|
|
|
|
|
by hnmonkey
2797 days ago
|
|
What's your definition of 'bonkers areas?' Can you show how 1 million net worth gets someone retirement? It seems to me that if you're retiring on 1 million dollars you're going to run out of money pretty easily unless you're living off rice and beans. And in many places with just $40k a year (assuming a 4% withdrawal of the 1 million) you might not be able to even cover your mortgage/rent/property taxes/bills not even factoring in food/healthcare/entertainment. These days people who retire can potentially live another 20 years or so and 1 million in the bank won't cover it at all. |
|
I'll use GBP to begin with and convert back to USD at the end, because I'm in the UK.
10K GBP a year is more than I currently spend on life. This excludes rent. I'll get to that.
300K at a 3.33% withdrawal gets you that.
Another 300K to buy a home outright. Sod the mortgage, you have 1M net worth, do that if you think you can beat HPI with investments. This is doable in most of the UK. In many areas you'd get something really rather nice for that.
That's 600K GBP or 768K USD, in total. That actually gets you a better standard of living than my current one, forever (I don't own a home).
A bit left over. So we'll spend another 5 grand a year 'cos we can. 166K GBP required at 3.33% withdrawal, 766K in total. Still not 1M USD.
In London (I live here) you'd probably want 750K for the house (you can do cheaper but if you have this money to begin with you probably wouldn't). That would bring it to very roughly 1.5-2M total. I think it's fair to consider London a "bonkers area".
When I say retirement I mean early retirement, sorry, I'm lazy.
It's kind of odd to me to explain this over and over because it seems like most people just don't do the math. If you have annual minimum wage x 25 in the bank then you are in a position to work fairly infrequently. If you have annual minimum wage x 50 you can probably sustain a basic existence indefinitely. Above that you're looking at More Toys.