Who here is retired? Sound off

[SimpleLife]

I'm curious, who here is currently retired? Retired meaning you are not working and have not worked in more than a year. I don't mean retired as in I quit being a medical doctor to be a trial attorney. Those are both hard occupations, so I wouldn't consider switching from one to another to be retirement. If you went from a Doctor to a Security Guard, I'll consider that retired for the purpose of this discussion, so long as you do have enough money to live off until you die, without said job.

How old are you?

How old where you when you retired?

What was your occupation?

What sized stash did you have when you retired?

What are you invested in?

What are you annual expenses?

What is the current size of your stash?

X-Factor: what else do you think is important to add, for consideration/analysis?

[Sclass]

SimpleLife, didn't your momma tell you it's impolite to ask things like this?

[OldPro]

If you want to get people to provide you information for some reason SimpleLife, it helps to start out by telling them why you want the information. Otherwise it can easily be seen as simply being nosy. Also, if you want people to disclose to you, it helps if you first disclose to them.

So why are you asking and what is your own situation need to come first if you expect to get responses.

I would have no problem answering at least some of your questions SimpleLife but I do wonder if there are enough people in the 'retired' category who post here for you to get any kind of meaningful number of responses at all. Frankly, I haven't come across too many posters here who are actually 'retired' as in no longer needing to work to buy groceries forevermore. And a year is certainly not a significant enough time period to be of any value for any kind of analysis or whatever.

I think there aren't enough to get past that first hurdle of people here who are actually retired in any case. Why don't you start with a simple question and see where it gets you. Just ask, 'are you retired according to the following criteria, yes or no?' See how many say yes and that will tell you if there are enough to bother finding out more about. Saying you are just 'curious' though isn't going to get you more info.

I am retired according to your definition, so that's one.

[SimpleLife]

I'm trying to look for a trend in terms of occupations, when they retired, what they invested in that worked for them, and whether it's been working out for them and for how long, and working out for them meaning not just maintaining principle, but also increasing their net worth.

Strange, many people on other forums, such as MMM post this info regularly. Telling someone that you were an Attorney, Broker, Engineer or Tattoo Artist and are invested in Real Estate or index funds, etc. isn't akin to revealing your social security number, a sample of your DNA, or your address. Not exactly PII that I'm asking for here, but if you don't want to play, no skin off my nose. But please, let's not compare asking what your occupation was to asking you what your real name, address and bank account info are and how old you were when you lost your virginity. Straw man arguments are poor taste.

[Noided]

Some people on this forum are quite agressive (or at least they sound agressive) over nothing in my opinion. I don't get it, if you don't want to answer, just don't. I would reply, but I am not retired.

[thrifty++]

Some people on this forum are quite agressive (or at least they sound agressive) over nothing in my opinion. I don't get it, if you don't want to answer, just don't. I would reply, but I am not retired.

Agree - I don't see why others are not happy to share this info either. I dont see why any of this is likely to identify you at all - except perhaps what your occupation is - but maybe not since you are not working. The point is to help inspire others to achieve the same by seeing comparative benchmarks.

[Tyler9000]

Edited personal info because this thread went in another direction and it felt out of place. I'm happy to share relevant data (within limits) when we're all on the same page.

[Gilberto de Piento]

Maybe an anonymous survey would be more effective in collecting this information? Too bad this feature isn't included in the ERE forum software (I don't think).

[jennypenny]

I think part of the discrepancy in opinion is generational. People my age (GenXers) were taught that asking about someone's salary or savings was the equivalent of asking how much they weigh. It's one of those things that's ok to volunteer but feels awkward when asked directly.

I like when people express their financial position by how many years of expenses they have saved up. That's the part that's important. It also removes the high-earning component. Didn't jacob say in another thread recently that he has 100x expenses now? His actual bank balance, rate of return, and annual expenses are essentially irrelevant at that point.

[GandK]

I think part of the discrepancy in opinion is generational. People my age (GenXers) were taught that asking about someone's salary or savings was the equivalent of asking how much they weigh. It's one of those things that's ok to volunteer but feels awkward when asked directly.

I like when people express their financial position by how many years of expenses they have saved up. That's the part that's important. It also removes the high-earning component. Didn't jacob say in another thread recently that he has 100x expenses now? His actual bank balance, rate of return, and annual expenses are essentially irrelevant at that point.

+1 to this entire post.

@SimpleLife:

Discussing my financial life is like discussing my sex life: I'm not opposed to doing it, but it does require context. And as OldPro pointed out above, your OP did not provide any context. I have no idea what you're looking for. So while I get that you're not exactly asking for DNA, it would feel much less awkward and intrusive if you would identify what data you're trying to find.

Also, jennypenny is right about years of expenses. $500k when you spend $5k/year is not the same as $500k when you spend $100k/year.

[jacob]

The sample size will be lower than the population size since people who have reached FIRE/ERE on the forums/blog-comments have tended to fade away after a while or only login/post very rarely (and would thus miss a thread such as this). Also consider that the lurker ratio here is rather high.

You can probably obtain better answers by going through the old journals instead of asking so directly.

Based on what I've picked up ... here's my impression of what the typical ranges are for ERE/ERE-like behavior when it comes to retirement by your definition based on the people who have filtered through here over the years.

The typical age range of ERE retirees begins in the late twenties with the majority being around the mid/late thirties and it goes into 80+ years old. Imagine a severely skewed population that has a long tail to old age, a peak at 35ish and the lowest value being around 28. Most will have started FIRE sometime around their early-mid thirties. The early ones tend to be high and early earners. The later ones (late 30--early 40) tend to be risk-averse, e.g. 2% and 3%'ers. Occupation wise, engineers dominate completely---you can't throw a rock in here without hitting some damn engineer ---but otherwise just look for typical I*TJ jobs (engineer, analyst, scientist, administrator, accountant, ..., and engineer). In particular when it comes to purely financial FIRE. However, there's a definite contingent of renaissance jack/jill of all trades who maintain some kind of adventurous semi-retirement at <$8k expense levels.

Typical stash size for the financial contingent seems to be around 500k and typical expenses are in the 12-18k range resulting in stashes of 27-40 years or SWRs between 2.5% and 4%. The stash for the renaissance contingent is much lower (100-300k) but typically they have several diverse income streams, not just one type like securities or a collection of rentals. I don't know if they qualify as retired by your definition since it's not a question of going from medical doctor to dog walker but a case of having several different jobs at the whenever level (e.g. seasonal coaching, occasional plumbing). The only ones I know with SWR<1% is J_ and myself.

Investments are with very few exceptions either index funds (the popular fare of the decade), PP, real estate/rentals, DGI, and self-guided/exotic. The latter group is small. The index group is the largest. It's quite apparent that preferences change slowly over time. Most people don't seem to stick with anything that underperforms an obvious alternative if it goes on for more than a couple of years.

Because SWRs tend to be conservative, "current stash" tends to be higher than "initial stash". I'm only aware of one single failure and this was from a guy a few years ago who handed over his savings to some scammy high ROI project without much due diligence and lost it all. It's far more common to get bored and pick up more income than to run out of money.

Personality type is overwhelmingly INTJ and IQ tends to be 1-3sd above average. We're almost always talking highly productive people who overperform in a typical employee setting.

In terms of analysis, I've observed a distinction in strategies and attitudes between three different groups.

1) An exclusively financial strategy that resembles ER more than ERE (in the renaissance sense) and which is made "early" due to outsized income. Money is spent slightly more efficient than MMM but nothing to brag about. You can probably split this group into paper-securities and more hands-on landlords.
2) A "how to survive without a salary" strategy of multiple sources of income which are easily tapable w/o much effort but w/o much of a stash. Money spending is efficient, but income is on a pay-as-you-go basis.
3) The combination of the two with a stash allowing more and higher income opportunities. This is pretty rare because the two groups above lack either the skills for their money or the money for their skills. These guys have the lowest SWRs.

[Sclass]

Simplelife,
I know what you're trying to get at. And I love you man, so I can PM you info to satisfy your curiosity and your need for inspiration...if you really want to know. I don't think knowing these details will help you much. Worse, it's not believable without the whole story which I'm unable to share. At the end of the day, the numbers are just numbers.

I can say the ERE process will take you where you want to go. After informally aggregating peoples' stories in the posts some common threads just keep coming through. Aggressive saving. Efficiency. Long term plans. Investing in compounding systems. Repeat.

The exact details will differ because we are all different.

Be cool. I've always told you that you've already won.

FFJ we know you were joking. You used a smiley face like O.J. did!
Ok I'm dating myself genXer in the house!

[jacob]

@SL/Sclass - Awwww, you guys!

[OldPro]

Are any of you guys actually retired? Well. you are getting some comments now SimpleLIfe but I'm not sure any are from people who have actually retired or not and are who you are looking for.

I'd actually change your definition of retired a bit SimpleLife. You defined it as, "so long as you do have enough money to live off until you die, without said job." I would change it to, so long as you have enough INCOME to live off until you die. I don't live off the money I have, I live off the income the money I have generates. That's a major difference. I have 0% SWR.

I can accept that some people plan to eat their capital. That's their choice. But it sure ain't as good as not having to do that. Frankly, to me, no one planning to eat capital has actually figured out how to FIRE. But then if you used my definition, the list of those who were 'retired' would be even smaller. At least those in this forum.

There are in fact a lot of people who have retired early on their income alone SimpleLife. They did not plan to and do not need to eat their capital. Here are quotes from 3 such early retirees:

"so you can live off of income from your assets."

"it's critical to create an inflation-adjusted income stream for spending needs that won't cut into principal."

"lives off a lower fixed income and reinvests everything else." (indicates income exceeds expenses and capital continues to be grown, not eaten.)

Those quotes come from this article: http://www.bankrate.com/finance/retirem ... ies-1.aspx

I suppose I see relying on eating capital to fund retirement as a second best answer. What to do when you can't actually figure out how to achieve FIRE without it, at an age you are happy with. Sometimes it reads here as if no one can FIRE without having to rely on eating capital. That simply isn't true and it might be more worthwhile SimpleLIfe looking at how people who have FIREd without having to rely on eating capital got there. Maybe you don't need to settle for second best.

For me the question was real simple. How do I generate enough income from the capital I have to fund my life for next year? When you have enough capital to do that, you can retire. After that, you simply answer the same question every year.

[cmonkey]

Having seen this thread pop up I was semi-hoping some of the more senior members on here would be willing to share as I have been curious. I can say, though, I'm glad no one did, I actually enjoy the mystery a lot more.

I've also made up my mind with regards to telling people when we are FI (I've been mulling this for the past few months). I'd like to project that mystery, myself. Everyone here will know, but I'm not telling family or friends. Secrets are fun.

[jacob]

I would change it to, so long as you have enough INCOME to live off until you die. I don't live off the money I have, I live off the income the money I have generates. That's a major difference. I have 0% SWR.

SWR as it is normally used is defined as annual expenses/net worth. Whether those expenses are paid by income or capital gains or liquidation is irrelevant by investing under the standard total return paradigm because the form of income is freely convertible assuming the assets are even the slightest bit liquid. Cash is, de facto, cash regardless of how it's classified.

By this definition, an SWR<3% is good for eternity, whereas an SWR~4% is successful for 30 years in the historically worst case (and obviously good for longer times in the better cases). "Until you die" means different things for different people. For some it may be 10 years, for others it may be 80 years.

There's a thread on SWR milestones elsewhere. That thread doesn't include everybody but as you can see there are quite a few people here who have enough money for the rest of their life. The trickier part is SL's somewhat idiosyncratic requirement to only engage in activities that are comparatively much easier than the previous. You'd have to go to the journals to figure that one out.

[Did]

I think it makes sense that many people who are home and clear stop hanging around here. This place provides a home for like minded people as they work it all out. Cheers to Jacob for continuing to facilitate and participate.

Like everyone else, I've achieved a number of things in my life, some very difficult. I've moved on from those things though, and no longer talk to people about them. I think if I had it - ERE or FI or whatever you called it - all worked out I would be on my way. Like most parents when their kids are grown.

To OP, I've only done things I want to do for the past two years. I'm still shuffling the deck to try and make the gig completely sustainable, but even if it isn't, and needs to be suplemented with activity I enjoy a bit less, I'm never going to be dependent on the man again. My core costs will always be covered, which makes me feel free.

[SimpleLife]

Some people on this forum are quite agressive (or at least they sound agressive) over nothing in my opinion. I don't get it, if you don't want to answer, just don't. I would reply, but I am not retired.

Agreed, thank you for this. If you don't want to participate, dont. No need to launch personal attacks with flawed logic as if I'm asking for DNA and bank account info. Jebus...

[jacob]

@SL - I don't think this has anything to do with flawed logic or even logic in the first place. You asked some questions which many consider private or taboo even if it may not be logical e.g. "never ask a women her age", "never ask your coworker what they make", etc.

Predictably nobody gave an answer.

You could probably have increased the response rate by volunteering your own data first. Tit for tat works better with sensitive information.

Also consider that while we may look anonymous here, people who are local to each other often know each other IRL in many cases. While they may be fine posting their info to the forum, they may not be fine about sharing it with each other via the forum.

[almostthere]

I wanted to know the same info while I was slogging it out to FI. That said, it has all been revealed many times in the forums if you go back through back posts. Jacob's description above is also amazingly accurate. It certainly nailed a description of me.