How much do you need to retire? A state-by-state breakdown ⁠60%

By Eric Revell⁠74%

5/14/2026, 12:00:42 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 26 faulty reasoning types, including Anchoring Bias, Framing Effect, and Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, with Hasty Generalization as the most egregious example at 21.4% saturation with 134 hits. Analysis detected 1,320 faulty-reasoning hits from 626 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 55.9% and a BS Rank of ⁠60% (8,634 of 21,180 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 59.20% of the article peer group.

Americans of all ages are facing affordability concerns, with retirees on fixed incomes in particular feeling the strain – though where they choose to live in their golden years has a big impact on their ability to live comfortably. 
A study by MoneyLion analyzed the monthly savings needed to retire comfortably across states after accounting for the national average expenses for retired households, as well as whether the retiree would have Social Security income and when the retiree began saving for retirement. 
The report found that the state with the highest annual cost of living for retirees was Hawaii, with a monthly cost of $90,752 for necessities and $181,505 for a comfortable cost of living based on the analysis. 
After accounting for Social Security income, MoneyLion estimated the annual cost of living as a retiree in Hawaii was $156,610. 
To save enough money to afford that cost of living in retirement, a person would have to save $5,800 a month over 45 years at age 20 before retiring at age 65, or $7,458 a month if they saved for 35 years starting at age 30, with Social Security income. 
Those figures rise to $6,722 and $8,643 a month, respectively, without Social Security. 
RETIREMENT 'MAGIC NUMBER' JUMPS AS AMERICANS GROW ANXIOUS ABOUT THEIR FINANCIAL FUTURES 
California had the second-highest annual cost of living, which MoneyLion estimated at $73,387 for necessities or $121,879 for the comfortable cost of living metric that accounts for Social Security income. 
The monthly savings would be $4,514 when starting at age 20 or $5,804 starting at age 30 with Social Security, while those would rise to $5,436 and $6,989 without Social Security. 
"Two of the biggest expenses a retiree needs to look into are the state income taxes and real estate property taxes that will factor into your budget. 
It's also why so many people are moving out of places like California and New York, because, beyond the cost of living, it's very expensive from a taxation perspective," Ted Jenkin, managing partner at Exit Wealth Advisors, told FOX Business. 
TRUMP ADMIN PROPOSES OPENING 401(K)S TO PRIVATE EQUITY, CRYPTO 
The lowest cost state analyzed in the report was West Virginia, which had an annual necessities cost of living of $29,059 with the comfortable cost of living at $58,117 per year, or $33,223 after accounting for Social Security income. 
The monthly savings target for West Virginia would start at $1,230 for those age 20 or $1,582 at age 30 with Social Security income, and those would rise to $2,152 and $2,767, respectively. 
Other states that have been popular relocation destinations were the middle ground of the analysis in terms of cost of living. 
Florida's was $44,170 for necessities or $88,339 for the comfortable cost of living, declining to $63,445 with Social Security income in the mix. 
Savings targets were $2,350 starting at 20 or $3,021 at 30, with Social Security to supplement those savings. 
LARRY FINK CALLS FOR SOCIAL SECURITY REFORM, SAYS INVESTING A PORTION OF FUNDS COULD STRENGTHEN THE PROGRAM 
Tennessee and Texas were each slightly above the $38,300 mark for their necessities cost of living, with the comfortable cost of living just over $76,000 or more than $51,300 with Social Security. 
GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE 
"There's a reason beyond the weather for why retirees are moving from high-tax states," Thomas Aiello, National Taxpayers Union vice president of federal affairs, told FOX Business. 
"Places like Florida, Texas, and Tennessee offer no state income tax, no estate ("death") tax, relatively low property taxes, and a policy environment generally more favorable to taxpayers. 
That can result in thousands of dollars in annual tax savings compared to New York, California or Illinois." 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 4.3%Eric Revell: 2.6%FoxBusiness: 4.4%Confirmation Bias4.3%This article: 21.1%Eric Revell: 4.7%FoxBusiness: 3.5%Anchoring Bias21.1%This article: 10.7%Eric Revell: 3.6%FoxBusiness: 4.1%Availability Heuristic10.7%This article: 3.4%Eric Revell: 1.3%FoxBusiness: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic3.4%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.4%FoxBusiness: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 3.0%FoxBusiness: 3.7%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 16.6%Eric Revell: 11.0%FoxBusiness: 13.0%Framing Effect16.6%This article: 10.9%Eric Revell: 1.4%FoxBusiness: 1.5%Loss Aversion10.9%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 1.4%FoxBusiness: 1.1%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 2.9%Eric Revell: 9.5%FoxBusiness: 8.8%Optimism Bias2.9%This article: 2.1%Eric Revell: 1.7%FoxBusiness: 2.0%Pessimism Bias2.1%This article: 9.1%Eric Revell: 6.9%FoxBusiness: 7.8%Negativity Bias9.1%This article: 4.5%Eric Revell: 2.5%FoxBusiness: 4.5%Self-Serving Bias4.5%This article: 6.4%Eric Revell: 0.5%FoxBusiness: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error6.4%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.6%FoxBusiness: 1.7%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.8%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 4.5%Eric Revell: 3.1%FoxBusiness: 3.9%Halo Effect4.5%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 1.9%Eric Revell: 2.8%FoxBusiness: 2.3%Recency Bias1.9%This article: 6.2%Eric Revell: 0.4%FoxBusiness: 0.4%Primacy Effect6.2%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.2%FoxBusiness: 0.8%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 10.7%Eric Revell: 6.7%FoxBusiness: 7.2%Appeal to Authority10.7%This article: 12.3%Eric Revell: 1.2%FoxBusiness: 1.6%False Dilemma12.3%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.8%FoxBusiness: 1.2%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.2%FoxBusiness: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 21.4%Eric Revell: 4.2%FoxBusiness: 6.3%Hasty Generalization21.4%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.4%FoxBusiness: 0.8%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.9%FoxBusiness: 1.2%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 9.1%Eric Revell: 3.4%FoxBusiness: 6.1%Appeal to Emotion9.1%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.8%FoxBusiness: 1.2%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 10.7%Eric Revell: 3.9%FoxBusiness: 4.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)10.7%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.2%FoxBusiness: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 1.0%FoxBusiness: 2.4%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 2.9%Eric Revell: 2.1%FoxBusiness: 1.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation)2.9%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 3.4%Eric Revell: 0.2%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Middle Ground3.4%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.3%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.1%FoxBusiness: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 4.3%Eric Revell: 1.3%FoxBusiness: 1.8%Unattributed Quote4.3%This article: 4.3%Eric Revell: 0.9%FoxBusiness: 1.4%Quote-first Misdirection4.3%This article: 8.1%Eric Revell: 3.2%FoxBusiness: 4.1%Biased Writer Voice8.1%This article: 4.5%Eric Revell: 1.9%FoxBusiness: 1.7%Indoctrination4.5%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.0%FoxBusiness: 0.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric Revell: 0.7%FoxBusiness: 2.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 14.7%Eric Revell: 2.8%FoxBusiness: 4.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…14.7%

626 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers18%attributed speech513writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 43 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 50 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverageTed Jenkin • 40 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageThomas Aiello • 27 words • 0.0% coverageThomas Aiello • 28 words • 100.0% coverageThomas Aiello • 18 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Ted Jenkin

100%flagged-word coverage
40 attributed words35% of attributed speech89% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Attempt to Sell a Product +89.9 ptsWriter: 10.1%Ted Jenkin: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-9.9 ptsWriter: 9.9%Ted Jenkin: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-5.3 ptsWriter: 5.3%Ted Jenkin: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-5.3 ptsWriter: 5.3%Ted Jenkin: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.