The secret to a happier, healthier life: Just retire

[BLADEMDA]

Love or hate Obama. The ACA has made it more attractive for semi affluent people to retire. Keep ur income below 400% of poverty (family of four $100k or less). Couples $65k or less. That's adjusted gross income after deductions.

ACA basically will give u $5000-10000 extra in subsidies being "poor".

Before many people worked cause they couldn't qualify for Medicare until age 65. Now the ACA is an option for many semi affluent people like many physicians in their late 50s and 60s to retire early.

No more denial for pre existing conditions

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/01/27/theyre-millionaires-and-they-get-obamacare-subsidies.html

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[PhysicianOnFIRE]

OMG. So much to learn. How long did it take you guys before you felt you had a good working knowledge of investing for yourself?

If you start with the right information (which you've been given in this thread), you can have a solid understanding in a few months. Read a couple books, browse the forums (Bogleheads, WCI, this one) and you'll be in good shape.

 

[Relaxis]

This thread has prompted me to get in the game.

Opened tdAmeritrade account, and bought 3 no-commission ETFs:

1. 70% VTI - Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF
2. 20% VEU - Vanguard FTSE All-World ex-US ETF (no-commission, VXUS not available w/o commission)
3. 10% BND - Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF (no-commission)

Thoughts?

 

[BLADEMDA]

This thread has prompted me to get in the game.

Opened tdAmeritrade account, and bought 3 no-commission ETFs:

1. 70% VTI - Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF
2. 20% VEU - Vanguard FTSE All-World ex-US ETF (no-commission, VXUS not available w/o commission)
3. 10% BND - Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF (no-commission)

Thoughts?

It you had opened an account at Vanguard all their funds/Etfs are available commission free. I recommend Vanguard and I have accounts with other major brokerages as well including TD Ameritrade.

You don't need the other brokerages until "Attending status" is achieved and even then I'm not sure just how much they really add to your returns vs just staying at Vanguard.

 

[pjl]

This thread has prompted me to get in the game.

Opened tdAmeritrade account, and bought 3 no-commission ETFs:

1. 70% VTI - Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF
2. 20% VEU - Vanguard FTSE All-World ex-US ETF (no-commission, VXUS not available w/o commission)
3. 10% BND - Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF (no-commission)

Thoughts?

My thoughts are basically a simple minded approach.
1. Get rid of bonds, who needs a stable anchor when you have 30 years to recover I am heavier on foreign than US so would move there.
2. Never ever look at how you are doing. Rebalancing is for people who have many times their yearly contributions in their account. Until that point the new funds will gently shift you towards your intended balance.

Way back in residency I learned that I was a great investor, doing wonderfully, and nearly invincible (2007) I would tell my wife weekly how great we were doing in retirement accounts, often beating my weekly salary from residency.
Then I learned I was easily vinced. 2008 made me realize I was just as lucky as everyone else and had no special skill in picking stocks or funds.
In 2009-now I basically learned dollar cost averaging my contributions over a life time will look good sometimes, bad sometimes, but overall will improve my future plans.
I also learned that skipping out on doing fun stuff but fully funding retirement and roth during residency was a silly choice, and after a couple months of partnership salary I had matched what cost me better vacations and more fun time out with friends during residency.

The smart financial move during residency is to invest and do it all roth, but really, you are in a situation where you will make 5-20 times your current salary within a few years, and you deserve a little life now.
*do NOT buy a fancy car/house now, but do spend an extra few thousand bucks making your life a little more fun.

 

[DocFocker]

don't do that.

Ask around? Ask who? Your colleagues? Terrible idea. You colleagues probably aren't any more financially savvy than you. Having a bigger bank account doesn't make you smarter. Your best bet is to educate yourself. It costs very little. Go visit the White Coat Investor site. Check out the Bogleheads forum.

The problem with financial advisors is that most work for a percentage of the assets they manage for you. There is loads of evidence that paying those fees costs you money long term because they add up to massive amounts. Let's say you pay 1% fee per year. After 10 years you've got $1M. At that point you are paying $10,000 a year for personal advice of which the advisor probably spends no more than 3-6 hours per year for you. Another 10 years and you might have $3M and be paying $30,000 a year for that same advice. That's why if you must get their advice, just pay an hourly rate. It'll end up being far, far, far cheaper for you in the end and you'll get the same advice.

If you want the simplest great advice possible, educate yourself enough to determine a desired asset allocation and use maybe 2-3 low cost funds to achieve it and simply add money every paycheck towards it. Don't check the stock market, don't watch CNBC, don't ask for stock tips from your buddy. If you do it consistently it's hard to not end up rich in the end as a physician.

I would add A Random Walk Down Wall Street to that reading list. With a little reading from Mr Money Mustache blog, the bogleheads forum, WCI and a random walk and you can learn the tools to manage your portfolio on you own. Open a Vanguard account and invest in a few of their ETFs across several asset classes and your going to beat 2/3s of professional money managers.

 

[epidural man]

This thread has prompted me to get in the game.

Opened tdAmeritrade account, and bought 3 no-commission ETFs:

1. 70% VTI - Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF
2. 20% VEU - Vanguard FTSE All-World ex-US ETF (no-commission, VXUS not available w/o commission)
3. 10% BND - Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF (no-commission)

Thoughts?

The real advantage of TDAmeritrade is the ThinkOrSwim platform. That is pretty awesome.

 

[deleted126335]

This thread has prompted me to get in the game.

Opened tdAmeritrade account, and bought 3 no-commission ETFs:

1. 70% VTI - Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF
2. 20% VEU - Vanguard FTSE All-World ex-US ETF (no-commission, VXUS not available w/o commission)
3. 10% BND - Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF (no-commission)

Thoughts?

Excellent start. If you can stay disciplined you will do well. If you want to do even better, learn about value tilting, tax loss harvesting, asset location strategies, TIPs, etc. you have been given solid recommendations in resources to explore.



Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

 

[BLADEMDA]

"I typically recommend that investors think about populating a calculator with maybe a 6% return for the stock portion of their portfolio, maybe a 2% return unfortunately for the bond piece. You don't want to be too aggressive any time you're looking at equity return assumptions of say 10%. In my view that's way too aggressive, that's probably unrealistic at this juncture."

Morningstar.com

 

[BLADEMDA]

 

[BLADEMDA]

50% of those who voted in the poll indicated full or semi-retirement by age 55. As someone near that age I have a hard time believing that 50% of Anesthesiologists on SDN will actually be able to pull that off in today's market. Of course, guys like SEVO, Mman, Jet, myself, etc had the opportunity for true Private practice partnerships which makes that goal realistic. Can an employed physician expect to semi-retire by age 55?

 

[Mman]

Can an employed physician expect to semi-retire by age 55?

it all depends on what lifestyle someone chooses to live. Some people plan to live on 50K per year for the rest of their life and then it's doable. Others have a spouse that works and generates significant additional investing dollars. It's easier to do with a higher income, but still doable if you set your goals more modestly.

 

[BLADEMDA]

 

[BLADEMDA]

 

[pgg]

50% of those who voted in the poll indicated full or semi-retirement by age 55. As someone near that age I have a hard time believing that 50% of Anesthesiologists on SDN will actually be able to pull that off in today's market. Of course, guys like SEVO, Mman, Jet, myself, etc had the opportunity for true Private practice partnerships which makes that goal realistic. Can an employed physician expect to semi-retire by age 55?

Depends on what you plan to do in retirement, how many ex-wives need alimony, how many kids you have and how old they are and what they're doing and whether you're paying for it, how healthy you are, and how much you want to have left over to leave to heirs/charity when you die.

Mostly, it's expenses. Fishing off a dock in Alabama costs less than fishing off the back of a yacht anchored off Greece.

 

[deleted126335]

I would bet that many of those "retirements" were not planned. E.g., Layoffs, leaving work for health related reasons, etc.

 

[Promethean]

It depends on what you are doing and why.

Some people delay gratification their whole lives and work at something they hate or are bored with because they need the paycheck. They figure that their life will begin when they quit working.

My work is my life. I do everything that I do because I love it, and if something stops making me feel that way, I move on to the next thing. But I am always doing whatever I am passionate about. I want to work as much as I can, as long as I can. Eventually, my frail human body or mind will fail me, and I'll have to work less, or in a different capacity.

If "retire" means having enough money to live comfortably for the rest of one's life without working, then sure, I want that. Then I could offer my services for free, and have even more fun working. But if "retire" means stopping work in order to be idle and do things that I've put off... well, I haven't put off very much that I want to do. I'd spend a few weeks playing video games, travelling, and annoying the heck out of people in forums, and then I'd be looking for a job.

 

[G-Man82]

This thread has prompted me to get in the game.

Opened tdAmeritrade account, and bought 3 no-commission ETFs:

1. 70% VTI - Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF
2. 20% VEU - Vanguard FTSE All-World ex-US ETF (no-commission, VXUS not available w/o commission)
3. 10% BND - Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF (no-commission)

Thoughts?

Nice portfolio. Mirrors mine essentially except I take a little more in Bonds (age 33) more to cushion a drop than drag down a rise.

Why not open an account directly with vanguard since you're using their mutual funds and ETFs anyway? Unless you plan to hold some individual stocks?

Splitting hairs here, but VEU doesn't have international small cap, whereas VXUS does.

For me, I'm 20% bonds but I'll be taking some extra risk by tilting to small cap value. You should look into it. But there's nothing wrong with the simplicity of the 3 Fund portfolio: total stock market, total international market, and total bond market.

Consider REITs, EM (if not using total international), and Small cap value for extra risk and possibly reward.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[Chloroform4Life]

Im 30, lets say i take home 150k a year after tax, which is low, but that may be the future. I can live modestly with 50k a year no problen. Thats basically middle class living. Put 100k a year into retirement. By 55, I should have 2.5 mil in the bank, if I did not invest at all. By then, I should have a house paid off, so my yearly expense can go to 30-40k. By 65, with social security and medicare kicking in, my out of pocket expense can decrease to about 20k a year. If that is how I plan my retirement, I can live to 172 year old before my nest egg runs out. I guess, then I would just be living off social security. But I don't imagine my 172 year old self needing too much.

 

[deleted162650]

Im 30, lets say i take home 150k a year after tax, which is low, but that may be the future. I can live modestly with 50k a year no problen. Thats basically middle class living. Put 100k a year into retirement. By 55, I should have 2.5 mil in the bank, if I did not invest at all. By then, I should have a house paid off, so my yearly expense can go to 30-40k. By 65, with social security and medicare kicking in, my out of pocket expense can decrease to about 20k a year. If that is how I plan my retirement, I can live to 172 year old before my nest egg runs out. I guess, then I would just be living off social security. But I don't imagine my 172 year old self needing too much.

I dunno, probably A LOT of medical expenses when you're 172. Or at least a killer electric bill to keep the cryogenic tank running.

 

[sevoflurane]

Depends on what you plan to do in retirement, how many ex-wives need alimony, how many kids you have and how old they are and what they're doing and whether you're paying for it, how healthy you are, and how much you want to have left over to leave to heirs/charity when you die.

Mostly, it's expenses. Fishing off a dock in Alabama costs less than fishing off the back of a yacht anchored off Greece.

Hahaha! True dat. Don't like option one... Option two is eyebrow lifting.... but no.

 

[sevoflurane]

I dunno, probably A LOT of medical expenses when you're 172. Or at least a killer electric bill to keep the cryogenic tank running.

Now that's an interesting thought. People do that now.... kinda weird. But you never know.

 

[Psai]

Nice portfolio. Mirrors mine essentially except I take a little more in Bonds (age 33) more to cushion a drop than drag down a rise.

Why not open an account directly with vanguard since you're using their mutual funds and ETFs anyway? Unless you plan to hold some individual stocks?

Splitting hairs here, but VEU doesn't have international small cap, whereas VXUS does.

For me, I'm 20% bonds but I'll be taking some extra risk by tilting to small cap value. You should look into it. But there's nothing wrong with the simplicity of the 3 Fund portfolio: total stock market, total international market, and total bond market.

Consider REITs, EM (if not using total international), and Small cap value for extra risk and possibly reward.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

So as a resident would it be better to open up a vanguard account or should I do a roth 401k or a regular 401k (no employer matching) with pretax income? I've read a bunch of books about investing that were recommended by white coat investor and I still feel like I have no idea what I'm doing as I've never had enough money to invest before.

I was thinking about
70% vanguard 500 index after I save up that 10k
10% vanguard ftse all world ex-us small cap etf
20% vanguard total bond market etf

something like that

 

[BLADEMDA]

Im 30, lets say i take home 150k a year after tax, which is low, but that may be the future. I can live modestly with 50k a year no problen. Thats basically middle class living. Put 100k a year into retirement. By 55, I should have 2.5 mil in the bank, if I did not invest at all. By then, I should have a house paid off, so my yearly expense can go to 30-40k. By 65, with social security and medicare kicking in, my out of pocket expense can decrease to about 20k a year. If that is how I plan my retirement, I can live to 172 year old before my nest egg runs out. I guess, then I would just be living off social security. But I don't imagine my 172 year old self needing too much.

$50,000 per year? That's not a lot of money especially for a family of 4. My orthopedic friends earn that in 3 weeks.

 

[BLADEMDA]

The scary switch that happens to investors over age 60
It gets worse with each passing year.
Susie Poppick | @SusiePoppick
Sunday, 29 May 2016 | 11:00 AM ETCNBC.com



That linear decline seems to happen regardless of your sex, wealth and even your education and experience with the stock market, said study co-author and Texas Tech University professor Michael Finke.

Finke, along with Texas Tech professor Sandra Huston and University of Missouri finance professor John Howe, looked at literacy scores of more than 3,870 adults aged 60 and older. Topics in the assessment included investing, borrowing, insurance and basic financial knowledge.

"The changes in ability are similar to what happens with driving," Finke said. "It happens gradually, in a way we don't necessarily perceive one year to the next, and that makes us vulnerable."

Even though literacy scores dropped with age, when the study subjects were asked to rate their own knowledge of each topic in the test, general self-confidence did not decrease at all with seniority. And when it came to insurance, subjects actually assessed their knowledge morepositively as they got older — despite the fact that their abilities were declining.


Americans say this is their biggest financialregret
One reason older adults may be overconfident about insurance in particular, Finke said, is that seniors are more likely to have experience with or own life insurance: They are more likely, then, to overestimate their understanding of it.

Importantly, the gap between confidence and real ability just keeps widening with age, no matter the financial topic, Finke said.

"We need to acknowledge at the beginning of retirement that this is normal," he said. "It is a natural part of aging and we all experience changes in our ability to process information as we get older."

Indeed, in a second part of the study, the researchers found a correlation between cognitive decline and worsening financial literacy.


Don't let these 3 Social Security myths mess up your benefits
Specifically, they were able to predict aging adults' financial scores by looking at how they performed on assessments of two measures of intelligence: fluid and crystallized.

Fluid intelligence is the ability to quickly and efficiently process a stimulus, a capacity that tends to peak for most people in their mid-20s, said Finke. Tasks that might measure this skill include rapid arithmetic, he said.

Crystallized intelligence, on the other hand, depends on accessing memory and knowledge, and is at fullest strength for most around their mid-50s, he said. Thinking of synonyms for words and other vocabulary tasks might measure this type of intelligence, Finke said. Unfortunately, declines in both types of intelligence tended to be predictive of a slide in financial literacy.

A crucial insight from the research is that planning for both the financial and cognitive aspects of retirement must start far ahead of time.

The decline of pensions and rise of the 401(k) plans means more and more people are directly responsible for decision-making that will affect their quality of life in old age, Finke said.

"In a DIY world, consequences are greater than ever," he said. "It's very important to identify someone you trust early on who can take over decisions as a fiduciary, whether that's an adult child or a professional."

The best places to 'grow old' aren't always ones that rank high for retirement

Kevin Horan | Getty Images
Those planning for retirement, then, may want to look at the process as twofold: Working adults will need to both save enough and also form a succession plan for financial decision-making.

And if the latter sounds tricky, the former might be even harder.

A new Bankrate study finds that older Americans are falling far short of replacing the minimum 70 percent of pre-retirement income that advisors recommend. Out of seniors in all 50 states plus Washington, D.C., only those in Hawaii, Alaska and South Carolina have saved enough to hit that mark.

On the bottom of the list? Massachusetts, where retirees are able to replace only 48 percent of their previous income.

There's a little good news, though. No matter where you live or how old you are, there are still moves you can make to boost your retirement income — whether as an individual or a couple.

Simply being aware of the challenges you face is a big part of the battle.

 

[BLADEMDA]

If you want to survive and even thrive in retirement, most financial advisers believe you need at least 70% of the income that you had before you retired. But seniors in most states are falling short, a Bankrate study shows.



"Americans are facing a shortfall of retirement income (because) their saved assets are not enough to fund their desired or even current lifestyle," says James Carlson, chief investment officer at Questis, a financial services firm based in Charleston, South Carolina.


http://www.bankrate.com/finance/retirement/study-seniors-incomes-dont-go-far-enough.aspx

 

[Wiscoblue]

So between me and my wife we make 900k and live on 150k a year. Do I still need 630k in retirement? You need what you were spending in the last few years before you retired not what you were earning.

 

[BLADEMDA]

So between me and my wife we make 900k and live on 150k a year. Do I still need 630k in retirement? You need what you were spending in the last few years before you retired not what you were earning.

The 70% figure applied to most Americans in the middle tax bracket. Perhaps, if your income was about $300K W-2 (typical salary for some on SDN) then you would need about 70% of your take home pay post taxes or around $100K per year.

 

[Chloroform4Life]

When I retire, I'm going to eat ramen noodles and play video games all day. It will be a glorious time.

 

[BLADEMDA]

When I retire, I'm going to eat ramen noodles and play video games all day. It will be a glorious time.

So, is that retirement or college we are talking about?

 

[Chloroform4Life]

So, is that retirement or college we are talking about?

College without the studying. There's no better times than that.

Im pretty low maintenance. Just got to get my wife on board with that plan.

 

[Doctor4Life1769]

College without the studying. There's no better times than that.

Im pretty low maintenance. Just got to get my wife on board with that plan.

Good luck

 

[G-Man82]

So as a resident would it be better to open up a vanguard account or should I do a roth 401k or a regular 401k (no employer matching) with pretax income? I've read a bunch of books about investing that were recommended by white coat investor and I still feel like I have no idea what I'm doing as I've never had enough money to invest before.

I was thinking about
70% vanguard 500 index after I save up that 10k
10% vanguard ftse all world ex-us small cap etf
20% vanguard total bond market etf

something like that

As a resident, almost universally a Roth account is usually advised because you're in a lower tax bracket right now. Or if you have a lot of student loans and are in IBR / PAYE / REPAYE type plans, then maybe a traditional 401k may work in order to reduce your AGI and lower your expected loan payments.

Now whether you open a personal Roth IRA or cotribute to an employer Roth plan, is up to you. If you think you can put away >$5500/yr (Roth IRA limit) then going with the Roth 401k may be better. But if not, then a regular Roth IRA is nicer because you'll have access to a broad amount of funds without the employer plan constraints.

As far as your portfolio, why the Vanguard 500 vs the Vanguard total stock ETF? More diversification when owning the whole market (roughly 3000 vs 500 companies).

Why just international small cap?

Are you tilting?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[Psai]

As a resident, almost universally a Roth account is usually advised because you're in a lower tax bracket right now. Or if you have a lot of student loans and are in IBR / PAYE / REPAYE type plans, then maybe a traditional 401k may work in order to reduce your AGI and lower your expected loan payments.

Now whether you open a personal Roth IRA or cotribute to an employer Roth plan, is up to you. If you think you can put away >$5500/yr (Roth IRA limit) then going with the Roth 401k may be better. But if not, then a regular Roth IRA is nicer because you'll have access to a broad amount of funds without the employer plan constraints.

As far as your portfolio, why the Vanguard 500 vs the Vanguard total stock ETF? More diversification when owning the whole market (roughly 3000 vs 500 companies).

Why just international small cap?

Are you tilting?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

Well it's mostly because I've never had any money to be investing in my future before and I've only read a few investing books this past month.

But I was going for slightly higher returns as the 500 index has had 10.7% returns annually and the total stock etf is about 9% while the international small cap is around 11% although I know that one is more volatile. But I figured with a 30+ year horizon I can afford to take extra risks early on while my portfolio is still small and I'll be better off in the future as I turn more conservative. If I lose it, no big deal but if it gives me better returns, I'll be better off.

If I do a roth 401k through my employer I would probably do 70% vanguard total stock market index, 10% vanguard total international stock index and 20% vanguard total bond market index

 

[BLADEMDA]

IN BRIEF •
Understanding how people spend as they age can help financial advisors and their clients build better retirement plans, craft more effective investment strategies and attain more successful retirement outcomes. •
On average, spending is highest for households led by 45-year-olds; households led by older individuals spend less. While this pattern holds for the majority of households, spending patterns do vary. •
Research shows that most retirees fall into one of four spending profiles: foodie, homebody, globetrotter or health care spender.

• Financial advisors need to ask the right questions to create accurate profiles of their clients and adjust their retirement plans accordingly. Inquiring about housing, desire to travel and concerns about health care expenses are good places to start.

https://am.jpmorgan.com/blob-gim/1383280121551/83456/RI_Spending_in_retirement.pdf

 

[pgg]

Research shows that most retirees fall into one of four spending profiles: foodie, homebody, globetrotter or health care spender.

I saw "foodie" and laughed, so I went and read (skimmed) the article. Turns out their definitions are:

foodie - retiree who spends most money on food (ie, probably poor, living a subsistence existence)
homebody - retiree who still has a mortgage (ie, a foodie who doesn't own a home)
globetrotter - retiree who travels (ie, has money to travel)
health care spender - retiree who spends a lot on health care (ie, someone who's sick)


So their research has made the shocking discovery that some retirees have money, some don't, and some are in poor health!


And their "implications" section makes the insightful comment

After a financial advisor has identified a client’s spending profile, the advisor should have detailed discussions of where income has been—and will be—spent. The assumptions of the financial plan can then be tailored to fit the client’s particular experience.

Go figure. To plan how much money a person will need, one should consider what they will spend it on. And then add a couple % annually to cover the fee for the advice, of course.

 

[QofQuimica]

it all depends on what lifestyle someone chooses to live. Some people plan to live on 50K per year for the rest of their life and then it's doable. Others have a spouse that works and generates significant additional investing dollars. It's easier to do with a higher income, but still doable if you set your goals more modestly.

This.

I am semi-retiring next year, at age 42. I realized not too long ago that even if I stopped saving for retirement altogether after this year, I would be a multi-millionaire at full retirement age (67). I only have been spending about $$2500-$3000/month without being on any type of budget beyond just giving myself $1500/paycheck and putting the rest into savings. There just aren't a lot of pricey things I care to buy once I finish funding my niece's and nephew's college. I could go FT for another 1-2 years and fully retire by age 44, which I had considered. But I don't see much point in that. At least right now, I don't want to not work at all.

 

[sevoflurane]

This.

I am semi-retiring next year, at age 42. I realized not too long ago that even if I stopped saving for retirement altogether after this year, I would be a multi-millionaire at full retirement age (67). I only have been spending about $$2500-$3000/month without being on any type of budget beyond just giving myself $1500/paycheck and putting the rest into savings. There just aren't a lot of pricey things I care to buy once I finish funding my niece's and nephew's college. I could go FT for another 1-2 years and fully retire by age 44, which I had considered. But I don't see much point in that. At least right now, I don't want to not work at all.

Yeah... You're gonna need (expensive) benefits for a while.
While I admire individuals who can truly accomplish this, I think that you should be a multi-millionaire at this point in your career if you went straight through + full time. You likely benefited greatly from 2008 at your age bracket with moderate to good investing alone. Killed it with aggressive investing.
2 million is the new 1 million ten years from now- I think. Buying power is going to drop on inflation alone. We are going to see higher taxes and interest rates. One crash is one crash too many if you are counting on market returns to hold you through end of life. We are due for a good crash, but you can't count on it.
Of course, I could be wrong. Just my 2 cents.

 

[Mman]

Yeah... You're gonna need (expensive) benefits for a while.
While I admire individuals who can truly accomplish this, I think that you should be a multi-millionaire at this point in your career if you went straight through + full time. You likely benefited greatly from 2008 at your age bracket with moderate to good investing alone. Killed it with aggressive investing.
2 million is the new 1 million ten years from now- I think. Buying power is going to drop on inflation alone. We are going to see higher taxes and interest rates. One crash is one crash too many if you are counting on market returns to hold you through end of life. We are due for a good crash, but you can't count on it.
Of course, I could be wrong. Just my 2 cents.

As much as I'd like to retire early, I'm more likely to go half time until my nest egg reaches about 2-3x what I'd likely need. Just remove all doubt. It'd be too painful to retire and then have to go back to work 5 or 10 years later if truly unexpected things happened. If I end up having way too much, that's what charity and kids and grandkids are for.

 

[QofQuimica]

Yeah... You're gonna need (expensive) benefits for a while.
While I admire individuals who can truly accomplish this, I think that you should be a multi-millionaire at this point in your career if you went straight through + full time. You likely benefited greatly from 2008 at your age bracket with moderate to good investing alone. Killed it with aggressive investing.
2 million is the new 1 million ten years from now- I think. Buying power is going to drop on inflation alone. We are going to see higher taxes and interest rates. One crash is one crash too many if you are counting on market returns to hold you through end of life. We are due for a good crash, but you can't count on it.
Of course, I could be wrong. Just my 2 cents.

I didn't go straight through; I was still in med school in 2008. I've been out of residency for two years, and I'll have worked just under three years FT when I quit my current job. Am currently applying for a fellowship, which takes care of benefits and living expenses for the next couple of years. After that? Not sure what I'll be doing work-wise, but likely something at least PT. Will get subsidized Obamacare if I don't have employer health insurance. Won't need DI or life insurance. My car, renter's, and umbrella policies are all cheap.

What's making this possible in my case are two things: living very far below my means, and getting out of med school without debt. (I'm MD/PhD.) I don't need to have saved multi millions of dollars when I'm living on ~$30,000 per year, especially given that I'll be working at least PT for the next decade or two. When the market crashes (and I would go a step farther than you and predict that it will likely crash a few times over the next several decades), I'll just wait it out.

 

[BLADEMDA]

I didn't go straight through; I was still in med school in 2008. I've been out of residency for two years, and I'll have worked just under three years FT when I quit my current job. Am currently applying for a fellowship, which takes care of benefits and living expenses for the next couple of years. After that? Not sure what I'll be doing work-wise, but likely something at least PT. Will get subsidized Obamacare if I don't have employer health insurance. Won't need DI or life insurance. My car, renter's, and umbrella policies are all cheap.

What's making this possible in my case are two things: living very far below my means, and getting out of med school without debt. (I'm MD/PhD.) I don't need to have saved multi millions of dollars when I'm living on ~$30,000 per year, especially given that I'll be working at least PT for the next decade or two. When the market crashes (and I would go a step farther than you and predict that it will likely crash a few times over the next several decades), I'll just wait it out.

I've worked more hours and done more cases right now than you will do in the rest of your career. I hope you plan on at least teaching others some subject as you have a MD/PhD.

Anyway, congrats on your plan but I can't help but think you barely used your education and training. Money isn't everything and you have a lot to contribute it if you choose to do so.

 

[QofQuimica]

I've worked more hours and done more cases right now than you will do in the rest of your career. I hope you plan on at least teaching others some subject as you have a MD/PhD.

Anyway, congrats on your plan but I can't help but think you barely used your education and training. Money isn't everything and you have a lot to contribute it if you choose to do so.

Agree. I have an academic position now and will be teaching/doing research during fellowship along with my clinical responsibilities. I am definitely not doing this for the money; I'm obviously taking a significant pay cut.

 

[pgg]

Charity work in a place you can't get sued is a really, really enjoyable way to spend time.

 

[deleted126335]

Charity work in a place you can't get sued is a really, really enjoyable way to spend time.

I have been thinking about this for awhile. Do you know of any for anesthesiology that doesn't involve pediatrics and not religiously affiliated?

 

[pgg]

No.

The only such work I've done has been with operation smile and a few times through the military.

 

[abolt18]

It depends on what you are doing and why.

Some people delay gratification their whole lives and work at something they hate or are bored with because they need the paycheck. They figure that their life will begin when they quit working.

My work is my life. I do everything that I do because I love it, and if something stops making me feel that way, I move on to the next thing. But I am always doing whatever I am passionate about. I want to work as much as I can, as long as I can. Eventually, my frail human body or mind will fail me, and I'll have to work less, or in a different capacity.

If "retire" means having enough money to live comfortably for the rest of one's life without working, then sure, I want that. Then I could offer my services for free, and have even more fun working. But if "retire" means stopping work in order to be idle and do things that I've put off... well, I haven't put off very much that I want to do. I'd spend a few weeks playing video games, travelling, and annoying the heck out of people in forums, and then I'd be looking for a job.

I did select 55 though I guess I really intend more to be FI by 50, likely work less then, and perhaps part time/locums in my later fifties just because I can't sit idle too long. I mostly just intend to be working a lot less at age 55.

 

[BLADEMDA]

 

[BLADEMDA]

Retirement calculators may not add up
Have you saved enough? These tools give an incomplete answer.

The next time a calculator tells you that you're on track for a timely retirement, take those results with a heaping spoonful of salt.


A recent analysis of a dozen free retirement planning calculators from different financial services firms found wildly varying projections on how much income you'll need once you've stopped working.

Corporate Insight, a New York-based research and consulting firm, drafted a hypothetical profile of Art Vandelay (apologies to Seinfeld), a 40-year-old architect who is single, earns a $100,000 salary and has saved $100,000 in his 401(k) savings plan. Corporate Insight analyzes industry trends and customer behaviors for financial services companies.

Based on the data and other inputs, the calculators gave a wide range of monthly retirement income projections, from $6,013 to $3,772.



http://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/25/retirement-calculators-may-not-add-up.html

 

[deleted126335]

If you are really serious about going through the data about withdrawal strategies and asset allocation strategies for the soon to be retiree check out this website. The book was published this year. I haven't bought the book but looked at the first three free chapters. It looks very thorough and gets high praise on the boglehead website

http://livingoffyourmoney.com