Chat is a text only community for casual conversation, please keep shitposting to the absolute minimum. This is intended to be a separate space from c/chapotraphouse or the daily megathread. Chat does this by being a long-form community where topics will remain from day to day unlike the megathread, and it is distinct from c/chapotraphouse in that we ask you to engage in this community in a genuine way. Please keep shitposting, bits, and irony to a minimum.
As with all communities posts need to abide by the code of conduct, additionally moderators will remove any posts or comments deemed to be inappropriate.
Thank you and happy chatting!
I spoke the other day about rich people whingeing that they don't have enough to retire in luxury. In today's news there is a 67 year old man who hates his job and wants to retire. However the poor thing only has $700K saved up. This only gives him $28K a year in interest. 
Poor old dear still hasn't paid off his mortgage so how will he manage on that?
How the other half live.
Social Security data says that 3.16% of 67 year old men and 7.22% of women live to be 97. Bit high not to take into account when the stakes are putting food on the table.
ok so 97% chance of death. What I said remains correct, his late age of working means he can withdraw more than 4%. 4% is the rule of thumb for people retiring at 55, not at 67
We don't know the gender of this person
Rule of 4% is just for a period of 30 years. The math doesn't become less correct based on age. It was originally conceived in 1994 for people retiring 62-65. With increases in life expectancy since then I don't think 67 is too far of a stretch to apply it.
Wow, you're right. A lot of people in these comments have said they're a man, but it doesn't actually say that anywhere.
I was going off of this from OP, I thought they knew this person personally and didn't see the hyperlink