William Miller from TX posted over 8 years ago:

Retirement Planning Mistakes Investors Often Make: Q: Why doesn't this article address the options of putting investments into annuities ? William Miller

RKalman from CA posted over 8 years ago:

This article is so general that it is nearly meaningless. These caveats are common sense. As a retired person, I find retirement planning bewildering. There are so many options and so many ways people try to take advantage of seniors one needs a crafty ninja broker/lawyer/agent to guide through the shark infested waters. the market is scary and volatile and with a precious nest egg of savings, one has to be real careful what they do with it. Plus we have a governmental administration who sees its mission to remove the safety nets of affordable health care coverage, environmental protection, vital scientific research, embracing technological innovation for peaceful purposes, and so forth. It isn't all about, well I goofed thinking things were gonna cost less now.

RKalman from CA posted over 8 years ago:

This article is so general that it is nearly meaningless. These caveats are common sense. As a retired person, I find retirement planning bewildering. There are so many options and so many ways people try to take advantage of seniors one needs a crafty ninja broker/lawyer/agent to guide through the shark infested waters. the market is scary and volatile and with a precious nest egg of savings, one has to be real careful what they do with it. Plus we have a governmental administration who sees its mission to remove the safety nets of affordable health care coverage, environmental protection, vital scientific research, embracing technological innovation for peaceful purposes, and so forth. It isn't all about, well I goofed thinking things were gonna cost less now.

Donald Myers from AZ posted over 8 years ago:

I agree with RKalman, there is nothing new here. Moreover the author (and several of the cited authors) keep harping on the 4% rule but if you have an IRA then that rule is irrelevant. If the author(s) stressed the use of the 4% rule as a guide for "spending" it might make sense, i.e. even though you have to withdraw far more than 4% from an IRA very soon after age 70, you could certainly at least try to control your spending. Simply warning against a too aggressive or a too conservative portfolio really help much. It is a bit like the target funds promoting a conservative portfolio soon after retirement (a sure plan for running out of money).

Dale Heller from TN posted over 8 years ago:

This article is hardly worth the electrons it took to pass it along. I was expecting more insight, strategies, and actionable items than this, especially from AAII. The 4% rule is all but obsolete these days. How one could plan 20-30 years of their future by a "...4% spending guideline..." is beyond me. This article may be better placed in another innocuous magazine. Copying an article, especially this one, from another publication (Retirement Daily) is not what I had hoped for from my subscription.

Gerard Bieker - Administrator from KS posted over 8 years ago:

It makes sense to me to try and live off the cash flows from your investments once you retire and leave the principle alone. If you can do that it should get you through the up and downs of the stock and bond markets. There may be times where you have to draw some principle down but your diversified you can decide where to draw down from.

Rolf from WI posted over 8 years ago:

I agree with most of the comments. It's getting kind of old to hear the rehash of, save more, spend less, work longer etc. as ways to have a properly funded retirement. Those things should all be obvious to anyone subscribing to this site. I know this article doesn't directly mention those things, but it seems to be the type of info that we are getting more and more of.

Anthony Tuk from North Carolina posted over 8 years ago:

Retired early 17 years ago and have done well (i.e maintained investment capital and increased spending and reserves) Everyone would like to hear that a simple rule (i.e 4% withdrawl) would be OK for you and you will be fine.However this is a bit trite, especially for those who have spent their lives managing businesses and the building of their retirement funds. Retirement is a process of management not the simple administration of a rule. Example: lowering fixed costs in pre-retirement so as to make it painless to adjust expenditure commensurate to return of investments requires a plan and actions to make this happen along with many adjustments to changing conditions (2007-2009 comes to mind) Have found that narrowly focused minimization (like taxes) or maximization (like Social Security or Investment return) programs haven't worked well for many, including me. Partial use of these ideas has worked: Rolling some money in the good years from a regular IRA to a Roth, taking some money from an IRA and reserving some cash(paying a little more tax).....etc. Basically a diversification of applied ideas has worked. A final example: I took Social Security at 62 (a no-no according to Social Security wizards).I avoided taxes on IRA withdrawls and took advantage of the opportunity to invest and compound this money: Avoided "opportunity costs" If you die at 70 and are still working, you have maximized your Social Security and minimized your return.....

Christopher Viscomi from VT posted over 8 years ago:

Is this really the lead article? What a generic, noneducational waste of time. Please respect the intellect of your subscribers more than this filler piece.