Comments on: Measuring my performance against the Edelman 'secrets' …

By: Moneymonk

Moneymonk — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 20:37:07 +0000

401K’s are a tool of the poor—whoa that is sooo harsh, but true

401k’s were design as a supplement to retirement not THE retirement

By: AJC

AJC — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 01:42:53 +0000

@ Moom – even at 9.5% after tax return, why would you REDUCE LEVERAGE by paying down your mortgage, when to grow your wealth you need to INCREASE LEVERAGE?

By: moom

moom — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 00:42:13 +0000

I fail on all of those Though I don’t own a house. Under US conditions if I did I would carry a mortgage. Under Australian conditions – 9.5% no tax deductions – it’s more a borderline case… Houses are too expensive here, especially with the market beginning to weaken. I don’t have children either. But on #7 I think I benefitted from interaction with my parents about finances and today I help look after my Mom’s money.

By: Why bother? Ric Edelman says that you already have it all … « How to Make 7 Million in 7 Years™

Mon, 11 Aug 2008 17:31:06 +0000

[...] 11, 2008 The Number Tags: millionaire, money, Rich, The Number, wealth I while ago I wrote a post gauging my own performance against the “Ric Edelman Secrets” [...]

By: How do I figure social security and pension plans into my ‘Number’? « How to Make 7 Million in 7 Years™

Mon, 14 Apr 2008 14:18:38 +0000

[...] you can read his original comments here, but this is the essence of his problem: I am just having trouble trying to quantify my pension so [...]

By: AJC

AJC — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 21:49:03 +0000

@ RDiN – You bring up a good point that I will cover in an upcoming post … in the meantime, for your specific situation, I recommend seeing a qualified fee-based planner. AJC

By: Robert DiNero

Robert DiNero — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 21:00:21 +0000

Sorry for the confusion, I am just having trouble trying to quantify my pension so I can include it in my net worth. In the previous post I used money in a taxable account and equity in my home to come up with my net worth. This new number will have an impact on how I allocate the money in my taxable account. For e.g., possibly pay of my home. The trouble is I don’t receive a lump sum, but rather 65% of my base upon retirement, every year, which includes increases for cost of living every year. Hence, my confusion. My base is approximately $90,000 and if I were to retire now I would receive 65% of said number for life, which is about $58,500 per annum.

By: A Couple Honerable Mentions | Fiscal Musings

A Couple Honerable Mentions | Fiscal Musings — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 02:57:08 +0000

[...] first is a book review of a book review. It’s called measuring my performance against the Edelman secrets and is a review of the book by Ric Edelman. This is from a blog that I recently found and am [...]

By: AJC

AJC — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 21:55:48 +0000

Hi RDiN. It sounds to me like you are asking “does the 20% rule work in retirement?” If so, I will address in an upcoming post, because it is an important distinction. The simple answer for now is that the 20% Rule is REALLY saying: “Always have at least 75% – 80% of your Net Worth in INVESTMENTS”.

But, when you retire, you are (generally) no longer concerned with GROWING your portfolio, but SAFELY WITHDRAWING from your portfolio.

Therefore, you really need to see a properly-qualified fee-based financial planner to help you make these decisions.

By: Robert DiNero

Robert DiNero — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 20:50:19 +0000

As indicated in a previous post, I concur with the no more than 20% of your net worth rule in your primary residence. But this leads me to my next question: do I qualify to pay off my personal residence using the 20% rule. I have a Police & Firemen pension that some say is worth approximately a millions dollars, no debt, other than my mortgage of $200,000, and $160,000 in a taxable account. I make approximatley $115,000 year and at the ripe old age of 53 get to walk away with 65% of my base pay, which if I was to leave now would be about 65% of approximatelely $90,000, not to mention full benefits. It would appear that I qualify to pay off my house using the 20% rule?