How much is needed to retire?

[Rock]

The technique doesn’t sell naked options. All of the option spreads are fully hedged with determinable risk. They are low risk methods for a retirement accounts. It would include Iron Condors, Collars, and some vertical spreads to take advantage of directional movement. The broker I heard this from does it on his own account, and was in the business for thirty years. I have been simulating for less then a month and I am up more then the 3%, but will practice alot more before I use real money.

Yes, most of these option techniques with their fancy names limit downside risk. But the compromise is that returns will be less smooth (just as with delta hedging). Thus, you cannot expect to consistently generate 3% per month. In a bad month, you may lose 3 times (9%) or more depending on which technique you employ and the parameters you set. But at least your losses will be contained within bounds you set, much wiser in long term.

It is common to make 2 fast calculations (estimates) based on chance alone (accurately timing the market on consistent basis is next to impossible):

1. Percentage chance of breaking even or better.
2. Ratio of upside potential to downside risk.

Generally, the higher your number 1, the less attractive your number 2 will be. I don't think it is reasonable to expect an options trader to generate consistent positive returns on a month-by-month, year-by-year basis. There are always going to be some down months and/or years.

I believe the majority of truly great traders with strong long term verifiable track records realize that the best way to monetize their past performance is to lever other people's money by starting their own hedge funds. These typically pay them 2% up front and 20% of client gains. One good year with a big enough fund will make them wildly rich.

Now, I challenge you to find me just one hedge fund which: a. has generated annual returns of over 10% (net of all fees) each year for all of the last 10 years using options strategies, b. is open to new investors and c. generates its returns using highly liquid instruments with clear market values, d. allows easy entry and exit (6 months or less) without unreasonable penalties for doing so.

In investing and trading, short track records (a few months to 3 years or more) don't mean much. I've seen funds with 4 or 5 years of 20%+ gains each year lose all the gains and even most of the starting capital when markets suddenly changed. 10+ years can cover a full economic cycle and will show how performance adjusted to different phases. Just remember, even Warren Buffet has down years.

[MrPeabody]

The technique doesn’t sell naked options. All of the option spreads are fully hedged with determinable risk. They are low risk methods for a retirement accounts. It would include Iron Condors, Collars, and some vertical spreads to take advantage of directional movement. The broker I heard this from does it on his own account, and was in the business for thirty years. I have been simulating for less then a month and I am up more then the 3%, but will practice alot more before I use real money.

Yes, most of these option techniques with their fancy names limit downside risk. But the compromise is that returns will be less smooth (just as with delta hedging). Thus, you cannot expect to consistently generate 3% per month. In a bad month, you may lose 3 times (9%) or more depending on which technique you employ and the parameters you set. But at least your losses will be contained within bounds you set, much wiser in long term.

It is common to make 2 fast calculations (estimates) based on chance alone (accurately timing the market on consistent basis is next to impossible):

1. Percentage chance of breaking even or better.
2. Ratio of upside potential to downside risk.

Generally, the higher your number 1, the less attractive your number 2 will be. I don't think it is reasonable to expect an options trader to generate consistent positive returns on a month-by-month, year-by-year basis. There are always going to be some down months and/or years.

I believe the majority of truly great traders with strong long term verifiable track records realize that the best way to monetize their past performance is to lever other people's money by starting their own hedge funds. These typically pay them 2% up front and 20% of client gains. One good year with a big enough fund will make them wildly rich.

Now, I challenge you to find me just one hedge fund which: a. has generated annual returns of over 10% (net of all fees) each year for all of the last 10 years using options strategies, b. is open to new investors and c. generates its returns using highly liquid instruments with clear market values, d. allows easy entry and exit (6 months or less) without unreasonable penalties for doing so.

In investing and trading, short track records (a few months to 3 years or more) don't mean much. I've seen funds with 4 or 5 years of 20%+ gains each year lose all the gains and even most of the starting capital when markets suddenly changed. 10+ years can cover a full economic cycle and will show how performance adjusted to different phases. Just remember, even Warren Buffet has down years.

The behavior you describe in hedge funds is the reason I have always managed my own money. You have people who can’t trade who decide they can only make money by finding a way to take other people’s money by charging huge fees. Then they are under pressure to use high risk methods and blow out. They collect their fees whether they perform or not. I pulled my money out of the market before it crashed and preserved my entire portfolio, while the people who had their money professionally managed typically lost half of their portfolios. The professionals did nothing to protect them. The professionals have the system setup so your choices are to get 1% with a CD or give your money to them, so they can charge huge fees while losing your money. I am not interested in getting rich, but in making a living from what I already have. If you manage your own money – 1) you keep all your own profits, 2) it’s easier to make a profit and find opportunities with a smaller portfolio, 3) you are not under pressure to use high risk methods, but can be a tortoise growing your portfolio slowly while making income, and 4) you avoid Bernie Madoff, hedge funds, inefficient mutual funds, and incompetent “professionals� who suck your money while giving you a percent of your profits so low you can’t live off them. On the other side of the coin, it is extremely challenging and you have to take it seriously and treat it like a business, or you will lose your money.

As a side note, I have been trading futures for a year. I have been trading only 1 contract which is the minimum risk possible, and average about $100 a day. With 20 trading days in a month, that is about $2000 a month. With that, someone could retire and live in the Philippines. The margin needed to trade 1 contract is $2000, but a brokerage may require $5000 to open an account. So, theoretically, a talented young trader could retire to the Philippines with $5000. That’s pushing it, but it illustrates a point. Contrast that with the man in America who decides he can’t afford to retire with 1 million dollars.

[NorthAmericanguy]

Thanks for the info guys! This is quite a bit to think about.

[NorthAmericanguy]

I'm 31 and the plan is to move when I'm at least 45-50 years old, but if my mother is still alive, then it will be later.
As far as your advice, I really appreciate all this information, but to be honest, I refuse to put my money into something I don't understand. My last girlfriends dad was a big time stockbroker and he would try to explain investing to me but I could not understand it. Not only that, but I don't trust these banks and such... A few people I know lost money (one person all of it) who were investing in stocks, 401ks and other financial instruments.
I was hoping this could be as simple as work, save money, then move to a cheaper county to live because of the currency exchange difference alone. This is what foreigners do that I have met who told me their plans.

OK, here's my $0.02:

* At 31, you're a far better catch to women than some 50-year old balding sex tourist. So if you want to go abroad, plan to go soon while you're still young, full of libido, and while your mother is still in good health. Instead of planning to be abroad in 15-20 years, consider going sooner, and return in 15-20 years to care for your mother. Your dedication to filial piety is admirable and shows character that's appealing to many Asians.

* If you prefer to stay in the US and work hard for the next 15-20 years, you mind as well play here (in the US). Make sure you're well paid for whatever you're doing. If you're looking for a wife, keep an eye out for the girl who'd lean over and open your door for you from the passenger side. And if you just want bling bling's, consider using agencies such as model quality introductions and seeking arrangement to "outsource" your dating:

http://www.ocweekly.com/2003-02-13/feat ... g-for-10s/
http://www.seekingarrangement.com/press.php

* For financial advice, I recommend visting this forum:
http://www.bogleheads.org/

A good (and simple) book to read is the Coffeehouse investor.
http://www.coffeehouseinvestor.com/

If you don't like stocks, bonds, mutual funds, etc., consider real estate. The rules are very simple, only buy something that you can rent out and make positive cashflow after expenses. Read the book "Rich Dad Poor Dad" by Kiyosaki for some ideas, but don't pay for his stupid rip-off seminars.

Thank you sir for the links! And yes, I have a copy of Rich Dad Poor Dad.

[NorthAmericanguy]

$30,000.

You can buy a house in Asia for $10,000 and you can live on about $300 a month. That will give you 5.5 years of income.

I maintain that any sane man will become bored out of his f***ing mind within 12 months of being 'retired' and then go and look for something new and productive and income producing to do as a hobby. Thus your assets will not continue to decline.

I strongly assert that 'retirement' is a scam to get you to work for 40 years and save $2 million dollars that bankers can then steal and invest and make fees and commissions off of. If you pocket $30k and then split they don't have your millions to play with, now do they?

Society wants you slaving away until you are 50 or 60 or 70.

Don't. It's a trap designed to benefit THEM, not YOU.

Me? I retired at age 47 years 8 months. After 1 year I became bored and decided to teach English.

$30k.

Yes, this is what I believe.

[momopi]

I just want to get a general idea of how much money I should save up here in the states before I move to an Asian country (i.e. Thailand). This move is about retirement so I don't plan on working and it's also about excaping from being alone because people here in the states don't socialize with people who they don't know.
So would 300k US currency be enough to live on if I lived modestly and found me 1 good woman?

Here's another consideration: if you have a set financial goal, finding ways to make more money may help you reach that goal faster. So think about how much $ you're making now, and how you can improve that income.

I'll give a couple examples:

At my previous job, my beginning pay was $40k, and it took me almost a decade to reach 6 figures through annual raises and multiple promotions. In comparison, my friend's wife is a pharmacist, and her starting pay is 6 figures out of school (and passing the certification exam), plus large sign-on bonus. In terms of making more $ faster, her way is better than mine.

While I was at Fort McMurray (Alberta, Canada), I spoke to some of the workers and they told me that the starting pay for oil workers is six figures and up. Even the guy with a broom at the facility is making $80k/year. However, housing and rent is expensive in the oil boom town, and company dorms are "basic" at best. On the up side, you're only a short flight from Edmonton, Calgary, and Vancouver. Alberta & Calgary actually started as oil boom towns in the early 1900's, just like Fort McMurray today.

Canada is stingy with giving out jobs to foreigners, but they need oil & mining workers and the industry is very profitable. I've been told that every operation up by Fort McMurray is generating at least $500 million/year in profit. See here for the Canadian immigration "skilled workers" list. If you're able to acquire some job experience in the US, you might be able to take a few contracts in Canada and make big $$:

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/immigrate/ ... ctions.asp
http://www.workopolis.com/EN/job-search ... rray&lg=en

(The Ft. McMurray suggestion is just an idea. There are many other industries at various locations around the world with shortage in skilled labor. Look around, you might find something better that you like!)

[globetrotter]

"It behooves you to take some risk to avoid the unattractive option of holding a wasting asset."

Nope.

The risk is that your broker and banker and real estate counter party will rip you off.

The events of the past 3 years have shown, rather conclusively, that investment advisors are in it for themselves. Too many in the USA are on the take. The risk is too high for all asset classes and transactions.

This goes far beyond due diligence. They don't give a shit about you, they only want your fat sums sitting around for them to play with.

f**k them.

Put your money in cash and let it sit there. It's better than having your 'investment' in your house plummet -90% (Nevada/Socal) and your stocks and bonds and pensions plummeting -20%.

I did NOT put $70k in to a house down payment in 2007.

I saved myself about $300k and counting due to this.

Momopi's advice is from a dead time - pre-2007. The New Normal needs new methods. His methods will just destroy you during what is coming.

[globetrotter]

I think you needed a real hobby

I have many hobbies. Learning languages, playing guitar, travel, web businesses, fora, reading, writing, music, hitting on young women...

I get bored out of my mind doing only them all day long.

I did this, in 2008-9. It sucked balls.

I am warning everyone I can that retirement may be, for you, a total scam.

Take off one or two years now, when you are 30-40. See if you like doing nothing all day but your hobbies.

I did not.

You do NOT want to suffer and sacrifice for 4 decades and then retire at 60 and realize in 60 days that you hate it and that you are bored. Chances are that you'll die in a year or two, as well.

That's what I am saying - that this goal everyone seems to have of:

'God I can't WAIT to not *have to* work'

...is a lie, a scam, living death.

[starkeep]

I think globetrotter is right. i bought a new house in las vegas for 340000 now its worth 150000 so unless someone buys forclosures or now when realestate is low the best thing is precious metals or in the bank. Those printing presses keep printing and inflating the dollar. I just hope my retirement pension will hold up for a while.

[i_want_a_hot_white_chick]

I just want to get a general idea of how much money I should save up here in the states before I move to an Asian country (i.e. Thailand). This move is about retirement so I don't plan on working and it's also about excaping from being alone because people here in the states don't socialize with people who they don't know.

So would 300k US currency be enough to live on if I lived modestly and found me 1 good woman?

Hi Northamericanguy,

When you retire, the rule of thumb is that you can spend 4% of your nest egg every year. That means your nest egg needs to be 25 times as big as your annual expenses. So if you have a nest egg of $300,000 then you can spend $12,000 per year or $1,000 per month. So I think you are correct that $300,000 would be enough but it would be just barely enough since $1,000 a month is about as little as a person can live on.

If you have investments, I recommend that you read "A Random Walk Down Wall Street". The book explains the Efficient Market Hypothesis which is basically an academic way of saying that you get what you pay for when you choose investments. It doesn't make sense to attempt to pick stocks because you are almost as likely to choose a bad stock as a good one. Also, the more you trade the more money you lose because of commissions and transaction costs. The best way to invest is to simply find low cost ETFs that are well diversified and hold on to them for a long time. The less often you trade the less you pay in taxes because you only pay capital gains taxes when you sell a stock or ETF. If you just hang on to those ETFs for many years without selling then the money that would have gone to the IRS instead continues to increase in value.

[Rock]

I just want to get a general idea of how much money I should save up here in the states before I move to an Asian country (i.e. Thailand). This move is about retirement so I don't plan on working and it's also about excaping from being alone because people here in the states don't socialize with people who they don't know.

So would 300k US currency be enough to live on if I lived modestly and found me 1 good woman?

Hi Northamericanguy,

When you retire, the rule of thumb is that you can spend 4% of your nest egg every year. That means your nest egg needs to be 25 times as big as your annual expenses. So if you have a nest egg of $300,000 then you can spend $12,000 per year or $1,000 per month. So I think you are correct that $300,000 would be enough but it would be just barely enough since $1,000 a month is about as little as a person can live on.

If you have investments, I recommend that you read "A Random Walk Down Wall Street". The book explains the Efficient Market Hypothesis which is basically an academic way of saying that you get what you pay for when you choose investments. It doesn't make sense to attempt to pick stocks because you are almost as likely to choose a bad stock as a good one. Also, the more you trade the more money you lose because of commissions and transaction costs. The best way to invest is to simply find low cost ETFs that are well diversified and hold on to them for a long time. The less often you trade the less you pay in taxes because you only pay capital gains taxes when you sell a stock or ETF. If you just hang on to those ETFs for many years without selling then the money that would have gone to the IRS instead continues to increase in value.

1. 4% sounds like prudent advice. But even that may fall short if you are using your nest egg to live in a high growth emerging economy where inflation will likely hit high levels. If you plan to settle long term in such a country, better to invest at least a significant portion of your nest egg in reasonably conservative local currency investments.

2. Market efficiency is still hotly debated between academics and traders on the street. Personally, I've found the equity markets are far from perfectly efficient, especially in developing economies. They are driven by the human emotions of fear and greed plus regulatory loopholes more than anything else. Warren Buffet doesn't trade, George Soros does. But I don't think either claim that equity markets are completely efficient (correct me if I am wrong). They have radically different approaches to exploiting markets and stock investments and both have been goldmines.

3. If you reside in some Asian countries and build connections with certain people or local institutions, you sometimes get opportunities to trade local stocks, bonds, CBs, etc, on quasi-inside information. This can be very profitable if you have a reasonable chunk of starting capital. As long as you have an idea about what you are doing, the risk is low. Such practice is often widespread and the regulators don't have the will or resources to restrict the small-fry retail side of this activity. Even big hands get away with it more often than not. The environment is entirely different from the US where anything like that would be very risky.

4. Even if the markets are not efficient, beating them long term is tough. You need an edge - say quasi inside info, a passion for value hunting and the time and energy to do this, or enough experience and local knowledge in an emerging market to detect and exploit some of the inefficiencies when they occur.

5. Otherwise, ETF diversification is a wise strategy for a world traveler. If you wanna remain neutral to all markets and asset classes, you can by passive global index funds which encompass US, developed, and developing world equities, real estate, investment grade bonds, high yielding bonds, commodities, precious metals, and global currencies. There are many choices of very broad funds which give such diversification. I've used iShares a lot in the past. If you plan to spend most of your time in one country, its wise to heavily overweight investments in that market.

[globetrotter]

Personally I have never understood the concept of planning to leave the seed corn untouched forever.

Why enrich your banker or financial planner?

You won't live forever.

Spend it, and NOT on healthcare.

[Rock]

Personally I have never understood the concept of planning to leave the seed corn untouched forever.

Why enrich your banker or financial planner?

You won't live forever.

Spend it, and NOT on healthcare.

Problem with that is if you run out of money before you run out of life. Not every senior citizen wants to have to work for a living. And the ones who do may not be able to find work or set-up a business at that age. After the body grows old and mind feeble, life may go on for another 2-3 decades or more. How do you finance old age if you've spent everything by the end of middle age? Inheritance? That doesn't work for a lot of people.

And nobody is proposing paying bankers or financial planner. Passive ETFs have razor thin fees and don't involve any financial planners. They are structured according to formulas, not run by active fund managers. Direct stock market investing, especially in several Asian markets, costs next to nothing, just pennies per thousand dollars.

As for healthcare, what do you do if you have an accident or your body surprises you in some way? Insurance or medical treatment may be a lot cheaper in many Asian countries. But it's not free. Serious problems will still cost you significantly if you want the highest quality treatment available.

[djfourmoney]

Interesting topic -

I would never retire without some other interest and I don't mean some of the stuff Globetrotter listed. There's nothing wrong with those things, I just see them as activities and not hobbies, big difference.

I would never retire just to keep a bunch of low cost prostitutes around. That just sounds ridiculous. Over on ISG I know most of what drives that sort of thinking is they have been burned by divorce and the relationship became sexless long before it finally ended.

So really I don't understand the draw of many of these tiny countries and the desire to find some happy medium between typical Western living and what on the surface looks more affordable elsewhere.

I'm under no grand illusion being an expat.

The top reasons I have for leaving?

Affordable Health Care. Health Care cost too much in the US period, even if your lucky enough for your employer to provide it at a discounted rate or even gives you a full ride. Where I used to work, a majority of the men relied on their wive's health insurance because she had your typical office job.

Sense of community, there isn't much of one in the US and I don't have any grand illusions either especially with other US expats. I've heard all sorts of stories that Americans often keep their bad habits even abroad.

Here's an example -

I have been invited by Americans in the States to drop by the next time one came through, I have twice, just to be sure about this, but the people just didn't remember me or my wife and we were turned away.

I am not looking for an affordable spot on Earth because the standard of living in other places is rising and quickly. You won't be able to stay in your poor country at poor prices for very long as more people get out of poverty locally and start joining the middle class. As mentioned the value of the US dollar is dropping and not at the same exchange rate as it was only a few years ago. They are also saying "real" recovery won't happen until 2014-2015 and nobody knows what that will look like.

I'm not looking for a more affordable standard of living but a BETTER one without breaking the bank. People in America complain about taxes and that they are too high. I'd say that argument is actually hiding another concern, which is that for the money they take, when you need a service or help, you're in an income bracket too high to get help. Which means you're actually in the struggling working poor or lower middle class. I am looking to get more for my tax dollar.

Conservative Investments usually are best for the long term. They only pay at a small rate, but at least they pay and the risk is low.

Can somebody really break down the reasons for being in China, Thailand, etc, etc. instead of South America, Central America, Eastern Europe or Western Europe???

One of the poorest countries in the World is Moldova but you don't see much talk about that. There's a guy on the RU forums that lives in Ukraine and after crunching the numbers and taking his wife's career into account, he felt it was best to live there. I wouldn't call Ukraine expensive to live. Also more people paper over the fact that many poor countries are corrupt beyond belief, doesn't that concern you or are you corrupt yourself and don't mind paying a bit more than the next guy just to get the job done?

I just wonder about some of this stuff.

[djfourmoney]

Personally I have never understood the concept of planning to leave the seed corn untouched forever.

Why enrich your banker or financial planner?

You won't live forever.

Spend it, and NOT on healthcare.

Problem with that is if you run out of money before you run out of life. Not every senior citizen wants to have to work for a living. And the ones who do may not be able to find work or set-up a business at that age. After the body grows old and mind feeble, life may go on for another 2-3 decades or more. How do you finance old age if you've spent everything by the end of middle age? Inheritance? That doesn't work for a lot of people.

And nobody is proposing paying bankers or financial planner. Passive ETFs have razor thin fees and don't involve any financial planners. They are structured according to formulas, not run by active fund managers. Direct stock market investing, especially in several Asian markets, costs next to nothing, just pennies per thousand dollars.

As for healthcare, what do you do if you have an accident or your body surprises you in some way? Insurance or medical treatment may be a lot cheaper in many Asian countries. But it's not free. Serious problems will still cost you significantly if you want the highest quality treatment available.

Yeah I don't get it either, there many low cost investments, just most are interested in get rich quick schemes which is why are economy is the way it is. That and also showing the opulent lifestyles of the Rich constantly feed into that.

I also agree you can't plan yourself for unforeseen cost. You could be the typical conservative and say you're responsible for your well-being. But I'm not and I say instead of spending zillions on propping up an industry to benefit the few instead of the many, I rather live where we all benefit and selfish types are shouted down.