FREE NEWSLETTER
SUPPOSE YOU KNEW you’d live until at least age 90. How would that change your thinking about retirement?
It seems most of us focus less on the possibility of a long life and more on the risk of an early death. This grim view is buttressed by endless anecdotal evidence—celebrities who pass away in their 40s and 50s, terrible accidents that take multiple lives, old classmates and colleagues who die at tragically young ages. Still, I’m starting to think that this focus on an early demise is not only a gloomy distraction from life’s daily joys, but also it leads us to make less-than-ideal retirement decisions.
Indeed, as I squint into the future from the not-so-grand age of 61, it occurs to me that there’s a chance I have three decades or more ahead of me, and it would be a shame to spend all that time focusing solely on fun and on short-term investment results. If I do that, I fear there’s a risk I’ll look back and rue the wasted time.
So, humor me, and join me in a thought experiment: If you knew the grim reaper wouldn’t turn up until your 90s, how would that alter your retirement plans? Here are four changes you might make:
Still, on this last one, I think it’s important to strike the right balance. Even if folks knew they’d live to their 90s and hence they might want to spend a tad more cautiously in their 60s, I wouldn’t want to discourage them from ticking off bucket-list items in their 60s and early 70s. While we might live until our 90s, our desire to spend time in the wider world—whether it’s traveling, hiking, attending concerts, visiting friends—might wane in our late 70s or early 80s.
All this raises an obvious question: What are the chances that a 65-year-old will live to his or her 90s? Among the general population, the odds aren’t great: 20% of 65-year-old men and 31% of 65-year-old women will live to age 90. What if you’re married? The chance that one of you will live to 90 rises to 45%.
But what if you’re a 65-year-old who is in good current health, has lived a healthy lifestyle and didn’t have a job that was physically demanding? The odds of making it to 90 rise to 30% for men and 42% for women, with the chances that one member of a couple lives that long at 60%. Suddenly, living to 90 looks like a distinct possibility.
Still, such odds may not be enough to persuade folks to change their behavior. But I’d encourage readers to ponder one more notion: As you plan your retirement, what’s the bigger financial risk, dying early or living to a ripe old age?
Let’s be honest: If you keeled over at 68, it would be a family tragedy—but it wouldn’t be a financial one. At that juncture, all your financial problems would be over, and your family would likely be better off financially because they’d inherit your retirement nest egg, which would probably still be largely intact.
Instead, the real financial risk is living to a ripe old age. That raises the question: As you make your retirement plans, shouldn’t you care more about the live version of your future self, rather than the dead one?
Jonathan Clements is the founder and editor of HumbleDollar. Follow him on X @ClementsMoney, on Facebook and on Threads, and check out his earlier articles.
Want to receive our weekly newsletter? Sign up now. How about our daily alert about the site's latest posts? Join the list.
As life reaches its end the need for care increases. Exponentially. There are only two ways to meet that need: Time and labor gifted by those who love you, or time and labor purchased privately. Those who love you will do their best, and may even set aside their own lives or careers to do the work – if you are lucky and it doesn’t bother you to impose on them. Those who offer services for hire, whether in your home or in a facility, will only provide for you as long as you can pay. Concocting some combination of the two strategies may be an option, but I know now that it takes an unnatural amount of effort to secure a natural death for someone you love.
My personal conclusion is that no “bucket list” of exotic travel or other indulgence is worth putting myself in the position of being without the resources I need to live out my last hours in compassionate, skilled, care and perhaps even with a loved one standing beside me. Not alone, abandoned in an institutional wasteland, between shifts.
At the fine, young age of middle-70s, already I find so many things that I can no longer do. (I won’t list the particulars, but they are significant that I don’t move much heavy stuff around any more, and can hardly manage to hit a nail on the head with a hammer.) (On the Nail’s head, that is.)
The idea of being without assets at the farthest end of my life seems as irresponsible as doing so at any earlier age. These questions—such as (A) will I die before I get a profitable return on my Social Security and (B) why shouldn’t I blow through a lifetime of savings and leave <0 behind—are no more avoidable now than they’ve ever been.
If “freedom” means the right to pursue your own course, and find your own “doom,” to shift the burden of self-responsibility on to my kids is—to repeat myself—no more avoidable now then ever.
“I know not what self-indulgent wasteful, final years others may choose. But as for me, give me a secure pension & assets in reserve to cover my ass in my declining years, or give me death.”*
Regards,
(($; -)}™
Gozo
—
*Nathan Hale (oft-misquoted)
Many of my friends in their late 50s are reading Die with Zero and taking it to heart. In other words, spend in your 60s while you have the energy and physical capabilities. I agree to an extent. I’ve watched my father and mother-in-law live until their mid-90s, ending up in assisted living centers and spending every last cent they had. My Dad just passed at 88 after a 12-year battle with Alzheimer’s. His monthly expenses were in excess of $9,000 per month, leaving my 84-year-old mom with reduced income for the rest of her life. These types of money decisions are fraught with what-ifs. Your money can go very quickly when 2 people need expensive care. Of course, Medicaid or state funds can kick in, but not for the types of places you’d like to stay in.
I’ve found the “happy medium” seems to work best for us. Spend enough to enjoy retirement but not go crazy and leave enough for a long-term retirement and possibly declining health. I was in Omaha earlier this month and noticed Warren Buffett is walking with a cane now. He was so on-the-go for so long I thought he would stay that way. I’m reminded of a quote that goes, “There is nothing you can have when you are old that beats being young and having nothing.”
Interesting discussion. As a (now retired) financial planner, my observation was that invariably clients underestimated their life expectancies. I had some interesting and enlightening conversations some years ago with Joe Tomlinson, a retired actuary who has published extensively on such topics. He commented that life expectancy for highly educated, physically fit individuals (the typical Humble Dollar reader) was 15-20 years longer than those with limited education and poor physical condition. He also said that life expectancy for these individuals was increasing (for individuals at a given age) almost 1/3 year every year into the future. So any past published table is probably seriosly outdated by now.
I just looked at an 2015 annuity table (which is based on those healthy, educated folks) which Joe generously provided, updated with those annual increases since its initial publication, for a 70 year old man and woman. There is an almost 50% probability that the man will be alive at 90 and the woman at 95. The fortunate 50% will live (possibly much) longer!
Most Humble Dollar readers should plan on being around for a long time (and plan prudently to fund that entire period)!
Great article with common sense. For me most of the answers/solutions depend on 2 major things: having enough money + interesting things to do in retirement.
What is enough money? I read many opinions/articles/research and found out that it starts at 10-15 times your annual expense. I like to be sure that I never have to work and thought that 20 times is the minimum. I retired with 25+ times portfolio, not including SS, in 2018, and since then it has been up by a lot. I plan that this money should last for me and my wife to age 100.
Things to do: I have so many things to do that my day is full of spending time with others + many experiences around the world. My wife was afraid to retire and did it a couple of years after me. She has been surprised by how busy she is.
All the people I know that still work, don’t have enough money or haven’t found interesting things to do. I don’t know anyone who said before death she would wish she didn’t work more.
I treat money, investing, and spending like a math equation. As long as I am in good mind, I control the money at all times and invest MY way.
LTC-I ran the numbers and it doesn’t make sense, you pay too much, it doesn’t cover enough, and there are loopholes. At retirement (2018) I calculated that 5 years between me and the wife was enough. That came to $8K per month * 12 months = rounding to $100K * 5 = $500K. Since 2018, I doubled my money it is now worth one million. There is no dedicated portion (bucket) for that. It’s all invested at 99+% and I manage one portfolio for everything.
Annuities– never done it and never would as long as I’m capable managing our portfolio. My wife has detailed instructions on what funds to use if I die earlier. Simple annuities are OK, but more complicated ones are rarely OK.
Years in cash– again, it’s all invested, my unique bond funds are the answer to that too.
Fund Daddy…I would never try to convince a person of the need or benefits of a product they feel they do not need, but I wish I had a dollar for every person who has ever told me they plan to self insure for LTCi.
I happen to own an excellent, inexpensive LTCi policy I purchased in 2005, as a part of an employee benefits package. After two small premium increase over the past 19 years, it costs me@$1675 annually for a policy that pays $300 a day for Nursing home or Assisted Living care and a slightly smaller amount for in home care, for a 5 years period. It has a 5% COLA attached to it as well. I kept it and paid the premiums personally, after leaving the company a few years later. My wife, however, does not have LTCi, as she could not qualify for a stand alone LTC policy, not could she qualify for a life policy with LTCi Rider. Our retirement plan has only earmarked $200K for her care, should she need it, because we own 4 annuities with Income Riders, that will also cover LTC, if needed. You said you “ran the numbers” and you felt you it cost too much, had loop holes and didn’t cover enough. If that is actually true, you were not looking at a quality plan, because none of that is true in my case.
You stated you wouldn’t consider Annuities, as long as you were able to manage your own investments.
Questions…how will you know when you are no longer able to do so, assuming the primary reason for needing assistance is dementia? In anticipation of retirement, I purchased 4 annuities. 3 in my name, but joint, and 1 in my spouse’s name, also joint.. These were funded with Roth Dollars, so when they are “turned on” for income in the future, they will produce tax free income dollars. Until them, the income side of the Annuity Ledger is growing by 8.25% annually.
If your wife is like mine, the detailed letter will better serve her after your demise. In my case, that is what my detailed letter of instruction is for. I also have an advisor who is 40 years younger than me, to assist her when I am no longer here to do it. (My portfolio is at Vanguard, and I use the PAS program @30 bp annually.)
I wish you long and happy life, but you owe it to yourself to find a truly qualified LTCi Professional and a similarly qualified Annuity Specialist and make sure you have the best information available. After 40 years in the industry and 15 years training/teaching financial planners and retirement planners at the collegiate level, in the CFP, CLU, ChFC and RICP programs, I can assure you that you do not have it now.
Good Luck!
– “an excellent, inexpensive LTCi policy”
Huh. I didn’t know that was possible.
If you are happy with your decision, I’m OK with that. IMO, it doesn’t make sense for most. Already explained why. Insurance products are so complicated that only actuaries understand them. The devil is in the details.
I think I will OK with “only” one million dedicated to LTC and that amount will get much bigger when I need it.
It’s also predictable why the most expensive and the highest commission insurance products are being promoted.
The only insurance that makes sense to me is an auto, home, and umbrella. If you have kids then a simple cheap constant monthly fee term life.
Another hint: don’t live in expensive states such as CA, NY and surrounding.
The following is just one article among many why not LTC
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/22/health/long-term-care-insurance.html
Great article Jonathan. This is a topic ive thought about quite a bit – how do you balance planning for a long life against living like you might not live that long. I find focusing on what is rally important to you can help guide your decisions. The tremendous number of thoughtful comments indicates how important and challenging this is to retirees.
A thought provoking question, different from the more common “if you knew you were going to die…?”
All four of our parents are in their mid-80s and in reasonably good physical and cognitive health. The last time we modeled our portfolio, future spending etc, we planned for long lives and were within acceptable bounds.
Beyond funding a long life though, the question of how we’d spend our time with this knowledge is an interesting one too. I’m not sure, and much would depend on whether we could also know that most of those long years would be healthy ones.
One thing my I’d add to the list in the article (my wife’s thought as we discussed it) is to prioritize finding a good CCRC that promises to keep us.
I have had a couple of nonagenarian ancestors, and one centenarian that I can think of going back three generations. That is not unusually long-lived by current standards. Yet I have an innate fear of running out of money in retirement, more than of cashing in before checking off bucket list items. I am a Federal employee, and currently I am eligible for immediate full retirement, but plan A is to continue working until SSA FRA. The counterweights are: A) my wife’s experience was that her Dad died at my FRA, weeks before she and my mother-in-law planned to take a bucket list trip; and B) my recent reading of Peter Attia’s book “Outlive” suggests I need more sleep and a more disciplined exercise program than my current regime to improve my odds of avoiding old-age dementia that plagued some in my family. So that would be an argument for saying “enough” a couple of years sooner.
I started Outlive, it was a tough, boring slug, to me anyway. Someday I’ll check it out again!
Great points all. But, I do plan to both retire early (hopefully mid 50s?) and to live into my 90s. Bear in mind, that longevity “plan” is meaningless as many factors or incidents may alter that plan. Few, if any, of my relatives have lived that long. My wife on the other hand has centenarians in her lineage.
But, I don’t plan to work longer; I do already plan to invest heavily in stocks and take SS late. Will all of this work out? No idea, but we’re saving heavily for that future.
From the comments looks like you’re “preachin to the choir “.
As I’ve discovered over the years, the HD choir does not sing with one voice. Some plan as though they’ll live to a ripe old age; others seem willing to spend freely in their 60s and 70s, and run the risk of sub-par care in their 80s and 90s. Some think it’s important to have a sense of purpose in retirement and are willing to consider part-time work; others are anxious to avoid anything that feels like an obligation. I have my views on these issues, but I’m also not interested in forcing my views on others.
A story: When the economist and bestselling author Peter Bernstein (Against the Gods, Capital Ideas) died in 2009, I attended a celebration of his life. A childhood friend of Peter, who had spent his career as a research chemist, described how he had an idea for a research project in his 60s, but decided he might not live long enough to see it through. He noted wryly that he was now age 92.
I’ve always been aware that longevity was in my genes. Three grandparents and both parents lived well into their 90s. Two grandparents and my parents lived to “celebrate” their 70th wedding anniversaries. Financially, I have always planned as if I will reach at least 100. At 79, I’m approaching our 56th wedding anniversary with my high school sweetheart. It could all end tomorrow, but it’s been a blessed life.
Jonathan…After 40 years in the financial services business, followed by 15 years as an academic, teaching in the CFP, ChFC, CLU and RICP world, the magic question has always been “How long do you expect to live.”
If we knew the date of our demise, retirement planing would be easy.
I wanted until 70 to claim my social security benefits and until 73 years and 3 months to retire. My planning assumes I will reach 93 and my spouse at least that, as she is 4 yers younger than me. Will it happen, I have no idea, but that is what I am planning for.
In addition to our Social Security, which totals more than our normal retirement expenses, I purchased 4 Deferred FIA annuities, with Income Riders and they all have LTCi Benefits attached to them. We can turn them on at any time, but currently they remain deferred, and growing in income stream payout. In addition, We have 3 years of cash. Our invested portfolio, at Vanguard, is basically for late life emergencies, including LTC for my wife. (I have a generous LTCi Policy, and it should cover my lTC needs, if ever needed.)
As long as we don’t do anything stupid, like buy a second home or excessively expensive vehicles, we should be fine, even living to age 93.
Both of our children are college grads and independent, and productive tax paying citizens. (Neither of them has produced any grandchildren, so I will regretfully miss that part of life.) We plan to give them gifts while we are still living, but we are holding off until we complete our first year retired and see how we did, spending wise.
Your article is on point because too many people focus on dying early instead of living longer. By waiting later to retire, we have a reduced travel & adventure horizon, but on the positive side, we will be able to enjoy the next few years traveling and enjoying some of the hard earned retirement dollars, knowing we have additional income for later years already funded, and guaranteed.
Some of your other posters mention political and social issues being a concern. To be honest, yes, I have thought about those things as well, but one cannot live life expecting the worst. That is no way to live, at least not for me.
Thanks again for another thought provoking article.
Our retirement plan allows us to self insure LTC and we’ve financially planned for both of us to live until the end of our our 95th year. We tried every possible way to procreate and adopt and it never worked out. Without children, we deeply fear our future in terms of healthcare so we saved like crazy to pay for it.
There is a chance my next comment will be thought of as inappropriate, but I will take a chance and hope for the best.
I genuinely hope our society and faith communities will move toward a more compassionate acceptance of the right to end one’s own life in a safe, loving, and caring way. This, coming from a lifelong practicing Christian.
I’d rather not fight an unbeatable cancer than suffer through it until death. I’d rather not give hundreds of thousands of dollars to careless nursing homes as I fall into the coma of Alzheimer’s. If I’m diagnosed with ALS, then I’m going to want “out” immediately. It would all save so much pain and suffering. But even better yet, it would allow me to donate so much more to our principle charities since the self-funded LTC money would go unused.
My wife accepts my feelings on this and respects my wishes. She does not feel precisely the same way, and I respect her wishes equally. We are madly in love and profoundly care for each other’s desire to exit when the time is right for each of us.
I truly hope no one is offended by my post here.
It has been a year since my dad short circuited what could have been a life of suffering for him, mom and the rest of the family. This option was only available to those with a bad prognosis, but retain a clear mind. Once the mind starts to go, it will be hard to qualify. Looking back now, we see his assisted suicide as the bravest and most compassionate thing dad did for himself and all of us.
Thanks for sharing your Dad’s story. My Dad suffered from Alzheimer’s for 12 years. I know he did not want to live like that but we had to all watch him suffer for years. Outside of Switzerland, there are not a lot of options for non-terminal people with full mental capacity. Maybe someday we can specify how we’d like to go should we become severely mentally incapacitated.
Canada I know is on board and I hear Washington state is coming around.
I whole heartedly concur with you regarding the right to end one’s life in a safe, loving, and caring way…aka assisted suicide.
Many readers of HD are well prepared and have planned for longevity risk. That’s great.
From a macroeconomic and demographic point of view, perhaps the upper quintile (20%) of baby boomers might have sufficient financial resources to “make it” to age 95.
But that begs the question, what will happen to the bottom quintile of baby boomer (some or all of whom have a negative net worth)? And what happens to the million and millions of baby boomers (the middle three quintiles, 60%) who run out of assets long before they die?
For the fortunate top quintile who can afford long term care, what will the long term care infrastructure (facilities and staff) look like in 10-20 years? It’s already severely stressed with the much smaller Greatest Generation.
Society and our faith communities (along with policy makers) have significant issues to grapple with that are as problematic if not more so than coming to terms with assisted suicide. We’ve known for decades Social Security needs to be “fixed”. And from the policy makers…crickets. For them, since it’s more than an election cycle way, it’s not a problem they need to address yet.
I worry not at all for HD readers who are in the top quintile (or top 10% or top 5%) of the population in terms of net worth. The problem is all the other baby boomers of which there are probably 70 million.
Seems like this HD post is sort of the tip of the ice berg. With climate change, we won’t even have ice bergs upon which to put our elders (us).
At any rate, I really appreciate your post here. Thank you very much.
As best I can recall, HD has only run one piece on assisted suicide:
https://humbledollar.com/2023/04/planning-my-exit/
I’d be happy to entertain others….
A great article too.
Thanks for your heartfelt words. Elaine and I have a similar difference: I favor the quick exit when the writing is on the wall, she not so much.
My wife and I are in the happy position that everything we like to do is either free, cheap, or only a misdemeanor if we stole it. We started our estate planning when our boys were in grade school by educating them through college and grad school. We helped them purchase their first homes, and have then contributed enough to our grandchildren to pay for the first year of college at a good public university. We are also rewarding our grandchildren for having 1099 employment income with contributions to their Roth IRAs. Having done all this we have managed our own affairs in such a way that we can both check into nursing homes for a couple of years and still leave money from our estates. If we both live longer than that and have to move into a cheap Medicaid nursing home we’ll probably both be so senile we won’t know the difference and won’t care anyway
“free, cheap, or only a misdemeanor if we stole it.”
This is an excellent line! Thanks for thinking of it, and sharing it.
Regards,
(($; -)}™
Gozo
Let’s flip the question.
If I knew I would die young, I would spend a lot more now. I would give money to my kids and I would spend on political art projects that I feel strongly about. I’ve structured my financial life expecting to live to 90+. Maybe that’s wrong.
Also, I structured my financial life expecting political and social stability, including the monetary system. Before my dad died in 2014, he laid out details of why he thought we could be headed to civil war. Events since then largely conform to his story. It really could all crumble. Maybe we should spend more now because we won’t have the $ we expect or the ways to spend them that we’ve planned for.
Political & social instability will definitely be part of our next 2-3 decades. It always has been and most likely, based on human nature, always will be. Our job, however, is simply to prepare to the best of our ability, plan optimistically, and enjoy our lives in the meantime.
And if civil war comes, so be it. We made it through the last one, WWI, WWII, Korea, Viet Nam (I an a veteran of that war) The Balkans Conflict, two Gulf Wars as well as Afghanistan.
We have an opportunity in November to restore sanity to our government, or at least as much as that is possible. I’ll be doing my part, and hopefully the others on HD will as well.
We did restore sanity and experience to our government. We now need to hope we don’t let the insane back in come November.
Amen to that!
Regards,
(($; -)}™
Gozo
I have two reactions to this piece. First, even if I live another 30 or so years (I’m 63), they won’t be the same 30 years as the previous ones in terms of health, energy, and other responsibilities, like raising kids. I don’t want to keep working much longer because I’m tired and burned out. I’ve lost mental energy and enthusiasm for my work. And I understand that I come from a place of privilege to be able to say I can walk away from it and be financially fine.
Second, my family history has always made me assume I won’t have great longevity. My father and both of my grandfathers died in their 60s of heart attacks and my paternal grandmother died of lung cancer at 72 (and yes, she’d been a smoker, they mostly were in those days). My mom will be 83 this year, but she seems to be shutting down physically. I’ll be surprised if she’s still here five years from now. Her mother lived to 87 but her last few years weren’t great.
I’ve already outlived my father and so far am in good health. But I guess deep down I just think I’m not going to beat that history. I think we’ll be OK financially no matter how long I live thanks to being among the lucky ones with pensions (and we’ll both have survivor benefits and COLAs on those), but longevity just isn’t something I really think too seriously about, so thanks for this wake-up call.
I am an optimist. I take 90 for granted and work hard to stay fit. Most of my closest relatives had a “‘use by’ date” of about 92. So, I’d be a little bit disappointed if I was dying and I hadn’t yet reached 90. And my financial plans reflect my optimism.
To be honest, retirement was never a major goal for my husband and me. We worked full time to 72. I remember times at the end of a satisfying workday, when I’d think “how can I give this up?” My husband continues to work part time.
But we never thought of our lives being separated into a frugal saving phase followed by some kind of carefree spree. We did travel when we were younger—and did incur some credit card debt. I don’t regret that!! And we still travel—this past March I took my granddaughter to London on her spring break.
We have LTC insurance, we both have sizable pensions that are adjusted according to the performance of the state’s employee trust fund— so far we’ve kept up with inflation. Our pensions and Social Security exceed what we earned while working. We elected a guaranteed 15 year payout of our pensions to our beneficiaries if neither of us lives that long, and each of us is the 100% beneficiary of the other’s pension. We have IRAs that I don’t think we’ll ever touch.
In short, we’ve had pretty balanced lives. We were careful— but not extremely frugal— when we worked. And our spending in retirement has been pretty much the same. I don’t know about making it to 90, but who knows?
Not too worried. Vanguard projects that my wife and I are covered till our 90s. We have LT Care for the homes. 2 houses paid off (Lake and Main house) and no debt at all. I also ride a motorcycle on long distance trips, so my probability goes down a bit. But I do what I enjoy. Not going to be 88 and headed out the door saying “Gee I really wanted to do that..” … If I had my choice I would just stay home, read, walk the dogs, and drink coffee.
I sold my Harley last November, retired in January, and after traveling a year or two, plan to get me at least one dog. (A rescue for sure.). Heck, we have 6 acres and I might even become a rescue dog foster dad for a number of them.
Your plan of staying home, dogs, reading, and coffee works for me. Ha!
My circumstances allow me to invest for the next generation. I have increased my exercise program hoping to ensure that I am fit and independent if I make it to my mid eighties in 20 years. Being retired and having time I don’t see a downside.
I have always assumed I may live to 100. One grandfather lived to just short of 100, one grandmother to mid-90s. That didn’t stop me retiring from full-time work at 53 and part-time work a few years later. Long life doesn’t guarantee healthy life and I wanted to travel before I got too old and/or decrepit to enjoy it. Planning travel, traveling and writing about travel kept me happily occupied for 15 years. Now I’m staying very busy in my CCRC. Inflation does worry me, which is one reason I waited until 70 to take Social Security, and why I chose a CCRC that promises to keep me.
We were planning travel and did a test run last month by 2 1/2 weeks in Europe. In Italy, we drove to hotels off the beaten track and made day trips into cities. The hotels were fine, but seeing museums and churches and even just walking around were difficult because there are just too many tourists. We thought April would be off season, but everything was packed. We thought we could wake up in the morning and say, let’s do this today. But we found out that if you don’t book tickets online a week in advance, you’re shut out. I guess I should know as a New Yorker trying to push through Times Square to go to the theatre or through Grand Central, now a tourist destination, to catch a train, but travel isn’t what we expected.
To continue Cammer’s tangent, I just returned from a 16-day trip to Seville, Lisbon, and Porto in April 2024–a trip I’ve been planning for decades, according to a well-underlined but unused 1997 Fodor’s guide I found on my bookshelf a week before I left. (That was a great find because I felt no compunction about ripping out the old sections I wanted to bring with me.)
Because of the crowds we encountered in all three cities, I wish now I had actually completed the trip back in the 90s! Packs of big and small tour groups everywhere; long lines at every monument or site (and then shoulder-to-shoulder as you shuffled through); Tuk Tuks, tour vans, and enormous buses on narrow streets (and cruise ships in the rivers); over-booked restaurants; bottlenecks on every corner as people took selfies; standing-room-only on trains and trams; and much higher prices than I’d heard about (a famous bookstore in Porto now charges visitors 8 euros to stand in line for their turn to walk in by hourly appointment, and was sold-out the two days I checked online). And this was in a cool and rainy month of the year; I wonder what summer must be like. I learned a lot of world history from my tours of these three beautiful-but-stressed cities, and came to feel like we tourists are the latest wave of Visigoth invaders. It can’t be easy to live there right now.
All this is to say, that the big slice of my “retirement pie” labeled “Catch up on travel” may need to undergo a revision in terms of where and when. 🤔
Exactly why we don’t plan on traveling much. From what I read, most tourist spots here and abroad are as crowded as Disney World on spring break.
Maybe your trip isn’t what you expected, but don’t blame travel in general. The good news is this was a test run, so meant to be learned from. Yes, for the big attractions, you need to book. For other locations you can go more by the seat of your pants, to a point of course. Now you know and can plan your future travel accordingly.
Btw, if you ever want to view Da Vinci’s Last Supper, that booking is many months out.
So what should be blamed?? What other locations are you referring to? Most if not all popular locations are jam packed. Many countries are now taxing travel/visits to their cities because of the huge crowds
I was very lucky. I got to places like Angkor Wat before the crowds. The shoulder season has moved earlier and later. Even a decade ago I would go to Venice in November. My advice would be to pick second or third tier towns and sights – they are usually still worthwhile. Lonely Planet has pretty extensive coverage. Eastern rather than Western Europe or South America might be better, although Prague was already over-crowded twenty years ago.
Working longer so one doesn’t “look back and rue the wasted time” of not working is something I’ve never read as one of the common regrets of those in their final days. There is so much life to live other than a job. To each their own though. I’m not willing to pass up great experiences, endeavors, anything I might choose and yes, fun, during my healthy years to ensure I can pay someone to change my diaper and tell me my name in my last years. It may be controversial but I’d rather check out before that happens. The goal is to live, not exist.
I’ve never understood the appeal of full time work. The only thing I want to do 40 or more hours a week is sleep. Other than that I like too much variety for any one job to provide. Plus the things I like to do I doubt I could get paid for anyway.
Ideal scenario is I would have inherited enough money to be a professional student until at least 30, then move around to different states/countries for another decade or two. I’m retired now but no way do I have the energy to pickup where I left off on my dream life as outlined above. Very content and happy to wake up a free man everyday for the rest of life.
Actually a dual household would likely be worse off with a death at 68 because there would then only be one social security stream to keep the surviving spouse going. Plus say goodbye to joint federal taxation rates the following year. Plus possibly part or all of a pension would go poof.
This all would be offset by food, insurance, and medical expense savings, perhaps some housing savings too, if the widow(er) downsizes. The travel budget could be a jump ball. I know I’d travel more if I became widowed because staying home and looking at his empty chair every day would be a mighty burden.
I understand the statement about social security, but some up us would keep far more money if the income tax laws expire in 2025 and stay expired.
I don’t understand this point about current income tax rates. I believe them to be unusually low, so if they expire, I expect we’d pay more in taxes. What am I missing, or did I just misunderstand?
Regards,
(($; -)}™
Gozo
My longevity plan: Keep paying those long term care premiums no matter how much they increase (only paying one, since I’m a widow); maintain my modest home and living expenses such that Social Security and two small pensions could cover them; make IRA withdrawals for discretionary spending; wait until late 70’s/early 80’s to begin drawing on two annuities. My mom just passed away at 104; her mother lived to almost 102; her sister, 103. But that’s just my mother’s side …. Thanks for your article, Jonathan.
Solid plan, especially having the LTC! My dad’s assisted living is over $6k/mo. Once he resides in a nursing home it likely will be well over $10k. We’re in ILLINOIS.
My mother-in-law is moving into a memory care facility in a couple of weeks. Cost for a private room is about $8300/month (Southern California). They have LTC that will pay $4600/mo of that, and it goes up if she needs skilled nursing. The LTC premiums are waived now because she has an active claim.
Yes, they paid those premiums for 20+ years before getting to this point. But she’s 83 and other than the Alzheimer’s is in good health. She could live there for years. They have money, but the LTC payments mean there will still be plenty left for her 81-year-old husband if he needs care, too.
We’ve been paying on our policies for about a decade. Not an enjoyable or cheap cash outlay, but when you see my dad’s Assisted Living math, it almost becomes a no-brainer. Three grandparents died in their 60s; the one with the worst habits died at 77. My parents are in their upper 80s and THEIR grandparents all lasted about that long. I’m thinking I can make 92. 😀
Good thinking Jonathan… and good comments also. Contemplation and planning are smart… and pay off!
Right on Jonathan.
As the saying (and facts) goes, the longer you live the longer you live. At birth the life expectancy is about 77 years, but at age 80 it is about 88 for a man and 89 for a woman.
We’re all one doctor’s visit away from a life-changing event.
I love that last sentence Jonathan. Longevity is absolutely the largest threat to our finances. My philosophy is that you need to save for the future but also to have some fun along the way in case you don’t make it that far.
It depends. I retired at age 61. I took SS at age 65. But I have enough money to do this. I know that if I have enough money to continue to save and invest, I can never run out of money.
I know this is definitely not normal. But you should look at your own situation, and decide what is safe for you to do. Are you 50, have $10 million in savings, live modestly, and want to retire? You probably can. Are you 60, with $1 million, and still paying a mortgage? Better keep working. A good fee-only one-time financial advisor will tell you yes or no, and what might happen.
I’ve filled out several online life expectancy calculators. The consensus is that I will go around age 87. I discarded the results of one that says I’ll pass next Wednesday at Noon.
I will likely keep a portion of my portfolio in growth stocks till I checkout.
Sounds like rumors of your demise, by longevity calculator, were greatly exaggerated. 🙂
My mother will probably hit 95 this year, while my wife’s mother will turn 97. Her father reached 95, and mine 89. We are both in good health, and expect to follow in the family footsteps.
Your key statement is to have a plan—to consider the possibility of living those extra decades. Someone who’s able to quit work and begin playing in their 60s has some skill at making financial plans. That’s not the time to stop applying those skills.
SOA Longevity Illustrator
The Society of Actuaries (SOA) Research Institute and the American Academy of Actuaries have jointly created a very helpful Longevity Illustrator that is free and easy to use at https://www.longevityillustrator.org/. Based on the date it asks for (DOB, gender,etc.), the 25% probability of one of us still being alive makes our financial planning horizon her age 95.
Using these is like using a retirement calculator: possibly worse than starting from scratch. YOUR longevity is a sample size of 1. You can only infer so much from the longevity of the population or enormous sub-sample, especially in matters affected by genetics, lifestyle, and chance.
Thank you for that link!
A wake call for many of us is when you have siblings pass away while you are in your early 60s. It changed my whole outlook on life.
I agree about the wake up call!
I had 4 siblings…
My older brother was Killed In Viet Nam at 19…
My younger brother died at 31 of HIV…
His fraternal twin died at 68, after surviving 6 years after contracting lung and brain cancer…
My remaining sister is 71, divorced, and was recently diagnosed with dementia. She will most likely relocate to live with her oldest daughter within 12 months…
My Father died at 53, from service connected illnesses, after 32 years in the US Army.
My mother died at 82 from pancreatic cancer.
I am planning to live until my early 90’s…and have financially prepared to do so…but God will decide when my time is up.
So far I have made it to 73 and I am in pretty decent health. I have lost 56 pounds in the last 39 weeks and I am working on losing another 60. Now that I am retired, I am going to the Gym three days a week and plan to continue to do so as long as I am able.
Re your last para, good work!
Sounds like a good plan.
So true. I’ve had a similar experience and awaking. I’m the youngest of 4 and 2 of my 3 siblings (both sisters) died in their 70’s (my 60’s) from cancer and the 3rd (my brother) has had 2 significant cancer bouts over the last 30 years. I guess it’s now my turn and I meet with my cancer surgeon next week to schedule my first (and hopefully only) cancer operation. But collectively these events have definitely been a wake up call. That said, for years now I’ve been consciously trying to make the best use of my time while still trying to keep things balanced. So I still run my retirement spreadsheet out to 100. As Jonathan said above, if you manage your financial risk of living to a ripe old age, the alternative kind of takes care of itself.
My best wishes for a good meeting and surgical result.
Thanks!
My almost 90-year old dad is the oldest of 4, and the only survivor. His three siblings died (from illnesses) in reverse order, ie youngest 1st, back in 2003. You just never know…
Nothing like contemplating death to kick off a fun weekend here at HD! 🙂
I lack the imagination to accurately guess at my own longevity. But in this information age, it’s not hard or costly to ground this longevity question in your own actuarial sample with ancestry data for longevity vs birth year cohort for several generations of your ancestors.
Why stop there? Your personal report of currently known genetic risk factors can be had for a bit of spit and a fairly small sum paid to 23 and Me. And for less than the cost of a riding mower, you can assess your odds of dying prematurely from America’s #1 killer (cardiovascular disease) by getting a cardiac CT angiogram. It shows the current health of your heart’s arteries without the guessing your doctor has to do using the blood test from your annual checkup.
All this will be too much for many to do or even ponder. I can imagine an AI model turning all this personal data and more into a daily expected longevity score — with a low subscription cost, of course! Will this be motivating or just deeply depressing?
I’ll add that my own strategy here is to plan for one or both of us to hit the centenarian mark. We spend time or money on things that let us do that with good health and happiness, without worrying excessively about the genetic hands we were dealt.
I believe it’s more about diet and exercise than heredity. Most factors should be in our control, if we choose to steer the health & longevity ship!
Don’t forget sleep
Michael, adequate sleep has always been a tough one for this nightowl. l have less stress now that I’m retired, but that’s offset by more concerning my parents’ decline & needs. I’m lucky if I sleep 11-4a then maybe 5:30 -8a if my hamster wheel brain can turn off. This unfortunate life-long trait of 2 cycles of sleep has plagued me my adult life. Some say the Victorian era thrived doing it that way, that’s why many of us are here! 🤣
Totally agree about the importance of eating good food and a daily aerobic exercise habit plus some strength training. Still, many have strong genetic headwinds or tailwinds which drive longevity up or down well off the averages. There are a lot hidden icebergs in our seas, some which can be spotted easily if you are the sort to want to know (my spouse does not).