Dracula
Package Car is cake compared to this...
Sure thing, bud.
Bye Bye Pension and Hello to matching 401k coming in 2023?
- Thread starter 1whofan
- Start date
Sure thing, bud.
Dracula
Package Car is cake compared to this...
So, you're saying your 401k gained 400% since 2008? You've done better than anyone I've heard about. Good on you.
Brownslave688
You want a toe? I can get you a toe.
You're looking at it totally wrong. You're looking at it as if all of the money is put in at one time. It's not. That's not how this works.
But yeah most people recovered their 401k loses of 2007-2009 years ago.
"As of June 2012, more than 94% of 401(k) participants had a higher account balance then they had prior to the 2007 stock market plunge, VanDerhei said, citing his analysis of 24 million 401(k) participants."
401k balances at record high
Brownslave688
You want a toe? I can get you a toe.
I said the Dow has gained almost 400% from its Great Recession low.
1989
Well-Known Member
Pension will payout 15+% every year. Without any cost to me.
CoffeeStainedUniform
Well-Known Member
Current proposed pension breakdown
$12/hr pension contribution. 2,250hr work year $27,000/year contribution. 35 year to full retirement. If you made ZERO interest on your money you would have $945,000 in the bank. If after retirement you made 3% on your money you could draw $4300/month for just over 26 years.
*edit* I did the math and 35 contributing and earning 1.5% would give you $4300/month for an additional 30 years.
$12/hr pension contribution. 2,250hr work year $27,000/year contribution. 35 year to full retirement. If you made ZERO interest on your money you would have $945,000 in the bank. If after retirement you made 3% on your money you could draw $4300/month for just over 26 years.
*edit* I did the math and 35 contributing and earning 1.5% would give you $4300/month for an additional 30 years.
Last edited:
Dracula
Package Car is cake compared to this...
That's great, if you are working off of the assumption that those participants added nothing to those balances since 2007. But we probably know that's not the case.
As far as your example of buying low, that's great too. But there is an enormous difference between buying low when you start there, and buying low because that's where you ended up. The guy who starts there has a huge advantage because he's starting from zero. The guy that ended there is working off a negative. And he might go positive, but he's got a massive difference to make up before he ends up at his water level.
Honestly, I've got no desire to argue with you, but I lost $90,000 in 2008, and even with my increased deductions and increased earnings, I'm nowhere near I should be. You can argue with that, if you want, but those are the facts, and I haven't lowered my risk.
CoffeeStainedUniform
Well-Known Member
I'm sorry. I lost 2 houses I had no business owning and the $60k I'd put into them. The reprocussions are more than just the face value $$. I't took me 8 years to get close to where I started from.
Dracula
Package Car is cake compared to this...
My losses had nothing to do with extra houses, outside of the considerations that my 401k and that money was tied up into mortgage-backed securities, that I had no knowledge of.
My losses were strictly 401k related. At 41 years old, maybe I should've invested in all bonds and US treasuries. That would've saved my 401k. But that's not what conventional wisdom tells you. That, tells you to go risky while you are still relatively young. Turns out, that wisdom doesn't work out so well...unless you're a banker.
Now, I'm like the rest of you. Maxing out my 401k, hoping I'll eventually be able to work above my water level. I'm just not sure how long that will take...
DriveInDriveOut
Inordinately Right
He's saying it doesn't need to, because the day before the market tanked is not your cost basis. You averaged into the market over years. On top of that, since your dividends are reinvested from market lows you don't need as high a return to get back to before the crash.
DriveInDriveOut
Inordinately Right
If people want the Union to manage their money for them that's fine. We should have a choice is all I'm saying.
Last edited:
Brownslave688
You want a toe? I can get you a toe.
Of course they added some. The point was it really didn't take long to bounce back as far as the overall market goes.
The Dow was at 13,800 in Oct of 2007. It got back to there by feb 2013.
The S&P had over taken its fall 2007 high by Jan 2013.
BakerMayfield2018
Fight the power.
DriveInDriveOut
Inordinately Right
Pretty much what I'm expecting from the pension.
BigUnionGuy
Got the T-Shirt
I'm confused by this statement.
What pension are you in, that is managed by the Union ?
I'm not familiar with every Pension Plan....
The ones' that I am aware of, are jointly trusted between Union and Employer members.
Any insight ?
-Bug-
Brownslave688
You want a toe? I can get you a toe.
They're different?
BigUnionGuy
Got the T-Shirt
MyTripisCut
Never bought my own handtruck
Our local hires someone to manage the funds. Is that normal or not?
DriveInDriveOut
Inordinately Right
BigUnionGuy
Got the T-Shirt
Absolutely.
Do you think a "newly" elected slate could come in, and change things ?
@DriveInDriveOut was trying to make a point.
Just not sure what it is....
