That is the key. A lot of people do not know how to be frugal. They grew up spoiled by their parents or parent who couldn't say no. That is the end result when they are adults. There is a lot of stuff people can cut back on. Going to the movies every week? Bad habits like pubs or clubs most nights of the week. Eating out all the time instead of cooking at home. The list is huge.
As for the question of attaining a million being easier for older people, my opinion is that we were raised by folks who endured the Great Depression and WW2. They taught us to spend wisely and save for the future. Somehow the lesson got lost as generations went by and now young children have iPhones and parents spoil them silly. Us older people were working in our school years already. Summers might mean picking berries or whatever was local. Now there are restrictions on how much young people can work.
My keys to attaining a lot of money? Learn the discipline of saving early on. Even if the amount is small, it is that discipline that gets ingrained into one's mind and eventually you are putting several hundreds into your retirement accounts. (depending on your salary of course) Another key is to quit loaning money to the government in the form of overpaying your taxes. How many people get huge refunds every year? A lot. For example if you got $3000 back on your taxes that works out to $115 each paycheck. (3000 divided by 26) That money could be going to your 401k etc. Reduce your withholding so that you get close to break even. As you put more money into your tax deferred accounts, your taxable income goes down more and that provides you with even more money to put away. Usually big refunds get spent on adult toys or vacations etc.
If you get a bonus or a raise, think about what would happen if that hadn't happened. Put those raises and bonuses into your retirement accounts too.
How was my life after all that? I ate well, drove new cars, went on vacations etc. I wasn't deprived of the good things in life, I just knew what my limits were. I never let credit cards ruin my financial plan. That is very easy to do. I had a average middle class wage at my work but I did work OT and that also was saved. By the time I was in my early thirties I had my first $100k. Getting to $200k was much faster. The curve really takes off once you hit a certain amount. My accounts continued to soar as I kept to my plan. I won't tell exactly how much here but it is substantial. I was fortunate to have a good bull market. That is something we don't know or can predict. I made my share of mistakes as well. I pulled out of my funds after Oct 1987. That crash rattled me but it was a learning experience and I didn't make that mistake a second time. I thought about buying AAPL at $18. Hindsight. Thats water under the bridge now. I had money in Twentieth Century Ultra fund when it rose 87% one year. I had money in the TRowe Price New Asia fund when they had some booming years early on. Gold was spectacular in the early 2000's. I guess those made up for the mistakes.
The main point is to keep pumping the money away and whenever you have an opportunity to increase that, go for it. It's called paying yourself first.
I apologize for the long post. I didn't mean to drift off here but I wanted to share my experience and maybe someone can use some of my tips to increase their assets.

Let's first start with what retirement means. When Social Security began, it meant that a person would not be a pauper but food, clothing and shelter. Now, it means food, clothing, shelter, travel costs, cable TV, dining out, internet, Obamacare etc.
Yes, you can retire on $1M based upon the old definition. Under the new definition it is very difficult to do in expensive areas - east/west coasts and other high price areas - ESPECIALLY when you take into account housing costs - rental or purchase. Look at the cost or renting in NYC or San Francisco.
As to Social Security helping - look at how much you lose if you take it at 62 vs 65. AND, what a person gets if they do not make a lot of $ when working.
Then there is inflation - although the official CPI is low the retirement CPI is higher - food, energy and health care.
So, if you want to retire on $1M and maybe SS at 62 you will need to move to a low cost area.
However, generally speaking, it is very difficult to accumulate $1M - depending upon when you were born and if your spouce worked or not.
My guess is that there are 'OLDER' posters here born earlier then apx 1960 or '64 who have large assets who will disagree with me on the difficulty of accumulating $1M. They really need to look at the employment/economic/wage/benefit/defined benefit/health ins/401k changes over time.

The thing about these silly articles as others have stated is that the author can cherry pick time frames. He picked 2004 as the beginning year. What if it was 1999? Totally different circumstances.
With that said, perhaps the bucket or sleeve concept that others have discussed has more merit than the example in the article. Different sleeves for different periods during retirement.

Hi Guys,
I recognized that house assets were not included in the article scenarios.
The fact that the numbers I quoted did so just exasperated the gap between what was referenced in the piece and the realities of the median US retiree nest-egg. Subtracting the house and lot component means that the median retiree has maybe 15% of the articles baseline one million dollars. Only about 45% of US households own mutual funds.
That gap is one of the primary thrusts of my post. Most retirees would kill for a one million dollar portfolio. The referenced article is not representive of the retirement situation that confronts most retirees.
Best Wishes.

@MJG
You noted: "Home value represents about one-half of the nest-egg sum."
Although having free and clear real estate that may be sold to raise funds as wanted or needed, is a potentially valuable money resource; I believe the article relates to monies actually saved for retirement; and does reflect upon other sources of retirement income.
Perhaps I did not understand the "drift" of the article.

Hi Guys,
A one million dollar nest-egg is an unrealized dream for most retirees.
The median retiree nest-egg is shockingly small when contrasted against that illustration number. Different estimates locate a retiree's pot of gold at 20% to 35% of that target.
The median nest-egg depends on home ownership, on being single or married, and upon sex. Home value represents about one-half of the nest-egg sum. Married folks enjoy a retirement pot that is roughly double that of a single person. Single men save slightly more than women.
Also, a one million dollar nest-egg might be (a) totally inadequate for one who earned $300,000 annually, (b) comfortable for an individual who earned $100,000 annually, and (c) nirvana for a sole who struggled with a $40,000 annual income. It all depends.
Nest-egg survival is a challenge for most retirees. I trust most MFO members have escaped or will escape this dilemma.
Best Regards.

Another point. Many articles today stress that you really need $2 million for a comfortable retirement. One million may not be enough.

1. I agree that many financial "articles", including this one, are silly.
2. This article is really about asset allocation in retirement; the rest is cheap window dressing to frame the article. ($50K/$1M were simply neat round numbers for illustrative purposes.)
3. Waggoner errs in adding extra for income taxes - he's trying to match household income, and like IRAs, that's pretax also. (That is, income taxes come out of the $50K household earnings.)
Regarding people's comments here:
- IMHO health is one of the two big variables in retirement planning. The other is longevity. These are both areas where insurance can be invaluable - Medicare/Medigap or Medicare Advantage (Part C) for the former, and longevity insurance (deferred income annuity) for the latter. But they're not without cost.
- NYC - the median household income in Brooklyn is $45K; even in Manhattan is it "just" $67K. (Slate: Brooklyn's Median Household Income is Less Than $45,000 - Jan 9, 2014). One can get by, even in NYC on less than $50K, but the key phrase is "get by".
- Berkeley - I'm with davidrmoran on this one. $12K/year is foodstamp level income for one person, let alone three. Anywhere in the country. And unlike NYC, the Bay Area tends to be more homogeneous in housing/living costs (harder to find affordable pockets). From the Berkeley Pier to Walnut Creek (where there is no longer a T. Rowe Price office), from Baghdad by the Bay to Silicon Valley, the cost gradient is miniscule.

FYI: If you read any financial advertising, you know that your savings are inadequate, and you're likely to freeze to death in the dark a few weeks after retirement. For this reason, most Americans' retirement planning involves keeling over at their desks, or, failing that, starting a bomb-disposal unit as a retirement business.
But how much is enough? How about $1 million
Regards,
ted
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/columnist/waggoner/2014/10/23/can-you-retire-with-1-millio/17789939/

You are welcome John. My wife and I have a strong position in Global Reach. Doubtful that Grandeur Peak funds are in many workplace retirement accounts which would also limit individual accounts.

Hi Guys,
In selecting her aggressive retirement portfolio, Benz wisely chose 7 funds that all had positive Alphas for the past 5 years. Now comes the acid test. Will these funds retain their positive Alphas for the next 5years?
Who knows? Historically, that has not been the case with reversion to the mean exerting its influence.
Best Regards.

FYI: We employ actively managed mutual funds and a stock-heavy portfolio mix.
Regards,
Ted
http://news.morningstar.com/articlenet/article.aspx?id=668875&SR=Yahoo

FYI: From New York to California, Wisconsin to Texas, hundreds of thousands of teachers, firefighters, police officers and other public employees are relying on their pensions for financial security.
Private equity firms are relying on their pensions, too. Over the last 10 years, pension funds have piled into private equity buyout funds. But in exchange for what they hope will be hefty returns, many pension funds have signed onto a kind of omerta, or code of silence, about the terms of the funds’ investments.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/19/business/retirement/behind-private-equitys-curtain.html?ref=business
I hold a position in KKR: M* Snapshot Of KKR:http://quotes.morningstar.com/stock/kkr/s?t=kkr

Hi rono. Hard to give suggestions to a guy I used to take advice from. Heck, I think I remember guys like you and Ed talking about PRWCX 7 or 8 years ago.
Good luck on your roll over and have a happy retirement. I'm sure you and the Barron von Rothschild have all the bases covered.

Hi folks,
Just looking for your goodly wisdom. I'm retired and have a middle six figure 457 account (state gov't) that I just rolled into an IRA at Price (brokerage account). Took care of it online and over the phone in about an hour. Check's in the mail to me to forward. And yes, it's made out to them in my name.
I wee bit of background. 66 and retired. Active investor for 30 years (e. g. I was buying with my retirement account on Black Friday; I moved all the cash and bonds in both my wife and my retirement accounts into equities when the first Gulf War broke out; I went bullish on gold and silver in 2002 and hit my first homerun with Silver Weaton SLW.) Note that I am a momentum investor as compared to buy & hold.
I've got a DB pension and social security, no debt and wifey is about the same.
Some of this IRA I plan to spend wantonly and with great abandon. Some I plan to leave to my estate. Some I'll play with for giggles. What I need to do is to protect and safeguard the majority while covering myself against most economic probabilities. If we start with the traditional allocation it would be something like 34/56/10 - equities, bonds, cash. If I include a speculation fund, let's call it 30/50/10/10.
What percentage of int'l in each category?
What equity funds to consider?
What bond funds to consider?
What external funds to consider? (i.e. this is a Brokerage account so I could buy a Matthews Asian fund if I wanted).
Any and all suggestions are most welcome.
and so it goes,
peace,
rono

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1156906/000119312514373975/d804455d497.htm
497 1 d804455d497.htm CAUSEWAY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT TRUST
Causeway International Opportunities Fund
Institutional Class (CIOIX)
Investor Class (CIOVX)
SUPPLEMENT DATED OCTOBER 16, 2014
TO THE PROSPECTUS DATED OCTOBER 15, 2014
THIS SUPPLEMENT PROVIDES NEW AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION BEYOND THAT CONTAINED IN THE PROSPECTUS AND SHOULD BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE PROSPECTUS.
On October 15, 2014, the Causeway International Opportunities Fund (the “Fund”) converted from a “fund of funds” to a Fund making direct investments in securities. Effective as of the date hereof, the seventh paragraph under “Taxes” in the Prospectus is superseded and replaced in its entirety with:
If you buy shares when the Fund has earned or realized, but not yet distributed, ordinary income or net capital gains, you will be “buying a dividend” by paying the full price of the shares and then receiving a portion of the price back in the form of a taxable distribution. You can avoid this situation by waiting to invest until after the record date for the distribution. The Fund expects to pay significantly increased taxable distributions of net short-term capital gain (that is, the excess of short-term capital gains over short-term capital losses) and net capital gain (that is, the excess of net long-term capital gain over net short-term capital loss) in 2014 due to its conversion on October 15, 2014 from a “fund of funds” structure to directly investing in portfolio securities. This is because when it converted, the Fund redeemed shares in underlying Causeway Funds that had appreciated from the time the Fund purchased the shares, causing the Fund to realize capital gain during 2014. Taxable investors receiving the distributions should be prepared to pay taxes on them (at ordinary income rates for the net short-term capital gain and, for non-corporate shareholders, at the 15% and 20% maximum rates mentioned above for the net capital gain). However, if you are investing in the Fund through a tax-advantaged retirement plan or account, or are a tax-exempt investor, there will be no tax consequences to you from those distributions.
PLEASE RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE.
CCM-SK-022-0100

FYI: There’s been a debate in recent years about whether target-date funds expose investors saving for retirement to too much risk at the point they are leaving the workforce.
Now Rob Arnott, a respected investor and researcher, is raising concerns about the aggressiveness of the target funds designed for the youngest workers.
Regards,
Ted
http://blogs.wsj.com/totalreturn/2014/10/15/target-funds-are-too-risky-for-youngest-workers-arnott/tab/print/?mg=blogs-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs.wsj.com%2Ftotalreturn%2F2014%2F10%2F15%2Ftarget-funds-are-too-risky-for-youngest-workers-arnott%2Ftab%2Fprint&fpid=2,121

Okay, I'll bite. Why does an index fund close? Too low AUM? This one comes in one size only - institutional (but with a "modest" $250K min, not restricted to institutions).
Maybe they want to limit it to retirement plans and the like? (That's how American Beacon started out - as AAdvantage funds, designed for the AA retirement plan.)

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/809593/000080959314000116/ieisoftclose.htm
497 1 ieisoftclose.htm
American Beacon International Equity Index Fund
Supplement dated October 15, 2014
To the Prospectus and Summary Prospectus dated April 30, 2014
The information below supplements the Prospectus dated April 30, 2014 and is in addition to any other supplement(s):
The following information is inserted at the end of the section titled "Purchase and Sale of Fund Shares" on page 9 of the Prospectus and page 4 of the Summary Prospectus is deleted and replaced with the following:
The American Beacon International Equity Index Fund (the "Fund") will close to new investors as of the close of business on December 31, 2014. Existing shareholders as of that date may continue to purchase, redeem or exchange shares of the Fund on any business day, which is any day the New York Stock Exchange is open for business.
The following information is inserted as the final paragraph to the section titled "Purchase and Redemption of Fund Shares – Eligibility" on page 18 of the Prospectus:
Effective as of the close of business on December 31, 2014, the Fund will close to new investors. The Fund will continue to accept additional investments (including reinvestments of dividends and capital gain distributions) from: (1) existing shareholders of the Fund who had open accounts as of December 31, 2014; or (2) participants in most qualified retirement plans if the Fund was designated as an investment option as of December 31, 2014. Investors through financial intermediaries who did not have a funded position through the intermediary by December 31, 2014 may not invest in the Fund after that date.