Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudoreality
That's a little extreme. You are not going to need $5MM in savings when you are 100. So there can be a reasonable drawdown. Also, younger old people are generally more active and wish travel and such versus older old people (see go, slow, and no-go years). Not that I think you are saying this, but I want to point out that I don't think anyone is entitled to retire at 60. If you save money, fill your boots, but I don't think it is a basic right or anything.
$200k individual pre-tax income is not squarely middle class. According to this CBC article
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/can...tion-1.5317206
$120 household post-tax is the very top end of what could be considered middle class at 200% average household income, which would be the equivalent of a single-income household at $200 pre-tax. |
He's not suggesting that you $5m at 90. He's saying that if you want $200k/yr you need $5m to have that steady income through 90.
There's a serious disconnect here. Professionals tell people that to do this, you need $X.XX and have some surety that you will have that money. For some reason people just don't want to believe it. They just think that the numbers sound insane, so the guy doesn't know what he's talking about?