Debt is awesome when inflation runs hot.

The increasing prices have impacted my plan to retire at 62, work part-time, and save for the future. I'm concerned about whether those who navigated the 2008 financial crisis had an easier time than I am currently experiencing. The combination of stock market volatility and a decrease in income is causing anxiety about whether I'll have sufficient funds for retirement.

This is precisely why I like having a portfolio coach guide my day-to-day market decisions: with their extensive knowledge of going long and short at the same time, using risk for its asymmetrical upside and laying it off as a hedge against the inevitable downward turns, their skillset makes it nearly impossible for them to underperform. I've been utilizing a portfolio coach for more than two years, and I've made over $800,000.

Mind if I ask you to recommend this particular coach to you using their service?

Leticia Zavala Perkins, a highly respected figure in her field. I suggest delving deeper into her credentials, as she possesses extensive experience and serves as a valuable resource for individuals seeking guidance in navigating the financial market.

Thank you for the lead. I searched her up, and I have sent her an email. I hope she gets back to me soon.

Well said, but likely the "problem" for the minority (us too). Most who make plenty are quite aware the guidelines don't fit them that well. We're saving 60+% and the guidelines say we're average savers, on track but meh....lol. When we use our expenses instead of income, well, we're more than comfy, could have stopped working years ago. Always makes me laugh at the "Ignorance is bliss" expression. Nope, ignorance kills. Most would drop dead from shock if they found out they worked a decade longer than they needed to!

@@dstevens518 I think it depends on your situation, if you like your job, and the other part is these averages can't predict if you die of a heart attack at 68 vs if you live with reasonably good health til 98. My grandmother is about to turn 88, my grandfather died 10 years ago, she did not think she would live as long as she has with full mobility and mental acuity. For a lot of people, if they had average income and investments, living too long means not having saved nearly enough money. I think overall these types of videos should be regarded as a blueprint for financial beginners. It doesn't get into the upward revision Fidelity made earlier this year, that millennials and Gen Z need to invest ~30% of their income because the expected annual rate of return is going to be a lot lower for them, since their 20s-40s won't have IBM and Apple invented during their primary working years. It doesn't deal with what happens if you have a market crash during retirement in which you have to cash out a lot more shares to fund expenses, which defeats the purpose of living off of the investment returns. It doesn't get into different asset classes and the fact that "savings" isn't really savings unless it's actual savings, it's speculative investment.

it's not a flaw. It's using an xfactor of your gross income based on savings rate and average return on investment. That should yield a nest egg that allows for 40-60% of your retirement income need. Retirement income isn't intended to match your active working year income, unless you are planning on needing the same amount of income in retirement as you did in active work years. Of course, then, these figures wouldn't match.

I fully agree. It never makes sense to me that they keep using your salary amount and not your expenses.

Nobody ever said that all of your “retirement savings” need to be in “retirement accounts”. If you’ve maxed out your 401k and IRA for the year, just save in a regular taxable account.

Thanks for watching!

Enjoy the cruise!

you probably ought to actually read what they are saying rather than just the headline. They are in fact all talking about expenses. How you generate income in retirement is not the same as how you generate income during your active years. Your accumulation phase during active working years talks into account your income and your savings rate to afford your retirement income needs. The models assume your expenses are lower in retirement. Perhaps instead of wasting needless energy getting WAAAAAAAAYYYYY bent over headline, you might want to actually read what is being proposed. You can say you retired at 52 and going on a 24 day cruise in 2 weeks all you want to justify or bolster your argument, but that means you are giving us a headline for us to assume things about you the same as you are assuming about these pundit headlines. Everyeone is more than happy if you are comfortable in retirement.

@@hanwagu9967 LOL

It's in financial institutions best interest to keep you invested in the market's cuz their 100% guaranteed their fat commissions and fee's regardless of how the markets perform ... Just remember, it's your hard earned money 100% capital, at 100% risk for 30% of the profits, it's not their money, there at no risk for 70% of the profits. This is why owner's of financial institutions like fidelity have a net individual worth of $30 billion, and the millions of investors (customers) are barley scraping by. I mentioned fidelity cuz this video gave examples from fidelity, and remember fidelity is one of the better financial institutions, as the others Luke Prudential, black rock etc their fees are totally outrageous. Manage your money yourself, don't pay outrageous fees like 1% as that 1% is closer to 2% with BS hidden baked in fees, plus the outrageous fund fees, these fee's will erode your profits enomorous over a decade, 2 decades etc Pay yourself, by not paying mange fees, don't invest in any fund with an expense ratio that exceeds .35%

Thanks Phil!! 😊

4 ads seems like A LOT! I am definitely not placing 4 in there - I select to place 1-2 per video - but KZfaq has the final say!

@@ErinTalksMoney either way, you’re doing great! Keep it up Erin!

I've assumed it is whatever salary you have at that age, not starting salary

My guess would be your salary at that time because you likely inflated your lifestyle along with a lot of that salary increase

I’ve thought of it as 10x the expenses I expect to have in retirement, in current year dollars.

⁠​⁠@@NotThatKrakenthat’s also a way to think about it but you may also miss out on some expenses that way like not working in replacement cars, home maintenance, healthcare, etc. If you account for everything then it is a good benchmark.

I'd be a genius, my starting salary was $2.35/ hr.!

I haven’t but I was just told that May is military appreciation month…. so I will be putting out a couple videos during that month. It gives me a bit deadline that I have to stick to. 😊

there is no such thing as a US military pension.🤣

Caleb provides idiotic advice. TMG are just out to sell you on their "program." You need to go to the source material. For Fidelity, it uses its target date fund asset allocation to determine asset growth to determine the mulltiplier.

these methods aren't using salary as a proxy for expenses. Where do people come up with this assumption? TMND flaw is using net worth.

🤣 I invest with Fidelity which BTW is owned largely by Communist Chinese. Fidelity put my cash in bank of Hong Kong. See twenty-five companies people believe are American owned.

Thank you!! 🙏

I can't find you on Patreon.

I don’t have a Payreon at this time 😊 maybe one day

We'll. I've been listening to you for years. I'll start "tipping" you after every video. Just curious: are Patreon's terms unappealing? I'd assume your channel would do well...

Taxes and insurance don’t exactly go away in retirement.

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/Zrl9Zspztbmqf5c.html

agreed. The Fidelity multiplier assumes 45% of your retirement income needs will come from your investments, so swapping out multiplier from income to expenses would alter the math.

hogwash! it is not very difficult to overcome low earnings. People simply make the choice not to improve their situation. My dad worked two jobs and my mom worked one job and one part time over the summer to improve their situation when I was growing up.

It's called a budget. Divide the savings into categories. This much for you 401k, that much for home upgrade, then what's left over put the rest as an individual Ira account. It's that's easy, each year.

@@kevinacker9843 Is it better to save in high interest savings or put it into a brokerage, or is it really how people feel is the best way? Thanks!

Agreed. My income has gone up so much that even if I saved 100% of my income in my 20s, the stupid MND formula would call me an undersaver because it uses current salary x age instead of current expenses x age

Not all companies do match. For example my company does match but max at 3%. My wife's company is doing 5% but prior years it was up to 8%. Each company is different so you do not include the matching in your savings. It's your own % and that's it.

Surprised people make surprising conclusions about something they haven't actually read. You are correct that over time return on investment should surpass and comprise more of your nest egg value than contributions; however, the Fidelity model doesn't assume constant earnings from 30s to 50s. You don't know what you don't know, and you don't know what you are talking about since you didn't actually reaad Fidelity's methodology.

of all the formulas the millionaire next door one is the most flawed. First, it doesn't actually attempt to calculate your nest egg need for retirement. Second, the formula spits out accumulator of wealth value based off of the millionaire next door sample data. Third, net worth value is heavily skewed in the millionaire next door, because it treats businesses the same as individual and treats whether you have $800k worth of beanie babies the same as $800k of investable assets. As far as income as multiplier, you along with so many other people on here don't actually read the methodology or misinterpret what is being presented. Expenses are the target for the multiplier formulas using percent of income to yield 40-60% of retirement income need. retirement income is the same same as retirement expenses.

@@hanwagu9967No worries, I don't put any amount of faith or value in a little calculation like this. It's just a fun little thing to do to see what the result will be and it's something to chat about. Our financial plan, which I have put more work into, shows a post retirement expenses of a certain amount a month after taxes (pretty much what we're living on now), and between retirement investments and the brokerage account we're good to pull out a fair bit more than that - and that's ignoring any income from social security or from rental on farmland we own. And it's also considering a pessimistic rate of return on investments and inflation. Add those other income sources in and it looks even better.

I’m not judging your personal experience, but it hits me as though did/ interesting that you don’t have control of your income. My income has increased every year of my life and I can identify steps I’ve taken to make that the case. That’s not a brag but sharing my experience. I’m nearing 50, so it’s been sustained for quite a while. I wouldn’t take your statement as an absolute that applies to everyone.

wealth is not the same as savings.

no, they assume income escalation. The calculations can't make you feel anything: your feelings are a you problem.

@@hanwagu9967jesus christ dude take a day off the internet

@@adamp6320 seems you may want to take your own advice...better yet: get a rubber ball and squeeze it to relieve your pent up emotions. Seems if you dislike my being on the internet you have an obvious you problem.

You aren’t wrong, but you also aren’t really helpful with the comment. (I have a pension as well.) Since you don’t want to become someone complaining about living on a fixed income, you should still run some numbers about your expected retirement expenses and develop a suitable investment plan.

I hope it goes okay for you. True that other variables such as job loss, divorce, fraud and illness, even aging parents can wreak havoc on our best made plans.

BMWs were 4th. Stop Acting Rich and TMND are both flawed because they use net worth millionaires. Someone with a business asset value making them a millionaire and earning only $13.5k/yr income (averaage self-employed) may be a net worth millionaire but of course aren't going to be able to afford even mid-cost cars.

and yet all the millionaires I know drive porsches, range rovers, and teslas. Millionaires are not that uncommon anymore thanks to inflation either

Egad, use expenses, not income. Things become much clearer then. You'll find all those raises just mean you're getting to FI faster, and that produces ELATION, not confusion and frustration....

If your expenses stay the same at $100K income level as it did with a $50K income use the $50k numbers. If your cost of living creeps up then you need to use the new numbers.

@@dstevens518 that's not how the math and methodology works.

the multipliers assume salary escalation and savings contributions over time. For fidelity multiplier, if you are 30 with $50k income, then their formula is for you to have $50k saved at 30. When you are 60 with $100k income, then their formula says you need $800k saved at 60.

the guidelines does, that is why the xfactor changes as you get older. Yes, as time goes on, a greater portion of your portfolio return comes from gains rather than contributions.