AUTHOR: Humble Reader on 7/7/2025 FIRST: David Powell on 7/7 | RECENT: David Lancaster on 7/8
Comments
Not my decision, “retired” at 71 when the company decided it was time. The company was and still is struggling and I ended up in a 30% staff cut. My plan was always to work full time and delay Social Security benefits until 70, which I did, and then do a phased retirement on a part time or contract basis. I was financially prepared for retirement with or without any additional earned income. And being fired instead of voluntarily retiring did result in a few months of severance pay and a nice bonus. As for the non-financial aspects of retirement, I am now fully busy working on stuff I wanted to do but never got around to doing while working on company stuff.
I have had similar thoughts about concentration risk for most of this year. I ended up trimming some of my high-flyers and increasing stable-value investments in the form of money market and ultra-short term bond funds, all within IRAs to avoid tax consequences. I did look at international investments, which are having a very good year, but decided they did not offer enough trade-off between potentially reducing risk and sufficient long-term performance when compared with domestic U.S. investments.
Assuming married filing jointly, both at least 65, and all income is “ordinary”: Maximum gross income 2025 for 12% bracket: $143,650 Maximum gross income 2026 for 12% bracket: $148,300 (increase of $4,650) But Social Security benefit income and other non-ordinary income will affect these amounts.
Just a few days ago I did a comparison between S&P 500 market-cap weighted index funds and S&P 500 equal weight index funds thinking that I could reduce the concentration risks that everyone seems to be talking about these days. I was surprised to find that the equal weight strategy did not reduce volatility at all. Looking back as far 2002 the equal weight index was negative in 5 of 21 years and the market cap index was negative in 3 of 21 years. Only in 2022 did the equal weight index lose less than the market cap index. Most telling was that in 2008 the equal weight index dropped about 40% compared with market cap index’s 37%. And, not surprisingly, the equal-weight 10-year return was only 74% of the market-cap index fund return. So as far as I can discern there does not seem to be any benefit to investing in an S&P 500 equal weight index fund.
There are no radioactive materials in any microwave oven, at least not any more than everything else in your house and your house itself. The electronically generated radiation is “non-ionizing radiation”. These are electromagnetic “radio” waves at high frequencies. Just doing my part here to keep everything posted on the internet factual. And yes I do “nuke” my food!
I have to confess that I have more in invested in equities and more invested in technology than is recommended for being so near the start of retirement. But I also know I have also greatly benefited from these investments and have started my post-earned income years with much more than I would have had using a more conservative strategy. I do not think of volatility as being the same as or even similar to risk. I prioritize longer term data over short term, with 10-year results given the most weight; I do not even consider investments with less than 10-years of history. One of my analysis “spreadsheets” is a table showing annual returns of each of my investments for as far back as possible. With that I can do a “what if I owned my current investments” during prior market corrections to back before the dot-com era, and would I be okay with these investments? This year I increased what I call stable-value investments (cash, short term bonds, CDs…) to about 20% of my total, and considered more but decided that I already had enough to accommodate the volatility cycle that may now have started since there is virtually zero risk that I will ever be forced to sell depreciated investments and have enough stable-value to fund my needs and desires for any statistically probable down-market duration. So my action plan now is to do nothing.
I recently downloaded and reviewed all of our property documents that are publicly accessible online at the county records office. Found that the recorded utility easement that we had to sign when our electrical service was buried in 2000 has our Social Security numbers on it. Good part is that it is a scanned bitmap file and so not directly readable by a computer troll. But OCR software could make the numbers accessible to trolling. Social Security numbers were used as universal IDs for so long that everyone should assume that anyone who wants your number already has access to it. For some time now we’ve kept all our credit reports frozen; have 2 factor authentication, use unique randomly generated passwords, and have activity alerts on all financial accounts; have no social media accounts; have an activity alert on our county property records; avoid creating account usernames that are easily guessed (treat usernames like passwords); have multiple email accounts used for specific purposes (like humbledollarreader); do not click on any link in any email (always verify URL from known valid source); do not reply to any unverified email; do not read text from any unknown number; do not answer phone call from any unknown number; do not listen to voice mail from unknown number; keep account information and passwords on physical media that we possess and is connected to computer only when we are using it (do not trust any cloud-based online storage or password manager); and question when anyone requests Personally Identifiable Information that is not legally required. And, do not log-in when online reading, browsing or shopping (stay anonymous) until actually making a purchase or only when required. And log-off immediately afterwards and close browser to “break” the connection. Browser is configured to clear all cookies at close. Also close then re-open browser when switching between financial accounts.
I never even remotely considered stopping work before 70. My decision to continue working was hardly a “position of privilege”. Everything I now have I worked very long and hard for. I’ve avoided the physical and mental declines caused by smoking, alcohol, drugs, improper nutrition, and lack of exercise; and have so far had the good luck to not be affected by non-lifestyle attributed diseases or accidents. I turned on Social Security at 70 to assure maximum current benefit, maximum survivors benefit, maximum dollar value COLA increases. And, those post-FRA years were also some of highest earned income years, again adding to the final benefit amount. And I, as with most now approaching retirement, never had any possibility of a defined pension. Retirement savings and Social Security is all there will be. Waiting to 70 maximizes both.
I also take a plastic bag and pick up an average of about 6 beer cans per day, every day, on my 2 to 3 mile walk in my rural neighborhood. My states' 10-cent beverage container deposit law is useless. A $1 deposit would be a start. I have been fantasizing about installing dirt-bag cameras along the road to catch the perps… Sorry this is starting to sound like a rant, I will stop now.
I should have stated that the total payments to a Medicare Advantage insurance company for N users should be capped at no greater than the cost for N traditional Medicare users; not capping the benefits for individuals. The one and only reason to have the Medicare Advantage program is that it was promised to cost less than traditional Medicare since, after all, private enterprise always functions more efficiently than government, right? And why would the “illness burden” for Medicare Advantage be greater than traditional Medicare? Could it be due to “up coding” by the Medicare Advantage insurance companies to increase profit? This problem is very well documented. I hate to come off sounding so adversarial but I am absolutely certain that the Medicare system, Medicare users, and U.S. taxpayers would be better served if Medicare Advantage never existed. But this discussion branch is off-topic anyway since the article was about making individual Medicare enrollment choices and not about fixing the system. And I am sure that for some a Medicare Advantage plan could be the right choice.
Comments
Not my decision, “retired” at 71 when the company decided it was time. The company was and still is struggling and I ended up in a 30% staff cut. My plan was always to work full time and delay Social Security benefits until 70, which I did, and then do a phased retirement on a part time or contract basis. I was financially prepared for retirement with or without any additional earned income. And being fired instead of voluntarily retiring did result in a few months of severance pay and a nice bonus. As for the non-financial aspects of retirement, I am now fully busy working on stuff I wanted to do but never got around to doing while working on company stuff.
Post: What Age Did You Retire—and What Made You Decide It Was Time?
Link to comment from December 28, 2025
I have had similar thoughts about concentration risk for most of this year. I ended up trimming some of my high-flyers and increasing stable-value investments in the form of money market and ultra-short term bond funds, all within IRAs to avoid tax consequences. I did look at international investments, which are having a very good year, but decided they did not offer enough trade-off between potentially reducing risk and sufficient long-term performance when compared with domestic U.S. investments.
Post: Becoming A “Bad Investor”
Link to comment from December 17, 2025
Assuming married filing jointly, both at least 65, and all income is “ordinary”: Maximum gross income 2025 for 12% bracket: $143,650 Maximum gross income 2026 for 12% bracket: $148,300 (increase of $4,650) But Social Security benefit income and other non-ordinary income will affect these amounts.
Post: Calculating the Maximum Income While Staying in the 12% Tax Bracket
Link to comment from December 7, 2025
Just a few days ago I did a comparison between S&P 500 market-cap weighted index funds and S&P 500 equal weight index funds thinking that I could reduce the concentration risks that everyone seems to be talking about these days. I was surprised to find that the equal weight strategy did not reduce volatility at all. Looking back as far 2002 the equal weight index was negative in 5 of 21 years and the market cap index was negative in 3 of 21 years. Only in 2022 did the equal weight index lose less than the market cap index. Most telling was that in 2008 the equal weight index dropped about 40% compared with market cap index’s 37%. And, not surprisingly, the equal-weight 10-year return was only 74% of the market-cap index fund return. So as far as I can discern there does not seem to be any benefit to investing in an S&P 500 equal weight index fund.
Post: Index Fund Bubble
Link to comment from December 6, 2025
There are no radioactive materials in any microwave oven, at least not any more than everything else in your house and your house itself. The electronically generated radiation is “non-ionizing radiation”. These are electromagnetic “radio” waves at high frequencies. Just doing my part here to keep everything posted on the internet factual. And yes I do “nuke” my food!
Post: Replacement of Kitchen Appliances
Link to comment from November 24, 2025
I have to confess that I have more in invested in equities and more invested in technology than is recommended for being so near the start of retirement. But I also know I have also greatly benefited from these investments and have started my post-earned income years with much more than I would have had using a more conservative strategy. I do not think of volatility as being the same as or even similar to risk. I prioritize longer term data over short term, with 10-year results given the most weight; I do not even consider investments with less than 10-years of history. One of my analysis “spreadsheets” is a table showing annual returns of each of my investments for as far back as possible. With that I can do a “what if I owned my current investments” during prior market corrections to back before the dot-com era, and would I be okay with these investments? This year I increased what I call stable-value investments (cash, short term bonds, CDs…) to about 20% of my total, and considered more but decided that I already had enough to accommodate the volatility cycle that may now have started since there is virtually zero risk that I will ever be forced to sell depreciated investments and have enough stable-value to fund my needs and desires for any statistically probable down-market duration. So my action plan now is to do nothing.
Post: Is the current stock market anything to be concerned about?
Link to comment from November 21, 2025
I recently downloaded and reviewed all of our property documents that are publicly accessible online at the county records office. Found that the recorded utility easement that we had to sign when our electrical service was buried in 2000 has our Social Security numbers on it. Good part is that it is a scanned bitmap file and so not directly readable by a computer troll. But OCR software could make the numbers accessible to trolling. Social Security numbers were used as universal IDs for so long that everyone should assume that anyone who wants your number already has access to it. For some time now we’ve kept all our credit reports frozen; have 2 factor authentication, use unique randomly generated passwords, and have activity alerts on all financial accounts; have no social media accounts; have an activity alert on our county property records; avoid creating account usernames that are easily guessed (treat usernames like passwords); have multiple email accounts used for specific purposes (like humbledollarreader); do not click on any link in any email (always verify URL from known valid source); do not reply to any unverified email; do not read text from any unknown number; do not answer phone call from any unknown number; do not listen to voice mail from unknown number; keep account information and passwords on physical media that we possess and is connected to computer only when we are using it (do not trust any cloud-based online storage or password manager); and question when anyone requests Personally Identifiable Information that is not legally required. And, do not log-in when online reading, browsing or shopping (stay anonymous) until actually making a purchase or only when required. And log-off immediately afterwards and close browser to “break” the connection. Browser is configured to clear all cookies at close. Also close then re-open browser when switching between financial accounts.
Post: Another week, another data breech notification letter…
Link to comment from November 17, 2025
I never even remotely considered stopping work before 70. My decision to continue working was hardly a “position of privilege”. Everything I now have I worked very long and hard for. I’ve avoided the physical and mental declines caused by smoking, alcohol, drugs, improper nutrition, and lack of exercise; and have so far had the good luck to not be affected by non-lifestyle attributed diseases or accidents. I turned on Social Security at 70 to assure maximum current benefit, maximum survivors benefit, maximum dollar value COLA increases. And, those post-FRA years were also some of highest earned income years, again adding to the final benefit amount. And I, as with most now approaching retirement, never had any possibility of a defined pension. Retirement savings and Social Security is all there will be. Waiting to 70 maximizes both.
Post: The Messy Human side of Social Security Claiming
Link to comment from November 16, 2025
I also take a plastic bag and pick up an average of about 6 beer cans per day, every day, on my 2 to 3 mile walk in my rural neighborhood. My states' 10-cent beverage container deposit law is useless. A $1 deposit would be a start. I have been fantasizing about installing dirt-bag cameras along the road to catch the perps… Sorry this is starting to sound like a rant, I will stop now.
Post: Shopping carts. Please don’t consider this a rant. It is a lamentation.
Link to comment from November 5, 2025
I should have stated that the total payments to a Medicare Advantage insurance company for N users should be capped at no greater than the cost for N traditional Medicare users; not capping the benefits for individuals. The one and only reason to have the Medicare Advantage program is that it was promised to cost less than traditional Medicare since, after all, private enterprise always functions more efficiently than government, right? And why would the “illness burden” for Medicare Advantage be greater than traditional Medicare? Could it be due to “up coding” by the Medicare Advantage insurance companies to increase profit? This problem is very well documented. I hate to come off sounding so adversarial but I am absolutely certain that the Medicare system, Medicare users, and U.S. taxpayers would be better served if Medicare Advantage never existed. But this discussion branch is off-topic anyway since the article was about making individual Medicare enrollment choices and not about fixing the system. And I am sure that for some a Medicare Advantage plan could be the right choice.
Post: Don’t make the wrong Medicare decision
Link to comment from October 26, 2025