Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
January 22, 2013 at 4:58 PM in reply to: Over 21% of homeowners in SD County have paid off houses #758264January 22, 2013 at 4:55 PM in reply to: Over 21% of homeowners in SD County have paid off houses #758265
flyer
Participant[quote=bearishgurl]I’m failing to see why boomers need these high numbers in savings, stocks, etc to survive … especially ones with pensions who are just a few years from SS (assuming it pays out the retiree’s entire life).
I think a boomer with pension(s) can prudently “retire” on <=$1M, that is, IF they don't try to retire before at least age ~57 (preferably 59.5). A very experienced former worker can ALWAYS do something to make a little money ... even working from home (at least I can). LOTS of current "retirees" have their hand in a pot somewhere. Today's crop of boomers don't even own rocking chairs! I couldn't spend $5M if I tried. WTH do I need/want that costs that much ... even over the course of 20+ years? Of course, this statement assumes food (ESP fresh produce) will NOT triple or quadruple in price in my lifetime. I went to a "weightlifting-type" aerobic fitness class for the first time this past week and this large room was FULL of 60-somethings. And the majority of them were fit as a fiddle (both male and female). Just let me purchase a modest "vintage" 1950's house with hardwood floors (currently $175K to $350K) within 2 mi of a major ski resort (ex: S. Lake Tahoe) and a season lift pass (purchased the prior summer for half-price). I just learned from one of my fitness instructors (going on 70) that Snow Valley up in Big Bear Lake offers FREE sking to skiers over 70. He and his spouse just came back from two days on the slopes where he stated to the class that he planned to ski more often after he turned 70 :=] As a "retiree," even if I had a little 15-hr week paying "gig" shuffling court papers or the like, life really doesn't get any better than that and certainly doesn’t cost anywhere NEAR $5M . . . or even $2M, for that matter. There’s a LOT of biz functions I could perform as an “independent contractor.”
Not everyone has a desire to travel the world. I know several boomers who “inherited” RVs and boats in pretty good condition. For many, that is enough “entertainment” (along with owning a road-worthy vehicle).
Perhaps some Piggs are stating that “millions” or “$5M” is needed for a couple to retire. If that is the case, they often have two or more pensions between themselves, so no … I don’t think they need $5M.
I think taking a lot of risk to try to accumulate that much is unrealistic and overkill, unless one is presently young enough (~20-30-ish) and has time to recover from investment mistakes.
The above presupposes the retirees did NOT overextend themselves throughout life on RE loans and other forms of consumer credit, are retiring with a paid-off residence OR will sell their residence and buy a retirement residence with their sales proceeds and have pension allowances which greatly assist with healthcare premiums OR qualify medically for a low-cost HDHP.[/quote]
BG, I do agree with many of your points. As you said, pensions, employer health insurance, free travel etc., may somewhat supplant the need for “millions,” and I have factored those benefits into my personal equation.
Perhaps we should say saving “millions,” the equivalent, or whatever meets your own personal needs, would be a more accurate statement.
January 22, 2013 at 4:03 PM in reply to: Over 21% of homeowners in SD County have paid off houses #758257ParticipantRegarding various responses. . .
It’s true that a fairly large percentage of Baby Boomers have a lower net worth than they’d prefer–many times, not because of bad financial decisions–but because they are supporting themselves, their parents, their grown kids (who can’t find jobs, or buy homes) the government, etc., etc., but I believe that trend will continue to “infect” the majority of generations going forward. In fact, it could get even worse for them than it has been for the Baby Boomers.
Personally, like most of you, and as most financial professionals agree, we all may need multiple millions to sustain/enjoy retirement–and that’s what I was referring to with regard to “financial solvency.”
IMO, that’s when you can fully support yourself and/or your family for the balance of your life without being dependent on a job, and, as I mentioned, the stats are staggeringly low in that regard.
It’s easy to say we shouldn’t worry about things like that, and just blow it off, but, believe me, if things continue as they are with the ever-growing divide between the wealthy and the middle class (the poor will always be subsidized), there will inevitably be some price to pay (socially, politically, economically, etc.) In other words, you won’t be living in the same world you are enjoying today.
In one way or another, the “financial insolvency” in this country it will effect everyone’s quality of life.
edit: Case in point. Look for those 70% tax rates coming to a country near you. I jest now, but you never know!
January 22, 2013 at 4:18 AM in reply to: Over 21% of homeowners in SD County have paid off houses #758207ParticipantYou’re right, AN, everyone reaches their financial goals in different ways, at different times. As long as each of us reach our own particular financial goals in life, that’s all that really matters. (speaking purely from a monetary perspective)
My concern, and, I think, perhaps the concern of some others who have posted in this thread, is that the stats reveal only 5% of the population is financially solvent–based upon net worth–which is the generally accepted barometer for financial “success.”
As ER alluded, you don’t really know if people are financially successful until you know their net worth–minus smoke and mirrors.
As flu always says, don’t worry about it, take care of your own, which I know all of us here plan to do, but it still makes you wonder what the ramifications of the ever-declining financial solvency in 95% of the US population will create in our society going forward.
ParticipantSome of the best lots in town are in areas with older homes. Unless the home is of historic value, many people buy a house they might not love, tear it down, and build what they want. For many, it’s all about location, not how “new” the house is.
January 21, 2013 at 6:31 PM in reply to: Over 21% of homeowners in SD County have paid off houses #758191Participant[quote=earlyretirement][quote=CA renter]
What ER said is true about the yo-yo types who make incredible amounts of money on a lucky streak, but then double down and lose everything (and then some). Sometimes, they actually manage to come back again, but they usually crash again, too. Some might view this is “successful” because when these people are at the top, they can really fly high, but they can crash just as dramatically; and seeing this — more often than not — is what makes me want to do the exact opposite of what these people do, and what they invariably do is use leverage…lots of it (and get into really convoluted deals that don’t make any sense).[/quote]
Exactly. I’ve seen a lot of these types over the years. My feeling is this… it’s really difficult to really ‘know’ someone’s TRUE net worth. Many times it’s all smoke and mirrors and leverage and credit card debt fueling their lifestyle.
In other countries where I’ve lived it’s easier to ascertain one’s true net worth. Because no one is buying an expensive sports car unless they bought it outright. Or for the most part if someone “own’s” an expensive pad it means they bought it. If they take fancy trips around the world it’s because they have the cash for it.
The USA can be a land of smoke and mirrors where you THINK someone has a high net worth but it’s all a facade. They can live in a really amazing house in the best neighborhood, their kids can go to private schools, they take fancy trips and drive luxury cars…. but you know what? They could not only have NO net worth but worse they have NEGATIVE net worth.
I’ve met people over the years that kept trying to tell me that it doesn’t make sense to own outright and they could do better things with their money or earn more, etc. But the rub is that the vast majority of humans always over estimate their investment abilities. They think they can do better than anyone else. They think they are smarter than most people.
For those of you who haven’t watched “Queen of Versailles” – http://iurl.no/v1C Watch it! It’s amazing to see a guy building a $100 million dollar house yet not have any college savings set aside for his 8 (EIGHT) kids. All kinds of sharks like this out there.
Heck, I’m as guilty of this as anyone else and will be the first to admit it. Even people that are somewhat “conservative” in nature will make stupid investments that they didn’t think were stupid at the time.
So the trick is that those that say they will take $X money they have in the bank during the hard times to really have the money in the bank because in my experience there is always some “great investment” or “can’t lose investment” or “once in a lifetime investment property” etc. where you can take the funds you have and lose it.
Very, very, very few people have the discipline to hold large sums of money and ride out extremely difficult periods of time. I’m sure you will hear everyone and their brother tell you how much bloody money they’ve made in the last few years in the run off in the stock market.
But what most people don’t tell you is how scared they were at the peak of the crises when their 401k’s were getting decimated. And anyone that tells you they knew things would rebound so quickly is probably lying.
Like I said….most people think they are better investors then they actually are. I’ve met VERY few people that are truly gifted and make insane returns year after year after decade after decade. One is Warren Buffet and another is Steven Cohen. Although it looks like now there is a reason guys like Cohen could justify making 30% annual returns for decades.
People will go on and on telling you about their best and greatest returns on investment. While I’ve made some GREAT investments I try not to think about those. What I try to always remember is my WORSE investments.
An example of one of my worst investments. I was short selling stocks like Bank of America (BAC) for 2 years along with many of the financial companies back at the peak. I saw the crash coming and knew they were going to get killed so I started short selling them and made lots of money doing that.
Well, once banks started folding or getting sold and bailed out, I thought I was smarter than everyone else. I told myself, “you can’t lose!”. Long story short….I ended up investing in Washington Mutual (WAMU) 2 days before it went under.
I told myself that there was no way the government would let them fail. I saw other banks like Wachovia being bailed out and quickly sold so I figured that the same would happen to WAMU. I’m not sure if there are any WAMU investors on the board but if so you know how things turned out.
The FDIC handed over WAMU to Chase and the investors lost out. It was the quickest $250,000 I ever lost (literally in a few days).
So again, I saw think about your worst investments rather than your best investments. I’m as guilty as anyone else as making stupid investments or trying to “catch a falling knife”.
I mention this story because I say again that most people simply don’t have the discipline to hold cash during great investment opportunities. Things in principle sound great but it’s another thing in real life.
Of course I’m not saying there aren’t any totally disciplined people out there that can do it when they say they would rather not pay off their primary house and leverage it and they can always make guaranteed money. In reality, we all have hiccups.
I consider myself a VERY disciplined investor and I’d like to think I’ve made some very wise investments. But my point in my diatribe above is to point out that we ALL make horrible investments or decisions to use our money. Whether it’s that can’t lose investment, that great rental/investment property or making a loan to a dead beat family member.[/quote]
All so true ER! CA has become the land of “smoke and mirrors,” and I’m saying that as a native.
That wasn’t really the case when my wife and I grew up here in LJ, but as it’s become more expensive, and competitive, and people have become more and more desperate to “keep up appearances,” it has devolved into that.
What’s sad is that many people will spend everything they make during their best earning years just to exist here, then be left high and dry later in life, when they need financial security. Not a good plan.
People are always astounded when I bring up the topic of “net worth,” it’s like an elephant entered the room.
January 21, 2013 at 5:54 PM in reply to: Over 21% of homeowners in SD County have paid off houses #758186Participant[quote=CA renter]Good post, UCGal. You’re right, it really does depend on one’s stage in life, familial obligations, future employment/income prospects, etc.
What ER said is true about the yo-yo types who make incredible amounts of money on a lucky streak, but then double down and lose everything (and then some). Sometimes, they actually manage to come back again, but they usually crash again, too. Some might view this is “successful” because when these people are at the top, they can really fly high, but they can crash just as dramatically; and seeing this — more often than not — is what makes me want to do the exact opposite of what these people do, and what they invariably do is use leverage…lots of it (and get into really convoluted deals that don’t make any sense).[/quote]
Exactly, CAR.
Making your fortune is one thing, hanging onto it throughout your lifetime is another. I’ve seen people make and lose fortunes all my life. Our goal has always been to preserve ours for the long-haul.
Participant[quote=squat300][quote=flyer]squat, we all have different beliefs about how eternity will work out for each of us. I have friends who have strong spiritual beliefs as I do, and others who believe in nothing at all, and I respect all of them.
I can understand why some people hope there is “nothing,” it’s easier that way–no accountability. I’m sticking with what I believe to be true–to each his or her own.
Place your bets, and take your chances.[/quote]
There is plenty accountability here on earth, day to day.
Of course, now that I am persuaded our existence is a computer program, there maybe accountability in the sense that our characters accrue points in future games. Perhaps a high score may count in future reset games[/quote]
You never know, squat–you may be onto something. Guess we’ll all find out after that last breath!
Participantsquat, we all have different beliefs about how eternity will work out for each of us. I have friends who have strong spiritual beliefs as I do, and others who believe in nothing at all, and I respect all of them.
I can understand why some people hope there is “nothing,” it’s easier that way–no accountability. I’m sticking with what I believe to be true–to each his or her own.
Place your bets, and take your chances.
Participant[quote=squat300]im pretty sure financially he’s still going to win. he’s worth over $100 million he’ll get the baddest ass lawyers who will continue to grind plaintiffs into a fine mealy powder till they collectively try to settle for pennies on the dollar, but they’ll only get fractions of that,as he’s protected all his wealth these years diversifying hiding stuffing and moving money around all over the world.
he will still come out on top money wise.
and karmically, since he has no human feeling, you cannot hurt him.
there is no karmic revenge.
lance wins again!
woo-hoo![/quote]
Personally, I believe there is karmic, and many other forms of eternal “revenge,” so enjoy it while you can, Lance.
Everyone has different beliefs about what happens after this world, but, personally, I wouldn’t want to be riding his bike into the great forever.
January 20, 2013 at 3:18 PM in reply to: Over 21% of homeowners in SD County have paid off houses #758094ParticipantI agree with all of you “younger” guys, because I was doing the same thing when I was your age, but, building wealth then seemed to be less of a challenge than it it today.
Also agree that paying off a home while you are younger, and in the wealth-building mode, might not be the best thing to do–especially if you don’t have your ultimate nestegg, medical coverage, etc., etc., covered for the balance of your life–and that “number” will be in the millions for anyone in their 30’s and 40’s–if you want to live well.
Going back to the OP, I’d guess most of the 21% have everything covered, so it’s probably not a problem
ParticipantI give the man credit for staging a fight against a disease that any of us could face, and winning a battle many lose.
Other than that, everything else about him has been proven to be a myth, and on that basis, I have no respect for him.
At this point, I think most people wish he would stop wasting everyone’s time trying to justify his lies, and simply disappear from public view.
January 19, 2013 at 1:58 AM in reply to: Over 21% of homeowners in SD County have paid off houses #758030ParticipantFrom my experience, I’m pretty sure the decision to pay off a house is not an either/or decision for most of the 21% mentioned in the OP.
I would venture to guess most of the 21% have plenty of cash/investments/pensions, etc. to cover living expenses/retirement, etc., AND pay their homes off.
Some of us bought our homes/investment properties for relatively nothing, compared to today’s pricing. Others, who purchased their homes fairly recently, as some on this board have done, have come in with cash to purchase million+ homes–even at today’s prices–so it is conceivable that both can be achieved.
Participant[quote=AN]Lot B+, house D-. Based on the pictures, the layout seems dysfunctional to me. If I was given that house, I’d probably tear it down and rebuild from scratch to take more advantage of that view.[/quote]
AN, that’s exactly what many new buyers do in that area. Someone bought a home near one of my relative’s in SC for $1.5M, tore it down, and replaced it with a new mansion.
You can see numerous examples of that all over Point Loma, Sunset Cliffs and Mission Hills, etc.–it’s been going on for years. They usually build up to maximize the view, and that way, they get the view and/or location they want AND a new home.
Participant[quote=bearishgurl]L@rd, I so-o-o-o wish I could afford to “retire” in this area . . .[/quote]
Yes, BG, PL, SC, LJ, Mission Hills, etc., are great, and are also representative of “old money” areas where many homes are held free and clear, and are passed onto family members for generations, as mentioned in the “21%” post.
My wife and I grew up in LJ, and have relatives all over town. Now that we’re in our early 50’s, it’s been very interesting to see the evolution of San Diego over our past 50+ years (give or take the years we lived elsewhere.)
And yes, SK, agree you will definitely find many homes in the older neighborhoods 60+ years old, in all their vintage glory!
Many, as you know, have become amazing remodels. We knew a family with a home in Mission Hills built in the early 1900’s–with four stories and an elevator–on a fantastic lot!
-
AuthorPosts
