Roll call unretired! What is your timeline? Contingencies??

[Rukh O'Rorke]

Nov 28, 2023 16:16:13 GMT -5 minnesotapaintlady said:

Nov 28, 2023 10:17:24 GMT -5 Rukh O'Rorke said:

Been converting some stocks to cash in one of my 401k rollovers, as part of my walking back risk endeavors. I wasn't exactly thinking of leaving this particular money in cash, but realized I've now got about 2 years worth of cash available. Well - need to wait until 59.6 to avoid the penalty. Just a few days over 4 months until that milestone is reached. I only have 1 months cash in current employer 401k, which I could draw from penalty free if retired so that would leave 3 month to cover.

I suppose I could buy an ETF in this account and then transfer the stocks in the current 401k to cash.....seems better as the stock funds available aren't the least expensive, but not sure how to arrange everything - selling the individual stocks was a first step in an as-yet-to-be-finalized plan. So will think on that. With this rollover, I was aiming for medium risk with some growth and income, so not sure if I will just split the diffence - half stocks half MM/treasuries? More to think about...

It's hard! lol!!

I've said that before.  The accumulation phase is easy, just set it and forget it...shovel as much in as you can. It's the draw down part that is the PIA.

Are you thinking of quitting now?  Just wondering why it matters that you only have one month of cash in the workplace 401K? 

Also - the other thing we've talked about is our workplace 401ks not have great options to just hold some cash....I've been realizing that the fund options are equally ungreat compared to what you can get at vanguard on your own, so it doesn't make sense to avoid the cash option and just do the stocks because it is just a truth that the 401k is just less optimal in terms of expense ratios, choices, etc. than what you can get on the outside market, so I am eliminating that from my consideration on how to allocate between 401k and 401k rollovers.....

Still no big decision yet! I might roll some of the money cashed out from individual stocks into a fund if I decide to continued working for a few more years and yolo in the market.....

[minnesotapaintlady]

Nov 29, 2023 13:02:50 GMT -5 Rukh O'Rorke said:

Nov 28, 2023 16:16:13 GMT -5 minnesotapaintlady said:

I've said that before.  The accumulation phase is easy, just set it and forget it...shovel as much in as you can. It's the draw down part that is the PIA.

Are you thinking of quitting now?  Just wondering why it matters that you only have one month of cash in the workplace 401K? 

Also - the other thing we've talked about is our workplace 401ks not have great options to just hold some cash....I've been realizing that the fund options are equally ungreat compared to what you can get at vanguard on your own, so it doesn't make sense to avoid the cash option and just do the stocks because it is just a truth that the 401k is just less optimal in terms of expense ratios, choices, etc. than what you can get on the outside market, so I am eliminating that from my consideration on how to allocate between 401k and 401k rollovers.....

Still no big decision yet! I might roll some of the money cashed out from individual stocks into a fund if I decide to continued working for a few more years and yolo in the market.....

I have an S&P index fund option in my 401K which is just as good as anywhere else, and basically what all my Roth IRA is in as well, but the cash option (or should I say "guaranteed income") sucks so bad.  It's literally making less than 2% this year while money market accounts are at 4-5%.  Ridiculous.

[Rukh O'Rorke]

Nov 29, 2023 13:47:31 GMT -5 minnesotapaintlady said:

Nov 29, 2023 13:02:50 GMT -5 Rukh O'Rorke said:

Also - the other thing we've talked about is our workplace 401ks not have great options to just hold some cash....I've been realizing that the fund options are equally ungreat compared to what you can get at vanguard on your own, so it doesn't make sense to avoid the cash option and just do the stocks because it is just a truth that the 401k is just less optimal in terms of expense ratios, choices, etc. than what you can get on the outside market, so I am eliminating that from my consideration on how to allocate between 401k and 401k rollovers.....

Still no big decision yet! I might roll some of the money cashed out from individual stocks into a fund if I decide to continued working for a few more years and yolo in the market.....

I have an S&P index fund option in my 401K which is just as good as anywhere else, and basically what all my Roth IRA is in as well, but the cash option (or should I say "guaranteed income") sucks so bad.  It's literally making less than 2% this year while money market accounts are at 4-5%.  Ridiculous.

mine is ytd 3.55% one year 4.44%.

has a .35% expense ratio

[minnesotapaintlady]

Nov 29, 2023 13:56:08 GMT -5 Rukh O'Rorke said:

Nov 29, 2023 13:47:31 GMT -5 minnesotapaintlady said:

I have an S&P index fund option in my 401K which is just as good as anywhere else, and basically what all my Roth IRA is in as well, but the cash option (or should I say "guaranteed income") sucks so bad.  It's literally making less than 2% this year while money market accounts are at 4-5%.  Ridiculous.

mine is ytd 3.55% one year 4.44%.

has a .35% expense ratio

Mine has NA for the expense ratio, but the ytd is only 1.64%.  It's mostly bonds and not treasuries.

[CCL]

Is there an option for a balanced fund? That's what I put my extra cash in. They fluctuate some, but nothing like an all-equities fund.

I don't think I could handle a "cash" fund. I've done well overall with my stocks and funds.

Agree with MPL. I've always said it's easy putting the money in. Taking it out is the tricky part. When hubby retired, I set up a monthly auto withdrawal from his 401k. I've never changed it. Set it and forget it, I guess.

I just checked my Roth IRA. Fidelity says I'm up 18% ytd. I remember it was kinda discouraging first of year when I was minus. After a while you get to the point where taking out a monthly amount doesn't have much impact on your balance.

[Rukh O'Rorke]

Nov 29, 2023 15:54:20 GMT -5 CCL said:

Is there an option for a balanced fund? That's what I put my extra cash in. They fluctuate some, but nothing like an all-equities fund.

I don't think I could handle a "cash" fund. I've done well overall with my stocks and funds.

Agree with MPL. I've always said it's easy putting the money in. Taking it out is the tricky part. When hubby retired, I set up a monthly auto withdrawal from his 401k. I've never changed it. Set it and forget it, I guess.

I just checked my Roth IRA. Fidelity says I'm up 18% ytd. I remember it was kinda discouraging first of year when I was minus. After a while you get to the point where taking out a monthly amount doesn't have much impact on your balance.

good info.

do they automatically sell shares fo the withdrawl? Or do you designate 50% this fund, 50% that fund?

[minnesotapaintlady]

Our balanced fund is basically 60% Total Stock Market, 40% Total Bond Market.  There are like 12 funds making it up, but when you put them altogether that is essentially what it is.  I'm 90% stocks already, so it seems easier to just up the bonds and have the same effect.  But, I don't want more bonds.  I'm happy with 10%.  I do want to have about 10% in treasuries and/or cash. 

I might just have to break down and sell off some of my Rollover IRA.  I'm kind of emotionally attached to that fund though.  I have not touched it in any way shape or form the past 21 years.  It was 22K when I started and now it's just shy of 200K without ever adding another nickel.  I kind of want to retire early on that 22K.   Just use that money alone for the first 5 or 6 years.  It's a nice story to inspire the kids to save early.

[CCL]

Nov 30, 2023 11:35:07 GMT -5 Rukh O'Rorke said:

Nov 29, 2023 15:54:20 GMT -5 CCL said:

Is there an option for a balanced fund? That's what I put my extra cash in. They fluctuate some, but nothing like an all-equities fund.

I don't think I could handle a "cash" fund. I've done well overall with my stocks and funds.

Agree with MPL. I've always said it's easy putting the money in. Taking it out is the tricky part. When hubby retired, I set up a monthly auto withdrawal from his 401k. I've never changed it. Set it and forget it, I guess.

I just checked my Roth IRA. Fidelity says I'm up 18% ytd. I remember it was kinda discouraging first of year when I was minus. After a while you get to the point where taking out a monthly amount doesn't have much impact on your balance.

good info.

do they automatically sell shares fo the withdrawl? Or do you designate 50% this fund, 50% that fund?

With the 401k they automatically sell the shares based on percentages held in the account.

With IRAs I can choose which funds to sell.

[Rukh O'Rorke]

cool! thanks CCL

[minnesotapaintlady]

So, I've decided the two biggest things eating at me right now in my personal finance world are asset allocation and the whole withdrawal/spend down strategy once in retirement. After a LOT of reading on the Bogleheads forums over the holidays I've decided I'm not going to do anything drastic with AA until I reach my minimum FI number (about another 250K).  Once that happens this is my plan:

- Move enough of my Traditional IRA from 100% equities to get me to no more than 70/30 AA. This would = about 8 years of expenses at min FI#

- Once a year (during retirement) - Roth conversion up to the ACA subsidy optimal amount. Converted amount would go into a balanced or fixed income fund within the Roth similar to how the Traditional was invested.

- All withdrawals during retirement from the Roth balanced fund.

This lets me convert as much as possible without screwing up ACA.  The 8 years of fixed income gets me to age 67 at which point I'm golden.  Actually I'm golden at 65, but it's a buffer.

[Rukh O'Rorke]

Jan 4, 2024 23:10:42 GMT -5 minnesotapaintlady said:

So, I've decided the two biggest things eating at me right now in my personal finance world are asset allocation and the whole withdrawal/spend down strategy once in retirement. After a LOT of reading on the Bogleheads forums over the holidays I've decided I'm not going to do anything drastic with AA until I reach my minimum FI number (about another 250K).  Once that happens this is my plan:

- Move enough of my Traditional IRA from 100% equities to get me to no more than 70/30 AA. This would = about 8 years of expenses at min FI#

- Once a year (during retirement) - Roth conversion up to the ACA subsidy optimal amount. Converted amount would go into a balanced or fixed income fund within the Roth similar to how the Traditional was invested.

- All withdrawals during retirement from the Roth balanced fund.

This lets me convert as much as possible without screwing up ACA.  The 8 years of fixed income gets me to age 67 at which point I'm golden.  Actually I'm golden at 65, but it's a buffer.

just checked the NW thread - but you dont break out roth/401k. what proportion is that?

[minnesotapaintlady]

Jan 4, 2024 23:18:31 GMT -5 Rukh O'Rorke said:

Jan 4, 2024 23:10:42 GMT -5 minnesotapaintlady said:

So, I've decided the two biggest things eating at me right now in my personal finance world are asset allocation and the whole withdrawal/spend down strategy once in retirement. After a LOT of reading on the Bogleheads forums over the holidays I've decided I'm not going to do anything drastic with AA until I reach my minimum FI number (about another 250K).  Once that happens this is my plan:

- Move enough of my Traditional IRA from 100% equities to get me to no more than 70/30 AA. This would = about 8 years of expenses at min FI#

- Once a year (during retirement) - Roth conversion up to the ACA subsidy optimal amount. Converted amount would go into a balanced or fixed income fund within the Roth similar to how the Traditional was invested.

- All withdrawals during retirement from the Roth balanced fund.

This lets me convert as much as possible without screwing up ACA.  The 8 years of fixed income gets me to age 67 at which point I'm golden.  Actually I'm golden at 65, but it's a buffer.

just checked the NW thread - but you dont break out roth/401k. what proportion is that?

Right now I have about

770K pre-tax

170K Roth

[CCL]

MPL I'm confused. Are you saying, once retired, you will do Roth conversions, then turn around and withdraw the money (or a portion of it) for living expenses from the Roth?

I find it interesting to see all of your perspectives on retirement planning/investing. I know conventional wisdom says to be more conservative, but I've gotten more aggressive since hubby retired. 

[minnesotapaintlady]

Jan 4, 2024 23:31:05 GMT -5 CCL said:

MPL I'm confused. Are you saying, once retired, you will do Roth conversions, then turn around and withdraw the money (or a portion of it) for living expenses from the Roth?

I find it interesting to see all of your perspectives on retirement planning/investing. I know conventional wisdom says to be more conservative, but I've gotten more aggressive since hubby retired. 

Yes.  Assume I can withdraw 48K/year and stay in subsidy-land for health insurance.  I could just take that from traditional during the year and then if I didn't need to pull all of the 48K convert the rest to Roth, or, just convert that 48K immediately at the beginning of the year and pull from the Roth as I need it.  Money I don't need until the end of the year is growing all year in the tax-free forever account and if I don't need it all it is my conversion amount for the year.  It seems simpler to me and less chance of error if I'm trying to keep AGI to a specific number.  If there is a year the 48K isn't enough I draw more from the Roth that year.

This would just be until 65 at which point I wouldn't care about AGI much anymore.

[minnesotapaintlady]

As far as conservative vs. aggressive, all the studies I've been reading are telling me that between 50-75% stock allocation are very similar in terms of chances it lasts you 30 years based on a 4% withdrawal rate, but at the higher end of that range your chances of building wealth over time are greater.  Under 50% and over 75% are counterproductive.

If you're only doing a 3% draw, the higher stock allocation is basically invincible.

[tallguy]

Jan 4, 2024 23:10:42 GMT -5 minnesotapaintlady said:

So, I've decided the two biggest things eating at me right now in my personal finance world are asset allocation and the whole withdrawal/spend down strategy once in retirement. After a LOT of reading on the Bogleheads forums over the holidays I've decided I'm not going to do anything drastic with AA until I reach my minimum FI number (about another 250K).  Once that happens this is my plan:

- Move enough of my Traditional IRA from 100% equities to get me to no more than 70/30 AA. This would = about 8 years of expenses at min FI#

- Once a year (during retirement) - Roth conversion up to the ACA subsidy optimal amount. Converted amount would go into a balanced or fixed income fund within the Roth similar to how the Traditional was invested.

- All withdrawals during retirement from the Roth balanced fund.

This lets me convert as much as possible without screwing up ACA.  The 8 years of fixed income gets me to age 67 at which point I'm golden.  Actually I'm golden at 65, but it's a buffer.

Forgive me, but this seems sub-optimal.  Why would you want a balanced or fixed income fund inside your Roth?  Since Roth investments are tax-free on withdrawal, your highest-return investments are what should be located there.  That is where you should be 100% equities.  Keep your balanced or fixed-income funds in your traditional IRA instead.  This has the additional benefit of keeping the T-IRA from growing too much, which means that conversions or RMDs later will be lower.  Your Roth IRA should be growing in size relative to your traditional IRA.  You want to accelerate that process, not retard it.  

Assuming you will be holding off on claiming SS either to earn DRCs and maximize that benefit or to allow as much space as you can for Roth conversions, I can certainly understand wanting to both convert as much as possible and also control your income as precisely as possible.  Where the money ends up should also be a concern.  I would never want Roth money invested anywhere but equities.  Yes, it might be more volatile, but the odds are with you.  At the very least I would switch anything left over in your Roth balanced fund at year-end to equities, or put the new money in the new year there instead.  

[minnesotapaintlady]

Jan 5, 2024 3:59:26 GMT -5 tallguy said:

Jan 4, 2024 23:10:42 GMT -5 minnesotapaintlady said:

So, I've decided the two biggest things eating at me right now in my personal finance world are asset allocation and the whole withdrawal/spend down strategy once in retirement. After a LOT of reading on the Bogleheads forums over the holidays I've decided I'm not going to do anything drastic with AA until I reach my minimum FI number (about another 250K).  Once that happens this is my plan:

- Move enough of my Traditional IRA from 100% equities to get me to no more than 70/30 AA. This would = about 8 years of expenses at min FI#

- Once a year (during retirement) - Roth conversion up to the ACA subsidy optimal amount. Converted amount would go into a balanced or fixed income fund within the Roth similar to how the Traditional was invested.

- All withdrawals during retirement from the Roth balanced fund.

This lets me convert as much as possible without screwing up ACA.  The 8 years of fixed income gets me to age 67 at which point I'm golden.  Actually I'm golden at 65, but it's a buffer.

Forgive me, but this seems sub-optimal.  Why would you want a balanced or fixed income fund inside your Roth?  Since Roth investments are tax-free on withdrawal, your highest-return investments are what should be located there.  That is where you should be 100% equities.  Keep your balanced or fixed-income funds in your traditional IRA instead.  This has the additional benefit of keeping the T-IRA from growing too much, which means that conversions or RMDs later will be lower.  Your Roth IRA should be growing in size relative to your traditional IRA.  You want to accelerate that process, not retard it.  

Assuming you will be holding off on claiming SS either to earn DRCs and maximize that benefit or to allow as much space as you can for Roth conversions, I can certainly understand wanting to both convert as much as possible and also control your income as precisely as possible.  Where the money ends up should also be a concern.  I would never want Roth money invested anywhere but equities.  Yes, it might be more volatile, but the odds are with you.  At the very least I would switch anything left over in your Roth balanced fund at year-end to equities, or put the new money in the new year there instead.  

Only the CONVERTED amount that I would be drawing from that year would be in something safer.  So, say I start out retirement with 200K in my Roth in an S&P fund.  Year one convert 48K from traditional and put that 48K in a fixed income (or more likely balanced) fund alongside the 200K S&P.  That 48K is what I'll draw from that year.  If at year end there is say 8K left in the account I'll push it over to the equity fund and rinse and repeat the following year. 

It's more to simplify things so there is only one maximized pull from pre-tax per year.  I don't have to track withdrawals and there is potential of some additional growth in the Roth that year from the early (large) conversion. Of course, there's also the possibility that the market tanks 30% that year, so I want to make sure I have enough in fixed income in that draw pot to sustain me.  I was thinking if it was 70/30 stock/cash that even if the stock market dove 50% that year I'd still have 31K to live off of.  Not lavish, but probably plenty.

[Rukh O'Rorke]

Jan 4, 2024 23:46:50 GMT -5 minnesotapaintlady said:

Jan 4, 2024 23:31:05 GMT -5 CCL said:

MPL I'm confused. Are you saying, once retired, you will do Roth conversions, then turn around and withdraw the money (or a portion of it) for living expenses from the Roth?

I find it interesting to see all of your perspectives on retirement planning/investing. I know conventional wisdom says to be more conservative, but I've gotten more aggressive since hubby retired. 

Yes.  Assume I can withdraw 48K/year and stay in subsidy-land for health insurance.  I could just take that from traditional during the year and then if I didn't need to pull all of the 48K convert the rest to Roth, or, just convert that 48K immediately at the beginning of the year and pull from the Roth as I need it.  Money I don't need until the end of the year is growing all year in the tax-free forever account and if I don't need it all it is my conversion amount for the year.  It seems simpler to me and less chance of error if I'm trying to keep AGI to a specific number.  If there is a year the 48K isn't enough I draw more from the Roth that year.

This would just be until 65 at which point I wouldn't care about AGI much anymore.

this seems a great plan! I've heard others have gotten tripped up with interest, dividends from outside of retirement accounts. Have you a plan for that?

[minnesotapaintlady]

Jan 5, 2024 12:20:56 GMT -5 Rukh O'Rorke said:

Jan 4, 2024 23:46:50 GMT -5 minnesotapaintlady said:

Yes.  Assume I can withdraw 48K/year and stay in subsidy-land for health insurance.  I could just take that from traditional during the year and then if I didn't need to pull all of the 48K convert the rest to Roth, or, just convert that 48K immediately at the beginning of the year and pull from the Roth as I need it.  Money I don't need until the end of the year is growing all year in the tax-free forever account and if I don't need it all it is my conversion amount for the year.  It seems simpler to me and less chance of error if I'm trying to keep AGI to a specific number.  If there is a year the 48K isn't enough I draw more from the Roth that year.

This would just be until 65 at which point I wouldn't care about AGI much anymore.

this seems a great plan! I've heard others have gotten tripped up with interest, dividends from outside of retirement accounts. Have you a plan for that?

Well, I'll have to keep an eye on the ACA thing again as I get closer, because I know there are some things reverting back in 2026 in regards to that. But right now it's not like it cuts off if you're over an AGI level, just the subsidy decreases as AGI increases.  When I was messing around in our state's plan choosing calculator/tool thingy I just kept reducing AGI until the premium got to a point where I was happy with it and said "this is what I'll live off of".

I really don't have much of anything in taxable accounts.  Except for last year when I ended up with $1200 in I bond interest my capital gains and interest are typically only a couple hundred a year. 

[Rukh O'Rorke]

Jan 5, 2024 0:06:28 GMT -5 minnesotapaintlady said:

As far as conservative vs. aggressive, all the studies I've been reading are telling me that between 50-75% stock allocation are very similar in terms of chances it lasts you 30 years based on a 4% withdrawal rate, but at the higher end of that range your chances of building wealth over time are greater.  Under 50% and over 75% are counterproductive.

If you're only doing a 3% draw, the higher stock allocation is basically invincible.

do you have a source for this chart? I can't tell which is which due to font/blur....

[minnesotapaintlady]

Jan 5, 2024 12:47:11 GMT -5 Rukh O'Rorke said:

Jan 5, 2024 0:06:28 GMT -5 minnesotapaintlady said:

As far as conservative vs. aggressive, all the studies I've been reading are telling me that between 50-75% stock allocation are very similar in terms of chances it lasts you 30 years based on a 4% withdrawal rate, but at the higher end of that range your chances of building wealth over time are greater.  Under 50% and over 75% are counterproductive.

If you're only doing a 3% draw, the higher stock allocation is basically invincible.

do you have a source for this chart? I can't tell which is which due to font/blur....

I'll look after lunch, but it's left to right for the columns. 0% stocks on left, 100% stocks at right.

[Rukh O'Rorke]

Jan 5, 2024 8:21:36 GMT -5 minnesotapaintlady said:

Jan 5, 2024 3:59:26 GMT -5 tallguy said:

Forgive me, but this seems sub-optimal.  Why would you want a balanced or fixed income fund inside your Roth?  Since Roth investments are tax-free on withdrawal, your highest-return investments are what should be located there.  That is where you should be 100% equities.  Keep your balanced or fixed-income funds in your traditional IRA instead.  This has the additional benefit of keeping the T-IRA from growing too much, which means that conversions or RMDs later will be lower.  Your Roth IRA should be growing in size relative to your traditional IRA.  You want to accelerate that process, not retard it.  

Assuming you will be holding off on claiming SS either to earn DRCs and maximize that benefit or to allow as much space as you can for Roth conversions, I can certainly understand wanting to both convert as much as possible and also control your income as precisely as possible.  Where the money ends up should also be a concern.  I would never want Roth money invested anywhere but equities.  Yes, it might be more volatile, but the odds are with you.  At the very least I would switch anything left over in your Roth balanced fund at year-end to equities, or put the new money in the new year there instead.  

Only the CONVERTED amount that I would be drawing from that year would be in something safer.  So, say I start out retirement with 200K in my Roth in an S&P fund.  Year one convert 48K from traditional and put that 48K in a fixed income (or more likely balanced) fund alongside the 200K S&P.  That 48K is what I'll draw from that year.  If at year end there is say 8K left in the account I'll push it over to the equity fund and rinse and repeat the following year. 

It's more to simplify things so there is only one maximized pull from pre-tax per year.  I don't have to track withdrawals and there is potential of some additional growth in the Roth that year from the early (large) conversion. Of course, there's also the possibility that the market tanks 30% that year, so I want to make sure I have enough in fixed income in that draw pot to sustain me.  I was thinking if it was 70/30 stock/cash that even if the stock market dove 50% that year I'd still have 31K to live off of.  Not lavish, but probably plenty.

Maybe I'm getting to be an old fogey here, but I definitely think money you plan on using within the twelvemonth should be in fixed equity. 

[Rukh O'Rorke]

Jan 5, 2024 12:52:24 GMT -5 minnesotapaintlady said:

Jan 5, 2024 12:47:11 GMT -5 Rukh O'Rorke said:

do you have a source for this chart? I can't tell which is which due to font/blur....

I'll look after lunch, but it's left to right for the columns. 0% stocks on left, 100% stocks at right.

thanks! no need to look after lunch, that made it easier 

[tallguy]

Jan 5, 2024 8:21:36 GMT -5 minnesotapaintlady said:

Jan 5, 2024 3:59:26 GMT -5 tallguy said:

Forgive me, but this seems sub-optimal.  Why would you want a balanced or fixed income fund inside your Roth?  Since Roth investments are tax-free on withdrawal, your highest-return investments are what should be located there.  That is where you should be 100% equities.  Keep your balanced or fixed-income funds in your traditional IRA instead.  This has the additional benefit of keeping the T-IRA from growing too much, which means that conversions or RMDs later will be lower.  Your Roth IRA should be growing in size relative to your traditional IRA.  You want to accelerate that process, not retard it.  

Assuming you will be holding off on claiming SS either to earn DRCs and maximize that benefit or to allow as much space as you can for Roth conversions, I can certainly understand wanting to both convert as much as possible and also control your income as precisely as possible.  Where the money ends up should also be a concern.  I would never want Roth money invested anywhere but equities.  Yes, it might be more volatile, but the odds are with you.  At the very least I would switch anything left over in your Roth balanced fund at year-end to equities, or put the new money in the new year there instead.  

Only the CONVERTED amount that I would be drawing from that year would be in something safer.  So, say I start out retirement with 200K in my Roth in an S&P fund.  Year one convert 48K from traditional and put that 48K in a fixed income (or more likely balanced) fund alongside the 200K S&P.  That 48K is what I'll draw from that year.  If at year end there is say 8K left in the account I'll push it over to the equity fund and rinse and repeat the following year. 

It's more to simplify things so there is only one maximized pull from pre-tax per year.  I don't have to track withdrawals and there is potential of some additional growth in the Roth that year from the early (large) conversion. Of course, there's also the possibility that the market tanks 30% that year, so I want to make sure I have enough in fixed income in that draw pot to sustain me.  I was thinking if it was 70/30 stock/cash that even if the stock market dove 50% that year I'd still have 31K to live off of.  Not lavish, but probably plenty.

Okay, so that agrees.