On a board I visit, I was surprised that someone posted hating saving for retirement. They did not want to save 15% for retirement. Instead they preferred paying off their home. This couple was 33/35 and made $165k/year. However they had saved about $50k for retirement.
A poster on the board put up this link for a nifty retirement savings calculator. Assuming the average age of the couple to be 34, they should have saved at least $94k to have $1M @ age 65. This should generate $40k/year.
However this couple didn't want to save 15% of their income. Instead they preferred to try saving 15% of $40k, or the average family's income. They felt that if the average person saved that much they should be okay. WRONG thinking.
They aren't living on $40k now, so I don't understand why they would expect to live on $40k in retirement. I wonder if people don't justify saving less by saying they'll scale back their lifestyle in retirement? Which might be a problem if you consider rising health care costs and longer life expectancies.
Anyway I apparently need to have saved $57k, which I do. However DH needs to have $67k, which we also have. However we assume we'll need $3M, so we should have 3x that amount. I think we're moving in the right direction because it appears that between 26-27 the amount saved is only $4k. We're saving about 5-6x that much for retirement. But we have a long way to go.
So to that couple, I wish you would rethink you're priorities. I understand it's nice to be debt free, but it's even nicer to be able to even retire. If you place saving for retiement so far down on the list what will you live on in retirement?