Pensions Planning: The NUMBER

LHW99

Never in my life have I planned for or lived around ‘a number’ but ‘the number’ has impacted how I do things.

I agree, my point was that blissfully jumping because you may be fed up with a job may well take you through to 75 or so, but will you be fit enough at that age to take on shelf stacking etc? Would you cope with the upheaval of downsizing, or release sufficient money from it?

I have never had a "number" in terms of pot size, but have always had some idea of the income I need to continue living at a standard that I judge adequate (for me). Once you have that "FU" amount, everything else is the jam, cream and icing.

kimwp

LHW99 said:

Never in my life have I planned for or lived around ‘a number’ but ‘the number’ has impacted how I do things.

I agree, my point was that blissfully jumping because you may be fed up with a job may well take you through to 75 or so, but will you be fit enough at that age to take on shelf stacking etc? Would you cope with the upheaval of downsizing, or release sufficient money from it?

I have never had a "number" in terms of pot size, but have always had some idea of the income I need to continue living at a standard that I judge adequate (for me). Once you have that "FU" amount, everything else is the jam, cream and icing.

How do you know you have enough for that income?

kempiejon

I can see how much income my pot generates and compare that to my recorded expenses and wants for future income.

If you have a job, receive benefits are employed, get loyalties from copyright, generate investment income, have a pensions or a mix of them or any other sources, you cut your coat according to your cloth. 
 
The idea that one can retire when the pot is big enough is an indicator was soon updated in my plan. Part of my pot is invested for income, a change that came when I became a more retire early focused investor.
When I started buying income generating investments I could see my investment income grow alongside my wages from self/employment. Eventually the later outstripped the former.
(edit) Eventually the former outstripped the latter. Worked looked optional from then on. 

Sarahspangles

LHW99 said:

Never in my life have I planned for or lived around ‘a number’ but ‘the number’ has impacted how I do things.

I agree, my point was that blissfully jumping because you may be fed up with a job may well take you through to 75 or so, but will you be fit enough at that age to take on shelf stacking etc? Would you cope with the upheaval of downsizing, or release sufficient money from it?

I have never had a "number" in terms of pot size, but have always had some idea of the income I need to continue living at a standard that I judge adequate (for me). Once you have that "FU" amount, everything else is the jam, cream and icing.

As project managers like to joke “I can deliver this to spec, on time, in budget. Just pick which two…”

I’ve realised some people aren’t ready to retire unless and until simulations guarantee them a relatively high level of income up to age 100. They deprioritise retiring a little earlier, even though they’re more likely to live through 60 to 70 than 90 to 100. Other people want to retire as early as possible, and accept an increased likelihood they’ll run out of money and have a frugal later life.

Your ‘adequate’ plus ‘jam, cream and icing’ money sounds right to me. I can’t imagine not checking in at least annually on how much jam is left in the pot.

kimwp

Sarahspangles said:

LHW99 said:

Never in my life have I planned for or lived around ‘a number’ but ‘the number’ has impacted how I do things.

I agree, my point was that blissfully jumping because you may be fed up with a job may well take you through to 75 or so, but will you be fit enough at that age to take on shelf stacking etc? Would you cope with the upheaval of downsizing, or release sufficient money from it?

I have never had a "number" in terms of pot size, but have always had some idea of the income I need to continue living at a standard that I judge adequate (for me). Once you have that "FU" amount, everything else is the jam, cream and icing.

As project managers like to joke “I can deliver this to spec, on time, in budget. Just pick which two…”

I’ve realised some people aren’t ready to retire unless and until simulations guarantee them a relatively high level of income up to age 100. They deprioritise retiring a little earlier, even though they’re more likely to live through 60 to 70 than 90 to 100. Other people want to retire as early as possible, and accept an increased likelihood they’ll run out of money and have a frugal later life.

Your ‘adequate’ plus ‘jam, cream and icing’ money sounds right to me. I can’t imagine not checking in at least annually on how much jam is left in the pot.

I think as well (though don't quote me), the later you retire, the shorter your overall lifespan is likely to be. Though it may be correlation rather than cause and effect.

Sarahspangles

kimwp said:

I think as well (though don't quote me), the later you retire, the shorter your overall lifespan is likely to be. Though it may be correlation rather than cause and effect.

That’s interesting, if so. I would have assumed that people who retire early through ill health would skew the figures, assuming their condition implies lower life expectancy. Are you thinking that work stress skews the figures the other way? Do people put up with stress when they could retire, even though it increases risk?

Phossy

Sarahspangles said:

Do people put up with stress when they could retire, even though it increases risk?

Listening and reading to others stories about retiring, I don't think folks understand how much stress they are under until they retire and experience the huge weight that disappears from their shoulders. Stress is a huge factor in determining peoples health.

MallyGirl

Indeed. I yearn for the days when I am not awake at 5am thinking through some issue going on at work.

LHW99

Phossy said:

Sarahspangles said:

Do people put up with stress when they could retire, even though it increases risk?

Listening and reading to others stories about retiring, I don't think folks understand how much stress they are under until they retire and experience the huge weight that disappears from their shoulders. Stress is a huge factor in determining peoples health.

It does depend on the job though. Working in a specialised field from our own company meant there was a lot of control over what was done, how and when. It's that control that tends to reduce stress levels.

Sarahspangles

Phossy said:

Sarahspangles said:

Do people put up with stress when they could retire, even though it increases risk?

Listening and reading to others stories about retiring, I don't think folks understand how much stress they are under until they retire and experience the huge weight that disappears from their shoulders. Stress is a huge factor in determining peoples health.

I’m looking forward to finding out, the countdown is now in weeks…. I’ve previously had a sabbatical and a couple of shorter breaks between contracts but unluckily they’ve coincided with illness (two out of three) and at the same time parents requiring a step up in care. At the time it felt fortuitous I wasn’t also trying to work, and had a buffer to fund a chunk of time off.

With my luck I’m going to be that person everyone knows who pops off as they draw their pension. It runs in the family, my grand-uncle is “do not run with scissors, once there was a little boy…”