Do you and your husband save for retirement?

[Mejane]

My parents are having to worked past retirement age just to survive. They could have easily made different choices and been in much better shape financially.

 

This is my beloved aunt and uncle who own a business. They had really good years, but never saved. Now he's 72 and she's 68, and they don't see retirement on the horizon. :sad:

[B. Misan]

I'm not sure why you're chasing Sheldon around this thread. She's been clear: She and her family have chosen a debt-free lifestyle that places a priority on savings over, say, regular vacations. They are currently saving toward a family vacation, which is a separate savings goal (i.e., one apart from the regular savings program she initially described).

 

At what point did the poster say she'd choose food that would "hurt" her family? She said that she has and would again scrimp, if necessary. I read that to mean that she would make different choices, not hurtful choices.

 

And she already answered your question: In her family, savings comes first, even in the lean times.

 

There is nothing to misunderstand here. It may not be what you would choose, but isn't this a bit like chasing someone around a math thread asking if the poster always uses Saxon, would use it even if it hurt the student? I mean, really, Sheldon offered her experience. The end.

Edited May 9, 2011 by B. Misan
Clarity

[FairProspects]

I'm not sure why you're chasing Sheldon around this thread. She's been clear: She and her family have chosen a debt-free lifestyle that places a priority on savings over, say, regular vacations. They are currently saving toward a family vacation, which is a separate savings goal (i.e., one apart from the regular savings program she initially described).

 

At what point did the poster say she'd choose food that would "hurt" her family? She said that she has and would again scrimp, if necessary. I read that to mean that she would make different choices, not hurtful choices.

 

And she already answered your question: In her family, savings comes first, even in the lean times.

 

There is nothing to misunderstand here. It may not be what you would choose, but isn't this a bit like chasing someone around a math thread asking if the poster always uses Saxon, would use it even if it hurt the student? I mean, really, Sheldon offered her experience. The end.

 

Because if saving for retirement was as easy as giving up something optional like vacations, more of us would be able do it. When the choice is between saving for retirement and your health, the choice is less obvious.

 

I think we are just trying to ascertain whether some posters would still choose to be debt-free over at the expense of their health or their health insurance, because that is the choice some of us do have to make.

 

We haven't taken a vacation (other than a free one) in years. Choosing to give up vacations would not be enough to enable us to save for retirement. To be able to adequately save for retirement right now, we would have to postpone medical operations for a life-threatening condition.

 

So, I disagree that saving should be above everything. The point that I am making (and other posters) is that sometimes health comes first. Are there really those who would sacrifice health to be debt-free (I'm genuinely curious)?

[melissel]

I'm not sure why you're chasing Sheldon around this thread. She's been clear: She and her family have chosen a debt-free lifestyle that places a priority on savings over, say, regular vacations. They are currently saving toward a family vacation, which is a separate savings goal (i.e., one apart from the regular savings program she initially described).

 

At what point did the poster say she'd choose food that would "hurt" her family? She said that she has and would again scrimp, if necessary. I read that to mean that she would make different choices, not hurtful choices.

 

And she already answered your question: In her family, savings comes first, even in the lean times.

 

There is nothing to misunderstand here. It may not be what you would choose, but isn't this a bit like chasing someone around a math thread asking if the poster always uses Saxon, would use it even if it hurt the student? I mean, really, Sheldon offered her experience. The end.

 

I'm guessing you're referring to me? I'm hardly chasing. It's a discussion, and I'm trying to understand her viewpoint, particularly because some of the views expressed came off as a little judgmental.

 

This is a pretty definite statement:

 

No I can't. Savings are the first expenditure, period.

 

As is this:

 

Definitely different priorities. Debt free and saving is priority one for us.

 

Which was posted after I said that when I tried to save money on food, it hurt three of us physically. That makes it sound like saving money on food to meet the debt-free/savings goal, even in that situation, is still a higher priority. I find that hard to believe, so I'm questioning it. She is absolutely free not to answer, just as I am free to ask.

Edited May 9, 2011 by melissel
Mixing up my threads

[Luckymama]

My dh is a Certified Financial Planner. Enough said :D

 

Even when we were very poor (like qualifying-for-WIC-and-EItax-credit-poor) we saved in dh's 401K to the level of the match. We budgeted to the penny for everything and treated the retirement savings like one of our bills. Always having health insurance made a difference, I'm sure.

[melissel]

She's been clear: She and her family have chosen a debt-free lifestyle that places a priority on savings over, say, regular vacations. They are currently saving toward a family vacation, which is a separate savings goal (i.e., one apart from the regular savings program she initially described).

 

In addition, no one said anything about regular vacations, but since it was brought up, we're taking one vacation this summer, which will cost us about $400 total because family is covering the rest. We've already set the money aside. And we do save a few hundred a month in DH's 401K. Is that enough to justify family memories not made in the backyard? What if we only managed to save $50 a month, but still wanted to take that vacation with our extended family?

 

When you make inflammatory/judgmental statements on a public board, you have to expect some responses *shrug*

[B. Misan]

Are there really those who would sacrifice health to be debt-free (I'm genuinely curious)?

 

Sheldon never suggested that she and her family would put savings ahead of health. The OP asked about retirement savings. Sheldon expressed her experience, which is, simply put, yes, of course we've been saving; we put something away first and then attend to the rest of the budget, in lean and not so times. (Sheldon, is that a good take-away?)

 

So if a poster is in a situation in which health concerns do not prohibit him or her from saving regularly, as apparently they do for you (and other posters), you would like to know, well, what if they did? Why? That's not the situation in which he or she is operating, so to speak. All Sheldon could do is guess... I might do this. I might do that. How does that change what you're going to do to pay for a vacation or an operation or retirement? I'm genuinely curious.

 

Threads like these remind me of conversations in which public school parents immediately bristle when they learn someone is homeschooling. What? Does she think she's better than me? Money talk always ends up hurting someone's feelings, making someone else feel indignant and still someone else bereft.

 

What's the point, anyway? Everyone knows none of us needs our retirement savings (which should be at about $350,000 right now if you're in your late forties, according to many financial planners), anyway. Didn't you folks watch John Cusack light up the screen (she says, tucking her tongue in cheek) in 2012?

[B. Misan]

Sorry. I don't have the knack of posting. Yes, I was trying to reply to Melissal that first time and am again here. I guess I just don't see how having a clear idea of one's financial goals and declaring such *when asked* is at all inflammatory. I can understand, of course, how someone who had not been able to save might feel after reading about someone who had.

 

It all comes down to this, I think: Money talk is tricky and even divisive.

Edited May 9, 2011 by B. Misan
Clarity

[melissel]

Are there really those who would sacrifice health to be debt-free (I'm genuinely curious)?

 

Sheldon never suggested that she and her family would put savings ahead of health. The OP asked about retirement savings. Sheldon expressed her experience, which is, simply put, yes, of course we've been saving; we put something away first and then attend to the rest of the budget, in lean and not so times. (Sheldon, is that a good take-away?)

 

So if a poster is in a situation in which health concerns do not prohibit him or her from saving regularly, as apparently they do for you (and other posters), you would like to know, well, what if they did? Why? That's not the situation in which he or she is operating, so to speak. All Sheldon could do is guess... I might do this. I might do that. How does that change what you're going to do to pay for a vacation or an operation or retirement? I'm genuinely curious.

 

Threads like these remind me of conversations in which public school parents immediately bristle when they learn someone is homeschooling. What? Does she think she's better than me? Money talk always ends up hurting someone's feelings, making someone else feel indignant and still someone else bereft.

 

What's the point, anyway? Everyone knows none of us needs our retirement savings (which should be at about $350,000 right now if you're in your late forties, according to many financial planners), anyway. Didn't you folks watch John Cusack light up the screen (she says, tucking her tongue in cheek) in 2012?

 

Oh, goodness. It's a conversation! On the Internet, where intent doesn't always come across clearly. I sensed an intent and asked some questions to clarify. My feelings are certainly not hurt! I'm simply trying to understand the position better. If Sheldon and I were sitting across from each other having coffee, I'd still ask these questions, because it's a conversation. I'm pretty sure Sheldon's not about to show up at my door with a financial planner, and I'm not about to start pulling out articles about traditional foods and the evils of not eating all organic. It's really OK, I promise. We're just chatting here.

[FairProspects]

So if a poster is in a situation in which health concerns do not prohibit him or her from saving regularly, as apparently they do for you (and other posters), you would like to know, well, what if they did? Why? That's not the situation in which he or she is operating, so to speak. All Sheldon could do is guess... I might do this. I might do that. How does that change what you're going to do to pay for a vacation or an operation or retirement? I'm genuinely curious.

 

It doesn't change what we are going to do in the slightest.

 

I'm commenting to point out that there are legitimate reasons why people do not or cannot save for retirement, and not all of it is related to responsibility. Some of it is just pure luck or blessing (whatever you believe).

 

The idea being that maybe there won't be so much judgement if people knew a bit more. You just don't understand about people's choices until you've walked a mile in their shoes so while it is great to have opinions and goals, its best not to judge other's actions (or lack thereof).

 

ETA: And yes, maybe it does hurt a bit that others have been able to save so much. I would love to do that but our health really has impacted our finances. Still, we are better off than many, and live in a country with a medical system, so I'm trying to be more grateful and content.

Edited May 9, 2011 by FairProspects

[melissel]

Sorry. I don't have the knack of posting. Yes, I was trying to reply to Melissal that first time and am again here. I guess I just don't see how having a clear idea of one's financial goals and declaring such *when asked* is at all inflammatory. I can understand, of course, how someone who had not been able to save might feel after reading about someone who had.

 

It all comes down to this, I think: Money talk is tricky and even divisive.

 

And just to clarify, we do save, and I do believe it's important, and we put aside as much as we can without jeopardizing our ability to pay our bills. I disagree with Sheldon that it's THE MOST IMPORTANT thing. I think some things are more important. If I thought it was THE MOST IMPORTANT thing, I'd go back to work and put the kids in public school. Being home happens to be priority number one for me, and I'm grateful to have the choice (as hard as it can be sometimes to hang onto).

[kitten18]

Yes, we have been saving for retirement since we were married and got our first jobs, we were 22 and 24.

 

We always used to put the max in DH's 401K and then we were about 30, we started adding other investments too.

 

We just now are cutting back a little on our monthly investments. It used to be about 20% of DH's income but in the last couple years it has gotten close to 50% and it's not leaving us enough to live on. But, because we started early we have enough saved and compounding interest that it won't hurt too much to cut back for a couple years.

 

We both grew up with really good examples of how to manage money. Both of our sets of parents paid cash for everything and didn't have debt (except mortgage) even though they made very, very little money. DH and I often joke about how poor we were growing up but at the time we didn't know we were poor.

 

My parents have both passed away now but they were retired and living fairly comfortably on social security and a small amount of money they had saved.

 

DH's parents, FIL is retired, MIL is 70 and still working as a secretary at an elementary school. I think she still works because FIL would drive her crazy if they were together all the time.:lol: I don't know their exact financial situation but it is good and they won't need any help from us.

[Sparkle]

DH is fortunate enough to work for one of the last places on earth that still provides a pension. He contributes 8% of his monthly salary towards it and the state picks up the rest. Although I don't have any dreams of him being able to retire before 65, we should be able to live comfortably on his retirement. We have some money in mutual funds, too, but the less said about those, the better ;)

[melissel]

DH is fortunate enough to work for one of the last places on earth that still provides a pension. He contributes 8% of his monthly salary towards it and the state picks up the rest. Although I don't have any dreams of him being able to retire before 65, we should be able to live comfortably on his retirement. We have some money in mutual funds, too, but the less said about those, the better ;)

 

DH's mom still gets one, which is awesome! DH's company doesn't even match 401K contributions anymore :( I'm actually surprised to see so many people here saying their companies still match! I was under the impression that few did anymore. His little mutual fund is doing OK though, knock on wood.

[keptwoman]

In Australia, superannuation savings are compulsory. Everyone who works must contribute at least 11% of their salary, but are able to choose to contribute more. So when J gets a part time job, he will be starting his superannuation savings. It's part of a persons employment package and generally expressed in the offer as seperate to the salary, like an added extra. We need to up ours though, I'd like to be contributing 15%

Edited May 9, 2011 by keptwoman

[Rhonda in TX]

We've done 401-k's since we were in our 20's. We've always contributed 10%. Some employers have had matching and some have not. We've done it so long that we no longer miss the money. Our house will be paid off before we retire as well. We're not going to be rich, but we'll be okay.

[KrissiK]

Yes we do, because DH's company doesn't contribute anything. Although it's a great company and he loves his job. We each have a Roth IRA (even though I don't work, well, get paid for the work I do;), I can contribute to a Roth IRA) and contribute the maximum we can per year. It's tough, but it'll be worth it, I think. We're still in our early 40's so hopefully we'll have enough by the time DH retires.

[Susan in TN]

We are fortunate that Dh's company provides a 401K - we contribute 6% and the company matches that. I don't look at the total saved much - too depressing these past years to see how it's gone down, but it is slowly making it's way back up. I believe there is also a small pension that will amount to about $25/mo. I wonder what that will buy in 20 years? :lol:

 

 

My parents always lived frugally - not to an extreme, but enough to teach us the value of delayed gratification and living within one's means. They still work part-time, and have enough money to go out to eat with friends and travel to see their grandkids a couple times a year.

 

Dh's parents lived a somewhat extravagant life - a sort of "keep up with the in-laws" issue, I think, even though their income was far short of theirs. Their personal and business motto was "if you want something, take out a loan". Long story short - they eventually lost everything and now struggle to survive on S.S. and the local food banks.

 

It was interesting when dh and I got married ;). It took about 4 years of constant struggle before dh finally realized that making out a budget and living within your means was a good thing. I really was sorry for him - deep down I think he was terrified. I'm deeply indebted to Dave Ramsey and his financial counsel.

Edited May 9, 2011 by Susan in TN

[Susan in TN]

Our house will be paid off before we retire as well. We're not going to be rich, but we'll be okay.

 

I think this is one of the most important things at retirement. Having your home paid off can really free you from some major financial stress.

[justamouse]

Every penny counts. We save and scrimp now and sock it away.

 

Everything. From clipping coupons, never buying a new car, buying used everything.

 

We have our own business and it's become an investment which we pay off with sweat.

[Mejane]

In Australia, superannuation savings are compulsory. Everyone who works must contribute at least 11% of their salary

 

 

 

Right, and some folks here do this although it's non-compulsory, but it's the same principle. They save as if they must, and live on the rest; it's really a mindset. It's how my dh, and Sheldon, think. It wouldn't matter if someone needed a special diet - we would have to make it work on the after-savings income. As I said, we had debt and there were times we didn't have a dollar in our wallets, but we still saved into dh's 401k - the minimum at the time, but still. Folks who don't think this way will not understand it. It took me awhile to, so I get that.

[Shellydon]

Are there really those who would sacrifice health to be debt-free (I'm genuinely curious)?

 

Sheldon never suggested that she and her family would put savings ahead of health. The OP asked about retirement savings. Sheldon expressed her experience, which is, simply put, yes, of course we've been saving; we put something away first and then attend to the rest of the budget, in lean and not so times. (Sheldon, is that a good take-away?)

 

So if a poster is in a situation in which health concerns do not prohibit him or her from saving regularly, as apparently they do for you (and other posters), you would like to know, well, what if they did? Why? That's not the situation in which he or she is operating, so to speak. All Sheldon could do is guess... I might do this. I might do that. How does that change what you're going to do to pay for a vacation or an operation or retirement? I'm genuinely curious.

 

 

 

 

Basically this. Thanks! :D

 

 

I would still put *something* towards retirement then buy food. Even on special diets, there are ways to save, it just takes more work. (I had to do special diets a couple of times.)

[melissel]

Right, and some folks here do this although it's non-compulsory, but it's the same principle. They save as if they must, and live on the rest; it's really a mindset. It's how my dh, and Sheldon, think. It wouldn't matter if someone needed a special diet - we would have to make it work on the after-savings income. As I said, we had debt and there were times we didn't have a dollar in our wallets, but we still saved into dh's 401k - the minimum at the time, but still. Folks who don't think this way will not understand it. It took me awhile to, so I get that.

 

So, again, I'm going to assume you're referring to me, and I'm still struggling to understand parts of this. You say you still had debt. Do you mean, beyond a mortgage? If so, how does it make sense to carry debt and still contribute to savings? Wouldn't it make more sense to focus on the debt and then the retirement? Or do you mean debt as in mortgage only?

 

As for the rest, I guess I'm not seeing where one draws the line between what one deems necessary and important enough to affect savings and what isn't. If one of your children needed a special diet and you simply couldn't make it happen without cutting something from your monthly savings, you just wouldn't provide it?

[FairProspects]

Basically this. Thanks! :D

 

 

I would still put *something* towards retirement then buy food. Even on special diets, there are ways to save, it just takes more work. (I had to do special diets a couple of times.)

 

I give up. I'm in a terrible mood now and my real kids need me. I just hope that none of you who feel this way ever experience the horrible medical problems/expenses that we have and I hope you are all able to continue your wonderful savings programs. I'm done.

[Mejane]

So, again, I'm going to assume you're referring to me, and I'm still struggling to understand parts of this. You say you still had debt. Do you mean, beyond a mortgage? If so, how does it make sense to carry debt and still contribute to savings? Wouldn't it make more sense to focus on the debt and then the retirement? Or do you mean debt as in mortgage only?

 

As for the rest, I guess I'm not seeing where one draws the line between what one deems necessary and important enough to affect savings and what isn't. If one of your children needed a special diet and you simply couldn't make it happen without cutting something from your monthly savings, you just wouldn't provide it?

 

 

I'm not referring to you specifically, just talking in general.

 

Yes, we had debt beyond our mortgage. Dh was earning very little and I was home with kids. Because of the tax savings, the employer match, and the compounding that would accrue over the length of his employ, he felt contributing to his 401k was the right thing to do. Also, it was a "forced" savings. It came out before we ever saw it, so there was no "oh, things are really tight this month, so let's skip it" stuff. We knew we could tap into it if we really needed it, albeit with penalties. Dave Ramsey wasn't around then, so we didn't know about snowballing and all that. We probably should have paid down our debt first, but who knew?

 

As far as the other, if one of our kids had needed something we couldn't provide for out of our after-savings income, one of us would probably have gotten another job. I did work PT doing taxes one season, and also did childcare for a friend to pay down our debt. Later I found a job that allowed me to bring ds along. If we had had to do more to provide a special diet or something similar, we would have. Not saving would only have happened in the most extreme circumstances.

Edited May 9, 2011 by Mejane

[Shellers]

My husband worked for over 10 years drilling in the Jungles of SE Asia for Chevron. They matched what he contributed with Chevron stock. We are set. :001_smile:

[melissel]

I'm not referring to you specifically, just talking in general.

 

Yes, we had debt beyond our mortgage. Dh was earning very little and I was home with kids. Because of the employer match and the compounding that would accrue over the length of his employ, he felt contributing to his 402k was the right thing to do. Also, it was a "forced" savings. It came out before we ever saw it, so there was no "oh, things are really tight this month, so let's skip it" stuff. We knew we could tap into it if we really needed it, albeit with penalties. Dave Ramsey wasn't around then, so we didn't know about snowballing and all that. We probably should have paid down our debt first, but who knew?

 

As far as the other, if one of our kids had needed something we couldn't provide for out of our after-savings income, one of us would probably have gotten another job. I did work PT doing taxes one season, and also did childcare for a friend to pay down our debt. Later I found a job that allowed me to bring ds along. If we had had to do more to provide a special diet or something similar, we would have. Not saving would only have happened in the most extreme circumstances.

 

OK, that makes sense, thanks for taking a moment to clarify. I think part of what's preventing me from understanding a lot of this is that DH is commission only and his income is highly variable from month to month, so what is save-able and what is monthly operating expenses is all muddled together. And we're living in severe conservation mode because right now, he literally has no income slated for 2012, so the idea of saving more than we are right now is scary to me. I mean, it's in a "savings" account :lol: But as it looks right now, it won't be there much beyond December, and I'm already working P/T. I think all of that is making it hard for me to truly see it from another perspective *sigh*

[Mejane]

I give up. I'm in a terrible mood now and my real kids need me. I just hope that none of you who feel this way ever experience the horrible medical problems/expenses that we have and I hope you are all able to continue your wonderful savings programs. I'm done.

 

There's no need to be snarky. Everyone has bad luck and heartache; we've certainly had our share. Sorry you're having a hard time.

[Mejane]

OK, that makes sense, thanks for taking a moment to clarify.

 

No problem. Btw, I edited my op. I don't think there's any such thing as a 402k. :D

[mmasmommy]

We do not save for retirement at the moment, for the simple fact that you can't get blood from a stone. We are broke. It's not a matter of making it a priority, it's an impossibility.

 

We own our own small business (just DH & I) and make a very modest living. Our health insurance costs are astronomical (nearly $15,000 for the coming year). Take that and taxes off the top and we start in the hole nearly $30K every year. I work from home part time as well as part time out of the home just to provide the essentials. We have had to spend a small fortune getting DS well because insurance will not cover treatment for chronic lyme disease.

 

In the end I know that we are extremely lucky and that there are many others in much tougher situations.

 

I understand that people feel very strongly about money and everyone has their own priorities. I was actually told on a different board that I should sell my home and rent something cheaper even if it meant selling for less than I owe.

 

We do what is best for our family. Yes, I hope that things change for the better soon and we're able to get ahead but at the moment we are doing everything in our power to tread water and stay afloat.

[Sandra in FL]

Yes, it's a higher priority for us than saving for college. They can work and go to state universities.

 

We use mostly the ROTH IRA - pay the taxes up front and it compounds free of tax. Also, if there's anything left in the ROTH IRA, you can pass it on to the kids and they can withdraw from it spread over their life expectancy (again - the compounding really helps).

 

And if anyone has money to spare, you can open a ROTH IRA for your kids as long as they have earned income (from babysitting, mowing, helping in your family business). And have I said it enough times - the compounding (especially from such young ages) really helps.

 

IRS also allows a ROTH 401k, but not all companies are set up for it.

[Night Elf]

You say you still had debt. Do you mean, beyond a mortgage? If so, how does it make sense to carry debt and still contribute to savings? Wouldn't it make more sense to focus on the debt and then the retirement? Or do you mean debt as in mortgage only?

 

Although this question was not directed to me, my personal answer is that it makes total sense to save for retirement even though we are in debt. We have not gone deeper into debt to maintain our level of savings. Over the years, our level of debt has gone up and down, but our retirement savings has only gone up. Some people think living totally debt free forever is extremely important. I don't share that opinion. So while we do have some debt, it isn't more than we had 15 years ago. However, our retirement fund is significantly larger than where it was 15 years ago. The more money we have in the account, the more interest we earn. The more we have in the account, the more we have to put into various funds that earn us even more money. I guess I don't see the situation as all or nothing.

 

As for the rest, I guess I'm not seeing where one draws the line between what one deems necessary and important enough to affect savings and what isn't.

 

I'm trying to understand what you're saying here and I may be misinterpreting. What I'm reading is that you don't understand how people draw lines differently. People have different priorities and feelings. For example, since we're talking about saving for retirement, just how much are we talking about? People will save so they can have enough to get by, some will save so they will live comfortably being responsible only for themselves, and some will save so they can be rich and do all kinds of things they were unable to do while working hard and raising a family, perhaps even hoping to have enough to pass on to their children. What is necessary is dependent on what goals someone is trying to achieve.

[sheryl]

Yes, my dh handles all the investments and all financial issues. Good thing as I know nothing about it. We invest in stocks and have a mixed portfolio. Other than that my dh has a retirement match with his employer.......or something like that. I really should be more on board about this issue, but it overwhelmes me. We've been saving for about 25 years. HTH!

[melissel]

Although this question was not directed to me, my personal answer is that it makes total sense to save for retirement even though we are in debt. We have not gone deeper into debt to maintain our level of savings. Over the years, our level of debt has gone up and down, but our retirement savings has only gone up. Some people think living totally debt free forever is extremely important. I don't share that opinion. So while we do have some debt, it isn't more than we had 15 years ago. However, our retirement fund is significantly larger than where it was 15 years ago. The more money we have in the account, the more interest we earn. The more we have in the account, the more we have to put into various funds that earn us even more money. I guess I don't see the situation as all or nothing.

 

Thanks, that makes sense.

 

I'm trying to understand what you're saying here and I may be misinterpreting. What I'm reading is that you don't understand how people draw lines differently. People have different priorities and feelings. For example, since we're talking about saving for retirement, just how much are we talking about? People will save so they can have enough to get by, some will save so they will live comfortably being responsible only for themselves, and some will save so they can be rich and do all kinds of things they were unable to do while working hard and raising a family, perhaps even hoping to have enough to pass on to their children. What is necessary is dependent on what goals someone is trying to achieve.

 

Yes, I see what you're saying, and that's the gist of what I was asking. The point was made that savings is the FIRST priority, even if you have to eat beans, and that if you're not saving, or maybe not saving enough, then family memories not made in the backyard are not OK. My question was, at what level of savings do you have to be before you're entitled to feed your family the healthful diet they need and make family memories outside your backyard. Is $10 a month OK, because that's all you can scrape together? $100? $1000? $5000? If you're only saving $2000 a month, are you entitled to vacation then, or should you put that vacation money into savings as well, because you COULD be saving $2300 a month, and since savings is the FIRST priority, you should be focusing on that above all else?

 

I'm probably not explaining myself well at all, and I've run out of energy for the day. Some very absolute sentiments were expressed in a not-so-pleasant way, and I was looking for further clarification on them. Without all the blah blah blah, my overall point was this: My children are only young once, we only get one body each, and physical health is important. Saving for retirement matters a lot, but IMO, not more than ensuring that I can be home with my kids, feed all of us what we need to be healthy, and make sure we have good memories with family. If I have to work past 65 because I chose to be home and HS and we took a few family vacations and ate all-natural and gluten-free because not doing so causes physical problems, then so be it. Some posters seem to disagree, and I'm not exactly sure why I spent so much time trying to figure out why!

Edited May 10, 2011 by melissel

[6packofun]

I give up. I'm in a terrible mood now and my real kids need me. I just hope that none of you who feel this way ever experience the horrible medical problems/expenses that we have and I hope you are all able to continue your wonderful savings programs. I'm done.

 

I'm sorry. I think I understand where you're coming from. Remember that online people can sound like they have it all together and that things are easy peasy when their actual lives are something very different. Some have had it easier, some choose to sacrifice different things and it's all OK. I know that for us, just having the mindset of making saving a priority has NOT translated into the reality as our lives have been a roller coaster ride. I think if anyone had suggested in the midst of our trials that we'd better be contributing to the 401k because that was most important I would have laughed hysterically in their face. And people who've not struggled to feed their children and will have money to live on (with extra) both now and in retirement would probably laugh at us. Oh well!

[Audrey]

Feel free to share whatever you are comfortable with, how you go about doing this, and how you feel about retirement.

 

I am very nervous about retirement b/c I watch my parents and dh's parents majorly struggle into their late age, always worried about money, still needing to work, never able to visit or do anything because of "money." Always "money," ugh.

 

But on the other hand, I do not know how we will go about making a good retirement, I wish we had planned better or something. It's not that dh and I want to sit around and do nothing, but we sure would like to be able to visit our children and grandchildren when we want to!!!!

 

Just curious how others are planning (or not) for retirement.

 

 

We try, but it's hard. We have an RRSP and regularly put in a small amount of money monthly (it's set to come out of our chequing account every month). We try to put more in when we have some, but we usually don't have much extra. We don't see any value in taking out a loan to top up our RRSPs either. The banks try to get you to do that, but then you're paying back interest on money you didn't have to save in the first place. It doesn't make any sense to us, so we stick to the slow-as-you-go route.

 

FWIW, we are debt-free and own our farm outright. It took the first 10 years of our marriage scrimping and scrapping any way we could to make that happen. I'm proud of that accomplishment by itself. We don't take vacations out of province and keep our entertainment on the frugal side. It isn't that we spend much, but we don't make much to begin with when weighed against the usual expenses.

 

ETA: After reading the way this thread has gone, I feel I should say that my statements above are not a comment on how other people spend or save their own money. That is simply OUR situation and OUR priorities. To each his own and good financial luck to all.

Edited May 10, 2011 by Audrey

[5Wizards]

We put the max. into our 401K every year and will have a pension as well. Hopefully this year we'll be able to start saving for college as well, but the retirement is a higher priority than college savings for us. However, we do hope to be able to pay for undergrad. for all of our kids (community college and then 2 years in state), but I don't know if we'll meet that goal.

[RahRah]

DH and I save for retirement....due to watching our parents have significantly different outcomes in their retirement age.

 

My dad retired at 55, waited on SS until 65 and at 75, he and my mom are still modestly comfortable, own their home, cars and have enough money to take a couple of vacations a year. They're not wealthy by any means, but nicely comfortable on their modest income because they paid everything off before my dad retired, so when he retired they were debt-free.

DH's dad was so worried about retirement, he kept working until 75. Now at 78, he and MIL are still worried, despite having quite a hefty retirement fund to live off + the highest SS payment...they could live the next 30 years, in their current lifestyle, and not run out of money they saved that much! But, they also have debts still - they owe on their new house, one of their cars, for a land loan they took out to buy land and MIL spends like there is no tomorrow - so who knows? What should last the rest of their lives might really not be enough!

 

DH and I are trying to strike a balance between what we see in our parents, so we sock away the max into the 401(k), the max goes into my 401(k) and we paid off the majority of our debts (student loans, car loans, credit cards paid each month in full if used) and are working on paying off our mortgage within the next ten years so DH can retire at 60. With each pay period we now also pay ourselves first - 15% of his take home goes into a savings account that we'll use for investment (most likely real estate) in the coming years as that balance goes up.

 

We're living frugally to accomplish our goal for him to retire early because he doesn't want to be his dad - retiring at 75 and then in poor health only a year after retirement, with a million worries on him about not having enough when sitting right in front of him is more than enough. What we don't have is a college fund, mainly because by the time DS6 is ready to head to college, DH will be 60 and we can, if we feel it appropriate, fund that with retirement savings since DH will be able to tap retirement without penalty at 59.5, so one of his accounts is really, in our mind, college money if needed. We'd prefer the DS's to get a free ride with scholarships though!

Edited May 10, 2011 by RahRah

[DawnM]

Yes, Dh has a matching plan that has not been as great as it used to be.

 

I put in 17 years in the school system and have paid into the teacher's retirement system in CA, but some of those years were part time after I had kids.

 

I am concerned about retirement and worry a lot. I really think we should sell this house and downsize NOW so that we can have a house paid for in 5 years and save, save, save.

 

DH isn't quite as worried as I am.

 

Dawn

[Leighton Academy]

We primarily save through dh's work. We both also have Roth IRAs that dh contributes to monthly. The boys both have college funds that we and dh's parents contribute to. Dh's parents buy our sons savings bonds and have since they were born. If all is well, I'm hoping we can cash them in at some point and maybe start retirement funds for the boys as soon as they're of age. It won't be a huge amount but I figure it will be a great start for them. Dh's parents have been a great example to us and I'm hoping we're setting a great example for our boys.

 

ETA: I posted this before reading everyone else's responses. I don't want to make it seem that others are not setting good examples for their children. We have made choices that put us in the position. We've made alot of sacrifices to be in our current financial position. Some of the sacrifices are not ones that many others would choose to make. We have been fortunate in that our children are healthy and have no medical issues (go to the dr. once a year for a check-up). I make it a priority to feed the family an organic/healthy diet. I try to buy environmentally friendly, healthy products for the boys to use. I'm sure things would be different if I had to choose between the health of my children and saving for retirement. Fortunately, I'm not in that position but we have sacrificed mightily in other ways to get to where we are.

Edited May 10, 2011 by Leighton Academy

[rafiki]

.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

It doesn't change what we are going to do in the slightest.

 

I'm commenting to point out that there are legitimate reasons why people do not or cannot save for retirement, and not all of it is related to responsibility. Some of it is just pure luck or blessing (whatever you believe).

 

The idea being that maybe there won't be so much judgement if people knew a bit more. You just don't understand about people's choices until you've walked a mile in their shoes so while it is great to have opinions and goals, its best not to judge other's actions (or lack thereof).

 

ETA: And yes, maybe it does hurt a bit that others have been able to save so much. I would love to do that but our health really has impacted our finances. Still, we are better off than many, and live in a country with a medical system, so I'm trying to be more grateful and content.

 

:iagree::grouphug::grouphug::grouphug:

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

Because if saving for retirement was as easy as giving up something optional like vacations, more of us would be able do it. When the choice is between saving for retirement and your health, the choice is less obvious.

 

I think we are just trying to ascertain whether some posters would still choose to be debt-free over at the expense of their health or their health insurance, because that is the choice some of us do have to make.

 

We haven't taken a vacation (other than a free one) in years. Choosing to give up vacations would not be enough to enable us to save for retirement. To be able to adequately save for retirement right now, we would have to postpone medical operations for a life-threatening condition.

 

So, I disagree that saving should be above everything. The point that I am making (and other posters) is that sometimes health comes first. Are there really those who would sacrifice health to be debt-free (I'm genuinely curious)?

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree:

[Sandra in FL]

:iagree:

 

We put 15% toward retirement, by contributing the % we need to get employer match if they have one, then as much as we can in ROTH.

 

However, we do not have college funds. I worked full time and went to school full time, DH had his schooling 100% parental paid for. DH would like to do the same for these kids, but you can only cut the pie in so many pieces. Our retirement comes first. When the kids are all in college, I can work. We'll have three in college at once. Right now their therapies and medical needs are priority over college funding.

 

Of course, gotta fix them so that they can help themselves. I'm not sure that helping them too much is good for them either. We spent a ton of money on speech therapy for our 2 ds. And another ton on OT and PT for 1 ds.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

My dh is a Certified Financial Planner. Enough said :D

 

Even when we were very poor (like qualifying-for-WIC-and-EItax-credit-poor) we saved in dh's 401K to the level of the match. We budgeted to the penny for everything and treated the retirement savings like one of our bills. Always having health insurance made a difference, I'm sure.

 

One can go broke even with health insurance due to medical expenses as have very many have in our our country:(

[Night Elf]

Saving for retirement matters a lot, but IMO, not more than ensuring that I can be home with my kids, feed all of us what we need to be healthy, and make sure we have good memories with family. If I have to work past 65 because I chose to be home and HS and we took a few family vacations and ate all-natural and gluten-free because not doing so causes physical problems, then so be it. Some posters seem to disagree, and I'm not exactly sure why I spent so much time trying to figure out why!

 

Aw.. don't worry about it. As long as you're making the decisions you feel are right for your family, that is all that matters. We see that time and time again on nearly every subject we discuss on this board. Problems arise when someone makes a judgment based on their own beliefs. I know there are people who think I'm a poor parent because I don't share the same feelings about tv, video games, food choices, sleeping choices, etc. as they do. But in the end, I am "in" my daily living and see how our decisions have affected our lives in a positive way. If I felt any choice was negatively impacting my family, I would most definitely reconsider. But I'm not going to stop doing something with my children because someone else decided it was bad for their children. I see the same thing with this discussion on finances. What we are doing is working quite well for our family even though it is very different from what other families are doing. There have been incidents on this board over the years where people are not that accepting of differences.

[AnitaMcC]

No we haven't even started saving.

 

But I am already on disability retirement through the Veterans Affairs.

 

Dh has pretty much been self employed since getting out of the Navy and so far no retirement savings.

 

We have told our kids that they better make good money because they will need to take care of Dh and I in our old age. :D

 

Dh and I had decided a few years ago that we will not take out any more debt other than for home and transportation and only then if it is absolutely needed. Since we have taken care of our previous debt, we will live on how much I get in disability payments. Anything he makes is to allow us to do more for the kids and to save for his retirement. Which is one of the reasons we are moving from IL to PA. We want to move to less expensive living area while getting closer to his family in NY.

[Peela]

Dh reckons he will never retire- he loves his work too much- and truth is, he probably wont need to unless severe illness takes its toll. His work is not physically taxing.

But since he is self employed, and i am not employed, we dont get any benefits. There should be a pension for us later but who knows. We have 2 investment properties. Our idea is to pay at least one of them off

[Katiebug_1976]

Retirement? Whats that?:D I know we should be saving for it, but there just isn't any left at the end of each paycheck right now.

[Susan C.]

We'd have a great retirement saved up if we hadn't had to pay $12,000/yr. for health insurance. Add homeowners insurance (near coast), and it would be even better.