[Saanil]

Originally Posted by sdp1975

My calculations are based on zero inflation. Eg if I have 1 cr in the bank today and my monthly expenses are 80k , ie annually about 10 lacs , then I can survive for 10 years.

I get it. A very simple calculation is that if I save Rs 83.3k every month for the next 10 years, I will have 1cr in the bank account. This assumes that the amount which you are saving every month is not being put into any kind of financial instrument and will remain stagnant. I guess one needs to have an after tax (in-hand) salary of at least 1.5lakh per month if he intends to save 83.3k every month.

[dark.knight]

Originally Posted by Saanil

Got it - I completely ignored inflation! Can you help me with one calculation. I am 30 years old now. Let us say my aim is to have 1cr in my bank account by the time I am 40 years old i.e. in 10 years. How much should I save monthly in order to reach my target i.e. 1cr in bank account in 10 years. My salary is the only source of income and it will grow at 5% per annum.

You kinda didn't mention the salary, (I get it, no one should talk about salary ), so how can anyone tell you how much % of X salary i.e Rs.Y to save in order to reach your target of 1 cr in bank account in 10 years. To further know how much to save, one should be able to understand how much is in the bank account today.

My advice would be to forget what should necessarily happen 10 years hence.. the economic climate then would be way different from what it would be today. The FD rates of today are way smaller compared to what it was 5 years back, 10 years later it can go either way, who knows?

Assuming the salary is Rs.1000, essential expenditures are about Rs.600-Rs.700/-, you can save the balance remaining each month. Rest depends on how much you spend money or cars or watches or clothes on certain months (yes we run into each other in those kinda threads don't we?). The key to remember here always is that money saved is money earned. Saving not only in terms of remainder of salary after expenses but also in cutting down of expenses as and where possible. 1 crore saving in 10 years, if starting from scratch works out to an average of 10 lakhs per year, assuming 5% increase in salary, again if starting from scratch you should start out at around 6-6.5 lakhs saving in the first year (50k p.m), only then after factoring in inflation would you arrive anywhere close to that number in savings.

Uber for 5 kms 2 years ago - Rs.80, today - Rs.180
Petrol for 1 litre 2 years ago - Rs.68-70, today Rs.80
Diesel 3-4 years ago - Rs.48-52-, today Rs.65 odd
Wheat Bread 4 years ago - Rs.24-26, today Rs.40 odd
Cost of small hatchback 5 years ago - Rs.7,00,000 on road, today Rs.9,00,000/-

[the_skyliner]

Originally Posted by Ferrari1976

My dad used to say this often: "Change of work is rest".

Fantastic advice by your father.

I feel planning what to do post retirement is equally important as planning the retirement financially. Enough cash flow post retirement will keep you comfortable but not happy unless you do have a plan for the whole day, each day.

Have seen a couple of old folks struggling after retirement purely because they didn't know what they will do with the additional free time. Early retirement just makes it even worst.

Before anyone decides to hang their shoes they should definitely ask themselves this: what is that they will be able to do by retiring early that they can not do now?

You will be surprised that many a times the answer to this is almost "nothing".

And this is why:

1. You think one will be able to travel a whole lot more than now if retired at 40? Not feasible because most will have families and kids. Kids can't bunk the school all the time and travel.

2. Full time investing? Unless one decides to be a day trader, investing needs just 6-8 hours of time in a week. Easily feasible for folks who are interested.

3. Socialize more? Only you are retiring not your friends and family.

4. Give more time to hobby? Hobbies are to spend quality time away from work it can not replace the time spent at work.

5. Farming? That's not retirement, it is "change of work". There are other things associated with farming which one should consider before jumping into. The commute from your home to farm. For many who settled in cities, it will be more than 1-2 hours one way. Like going to work.

I am sure there will be folks for whom the answer will be different. Some may like to get in to social service full time which can be a good activity to spend quality time and gain huge satisfaction & fulfilment.

Important is thinking over this along with planning finances for retirement. If planned well, it can be liberating for sure.

[Saanil]

Originally Posted by dark.knight

You kinda didn't mention the salary, (I get it, no one should talk about salary ), so how can anyone tell you how much % of X salary i.e Rs.Y to save in order to reach your target of 1 cr in bank account in 10 years. To further know how much to save, one should be able to understand how much is in the bank account today.

I am trying to get some figures so that I can have an approximate idea of the amount I will be able to save in 10 years. Somehow I am more comfortable when someone tells that if you want to accumulate 1cr in 10 years, you have to save X amount every month. Once I know this X mount, I can look at my monthly expenses and see if its possible to reduce some expenses.

Assume that my monthly post tax salary is Rs 70k. Out of this, I am able to save Rs 28k every month i.e. savings rate of 40%. Assuming a 5% increment and a constant savings rate of 40%, in 10 years, I will be able to accumulate around 42 lakhs (assuming that the monthly savings are kept under the mattress). So if I want to save 1cr in 10 years, I need to increase by monthly salary by 2.4x!

[alpha1]

Originally Posted by rajushank84

Per my calculation, a 5 crore corpus + a house to stay in (in 2018 values) gives a fairly decent middle-class lifestyle. Not upper-middle-class, but strictly middle-class.

The only issue that I see is 5 crore corpus and Middle class in the same paragraph. I think the nouveau rich love calling themselves middle class.
Or perhaps you meant a rich guy fixes this as a corpus and then downgrades to a middle class lifestyle?

.
So as you can see, it is not mediocrity. To the contrary, it is an extreme ideal and an extreme desire. It comes from the stance that "free" time is so valuable, it is worth giving up a lot of potential money for, once the bare minimum needed is reached. Even if that "free" time is wasted away in so-called unproductive means, it is still a better quality of life than time spent employed at an uninteresting workplace. And time spent helping others beats both, it is the best quality if life. This is the idea behind the extremely early retirement passion, not "settling" for a middle class life.

Agree with you.

What I have come to conclude is that everyone (right from his/her birth) today is being sold the "American" concept of an ideal fulfilling life = wealth, ownership of properties (which also includes real estate).

And there is a reason for it - this fuels the economy and suits the purpose of people who are intrinsically (by nature/instincts) driven by the pursuit of "wealth, ownership of properties". I am sure you would have come across the whatsapp forward about why "a cyclist is a disaster for country's economy"

"We buy things we don't need, with money we don't have, to impress people we don't like."

I will be eagerly looking forward to stuff being posted on this thread. However, there is one thing that one point that I want to make: please don't assume that your "basic needs" 10 years or 20 years down the line will be same as today with only y-o-y cost inflation.

As I said, the world belongs to marketeers who will change the definition of "basic requirements" and cause you (and the society at large) to spend your money on fancy new stuff that you never would've dreamt of and your retirement calculation didn't take care of.

[rdst_1]

Originally Posted by rajushank84

I need to point out a simple flaw in your plan which would destroy your wealth quickly!
- Don't put it in FD. If you put it in FD, your returns just match inflation levels. So in other words, your 5 crore would stay at 5 crores' equivalent value in future only if none of it is used.

That doesn't necessarily mean it is a bad thing, especially if someone is retired. As long as the interest rates are substantial enough, it can be a stress free investment. Not everyone is savvy enough to make investment decisions.
For a 5cr FD, as pointed out gives an income of 24LPA after taxes which is definitely upper middle class. Also, if your corpus is secure and you are able to live off the rest of the life on just the returns, it is of no consequence that the value of your corpus is halved. You would be dead, so it wouldn't matter.
My dad retired with a pension and just 42L in FDs. He did have a house to live in. That meant an income of around 80k per month. That was close to what he used to get in hand when he was working. And he had lifetime health insurance for himself and my mother from his employer. He continued living the way he used to and was able to save around 40k a month and that would increase his corpus to stay abreast with inflation.
Just wanted to say, that a stress free investment can be more than enough if the difference in returns is not huge.

[SilentEngine]

Great topic, one that makes me indulge from time to time in similar thought experiment of asking myself how soon can I retire? However, the fact that we can even consider such thoughts mean that we are already in a small fortunate group, while most don't have that luxury. Which means - come what may - we should be able to sail through the life just fine? It doesn't have such an easy answer. At least, personally it helps me keep my feet firmly on the ground.

Originally Posted by rajushank84

Per my calculation, a 5 crore corpus + a house to stay in (in 2018 values) gives a fairly decent middle-class lifestyle. Not upper-middle-class, but strictly middle-class.

This is true for what age? Or are you saying that with kind of corpus, one can live for as long as one lives, irrespective of current age?
A lot of "middle-class" folks retire without ever seeing even a fraction of that amount and somehow seem to be able manage just fine.

Originally Posted by alpha1

"We buy things we don't need, with money we don't have, to impress people we don't like."

Exactly!

As a general practice, if one can lead their life within their means (no unnecessary expenses, loans etc), have some kind of plan for emergencies (insurance etc), and have a habit of regular saving/investing, rest would probably take care of itself. That's probably how most people from earlier generations (such as my parents) lived their lives.
There is a Kannada proverb which seems apt here - ಹಾಸಿಗೆ ಇದ್ದಷ್ಟು ಕಾಲು ಚಾಚು. Meaning - stretch your legs only till what the bed allows for.

Coming to retirement (early or not) - personally, one key difference what i see is - my parents have a monthly pension for as long as they live, and that's good enough to lead a comfortable life based on their own lifestyle. I won't have a pension unless I plan it myself. This one point alone would make a big difference to how one needs to plan their finances for the future.

[rajushank84]

Originally Posted by Saanil

Got it - I completely ignored inflation! Can you help me with one calculation. I am 30 years old now. Let us say my aim is to have 1cr in my bank account by the time I am 40 years old i.e. in 10 years. How much should I save monthly in order to reach my target i.e. 1cr in bank account in 10 years. My salary is the only source of income and it will grow at 5% per annum.

Assuming you use a high-return investment vehicle (say 10%), around Rs.43,500. Here's the calculation:

But keep in mind that after 10 years, 1 crore will have only the value that 50 lakhs has now. So plan for it in your mind as 50 lakhs (from buying power perspective), not as 1 crore.

Originally Posted by sdp1975

My calculations are based on zero inflation...
My assumptions are that inflation and wealth grow roughly at the same rate , especially so over a long period of time , and the growth of wealth is the same whichever investment class you put it in - such as FDs , equities , property , gold etc . They're all going to average out in the end with their upturns and downturns. It does make the calculations a lot simpler for me.

But if inflation and growth even out, then where will withdrawal / usage come from? If withdrawal continuously happen when growth and inflation stay roughly the same, and eventually bring the corpus down to zero?

Originally Posted by the_skyliner

Before anyone decides to hang their shoes they should definitely ask themselves this: what is that they will be able to do by retiring early that they can not do now?
...
Important is thinking over this along with planning finances for retirement. If planned well, it can be liberating for sure.

Insihgtful, thanks! I think you hit the nail on the head.

Originally Posted by alpha1

The only issue that I see is 5 crore corpus and Middle class in the same paragraph. I think the nouveau rich love calling themselves middle class.
Or perhaps you meant a rich guy fixes this as a corpus and then downgrades to a middle class lifestyle?
...
However, there is one thing that one point that I want to make: please don't assume that your "basic needs" 10 years or 20 years down the line will be same as today with only y-o-y cost inflation.

Agreed! I did mean the "rich" man choosing to live the middle-class-ish lifestyle. It is not a middle class lifestyle, because the middle class man has to work full-time and not unusually overtime. Not having to work is essentially the opposite of this. Only the external and superfluous aspects of their lifestyles are the same. Same kind of house, same kind of vehicle, same patterns of spending. With one "minor" difference- one has to work, one doesn't.

Interesting! I did not think that we would need more money than we do now, after accounting for inflation.

Originally Posted by SilentEngine

This is true for what age? Or are you saying that with kind of corpus, one can live for as long as one lives, irrespective of current age?
A lot of "middle-class" folks retire without ever seeing even a fraction of that amount and somehow seem to be able manage just fine.

For any age, but by current prices. Broadly speaking, here is the calculation (as you can see, there is a lot of buffer / room for comfort in this calculation):

Monthly expenses for a small middle-class family (approximtaley):

• Food 10000
• Clothing 7000
• Home & appliance maintenance 5000
• Property tax 5000
• Healthcare 8000
  Education 8000
• Utilities 5000
• Transport 10000
• Recreation 5000
• Luxury shopping 5000

= Rs.68,000 per month

Let's say you have 5 crores:

• Set aside 20% (1 crore) for future big ticket items like children's education, wedding, our own old-age health
• Remaining 4 crores, invest in mutual funds
• Let's say on average they generate 10% YoY, and inflation is around 7%. The remaining 3% can be used.
• I like to give myself another buffer over inflation spikes, and use just 2.5% instead of 3%.
• That would be - (40000000 * .025 * .9 / 12) = Rs.75,000 per month
• That slightly exceeds our "monthly needs" by 10% and leaves us in a comfortable spot.

Theoretically, this should continue to grow indefinitely, regardless of age and lifespan. Since we are withdrawing only 2.5% (or even 3%), the remainder of the returns should balance out inflation in the long run, and value-wise remain on parity with it.

But I guess you could cut down on this a lot - this calculation includes some comfort buffers. If you need to go minimalist:
- Reduce or remove the 20% buffer, and cover these expenses with inherited money (especially if you have another one to live in)
- Reduce the percentage buffer and use (withdraw) 3% instead of 2.5%
- If you do these, you could hit the desired Rs.68K at 3 crore itself instead of 5.
- You could do a lot to reduce the monthly too, depending on where you live. Some families would scoff at the 68K figure, and comfortably live on half of that. So you could even reduce that 3 crore to 1.5, for those families. It is all about 1) lifestyle, 2) building a corpus, and 3) investment vehicle for max return rate

[Acharya]

Well, there is a dedicated blog from one Mr Money Mustache, who walked away from work life in his early 30s and started so called early retirement life.
Quite a few interesting advices and learning from his first hand experience -

https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/blog/

I would certainly want to work as far as humanly possible irrespective of financial needs, as it keeps me happy.

[sdp1975]

Originally Posted by rajushank84

But if inflation and growth even out, then where will withdrawal / usage come from? If withdrawal continuously happen when growth and inflation stay roughly the same, and eventually bring the corpus down to zero?

Yes , with a zero growth/inflation assumption, the withdrawal is from the corpus that finally becomes zero.

I don't really believe in the theories of 8% returns , 5% inflation and therefore 3% growth. Over a period of time , if the returns are 8% , inflation will more or less be the same . Beating inflation is near impossible, just as outpacing returns by putting money in a different investment class is.

[alpha1]

Originally Posted by rajushank84

Interesting! I did not think that we would need more money than we do now, after accounting for inflation.

Just to make myself clear.
What I meant was 20 years ago no one would've predicted the usage of desktops, laptops, mobile phones, gizmos, travel.

Inflation calculations 20 years would've accounted for only those things that were already in existence (like house, food, clothes).

But today the old generation has to spend money for these things. In additional to what their calculations were for house, food, clothes etc.

[abhijeet080808]

One point I would like to understand is why people are so pessimistic about the stock market either via Stocks or Mutual Funds.

Here is one chart that illustrates the historical performance of stock market in India.

The key points from the chart (As on March 31'st 2012) -

- Rs.1 Lakh invested in Sensex 33 years ago is Rs.1.74 crores today. After adjusting for inflation it is worth Rs.12.54 lakhs today

- Rs.1 Lakh invested in FD 33 years ago is Rs.14.22 lakhs today. After adjusting for inflation it is worth Rs.1.02 lakhs today

- Rs.1 Lakh kept as cash 33 years ago is worth only Rs.7 thousand today in terms of purchasing power

So, the stock market actually provided an absolute growth of ~16% and net growth of ~8% per year for the last ~30 years taking inflation into account (~8%) while fixed deposits barely matched inflation. This is without even taking taxation into account.

More information here.

Personally, I follow only 3 rules -
1. Do not time the market (i.e. invest via SIP).
2. Review MF/stocks at least once a year and do not be afraid to switch if needed (if and only if they are underperforming peer benchmarks by a relevant margin).
3. Do not invest in real estate for emotional reasons in the guise of "investing".

I personally have a corpus of ~25L (around 80% invested in markets mostly via equity MF, rest 20% in PF and NPS) at an age of 31 years. I believe I am on the right track and if I choose to, I will be able to retire by ~45 years of age and not feel a significant difference in living standards. This is provided if I ideally keep investing around 80k per month till that time. This can be speeded up if I can increase the SIP amount as years goes by.

[SmartCat]

Originally Posted by alpha1

Just to make myself clear. What I meant was 20 years ago no one would've predicted the usage of desktops, laptops, mobile phones, gizmos, travel. Inflation calculations 20 years would've accounted for only those things that were already in existence (like house, food, clothes).
But today the old generation has to spend money for these things. In additional to what their calculations were for house, food, clothes etc.

You are essentially questioning the need/existence of trillion dollar life insurance and pension fund industry.

Flaws in your arguments:

1) Consumer price inflation accounts for all the changes in lifestyle of a household. It has different heads like "communications", "transport", "entertainment" etc and a particular weightage for each. And this is updated frequently.

2) With technological changes, prices of certain things do not rise as much as inflation or even fall in value (Eg: internet connection 20 years ago vs internet connection now, television, computer, phone calls etc)

3) If you were travelling by bus or train 20 years ago, but now take a flight instead - you have basically upgraded your lifestyle. You can still travel by bus or train now if you want to, and it doesn't cost that much.

4) You always have the choice of not buying the latest gadgets. It comes under "want" and not "need". Also, expenses crash once kids are done with college. Once you get even older, your lifestyle expenses go down but medical expenses can go up. Your expenses graph will not be very linear, but roughly match inflation rate over a long period of time.

[V.Narayan]

For all those planning for retirement or early retirement let me share with you my real life experience.

I voluntarily retired recently and switched to a second career that I hope will be more meaningful in the long run even though it is less than a fraction monetarily. Your date of retirement is not a magic switch when all of a sudden or even with effort you will be able to live off 50% of your pre-retirement income. If your parents do it hats off to them - though they probably don't share the challenges and inner anguish with their children. Can you at 40 suddenly switch the tap to half-full and live within a truncated income - maybe but only with great discomfort. The same applies when you are 58 or 60 or 62. You will desire a standard of living similar to what you have got used to over several years. Infact in your late 50s and early 60s your expenses continue at the peak as grown up kids are settled off, as the very elderly parents need more and more care and your income tap is petering down. Maybe past 68 your expenses do come down - I will discover as I get there.

My advice, unasked as it is, is to maintain a steady standard of living today so that later when your income is a little lower you can continue with a relatively balanced life. When I was in my early forties wifey and I took a conscious decision not to buy some extravagant luxuries that would help us look down on the Sharma's and Singh's next door and in return manage our savings to live a steady consumption pattern after I had stopped earning - which day has come. Mind you we live a very comfortable life. But for about the last ten years I had this amusing situation where some of my senior most employees were driving cars bigger than mine!!

[GTO]

Originally Posted by Acharya

I would certainly want to work as far as humanly possible irrespective of financial needs, as it keeps me happy.

This. I believe man was built to create something or contribute to society in some way. If an intelligent & able man / woman prematurely retires, it is such a waste of talent. Just imagine how different the world would be if Henry Ford or Steve Jobs had chosen to retire before they achieved what they did.

Equally, I don't mean that one should "work in an office" all their lives. But to "contribute" to our environment is important. My beloved late Dad had said he'll work till the last day of his life, and he did until kidney failure slowed him down (he still went to office on alternate non-dialysis days till he had the strength to).

I see myself working till the last day of my life too. But (hopefully) in a short time, I want to devote a part (preferably majority) of my day to social work. Our country has too many sufferers man. Helping people out with food, education & healthcare (in that order) is a DREAM of mine.

I absolutely & completely love what I do (including the majority of my time that's spent on Team-BHP) and I am fortunate enough that I can retire this weekend if I wanted to. But I won't retire in the strict definition of the term and do nothing or only indulge in my hobbies. My 10 hard hours a day (I work from 8 to 6) will remain, but I'll change it from "working on my desk" to "giving something to society".

I think I'll start with a couple of hours (hopefully soon) and slowly build it up from there.

Just my opinion of my life and don't mean to impose it on anyone. I firmly believe in "to each, his own".