????你的養(yǎng)老金是不是存得太多了,？或者你認(rèn)為這個(gè)問(wèn)題本身就很無(wú)厘頭,？

????而事實(shí)是這樣的：晨星投資管理公司（Morningstar）退休研究部主管大衛(wèi)?布蘭切特率先提出了這個(gè)問(wèn)題，而且他發(fā)現(xiàn),， 20%左右的人對(duì)這個(gè)問(wèn)題的回答是肯定的,。布蘭切特認(rèn)為情況有些嚴(yán)重，他說(shuō)：“養(yǎng)老儲(chǔ)蓄金毫無(wú)疑問(wèn)是大多數(shù)人人生最大的一筆投入,。但想象和現(xiàn)實(shí)差距很大,，人們以為自己需要存上100萬(wàn)美元來(lái)養(yǎng)老，實(shí)際上只要80萬(wàn)就夠了,?！?/p>

????那么，這種情況是否也出現(xiàn)在你身上,？大家最好還是重新審視一下自己的養(yǎng)老儲(chǔ)蓄計(jì)劃,，以及目前的開(kāi)銷(xiāo)。

????長(zhǎng)期以來(lái),，根據(jù)概測(cè)法,，人們應(yīng)該存下退休前收入（即退休前的最終年收入）的70%到80%作為養(yǎng)老金。而且,，算上通貨膨脹的話(huà),，這個(gè)比例還應(yīng)該逐年上調(diào)。但美國(guó)消費(fèi)者金融調(diào)查報(bào)告（Survey of Consumer Finances）的數(shù)據(jù)顯示,，人們的實(shí)際開(kāi)銷(xiāo)并不會(huì)因?yàn)橥浀挠绊懚蠞q,。

????通常，四十五至五十歲的人群開(kāi)銷(xiāo)最大,。（這個(gè)年齡段的人通常要負(fù)擔(dān)一個(gè)上大學(xué)的孩子,，同時(shí)撫養(yǎng)一個(gè)一兩歲的小家伙。）但之后,，開(kāi)支就逐漸減少了,，尤其是等到孩子們都成年以后，父母?jìng)兙蜁?huì)縮減開(kāi)銷(xiāo),，取消房貸抵押（盡管這種情況越來(lái)越少）,，處理掉多余的汽車(chē),。這種狀態(tài)一直持續(xù)到晚年，直到醫(yī)療和交通方面的開(kāi)銷(xiāo)出現(xiàn)增長(zhǎng),。根據(jù)年齡段的不同,，人們退休后的年均最低花費(fèi)在退休前收入中的占比從低于54%到超過(guò)87%不等。

????摩根大通資產(chǎn)管理公司（JP Morgan）退休部的主管邁克爾?法爾孔說(shuō),，這對(duì)于年收入約5.6萬(wàn)美元的中等收入人群是個(gè)鼓舞人心的消息：這部分人群退休后的年度開(kāi)支并沒(méi)有像當(dāng)初預(yù)料的那樣,，從65歲時(shí)所需的4.3萬(wàn)美元增長(zhǎng)到90歲時(shí)的8萬(wàn)美元（受通脹影響），而是僅僅止步于5萬(wàn)美元左右,。其中,，社保資金彌補(bǔ)了相當(dāng)大的缺口。

????但收入更高的人群,，尤其是高于平均水平,，但稱(chēng)不上富豪的那些人，在決定養(yǎng)老儲(chǔ)蓄時(shí)不能掉以輕心,。他們退休后的開(kāi)支當(dāng)然會(huì)較之退休前減少,，但這并不意味著他們的儲(chǔ)蓄足以維持這些開(kāi)支。

????法爾孔說(shuō)：“多攢錢(qián)是‘富人’不得不面對(duì)的問(wèn)題,?！彼慕忉屖牵骸叭绻乙荒昴軖?0萬(wàn)到30萬(wàn)美元，那么在退休前,，我的開(kāi)銷(xiāo)可能是收入中較小的一部分,，因?yàn)槲业么驽X(qián)，還得交稅,。我大概只會(huì)花掉總收入的50%,。”而由于扣除各種費(fèi)用后的實(shí)際收入更高,，社會(huì)保險(xiǎn)所能承擔(dān)的退休后開(kāi)支占退休前收入的比例也無(wú)法達(dá)到與較低收入人群相同的比例,。而稅款也是很大一筆開(kāi)支，包括從退休賬戶(hù)取款需要繳納的稅款,。

????當(dāng)然,，確定自己是否過(guò)度儲(chǔ)蓄是明智之舉。這樣的話(huà),，你就不會(huì)在當(dāng)下急需開(kāi)支時(shí)瞻前顧后,。比如，你可以把一部分儲(chǔ)蓄用來(lái)替孩子還掉助學(xué)貸款,，也可以把它用于休閑娛樂(lè),。布蘭切特給出了一條私人建議：“和金融理財(cái)師交流5小時(shí)絕對(duì)有必要。遺憾的是，很少有人這么做,?！比绻悴幌肫刚?qǐng)理財(cái)師，利用網(wǎng)絡(luò)工具和退休計(jì)算器也不失為明智的做法,。

????另外,，請(qǐng)記住，這篇文章要說(shuō)明的道理之一是,，制定退休儲(chǔ)蓄計(jì)劃不是一勞永逸的事,。你的花銷(xiāo)并不是一成不變，同樣,，你的健康狀況,、賺錢(qián)能力以及你的投資回報(bào)順序也不是一成不變的，未來(lái)它們甚至?xí)タ刂?。即使你已設(shè)定了退休目標(biāo),，而且正在為之奮斗，每隔幾年重新評(píng)估一下也是相當(dāng)重要的,。這樣做不僅有益于未來(lái)的生活，也有助于過(guò)好當(dāng)前的生活,。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

????譯者：劉進(jìn)龍/汪皓???

????Are you saving too much for retirement? Can you believe I'm even asking that question?

????Full disclosure: The folks at Morningstar Investment Management, specifically head of retirement research David Blanchett, asked it first. He found that for many people the answer is yes -- by an average of 20%. That, as Blanchett acknowledges, is a big deal. "Retirement is, by and large, the most expensive purchase of anyone's lifetime," he says. "For people who think they need $1 million but find they only need $800,000, it is a big difference."

????So how do you figure out whether it applies to you? You have to take a step back and look at both the retirement saving goals you've set for yourself and your current spending.

????There has long been a rule of thumb that says you should plan to replace 70% to 80% of your pre-retirement income (that is, your final annual salary before you retire) in retirement -- and that that number should be adjusted upward, with inflation, each year. In real life, data from the Survey of Consumer Finances shows, spending, and therefore the amount you'll need, isn't that linear.

????People in their mid-40s to 50s spend the most. (As someone right in the middle of that range with one child in college and another starting in 18 months, I can totally see why that's the case.) From there, spending starts to decline as -- typically -- the kids leave the nest, you downsize, retire the mortgage (although that's getting less common), ditch the extra car, etc., etc., until medical needs drive expenses up again toward the end of life. Bottom line, the amount people need to replace varies from under 54% of pre-retirement income to over 87%.

????For average earners, whose pre-retirement income is roughly $56,000, this is welcome news, says Michael Falcon, Head of Retirement at JP Morgan Asset Management. Their annual spending in retirement seems not to be escalating as previously thought from around $43,000 at age 65 to nearly $80,000 at age 90 (due to inflation); instead, it climbs only to around $50,000. Social Security can cover a significant chunk of that.

????But higher earners -- particularly those who earn more than the median income but below what the country considers wealthy -- should be cautious before taking their feet off the gas. Their spending actually declines in retirement -- but that still doesn't mean they'll have saved enough to cover it.

????"Having to save more is an affluent problem," Falcon says. And here's why: "If I make $200,000 to $300,000 a year, I'm probably spending a lower percentage of my gross income pre-retirement because of saving and taxes," Falcon says. "I may be spending only 50% of my gross salary." Still, because of the higher take-home, Social Security will not replace the same percentage of pre-retirement income. And taxes -- including those on withdrawals from retirement accounts -- will take a bigger bite.

????Of course it pays to figure out if indeed you're over-saving. That would free you up to use the money in the present, whether you put it toward defraying student loan debt for your kids or enjoying yourselves. Blanchett recommends a personal touch. "Nothing can substitute for spending five hours with a CFP," he says. "But the percent of the population that will do that ... is a definite minority." For people who are not going to engage, utilizing the online tools and retirement calculators available is a step in the right direction.

????And remember, one thing this paper shows is that this is not a one-and-done experience. Your spending is not static. Neither is your health, earning potential, or -- even further from your control -- the sequence of your investment returns. Even if you've set retirement goals and are working toward them, revisiting the process every couple of years will pay off. Not just in how you're able to live in the long run, but in how you're able to live today.