[vundercind]

“Never work again” money is crazy-high for younger folks (like, not already close to qualifying for Medicare) in the US, on account of the costs and financial risks of our healthcare system.

Most of the FIRE bloggers who bother to account for this—like MMM—have a (perhaps implicit) fallback plan of returning to work somewhere with decent health insurance if they or a family member becomes very sick, but that’s quite a gamble.

(Never mind that a bunch of those sorts have jobs and couldn’t remain comfortably “retired” without them—god I really hate that part of the blogosphere, “look it’s so easy you dumb idiot” but then you start reading between the lines and realize how much of it’s just a bit)

[toast0]

> “Never work again” money is crazy-high for younger folks (like, not already close to qualifying for Medicare) in the US, on account of the costs and financial risks of our healthcare system.

Exchange plans are fine enough, and like, they're not that cheap, but they're also not that expensive either. Depending on how much you make from investments on your never have to work again horde, you may be able to qualify for rate subsidies, and then it's even less expensive. In my county, if I were 64 years old, assigned male at birth, I'm looking at about $17,000/year for a Blue Cross Bronze plan (less costly options available), with $9,200 out of pocket max. Budgeting $26,000/year for healthcare means less than $1 M should cover you for life (assume 3% perpetual withdrawal rate). Rates are lower for younger people, but budgeting based on current costs for the oldest people should help the numbers work. Double the budget if you have a spouse; do some math if you have kids you need to cover until they become independent. Definitely make sure you work until you have earned Medicare eligibility, cause it'll be handy when you reach that age.

Is $1-2 M crazy-high? Kind of, but depending on what your annual withdrawal rate target was, maybe you can just say if you've got enough to pull $100,000/year, you're good on healthcare too. Hopefully most years you won't hit the out of pocket max.

[vundercind]

> maybe you can just say if you've got enough to pull $100,000/year, you're good on healthcare too.

You’ll be exposed to tens of thousands in risk per year on top of (low) tens of thousands in premiums per year for a family Exchange plan. You’ll be burning nearly half of that (and spending all your free time trying to keep hospitals and insurers taking even more) if one of you gets cancer—or, if it’s you who gets cancer, you better hope someone else can handle that.

You also can’t withdraw at as high a “safe rate” as people planning for an ordinary retirement at ~65 do, because your fund needs to last a lot longer despite inflation and such. $2m isn’t “retire at 35” (… or 45) money. It might be “take a big gamble and maybe get lucky… for a while” money. Or semi-retire money.

[edit] at constant 2% inflation (ha!) you need a very safe source of consistent (not average!) 6% returns to retire with 80,000/yr income on $2m, without eating into principal. Anything goes wrong (“whoops, ‘safe’ wasn’t as safe as I thought!” or “whoops, we had a year of 7% inflation and my investments didn’t benefit from that!”) and you can find yourself burning principal while your account value is already down. It won’t take a lot of that before $80k is no longer your safe-withdrawal amount. A couple such years and you may be back to work. 30+ years is a long time…

[edit edit] also damn under $10k max out of pocket on a family plan at the bronze level for $17k? I gotta get out of my shithole state. That’s better than our Gold plans (also our plans tend not to cover like 2/3 of area providers, which may include 100% of area specialists for certain situations)

[kudokatz]

> You also can’t withdraw at as high a “safe rate” as people planning for an ordinary retirement at ~65 do

Solvable, including consideration of valuations via CAPE PE 10. Based on past data, the safe withdrawal rate (SWR) happens to be around 3.25-3.5% of assets to extend to a 60-year time horizon [1]

> at constant 2% inflation (ha!) you need a very safe source of consistent (not average!) 6% returns to retire with 80,000/yr income on $2m, without eating into principal.

For most of this research, "failure" constitutes running out of money. Preserving the initial portfolio value in inflation-adjusted terms can also be solved for. It takes the SWR closer to 2.8-3% for 60-year horizon with high equity valuation corrections.

> You’ll be exposed to tens of thousands in risk per year on top of (low) tens of thousands in premiums per year for a family Exchange plan.

Better to cap expenses and be ready to pay for it than live in fear. Save, invest, and move on with life.

> $2m isn’t “retire at 35” (… or 45) money. It might be “take a big gamble and maybe get lucky… for a while” money. Or semi-retire money.

Depends on how much money you need to spend every year to be happy. Sounds like you need a lot of it. For many, $2m would be fine, even with a very long time horizon. And if any problems crop up, there would be a 15-20 year warning during which a small income boost could top things up.

----

Things don't always have to be so gloomy.

[1] https://earlyretirementnow.com/2017/09/13/the-ultimate-guide...

[toast0]

My budget includes the premiums and the individual out of pocket max. If that's not good enough, what number am I supposed to be looking at? My with a spouse budget is just 2x the individual budget, family out of pockets are usually around 2x individual in my neck of the woods, so that doesn't make a big difference; if there's kids, then it would, but the modelling there gets tricky because you've got to figure out what age you're kicking them off the plan (assuming they don't have a debilitating condition that leaves them dependent on you for their whole life... that falls outside my plan).

> You also can’t withdraw at as high a “safe rate” as people planning for an ordinary retirement at ~65 do, because your fund needs to last a lot longer despite inflation and such. $2m isn’t “retire at 35” (… or 45) money. It might be “take a big gamble and maybe get lucky… for a while” money. Or semi-retire money.

The $2 M is the budged accumulation only to pay for premiums and out of pocket until you hit Medicare; and that's assuming a spouse. Budgeting that based on perpetual withdrawl rate gives yet another buffer, because it only has to last until Medicare eligibility age. Yeah, there's unknowns, but whatever. I'm not saying $2 M is enough to accumulate for early retirement. It could be, but a lot of people want to spend more money than that. $2 M doesn't generate that much income, so you'll likely qualify for health plan subsidies, which would help a bit too.

Edit: I used zipcode 98110, birthday for illustration 01/01/1960. Going into the less expensive side of my state, zipcode 99336; there's no blue cross out there, but the most expensive bronze plan for that birthdate is $14,000 / year with the same $9200 out of pocket max. And yeah, limited networks suck ... I'm not going to shop for hypotheticals there --- I'm pretty sure if there's no reasonable in network doctors, you can fight your insurance to get covered at a reasonable doctor, regardless of the insurance and state, and if you're early retired, you'll have time for it.

[lupire]

Some people think that if you can't spend a million dollars a year on healthcare for 50 years, you are poor. In a sense they are right, because nothing is more valuable than life, but if you lower your expectations beyond the tippy top 0.1%, and take up a nice hobby like skydiving or motorcycling, you can get by with a lot less.