I know that once upon a time, a million dollars was a lot of money. Now don't get wrong, it is still a huge sum. But once, being a millionaire meant something. It was something to strive for, back when I was a "thousandnaire".

I think that term has lost its meaning when the median home sales price in the US is $440,000 as of June 2026.

I am wondering what beginners are striving for now a days? What is life changing money today? It wasn't that long ago, when that million-dollar lottery went to seven million because one million after taxes, wasn't nearly enough. Today with huge prizes, billionaire sized prizes have occurred. My targets have been steamrolled over by society, I guess.

Back in our working days DH told me we would need 3 million dollars to live comfortably in retirement. I told him we would never make it and I threw up my hands...we made high salaries, saved diligently, but 3 million? Never happen.

Even when I was younger it was never a dollar amount I was concerned either. I always had a cash flow number in my head. The earliest Incan remember was having $10K left a month after paying the bills.

Actually, I was striving toward that first Million figure. I watched my first cashflow of $100 profit grow and never looked back.

I went back and opened my xls file from 2005, because it was easy enough to get to.

In it I had a small section that read yearly goal and yearly goal left.

The goal was 45k, and I was still shy of that. This was just for the rentals. I had a W2 at the time.

The median salary in Indiana then was $44.1k, so my RE beat that.

I guess I am a millionaire on paper because I own more than that in holdings, but I sure don't have that in the bank or other liquid assets.

I do remember years ago talking to my kids about the lottery. I said that if I won a million dollars I couldn't pay off all the holdings, after taxes and such.

I guess I could say that having a million in the bank would be a nice effort, but I would want to take that money and make it work for me.

So maybe having a million in the bank but not needing to use it to make more money should be the goal?

I am about 85% RE and 15% Stocks. I don’t think one is better than the other. I think they meet different needs. I liked the cash flow of RE and it allowed me to invest and spend at the same time.

The 4% rule means yes that you would only be able to spend 40K per million but I will add that from a stock investment perspective and average returns you would have invested around 300K to achieve that million dollar number. That number varies with how early you start but I assumed starting at around 35 and investing for 30 years.

If I calculate the value of my real estate and not my purchase price my return is probably only 5%. If I look at my purchase prices it’s ridiculous but that wouldn’t be fair comparison.

What are we ultimately striving for anyway?

Besides that, I think NE and RB may be correct.

There are several time value of money calculators that would give you the scientific answer to that question.

I concur a million dollars isn't really a lot in today's world.

Something that I learned years ago & has stood me well ever since is;

I don't really have a specific number in mind. It was always do I have enough to retire in some form or fashion to replace my after tax living expenses.

If you are all stocks my simple mind would run the calculation like this. If you need 100K a year, you'd want 25 or 30 years in stocks so 2.5 or 3 million. Even if the stock market flat lined for 30 years you have 30 years of assets in the brokerage. Now in reality the market will go up so you could probably get by with 2 million in the brokerage account and never run out of money during your lifetime.

If you are all in real estate and you need 100K a year, you'd want to be grossing 300K - 350K a year in rents. Where I'd figure 1/3 for taxes, 1/3 for rental expenses, and 1/3 to live on (thus 100K).

If you have both then some middle ground of the two. If you only need 75K a year in after tax dollars to survive life, then you need even less to retire.

This doesn't even take into account social security so you might need even less than these calculations.

You can not take it with you when you die. Plan to spend it. Plan to enjoy it. Your heirs don't deserve it and didn't work for it. You did. Stop working and start enjoying it.

My heirs didn't (and still don't) work for it so I agree wholeheartedly that they don't deserve it.

Our goal is to die broke, or just on the good side of zero.

We are slowly setting the properties up with an estate planner so the transition will be smooth for the kids. I don't want to be a butt about it after all.

They will get the properties and hopefully maintain the inflow for the short time until said properties are sold.

Interesting article on this in my news feed this morning. Here's a slice of it.

To retire comfortably, Americans think they will need $1.2 million saved, according to a new survey from global investment manager Schroders.

Yet just 30% of the workplace retirement plan participants surveyed said they think they’ll reach a $1 million savings mark before retiring, the survey found.

More than half — 51% — said they expect to have less than $500,000 saved when they reach retirement, including 24% who say they will have less than $250,000 saved, according to the survey, which polled 1,500 investors between March and April.

The reasons retirement savers cite for falling short include rising costs, credit card debt and competing expenses, the results found. Notably, 33% have more credit card debt than retirement savings, according to the survey. Meanwhile, 55% said they are unable to save 10% of their paychecks toward retirement due to competing expenses — and 69% said rising costs have put retirement out of reach for their generation.

"More than half — 51% — said they expect to have less than $500,000 saved when they reach retirement, including 24% who say they will have less than $250,000 saved, according to the survey, which polled 1,500 investors between March and April."

One of the things I have to remind myself of is norms and medians. That means that the norm in America is far different than my immediate environs and personal circumstances. The media also promotes a norm that isn't reality.

I'm in a retirement group on FB where this is a CONSTANT discussion and worry. There are quite a few people in the group who are making it on a SS benefit of $ 2000 or less monthly. Occasionally, there's anger and resentment expressed against those who talk about having more resources. At one point, it got so bad that the group manager formed a separate group for those of lesser means. Any talk or questions from those with more was seen as flexing no matter how innocent the question or comment was. Riotous living, divorces, health issues and etc. account for some of the problems with savings.

I'm not one for ostentatious display anyway but this is another reminder that merely appearing to be well off can be a problem.

It is obviously your fault for being diligent and making it work.

Having met GKARL before I can say that the arrogance is quite well hidden with him. He just seems like a normal guy that I enjoyed talking to.

Thanks Zero. I may take you up on that White Castle offer whenever I make it back home to Indiana.

Congrats to you Phil!

I heard somebody say once....."A million dollars, that is so 1990's"