Has to do with percent of income replaced at retirement with savings, projected spending, and growth assumptions. Fidelity has an article that says the modeled it over $50,000-300,000 per year salary. This is for replacing approximately 45% of income with savings. If I retired today, SS would replace 26% of income.

Most importantly, the general rule is when you make more, you spend more. Car, convenience, house, clothes, food, entertainment, kid activities, vacations, etc. Some of that may diminish when you retire, but to replace a big chunk of income, you want big savings.

That 15% assumes that your quality of life in retirement won’t plummet and that you may even spend more if you’re traveling and taking up expensive hobbies.

Interestingly, in the abstract , the intro, discussion and conclusion say consumed. As does the title.

Results used the accepted term for epidemiology studies. Exposed

But conclusions aren’t always fair and balanced. The quality of the conclusion is partly based on the quality of the peer reviewers. Higher impact journals will have better reviewers that force researchers to write a more balanced conclusion. Also, the conclusion doesn’t give numbers. If the study is 50,000 people, there could be a “statistical significance” at a difference of 0.25%. So for every 400 people who get a new intervention, one more will benefit. But the conclusion might say “more people benefited from the intervention.”

I collect it to make a clone of her