Check your inbox or spam folder to confirm your subscription.
Go to main Voices page »
Only if you are planning suicide.
It’s a risky strategy. I plan to have my normal expenses covered by pension and social security, with some investments that will cover inflation and assisted living if needed. I have no particular need or desire to leave a legacy to relatives or charity, but I hope my heirs receive a small legacy, because that means I didn’t run out of money.
Not for me. I want to leave as much as I can to charity. I plan to retire on dividends, interest and SS and never touch the principal.
Of course not, but …
Let’s say you annuitized your savings. You can manage how much you leave to heirs or charity while helping to ensure you don’t outlive your money.
It’s a balance. Individuals should be considerate of longevity risk but also enjoy what they’ve worked so long to earn. The curve of retirement spending often features a dip in mid-retirement (i.e. 70s) when people get to be too old to travel but are still in decent health to where there are fewer major health expenses. 80yo and beyond has more healthcare costs, so that should be planned for.
Many people want to leave a legacy though. Bequeathing assets to children, grandchildren, and charity are common. A good financial advisor can help plan that.
Probably not a good strategy. The danger is that you may live longer than you anticipate and find yourself in dire financial straits. Isn’t the purpose of retirement planning to avoid financial struggle in retirement?
Not for me. I want my wife and I to have a safe and comfortable retirement, but would also like to leave a legacy to my children and grandchildren.
I, for one, have always wanted to leave a financial legacy. It’s one of my motivations for building wealth.
That assumes you know when it’s going to happen.