Why will it take so long?

[Mgmny]

Bumping my old thread, but i still feel this way.

We have $220k in the market today. Wife is still working 1 year after our son was born, but who knows for how much longer.. Maybe 2-4 more years?

Still looking at 10 years out to hit FI number of 1,250,000 (36k a year savings when i'm single income, around 60k now), which just seems crazy when we're putting so much away and I see other people online and on these forums who say, "FI at 32!" I'll be 39/40 in 10 years, and my son will be 11 - so older than I would have hoped he would be before I am able to dedicate most of my time to him and his potential future siblings.

I listen to the ChooseFI podcast on occasion, and they are always saying, "If you get this under control, you can be FI in 6 years!" all the time, and I feel like i'm really putting a lot away compared to my peers, and i'm looking at 10 years if things go "as planned".

[Villanelle]

Bumping my old thread, but i still feel this way.

We have $220k in the market today. Wife is still working 1 year after our son was born, but who knows for how much longer.. Maybe 2-4 more years?

Still looking at 10 years out to hit FI number of 1,250,000 (36k a year savings when i'm single income, around 60k now), which just seems crazy when we're putting so much away and I see other people online and on these forums who say, "FI at 32!" I'll be 39/40 in 10 years, and my son will be 11 - so older than I would have hoped he would be before I am able to dedicate most of my time to him and his potential future siblings.

I listen to the ChooseFI podcast on occasion, and they are always saying, "If you get this under control, you can be FI in 6 years!" all the time, and I feel like i'm really putting a lot away compared to my peers, and i'm looking at 10 years if things go "as planned".

Sounds like you might  be well served by looking at the expense side of the equation.  If you can cut your expenses, it will allow you to save a bit more, but more importantly, it will mean you don't need $50k/yr and $1.25m saved. 

Can you move to a cheaper area (our country) after you retire?

Also, make sure you are considering things like a paid off house.  If you currently own, your house should be mostly paid off by the time you retire, which would mean significantly lower expenses. 

[Eowyn_MI]

I feel like i'm really putting a lot away compared to my peers, and i'm looking at 10 years if things go "as planned".

Are your peers the people that you work with?  Or do you mean other people aiming at FIRE?

If the former, then yes, you probably are putting away much more than they are.  However, you need to put more away because you won't be working for as long as they will be.

If the latter, then no, you probably aren't putting away an above average amount.  For reference, I'm single with no kid expenses and an above average salary (88k) and I'm still estimating 6 or 7 more years to full FIRE.

E: bad grammar

[Dicey]

Also, what are you investing in?

Suggestion: find a compound interest chart and print it out. Notice it takes a while for the line to arc steeply upward. The more velocity you create in the early stages of accumulation, the higher the bounce. It's a marathon, not a sprint.

[frugal_c]

Bumping my old thread, but i still feel this way.

We have $220k in the market today. Wife is still working 1 year after our son was born, but who knows for how much longer.. Maybe 2-4 more years?

Still looking at 10 years out to hit FI number of 1,250,000 (36k a year savings when i'm single income, around 60k now), which just seems crazy when we're putting so much away and I see other people online and on these forums who say, "FI at 32!" I'll be 39/40 in 10 years, and my son will be 11 - so older than I would have hoped he would be before I am able to dedicate most of my time to him and his potential future siblings.

I listen to the ChooseFI podcast on occasion, and they are always saying, "If you get this under control, you can be FI in 6 years!" all the time, and I feel like i'm really putting a lot away compared to my peers, and i'm looking at 10 years if things go "as planned".

To retire in 10 years you would probably need to keep saving the $60k the entire time.  If you reduce to $36k in 3 years, that will add 1 to 2 extra years to your career.

The people who retire in 6 years are generally cutting their expenses to the bone, or have very high salaries.  It's a very unrealistic expectation.  I mean if you want to try to get by on $24k a year you could probably retire in 4 or 5 years but you aren't aiming for such a tight retirement income.

If you choose to compare to your peers remember that they generally won't retire until 65 as opposed to you retiring in your 30s.    It takes some time.  We are talking about saving enough that you never, ever have to work again.

You do have some other options.  You could probably step back to part-time in 5 years or so and let the market do the rest.

[Mgmny]

Bumping my old thread, but i still feel this way.

We have $220k in the market today. Wife is still working 1 year after our son was born, but who knows for how much longer.. Maybe 2-4 more years?

Still looking at 10 years out to hit FI number of 1,250,000 (36k a year savings when i'm single income, around 60k now), which just seems crazy when we're putting so much away and I see other people online and on these forums who say, "FI at 32!" I'll be 39/40 in 10 years, and my son will be 11 - so older than I would have hoped he would be before I am able to dedicate most of my time to him and his potential future siblings.

I listen to the ChooseFI podcast on occasion, and they are always saying, "If you get this under control, you can be FI in 6 years!" all the time, and I feel like i'm really putting a lot away compared to my peers, and i'm looking at 10 years if things go "as planned".

Sounds like you might  be well served by looking at the expense side of the equation.  If you can cut your expenses, it will allow you to save a bit more, but more importantly, it will mean you don't need $50k/yr and $1.25m saved. 

Can you move to a cheaper area (our country) after you retire?

Also, make sure you are considering things like a paid off house.  If you currently own, your house should be mostly paid off by the time you retire, which would mean significantly lower expenses.

Thanks Villanelle. Good points!

We are admittedly very "bad" at the house thing. We probably both lust after houses too much. We just purchased a new home in August worth $415k (with $180k down payment). But, so often we say, "it would be nice to get more land" or "live on a lake" etc etc. This mindset makes me want to ALWAYS assume there is a house payment, because when there isn't, it might be time to move again. At least, i see this happening for the foreseeable future. I know it's a bad mindset, but it's our vice... Maybe we can use geo-arbitrage a BIT when we FIRE, but we want to be close-ish to our families, and right now we just moved to a house that is smack between our parents (25 and 35 minutes to each). So, even if we pull a frugalwoods, and move to the country where it's cheaper, we really aren't interested in moving states/hours away. Maybe 1 hour away, but that's it...

I want to be as conservative as possible in my calculations, and because are still growing our family, who knows how much little ricky's diabetes medicine will cost or baby suzy's trombone lessons, etc... I feel really comfortable at the 50k a year expense.

[Mgmny]

I feel like i'm really putting a lot away compared to my peers, and i'm looking at 10 years if things go "as planned".

Are your peers the people that you work with?  Or do you mean other people aiming at FIRE?

If the former, then yes, you probably are putting away much more than they are.  However, you need to put more away because you won't be working for as long as they will be.

If the latter, then no, you probably aren't putting away an above average amount.  For reference, I'm single with no kid expenses and an above average salary (88k) and I'm still estimating 6 or 7 more years to full FIRE.

E: bad grammar

When I say peers comparing our 40-60k a year savings, I mean people who are our friends. Like, our not-quite 1-year-old already has $7,000 in his 529 account. We have some friends that have 2 years olds with $0 saved. I know that isn't a retirement-related comparison, but i don't think we have any friends that max out 401ks like we do. We have some friends that are probably contributing around 0% to retirement based on comments they make...

This makes us feel entitled probably, because we are "sacrificing" $60k a year, but 10 years away is such a "pie in the sky" thing. And when i say sacrificing, i mean we are shopping at Aldi and not the upscale grocer, and we are not driving new BMWs, so it's not like we aren't living a really good lifestyle, it's just we feel like we are making a lot of money and we aren't living some extravegent life of luxury because we are saving for something 10+ years away...

[Mgmny]

Also, what are you investing in?

Suggestion: find a compound interest chart and print it out. Notice it takes a while for the line to arc steeply upward. The more velocity you create in the early stages of accumulation, the higher the bounce. It's a marathon, not a sprint.

About 120k is in Wealthfront so whatever their most aggressive mix is. All of it is low-cost etfs akin to VTSAX, etc. 70k is in a 401k that is a total stock market index fund (spartan something or other), and the remaining is in VTSAX/VTI / TDAmeritrade's equivalent.

We own exactly 0 individual company stocks.

As for compound interest, i totally understand mentally how this will work, but i think because we are in the building the base stage, it feels not so great. I mean, $220,000 in investments for a 25 and 29 year old is INCREDIBLE, it really is! BUT, it means we have about $8,000 a year of our retirement funded... or not nearly enough!!

[Mgmny]

Bumping my old thread, but i still feel this way.

We have $220k in the market today. Wife is still working 1 year after our son was born, but who knows for how much longer.. Maybe 2-4 more years?

Still looking at 10 years out to hit FI number of 1,250,000 (36k a year savings when i'm single income, around 60k now), which just seems crazy when we're putting so much away and I see other people online and on these forums who say, "FI at 32!" I'll be 39/40 in 10 years, and my son will be 11 - so older than I would have hoped he would be before I am able to dedicate most of my time to him and his potential future siblings.

I listen to the ChooseFI podcast on occasion, and they are always saying, "If you get this under control, you can be FI in 6 years!" all the time, and I feel like i'm really putting a lot away compared to my peers, and i'm looking at 10 years if things go "as planned".

To retire in 10 years you would probably need to keep saving the $60k the entire time.  If you reduce to $36k in 3 years, that will add 1 to 2 extra years to your career.

The people who retire in 6 years are generally cutting their expenses to the bone, or have very high salaries.  It's a very unrealistic expectation.  I mean if you want to try to get by on $24k a year you could probably retire in 4 or 5 years but you aren't aiming for such a tight retirement income.

If you choose to compare to your peers remember that they generally won't retire until 65 as opposed to you retiring in your 30s.    It takes some time.  We are talking about saving enough that you never, ever have to work again.

You do have some other options.  You could probably step back to part-time in 5 years or so and let the market do the rest.

Yeah, i think i'm assuming we'll be at $60k a year for at least 1 more year, and if we drop to 36k a year (which is just the simple maxing and tax sheltering of 401k, 2 IRAs, 1 HSA), but yeah, it could be 11 years or 12 years. Point being - not 5.

And I guess i feel like the fact that we have 220k in investments saved already means we have persuing for 2-3 years already, so if we do it in 11 from now, that's 14 total years. That seems like compared to the anecdotal stuff i see on these forums and on the podcast. But for sure, it's MUCH better than the people who are looking at 65. Or my father who still works at 68 and plans to retire at 70, maybe.

The part time thing is a thought, and i toy with it, but it just seems SO dumb to work making $12 an hour, when i can just spend the time now and make 4x as much. In true form of "Your Money or Your Life" it would be illogical to waste 4x the life energy in the future for somethign i can get 4x as fast "now" (or in 11 years). Right?

[frugal_c]

I agree with you on the part time thing, if it's at that wage level.  Some people can find opportunities to do part-time contract work at their old rates, that is more what I was thinking.  Obviously not an option for many and to me I would rather get it over with but I wanted to provide it as an option.

You remind me a bit of myself when I was younger.  I can tell you that we got whacked pretty hard by the financial crash a decade ago.   It turned out okay in the end but we went from planning a retirement around 50's maybe (not really clearly defined) to thinking that maybe we could retire when we were 60, if it wasn't the apocalypse.  It was a big change and I found it hard to deal with the crash because we had fairly tight timelines with little room for error.  Eventually the markets recovered and I am back on track and more so but the point is, it can take time and don't do what I did and get too focused on the exact timelines.  It just creates unnecessary stress.

Good luck to you.  It will work out in the end.  If you want to accelerate it, you can also look at some kind of side job or real-estate investing.

[Dicey]

Also, what are you investing in?

Suggestion: find a compound interest chart and print it out. Notice it takes a while for the line to arc steeply upward. The more velocity you create in the early stages of accumulation, the higher the bounce. It's a marathon, not a sprint.

About 120k is in Wealthfront so whatever their most aggressive mix is. All of it is low-cost etfs akin to VTSAX, etc. 70k is in a 401k that is a total stock market index fund (spartan something or other), and the remaining is in VTSAX/VTI / TDAmeritrade's equivalent.

We own exactly 0 individual company stocks.

As for compound interest, i totally understand mentally how this will work, but i think because we are in the building the base stage, it feels not so great. I mean, $220,000 in investments for a 25 and 29 year old is INCREDIBLE, it really is! BUT, it means we have about $8,000 a year of our retirement funded... or not nearly enough!!

I'm not familiar with Wealthfront. What are their fees?

[ysette9]

It comes down to priorities. What do you value more, the house thing or reaching your finish line sooner? If the fancy house is that important then just make peace with that. If being done in 5 years rather than 10 is a bigger lure then reevaluate the house.

I used to track thing really closely the first few years of my career. I plotted my net worth and scrutinized the graph, willing the flat line progression to start looking more exponential. It is hard in the beginning because you are doing all the heavy lifting yourself. But stick with it. At this point our net worth has been growing in eye-watering leaps and bounds in large part because the big base means compound interest is flexing its muscle. You will get there in time.

[Mgmny]

Also, what are you investing in?

Suggestion: find a compound interest chart and print it out. Notice it takes a while for the line to arc steeply upward. The more velocity you create in the early stages of accumulation, the higher the bounce. It's a marathon, not a sprint.

About 120k is in Wealthfront so whatever their most aggressive mix is. All of it is low-cost etfs akin to VTSAX, etc. 70k is in a 401k that is a total stock market index fund (spartan something or other), and the remaining is in VTSAX/VTI / TDAmeritrade's equivalent.

We own exactly 0 individual company stocks.

As for compound interest, i totally understand mentally how this will work, but i think because we are in the building the base stage, it feels not so great. I mean, $220,000 in investments for a 25 and 29 year old is INCREDIBLE, it really is! BUT, it means we have about $8,000 a year of our retirement funded... or not nearly enough!!

I'm not familiar with Wealthfront. What are their fees?

0.25%, minus the first $20,000 I have with them is free.

[Mgmny]

I agree with you on the part time thing, if it's at that wage level.  Some people can find opportunities to do part-time contract work at their old rates, that is more what I was thinking.  Obviously not an option for many and to me I would rather get it over with but I wanted to provide it as an option.

You remind me a bit of myself when I was younger.  I can tell you that we got whacked pretty hard by the financial crash a decade ago.   It turned out okay in the end but we went from planning a retirement around 50's maybe (not really clearly defined) to thinking that maybe we could retire when we were 60, if it wasn't the apocalypse.  It was a big change and I found it hard to deal with the crash because we had fairly tight timelines with little room for error.  Eventually the markets recovered and I am back on track and more so but the point is, it can take time and don't do what I did and get too focused on the exact timelines.  It just creates unnecessary stress.

Good luck to you.  It will work out in the end.  If you want to accelerate it, you can also look at some kind of side job or real-estate investing.

That's a good point... I could find contract work that would pay more than i'm making now, and only take the contracts that are appealing/close to home. Maybe work 5-7 months out of the year full time, but have the other months off. Good point!

When i think part time, i think grocery store, barista-FIRE etc.

[Mgmny]

It comes down to priorities. What do you value more, the house thing or reaching your finish line sooner? If the fancy house is that important then just make peace with that. If being done in 5 years rather than 10 is a bigger lure then reevaluate the house.

I used to track thing really closely the first few years of my career. I plotted my net worth and scrutinized the graph, willing the flat line progression to start looking more exponential. It is hard in the beginning because you are doing all the heavy lifting yourself. But stick with it. At this point our net worth has been growing in eye-watering leaps and bounds in large part because the big base means compound interest is flexing its muscle. You will get there in time.

For sure, and I completely understand about wanting a fancy-pants house meaning it will take more time.

[waltworks]

TANSTAAFL.

Cut your expenses more, or else put your nose back to the grindstone and stop worrying about it.

-W

[MrThatsDifferent]

Dude, do you have any idea how rare and blessed you’ll be to FIRE at only 40? I think perspective would help. You’re comparing yourself to a handful of people who pulled this off younger. You’re so far ahead of everyone. Relax! It’s not a sprint and unless you hit the lottery, there isn’t much you can do to speed this up. Find a job that pays double? Your wife goes back to work and does the same? Family watches your kid for free? You move in with family? Unless you’re willing to go super hard, consider reframing where you’re at and what you’ve achieved. Take pride and enjoy your life instead of feeling inadequate and questioning your own worth. It’s ok for it to take some time. Have a destination sure, while you savor the journey getting there.

[Metalcat]

Bumping my old thread, but i still feel this way.

We have $220k in the market today. Wife is still working 1 year after our son was born, but who knows for how much longer.. Maybe 2-4 more years?

Still looking at 10 years out to hit FI number of 1,250,000 (36k a year savings when i'm single income, around 60k now), which just seems crazy when we're putting so much away and I see other people online and on these forums who say, "FI at 32!" I'll be 39/40 in 10 years, and my son will be 11 - so older than I would have hoped he would be before I am able to dedicate most of my time to him and his potential future siblings.

I listen to the ChooseFI podcast on occasion, and they are always saying, "If you get this under control, you can be FI in 6 years!" all the time, and I feel like i'm really putting a lot away compared to my peers, and i'm looking at 10 years if things go "as planned".

You are putting a lot away compared to your peers, which is why your retirement timeline is 10 years instead of 30-40.

What you are NOT doing is putting away a lot compared to other more aggressive Mustachians. So why would you expect to FIRE faster than they do?

You're spending a ton on housing and talking about potentially spending even more? And yet you're complaining that it's going to take you a single decade to reach FI?

Honestly, you sound like someone who is naturally athletic complaining about having to exercise a few hours a week to stay in shape while your friends are sedentary, but you're pissed that you're not as ripped as the people who train a few hours a day.

Life is a series of trade offs. If you're that unhappy that 10 years feels unbearable, then maybe you've made some bad trades?

[reeshau]

This makes us feel entitled probably, because we are "sacrificing" $60k a year, but 10 years away is such a "pie in the sky" thing. And when i say sacrificing, i mean we are shopping at Aldi and not the upscale grocer, and we are not driving new BMWs, so it's not like we aren't living a really good lifestyle, it's just we feel like we are making a lot of money and we aren't living some extravegent life of luxury because we are saving for something 10+ years away...

If you think 10 years is a long way away, imagine living like the others (seem to) do, and having retirement be 35+ years away!  I would look at it as buying 25 years to do anything you want, rather than focusing on the incremental differences for 10.  You could live larger, at the cost of some of those 25 years.  How many years of your life (your freedom) are you willing to pay for a BMW?  Now that's a kind of question that will sort your priorities really quickly.

[Laura33]

Bumping my old thread, but i still feel this way.

We have $220k in the market today. Wife is still working 1 year after our son was born, but who knows for how much longer.. Maybe 2-4 more years?

Still looking at 10 years out to hit FI number of 1,250,000 (36k a year savings when i'm single income, around 60k now), which just seems crazy when we're putting so much away and I see other people online and on these forums who say, "FI at 32!" I'll be 39/40 in 10 years, and my son will be 11 - so older than I would have hoped he would be before I am able to dedicate most of my time to him and his potential future siblings.

I listen to the ChooseFI podcast on occasion, and they are always saying, "If you get this under control, you can be FI in 6 years!" all the time, and I feel like i'm really putting a lot away compared to my peers, and i'm looking at 10 years if things go "as planned".

Sounds like you might  be well served by looking at the expense side of the equation.  If you can cut your expenses, it will allow you to save a bit more, but more importantly, it will mean you don't need $50k/yr and $1.25m saved. 

Can you move to a cheaper area (our country) after you retire?

Also, make sure you are considering things like a paid off house.  If you currently own, your house should be mostly paid off by the time you retire, which would mean significantly lower expenses.

Thanks Villanelle. Good points!

We are admittedly very "bad" at the house thing. We probably both lust after houses too much. We just purchased a new home in August worth $415k (with $180k down payment). But, so often we say, "it would be nice to get more land" or "live on a lake" etc etc. This mindset makes me want to ALWAYS assume there is a house payment, because when there isn't, it might be time to move again. At least, i see this happening for the foreseeable future. I know it's a bad mindset, but it's our vice... Maybe we can use geo-arbitrage a BIT when we FIRE, but we want to be close-ish to our families, and right now we just moved to a house that is smack between our parents (25 and 35 minutes to each). So, even if we pull a frugalwoods, and move to the country where it's cheaper, we really aren't interested in moving states/hours away. Maybe 1 hour away, but that's it...

I want to be as conservative as possible in my calculations, and because are still growing our family, who knows how much little ricky's diabetes medicine will cost or baby suzy's trombone lessons, etc... I feel really comfortable at the 50k a year expense.

Dude.  What you have here is a reminder that life is an "or," not an "and." 

Last year, you were living in a $265K house and frustrated that it was going to take you so long to FIRE.  A year later, you're living in a $415K house and frustrated that it's going to take you so long to FIRE.  There's an elephant in the room here.  All the ALDI in the world won't compensate for having to pay off almost a half-million dollars in debt just for the roof over your head.  You voluntarily tied yourself to 2+ more years of work, just to pay the additional principle.  And yet you're frustrated that it's taking so long to FIRE?

Look, you are doing great for someone your age.  You have a lot of savings, reasonable expenses, a significant college fund for an infant, and the luxury of one of you working as little as desired whenever you decide to make that switch.  Those are all awesome things!  But it's like the engineer's triangle:  good, fast, cheap -- pick two.  In your case, you have many great options to which you can deploy your dollars:

-- FIRE ASAP
-- Parent stay home/work part-time
-- Bigger house
-- Even bigger house
-- Pay for college education

But you can't do all of them.  Want proof?  Look at those people you're comparing yourself to -- I mean, really look.  Go through their budgets with a fine-tooth comb.  Either they make more money, or they have chosen cheaper housing, or they do not plan to fund a college education, or they jammed with two parents working full-time and delayed having kids/didn't have kids at all, or they made some other tradeoffs.  If FIRE is your highest priority, you can make those same choices and do what they do.  But if you have other priorities, you're going to get different results.  You can't cherry-pick the good parts and ignore the tradeoffs that come with that choice. 

So: what balance makes you and your family the happiest?  Might want to do a little more work reminding yourself that this is the life you are choosing to live, based on your priorities, and it's a pretty damn good one.  And if your priorities change, you can change your decision.

[wellactually]

I just re-registered after years out of the forum because of this thread.

You have got to work on your perspective and attitude. You are comparing yourself to peers who you say you've done so much better than. Okay cool. But it seems like you and your wife have enjoyed some really great privileges. It looks like you were both able to go to college and graduate without debt. Did you each pay 100% of your higher education costs? Even if you got scholarships, can you acknowledge that you had advantages that got you to this point? You graduated at a time when the job market was mostly recovered. Myself and many of my peers just a couple years older than you graduated into the worst job market of the era. Your wife, who I'm sure works hard and earns her salary, has the benefit of flexible employment in a family-related business with a company car. You both get free phones even.

Through what I expect is a combination of your hard work, good decisions, luck, and advantages, you and your wife started out in good paying jobs with no debt. You then did not squander that situation and made some good decisions. Comparing yourself to others who have likely had a whole range of situations that they started from is unhelpful.

Just for a small dash of reality, even getting pregnant easily when you wanted to is a privilege. I spent $25,000 in the last 2.5 years to finally get pregnant. I certainly would have loved to put that money towards savings or home remodeling, but I also recognize that being able to have the choice to spend that money on fertility treatments was a privilege. That doesn't mean we didn't make great decisions to be financially stable and work our butts off to save up while denying other wants. But it does mean that we had a choice and so we can be at peace looking at our networth numbers and knowing that spending that money was the right choice for us.

You are choosing to do "normal" things like living in a very expensive house, going out to eat a lot and getting new clothes regularly. Why should you get an even more abnormal RE date while making those choices?

Anyway, stop comparing yourself to others, it will only make you more judgmental and entitled. And I say this as someone who has at times in my life been "the asshole" who had to be right and who knew the best way to do things. It is not a fun person to be nor a fun person to be around. You might think your peers don't realize you're judging their choices, but they either already do or will. And frankly, you're judging them based on your own measuring stick which is retiring very early, meanwhile they are okay working until their 60s and choosing to spend money differently now.

If you enjoy podcasts, I really recommend this episode of This American Life: https://www.thisamericanlife.org/504/how-i-got-into-college. Acts 2-3 talk about a man who identifies all the lucky breaks that took him from a fleeing Bosnia to graduating Harvard. I don't want to spoil too much, but his perspective on life really changed the way I approached the world and I think it would benefit you too.

ETA: Also recognize the privilege of your childcare option! That's over $1000/month expense in most parts of the US which you are avoiding because of the privilege of available and willing family!

[Spud]

If I look at my own situation, I could easily start a thread like this because I'm not going to retire any time soon, but it would be utterly pointless because I already know what the solutions are:

1. Stop trying to start a family.
2. Sell my house which is large enough for a family and go and live somewhere smaller, just me and my wife.
3. Learn new skills in order to get a higher paying job.
4. Travel back in time so that I can stumble across the concept of FIRE when I was age 16 rather age 31 (I'm 37 now).

Our discretionary spending is as low as it can be. Seriously, we are full on frugal weirdos. We don't do birthday presents or Christmas presents. We eat out about 5 times a year at most. Don't have any expensive hobbies, walk to and from work etc.

Laura33 nails it here:

Last year, you were living in a $265K house and frustrated that it was going to take you so long to FIRE.  A year later, you're living in a $415K house and frustrated that it's going to take you so long to FIRE.  There's an elephant in the room here.  All the ALDI in the world won't compensate for having to pay off almost a half-million dollars in debt just for the roof over your head.

Anybody's 3 biggest expenses are are: 1. Housing, 2. Transportation, 3. Food.

This covers the size and location of the house (mortgage/rent), property taxes, cost of property maintenance, type of vehicle, number of vehicles, length of commute, how much you drive overall, cost of fuel, cost of vehicle maintenance, how often you eat out, how often you order in, whether or not you can cook, whether or not you plan your menu for the week before you go food shopping, how much alcohol you drink, how often you have other people round for dinner.

But out of all of that, and this definitely holds true for me, the mortgage payment, each month, is greater than the rest of it put together. Sure, you can mess about with the smaller stuff like how much you spend on shower gel or some crap, but it's not going to alter the big 3, which are the things that keep most people working until they are old.

[Cassie]

I would have one parent go part time and enjoy the baby now while little.  Once kids get older they are involved with their own lives and activities.  You want to instantly arrive at your destination and not do the work it takes to get there.  You just increased your biggest expense which is the house.

[arebelspy]

The part time thing is a thought, and i toy with it, but it just seems SO dumb to work making $12 an hour, when i can just spend the time now and make 4x as much. In true form of "Your Money or Your Life" it would be illogical to waste 4x the life energy in the future for somethign i can get 4x as fast "now" (or in 11 years). Right?

I disagree.

Part time (Semi ER) saves you life energy, because even working at a lower rate you work for less time. By spreading it out, you let the market do the work in the meantime.

For example, say you consulted for the same rate (to keep the math simple at first) and worked 1/4th the hours. You'd have to work 4X as long to make the same amount of money.

So if you had 10 years of work left, you'd need to do 40 part time years to make the same amount.

HOWEVER, because you have investments, those will be cranking away, and likely you only need to work 20 years, not 40. 20 years of compounding can do a lot (say double twice). You've halved the life energy needed.

Now the math gets a lot trickier when we talk about earning less (though some bits work in your favor, like paying less in taxes), but in essence, spreading out work doesn't straight multiply out like you're considering, because during that time you have compounding working for you. So semi-ER can lead to more years worked, but much less total time worked.

Good if you want to be home with a kid. Less so if you want to be totally free to travel. Depends on your goals. But semi-ER can be a really good tool.

[arebelspy]

There's a few solutions.

The Status Quo:

1) Accept the status quo. You have a decade left. You'll be done around 40. Not bad. Accept that, and be happy.

2) Be unhappy about the status quo, but don't do anything to change it.

Not The Status Quo:

3) Turbocharge your FIRE. Cut expenses, increase income. Cut full FIRE time by 30-50%.

4) Look into more semi-ER options (part time work, sabbaticals, seasonal work, consulting, etc. and coast FIRE). Semi-ER any time from now onward, and work as needed, but be pretty free.


Given it's been a year since the OP and it still seems to be bugging you a lot, option 1 seems hard for you to do. Option 2 is the status quo, and most likely course of action.

But I'd recommend 1, 3, or 4, in some order.

Good luck!

[GoConfidently]

[snip]

Sub teaching is something I never considered - but a super idea! Thank you!! Even making $10k a year in income would impact FIRE by $250k in savings, which means my wife and I each only need to earn $5k a year, which seems very doable - even if we're just working at a supermarket bagging groceries a few hours a week (10 hours each * 2 of us * $10/hour * 52 weeks per year = $10,400), but I'm sure subbing 1 day a week everyu other week is probably far more lucrative than bagging groceries.

You’re over-imagining substitute pay. In my area, it’s $100 a day for subs that are certified teachers and $85 for non-certified subs with a bachelor’s degree. School isn’t in session year round, so at 1 day every other week, you’re looking at significantly less than a regular $10/hr grocery bagging job.

Your area might pay significantly more if demand is high, but I doubt it based on national teacher salary rates.

[Metalcat]

The part time thing is a thought, and i toy with it, but it just seems SO dumb to work making $12 an hour, when i can just spend the time now and make 4x as much. In true form of "Your Money or Your Life" it would be illogical to waste 4x the life energy in the future for somethign i can get 4x as fast "now" (or in 11 years). Right?

I disagree.

Part time (Semi ER) saves you life energy, because even working at a lower rate you work for less time. By spreading it out, you let the market do the work in the meantime.

For example, say you consulted for the same rate (to keep the math simple at first) and worked 1/4th the hours. You'd have to work 4X as long to make the same amount of money.

So if you had 10 years of work left, you'd need to do 40 part time years to make the same amount.

HOWEVER, because you have investments, those will be cranking away, and likely you only need to work 20 years, not 40. 20 years of compounding can do a lot (say double twice). You've halved the life energy needed.

Now the math gets a lot trickier when we talk about earning less (though some bits work in your favor, like paying less in taxes), but in essence, spreading out work doesn't straight multiply out like you're considering, because during that time you have compounding working for you. So semi-ER can lead to more years worked, but much less total time worked.

Good if you want to be home with a kid. Less so if you want to be totally free to travel. Depends on your goals. But semi-ER can be a really good tool.

Yep, I STRONGLY recommend at least doing some simulations of what your options are.

As your stache gets bigger, you quickly see that compounding does the heavy lifting of building your stache, so the longer you are able to leave it alone, the quicker it is to reach the minimum amount you need.

The trade off is obviously that you need to generate enough income to be able to leave the stache alone, but if you can find a combo of low spend rate and decent part time work, this can be a hell of a lot more appealing than grinding full time if you don't enjoy your career.

As for part time work, get creative, look into consulting, look into temporary contracts, look into more training even if there's a type of work you've always wanted to do.

I've built up 4 part time jobs since I started looking for opportunities. They weren't there immediately, but after a year of networking, learning, and keeping an eye open for opportunities, they started showing up, and two of those job titles didn't even exist until I suggested that they should.

As arebelspy pointed out, you can either keep doing what you're doing, which you know isn't compatible with being happy, or you can do the work and find a creative way to live better.

The options may not present themselves right in front of your face, but one of the most important things to realize in life is that the best path is rarely the obvious one.

Society won't lay out your best options for you. Happiness is not what it wants from you. You have to go against the grain to get it.

[Dicey]

Society won't lay out your best options for you.
Happiness is not what it wants from you.
 You have to go against the grain to get it.

Another brilliant observation from @Malkynn!

[Mgmny]

I'm sorry I haven't responded sooner - i sort of got a few reality-check facepunches, and it took a few days/week for me to appreciate them. I'll respond to all of you now. 

[Mgmny]

TANSTAAFL.

Cut your expenses more, or else put your nose back to the grindstone and stop worrying about it.

-W

Good points. I'm pursuing FIRE because i don't particularly enjoy grinding on someone else's stone, but you are right - nothing is free. I need to keep grinding to get there faster.

Cutting frivolous expenses is an option, but i don't think our budget is too runaway at the moment... Clothing is probably the biggest expense we could look at trimming significantly on, but my clothing budget is like $200 a year - if that, whereas my better half's is probably 5-10x that. So, that would require a conversation that may not be worth it. we'll see!

[Mgmny]

Dude, do you have any idea how rare and blessed you’ll be to FIRE at only 40? I think perspective would help. You’re comparing yourself to a handful of people who pulled this off younger. You’re so far ahead of everyone. Relax! It’s not a sprint and unless you hit the lottery, there isn’t much you can do to speed this up. Find a job that pays double? Your wife goes back to work and does the same? Family watches your kid for free? You move in with family? Unless you’re willing to go super hard, consider reframing where you’re at and what you’ve achieved. Take pride and enjoy your life instead of feeling inadequate and questioning your own worth. It’s ok for it to take some time. Have a destination sure, while you savor the journey getting there.

I don't think I truly recognize how rare FIRE at 40 is. It is incredibly rare, and I am incredibly fortunate. You are right. The alternative is another 25+ years of employment which is the "norm" so i should be very thankful for what i have.

[Mgmny]

Bumping my old thread, but i still feel this way.

We have $220k in the market today. Wife is still working 1 year after our son was born, but who knows for how much longer.. Maybe 2-4 more years?

Still looking at 10 years out to hit FI number of 1,250,000 (36k a year savings when i'm single income, around 60k now), which just seems crazy when we're putting so much away and I see other people online and on these forums who say, "FI at 32!" I'll be 39/40 in 10 years, and my son will be 11 - so older than I would have hoped he would be before I am able to dedicate most of my time to him and his potential future siblings.

I listen to the ChooseFI podcast on occasion, and they are always saying, "If you get this under control, you can be FI in 6 years!" all the time, and I feel like i'm really putting a lot away compared to my peers, and i'm looking at 10 years if things go "as planned".

You are putting a lot away compared to your peers, which is why your retirement timeline is 10 years instead of 30-40.

What you are NOT doing is putting away a lot compared to other more aggressive Mustachians. So why would you expect to FIRE faster than they do?

You're spending a ton on housing and talking about potentially spending even more? And yet you're complaining that it's going to take you a single decade to reach FI?

Honestly, you sound like someone who is naturally athletic complaining about having to exercise a few hours a week to stay in shape while your friends are sedentary, but you're pissed that you're not as ripped as the people who train a few hours a day.

Life is a series of trade offs. If you're that unhappy that 10 years feels unbearable, then maybe you've made some bad trades?

I guess you are right - I'm not doing as well as the aggressive mustachians, and I think because I don't see this in my day-to-day life, it's hard for me to grasp. I don't know a single person who bikes to the grocer (or would even consider it feasible, as an example). I'm more used to people thinking WE'RE the aggressive ones because we don't pay for cable/dish. That's my baseline.

For your athleticism example, my sports twist: it's like we're the starting QB for the varsity football team, but we're not getting drafted because there are better QBs at different schools - we just don't play them or see them. We can only see their stats online and it's crazy that even as good as we are, there are people we are never exposed to that are better. I'm unhappy we aren't getting drafted, but it's challenging to train harder when I don't see these rockstars in an everyday setting. I AM the rockstar compared to my peers that we know...

[Mgmny]

This makes us feel entitled probably, because we are "sacrificing" $60k a year, but 10 years away is such a "pie in the sky" thing. And when i say sacrificing, i mean we are shopping at Aldi and not the upscale grocer, and we are not driving new BMWs, so it's not like we aren't living a really good lifestyle, it's just we feel like we are making a lot of money and we aren't living some extravegent life of luxury because we are saving for something 10+ years away...

If you think 10 years is a long way away, imagine living like the others (seem to) do, and having retirement be 35+ years away!  I would look at it as buying 25 years to do anything you want, rather than focusing on the incremental differences for 10.  You could live larger, at the cost of some of those 25 years.  How many years of your life (your freedom) are you willing to pay for a BMW?  Now that's a kind of question that will sort your priorities really quickly.

Thanks Reeshau - this is really good perspective. It's a tradeoff for sure. 10 years isn't terrible compared to the alternative. Thanks for the reality check!!

[Mgmny]

Bumping my old thread, but i still feel this way.

We have $220k in the market today. Wife is still working 1 year after our son was born, but who knows for how much longer.. Maybe 2-4 more years?

Still looking at 10 years out to hit FI number of 1,250,000 (36k a year savings when i'm single income, around 60k now), which just seems crazy when we're putting so much away and I see other people online and on these forums who say, "FI at 32!" I'll be 39/40 in 10 years, and my son will be 11 - so older than I would have hoped he would be before I am able to dedicate most of my time to him and his potential future siblings.

I listen to the ChooseFI podcast on occasion, and they are always saying, "If you get this under control, you can be FI in 6 years!" all the time, and I feel like i'm really putting a lot away compared to my peers, and i'm looking at 10 years if things go "as planned".

Sounds like you might  be well served by looking at the expense side of the equation.  If you can cut your expenses, it will allow you to save a bit more, but more importantly, it will mean you don't need $50k/yr and $1.25m saved. 

Can you move to a cheaper area (our country) after you retire?

Also, make sure you are considering things like a paid off house.  If you currently own, your house should be mostly paid off by the time you retire, which would mean significantly lower expenses.

Thanks Villanelle. Good points!

We are admittedly very "bad" at the house thing. We probably both lust after houses too much. We just purchased a new home in August worth $415k (with $180k down payment). But, so often we say, "it would be nice to get more land" or "live on a lake" etc etc. This mindset makes me want to ALWAYS assume there is a house payment, because when there isn't, it might be time to move again. At least, i see this happening for the foreseeable future. I know it's a bad mindset, but it's our vice... Maybe we can use geo-arbitrage a BIT when we FIRE, but we want to be close-ish to our families, and right now we just moved to a house that is smack between our parents (25 and 35 minutes to each). So, even if we pull a frugalwoods, and move to the country where it's cheaper, we really aren't interested in moving states/hours away. Maybe 1 hour away, but that's it...

I want to be as conservative as possible in my calculations, and because are still growing our family, who knows how much little ricky's diabetes medicine will cost or baby suzy's trombone lessons, etc... I feel really comfortable at the 50k a year expense.

Dude.  What you have here is a reminder that life is an "or," not an "and." 

Last year, you were living in a $265K house and frustrated that it was going to take you so long to FIRE.  A year later, you're living in a $415K house and frustrated that it's going to take you so long to FIRE.  There's an elephant in the room here.  All the ALDI in the world won't compensate for having to pay off almost a half-million dollars in debt just for the roof over your head.  You voluntarily tied yourself to 2+ more years of work, just to pay the additional principle.  And yet you're frustrated that it's taking so long to FIRE?

Look, you are doing great for someone your age.  You have a lot of savings, reasonable expenses, a significant college fund for an infant, and the luxury of one of you working as little as desired whenever you decide to make that switch.  Those are all awesome things!  But it's like the engineer's triangle:  good, fast, cheap -- pick two.  In your case, you have many great options to which you can deploy your dollars:

-- FIRE ASAP
-- Parent stay home/work part-time
-- Bigger house
-- Even bigger house
-- Pay for college education

But you can't do all of them.  Want proof?  Look at those people you're comparing yourself to -- I mean, really look.  Go through their budgets with a fine-tooth comb.  Either they make more money, or they have chosen cheaper housing, or they do not plan to fund a college education, or they jammed with two parents working full-time and delayed having kids/didn't have kids at all, or they made some other tradeoffs.  If FIRE is your highest priority, you can make those same choices and do what they do.  But if you have other priorities, you're going to get different results.  You can't cherry-pick the good parts and ignore the tradeoffs that come with that choice. 

So: what balance makes you and your family the happiest?  Might want to do a little more work reminding yourself that this is the life you are choosing to live, based on your priorities, and it's a pretty damn good one.  And if your priorities change, you can change your decision.

Good points, thanks Laura33.

This isn't the point you are making, I know, BUT i'm going to defend the house purchase (to my detriment, i know). We ended up selling the house we paid 220k for in 2015 for 315, and then purchased our new home brand new for 415k.

So, our first 30 year loan was based on 209k at 4.25% and our new loan is 240k at 3.75%. Our monthly payment is only $100 more a month. YES I KNOW MONTHLY PAYMENT MEANS NOTHING, BUT it feels really cool to trade a house we paid 220k for 4 years ago built 40 years ago for a house we had built for us with more space, efficiency, etc. for only $100 more a month. I know i know, not the point, and still effectively cost me $200k more. I realize that completely. But it's really not as bad as us taking out a half a million dollar loan with a $2200 a month disappearing into interest each month. But regardless, it was a $200k expense, yes.

Back to your post: Your list is good, and the engineer's triangle (or we call it the iron triangle in project management, so i should be very familiar with this concept) is a really important thought that I don't think of often enough. I just want it all, and I don't reflect on my situation/experiences enough to realize that I am getting about as close to having it all as possible. Just 10 years away...

As for looking at the "FIRED AT 29!" people, it does look like a lot of those people have 4+ rental properties - so a sustainable income from non-savings/investments. I'm not interested in getting into rentals or DEPENDING on any other type of side hustle during retirement - i just want my portfolio to work for me....

[Metalcat]

Bumping my old thread, but i still feel this way.

We have $220k in the market today. Wife is still working 1 year after our son was born, but who knows for how much longer.. Maybe 2-4 more years?

Still looking at 10 years out to hit FI number of 1,250,000 (36k a year savings when i'm single income, around 60k now), which just seems crazy when we're putting so much away and I see other people online and on these forums who say, "FI at 32!" I'll be 39/40 in 10 years, and my son will be 11 - so older than I would have hoped he would be before I am able to dedicate most of my time to him and his potential future siblings.

I listen to the ChooseFI podcast on occasion, and they are always saying, "If you get this under control, you can be FI in 6 years!" all the time, and I feel like i'm really putting a lot away compared to my peers, and i'm looking at 10 years if things go "as planned".

You are putting a lot away compared to your peers, which is why your retirement timeline is 10 years instead of 30-40.

What you are NOT doing is putting away a lot compared to other more aggressive Mustachians. So why would you expect to FIRE faster than they do?

You're spending a ton on housing and talking about potentially spending even more? And yet you're complaining that it's going to take you a single decade to reach FI?

Honestly, you sound like someone who is naturally athletic complaining about having to exercise a few hours a week to stay in shape while your friends are sedentary, but you're pissed that you're not as ripped as the people who train a few hours a day.

Life is a series of trade offs. If you're that unhappy that 10 years feels unbearable, then maybe you've made some bad trades?

I guess you are right - I'm not doing as well as the aggressive mustachians, and I think because I don't see this in my day-to-day life, it's hard for me to grasp. I don't know a single person who bikes to the grocer (or would even consider it feasible, as an example). I'm more used to people thinking WE'RE the aggressive ones because we don't pay for cable/dish. That's my baseline.

For your athleticism example, my sports twist: it's like we're the starting QB for the varsity football team, but we're not getting drafted because there are better QBs at different schools - we just don't play them or see them. We can only see their stats online and it's crazy that even as good as we are, there are people we are never exposed to that are better. I'm unhappy we aren't getting drafted, but it's challenging to train harder when I don't see these rockstars in an everyday setting. I AM the rockstar compared to my peers that we know...

Yeah, you're a big fish in a small pond.

And?

The less you compare yourself to others and the more you quantify your situation according to objective measures, the more you will be able to make important decisions about critical lifestyle trade offs.

That's all this shit is, that's all FIRE is, it's a series of lifestyle trade offs that you decide for YOURSELF are worthwhile.

Guess what?!
Some of us decide that FIRE isn't worth it. Some of us decide that it's worth living in a small apartment. Some of us decide to go back to work even after retiring.

This is life, and life is fucking complex.

The sooner you realize that what you are doing is making very individual lifestyle tradeoffs, the better you will be at making your own personal decisions.

Stop comparing. Start living.

[Mgmny]

I just re-registered after years out of the forum because of this thread.

You have got to work on your perspective and attitude. You are comparing yourself to peers who you say you've done so much better than. Okay cool. But it seems like you and your wife have enjoyed some really great privileges. It looks like you were both able to go to college and graduate without debt. Did you each pay 100% of your higher education costs? Even if you got scholarships, can you acknowledge that you had advantages that got you to this point? You graduated at a time when the job market was mostly recovered. Myself and many of my peers just a couple years older than you graduated into the worst job market of the era. Your wife, who I'm sure works hard and earns her salary, has the benefit of flexible employment in a family-related business with a company car. You both get free phones even.

Through what I expect is a combination of your hard work, good decisions, luck, and advantages, you and your wife started out in good paying jobs with no debt. You then did not squander that situation and made some good decisions. Comparing yourself to others who have likely had a whole range of situations that they started from is unhelpful.

Just for a small dash of reality, even getting pregnant easily when you wanted to is a privilege. I spent $25,000 in the last 2.5 years to finally get pregnant. I certainly would have loved to put that money towards savings or home remodeling, but I also recognize that being able to have the choice to spend that money on fertility treatments was a privilege. That doesn't mean we didn't make great decisions to be financially stable and work our butts off to save up while denying other wants. But it does mean that we had a choice and so we can be at peace looking at our networth numbers and knowing that spending that money was the right choice for us.

You are choosing to do "normal" things like living in a very expensive house, going out to eat a lot and getting new clothes regularly. Why should you get an even more abnormal RE date while making those choices?

Anyway, stop comparing yourself to others, it will only make you more judgmental and entitled. And I say this as someone who has at times in my life been "the asshole" who had to be right and who knew the best way to do things. It is not a fun person to be nor a fun person to be around. You might think your peers don't realize you're judging their choices, but they either already do or will. And frankly, you're judging them based on your own measuring stick which is retiring very early, meanwhile they are okay working until their 60s and choosing to spend money differently now.

If you enjoy podcasts, I really recommend this episode of This American Life: https://www.thisamericanlife.org/504/how-i-got-into-college. Acts 2-3 talk about a man who identifies all the lucky breaks that took him from a fleeing Bosnia to graduating Harvard. I don't want to spoil too much, but his perspective on life really changed the way I approached the world and I think it would benefit you too.

ETA: Also recognize the privilege of your childcare option! That's over $1000/month expense in most parts of the US which you are avoiding because of the privilege of available and willing family!

I guess i'm glad i pulled you "out of retirement" to back on the forums to rebuke me! Hopefully, you hang around!

Thank you for the reality check. My family is incredibly fortunate, and we need to be more thankful for it. We have had a lot of privileges afforded to us, and i know we don't recognize them as often as we should. Obviously, it's an area we should be trying to improve on. I recognize 99% of the world has it worse off than us in terms of privilege and opportunity - we are a hetero, white couple, living in suburban america, in a state with one of the highest qualities of life in the USA, both working full time in white collar jobs, making more money than 99% of the world's population. We are healthy, and we were able to conceive our beautiful son without issue. We don't wonder where our next meal is coming from and if we can afford any of our bills. We are incredibly fortunate, lucky, and privileged.

The flip side is, and what is/was getting me stuck: Even with all this privilege and lots hard work, there are still people "beating" us to FI. That said, I will work on being more thankful that FI is even an option.

[arebelspy]

Yeah, you're a big fish in a small pond.

And?

The less you compare yourself to others and the more you quantify your situation according to objective measures, the more you will be able to make important decisions about critical lifestyle trade offs.

That's all this shit is, that's all FIRE is, it's a series of lifestyle trade offs that you decide for YOURSELF are worthwhile.

Guess what?!
Some of us decide that FIRE isn't worth it. Some of us decide that it's worth living in a small apartment. Some of us decide to go back to work even after retiring.

This is life, and life is fucking complex.

The sooner you realize that what you are doing is making very individual lifestyle tradeoffs, the better you will be at making your own personal decisions.

Stop comparing. Start living.

This is great advice.

And it applies both ways--don't compare to society/consumers... but also don't compare to Mustachians.

I had to give up on low spending due to lifestyle changes. But it's just as detrimental to compare to one group as another. Build the life you (and your partner) want.

[Mgmny]

If I look at my own situation, I could easily start a thread like this because I'm not going to retire any time soon, but it would be utterly pointless because I already know what the solutions are:

1. Stop trying to start a family.
2. Sell my house which is large enough for a family and go and live somewhere smaller, just me and my wife.
3. Learn new skills in order to get a higher paying job.
4. Travel back in time so that I can stumble across the concept of FIRE when I was age 16 rather age 31 (I'm 37 now).

Our discretionary spending is as low as it can be. Seriously, we are full on frugal weirdos. We don't do birthday presents or Christmas presents. We eat out about 5 times a year at most. Don't have any expensive hobbies, walk to and from work etc.

Laura33 nails it here:

Last year, you were living in a $265K house and frustrated that it was going to take you so long to FIRE.  A year later, you're living in a $415K house and frustrated that it's going to take you so long to FIRE.  There's an elephant in the room here.  All the ALDI in the world won't compensate for having to pay off almost a half-million dollars in debt just for the roof over your head.

Anybody's 3 biggest expenses are are: 1. Housing, 2. Transportation, 3. Food.

This covers the size and location of the house (mortgage/rent), property taxes, cost of property maintenance, type of vehicle, number of vehicles, length of commute, how much you drive overall, cost of fuel, cost of vehicle maintenance, how often you eat out, how often you order in, whether or not you can cook, whether or not you plan your menu for the week before you go food shopping, how much alcohol you drink, how often you have other people round for dinner.

But out of all of that, and this definitely holds true for me, the mortgage payment, each month, is greater than the rest of it put together. Sure, you can mess about with the smaller stuff like how much you spend on shower gel or some crap, but it's not going to alter the big 3, which are the things that keep most people working until they are old.

Good points. With the biggest spending category (housing) we are admittedly suckers for a nice house, so that is something that we could be doing better at...

I should look at my own list and realize that the trade-offs aren't worth it and that my life is pretty good right now.

[Mgmny]

I would have one parent go part time and enjoy the baby now while little.  Once kids get older they are involved with their own lives and activities.  You want to instantly arrive at your destination and not do the work it takes to get there.  You just increased your biggest expense which is the house.

Thanks Cassie! My wife has an incredibly flexible job (like today, my mother is in Florida on vacation, so she is "working from home" today, which really just means watching our son. She does this every thursday and friday too). So, the part time thing is probably just throwing money and time away.

The housing "expense" didn't change too much do to the downpayment (our monthly expense is only $100 more than our old house), but as a line item, it definitely cost us a lot of money to keep the expense low...

[Mgmny]

The part time thing is a thought, and i toy with it, but it just seems SO dumb to work making $12 an hour, when i can just spend the time now and make 4x as much. In true form of "Your Money or Your Life" it would be illogical to waste 4x the life energy in the future for somethign i can get 4x as fast "now" (or in 11 years). Right?

I disagree.

Part time (Semi ER) saves you life energy, because even working at a lower rate you work for less time. By spreading it out, you let the market do the work in the meantime.

For example, say you consulted for the same rate (to keep the math simple at first) and worked 1/4th the hours. You'd have to work 4X as long to make the same amount of money.

So if you had 10 years of work left, you'd need to do 40 part time years to make the same amount.

HOWEVER, because you have investments, those will be cranking away, and likely you only need to work 20 years, not 40. 20 years of compounding can do a lot (say double twice). You've halved the life energy needed.

Now the math gets a lot trickier when we talk about earning less (though some bits work in your favor, like paying less in taxes), but in essence, spreading out work doesn't straight multiply out like you're considering, because during that time you have compounding working for you. So semi-ER can lead to more years worked, but much less total time worked.

Good if you want to be home with a kid. Less so if you want to be totally free to travel. Depends on your goals. But semi-ER can be a really good tool.

I consider myself reasonably intelligent and well-read on FI. But I have NEVER even considered or ran the math on that scenario...

High level: It looks like if my wife and I work full time for 5 more years, and then i drop to consulting between 4-6 months a year for 8ish years, we will hit FI... That could be ticket out of here!! I will need to do more research on this approach...

[Mgmny]

There's a few solutions.

The Status Quo:

1) Accept the status quo. You have a decade left. You'll be done around 40. Not bad. Accept that, and be happy.

2) Be unhappy about the status quo, but don't do anything to change it.

Not The Status Quo:

3) Turbocharge your FIRE. Cut expenses, increase income. Cut full FIRE time by 30-50%.

4) Look into more semi-ER options (part time work, sabbaticals, seasonal work, consulting, etc. and coast FIRE). Semi-ER any time from now onward, and work as needed, but be pretty free.


Given it's been a year since the OP and it still seems to be bugging you a lot, option 1 seems hard for you to do. Option 2 is the status quo, and most likely course of action.

But I'd recommend 1, 3, or 4, in some order.

Good luck!

Let's get rid of #2. That's no way to live life and it's unfortunate that's how i'm feeling today... I will work on 1,3 and 4!

I think 3 is going to be the toughest.... I will look closely at 4 and 1 is what it will need to be for today and x days/weeks/months/years for awhile,  until i figure out 4!

[Mgmny]

[snip]

Sub teaching is something I never considered - but a super idea! Thank you!! Even making $10k a year in income would impact FIRE by $250k in savings, which means my wife and I each only need to earn $5k a year, which seems very doable - even if we're just working at a supermarket bagging groceries a few hours a week (10 hours each * 2 of us * $10/hour * 52 weeks per year = $10,400), but I'm sure subbing 1 day a week everyu other week is probably far more lucrative than bagging groceries.

You’re over-imagining substitute pay. In my area, it’s $100 a day for subs that are certified teachers and $85 for non-certified subs with a bachelor’s degree. School isn’t in session year round, so at 1 day every other week, you’re looking at significantly less than a regular $10/hr grocery bagging job.

Your area might pay significantly more if demand is high, but I doubt it based on national teacher salary rates.

Well sure. Looks like subs make about $100 a day in MN. That's for ~6 hours of work, so about $17 / hour. The difference is i could get more hours bagging groceries than i could as a sub. Still, if we each pick up a sub shift every other week we would make $5200 a year for just 1 day a week between the 2 of us. That's not bad.

I like Arelsby's idea of part time contracting better though. I was contracting before my current gig making $65/hour. So, if i do that for 4 months a year, that's $42,000 - or almost our entire FIRE budget. We could Coast FIRE on that...

[Cassie]

Your wive’s job sounds great.  Enjoy your baby:))

[Mgmny]

Your wive’s job sounds great.  Enjoy your baby:))

Thanks Cassie! It really is. The downside is she is gone every Tuesday night traveling for work. Tomorrow, she has a 6-hour drive to a customer and then on Wednesday, she has a 6-hour drive home.

I tell her to think of it as a mini-vacation, but being away from our son doesn't always make it seem like that! But, she can go out to eat wherever she wants albeit, alone... :(

Also, her ability to work from home (aka be a mom) on Thursday and Friday are becomming harder for her as our son is becoming more mobile. If people call her or email her, she still needs to answer/respond. But, when there's a baby who just needs to nurse, you can talk on the phone at the same time. Now that we have a 1-year old, it's a different story!

We need to see how feasible this setup is when we get pregnant again with #2...

[Mgmny]

We probably both lust after houses too much... so often we say, "it would be nice to get more land" or "live on a lake" etc etc. This mindset makes me want to ALWAYS assume there is a house payment, because when there isn't, it might be time to move again. At least, i see this happening for the foreseeable future.

Besides slow travel do you have a visualization of what your future life will be like and how much it will cost?  In this perfect FIRE future what are you doing every day, where are you living, and has you and your partner's unbounded lust for larger and more beautiful property somehow abated?  :)

GREAT questions! I am hoping for more property BECAUSE of FIRE! I'm imagining large gardens, chickens (don't tell my wife...), diy projects around the house/property, taking time with my family, peaceful/scenic surroundings. I don't want to go so far as to say "off the grid" / "Homesteading" but a simpler life would be cool.

[Mgmny]

The part time thing is a thought, and i toy with it, but it just seems SO dumb to work making $12 an hour, when i can just spend the time now and make 4x as much. In true form of "Your Money or Your Life" it would be illogical to waste 4x the life energy in the future for somethign i can get 4x as fast "now" (or in 11 years). Right?

I disagree.

Part time (Semi ER) saves you life energy, because even working at a lower rate you work for less time. By spreading it out, you let the market do the work in the meantime.

For example, say you consulted for the same rate (to keep the math simple at first) and worked 1/4th the hours. You'd have to work 4X as long to make the same amount of money.

So if you had 10 years of work left, you'd need to do 40 part time years to make the same amount.

HOWEVER, because you have investments, those will be cranking away, and likely you only need to work 20 years, not 40. 20 years of compounding can do a lot (say double twice). You've halved the life energy needed.

Now the math gets a lot trickier when we talk about earning less (though some bits work in your favor, like paying less in taxes), but in essence, spreading out work doesn't straight multiply out like you're considering, because during that time you have compounding working for you. So semi-ER can lead to more years worked, but much less total time worked.

Good if you want to be home with a kid. Less so if you want to be totally free to travel. Depends on your goals. But semi-ER can be a really good tool.

Yep, I STRONGLY recommend at least doing some simulations of what your options are.

As your stache gets bigger, you quickly see that compounding does the heavy lifting of building your stache, so the longer you are able to leave it alone, the quicker it is to reach the minimum amount you need.

The trade off is obviously that you need to generate enough income to be able to leave the stache alone, but if you can find a combo of low spend rate and decent part time work, this can be a hell of a lot more appealing than grinding full time if you don't enjoy your career.

As for part time work, get creative, look into consulting, look into temporary contracts, look into more training even if there's a type of work you've always wanted to do.

I've built up 4 part time jobs since I started looking for opportunities. They weren't there immediately, but after a year of networking, learning, and keeping an eye open for opportunities, they started showing up, and two of those job titles didn't even exist until I suggested that they should.

As arebelspy pointed out, you can either keep doing what you're doing, which you know isn't compatible with being happy, or you can do the work and find a creative way to live better.

The options may not present themselves right in front of your face, but one of the most important things to realize in life is that the best path is rarely the obvious one.

Society won't lay out your best options for you. Happiness is not what it wants from you. You have to go against the grain to get it.

Thansk Malkynn!

I just ran some numbers, and it looks like if my wife and I grind it out for 5 years and contribute 60k a year, we will have about 710k. Then, if i coast for another 7-8 years, I will have enough to FIRE!

That is actually super impressive. If I take a consulting job at $55/hour (was contracting at $65 prior to this job), I would need to work about 5 months a year. Obviously less and less if my rate is higher than $55. This is super exciting stuff!  That would give me back 6 months a year! And I would still be FIRE-ing in 12 years from today.

Man, this is invigorating! I don't know if i can keep my wife on the hamster wheel for 5 more years (especially if we have more children in that time), but it would definitely make things MUCH easier!

[Mgmny]

Society won't lay out your best options for you.
Happiness is not what it wants from you.
 You have to go against the grain to get it.

Another brilliant observation from @Malkynn!

So true! Thanks for highlighting it Dicey, and thanks for saying it Malkynn!!

[Mgmny]

Bumping my old thread, but i still feel this way.

We have $220k in the market today. Wife is still working 1 year after our son was born, but who knows for how much longer.. Maybe 2-4 more years?

Still looking at 10 years out to hit FI number of 1,250,000 (36k a year savings when i'm single income, around 60k now), which just seems crazy when we're putting so much away and I see other people online and on these forums who say, "FI at 32!" I'll be 39/40 in 10 years, and my son will be 11 - so older than I would have hoped he would be before I am able to dedicate most of my time to him and his potential future siblings.

I listen to the ChooseFI podcast on occasion, and they are always saying, "If you get this under control, you can be FI in 6 years!" all the time, and I feel like i'm really putting a lot away compared to my peers, and i'm looking at 10 years if things go "as planned".

You are putting a lot away compared to your peers, which is why your retirement timeline is 10 years instead of 30-40.

What you are NOT doing is putting away a lot compared to other more aggressive Mustachians. So why would you expect to FIRE faster than they do?

You're spending a ton on housing and talking about potentially spending even more? And yet you're complaining that it's going to take you a single decade to reach FI?

Honestly, you sound like someone who is naturally athletic complaining about having to exercise a few hours a week to stay in shape while your friends are sedentary, but you're pissed that you're not as ripped as the people who train a few hours a day.

Life is a series of trade offs. If you're that unhappy that 10 years feels unbearable, then maybe you've made some bad trades?

I guess you are right - I'm not doing as well as the aggressive mustachians, and I think because I don't see this in my day-to-day life, it's hard for me to grasp. I don't know a single person who bikes to the grocer (or would even consider it feasible, as an example). I'm more used to people thinking WE'RE the aggressive ones because we don't pay for cable/dish. That's my baseline.

For your athleticism example, my sports twist: it's like we're the starting QB for the varsity football team, but we're not getting drafted because there are better QBs at different schools - we just don't play them or see them. We can only see their stats online and it's crazy that even as good as we are, there are people we are never exposed to that are better. I'm unhappy we aren't getting drafted, but it's challenging to train harder when I don't see these rockstars in an everyday setting. I AM the rockstar compared to my peers that we know...

Yeah, you're a big fish in a small pond.

And?

The less you compare yourself to others and the more you quantify your situation according to objective measures, the more you will be able to make important decisions about critical lifestyle trade offs.

That's all this shit is, that's all FIRE is, it's a series of lifestyle trade offs that you decide for YOURSELF are worthwhile.

Guess what?!
Some of us decide that FIRE isn't worth it. Some of us decide that it's worth living in a small apartment. Some of us decide to go back to work even after retiring.

This is life, and life is fucking complex.

The sooner you realize that what you are doing is making very individual lifestyle tradeoffs, the better you will be at making your own personal decisions.

Stop comparing. Start living.

Thank you. I will work on the attitude adjustment, and optimizing my current lifestyle towards happiness and less towards comparison.

[Mgmny]

Yeah, you're a big fish in a small pond.

And?

The less you compare yourself to others and the more you quantify your situation according to objective measures, the more you will be able to make important decisions about critical lifestyle trade offs.

That's all this shit is, that's all FIRE is, it's a series of lifestyle trade offs that you decide for YOURSELF are worthwhile.

Guess what?!
Some of us decide that FIRE isn't worth it. Some of us decide that it's worth living in a small apartment. Some of us decide to go back to work even after retiring.

This is life, and life is fucking complex.

The sooner you realize that what you are doing is making very individual lifestyle tradeoffs, the better you will be at making your own personal decisions.

Stop comparing. Start living.

This is great advice.

And it applies both ways--don't compare to society/consumers... but also don't compare to Mustachians.

I had to give up on low spending due to lifestyle changes. But it's just as detrimental to compare to one group as another. Build the life you (and your partner) want.

The combination of the "FIRE at 31!!!" and "We have $0 in savings, and we took out a personal loan to buy a stroller because our baby deserves the best!" is where i'm getting caught. Comparing myself to both is the problem.

[arebelspy]

There's a few solutions.

The Status Quo:

1) Accept the status quo. You have a decade left. You'll be done around 40. Not bad. Accept that, and be happy.

2) Be unhappy about the status quo, but don't do anything to change it.

Not The Status Quo:

3) Turbocharge your FIRE. Cut expenses, increase income. Cut full FIRE time by 30-50%.

4) Look into more semi-ER options (part time work, sabbaticals, seasonal work, consulting, etc. and coast FIRE). Semi-ER any time from now onward, and work as needed, but be pretty free.


Given it's been a year since the OP and it still seems to be bugging you a lot, option 1 seems hard for you to do. Option 2 is the status quo, and most likely course of action.

But I'd recommend 1, 3, or 4, in some order.

Good luck!

Let's get rid of #2. That's no way to live life and it's unfortunate that's how i'm feeling today... I will work on 1,3 and 4!

I think 3 is going to be the toughest.... I will look closely at 4 and 1 is what it will need to be for today and x days/weeks/months/years for awhile,  until i figure out 4!

Your attitude is a lot better in the most recent posts.

The premise of this thread is #2. But to throw that out, shoot for the attitude of #1 while working towards 4, well, that's a lot better way to live.

I have thought for awhile about writing a book about semi-ER. I think it's the most underrated/under-discussed topic in our community.

You should absolutely spend some more time on it. :)