I have a live for today attitude. I'm 60 next year, so this year I'm hiking the Inca Trail while I'm still fit - you just never know what's ahead.
My father was 51 when he dropped dead of a heart attack. He was fit and we thought healthy. He had planned to retire at 55 and he and my mum were going to travel the world. My mum eventually did it on her own - two lots of 6months.
What does a 'live for today attitude' actually mean gypsy? Do you ignore tomorrow in your financial planning?
What does your Father's death have to do with anything? Are you trying to suggest the same old, same old flawed logic of 'you could get hit by a bus tomorrow' and therefore it is OK to not think about tomorrow?
Live for today IMHO means having a lifestyle that you can support now and not think to the future. Lots of folk do exactly that and seem very contented so it works for some but not all. Lots of our friends need order in their lives hence they cannot fathom the way we work travel work etc.
It does provide for interesting conversations.
The bus logic is excellent as it gives you the power to base a decision on what you want to do!
A colleague of mine spent years planning what she was going to do in retirement and saving for that time. She died of cancer within a year of retiring. Its a reality check. If I can afford it, I'm going to do it while I have as much of my health and fitness as is still possible. This doesn't mean I'm not thinking of the future, I am, but there are things I may not be able to do by the time I reach retirement age. If it cuts down my retirement savings, so be it. I don't want to regret not doing them.
Live for today. = Have a few thousand in an account (my mum used to call it her drop dead money), which I have, so no one has to pay for my funeral and ... Spend the rest ... you can't take it with you.
Even the best preparations can go pear shape. My dad is well prepared for retirement but stayed working until four years ago well past 65. Granted he worked less but still carried the responsability of running a company. Some would say my dad wanted to but the truth is my father spend no time thinking or missing the company he created and build up for all those years.
My dad got four good years of retirement in and he travelled to many places all first class. But, now, at 78 he's going down to Scotsdale Arizona by air ambulance to a cancer clinic because the doctors at home can't help him and have given up on him. My father worked hard all his life and had enjoyed his retirement for only four years. He really enjoyed those years and he had a lot of hobbies and a good group of friends and a loving wife. But, I wish his health had stayed good. Last year he had a kidney removed and recovered from that.
My point is it's important to prepare but who can say how prepared you need to be and what is worth more?
Sorry to hear that majortraveller. At least he had four, but could've had more.
I think there is a difference in the culture between your country and mine when it comes to being worried about how much money you have in retirement.
never understand this apparent belief that things have to be either/or all the time. I can accept that someone with only $10k can't really choose to live today and save for tomorrow. I can even accept that of someone with $50k. But surely anyone with more than that can live today AND invest for tomorrow at the same time.
Let's test this. V200, Ann and gypsy, suppose you had $100k a year income. Would you spend the entire $100k each year with no thought for investing a bit of it for the future?
The 'get hit by a bus tomorrow' logic has one major glaring flaw. What if you DON'T get hit by a bus tomorrow?
you miss the point resurgam........last post on this from me, I am adding to the hole in the ozone layer typing replies.
majortraveller - My point is it's important to prepare but who can say how prepared you need to be and what is worth more?
Those are the wisest words on the thread so far...
My parents died young, my husband died at 49 (we were due to retire this year... some 6 years along...), and sundry other friends and relatives have gone and I know some very old (and some some folks quite young) "high needs" healthwise people who struggle to do more than exist financially.
I've travelled overseas 4 times (2-4 months each time) in the last 6 years - doing the things I said I always wanted "do before I die". Australians are lucky to have a frugal living safety-net aged pension for retirement (65+) that depends on assets/income NOT how long you've worked/how much contributed. I figure that if I make it to at least my official life expectancy (mid 80s), have run out of all resources other than the pension, done most of the things I want to do, and in good enough health for my financial situation to feel "constraining" I should count my life as a success/lucky.
I live frugally all the time at home earning what I need to save at the rate I want, but spend up a bit more when away... so if I drop dead prematurely somebody gets lucky, otherwise I plan to not have much to leave behind if I get over 80...
back to majortraveller's point - If somebody wants to do something that would say take a decade to prepare for to some ideal level, maybe that isn't worth it for them to wait for everything to fall into place, other stuff can derail the best laid plans. Maybe they've just gotta go "prematurely" by some people's definition. But even people who do all the prep right but don't take out the travel insurance that turns out to be needed could have a similar effect in terms of medical debts. If somebody does their "dream" trip/project and they end up back home broke... well they've just got to fix that themselves (ie not expect other people to carry the can for them financially).
Everybody's tolerance for risk and uncertainty is different, just as their capacity to rationally deal with these factors vary.