Jacob spotted in the wild over at Bankrate.com
Cool, thanks GnK!
That 400 [x monthlies] number keeps popping up... Both Jacob and Syd (anyone know her blog?) seemed to follow that and/or the 3% drawdown rule... I am curious how Gary was able to retire with only 84x monthly expenses saved. Must have had some incredible investment returns/luck. Retire on $350k with 50k annual expenses? Yikes.
I remember the first time I read the 400 number many years ago, I calc'd mine and I think I was around 60. Was running numbers on how much a new small house of mine will reduce my expenses when I move in... 396 x monthlies, I couldn't believe it.
That 400 [x monthlies] number keeps popping up... Both Jacob and Syd (anyone know her blog?) seemed to follow that and/or the 3% drawdown rule... I am curious how Gary was able to retire with only 84x monthly expenses saved. Must have had some incredible investment returns/luck. Retire on $350k with 50k annual expenses? Yikes.
I remember the first time I read the 400 number many years ago, I calc'd mine and I think I was around 60. Was running numbers on how much a new small house of mine will reduce my expenses when I move in... 396 x monthlies, I couldn't believe it.
-
- Posts: 5406
- Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 3:28 am
- Location: Wettest corner of Orygun
- jennypenny
- Posts: 6861
- Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:20 pm
I agree Chenda, unless he bought 30yr CDs in the late 80s. He must be invested in real estate or a business.
Very cool Jacob. Nice photo. You could be the next James Bond...
http://tinyurl.com/nextjamesbond
Very cool Jacob. Nice photo. You could be the next James Bond...
http://tinyurl.com/nextjamesbond
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 16126
- Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
- Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 77
- Contact:
That article was written a LOOONG time ago.
Note that Gary's 350k was 17 years ago whereas the 50k number is present ... rule of thumb says that with inflation, money doubles every two decades, so that's 700k today. Also, that 350k would have seen a lot of the 1990s meaning it's probably quite a bit higher today.
Note that Gary's 350k was 17 years ago whereas the 50k number is present ... rule of thumb says that with inflation, money doubles every two decades, so that's 700k today. Also, that 350k would have seen a lot of the 1990s meaning it's probably quite a bit higher today.
-
- Posts: 603
- Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 2:07 am
If it was written a long time ago I'm extremely amused, since Fox News ran it yesterday also:
http://www.foxbusiness.com/personal-fin ... -possible/
http://www.foxbusiness.com/personal-fin ... -possible/
@Jacob; yes, that makes sense.
They must have made some huge lifestyle changes because it says they spent 80k/yr before retiring... But if we double $350k and half 50k (current expenditures) they had roughly 336 x monthly expenditures. Which seems very doable, especially since they were close to SS.
@GandK: Damn, I was really hoping comments would have been enabled over on fox... There would have been some irate ones!
They must have made some huge lifestyle changes because it says they spent 80k/yr before retiring... But if we double $350k and half 50k (current expenditures) they had roughly 336 x monthly expenditures. Which seems very doable, especially since they were close to SS.
@GandK: Damn, I was really hoping comments would have been enabled over on fox... There would have been some irate ones!
-
- Posts: 1659
- Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:24 am
Just read the exact same story now on Yahoo Finance. So if you're looking for those blustering comments...
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/early-ret ... rtune.html
(I can totally relate to your position Jacob--this shit would get really, really old fast--but I'm not you, and I can't help but find humor in all the outrageous, predictably stupid assumptions like this one: "It's a sure thing that the guy who's food is $100 is eating unhealthy processed junk." ROFL... so off the mark it's hilarious. Processed junk is MORE expensive than eating healthy. But they know so little about eating healthy that this is the only way they can think--pay a lot for processed, pre-prepared "healthy" food, or pay moderately less for processed, pre-prepared "junk" food. Cooking from inexpensive staples doesn't even occur to them. Talk about Plato's Cave.)
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/early-ret ... rtune.html
(I can totally relate to your position Jacob--this shit would get really, really old fast--but I'm not you, and I can't help but find humor in all the outrageous, predictably stupid assumptions like this one: "It's a sure thing that the guy who's food is $100 is eating unhealthy processed junk." ROFL... so off the mark it's hilarious. Processed junk is MORE expensive than eating healthy. But they know so little about eating healthy that this is the only way they can think--pay a lot for processed, pre-prepared "healthy" food, or pay moderately less for processed, pre-prepared "junk" food. Cooking from inexpensive staples doesn't even occur to them. Talk about Plato's Cave.)
-
- Posts: 1948
- Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 3:31 am
-
- Posts: 1948
- Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 3:31 am
What emotional response should we make to these ridiculous responses? Really, it is a great demonstration of how a lot of people are too fixed on their own small world to see alternatives, whether that is by training or temperament. The comments about Jacob eating cheap processed food are particularly illuminating, as Spartan Warrior pointed out.
Honestly, I feel pity. These people simply do not realize how the entire culture around them is determining their behavior by convincing them through advertising, propaganda, and fear mongering that there is only a very, very limited set of options available to them.
Honestly, I feel pity. These people simply do not realize how the entire culture around them is determining their behavior by convincing them through advertising, propaganda, and fear mongering that there is only a very, very limited set of options available to them.
It's funny how they don't see their archaic "you should work hard all of the time because it was what I was taught and do" philosophy says more about their inability to open their minds than about the character of those who think working hard might not be the be all and end all.
It does inspire in me a desire to respond, "Neener neener neener! Your taxes pay for the library books I read!" or simply, "Suckers!"
It does inspire in me a desire to respond, "Neener neener neener! Your taxes pay for the library books I read!" or simply, "Suckers!"