I wish they would have highlighted some of the FIRE folks who didn't so heavily monetize their blogs... My favorite people are ones like LivingaFI/Dr. Doom, who created awesome content, but then didn't cash in on it.
I'm seeing a lot of mocking of this article, so the visitors may not all be friendly. ;-)
I'm seeing a lot of mocking of this article, so the visitors may not all be friendly. ;-)
Where are you seeing the mocking?
Anyone else think it's kind of weird that Mr. 500 (or whatever his blogger superhero name is) moved to Longmont? Uprooting your family, with young children, so you can fanboy on your favorite blogger? That's one serious man crush on Pete. I wonder if that is awkward for Pete. I kind of hope it is.Of course, it couldn't possibly be because Longmont is a nice place to live. Aren't downsizing and moving to a lower COLA two key options on the path to FIRE? Your criticism is mean-spirited and adds absolutely no value to the discussion. For the record, I know neither party personally and I don't follow the other blogger, but your comments, "Tom Smith" are in clear violation of Forum Rule #1. Move along, please.
I wish they would have highlighted some of the FIRE folks who didn't so heavily monetize their blogs... My favorite people are ones like LivingaFI/Dr. Doom, who created awesome content, but then didn't cash in on it.
and that at least one person (and perhaps more) in the article had a spouse who still worked full time to support the family rather than live off the stash makes it even less realistic and inspirational for FIRE-wannabes. Especially the single ones. I still like the article and find it better than most but can see why many people would have problems with it. Especially when.the first person interviewed appears to be more a SAHP financially supported by his working spouse than a early retiree living off his stash.I'm seeing a lot of mocking of this article, so the visitors may not all be friendly. ;-)
Where are you seeing the mocking?
Facebook.
And it is because of the focus on really high earners - that’s not relatable to a lot of people.
I feel like this marks a snowball moment (when FIRE snowballs) - many more folks look up, look around at the reality around them, and get it
I wish they would have highlighted some of the FIRE folks who didn't so heavily monetize their blogs... My favorite people are ones like LivingaFI/Dr. Doom, who created awesome content, but then didn't cash in on it.
It's self selection.
We've all seen those interview requests here and on other forums, especially /r. If you're a fairly private individual/couple, why would you want your information in a NYT article?!?
Now, if you're a blogger looking for more clicks, you'd be all over that journalist.
Yes sol, it's all over now.
It was in the lifestyle section, and they were just very slightly making fun n of it, IMO. ;-)
I'm worried you're right. I think this might be just like when the housing market was saturated with "buy and flip!" news coverage, or the dotcom bubble had popular media proclaiming anyone can be a millionaire if they buy pets.com. Is this the crescendo that signals the subsequent collapse?
We've been living in the golden age of early retirement. We all saw it, we lived it, we benefited from it. Now that everyone else is on board, does that mean the edge is gone?
I feel like this marks a snowball moment (when FIRE snowballs) - many more folks look up, look around at the reality around them, and get it
I'm worried you're right. I think this might be just like when the housing market was saturated with "buy and flip!" news coverage, or the dotcom bubble had popular media proclaiming anyone can be a millionaire if they buy pets.com. Is this the crescendo that signals the subsequent collapse?
We've been living in the golden age of early retirement. We all saw it, we lived it, we benefited from it. Now that everyone else is on board, does that mean the edge is gone?
What an odd response! I have no interest in banning you, and suggested no such thing. I merely asked you obey the forum rules. Your need to compare post numbers is equally baffling. As for blocking you, why I would need to? Huh...Anyone else think it's kind of weird that Mr. 500 (or whatever his blogger superhero name is) moved to Longmont? Uprooting your family, with young children, so you can fanboy on your favorite blogger? That's one serious man crush on Pete. I wonder if that is awkward for Pete. I kind of hope it is.Of course, it couldn't possibly be because Longmont is a nice place to live. Aren't downsizing and moving to a lower COLA two key options on the path to FIRE? Your criticism is mean-spirited and adds absolutely no value to the discussion. For the record, I know neither party personally and I don't follow the other blogger, but your comments, "Tom Smith" are in clear violation of Forum Rule #1. Move along, please.
I wish they would have highlighted some of the FIRE folks who didn't so heavily monetize their blogs... My favorite people are ones like LivingaFI/Dr. Doom, who created awesome content, but then didn't cash in on it.
I would actually recommend that you just block me if you don't find value in my comments. Trying to get me banned seems frankly a little heavy-handed; I'm sure with 8,000 posts you could do it, but geez. I'm not even sure what, precisely, you're objecting to. I do wish the NYT article would have highlighted different people. I would have liked to see people highlighted who are like Spartana, or Dr. Doom, or Sol, or Arebelspy, or Dandarc or literally a hundred other people on this board who I have learned from over the years.
And no, I don't think anyone who frequents this board ends up in Longmont just because it's a nice place to live. I actually find your uncharitable interpretation of my comments to be mean-spirited. Again, I think you should just block me if you find my comments unpleasant. Have a great day.
I feel like this marks a snowball moment (when FIRE snowballs) - many more folks look up, look around at the reality around them, and get itIs this the crescendo that signals the subsequent collapse?
The interview requests crop up fairly often and there was a recent request to be part of a FIRE movie which is being made. There are also requests to individual FIREees via pm so you probably wouldn't see that. I think91st of us are a extremely private though and don't want to be "outed" or feel we don't have anything new or interesting to say. Especially if we weren't in the high income, FIRE fast crowd of current bloggers. No one wants to hear about a working class person saving half their lowish salary for 20 years and retiring at 40 in a very modest way. Boring ;-).I wish they would have highlighted some of the FIRE folks who didn't so heavily monetize their blogs... My favorite people are ones like LivingaFI/Dr. Doom, who created awesome content, but then didn't cash in on it.
It's self selection.
We've all seen those interview requests here and on other forums, especially /r. If you're a fairly private individual/couple, why would you want your information in a NYT article?!?
Now, if you're a blogger looking for more clicks, you'd be all over that journalist.
I have to admit I haven't seen those interview requests either here or elsewhere. I guess I just live in a sheltered section of the FIRE world.
Anyway, I share spartana's concern that it ended up with a group of interviewees that was skewed married and very high income relative to the distribution I see on the forums, but I suspect you are right that this results from ascertainment bias resulting from who saw and was interested in responding to those interview requests.
But I'm thinking who wants to read about how I'm eating rice and beans at home and going without cable? Probably no one. The high income earning couple who FIREs fast just by not buying a Ferrari or downsizing from the McMansion to a smaller house is much more interesting.
Someone recently asked me why I never blogged about my personal FIRE journey since there's not much out there in the FIRE-wannabe world about lower income ERees (especially the single or divorced femald's ones or single parents) that doesn't make them sound like crazy van dwelling hippies. But I'm thinking who wants to read about how I'm eating rice and beans at home and going without cable? Probably no one. The high income earning couple who FIREs fast just by not buying a Ferrari or downsizing from the McMansion to a smaller house is much more interesting.The interview requests crop up fairly often and there was a recent request to be part of a FIRE movie which is being made. There are also requests to individual FIREees via pm so you probably wouldn't see that. I think91st of us are a extremely private though and don't want to be "outed" or feel we don't have anything new or interesting to say. Especially if we weren't in the high income, FIRE fast crowd of current bloggers. No one wants to hear about a working class person saving half their lowish salary for 20 years and retiring at 40 in a very modest way. Boring ;-).I wish they would have highlighted some of the FIRE folks who didn't so heavily monetize their blogs... My favorite people are ones like LivingaFI/Dr. Doom, who created awesome content, but then didn't cash in on it.
It's self selection.
We've all seen those interview requests here and on other forums, especially /r. If you're a fairly private individual/couple, why would you want your information in a NYT article?!?
Now, if you're a blogger looking for more clicks, you'd be all over that journalist.
I have to admit I haven't seen those interview requests either here or elsewhere. I guess I just live in a sheltered section of the FIRE world.
Anyway, I share spartana's concern that it ended up with a group of interviewees that was skewed married and very high income relative to the distribution I see on the forums, but I suspect you are right that this results from ascertainment bias resulting from who saw and was interested in responding to those interview requests.
True that. Live beneath means, save and invest, play the long game to FIRE. Not much I can add. That's the most bewildering thing about it, so simple yet those on the outside still assume there's some secret "trick" to it.
But I'm thinking who wants to read about how I'm eating rice and beans at home and going without cable? Probably no one. The high income earning couple who FIREs fast just by not buying a Ferrari or downsizing from the McMansion to a smaller house is much more interesting.
I disagree. I turn 35 this year. Still yet to crack $100K in income (aside from a single year in which I got a healthy annual bonus from one employer, then switched jobs and got a sign-on bonus from the new employer). I have 4 kids and a SAH spouse. I would have loved to find a FIRE blog that spoke to people who weren't earning $100K+ in their 20s. I don't read blogs any more, mostly just set on cruise control now. But it would have been nice to know that there were other people of modest means who were pursuing the dream before I discovered the MMM forum.
Someone recently asked me why I never blogged about my personal FIRE journey since there's not much out there in the FIRE-wannabe world about lower income ERees (especially the single or divorced femald's ones or single parents) that doesn't make them sound like crazy van dwelling hippies. But I'm thinking who wants to read about how I'm eating rice and beans at home and going without cable? Probably no one. The high income earning couple who FIREs fast just by not buying a Ferrari or downsizing from the McMansion to a smaller house is much more interesting.
I was disappointed they didn't allow comments for the article. These articles generate a lot of heated responses.
Over at Bogleheads they are mostly against retiring in your 30s with only $1 mil. They also say that you can't call yourself retired if you have a working spouse.
https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=4106293&sid=070cfbb061c86353d9b0cb846155942c#p4106293
- God forbid you decide / need to buy something
I was disappointed they didn't allow comments for the article. These articles generate a lot of heated responses.
Over at Bogleheads they are mostly against retiring in your 30s with only $1 mil. They also say that you can't call yourself retired if you have a working spouse.
https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=4106293&sid=070cfbb061c86353d9b0cb846155942c#p4106293
I agree. I'd find spartana's story more interesting.But I'm thinking who wants to read about how I'm eating rice and beans at home and going without cable? Probably no one. The high income earning couple who FIREs fast just by not buying a Ferrari or downsizing from the McMansion to a smaller house is much more interesting.
I disagree. I turn 35 this year. Still yet to crack $100K in income (aside from a single year in which I got a healthy annual bonus from one employer, then switched jobs and got a sign-on bonus from the new employer). I have 4 kids and a SAH spouse. I would have loved to find a FIRE blog that spoke to people who weren't earning $100K+ in their 20s. I don't read blogs any more, mostly just set on cruise control now. But it would have been nice to know that there were other people of modest means who were pursuing the dream before I discovered the MMM forum.
I'm no IRP, but to be fair, I struggle to view someone as "retired" when they have a working spouse, especially if they have young children at home, and doubly so when they depend on the working spouse for health insurance.
I agree. I'd find spartana's story more interesting.But I'm thinking who wants to read about how I'm eating rice and beans at home and going without cable? Probably no one. The high income earning couple who FIREs fast just by not buying a Ferrari or downsizing from the McMansion to a smaller house is much more interesting.
I disagree. I turn 35 this year. Still yet to crack $100K in income (aside from a single year in which I got a healthy annual bonus from one employer, then switched jobs and got a sign-on bonus from the new employer). I have 4 kids and a SAH spouse. I would have loved to find a FIRE blog that spoke to people who weren't earning $100K+ in their 20s. I don't read blogs any more, mostly just set on cruise control now. But it would have been nice to know that there were other people of modest means who were pursuing the dream before I discovered the MMM forum.
But I'm probably not normal.
It turns out that when it boils right down to it, your time to reach retirement depends on only one factor:Your savings rate, as a percentage of your take-home pay
If you want to break it down just a bit further, your savings rate is determined entirely by these two things:How much you take home each yearHow much you can live on
I always just want to laugh and point out that FIRE is just an alternative to mindless, consumerist spending. That’s it.
As Pete had pointed out: for the people who *can’t* afford to retire super early, frugality and mindfulness about money are actually MORE important.
This way of living is actually MORE beneficial to those who can’t get the kind of extreme results that high income earners can get. For many, “early retirement” might mean being able to retire by 60 instead of 75. Think about the magnitude of that impact on someone’s life.
Whenever someone criticizes the goal of FIRE, I reply “take just a moment and contemplate for a second what the actual alternative is...working longer to be able to spend more mindlessly...”
I only eked past the $100k mark once in my career and I didn't retire until I was 54. Before MMM sprang to life, I devoured The Tightwad Gazette. Once blogs were born, I found "The Frugal Girl" and "The Non Consumer Advocate" enormously helpful. They are both still going strong, and I still read every post, despite being almost six years post FIRE.But I'm thinking who wants to read about how I'm eating rice and beans at home and going without cable? Probably no one. The high income earning couple who FIREs fast just by not buying a Ferrari or downsizing from the McMansion to a smaller house is much more interesting.
I disagree. I turn 35 this year. Still yet to crack $100K in income (aside from a single year in which I got a healthy annual bonus from one employer, then switched jobs and got a sign-on bonus from the new employer). I have 4 kids and a SAH spouse. I would have loved to find a FIRE blog that spoke to people who weren't earning $100K+ in their 20s. I don't read blogs any more, mostly just set on cruise control now. But it would have been nice to know that there were other people of modest means who were pursuing the dream before I discovered the MMM forum.
I only eked past the $100k mark once in my career and I didn't retire until I was 54. Before MMM sprang to life, I devoured The Tightwad Gazette. Once blogs were born, I found "The Frugal Girl" and "The Non Consumer Advocate" enormously helpful. They are both still going strong, and I still read every post, despite being almost six years post FIRE.But I'm thinking who wants to read about how I'm eating rice and beans at home and going without cable? Probably no one. The high income earning couple who FIREs fast just by not buying a Ferrari or downsizing from the McMansion to a smaller house is much more interesting.
I disagree. I turn 35 this year. Still yet to crack $100K in income (aside from a single year in which I got a healthy annual bonus from one employer, then switched jobs and got a sign-on bonus from the new employer). I have 4 kids and a SAH spouse. I would have loved to find a FIRE blog that spoke to people who weren't earning $100K+ in their 20s. I don't read blogs any more, mostly just set on cruise control now. But it would have been nice to know that there were other people of modest means who were pursuing the dream before I discovered the MMM forum.
I really like "The Non-Consumer Advocate"! I wish she'd write something every day.
I also like "Life After Money" which was discussed here a few years ago and a lot of people weren't very impressed, but her life is a lot more like mine that say, MMM's is.
The interview requests crop up fairly often and there was a recent request to be part of a FIRE movie which is being made. There are also requests to individual FIREees via pm so you probably wouldn't see that. I think91st of us are a extremely private though and don't want to be "outed" or feel we don't have anything new or interesting to say. Especially if we weren't in the high income, FIRE fast crowd of current bloggers. No one wants to hear about a working class person saving half their lowish salary for 20 years and retiring at 40 in a very modest way. Boring ;-).Spartana's route to retirement involved making a military committment of roughly twenty years. These articles draw too many naysayers. If dear Sparty were to agree to an interview, she'd be hit with a barrage of 'reasons" why her story not helpful to others, because it's "too late" (or too whatever) for them to replicate. She'd also give up her privacy. Who needs that? The fact is, she capitalized on the opportunities available to her at the time and made them work to her advantage. Every one of us made thousands of choices to get to where we are today, proving it can be done by virtually anyone with sufficient determination. Who needs to be criticized by random strangers on the internet?.Sparty's already had to cope with one crazy-ass weirdo, why risk another? Nope nope nope.
The interview requests crop up fairly often and there was a recent request to be part of a FIRE movie which is being made. There are also requests to individual FIREees via pm so you probably wouldn't see that. I think91st of us are a extremely private though and don't want to be "outed" or feel we don't have anything new or interesting to say. Especially if we weren't in the high income, FIRE fast crowd of current bloggers. No one wants to hear about a working class person saving half their lowish salary for 20 years and retiring at 40 in a very modest way. Boring ;-).Spartana's route to retirement involved making a military committment of roughly twenty years. These articles draw too many naysayers. If dear Sparty were to agree to an interview, she'd be hit with a barrage of 'reasons" why her story not helpful to others, because it's "too late" (or too whatever) for them to replicate. She'd also give up her privacy. Who needs that? The fact is, she capitalized on the opportunities available to her at the time and made them work to her advantage. Every one of us made thousands of choices to get to where we are today, proving it can be done by virtually anyone with sufficient determination. Who needs to be criticized by random strangers on the internet?.Sparty's already had to cope with one crazy-ass weirdo, why risk another? Nope nope nope.
It's important to realize that the authors of articles like these are just trying to earn a living, working for an entity that's just trying to make a buck. Just because someone wrote an article in a mainstream publication does not mean that the concept of FIRE is now mainstream. Who among us is looking for external validation anyway? Typically, the answer is primarily the people looking to drive traffic to their blogs. Otherwise, why open themselves up to a barrage of criticism or scary nut job stalkers?
Recent example: when Liz of "The Frugalwoods" published her book, there was a huge backlash on this very site. For a while, she valiantly attempted to respond to the stones thrown. Finally, the furor subsided with the passage of time, but man, for a while it was fierce. Just last week, she finally told the story of her massive struggle with severe postpartum depression after Littlewoods was born. Yup, she was grappling with that monster while the naysayers were beating the shit out of her. And we're far more polite than the rest of the internet. It kills me that while she was suffering, total strangers were blithely and vociferously diminishing their accomplishments. How awful for them.
Privacy has great value. Once lost, it is difficult, if not impossible, to regain.
Spartana, you sadly have learned this harsh lesson. Though I hate that you have been forced to regroup*, even on this forum. No way would I criticize you for wanting to shield yourself and protect the life you worked so hard to achieve.
*Don''t tell Sam or Nords or any of the military folk, but your stories were the most relatable and inspirational to me and I'm sorry they're gone and the reason for that. I love that you stayed on post-FIRE, even if you post less than before. Your wisdom continues to be totally relatable, despite my utter lack of military experience Understand that writing one's own story in a journal, even on line, is completely different that being interviewed by someone else for general publication.
Sorry if this is ramble. I am writing under the effects of (good, post-FIRE type) stress and sleep deprivation. I've been thinking about this for some time and this way my first chance to respond.
But Vicki Robin, who wrote that financial guide with Joe Dominguez, said the FIRE crowd is a different breed of dropout than those in the ’90s. “Our aim was not just to have a whole bunch of people quit their jobs,” Ms. Robin said. “Our aim was to lower consumption to save the planet. We attracted longtime simple-living people, religious people, environmentalists.”
Either way, the message is clear: FIRE is a reaction to negative forces rather than positive proaction. So we therefore need to make work less stressful and/or empower people at work to solve the FIRE problem.
Because only paid employment can provide fulfillment?
Nice article! I've spent a lot of time on these forums, and previously, the early retirement forums. I am curious where the lines are drawn regarding lean/regular/fat fire. I've heard the terms thrown around a bit, but not really with numbers. I'd guess I'm in the regular FIRE zone, currently at $1M and hoping to pull the plug at $1.5M.
This^^^. To me lean FIRE just means you have enough passive income to mean all "your" basic expenses without earned income. Whether that's $500/month or $5000/month just depends on your own unique situation. Fat FIRE to me means you have a passive income far beyond your basic expenses and that extra allows you to do and buy "all the things" if you want.Nice article! I've spent a lot of time on these forums, and previously, the early retirement forums. I am curious where the lines are drawn regarding lean/regular/fat fire. I've heard the terms thrown around a bit, but not really with numbers. I'd guess I'm in the regular FIRE zone, currently at $1M and hoping to pull the plug at $1.5M.
There are no lines.
They are vague concepts that you define for yourself based on your own personal needs.
Anyone else think it's kind of weird that Mr. 500 (or whatever his blogger superhero name is) moved to Longmont? Uprooting your family, with young children, so you can fanboy on your favorite blogger? That's one serious man crush on Pete. I wonder if that is awkward for Pete. I kind of hope it is.Wow, Tom, I think you can lighten up a little.
I wish they would have highlighted some of the FIRE folks who didn't so heavily monetize their blogs... My favorite people are ones like LivingaFI/Dr. Doom, who created awesome content, but then didn't cash in on it.We bloggers frequently get interview requests from freelancers, and occasionally from masthead journalists. We tend to refer the people who we know will want to do the interviews. The writers are typically on deadline and not typically interested in chasing down people who don’t seem interested in doing interviews.
Another thing I liked about the article and the way it portrayed the subject was the unconventional pose it used for Scott and Taylor Rieckens, with him sitting and her standing next to the chair he's sitting in, seeming to loom tall... which, in my view, is not a typical pose for heterosexual couples. (I pause here to consider that it may be because she is indeed taller than him [I don't know if this is the case] and this was a way to camouflage something about the couple that might mark them as atypical.) In any case, I really like the pose. And I will follow the links to the FI blogs I didn't know about prior to this article.They’re a perfectly normal family. They’re both about 5’9” (my height), although I didn’t whip out a tape measure. A few months ago I spent a thoroughly enjoyable three hours with them (they were house-sitting by Kauai’s Hanalei Bay) as part of the documentary’s interviews. There was also surfing, although I don’t know whether that’ll make the cut.
But will we see you surfing? That's the good stuff ;-).I sure hope so! No promises, but we were out there for an hour.
I'm actually very curious to see how the movie comes out and what comments it will generate from the public. I suppose it will be mixed reviews like most of the articles. Plus it may only show a small segment of the FIRE population (bloggers like yourself) due to the rest of us ERees hiding when people want to interview us ;-).Ironically most of us bloggers are even more introverted than most people... it’s why we become bloggers in the first place. Otherwise we’d be motivational speakers and YouTube rockstars.
Last week I was at CampFI with over 40 other people who are already on the path to FI. (Although one skeptical spouse really had his eyes opened and has now fully thrown in with the rest of the cult.) I got zero questions about the flaws in the 4% Safe Withdrawal Rate or asset allocation. I got hundreds of questions about “life after FI”. I hope the documentary picks up on that from all of the interview footage.