Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Actuarial Discussion Forum > Finance - Investments > Non-Actuarial Personal Finance/Investing
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions


Fill in a brief DW Simpson Registration Form
to be contacted when new jobs meet your criteria.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #61  
Old 06-25-2014, 05:50 PM
mathmajor's Avatar
mathmajor mathmajor is offline
Member
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Nowhere in particular
Studying for Japanese
College: B.S. Applied Math
Favorite beer: La Croix Grapefruit
Posts: 10,005
Default

I don't know why I'm projecting out this far being age 25, but I'm getting $2.5-$3.5MM under various assumptions (today's dollars). Like $300k/yr until age 80? Fun to think about but nobody knows what'll happen. Just gonna keep working on my first 100k
__________________
3.14159 26535 89793 23846 26433 83279 50288 41971 69399 37510 58209 74944 59230 78164 06286 20899 86280 34825 34211 70679 82148 08651 32823 06647 09384 46095 50582 23172 53594 08128 48111 74502 84102 70193 85211 05559 64462 29489 54930 38196 44288 10975 66593 34461 28475 64823 37867 83165 27120 19091 45648 56692 34603 48610 45432 66482 13393 60726 02491 41273 72458 70066 06315 58817 48815 20920 96282 92540
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 06-26-2014, 12:12 PM
hellomath hellomath is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Studying for relaxation
Posts: 4,035
Default

On a related note, is it worth it to you to work 20% more to get paid 20% more and retire in your 40s and 50s? Or would you rather work 9-5 and retire at 60?
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 06-26-2014, 12:27 PM
nonlnear nonlnear is offline
Member
Non-Actuary
 
Join Date: May 2010
Favorite beer: Civil Society Fresh IPA
Posts: 30,292
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hellomath View Post
On a related note, is it worth it to you to work 20% more to get paid 20% more and retire in your 40s and 50s? Or would you rather work 9-5 and retire at 60?
As a hypothetical, maybe - if that 20% more work doesn't crush my current recreation.

But treating it as a realistic question, my current professional situation is such that I don't believe I will have to work any harder to get a raise quite a bit larger than 20%. My last raise (from an external move) was 40% and it was a HUGE reduction in workload. My current situation seems to be unfolding such that with my next move, either internal or external, I'll be looking at something north of 30% for very little change in workload pretty soon. Compensation in my current situation is more determined by upward visibility than amount of effort.

The notion that effort and compensation are proportional is generally true on average for most jobs, but there is so much variance that it's not really all that relevant to many individual scenarios IMO.
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 06-26-2014, 01:13 PM
mathmajor's Avatar
mathmajor mathmajor is offline
Member
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Nowhere in particular
Studying for Japanese
College: B.S. Applied Math
Favorite beer: La Croix Grapefruit
Posts: 10,005
Default

An early actuarial career (EL salary -> 2x that) doesn't come with anything like 2x work, I find.
__________________
3.14159 26535 89793 23846 26433 83279 50288 41971 69399 37510 58209 74944 59230 78164 06286 20899 86280 34825 34211 70679 82148 08651 32823 06647 09384 46095 50582 23172 53594 08128 48111 74502 84102 70193 85211 05559 64462 29489 54930 38196 44288 10975 66593 34461 28475 64823 37867 83165 27120 19091 45648 56692 34603 48610 45432 66482 13393 60726 02491 41273 72458 70066 06315 58817 48815 20920 96282 92540
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 06-26-2014, 01:18 PM
Yodamon Yodamon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 71
Default

What if instead of calculating based on the year you want to retire, you base it on the # of years expected to live past X retirement age? Someone could retire at 65 and live to 100, but what if someone is only going to live to 75 then they could retire at 40 (assuming at 40 they have funds to live to 75 but not 100)?
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 06-26-2014, 01:27 PM
Guest
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hellomath View Post
On a related note, is it worth it to you to work 20% more to get paid 20% more and retire in your 40s and 50s? Or would you rather work 9-5 and retire at 60?
I think it's a complete myth that you work harder for more money, especially within the same industry/company.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 06-26-2014, 01:40 PM
DixieFlyer's Avatar
DixieFlyer DixieFlyer is offline
Member
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Favorite beer: Four Peaks Kiltlifter
Posts: 2,461
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeepPurple View Post
The stock market will return much more that the 3 to 5 percent at which you can borrow mortgage money these days.
Are you teetering on the precipice of total mental retardation? It would appear so.
__________________
Don't steal; the government hates competition.
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 06-26-2014, 01:44 PM
hellomath hellomath is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Studying for relaxation
Posts: 4,035
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ke$ha View Post
I think it's a complete myth that you work harder for more money, especially within the same industry/company.
The ratio might be off, but the concept is similar.

Our director goes from one meeting to the next on a daily basis. Guess when he reads and replies his emails?
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 06-26-2014, 01:54 PM
nonlnear nonlnear is offline
Member
Non-Actuary
 
Join Date: May 2010
Favorite beer: Civil Society Fresh IPA
Posts: 30,292
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ke$ha View Post
I think it's a complete myth that you work harder for more money, especially within the same industry/company.
IMO it's true on average (per capita, not dollar averaged!) basis, but primarily because it's largely true in many labor jobs.

The claim become slightly closer to plausible for professional jobs if you stretch the term "harder" to something more like "productively" to account for the value human capital brings to the table. Still not sure if it's actually true for a lot of professional/managerial work though, but maybe a little closer to plausible.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 06-27-2014, 10:14 AM
Liz Lemon Liz Lemon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 103
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeepPurple View Post
There's some insight here, but it needs refinement.

Your passive income now not only needs to feed your current living expenses, it needs to feed the growth in your asset base to cover future inflation of your current living expenses.

Secondly, why the heck would you pay off your mortgage early? The stock market will return much more that the 3 to 5 percent at which you can borrow mortgage money these days. Also, and this is important, the biggest hedge against inflation that most people have access to is a fixed rate mortgage. If and when inflation increases (and it really cannot go down any further) then owing dollars at the pre-inflation fixed rate is like free money added to your personal balance sheet.

Let's say your mortgage balance is 100k. It is better to own the house, owe 100k on it and have 100k in the bank than to own the house, owe nothing, and have an empty account.
I understand that my current living expenses will increase roughly in line with inflation. My goal has been to follow the theory of dividend growth investors. By investing in companies that belong to the dividend champions list (companies that have not only paid dividends, but increased them annually for 25 years or more) my passive income stream already has a nice built in inflation protection. So that is how that would work.

The mortgage payoff is a personal decision from the standpoint of someone who doesn't like debt. To me, it just represents a level of freedom and security to not have to make that monthly mortgage payment. Also, we are saving quite a bit of our income now. With the market at or close to a peak, I'm nervous about funneling even more into it. It is becoming a little harder to find stocks that I think are fairly priced. So at this point, I would just be putting the extra cash into savings and we know I'm not beating the mortgage interest rate in a savings account.

Again, it's all personal and I know theoretically I should be investing the money elsewhere since theoretically I can get a higher return. But this is what feels comfortable for me and I think we have a nice balance. Again, it's not an either/or situation for us. Like "either we pay down the mortgage or we invest in stocks". We are able to do both and I think I'm finding good balance this way.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:39 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.24901 seconds with 9 queries