2019)

VacationForever said:


> I spent all my IRA money to buy deferred income annuities.



I prefer to keep all my $$ in my own hands (or rather my broker's), as we have enuff retirement income from other sources. At least that way, I can cash in some low-fee ETF's and head down to the candy store whenever I want.

.


----------



## VacationForever (Jan 26, 2019)

Talent312 said:


> I prefer to keep all my $$ in my own hands (or rather my broker's), as we have enuff retirement income from other sources. At least that way, I can cash in some low-fee ETF's and head down to the candy store whenever I want.
> 
> .


You have a nice pension and many of us are not that fortunate.


----------



## stmartinfan (Jan 26, 2019)

I'm a big believer in having a professional financial planner, but finding a good one can be a challenge.  It took us 3 tries, but we've been serviced well by our current guy and he's young enough that he will out live us!  My husband, who's a good negotiator, did get us a better pricing structure than the planner's “official” rate, so remember that it can be worth it to ask.  He has brought us better investment ideas than we would ever have done on our own and our quarterly meetings help us keep focused on what's happening so we can adjust if necessary.  I know there are lots of terrible ones in the industry so it's scary to choose one but it has been a good decision for us.


----------



## bogey21 (Jan 26, 2019)

VacationForever said:


> You have a nice pension and many of us are not that fortunate.



I, too, have a nice pension but only because I made a good decision.  I had the option of taking either a lump sum or an annuity (Pension) when I retired.  I chose the annuity so I wouldn't have to make investment decisions in my retirement.  Even though I managed large investment portfolios during my working career I still think taking the annuity was one of the best investment decisions I ever made...

George


----------



## WinniWoman (Jan 27, 2019)

bogey21 said:


> I, too, have a nice pension but only because I made a good decision.  I had the option of taking either a lump sum or an annuity (Pension) when I retired.  I chose the annuity so I wouldn't have to make investment decisions in my retirement.  Even though I managed large investment portfolios during my working career I still think taking the annuity was one of the best investment decisions I ever made...
> 
> George




IF the annuity is a good deal it works as in your case. 

The one at my husband's job only lasts 10 years and is only $1500 per month- and much, much less if you have joint and survivor and all those other options. No thanks. We will take the lump sum and take our chances. 

Social security will be our annuity.


----------



## WinniWoman (Jan 27, 2019)

stmartinfan said:


> I'm a big believer in having a professional financial planner, but finding a good one can be a challenge.  It took us 3 tries, but we've been serviced well by our current guy and he's young enough that he will out live us!  My husband, who's a good negotiator, did get us a better pricing structure than the planner's “official” rate, so remember that it can be worth it to ask.  He has brought us better investment ideas than we would ever have done on our own and our quarterly meetings help us keep focused on what's happening so we can adjust if necessary.  I know there are lots of terrible ones in the industry so it's scary to choose one but it has been a good decision for us.



I am going through this process now. So far, one nationally recognized CFP company(Fiduciary)wants to take our money and change it over to a Schwalb account and re invest it in all these other funds (not Vanguard, or Fidelity, or T Rowe Price) and wants to charge us a HUGE percentage every single year based on our money, plus $800 to set up the financial plan. The free virtual ZOOM and phone meetings we had were helpful, but those fees- ugh....  This is the second guy I have met with (the other was 2 years ago) and their rates were essentially the same- like $10,000 per year. Except this one takes a percentage and the other charges a set fee of $2500 per quarter. (The other guy wanted to take our money and move it to TD Ameritrade). Over 10-20 years that is a HUGE chunk of change! I'd rather give that money to our son than hand it off to these guys.

This is not to say I don't think there is value in what they do- but EVERY SINGLE year you have to pay these high fees.? No thanks. I can see maybe initially when setting everything up- a set fee. And then maybe hourly advice from then on as needed.

These guys have to be getting money from the brokerage houses for moving money there. This guy says the funds have no loads, no transaction fees or sales commission, but then says that Schwalb can also charge fees. I am suspicious that these planners also might get something every time they make a trade on our behalf. Don't know.

Ummm.. no. I want someone to look at what we have and give us the advice and we will handle it. What is wrong with T Rowe Price? He asked me why we use them. Uh- I don't know- maybe their funds are pretty good? They have good customer service? The question is- why doesn't HE USE T Rowe Price? Or Vanguard? Or Fidelity?

So- Monday I am going to call some local CPA firms that do FP and one more CFP who does charge by the hour or visit.


----------



## bogey21 (Jan 27, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> We will take the lump sum and take our chances.



I'm not saying you are wrong but be careful.  When I retired 12 of us retired at the same time.  It was called an Early Retirement Window.  Its purpose was to allow the new Chief Executive to pick his own key people.  I took the annuity.  The other 11 took the lump sum.  This was in the year 2000.  Best I can tell is that only 3 or the 11 have a decent portion of their lump sums left.  Some pissed it away.  Some didn't budget their expenses well.  And others lost their butts when the stock market crashed in 2008...

George


----------



## Talent312 (Jan 27, 2019)

I am a firm believer that one can be their own financial planner. Yeah, like a lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client, but... If you study enuff and research the options, you can get a handle on it and do about as well as the pros (IMHO). Before I started investing, I read and read, in the years that followed, kept reading. Peter Lynch's "One Up on Wall Street" (1989) was a favorite.

I started planning for retirement about four years out, which again, gave me time to read and study my options. In short, I decided long ago that I would do whatever was necessary to plan my own financial future  _(even if meant working at a job I found stressful)_, and if I missed the boat a few times, so be it, at least I wasn't paying someone else to do it for me.
.
.


----------



## Bucky (Jan 28, 2019)

Talent312 said:


> I am a firm believer that one can be their own financial planner. Yeah, like a lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client, but... If you study enuff and research the options, you can get a handle on it and do about as well as the pros (IMHO). Before I started investing, I read and read, in the years that followed, kept reading. Peter Lynch's "One Up on Wall Street" (1989) was a favorite.
> 
> I started planning for retirement about four years out, which again, gave me time to read and study my options. In short, I decided long ago that I would do whatever was necessary to plan my own financial future  _(even if meant working at a job I found stressful)_, and if I missed the boat a few times, so be it, at least I wasn't paying someone else to do it for me.
> .
> .



During all my years of military service we never made enough to worry about investing, much less worry about letting someone else do it for us! After I retired from the military, thankfully that changed. But, I still manage our portfolio. We’ve done fairly well but who knows, may have been able to do better using someone else. But, I just can’t handle someone making decisions for us! If there is a decision made that’s going to possibly cost us, I want to be the person responsible for making that decision. I can live with that.


----------



## AnnaS (Jan 29, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> I am going through this process now. So far, one nationally recognized CFP company(Fiduciary)wants to take our money and change it over to a Schwalb account and re invest it in all these other funds (not Vanguard, or Fidelity, or T Rowe Price) and wants to charge us a HUGE percentage every single year based on our money, plus $800 to set up the financial plan. The free virtual ZOOM and phone meetings we had were helpful, but those fees- ugh....  This is the second guy I have met with (the other was 2 years ago) and their rates were essentially the same- like $10,000 per year. Except this one takes a percentage and the other charges a set fee of $2500 per quarter. (The other guy wanted to take our money and move it to TD Ameritrade). Over 10-20 years that is a HUGE chunk of change! I'd rather give that money to our son than hand it off to these guys.
> 
> This is not to say I don't think there is value in what they do- but EVERY SINGLE year you have to pay these high fees.? No thanks. I can see maybe initially when setting everything up- a set fee. And then maybe hourly advice from then on as needed.
> 
> ...




Those are some high fees.....I guess it depends on one's portfolio.

I will take a few dollars less in return and take care of it myself. 

My problem is I trust no one.......


----------



## WinniWoman (Jan 29, 2019)

AnnaS said:


> Those are some high fees.....I guess it depends on one's portfolio.
> 
> I will take a few dollars less in return and take care of it myself.
> 
> My problem is I trust no one.......




Me too.


----------



## Blues (Jan 30, 2019)

Talent312 said:


> I am a firm believer that one can be their own financial planner. Yeah, like a lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client, but... If you study enuff and research the options, you can get a handle on it and do about as well as the pros (IMHO). Before I started investing, I read and read, in the years that followed, kept reading. Peter Lynch's "One Up on Wall Street" (1989) was a favorite.



One of the best quotes I ever read, and I have to paraphrase, was basically that in order to wisely pick a financial planner and not get taken for huge expenses and fees, you have to know so much about finance and financial planning that, by that time, you may as well do it yourself.

In any case, I agree with you.  There's nothing like studying the subject to make sure you know what you're doing.  And if at that point you decide to get outside advice in the form of a financial planner, you'll know what questions to ask and where the pitfalls lie.


----------



## Blues (Jan 30, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> I am going through this process now. So far, one nationally recognized CFP company(Fiduciary)wants to take our money and change it over to a Schwalb account and re invest it in all these other funds (not Vanguard, or Fidelity, or T Rowe Price) and wants to charge us a HUGE percentage every single year based on our money, plus $800 to set up the financial plan. The free virtual ZOOM and phone meetings we had were helpful, but those fees- ugh....



Mary Ann, if I were you, I'd look into Vanguard's Personal Advisor Service (PAS).  If you qualify, they charge 0.3% of assets.  Much better than most face-to-face advisors.  Of course, you don't get face-to-face, but you do get financial planning and consultations via the web.  Other companies have similar services for similar fees, including Fidelity and Betterment.  But I'd trust Vanguard with this one.  And that's despite the fact that I'm primarily at Fidelity.


----------



## am1 (Jan 30, 2019)

Not bad but some people are not meant to be investors outside their home, possible business and money in the bank.  What is best for them paying a financial advisor or sitting on the sidelines watching.  

I'm not a fan of financial advisors but for some it is best.  



Blues said:


> One of the best quotes I ever read, and I have to paraphrase, was basically that in order to wisely pick a financial planner and not get taken for huge expenses and fees, you have to know so much about finance and financial planning that, by that time, you may as well do it yourself.
> 
> In any case, I agree with you.  There's nothing like studying the subject to make sure you know what you're doing.  And if at that point you decide to get outside advice in the form of a financial planner, you'll know what questions to ask and where the pitfalls lie.


met


----------



## Steve Fatula (Jan 30, 2019)

Blues said:


> Mary Ann, if I were you, I'd look into Vanguard's Personal Advisor Service (PAS).  If you qualify, they charge 0.3% of assets.  Much better than most face-to-face advisors.  Of course, you don't get face-to-face, but you do get financial planning and consultations via the web.  Other companies have similar services for similar fees, including Fidelity and Betterment.  But I'd trust Vanguard with this one.  And that's despite the fact that I'm primarily at Fidelity.



Fidelity has offered me portfolio reviews the past several years, including detailed recommendations, discussions about goals, where to invest, detailed analysis and reports, etc. The price they charged me was 0. Not sure why, maybe it depends how much money you have with them.


----------



## VacationForever (Jan 30, 2019)

Steve Fatula said:


> Fidelity has offered me portfolio reviews the past several years, including detailed recommendations, discussions about goals, where to invest, detailed analysis and reports, etc. The price they charged me was 0. Not sure why, maybe it depends how much money you have with them.


Yes, this is free.  I used to have my money in Fidelity.


----------



## Ralph Sir Edward (Jan 30, 2019)

This is not intended to be political, but there are many politicians wanting to raise tax rates.

One might want to save money for traditional to roth ira conversions, just in case. You might have only a narrow window to convert ahead of tax changes, should they occur. . .


----------



## Brett (Jan 30, 2019)

Ralph Sir Edward said:


> This is not intended to be political, but there are many politicians wanting to raise tax rates.
> One might want to save money for traditional to roth ira conversions, just in case. You might have only a narrow window to convert ahead of tax changes, should they occur. . .



all the "politicians just waiting to raise your taxes"
it's huge,  *HUGE*  I tell 'ya ....  *Buh*-lieve Me !

but I agree, Vanguard, Schwab and Fidelity will give you free advice on investments, IRA's and guidance on financial advice.


----------



## WinniWoman (Jan 30, 2019)

Blues said:


> Mary Ann, if I were you, I'd look into Vanguard's Personal Advisor Service (PAS).  If you qualify, they charge 0.3% of assets.  Much better than most face-to-face advisors.  Of course, you don't get face-to-face, but you do get financial planning and consultations via the web.  Other companies have similar services for similar fees, including Fidelity and Betterment.  But I'd trust Vanguard with this one.  And that's despite the fact that I'm primarily at Fidelity.




Thanks. Yes I know about Vanguard's service.

I have T Rowe Price as our financial company and they do have actually a free advisory service that I qualify for in terms of investments like Vanguard's which I have utilized (via phone) and on line and am in the process of doing an update with them. It also includes two on line tools I have used. I don't always listen to their advice because I feel they have their eyes on our cash accounts OUTSIDE of their company- they are always saying we need more stock exposure- yet when I use their Future Path tool it says my current portfolio has a 98% success rate, as does the hypothetical one with more stock exposure. (both use Monte Carlo- Future Path and The Advisory Service).

For the other kind- the paid service they offer where they manage everything for you- you need to have 5 million dollars and I have no where near that! LOL!I am not going to move my money to Vanguard at this point. I like Vanguard- don't get me wrong- and Fidelity- and I do have a couple of their funds in my Price brokerage account.

I just feel I need a totally objective professional at this point that just charges for the advice/plan and more holistic. My search continues. I do have a intro. appt with one on Friday and a phone intro. with another on Monday. The CPA firm can't do anything until after tax season, but I do hope to meet with them as well.


----------



## geekette (Jan 30, 2019)

Ralph Sir Edward said:


> This is not intended to be political, but there are many politicians wanting to raise tax rates.
> 
> One might want to save money for traditional to roth ira conversions, just in case. You might have only a narrow window to convert ahead of tax changes, should they occur. . .


Lots of folks want to do lots of things but the only thing that counts is current law.  I don’t personally believe that Roth will remain tax free indefinitely, but, it is today.   I like how you said to save up for conversion, that is good advice as some might have tax taken out of conversion dollars, which is a terrible idea.  While I won’t convert because I won’t prepay tax, it could be a useful exercise for others. I just wouldn’t suggest using current headlines as the motivator.


----------



## Blues (Jan 31, 2019)

Steve Fatula said:


> Fidelity has offered me portfolio reviews the past several years, including detailed recommendations, discussions about goals, where to invest, detailed analysis and reports, etc. The price they charged me was 0. Not sure why, maybe it depends how much money you have with them.



Yes, they've given me free portfolio reviews too.  While I like Fidelity and their customer service, I feel that they use these reviews to move you into funds with higher expense ratios.  Their review for me recommended about a dozen different sector funds, most of which had ER's of around 0.75%.  I'm a big fan of the boglehead-style 3 fund portfolio -- US total stock, international total stock, and total bond.  You can do that at Fidelity with zero ER for the first two, and 0.025% for bonds.  Even though I like Fidelity and their customer service, I'm very leery of their advice; I feel they try to lead you down the primrose path to higher expenses.  That's why I suggested Vanguard PAS to Mary Ann.  I think they're more objective; and even their managed funds are a lot lower in expense ratio.


----------



## Steve Fatula (Jan 31, 2019)

Blues said:


> Yes, they've given me free portfolio reviews too.  While I like Fidelity and their customer service, I feel that they use these reviews to move you into funds with higher expense ratios.  Their review for me recommended about a dozen different sector funds, most of which had ER's of around 0.75%.  I'm a big fan of the boglehead-style 3 fund portfolio -- US total stock, international total stock, and total bond.  You can do that at Fidelity with zero ER for the first two, and 0.025% for bonds.  Even though I like Fidelity and their customer service, I'm very leery of their advice; I feel they try to lead you down the primrose path to higher expenses.  That's why I suggested Vanguard PAS to Mary Ann.  I think they're more objective; and even their managed funds are a lot lower in expense ratio.



My experience was different, perhaps it depends who you get or what you tell them you want. ER's by themselves are not necessarily bad. But I understand your point. I most certainly do not blindly follow anyones advice though, in the end, it's my money at risk! My response was based on a previous suggestion that Fidelity charged for such a service.


----------



## WinniWoman (Feb 23, 2019)

So we met with the last CFP on my short list this morning. 8 am an hour away. Way to early. LOL!

Anyway, as nice as most, but wants to take over our assets after the initial financial plan ($1800)- and 1% of managed assets, which I suspected he would.
Also- the thing that got me besides the 1% asset management fee (which I understand is standard in the industry) is that he wants to put 95% of our money in equities. Yeah- you read that right.

He is a Dave Ramsey CFP recommendation. Before our meeting he had sent us the book "Simple Wealth, Inevitable Wealth" by Nick Murray and the first thing that stood out at me reading it was- 95 % in equities and also the push to have a CFP manage your assets.

Ummm.. no. Did not agree with this. The ETF's he would use through Pershing were with a company called Wisdom Tree. Never heard of them and we do have some ETF's in a brokerage account. All our assets would be sold off and put in this Wisdom Tree Account with Pershing.

Sigh...So I think if anyone we would go with the Garrett Financial Planning Group fee only planner who seems to be holistic. I have a few more questions for him however.

I have been speaking with the T Rowe Price advisor and of course, he wants me to put more in equities and also has an eye on our cash outside of T Rowe Price. But I would probably consider investing a little more in equity funds but not to the extent he is talking about.

Supposedly he uses the Monte Carlo tool.

Really? Well, the Monte Carlo tool I use on their own Future Path site says we are good as we are, even with leaving our allocations as is. So I don't get it.

Wow is all I can say.


----------



## pedro47 (Feb 23, 2019)

To the OP, sometimes you can have to much information and advice.
Step back and relax and talk to someone who has had actual experience using that CFP, Vanguard, T.Rowe Price, Charles Schwab or Fidelity.


----------



## DancingWaters (Feb 23, 2019)

Mpumilia,
We retired 2 1/2 years ago after talking to 3 different financial planners.  Everything has not been great and we are not on retirement easy street, but it is OK.    We both work part time because we like to work and we like the extra money.   We are not living the life we lived before but we are doing ok.  We retired at 62.  We also babysit 4 days a week for our grandkids, we just take turns when we are not at our part time jobs.   My husband and financial planner thinks we are financially fine, so I have given up worrying.  Take one step at a time...


----------



## elaine (Feb 23, 2019)

Everyone's retirement is different, but here's my analysis- a compilation of various experts:
1. make a budget of the minimum you need--fixed costs, food, insurance, etc.
2. where is the $ to cover #1 without tapping into retirement portfolio? PT job, pension, SS, stock dividends, etc.
3. how much more will you need to withdraw from portfolio to cover#1? If it's more than 3-4% of your funds, then #2 needs to increase or delay retirement.
4. add in reasonable costs above minimum--travel, new car, charitable donations, gifts, hair salon, entertainment, etc. Can you still do that with only 3-4% withdrawal?
Now, look at ready cash that could cover #1. The more cash you have (or the less cash you need because of pension, SS etc.), the larger amount of equities you can have in your portfolio, as you can "let it ride" in a downturn and not have to sell low to meet your minimum needs. That downturn could last up to 2-3 years.
We do not have a FP and don't see a need for one. It's DH's hobby. He reads Rick Edelman and Morningstar.
95% equities is truly nuts for anyone 55+, IMHO, unless very wealthy.


----------



## DancingWaters (Feb 23, 2019)

My husband is thrilled he retired from his 37 year job and is happy working part time the days he wants to.   I’m not, but realize I physically feel better now that I retired from the stressful job....
We have sold some of our toys, which we both are happy about.   We still have our favorite “toys” and will keep them as long as we physically can use them.   Thus, part time jobs


----------



## WinniWoman (Feb 24, 2019)

elaine said:


> Everyone's retirement is different, but here's my analysis- a compilation of various experts:
> 1. make a budget of the minimum you need--fixed costs, food, insurance, etc.
> 2. where is the $ to cover #1 without tapping into retirement portfolio? PT job, pension, SS, stock dividends, etc.
> 3. how much more will you need to withdraw from portfolio to cover#1? If it's more than 3-4% of your funds, then #2 needs to increase or delay retirement.
> ...




We have always lived on a budget so #1 is taken care of. Not much will change except lower gas expenses when my husband retires except have to factor in health insurance premiums.

When we sell our home and move- yeah- we will go through a lot of money.

There is no other money to use to take care of #1. We have to live off our savings. We are trying to use my husband's SS as an annuity (in other words- delay his) and then maybe I will take mine soon- that is one reason we need a Financial Advisor.

We have an emergency fund as well.

One of the FP's I met with is a Rick Edelman Financial Engines guy (on Dave Ramsey's recommended list) and wanted $800 for the financial plan (I am ok with that) and  1.75% + for managing our investments. Most all seem to want to do this- sell everything we have with a perfectly good mutual fund company and put it in funds or ETF's that they want to use.

The 2 other guys wanted $1500 and $1800. The first one is a Garret Financial Group guy and the second is a Dave Ramsey guy.

They are all considered fee only fiduciaries.

The second guy at $1800 is the one that I just posted about.  What I see is they "lure" you in- saying you can keep your money with the fund company you have "for the time being". Then when you meet they will talk about taking over your money at some point.

The Garret guy also said we could keep our money at T Rowe Price.  But I need to press him further to get an idea as to what comes later after the initial plan. I liked his approach, which was very holistic.

The guy we met with yesterday- I told him about the T Rowe Price Advisor (who is not holistic but focuses only on our money and how it is invested). I said it was interesting how the advisor said they use the Monte Carlo method to determine how we should invest and he, too, said we needed more equities (and also has his eye on our cash OUTSIDE T Rowe Price), but what baffled me was T Rowe Price also has an on line tool called Future Path that uses the same Monte Carlo tool and it says our investments are fine as they are - 99% - and if we were to go into stock more significantly that would bring us up just 1% more to 100%.! So why would we take on more risk?

The only thing he could come up with in response was that the Monte Carlo system was bunk. SMH....


----------



## geekette (Feb 24, 2019)

elaine said:


> ...
> 95% equities is truly nuts for anyone 55+, IMHO, unless very wealthy.


Not nuts, not wealthy.  53 now, but not changing anything.  Can't say as for everyone, but equities are the only way for me to attain wealth unless I marry a rich guy (not planned, I would never marry or divorce for money reasons).

Planning to sell off equities is not my plan so market price swings are not an issue for me.   I do have a strategy, it has been in place for about 30 years.  My risk tolerance is pretty high but I don't invest in fly by nights, I own many old stodgy companies in most industries and of course utilities.  The risk of all my portfolios going poof overnight is less than the risk of outliving my money with any other strategy.  Equities are indeed the riskiest, but owning many of the least risky of the class puts me on a surer path than chasing yield or astronomical growth.  I keep waiting for a company I own to implode, waiting for the doom and gloom scenarios warned about.  

I think it's nuts to sit on large piles of cash.  I have a larger need for continuing to grow my dough to outpace inflation than I do for "safety".   As a dividend investor, I get some massive raises in those quarterly payments (sometimes I catch a 20% increase which never ever happened with a paycheck; more normal is 3-5% div raise).  Currently reinvesting all dividends, each and every payment is higher.  I do own some companies that have cut dividends, it does happen.  The raises in other companies have made up for this as each year, my total haul is higher.  Even after a cut, the march upward begins again as reinvesting means more shares for the next divvie payment.

We are all different, and all view "Risk" differently.  Comfort matters, too, and I am very comfortable owning stocks directly but would be quite uncomfortable putting it into ETFs instead or holding 10-20% cash.  

I'd rather not be called nuts but don't really care.  Div investors have always caught scorn but I will keep promoting the strategy because for many of us, it provides Sleep Well At Night and the best shot at not outliving our money.


----------



## geekette (Feb 24, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> We have always lived on a budget so #1 is taken care of. Not much will change except lower gas expenses when my husband retires except have to factor in health insurance premiums.
> 
> When we sell our home and move- yeah- we will go through a lot of money.
> 
> ...


Your experience is why I steer clear.  The only person that really cares about your money is YOU, everyone else just looks at how they can get a piece of it.  

Keep us posted, your adventure is very interesting.  I personally think that you have done a great job in your planning and allocations.


----------



## rapmarks (Feb 24, 2019)

I guess I am fortunate that our financial advisor does not charge any fee and manages our portfolio with out trying to switch things around.  Our only activity occurs when bonds are called or the five year baskets come due.  
But anyone in good health is fortunate.  Our neighbor under 65 has lost his second home, motor home, business, boat etc.because he has severe Alzheimer’s and his wife could not run the business and he has been placed in a nursing home.


----------



## Icc5 (Feb 24, 2019)

We both retired early at 62.  I hit that age 4 years before my wife so she was able to see how I handled it.  When we got together we were older already.  She was 34 and I was 38.  We each already owned a house.  We both worked in a grocery store which didn't pay fantastic but had a decent pension plan and health plan.  I put in 43 years which included about 15 in management.  Years ago in retail clerks you could be in management and in the union.  My wife put in 42 years.  My first house was paid off my wife's house was about half paid off.  We sold both and bought one that was almost twice as expensive.
Made large house payments (we are in California) for about 25 more years and paid it off.  
In the beginning we weren't allowed to have a 401k because we already had the union pension plan.
Once we could have a 401k we both invested about 1/2 what was allowed.  I also had a 1/2 dozen stocks that I started investing in when I was 21.  We also had 2 kids which our union medical helped greatly especially things like dental for braces.
We also bought long term policies when we were 45 and 41 and started using a financial adviser for new money.  I still managed our stock account and added to it.  We own mostly dividend payers.
Retirement has been easy.  Luckily neither of us has had major health problems.  I took early SS and we are waiting till she is 70 to start hers.  Between the pension and SS I make much more then when I worked.  She makes less but between both we make total what we did when working.  We have our union retirement health plan which is more costly and covers less then when working but still much cheaper then an outside plan.
We usually go on 1-2 cruises per year, 6-8 timeshare trips a year and still manage to save in our savings account.  We use a credit card that gets us mileage and have always paid the card off monthly.
We have consolidated our 401k's and Roth with one company.  We got rid of the financial advisor about 2 years ago after him and I figured out what direction to go (we have always already been headed in that direction.
As I said before we have been lucky both in health,timing, and wealth.  To be where we are today after what Iwould call mediocre jobs has been luck.  The best two things we did was stayed for long times in a job that had a health and pension plan and good investments in the market.  Probably best was never paid interest on a credit card and never bought what we couldn't afford.
The topping on the cake is we got to take our kids to Hawaii about 4-5 times each, took both on a few cruises, took both to Disney World and Disneyland several times and both have been able to see about 35 states on timeshare trips.  
What I've learned is all kids are different.  My son is a lot like me and invests,saves, looks ahead.  Our daughter is just the opposite with no savings, bill collectors at her door and worries each month about paying rent.
Bart


----------



## bogey21 (Feb 24, 2019)

As many of you know I live in a CCRC where many of my fellow retiree's ages are between the low 80s and (believe it or not) 100.  One thing I have observed in talking with a number of them is how many have a large amount of money in investments, the bank and/or both but are afraid to spend it as they are paranoid about running out...  

Without having dug into this with my usual vigor I wonder if they would not be better off if they had they purchased a series of deferred annuities with payouts in increasing amounts in 5 year intervals starting at say age 75.  My uninformed understanding is that if they died before collecting, the annuities could be set up so their beneficiaries would get the money.  If I am right about this, many of my fellow residents could clear their minds, spend their money and better enjoy their remaining lives.  Maybe I am biased because I have been living on a full blown annuity (Pension) for the last 19 years...

George


----------



## WinniWoman (Feb 24, 2019)

rapmarks said:


> I guess I am fortunate that our financial advisor does not charge any fee and manages our portfolio with out trying to switch things around.  Our only activity occurs when bonds are called or the five year baskets come due.
> But anyone in good health is fortunate.  Our neighbor under 65 has lost his second home, motor home, business, boat etc.because he has severe Alzheimer’s and his wife could not run the business and he has been placed in a nursing home.



A financial advisor who doesn't charge anything? Are you sure he isn't making commissions off your investments?


----------



## VacationForever (Feb 24, 2019)

bogey21 said:


> Without having dug into this with my usual vigor I wonder if they would not be better off if they had they purchased a series of deferred annuities with payouts in increasing amounts in 5 year intervals starting at say age 75.  My uninformed understanding is that if they died before collecting, the annuities could be set up so their beneficiaries would get the money.  If I am right about this, many of my fellow residents could clear their minds, spend their money and better enjoy their remaining lives.  Maybe I am biased because I have been living on a full blown annuity (Pension) for the last 19 years...
> 
> George



Only QLAC (Qualified Longevity Annuities Contract) can start after age 70 1/2 but no later than 85 and it is limited to 130K, and this limit is adjusted by the IRS periodically.  This was first introduced in July 2014.  With QLAC, you have the option of choosing single life, joint lives and also with the option of refund of unutilized/balance of premiums to your beneficiaries.   QLAC applies to tax sheltered money.  One can use taxable funds to buy deferred annuities and to start at whatever age one choooses.


----------



## VacationForever (Feb 24, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> A financial advisor who doesn't charge anything? Are you sure he isn't making commissions off your investments?


Our friend uses Schwab and they have money managed by them for free.  Obviously money management is different from someone who can look at the whole picture which is what you are looking for.  Regardless, you should give them a call to find out.

This friend has $1M with Schwab which puts them at "Pinnacle" level.  He manages some of the money where he wants full control and the rest is left to Schwab person to manage.  He gets all sorts of freebies from Schwab at Pinnacle level.  Recently he received a $300 golf club and 2 free rounds of golf per year at private country clubs.


----------



## WinniWoman (Feb 24, 2019)

VacationForever said:


> Our friend uses Schwab and they have money managed by them for free.  Obviously money management is different from someone who can look at the whole picture which is what you are looking for.  Regardless, you should give them a call to find out.




T Rowe Price does the same for us and I use it.

Schwab you have to have your money with them, of course. I see no reason to pull my money out of T Rowe Price. That is what turns me off with some of the advisors I have met with. Why can't they just look at what I have and give me objective advice as to how it is or what changes I could make within T Rowe Price?

Why? Because they make their money moving it (imagine what that does to your returns when they sell it all off!) and then charging you a percentage of your assets to "manage" it- which the computer does anyway in re balancing. You think these guys actually manage  the funds of every single one of their 200-400 clients? No way. Everything is computerized.

I have nothing against them earning a living. I am just saying I would rather not pay for that. Heck- one could put their money in a no load target date retirement mutual fund themselves and call it a day. Really.

All these companies have these advisement services now. Vanguard, Fidelity, etc.  Makes sense to help people and therefore try to keep the money in house, otherwise people might sway elsewhere, especially if they hire a  financial advisor and he/she takes over the management and ends up liquidating everything and moving it to another brokerage house.

This is why I have searched tirelessly for an objective, fee only, hourly based if needed/wanted, CFP that is a fiduciary. I think I found my guy. Will know this week.

Meanwhile, I still am consulting with the T Rowe Price guy- but these guys are not totally objective. They focus on the investments you have with them and where they can get more of your money. That is ok- as long as you are aware of it and don't give in to letting them make all the trades for you. I take everything he says in and then I sleep on it and then decide what I want to do and not do.

I do nto even let them take the RMD's from my inherited IRA account. I DECIDE each year where to take it from. But that is just me.

I need a face to face person that can help us with the other aspects of our lives obviously in relation to the money we have. A little bit of hand holding to get us going. Someone to devise an income plan for us. How to draw down our assets and when to take SS and all the tax implications that go along with it. Medicare and health insurance help. Toss around ideas to how to help us with our relocation- financially. Estate planning advice and referral to an appropriate atty.  And yes- he can make recommendations on products and also regarding our portfolio. That kind of stuff- each tied into the other. The big picture.

Investment company advisors do not do all that.

But I in no way want to pay someone a percentage of our assets each year to "manage" them. At least not right now when I can do it myself. I would rather give that money to our son if I am going to lay that kind of dough out.


----------



## rapmarks (Feb 24, 2019)

In Florida there always free seminars about retirement and if you attend they claim to give you a free consultation about your financial picture and the best options.  Usually they are selling annuities


----------



## WinniWoman (Feb 24, 2019)

rapmarks said:


> In Florida there always free seminars about retirement and if you attend they claim to give you a free consultation about your financial picture and the best options.  Usually they are selling annuities




Ha! Ha! Red flag right there!


----------



## elaine (Feb 24, 2019)

Let me rephrase my 95% equities at 55+ nuts statement. The statement is in context of being able to ride out a downturn. So I should have said anyone within a few years of retirement who needs to withdraw funds to live vs 55+. So, someone at 53 might be planning to work until 60+ and not be in that category.
During the 2008 crash from sept 1 to the bottom in March 2009 the S&P was down 50%. Selling off then would have been a huge hit to a portfolio. I know because we watched my mom’s portfolio tank and we made distributions to her out of our pocket to keep from having to withdraw during a firesale. But if one could let it ride and even use as an opportunity to buy then one did fine.
 Again if one needs $ to meet expenses then one needs a pot of cash or easily liquidated equivalents to ride out an equity downturn imho. Even mixed portfolios were down almost 30% by March 2009. I’d rather have more in equities  and a small pot of cash to tide  me over. I have the stomach for a downturn as long as I don’t have to withdraw.


----------



## WinniWoman (Feb 24, 2019)

elaine said:


> Let me rephrase my 95% equities at 55+ nuts statement. The statement is in context of being able to ride out a downturn. So I should have said anyone within a few years of retirement who needs to withdraw funds to live vs 55+. So, someone at 53 might be planning to work until 60+ and not be in that category.
> During the 2008 crash from sept 1 to the bottom in March 2009 the DOW was down 50%. Selling off then would have been a huge hit to a portfolio. I know because we watched my mom’s portfolio tank and we made distributions to her out of our pocket to keep from having withdraw during a firesale.




Right, yes. We have a few years cash in our emergency fund in case of downturns. Also- hubby's entire 401K is right now is in stable value fund. When he retires we will see what to do with it, but I do not want to put that in equities right now because next year he could be rolling it over to his IRA- so then maybe it will go in equities then. OR -we might keep it in there- not sure. Can't get those outside of a 401K. 

My 401K was rolled over into my IRA and right now is sitting in a money market account because I have not dealt with investing it but I will and it will go into equities.  Then we also have a lot of cash in our checking account- several months worth of expenses. And, finite savings accounts for vacations, a used new car if needed, and home repairs when needed that I set up when I was still working. Nothing more gets added to those accounts now.

So, yeah- we have big cash position, but for practical reasons. Not to mention we might be needed a lot of cash for when we move- all the expenses that go along with that. All while living off our savings. Freaks me out!


----------



## elaine (Feb 24, 2019)

When thinking equities in a portfolio, that also means mutual funds invested in equities. Not just single stocks. So someone who had 25% indiv stocks, 50% stock mutual funds, 25% cash/bonds is a 75/25 mix.


----------



## WinniWoman (Feb 24, 2019)

elaine said:


> When thinking equities in a portfolio, that also means mutual funds invested in equities. Not just single stocks. So someone who had 25% indiv stocks, 50% stock mutual funds, 25% cash/bonds is a 75/25 mix.




Yes I know. I don’t own any individual stocks. I may be old fashioned but I have always used the old method of 100-your age equals the percentage of equities you should have. I like simplicity.

But- I must admit I am even more conservative that. I have a moderate income portfolio now according to T Rowe Price and T Rowe Price says I should have a more balanced one.

But that is something I can slowly work on.


----------



## VacationForever (Feb 24, 2019)

I want to go 100% equities on half of our portfolio but our money manager insists on staying on with a 60-40 mix being that 100% is too risky.  My intention is to not touch that portfolio and it will ultimately go to my son. We only need about half of our funds to live on. Also with good long term care insurances in place there will be little reason for emergency withdrawals. But we both do not want to go back to managing our portfolio.


----------



## Brett (Feb 24, 2019)

I'm looking at 110 - minus (my) age for the equities / fixed income split


----------



## VacationForever (Feb 24, 2019)

That's the new thinking, use either 110 or 120 and minus age for % of stock holding.


----------



## bogey21 (Feb 24, 2019)

VacationForever said:


> One can use taxable funds to buy deferred annuities and to start at whatever age one chooses.



This would work for many of the people I was referring to as  little (if any) of their money is tied up in non-taxable accounts.  Best I can tell it is more often than not in Bank CDs, Mutual Funds, Bank Accounts and maybe a few Stocks and Bonds in a brokerage account...

George


----------



## VacationForever (Feb 24, 2019)

bogey21 said:


> This would work for many of the people I was referring to as  little (if any) of their money is tied up in non-taxable accounts.  Best I can tell it is more often than not in Bank CDs, Mutual Funds, Bank Accounts and maybe a few Stocks and Bonds in a brokerage account...
> 
> George


Yep.  I agree with you.  I am a huge believer of deferred income annuity.  I used all of my IRA to buy 2.  The only thing we have not done is using part of my husband's IRA to buy a QLAC as I am on the fence with that one.


----------



## WinniWoman (Feb 24, 2019)

So, I did decide to go with that Garret Planning Group fee only advisor. He charges $1500 for a plan and works with you on going for several months until the plan is implemented and working correctly.

Down the line he has different fee structures- a retainer for $1200+ per year or $200 per hour. It can vary by needs.

He does not take custody of or manage or trade assets. Clients choose their own provider for their investments and handle their own trades and purchases, etc. Like I said, he did initially say I could keep my T Rowe Price company that I have now when I met with him so I am hoping there are no surprises with that- but I don't think so. He makes recommendations and monitors your portfolio and so forth, of course.  He says he does use the Monte Carlo methodology as one of many tools.

This is EXACTLY what I wanted! Better than paying thousands of dollars in management fees based on assets every single year!

I am awaiting his reply now to set up our first working meeting and am anxious to get started. He is available on Saturdays so that will be good for my husband as well.

We shall see!


----------



## geekette (Feb 25, 2019)

elaine said:


> Let me rephrase my 95% equities at 55+ nuts statement. The statement is in context of being able to ride out a downturn. So I should have said anyone within a few years of retirement who needs to withdraw funds to live vs 55+. So, someone at 53 might be planning to work until 60+ and not be in that category.
> During the 2008 crash from sept 1 to the bottom in March 2009 the S&P was down 50%. Selling off then would have been a huge hit to a portfolio. I know because we watched my mom’s portfolio tank and we made distributions to her out of our pocket to keep from having to withdraw during a firesale. But if one could let it ride and even use as an opportunity to buy then one did fine.
> Again if one needs $ to meet expenses then one needs a pot of cash or easily liquidated equivalents to ride out an equity downturn imho. Even mixed portfolios were down almost 30% by March 2009. I’d rather have more in equities  and a small pot of cash to tide  me over. I have the stomach for a downturn as long as I don’t have to withdraw.


Actually, I am ill and may not ever return to work.  I had a plan, life had other ideas.  I will be living off my portfolios sooner rather than later.   Lucky me to have had a plan and been working the plan for decades or I would be royally screwed right now.

Yes, if a person is planning to sell equities for running money, there will be ups and downs, potential for years-long runs in either direction.  But, having a lot of companies, it is not an S&P issue, it is company by company.    Many companies bought a long time ago are double triple or more what I paid for them.  Even if the going price is not highest ever, it can still be much more than I ever paid.   

LMT is a good example.  I bought in 2011 around $79, put in about 5k.  It has been past and beneath $300 for a while now.  If I need to sell at $250 vs $325, yes, less than Highest Possible, but still a win for me.  How much heartache would I let myself feel?  None.  As a div investor, many shares I didn't "buy" but were divs granted that went towards more shares.  It is not technically true that they are "free" shares but it is an easy way to get fine fast with sales.  I generally get about a half share per reinvestment with LMT.  Half shares gained at roughly $80 - $300 over the years.  And this is not a lot of years, either.  My initial $45 dividend is now $165.  Doing nothing but reinvesting.  I have collected in dividends about half my original investment.  It's more like a quarter of it for, say, MCD and PG.  Eventually I will get more each year than I originally invested.  Unless I start selling off shares.

A lot of money is lost in the market through fear and greed.  Choosing to keep those out of my investing has been beneficial to me.  Many companies I entered in 2010-2011 have done this same kind of stellar run up along with juicy dividend raises.  Could be the next recession doesn't take prices below my entry points.  Nobody knows, but it will be good data to have.

No sales planned but I will pull some dividend dough from IRA this year for year 2 of 5 years of substantially equal withdrawals.  I can weather this removal and it is the best course for me to adapt to my new reality.  I am reasonably certain that the downturn will occur within 5 years but that won't harm my plan for withdrawals.  

It's not so straightforward for ETFs and funds and they are susceptible to panic selling.  Fund managers have to sell when folks want their money.  It is the behavior of other investors that impacts any other investor's ability to exit at a "good price".  I am better off having 80 companies than a handful of ETFs.  Either way, if a person is going to need the money, why not dollar cost average out the same way it got dollar cost averaged in?  Remove emotion, just do the transaction.  Living off investments, one knows whether or not they are going to need to tap them in the next few years.  Sitting on hope while delaying action can make things worse and amp up stress level.  A plan can be made.  Fear of selling is not something that I'll allow happen to me.  I have done well in the stock market and won't let market prices stop me from living my life by redeeming shares held for decades.  But I also am in no hurry nor need to part with any golden geese so long as they keep ponying up quarterly.  

I am an oddball that doesn't go with rule of thumb stuff, but it remains a good idea to remove money from the market that one needs before that need is imminent.  I don't do that because I have a dividend cash flow instead and while never guaranteed, it is a solid growing flow.  While I am way too early to crack this nest egg, I can make it last by letting it ride.  I understand that can seem counterintuitive or even plain wrong but leaving enough divs in place to compound on the slow boat to wealth is working for me.  The more shares I stack up by avoiding taking divs in cash, the higher the next divs and more shares I have for whenever, ifever, sales are warranted.  I don't mean to be disrespectful, but it is unthinkable that I would have someone cover me vs sell when I need to.  I hope anyone that experienced that fear or panic has changed their money management to avoid future problems like that.  Either accept that you might need to sell when the market is in a bad mood or don't be in the market.   

It is important to have a plan and contingencies.  That is what keeps the hand steady when unexpected things happen in the market and my life.  Any equity investor should understand that what goes up can easily go down, and the reverse is true, also.  Nobody knows where the top is, or when, and nobody knows where or when the bottom is.  How sure do you need to be that the money will be there for you when you need it?  Invest according to that because the next low is coming.


----------



## WinniWoman (Mar 20, 2019)

So we are just starting to work with a fee only CFP. So far he is big on us converting some of the Traditional IRA money to Roths once my husband retires next year and paying the taxes. He also has mentioned a Qualified Income Annuity. I despise the idea of annuities. To me- insurance companies would not sell them if they were not going to be the ones making out on the deal. They don't offer these products out of the goodness of their hearts.

I am really adamant about this. I mean- what if we live about the same age as our parents? Which for both of us was not past 83? So I have to give the insurance company this money and I could be dead in 20 years?  To save taxes? I would rather give money to our son than have an insurance company hanging onto it. (Did I mention I hate insurance companies?) To me, as it is we are going to delay taking SS so that is the annuity. FYI- the CFP does not sell anything. He would be referring us to someone who sells annuities.

Then he says when my husband retires next year we should take our income from our taxable accounts first. We have to talk with him about all this but my head is already spinning. i mean- we do not have millions of dollars to work with. Then I would maybe say- ok- "what's $130,000 to pay for an annuity where we might not see a dime of it, nor would our son?".


----------



## VacationForever (Mar 20, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> So we are just starting to work with a fee only CFP. So far he is big on us converting some of the Traditional IRA money to Roths once my husband retires next year and paying the taxes. He also has mentioned a Qualified Income Annuity. I despise the idea of annuities. To me- insurance companies would not sell them if they were not going to be the ones making out on the deal. They don't offer these products out of the goodness of their hearts.
> 
> I am really adamant about this. I mean- what if we live about the same age as our parents? Which for both of us was not past 83? So I have to give the insurance company this money and I could be dead in 20 years?  To save taxes? I would rather give money to our son than have an insurance company hanging onto it. (Did I mention I hate insurance companies?) To me, as it is we are going to delay taking SS so that is the annuity. FYI- the CFP not sell anything. He would be referring us to someone who sells annuities.
> 
> Then he says when my husband retires next year we should take our income from our taxable accounts first. We have to talk with him about all this but my head is already spinning. i mean- we do not have millions of dollars to work with. Then I would maybe say- ok- "what's $130,000 to pay for an annuity where we might not see a dime of it, nor would our son?".


What he referred to is QLAC.  QLAC is a good idea for people who are afraid of running out of money in their old age. The latest one can start the QLAC income stream is 85 because Uncle Sam wants to get their hands on the taxes.  You can start it sooner, like 75.  You are right in that insurance sells policies or annuities to make money.  However annuities policy holders can benefit, i.e. get more money than they put in because of mortality credits.  Like the good old tontine, the last person standing gets the whole pot of money.

One can also buy a QLAC with return of premium to their beneficiary if the holder dies before start of annuity payment or if started, the balance of premium minus amount of annuities received.  Of course the beneficiary will lose time value of money, i.e. growth of the premium in an invested account, but it is better than losing the premium.

The CFP advises you to start pulling out of IRA first and a year after your husband stops working because of the progressive nature of taxes.  It is better to pay no to low tax rates than to take at higher tax rates later on when SS and RMD start.  Letting the money grow tax free and at withdrawal in Roth makes sense.


----------



## WinniWoman (Mar 20, 2019)

VacationForever said:


> What he referred to is QLAC.  QLAC is a good idea for people who are afraid of running out of money in their old age. The latest one can start the QLAC income stream is 85 because Uncle Sam wants to get their hands on the taxes.  You can start it sooner, like 75.  While you are right in that insurance sells policies or annuities to make money.  However annuities policy holders can benefit, i.e. get more money than they put in because of mortality credits.  Like the good old tontine, the last person standing gets the whole pot of money.
> 
> One can also buy a QLAC with return of premium to their beneficiary if the holder dies before start of annuity payment or if started, the balance of premium minus amount of annuities received.  Of course the beneficiary will lose time value of money, i.e. growth of the premium in an invested account, but it is better than losing the premium.



So instead of worrying about running out of money, now I would be worrying about dying before we got all our money back with interest! LOL!

So let me get this straight. So buy buying this thing we would just be delaying paying taxes then. Either way- whether the money stays in the IRA or we buy this annuity, we have to pay taxes anyway. Except if we keep our money we at least have access to it should be need it. After all- it is our money. Once the insurance company has it - it is their money. I still don't see anything to like about this.

But I am not that bright, I'll admit.


----------



## VacationForever (Mar 20, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> So instead of worrying about running out of money, now I would be worrying about dying before we got all our money back with interest! LOL!
> 
> So let me get this straight. So buy buying this thing we would just be delaying paying taxes then. Either way- whether the money stays in the IRA or we buy this annuity, we have to pay taxes anyway. Except if we keep our money we at least have access to it should be need it. After all- it is our money. Once the insurance company has it - it is their money. I still don't see anything to like about this.
> 
> But I am not that bright, I'll admit.


Look at @bogey21 he got much more back from annuity than the $1M that was used to buy.   Don't forget that you went to the CFP because you needed help.  He is the professional and you are not.  At the end of the day. whatever you decide is what you are comfortable with.

The fact that your head is spinning is another data point as to why you need professional guidance. Take away your own bias will be the start.


----------



## WinniWoman (Mar 20, 2019)

VacationForever said:


> Look at @bogey21 he got much more back from annuity than the $1M that was used to buy.   Don't forget that you went to the CFP because you needed help.  He is the professional and you are not.  At the end of the day. whatever you decide is what you are comfortable with.
> 
> The fact that your head is spinning is another data point as to why you need professional guidance. Take away your own bias will be the start.



Yes. I know. I struggle with that inner voice inside me.

I am hoping he will come up with an alternative to it. Like gifting $10,000 per person per year to our son or something like that. Or just- let's say, investing it- laddering it- whatever- to throw off a similar income that the annuity would have provided at a later age.


----------



## am1 (Mar 20, 2019)

I’m not for annuities either but instead consider there are winners and losers.  If you are a winner you keep getting a monthly check.  A reason to look after yourself and keep collecting.  The others have no need to keep collecting. 

Consider giving the amount to your son and have him pay you the same terms as the annuity.  He would make out better on average as there is no company taking a rake.  Taxes could outweigh that benefit. 

Because you do not have millions of dollars an annuity allows you to not outlive the money you do have.


----------



## Brett (Mar 20, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> Yes. I know. I struggle with that inner voice inside me.
> I am hoping he will come up with an alternative to it. Life gifting $10,000 per person per year to our son or something like that. Or just- let's say, investing it- lattering it- whatever- to throw off a similar income that the annuity would have provided at a later age.




I agree that you should be comfortable with their investment advice before doing anything.  I share your concerns with insurance annuities (taxes and high sales commissions) but annuities can work for some people, my 98 year old mother is a prime example.  She bought into a supplemental teacher's pension offered by the state and is still collecting after retiring 45 years ago.
 Of course an annuity would be a bad investment if one died a few years after buying it -  but maybe spouses can collect on annuities like a regular pension.


----------



## VacationForever (Mar 20, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> Yes. I know. I struggle with that inner voice inside me.
> 
> I am hoping he will come up with an alternative to it. Like gifting $10,000 per person per year to our son or something like that. Or just- let's say, investing it- laddering it- whatever- to throw off a similar income that the annuity would have provided at a later age.


You can gift $15K a year to your son, $30K between your husband and you.  But you have to ask yourself if you can afford to do that.  

Have you figured out your expense needs?  Will RMDs + SS be sufficient income to meet your expense needs?  You can always ladder bonds and cds although neither generate a whole lot of money unless you have lot of money / principal.


----------



## WinniWoman (Mar 20, 2019)

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/why-annuities-are-a-bad-idea-for-almost-everyone-2018-03-05


----------



## WinniWoman (Mar 20, 2019)

VacationForever said:


> You can gift $15K a year to your son, $30K between your husband and you.  But you have to ask yourself if you can afford to do that.
> 
> Have you figured out your expense needs?  Will RMDs + SS be sufficient income to meet your expense needs?  You can always ladder bonds and cds although neither generate a whole lot of money unless you have lot of money / principal.




I have to ask the CFP if the gifting thing could be a substitute for the annuity in terms of getting money out of an IRA. This I don't know and I don't know if we could afford it. I do know he is not big on worrying about our son- just our needs right now. Which is right.

We know our expenses will be the same as they are now, plus the expense of moving. The CFP is working on that now. I have to give him housing info., but we are not sure what we will be doing or where we will be going. I am figuring we will have to rent somewhere 1st after we sell the house. Then look to buy from there. When I speak to him I think he should just draw up the worst case scenario for housing to play it safe.

He wants us to live off our savings in our taxable accounts until we are 70 and then start SS then- plus the RMD's of course. which he wants to lower by doing the Roth conversions. That is why he was thinking of the annuity- to take money out of the IRA's as well to lower RMD's and also any Medicare premium increases that would result because of the RMD's.


----------



## Brett (Mar 20, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> https://www.marketwatch.com/story/why-annuities-are-a-bad-idea-for-almost-everyone-2018-03-05


_
"Annuities are such terrible investments that the minute the government passed a law specifying that financial professionals had to act in their clients best interest, *annuity sales fell off a cliff*."_

true, and then the DOL's "*fiduciary rule*" was cancelled with the new administration.    Insurance annuities became a best selling investment product last year (2018) according to the Wall St Journal because it gave salespeople the highest commission.


----------



## VacationForever (Mar 20, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> I have to ask the CFP if the gifting thing could be a substitute for the annuity in terms of getting money out of an IRA. This I don't know and I don't know if we could afford it. I do know he is not big on worrying about our son- just our needs right now. Which is right.
> 
> We know our expenses will be the same as they are now, plus the expense of moving. The CFP is working on that now. I have to give him housing info., but we are not sure what we will be doing or where we will be going. I am figuring we will have to rent somewhere 1st after we sell the house. Then look to buy from there. When I speak to him I think he should just draw up the worst case scenario for housing to play it safe.
> 
> He wants us to live off our savings in our taxable accounts until we are 70 and then start SS then- plus the RMD's of course. which he wants to lower by doing the Roth conversions. That is why he was thinking of the annuity- to take money out of the IRA's as well to lower RMD's and also any Medicare premium increases that would result because of the RMD's.


Taking money out of IRA is a taxable event, whether you move it to Roth or for gifting.

If he is worried about reducing RMDs in order to lower premium increases (IRMAA), which starts at 170K per year for a couple, then you are in a great shape financially.

Very few people buy QLAC just to avoid paying higher taxes due to RMD.  If that is the sole reason, then I would not want to do so either.  QLAC is really only for people who worry about running out of money in their old age.  If your projected SS + RMD indeed exceed 170K, you are very unlikely to run out of money.  You have done well!


----------



## VacationForever (Mar 20, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> https://www.marketwatch.com/story/why-annuities-are-a-bad-idea-for-almost-everyone-2018-03-05


For everyone of the article that argues against annuities, you will find one that tells you why it should be part of a person's investment portfolio but for only those who can afford it AND without a nice pension.  Our term annuities make up of 12% of our portfolio and fit into our retirement strategy.


----------



## WinniWoman (Mar 20, 2019)

VacationForever said:


> Taking money out of IRA is a taxable event, whether you move it to Roth or for gifting.
> 
> If he is worried about reducing RMDs in order to lower premium increases (IRMAA), which starts at 170K per year for a couple, then you are in a great shape financially.
> 
> Very few people buy QLAC just to avoid paying higher taxes due to RMD.  If that is the sole reason, then I would not want to do so either.  QLAC is really only for people who worry about running out of money in their old age.  If your projected SS + RMD indeed exceed 170K, you are very unlikely to run out of money.  You have done well!




We make nowhere near $170,000! Nor would we have that type of income in our 70's! Wow! I don't get it? My husband makes 5 figures. I am not even working.

Something seems not right here. He said he wants to keep our income under $78,000. I know he is also taking into consideration extra money we might need to withdraw to pay for a home because our home sale$ might not be enough.

I guess I will have a long conversation with him very soon. Why is everything so complicated?


----------



## VacationForever (Mar 20, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> We make nowhere near $170,000! Nor would we have that type of income in our 70's! Wow! I don't get it? My husband makes 5 figures. I am not even working.
> 
> Something seems not right here.


Then CFP should not even have talked about avoiding income-based Medicare premium increases as a result of higher RMDs. Income above $170K for a couple or $85K for a single person is the trigger for higher Medicare premiums.


----------



## WinniWoman (Mar 20, 2019)

VacationForever said:


> Then CFP should not even have talked about avoiding income-based Medicare premium increases as a result of higher RMDs. Income above $170K for a couple or $85K for a single person is the trigger for higher Medicare premiums.



I am going to question him on that. Thanks for your input on this. Very much appreciated. Even though we have hired a professional, I still am of the type that always is skeptical and has to analyze everything and aks questions. A pain in the ars, I know. All this so new to me.


----------



## bogey21 (Mar 20, 2019)

On this annuity thing.  I live in a CCRC where there are a lot of people (mostly widowed women between 85 and 100 years old) who have a lot of money and spend next to nothing paranoid that they will become destitute.  So what happens?  They miss out on things they would like to do and leave their money to their heirs many of whom don't even have the decency to visit them.  An annuity with part of their money would relieve them of their fear and allow them to better enjoy the time they have left on this planet...

George


----------



## WinniWoman (Mar 20, 2019)

VacationForever said:


> Taking money out of IRA is a taxable event, whether you move it to Roth or for gifting.
> 
> If he is worried about reducing RMDs in order to lower premium increases (IRMAA), which starts at 170K per year for a couple, then you are in a great shape financially.
> 
> Very few people buy QLAC just to avoid paying higher taxes due to RMD.  If that is the sole reason, then I would not want to do so either.  QLAC is really only for people who worry about running out of money in their old age.  If your projected SS + RMD indeed exceed 170K, you are very unlikely to run out of money.  You have done well!




He is thinking the annuity would be bought with money from the Traditional IRA- which can be done without paying taxes on the withdrawel until the payments from the annuity kick in- but no later than age 85. Another way to bring down the IRA RMD's, but eventually taxes will have to be paid on those withdrawals at some point.


----------



## WinniWoman (Mar 20, 2019)

bogey21 said:


> On this annuity thing.  I live in a CCRC where there are a lot of people (mostly widowed women between 85 and 100 years old) who have a lot of money and spend next to nothing paranoid that they will become destitute.  So what happens?  They miss out on things they would like to do and leave their money to their heirs many of whom don't even have the decency to visit them.  An annuity with part of their money would relieve them of their fear and allow them to better enjoy the time they have left on this planet...
> 
> George



Why do they worry? Didn't you say even if you run out of money they do not throw you out of there?


----------



## bogey21 (Mar 20, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> Why do they worry? Didn't you say even if you run out of money they do not throw you out of there?


You are 100% correct.  My only explanation is that someone else (probably their dearly departed husbands) handled the finances and they haven't a clue.  And trust me, this is a significant number of them...

George


----------



## VacationForever (Mar 20, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> He is thinking the annuity would be bought with money from the Traditional IRA- which can be done without paying taxes on the withdrawel until the payments from the annuity kick in- but no later than age 85. Another way to bring down the IRA RMD's, but eventually taxes will have to be paid on those withdrawals at some point.


Yes, and that is QLAC which I referred to.  It is designed to be bought with IRA money.  It does relieve immediate tax obligation for whatever percentage of the $130K (max) is subject to with RMD, but it should not be the primary reason for buying QLAC.


----------



## Brett (Mar 20, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> Why do they worry? Didn't you say even if you run out of money they do not throw you out of there?



When I researched retirement places for my mother they all required significant deposits based on age when you transitioned from 'independent' to 'assisted' and you had to provide documented monthly income.   They don't evict you if you can't pay, the monthly fees get deducted from the deposit.  They make sure the deposit will cover this future (potential) liability.  The deposit is cloaked in a lot of legalese that allows inheritors to get some of the money back if it's not used.


----------



## WinniWoman (Mar 20, 2019)

Brett said:


> When I researched retirement places for my mother they all required significant deposits based on age when you transitioned from 'independent' to 'assisted' and you had to provide documented monthly income.   They don't evict you if you can't pay, the monthly fees get deducted from the deposit.  They make sure the deposit will cover this future (potential) liability.  The deposit is cloaked in a lot of legalese that allows inheritors to get some of the money back if it's not used.



They are all different. We are going to look at one in May (the independent living cottages) and they only allow one year if your funds are depleted. They do have a benevolent fund for after that but you have to "qualify" and there are no guarantees you can stay there.

The buy in fee is not bad at all but the monthly fees are really high. Like $50,000 per year for the most expensive cottage! And then you still have to pay separately for assisted living should you need it and also for anything else extra you might need.

I am not even sure that part of the fee is deductible as a medical expense because of the way it is structured. I know George's is, but this one we are looking at is different. But I will surely ask.


----------



## rapmarks (Mar 20, 2019)

Just went to look at one Friday.  Very small quarters would be five thousand a month for independent living, then lots of fees added for assisted living, a base of $2500 added and then four hundred additional for each level of help, and that is for one person


----------



## WinniWoman (Mar 20, 2019)

rapmarks said:


> Just went to look at one Friday.  Very small quarters would be five thousand a month for independent living, then lots of fees added for assisted living, a base of $2500 added and then four hundred additional for each level of help, and that is for one person




They are going to put us up in a cottage for a couple of days and get the tour and all that good stuff. I have a hard time comprehending the affordability of it all over time- especially when you are talking about potentially 25 - 30 years or so.


----------



## bogey21 (Mar 20, 2019)

The point being made that "they are all different" is a valid one.  For example there is no requirement in my CCRC for an additional  deposit when one moves from Independent Living to Assisted Living and the only financial analysis is done before signing the original contract.  In addition our front end fee is never "tapped" to cover monthly expenses.  If you opt for the smallest fee when you sign your contact, it is totally non-refundable after 3 months (the trial period).  If you opt to pay a significantly higher front end fee, it is either 70%, 80% or 90% refundable to your heirs upon your death depending on the size of the front end fee.  Our monthly fees do go up (but not all that much) when you permanently transition from Independent to Assisted Living.  *Clearly when checking out CCRCs one better read and reread the contract before committing*...

The monthly fees at my CCRC vary based on the size of your unit and whether there is one or two of you.  The cheapest is about $2,600 for one person in a small one bedroom unit up to $10,000 or so per month for two people in a large 3,000 square foot unit.  The front end fee will vary from a low of around $200,000 (this is up from the $65,000 I paid when I moved in almost 20 years ago) to $1 million or so dollars for a super large unit with 80% or 90% refundable to your heirs upon your death.  *Again one better read and reread the contract before committing*...

Although my contract with a non-refundable front end fee provides that they will cover my expenses if I cannot pay I suspect (but don't know) that those with refundable front end fees would have them tapped for monthly fees advanced before they were distributed to heirs...

George


----------



## geekette (Mar 20, 2019)

Remaining skeptical is a great way to go.  Take in info, cogitate, concoct life scenarios, keep on learning.

I share your strong dislike for ins cos.  I want my money with me, maintaining control.  I planned to deplete taxable first, but my circumstances changed.  Whatever you do, keep an eye towards flexibility since none of us knows our futures.  I would sooner ladder cds than buy an annuity.

IRA > Roth...  I have many reasons to not do any converting.  I am not in a position for RMDs to somehow ruin my life with taxes and Medicare payments.  I am not going to be high enough income to fear tax man in any regard.  Finding other money to pay off conversion taxes is a huge issue for me, too.  Far better that I work longer or PT in retirement to keep contributing to a Roth outright.

There is much for you to consider, including that you have planned well and are already well-positioned for the retirement you want.  Keep on talking to the planners.  Ideas are always good and at the end of the process, you will have enough info to be comfortable with your path forward.  But you are a smart cookie to keep a wary eye lest some advice be seriously bad for you.

Thanks for sharing your journey.


----------



## WinniWoman (Mar 20, 2019)

bogey21 said:


> The point being made that "they are all different" is a valid one.  For example there is no requirement in my CCRC for an additional  deposit when one moves from Independent Living to Assisted Living and the only financial analysis is done before signing the original contract.  In addition our front end fee is never "tapped" to cover monthly expenses.  If you opt for the smallest fee when you sign your contact, it is totally non-refundable after 3 months (the trial period).  If you opt to pay a significantly higher front end fee, it is either 70%, 80% or 90% refundable to your heirs upon your death depending on the size of the front end fee.  Our monthly fees do go up (but not all that much) when you permanently transition from Independent to Assisted Living.  Clearly when checking out CCRCs one better read and reread the contract before committing...
> 
> George



Yes. For sure. A couple we looked at were like that.

The one we are looking at the fee is only refundable up until 6 months and that is it! There are no tiers of buy in fees. It is one fee and the only difference of the buy in fees is dependent on the cottage or apartment you choose and the monthly fees as well. They say to factor 3% in terms of increases- but that is on the high end.

There is another we might look at where the buy in fee is only like $6000 and you pay like $3500 per month for the cottage. It doesn't have the amenities the other one has. (like pools, gym, etc), and assisted living and other services would be extra of course. It is very small and in a very rural, northern area, but near a town we really like. 

Of course, there could be waiting lists for these as well.


----------



## WinniWoman (Mar 20, 2019)

geekette said:


> Remaining skeptical is a great way to go.  Take in info, cogitate, concoct life scenarios, keep on learning.
> 
> I share your strong dislike for ins cos.  I want my money with me, maintaining control.  I planned to deplete taxable first, but my circumstances changed.  Whatever you do, keep an eye towards flexibility since none of us knows our futures.  I would sooner ladder cds than buy an annuity.
> 
> ...




Yes- thanks. I hadn't planned on converting either. I still can't wrap my head around how it would all work. He is trying to save us taxes on our Social Security when we finally take it at age 70. As VacationForever stated, the Medicare penalty should not factor in our situation so I have to question him on that one.

From what I am gathering he is telling us to take money out of our taxable accounts (which ones, I am not sure yet) to pay our living expenses and then take the difference up to our income "threshold" out of the IRA and put it into the Roth. How we actually pay the taxes for both I don't understand. Scares the crap out of me!

All I keep saying to my husband is it must be so great for people with decent pensions to not have to worry about emptying their bank accounts to live on in retirement. I look at our taxable accounts and think- heck- in a couple of years doing this the accounts would be depleted and we would not even be 70 yet!

At least my wine fix will be taken care of with my $29 per month pension! LOL! I am going to need it!


----------



## bogey21 (Mar 20, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> They say to factor 3% in terms of increases- but that is on the high end.



That is pretty much what has happened to me, roughly a 3% increase in my monthly fee every year.  When I moved in 19 years ago my monthly fee was something like $1,550 per month.  Today it is $2,602.  Without doing the math I suspect that $1,500 compounded at a rate of 3% for 19 years would about equal the $2,602 I am now paying...

George


----------



## VacationForever (Mar 20, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> Yes. For sure. A couple we looked at were like that.
> 
> The one we are looking at the fee is only refundable up until 6 months and that is it! There are no tiers of buy in fees. It is one fee and the only difference of the buy in fees is dependent on the cottage or apartment you choose and the monthly fees as well. They say to factor 3% in terms of increases- but that is on the high end.
> 
> ...



Wherever you look at, you need to put it in the back of your mind that your location should not be wholly dependent on where your son is now, unless he is someone who does not like to venture out geographically.  People move with job opportunities.  You know your son best.


----------



## WinniWoman (Mar 20, 2019)

bogey21 said:


> That is pretty much what has happened to me, roughly a 3% increase in my monthly fee every year.  When I moved in 19 years ago my monthly fee was something like $1,550 per month.  Today it is $2,602.  Without doing the math I suspect that $1,500 compounded at a rate of 3% for 19 years would about equal the $2,602 I am now paying...
> 
> George




That's not bad. The one we are looking at- the most expensive cottage is $4500 per month! They vary- but the average is $3500-$4000 per month. And the apartments are similar. 

Buy in varies form like $65,000- $175,000. Not too bad compared to others we have seen.

For sure, living in our current home is much cheaper than this and a lot of other options we looked at in NH. But we do have to move. Whether it is there or somewhere else remains to be seen.


----------



## VacationForever (Mar 20, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> Yes- thanks. I hadn't planned on converting either. I still can't wrap my head around how it would all work. He is trying to save us taxes on our Social Security when we finally take it at age 70. As VacationForever stated, the Medicare penalty should not factor in our situation so I have to question him on that one.
> 
> From what I am gathering he is telling us to take money out of our taxable accounts (which ones, I am not sure yet) to pay our living expenses and then take the difference up to our income "threshold" out of the IRA and put it into the Roth. How we actually pay the taxes for both I don't understand. Scares the crap out of me!
> 
> ...



Did he suggest that you both take SS at 70 instead of one sooner while the other at 70 and why?  I find it hard to comprehend why he suggested that.  I would generally say whoever's SS is going to be higher at 70 be the one who takes at 70.  For the other to not take until 70 means there is less to live on while waiting for both to turn 70.  My money guy suggested that I take mine at 70 and I explained my decision to take at 62 is the one that makes most financial sense.  He ultimately agreed with me.  Most of the money / finance folks are just used to telling people to withdraw at 70 because you will otherwise be losing 8% growth per year.  There are several scenarios where it is not good advice.


----------



## WinniWoman (Mar 20, 2019)

VacationForever said:


> Wherever you look at, you need to put it in the back of your mind that your location should not be wholly dependent on where your son is now, unless he is someone who does not like to venture out geographically.  People move with job opportunities.  You know your son best.




Yes. For sure. This we are aware of. He is not one for change, but he is a chameleon so he can surprise us for all we know.

We are open to moving to other areas. We are starting with what we know and like. We also had joined The Free State Project in NH years ago (I won't get into that as it is political) so we had been so committed to moving there. But we also now understand it might not happen.

So we have other areas on our radar. Husband likes the idea of Nevada, so that is a big contender if NH does not work out. Certainly would be a major life change for us and very different from what we are used to. I actually mentioned Nevada to our son, as he travels to Las Vegas sometimes for work.

First thing he said was- "I would never move to a desert!" LOL! Then he said Henderson is so touristy and close to the Hoover Dam and all that! Ha! ha! Well- he has his opinion but he isn't us!

We don't like south, but would consider Tennessee if we had to- but we have never even been there. My husband always wanted to live in Wyoming but I axed that immediately.

So- who knows?


----------



## WinniWoman (Mar 20, 2019)

VacationForever said:


> Did he suggest that you both take SS at 70 instead of one sooner while the other at 70 and why?  I find it hard to comprehend why he suggested that.  I would generally say whoever's SS is going to be higher at 70 be the one who takes at 70.  For the other to not take until 70 means there is less to live on while waiting for both to turn 70.  My money guy suggested that I take mine at 70 and I explained my decision to take at 62 is the one that makes most financial sense.  He ultimately agreed with me.  Most of the money / finance folks are just used to telling people to withdraw at 70 because you will otherwise be losing 8% growth per year.  There are several scenarios where it is not good advice.




Wow. You think like me. Yes- I asked him and he said we should both wait until 70 because we have enough money to live on in the meantime. But I did a lot of research into this and used the FIRECALC tool and some other ones and they said I should be taking it right now and hubby waiting until age 70.


----------



## VacationForever (Mar 20, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> Wow. You think like me. Yes- I asked him and he said we should both wait until 70 because we have enough money to live on in the meantime. But I did a lot of research into this and used the FIRECALC tool and some other ones and they said I should be taking it right now and hubby waiting until age 70.


Not even counting loss of investment growth by drawing from your investments, the difference in taking at 62 vs. 70 is something like 80 years old for breakeven.  In other words, at 80 years old, you will start to "lose" by drawing at 62 instead of 70.  Then there is surviving spouse benefits.  The suriving spouse will continue to draw at the higher of the SS amount of the the two.  If your husband goes before 82, I think he is 2 years older than you(?), then you just take over his amount.  If he continues to live beyond 82, then yes, you would lose by drawing at 62.  But then you are leaving your investments untouched by the amount that you are drawing from 62 until 70.  That in itself will grow and has the opportunity to grow for 18 years... from your 62 to 80 years old, which is at the breakeven point.


----------



## SmithOp (Mar 21, 2019)

Agree, we took the lower one at 62 and waiting on the higher one until 70.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## WinniWoman (Mar 21, 2019)

VacationForever said:


> Not even counting loss of investment growth by drawing from your investments, the difference in taking at 62 vs. 70 is something like 80 years old for breakeven.  In other words, at 80 years old, you will start to "lose" by drawing at 62 instead of 70.  Then there is surviving spouse benefits.  The suriving spouse will continue to draw at the higher of the SS amount of the the two.  If your husband goes before 82, I think he is 2 years older than you(?), then you just take over his amount.  If he continues to live beyond 82, then yes, you would lose by drawing at 62.  But then you are leaving your investments untouched by the amount that you are drawing from 62 until 70.  That in itself will grow and has the opportunity to grow for 18 years... from your 62 to 80 years old, which is at the breakeven point.




One thing I do recall him saying at our first informal meeting last weekend- after my husband asked when _*he*_ could take SS- was that he could take it at 66 and would be ok, but it would be worth it to wait until age 70. Then I chimed in and asked about _*me* _taking mine and he said age 70 would be good because we could live on our savings until then.

I don't know if him recommending this has something to do with our taxes - the years before and after age 70- or what. But I will also bring this all up with him also.

Thanks for your input on this.  I will probably be one of his most difficult clients. LOL!


----------



## Sugarcubesea (Mar 21, 2019)

I'm deciding what funds to pick for my Roth IRA for 2018... For my Roth's, since it grows interest free, I'm liking VIGAX and VGSLX and evenly putting my $6,500 in for 2018...


----------



## WinniWoman (Mar 21, 2019)

Sugarcubesea said:


> I'm deciding what funds to pick for my Roth IRA for 2018... For my Roth's, since it grows interest free, I'm liking VIGAX and VGSLX and evenly putting my $6,500 in for 2018...




I am actually wondering whether we should just have like 3 index funds (stock, bond, international) in all our retirement and brokerage accounts, or just one retirement balanced fund, instead of the multitude of ones we currently have- most managed; some ETF's; some indexed.


----------



## penak (Mar 21, 2019)

Thanks for the article,very helpfull


----------



## rapmarks (Mar 21, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> They are going to put us up in a cottage for a couple of days and get the tour and all that good stuff. I have a hard time comprehending the affordability of it all over time- especially when you are talking about potentially 25 - 30 years or so.


Why are you considering that at your young age?


----------



## bogey21 (Mar 21, 2019)

rapmarks said:


> Why are you considering that at your young age?



The terms I got when I moved into my CCRC at age 65 were light years better than the terms now being offered.  Will that continue?  Who know but my suspicions are that it might...

And understand that while you are in Independent Living status you are free to do anything or go anyplace as you would if still living in a private residence.  All you do is tell them you will be gone, where and for how long, and lock your door.  They monitor your apartment and in my case even gave me a discount on my monthly fee because I wouldn't be eating at the CCRC...

George


----------



## rapmarks (Mar 21, 2019)

bogey21 said:


> The terms I got when I moved into my CCRC at age 65 were light years better than the terms now being offered.  Will that continue?  Who know but my suspicions are that it might...
> 
> And understand that while you are in Independent Living status you are free to do anything or go anyplace as you would if still living in a private residence.  All you do is tell them you will be gone, where and for how long, and lock your door.  They monitor your apartment and in my case even gave me a discount on my monthly fee because I wouldn't be eating at the CCRC...
> 
> George


Yes, but it is costing them fifty thousand a year in fees.  Move than a million dollars by the time they are 85, when they might start needing assistance.


----------



## VacationForever (Mar 21, 2019)

I think in Mary Ann's case, they are going to sell their home regardless of the next residence.  If they ultimately want to live in a CCRC, then it will be one move as opposed to 2 moves.

For my husband and I, we simply do not want to move to a CCRC, unless one needs 24-hr skilled nursing care (LVN or RN care) or has dementia, becomes combative and posts a risk to others.  Having worked in the elder industry for more than 8 years, there is no better place than aging in place, i.e. at home.  No CCRC or any sort of assisted living place for us. If we need home care, we will have caregivers into our home, on our terms and not by CCRC rules.  We live in a single level condo on the penthouse floor and by design there is not a single step from the garage into each home.  We don't plan on moving again, except if my husband goes before me, then we will have a hard decision to make as to whether I move back to California to be with my son or if I can convince him to move out here.


----------



## WinniWoman (Mar 21, 2019)

rapmarks said:


> Yes, but it is costing them fifty thousand a year in fees.  Move than a million dollars by the time they are 85, when they might start needing assistance.



Yes. Exactly right. Crazy expensive. We said the same thing.

But we are considering all options. Ideally it would be great for this to be our last move anywhere. Hubby will be 66 next year and by the time the house sells 67. I mean- 10 years goes fast. Before you know it you are just about 80. Not that I’m rushing it!

 We are also going to look at a small one where the buy in fee is only $8500 and $3100 per month to live in a cottage. Everything- utilities, cable, WiFi, etc included. A simple type plan. Doesn’t have all the amenities like the other one in so far as a gym and pools and so forth. But it is right outside a small town in north country that we like. And affordable. 

I have spoken to realtors as well to be on the lookout for something in a 55+ community also. We might revisit one that is 62+ this summer where they maintain the exterior and interior of the house. It’s a refundable buy in rather than a purchase with a monthly fee. Last time there they said it was like $1000 per month. It is only independent living. 

Another option- just rent something indefinitely and call it a day.

Sigh...


----------



## WinniWoman (Mar 21, 2019)

VacationForever said:


> I think in Mary Ann's case, they are going to sell their home regardless of the next residence.  If they ultimately want to live in a CCRC, then it will be one move as opposed to 2 moves.
> 
> For my husband and I, we simply do not want to move to a CCRC, unless one needs 24-hr skilled nursing care (LVN or RN care) or has dementia, becomes combative and posts a risk to others.  Having worked in the elder industry for more than 8 years, there is no better place than aging in place at home.  No CCRC or any sort of assisted living place for us. If we need home care, we will have caregivers into our home, on our terms and not by CCRC rules.  We live in a single level condo on the penthouse floor and by design there is not a single step from the garage into each home.  We don't plan on moving again, except if my husband goes before me, then we will have a hard decision to make as to whether I move back to California to be with my son or if I can convince him to move out here.




I totally get it. But one thing I will say and I worked most of my career in the home health care industry. It sucks! People are not reliable. They steal. There is abuse. Many patients simply can’t be managed at home despite what their family thinks. Working all the years I did in the industry I can say I truly hate it. And we had help come in for my mom before assisted living but it was minimally ideal.

The concept is great but the reality is something different many times.

Sure, there are exceptions if you get lucky. Also- it is very expensive as well.

Not that institutional care is any better. Just don’t get old or sick.


----------



## VacationForever (Mar 21, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> I totally get it. But one thing I will say and I worked most of my career in the home health care industry. It sucks! People are not reliable. They steal. There is abuse. Many patients simply can’t be managed at home despite what their family thinks. Working all the years I did in the industry I can say I truly hate it. And we had help come in for my mom before assisted living but it was minimally ideal.
> 
> The concept is great but the reality is something different many times.
> 
> ...


Staying in a CCRC can has its own slew of issues: Norovirus, MRSA etc. Poor care when you need it, because no one is watching.  Predictable food week after week. If you buy into it you are pretty much at their mercy.  Yeah, you can complain to an ombudsman but then you get to watch your back that they will get back at you.  We have seen them all.  It does not work for us.


----------



## WinniWoman (Mar 21, 2019)

VacationForever said:


> Staying in a CCRC can has its own slew of issues: Norovirus, MRSA etc. Poor care because no one is watching.  Predictable food week after week. If you buy into it you are pretty much at their mercy.  Yeah, you can complain to an ombudsman but then you got to watch your back that they will get back at you.  We have seen them all.  It does not work for us.




Oh, I believe it for sure.

The ones we are looking at- you are not required to eat there- that is a separate fee. If you want assisted living- that is a separate fee. Everything is a separate fee.

Different from what George has. And there are only 10 skilled nursing visits included in the buy in fee so the year you buy in when you do your taxes you can only deduct the value of those at the time for medical expenses one time.

Well- we are getting free room and board out if the visit for 2 nights and then will head up to the small one and from there I booked a night at our timeshare resort in Lincoln as VRI was having a rental sale. Couldn't get a decent place in our son's town due to college graduation going on. Will get to see our son briefly.

Hey, it's a 4 day mini vacation.

The way I see it is we will pretty much know better whether or not it is for us. Affording it- that's a whole 'nother story. We have visited others. One we did not like because meals were required and a few other inconvenient factors. We did like one in Wolfeboro, but the main facility is in Laconia and we weren't crazy about that area or the facility.


----------



## VacationForever (Mar 21, 2019)

mpumilia said:


> Oh, I believe it for sure.
> 
> The ones we are looking at- you are not required to eat there- that is a separate fee. If you want assisted living- that is a separate fee. Everything is a separate fee.
> 
> ...


You are both young and healthy and I feel that you are better off moving into a condo.  It is a much cheaper and a more flexible option.  Unless you get a deal like George's, there is no upside to moving to a CCRC where you have to pay alot more when your level of care/needs go up.


----------



## WinniWoman (Mar 21, 2019)

VacationForever said:


> You are both young and healthy and I feel that you are better off moving into a condo.  It is a much cheaper and a more flexible option.  Unless you get a deal like George's, there is no upside to moving to a CCRC where you have to pay alot more when your level of care/needs go up.




Yes. I definitely get that. We would love to get a condo or a small one level house that is maintained by the community- we just want it to be in a 55+ community or something more like that-like a resort-like where you live- no rif raf, etc. Has to have a garage for hubby. Activities. That is what we are still aiming for. Not easy to find in NH.

This is why we are exploring everything now because once the house goes up for sale we have to make a decision - are we going to go to NH or go out West or wherever? Go into a CCRC or just get a condo? Or just rent something temporarily or indefinitely? And where?

Our plan has to be more concrete. We want to leave no stone unturned. We have heard of several people who have moved to where they thought they wanted to in retirement only to move again- and sometimes once again from that move because they did not like it.


----------



## rapmarks (Mar 21, 2019)

VacationForever said:


> You are both young and healthy and I feel that you are better off moving into a condo.  It is a much cheaper and a more flexible option.  Unless you get a deal like George's, there is no upside to moving to a CCRC where you have to pay alot more when your level of care/needs go up.


Totally agree.   Will stay in my home as long as we can.  When my aunts moved to assisted living, costs kept going up, personnel changed, they were not even allowed to keep a bottle of moisturizer in the room.  
I will never forget going out to Tucson to move my aunt to hospice.  I started going through her room and the floor supervisor, who she disliked, and the nurse stopped in the doorway and reprimanded me that we could not move out without thirtydays notice.  Real nice empathetic people, NOT.  I said if she’s dead she doesn’t have to give notice.  Unfortunately my other aunt had to stay there until she died.  And by the way, when they die, you will pay that daily fee until the day everything is removed from the apartment and most charities won’t take their things and aren’t even allowed in the building


----------



## bogey21 (Mar 21, 2019)

rapmarks said:


> Yes, but it is costing them fifty thousand a year in fees.  Move than a million dollars by the time they are 85, when they might start needing assistance.



Understand that I am divorced and thus a party of one but....my monthly CCRC fee is $2,602 and my Social Security is a touch over $1,600.  This means that I only have to chip in $12,000 out of pocket annually.  And remember that my monthly CCRC fee includes food and utilities.  Thus the real comparison is rent for a similar apartment plus the cost of food and utilities.  More importantly I am set up with a guaranteed significantly discounted rate for Assisted Living if I ever need it...

The deals are out there.  Finding the right one just takes work.  It took me 5 years.  You just have to dig it out.  Before choosing my CCRC I visited somewhere between 8 and 10 CCRCs in places as diverse as Hilton Head, SC and Baton Rouge, LA before settling on my CCRC in Fort Worth, TX...

George


----------



## WinniWoman (Mar 21, 2019)

bogey21 said:


> Understand that I am divorced and thus a party of one but....my monthly CCRC fee is $2,602 and my Social Security is a touch over $1,600.  This means that I only have to chip in $12,000 out of pocket annually.  And remember that my monthly CCRC fee includes food and utilities.  Thus the real comparison is rent for a similar apartment plus the cost of food and utilities.  More importantly I am set up with a guaranteed significantly discounted rate for Assisted Living if I ever need it...
> 
> The deals are out there.  Finding the right one just takes work.  It took me 5 years.  You just have to dig it out.  Before choosing my CCRC I visited somewhere between 8 and 10 CCRCs in places as diverse as Hilton Head, SC and Baton Rouge, LA before settling on my CCRC in Fort Worth, TX...
> 
> George




You got a great deal, George!  Just for an FYI- the fee I stated was the most expensive. This one CCRC does have less expensive buy in fees and monthly fees depending on what you want to live in. But the monthly fees are still high- most for what we would want are like $3500. There are some under $3000.  But- food not included.


----------



## rapmarks (Mar 21, 2019)

Yes he did get a great deal, and believe me we started looking in 1995 for my mother in law, all through the oughties for my aunts, then for my mother.  There are places you wouldn’t want to be in too.  Someone told me to look in the new ones, the people in them won’t be as old. I would say when we went to the new, upscale one with independent and up, one out of three patients was ambulatory.  
Maryann, you said ten years will go by in a snap.  It won’t if you are stuck in a place with no amenities and no people with common interests,  it will go by real slow.


----------



## WinniWoman (Mar 21, 2019)

rapmarks said:


> Yes he did get a great deal, and believe me we started looking in 1995 for my mother in law, all through the oughties for my aunts, then for my mother.  There are places you wouldn’t want to be in too.  Someone told me to look in the new ones, the people in them won’t be as old. I would say when we went to the new, upscale one with independent and up, one out of three patients was ambulatory.
> Maryann, you said ten years will go by in a snap.  It won’t if you are stuck in a place with no amenities and no people with common interests,  it will go by real slow.




Oh- I know that. The bigger one we are looking at has all the amenities. The small one, not so much, but does have activities. One is in the capital of the state and the other is 10 minutes from a town we really like.

We are looking at independent living homes. You have to be healthy to go into those. Both places are new/newer.
I have been around elderly people all my life- in home care where I spent most of my career. Get along great with them and find them more genuine and easy to talk to. My best friend is actually 84 and her husband is 88! LOL!

Anyway, of course, we would like to be around people with common interests. It would be preferable they would be closer in age to us. But- again- we are open to different living arrangements. If we go and hate these places- ok- so now we know. We can cross them off the list and move on.

BTW- I also placed my mom in an expensive, assisted living facility and as beautiful as it was, it was still- well- an assisted living facility. I get it. I have worked in healthcare all my life and I have seen it all. So I am not naive going into this.

I really hope to win a million dollars playing a scratch off and buy a gorgeous condo on a lake up there! LOL!


----------

