<p>On a different retirement savings topic… has anybody thought about how they’ll handle charitable contributions? </p>
<p>We are fairly generous now with donations to church and Compassion and various other organizations (often on solicitation…thinking this week about a donation toward a teen mission trip.). In theory we could cut now back to save more, but it seems right to share while we can. After retirement I’ll need to adjust things. </p>
<p>“We are fairly generous now with donations to church and Compassion and various other organizations (often on solicitation…thinking this week about a donation toward a teen mission trip.). In theory we could cut now back to save more, but it seems right to share while we can. After retirement I’ll need to adjust things.”</p>
<p>I agree, @Colorado_mom, I think you need to figure it out after you retire. Wait awhile, see how your finances shake out, and then decide what you’re going to do then. Seems like you can do all the planning for retirement in the world, and who really knows what’s going to happen until it does?</p>
<p>I donated to Compassion for years, and then I had to stop because I just couldn’t take it anymore. Such a great organization, but I felt so insincere, these little guys sending me letters about religion and I am an agnostic, but I just wanted to help them. The final straw was this kid saying he’d let me down because he couldn’t follow the religion anymore, and I told him I just didn’t care about the religion…just wanted to help him. I’m sure they never gave him my letter, as I never heard from him again. So hard to have personal contact with these kids, you just want to bring them home and adopt them!</p>
<p>I never heard of Compassion.</p>
<p>I agree with @busdriver11 about adjusting when the time is right. If cutting back now feels right, then you should consider where to cut back.</p>
<p>People w/o children or families to consider often decide where their estate will go - so they can have that taken care of.</p>
<p>As others have said, better to have more money than needed in retirement, than to run low due to unexpected (and un-plan-able) events.</p>
<p>One problem with giving is then receiving a lot of unsolicited mail. I guess one can say a prayer for various organizations as you receive the mail…turn it into a positive in that way.</p>
<p>Compassion is an organization that matches sponsors (monthly payments) with children in need. You write letters back and forth. It’s known for having low overhead costs. We signed up for Chamie in Ethiopia the week of Columbine shootings (50 miles from us in CO)… and had him for almost 10 years. Recently there has been more turnovers, so it would be easier to disengage. </p>
<p>Sorry to hijack, but I’m wondering how you’ve factored in the logistics and costs of assisted living/long term care into your planning. Are you considering buying supplemental insurance that covers these costs, paying for it out of retirement funds, or avoid using these sorts of services? </p>
<p>We did decide to buy long term care insurance thru DH’s employer plan. (We actually meant to buy it for both us, but there was a paperwork snafu on mine and I never chased it down. DH is 7 years older, and he was our main focus). </p>
<p>There are pros/cons on all approaches. What we liked about the LTC cares is their in-home health care coverage to prevent the need to nursing homes. In a financial planning class we learned that can be key in many families. </p>
<p>@Dad<em>of</em>3, the LTC plans available today are not as good as the ones in the past. Consumer Reports is probably as objective as anyone (i.e., they don’t profit from a purchase or a non-purchase). <a href=“Long Term Care | Insurance - Consumer Reports”>http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/2012/08/long-term-care-insurance/index.htm</a></p>
<p>The general consensus among those who aren’t in the business of selling these policies is that the following is correct:
</p>
<p>I bought LTC insurance for both H and I when we were both mid-40’s (now we are 58, I would not be able to get after my cancer at age 52). We have policies you cannot buy now, and our financial planner agrees we have great policies. Shortly after we got rate guarantee 10 years policies, I could have rewritten up for rate guarantee for 20 years - so my current rate increases would have been deferred. Life Ins. co is stable, just not writing LTC insurance now. Just had first price increase - will have two more, then will stabilize; our plan pays out high amount per day (with daily amount increasing yearly percent) with unlimited years. I like the security of having this, because it means I can get into high level of care and services if we meet criteria (Activities of Daily Living criteria). </p>
<p>The key thing is to apply when you are healthy. Also determine what you can afford and what benefits are you getting. If you get turned down from one company, you may not be able to get elsewhere, so care is needed in the process. Be sure to check with state insurance commission about various companies and policies before you apply for anything.</p>
<p>Some people think this insurance is a bit of a waste of money, esp. if you never use. How lucky would we be if we could live into old age w/o medical issues? I would rather give up home owner’s insurance than our LTC insurance policies. I have had really big medical bills (had good health insurance but still copays and deductibles) that were a lot bigger than any homeowner’s claim (largest there was $20,000 - which would not have covered one month of my cancer treatments). And I hope to never use LTC insurance! It was a royal PIA when I got my disability policy to pay benefits during my very intense treatment period for stage III cancer, and it was a good policy from a good company.</p>
<p>H has lots of longevity in his family, but his dad had some strokes in his early 80’s and needs a walker and much assistance - fortunately MIL can manage him at home. My mom had dementia and died at 78. My dad died of cancer at 63. You never know. BIL’s mother was in a nursing home not knowing anyone for over 10 years. Will our estate miss the insurance money? - no. I think the insurance will help preserve our estate if one of us runs into medical issues; we will be able to stay in our home or in a really nice facility will policy paying the costs.</p>
<p>If you can’t make the medical criteria for a LTC ins policy, you are ‘self insured’ and hopefully you will not need nursing home care for any length of time; medicare only pays for a short time with lots of rules after hospitalization/medical incident. The good news/bad news is the average length of time is 3 years once you qualify for ADL (however that means you die either before or after the avg). Again no crystal ball on individual circumstances.</p>
<p>The surviving spouse is probably who needs the policy - who knows how this works out, but women often survive much longer than men. My 60 year old sis has a small LTC policy, which would help with home care if ever needed; her much older H (now 77/78) will absolutely rely on her help, although after a small heart attack and a triple bypass at 70 and being retired throughout that period, he is in pretty good shape - walks every day (as he has for many years) and now watches even more dietary intake.</p>
<p>SOSConcern,</p>
<p>Sounds like you have gone through quite a bit.</p>
<p>I wish you the best.</p>
<p>
Do they think homeowners insurance is a waste of money if their house doesn’t burn down?</p>
<p>That said, with today’s policies, I’m not a buyer, but would probably be if I were offered the policy that you got a decade+ ago.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I do. I have the insurance but every time the renewal comes up, I just wonder. If the house burns down, I’d sell the land and move. Between the sale of land and savings from not paying the premium, I think i come out on top.</p>
<p>Insurance company has to come out ahead somehow. It seems that if your house burning down without insurance would be a catastrophic “I can’t live my life anymore” event, then you should probably have insurance, just in case. If it’s not a big deal, probably shouldn’t. The expected return of insurance has to be negative. Insurance is you buying lower variance to your net worth.</p>
<p>@Vladenschlutte , you are technically right. In truth, I could probably pay to have my house rebuilt if it burned down, but paying for someone who slipped and fell is probably a bigger concern. You can’t get an umbrella policy without homeowners (and high coverage auto), so there you go. </p>
<p>However, I remember some thread about the large number of people who can’t get $2000 together (or was it $5000?), but I would imagine that most people can’t get a six or seven digit home rebuilding amount together. </p>
<p>IxnayBob, I can’t imagine a house that would cost 7 figures to rebuild. I’m not an expert, but I believe that a very nice, large house could be built for less than $300k. Most of the value of existing homes is in the land.</p>
<p>@NYMomof2 , maybe 7 digits is pushing it, but we spent $250k on a renovation (architect, permits, contractor, hvac, appliances, etc.). If you have no insurance, and your house burned to the ground, you would also have to replenish furniture and other things that presumably also burned to the ground. </p>
<p>Northern NJ is an expensive place to build (or do anything, for that matter). The land is the most expensive, granted, but I would want to replace my 1920s house with something as similar as possible, although as we discovered during our renovation, at best you can approximate the materials and craftsmanship of the past. For example, try finding masons who will do first rate stucco work.</p>
<p>IIFC, new home construction cost generally ranges from $100-200/square foot, depending on where it is, the complexity of the design, and how fancy the materials are, and can go a lot higher if there is a lot of customization and you go top-end. So for a 2500 sq ft house you can be looking at $250K-500K to rebuild.</p>
<p>For most people, it’s a moot point because your mortgage will require you to have insurance.</p>
<p>If your house is paid off and not all that expensive, and you have the financial resources, it’s not crazy to drop the insurance. The odds are in your favor.</p>
<p>Actually you’d be in decent shape if your house burned to the ground if you were prepared to sell the land and leave. The problem is that buildings don’t usually burn to the ground, leaving nothing but a nice little pile of ash. More frequently they partially burn, leaving a rickety half-burned shell that you would be required to pull down and cart away in the interests of public safety. That’s expensive. You’d definitely be on the short end of that financial deal. Hope that makes you feel better about your insurance. :)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Another fire should do the job. </p>
<p>I stand corrected on construction costs. I had no idea they were so high. And I did not consider the cost of removing the carcass.</p>
<p>Here in my neck of the woods a lot can typically support a house 2-3X the lot value. For a $150k lot it means a $300K-400K house. Take away the builders’ markup (10% - builders do not make more than that off houses here), and you are looking at a replacement costs in the ballpark of $300K and even higher, which makes $1200 policy look like not a bad deal. </p>