i just looked at my 401K.
Does this make you feel better?
Median 401k amounts by age group
20s - $29k
30s - $70k
40s - $151k
50s - $247k
60s - $209k
Last edited:
OT Retirement
- Thread starter TampaBaySkers
- Start date
Does this make you feel better?
Median 401k amounts by age group
20s - $29k
30s - $70k
40s - $151k
50s - $247k
60s - $209k
I've got about 10 years left. 59 and a half, I'm selling my house cashing out my 401k. Selling my gold and silver and headed to the beaches of Thailand. You can live like a king over there for way cheaper than the good old US of Inflation. A brand-new house over there for 80k. with a pool. Good luck finding a house in this country for 80k that isn't in a crack neighborhood or on fire.
Last edited:
Just another couple up the rungs to becoming a totalitarian socialist country. High earners already are paying a 35% income tax rate on their last dollars. In my case as a self employed person the federal government already takes over 50% of the next dollars I make. 😕. 35% bracket plus 15.3% self employment tax Yeah I know you don’t feel sorry for me but damn that’s confiscatory.
It doesn't. I'll say I have other retirement besides my 401K but together I'm probably still behind. I'm 36.
Yup. Dual citizenship. Not a fan of the way this country is trending. Been to Phuket and Pattaya before. Loved it. The USD goes a long long way over there compared to the skyrocketing inflation going on here. 1,400 a month times 12 is about 17k a year. 10 years is 170k. 20 years 340k. Don't need to be a millionaire to live there.
Last edited:
Can we at least all agree that Phuket is the best named retirement location ever?
I am behind, I know it. Trying to do some forms of catching up.
I will have to wait for some inheritance later on to help make up some of the gap.
With that said, I have a retired friend who lives just off SS and honestly, he is totally comfortable with it.
Not yet. The only thing about buying a house over there you don't own the land it's built on. You have to marry a local to own it so I'll probably do the condo.
Buying Property in Thailand: A Straight-Talking Guide
1. Can I Buy a House in Thailand?
Yes, but you can't own the land it's on. The building structure can be legally owned and registered in your name.2. I've heard that if you're married to a Thai you can buy land?
True. But you can't register it in your name and you have to waive your rights to the property.Foreign nationals cannot own freehold land. A freehold land title must be registered in a Thai person's name or a company name.
Good question. I met a guy from England who got divorced. Moved to Pattaya, bought a bar for dirt cheap and married a smoking hot Thai girl. Told me it was the best decision he ever made. All he does is drink and party and hang out at the beaches and pools.
Yeah, I usually fast forward through the first part of that movie
Love for us Farangs.Yeah, I usually fast forward through the first part of that movie
What is a Farang? | ThingsAsian
Sometimes you can learn most about a people by studying how it views other peoples. In Thailand, the most common and prominent visitors from outer space are the farang s, a versatile term that may...
thingsasian.com
Lots of interesting answer in here. My suggestion to you is to visit a few Financial planners ( all must be fiduciary’s) have them evaluate your situation . They will run a Monte Carlo , which will give a probability of success given your situation.
I’m not suggesting you invest with them just get there opinion of your situation.
Next , if they give you a thumbs up , are you mentally prepared to retire? Believe you me it’s a mental hurdle for most to deal with the first 6-12 months . I’m serious , you life changes completely . Some don’t retire well others do .
I suggest retiring to something , ask yourself what are you going to do? You can’t travel all the time .
I'm certainly no social security expert. But the way I thought it was set up (and sold to Congress and survived through the Supreme Court) was that it is a "voluntary" insurance program. The way the insurance works is your benefit is based on what you put in. The program is already "means tested" because your benefit is not proportional to what you put in. Lower wage earners get back a larger precent of what they put in and higher earners get back a smaller percent of what they put in. BUT...your benefit is a percentage of what you put in. The earnings cap is in place so more fortunate people only pay for the "insurance" benefit that is the maximum given (currently $3822 at age 67). Removing the earnings cap (currently $168,600) means high earners no longer pay for their "insurance", they also pay for other people's insurance. It would be like if Flo at Progressive doubled your car insurance so people unable to afford auto insurance could have free insurance. If the government mandated Progressive to tax insured to pay other people's insurance, you would no longer be paying a premium for insurance, you would be paying a premium for insurance, plus money for "assistance" or "welfare" or whatever you want to call it. So removing the earnings cap means social security transitions from an insurance program to a welfare program unless you pay high earners significantly more benefits, which defeats the purpose of removing the cap. It is admittedly all a matter of semantics starting with SS being "voluntary", but welfare is welfare IMO.
Makes me feel great. I'm barely 40 and above the 50s group.
Ok great, but now here are the averages. I have work to do …
Average (mean) 401k amounts by age group
20s - $74k
30s - $160k
40s - $344K
50s - $558K
60s - $555k
Doesn't look as good but I have over 8 years and I'm nearly at the 40s mark. Plus I feel like a lot of people don't have a 401k and a Roth. I feel great about my overall retirement if 62 was my goal. I feel good with 58 - 60 as my goal.
I see your point, and I'm no expert on SS either, just offering my opinions Husker. If the object is for the system to continue to function, obviously things have to change or those who paid in for many years will be shit out of luck someday. The system could go for some improvements in a variety of ways. Personally, it doesn't affect my wife or I so, I can be pretty liberal when it comes to other peoples' money. LOL
As far as the Flo analogy, I've had homeowners insurance for 40 years and never had a claim, yet my insurance goes up 15-17% every year. Of course, I'm payng for those who do file claims, but not for those who aren't insured, which would really piss me off.
Same with our auto insurance, I've driven 54 years and my wife has driven for 51 years, neither have ever had a moving violation or accident, yet that goes up every year too. It doesn't make any difference if we "bundle" because my homeowners is good for homeowners, but not competitive on auto, conversely with my auto policy.
Everywhere you look its a screwed up system.
My wife and I retired and have had zero issues. I do agree, retiring can be a real challenge for some people.
There is no way the average fiddy sumthin y/o has a cool half mil in retirement savings. Not buying that.
dingle, quit whining and take one for the team. Just kidding.
I dont know enough about the tax system, but I've always felt those that are self-employed and paying 2X's the rate for self employment tax was unfair. At a minimum, that additional 7.65% should be a tax write off. At a minimum that puts them in the same category as regular employees.
Or they could consider reinstitution the Income Averaging like they did back before Reagan came into office. Plus, as you recall at that same time they began to phase out interest paid till it vanished a few years later. Those were big money saving items for the average Joe's when I used to help friends with their taxes.
Nowadays, who wouldn't like their interest (not including mortgage insurance here) written off? Many, many people pay a ton of interest of different type loans, and that money would likely go right into the system anyhow.
Off topic here, but I'm shocked the US government didn't make those who had their student loans forgiven to pay taxes on the forgiven amount, the same way as when someone reached a lower agreement with a credit card company.
Everywhere you look, the system takes its victims to the cleaners with no voice in the matter.
That’s why averages aren’t a great measure. High earners sku the numbers. Median is more in-line with the average American.
100 people in room. 99 have $1, 1 person has a $1,000. Median = $1, average = $10.99.
High earners don’t skew this since there’s an annual cap on 401k contributions
People with early foresight & financial discipline skew it
You don’t have to net a ton to max out your 401k
You just have to make it a priority
You can still income average if you file schedule F but I’ve yet to see any benefit in doing that. The issue for us is that as a 2 earner house hold anything extra either of us make is in that upper bracket. People who think high earners aren’t paying their fair share have no f’n clue. On top of that the property tax limit on schedule A that they put on bites is in the ass because of the inflation in property taxes. It SHOULD be a tax credit to be fair. I’m confident that when you add in all the property taxes, vehicle taxes, sales tax, excise tax, gas tax, cell phone “fees”, etc lots of people pay in excess of 40% of their income in tax and don’t even realize it.
The rich pay for literally everything in the US
I don’t think anyone should pay taxes (or be allowed to vote) until they’re clearing $60k/year
The U.S. HAS to do this. Chinese shell buyers are buying up huge amounts of farmland in the U.S.
A washing machine in the kitchen? My wife would be so efficient 🤣
They always get angry when they are loading the dishwasher and you start trying to get some. Im trying to put a load in the dishwasher she says. Well, what do you think im trying to do?😍😂
Some posts have discussed teacher retirement options.
If you live in Kansas and relatively close to the state border…quite a few teachers retire from Kansas and go to Missouri to teach and get vested in their retirement system by teaching 5 years. Missouri is not a social security state for full time educators so a higher percentage is placed in the Missouri pension plan.
I know quite a few people that have retired in Kansas and do not take the 100% pension amount because they want to support a significant other when they die.
There are different survivorship options but many take the 100% survivorship option so their wife or husband has a pension for their rest of their life. The survivorship options pay out a smaller amount but it can make sense depending on the situation. In this example…once the survivor passes away then the pension ends.
If you live in Kansas and relatively close to the state border…quite a few teachers retire from Kansas and go to Missouri to teach and get vested in their retirement system by teaching 5 years. Missouri is not a social security state for full time educators so a higher percentage is placed in the Missouri pension plan.
I know quite a few people that have retired in Kansas and do not take the 100% pension amount because they want to support a significant other when they die.
There are different survivorship options but many take the 100% survivorship option so their wife or husband has a pension for their rest of their life. The survivorship options pay out a smaller amount but it can make sense depending on the situation. In this example…once the survivor passes away then the pension ends.
Pretty much same as Nebraska. It’s a risky move to take it all and then die a few years later to leave your spouse nothing, but on the flip side my grandmother is a former teacher who retired at 61 and is still going at 92, she’s gotten waaaaaay more than she ever contributed to the pension.
I was probably 5 years in before I was truly maxing out my 401k. With that said - year one I chose to buy a motorcycle. Year two I bought another and year 3 bought a new to me car. I was probably putting 15% of my income which wasn’t enough to max out. As I became more financially aware it became a priority (motorcycles less so
.
