<p>The fidelity numbers will work for some people… Those that have a large proportion of their income in ss and or pensions. </p>
<p>The fidelity numbers will also work for those with large incomes that dont need that kind of income to retire…</p>
<p>
Since they have no idea what inflation will be in the future, I don’t see how they could be anything but current dollars.</p>
<p>The first estimate assumes you will make as much in the future as you put in for this year. If you want to stop working at some other age than when you can collect, you have to add that later.</p>
<p>I played around a little bit, every year you stop working before you start to collect lowers your benefit by 1.1-1.5% per year. So if you stop at 55, and collect at 62, your benefit will be about 8 or 9% less than if you work until 62. At least, that’s how my numbers worked out.</p>
<p>I think social security counts 35 years, as long as you get 35 years, you will be ok. I started working a lot younger so I have 35 years by the time I quit.</p>
<p>So the SS calculator uses current dollars. I have to go back to the calculator. Maybe at 3 AM.</p>
<p>I think they take your highest 35 years. If I stopped working at 55, it would be counting the years from 20-22 when I wasn’t making very much.</p>
<p><a href=“How is Social Security Calculated? — Oblivious Investor”>http://www.obliviousinvestor.com/how-social-security-benefits-are-calculated/</a></p>
<p>I count my teenage working years, not much but at least there are not zeros.</p>
<p>
Sort of. My Dad is a member of the “why spend $50 when I can make my life, my spouse’s life, and my kid’s lives miserable but I saved $50 club”. He begrudgingly takes his required distributions from his retirement accounts … does not spend any of the money … and invests it in non sheltered investments.</p>
<p>If that is what makes your dad happy, why not? </p>
<p>Well, maybe because others have to take up the slack? Dad could hire help to change his diapers but instead he is saving money and let free help take care of him? Or he manages family finance and refuses to spend money on what others need? </p>
<p>Looking for opinions on international index funds – especially from my fellow Vanguard-lovers. What is your take on the international stock index and international bond index funds? Do you allocate a certain percentage of your bond portfolio, for example, to be in international? Or a percentage of your total portfolio? Or stay strictly domestic? </p>
<p>I’m a fellow Vanguard lover. In my taxable space, I have a hodge-podge of funds that I don’t want to sell because of capital gains. In tax-advantaged space, I’m gliding towards our pre-retirement and retirement allocation of 10% total international bond, 10% total international stock, 40% total bond and 40% total stock. Boring, but it works for me. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I know that club and its affiliates. I used to note in business meetings "why spend full price for something that we know will work correctly and perform reliably when for 2/3 of that, we can buy something that’s almost completely useless. " </p>
<p>No international bonds here. Just domestic bonds, international equity, US equity. How often do you balance? Is balancing every quarter often enough?</p>
<p>A lot of my money is with Vanguard but other than the bond component of target retirement date funds and 529 funds, I don’t have any money directly in bonds. Probably quite immature in these assessments, but somehow I feel 1) with the interest rates where they are, there isn’t much prospect for either capital gains or dividends, 2) a lot of public sector bonds all over the world are in trouble, and 3) assuming between DW and I, we’ll have enough earned income over the next 5 years, I feel stocks will do better (what I mean is if we’re not forced to liquidate equities when the market drops and can hold out for 5-6 years there isn’t a big necessity for bonds) </p>
<p>Hey! Dadof3, If you dont like bonds, you dont have to buy bonds.</p>
<p>4% interest. 33 1/3 tax rate= 2.67 after tax return…</p>
<p>Inflation has averaged 2.75 percent compounded for many decades. i forget how many. :)</p>
<p>I would like to buy div stocks…but…they also have interest rate risk…the earnings or cash flow may decline.</p>
<p>However, an investor may also get some growth…</p>
<p>@iglooo, I don’t technically rebalance except in my tax-advantaged accounts, but even there I tend to only do it with new money. We’re still accumulating, so it’s not hard to do it that way. When that’s no longer the case, I don’t think I’ll do it on a time basis, but probably just rebalance when things are some percentage (3%???) out of line. </p>
<p>Re bonds in general, there are theoretical reasons for having them – I mostly trust the people whose “efficient frontier” studies show 80/20 equities/bonds returns as much as 100% equities but with lower volatility. </p>
<p>50/50 is very conservative. We are lucky that we don’t need to take much risk. I’m not a baseball fan, but this analogy works for me: we got onto 3rd base, why risk stealing home?</p>
<p>“Re bonds in general, there are theoretical reasons for having them – I mostly trust the people whose “efficient frontier” studies show 80/20 equities/bonds returns as much as 100% equities but with lower volatility.”</p>
<p>If that is true than stocks arent going to return that much.</p>
<p>Without reading the studies, i think the studies are measuring risk adjustment returns.</p>