At what point is FIRE nothing more than a game?

[helloyou]

I was watching some youtube video from lucky investors and these guys are multi-millionaires. They definitely have over $3M although they didn't disclose their net worth.

During the discussion, the guys were saying that they were just trying to earn more by trading stock but they are wealthy enough to not need any more money.

Trading was just a game, they said. Just like a video game to get a higher score. Nothing else.

I was wondering if it's the same with FIRE. At what point do you feel it's just a game and you don't need to do anymore...?

[Edubb20]

Same could be said for life in general.

For the sake of playing along with the question, i guess my gut says that it becomes a game once the real life consequences of potential changes are minimized to level where they aren't going to dramatically change my quality of life.   

[Telecaster]

People tend to keep the same habits post-FIRE as they do pre-FIRE.  If they enjoyed trading stocks before they got rich, they will probably continue to enjoy trading stocks. 

[Metalcat]

???

FIRE is typically about being able to retire early, or at the very least, be able to never do work they hate ever again, as in, has a tangible real-life impact, so not just a game.

If someone is working a job they don't love, just to amass wealth for the sake of wealth, then this community will be the first place to call them out for it.

[captaincoast]

Well... if your goal is to aspire to FIRE to have time to do your hobbies and enjoy life.... and your hobbies that bring you joy include trading stocks ... its a double edged sword :)

[Metalcat]

Well... if your goal is to aspire to FIRE to have time to do your hobbies and enjoy life.... and your hobbies that bring you joy include trading stocks ... its a double edged sword :)

If you're replying to me, please note I specified that someone would get dragged for staying in a job they don't like to make more money.

I take no issue with anyone making too much money through activities they enjoy.

[wageslave23]

I guess I see FIRE as a game, a very serious consequential game with my mental and physical well being on the line.  Kind of like Hunger Games

[charis]

The pursuit of FIRE feels like a bit a of a game, where I'm in competition with myself to get to the finish line. It's all about strategy.

[TheFrenchCat]

It's definitely not a game to me. Given my health issues, having the option to not work is an incredible safety net that I am diligently working towards.  I  might continue to work after reaching FI for the structure, but that doesn't make it frivolous to me.

[friedmmj]

I'm confused by the question from the OP.   FIRE cannot be a game by definition.  You either get to retire early or you don't.  The guys in the YouTube video are pursuing goals completely different than FIRE.

[helloyou]

Just to be clear from various comments... FIRE for me is not a game. I'm working hard to try to reach it and preserve it.
And I'll do job that pay way better instead of something that seems more interesting... all this for FIRE.

I'm also thinking that once FIRED I'd also be conservative with spending to keep being FIRED.

However... i'm thinking there must be a stage where there is no reason to accumulate more.. and that continuing to increase net worth becomes just an achievement, a milestone, or a game.

[seattlecyclone]

Capitalism is a game with real-world consequences. We're all playing whether we want to or not. It's to your advantage to learn the rules (written and otherwise), formulate a strategy, and obtain a good position for yourself, while trying to minimize the harm you do to the other players. Your score (money) really is just numbers in a database somewhere. We all tend to agree that these database points can be redeemed for real-world goods and services, at least until a critical mass of people decides to flip the game board over. Those at the top of the leaderboard often tend not to come out so well when that happens.

[BicycleB]

@helloyou, you're eliciting some deep thoughts in this thread!

I think it's the point where concern for the future is gone and the joy of the effort remains - if it does. How that maps to actual finances depends on the person's mindset.

[Weisass]

I mean, if it *is* a game, then it is the most boring @SS game I've ever played--
Step One: set up "board"
Step Two: don't spend your money or take stupid risks, let it build compound interest and snowball over a period of years.
Step Three: wait, add more, wait, add more, wait....
Step Four(?): have enough money to stop adding more, and start slowly spending it over a period of decades......

If I want a game, I would much rather play Settlers.

[DireWolf]

Was nothing like a game to me. I made $X, I spent $Y. I was comfortable and X was a good bit more than Y, so I put the extra money away. Yada, Yada, Yada, I was a millionaire. I started thinking about retirement, looking into this whole FIRE thing, and fine-tuned various aspects of my life (I downsized, I cut some wasteful spending). Once I knew how much I truly needed, and how close I already was, it all happened in a few years.

I had one bad experience with trading individual stocks early on, from then on it was solely index funds. I’m actually glad I was most of the way there before I discovered the various forums, blogs, vloggers, etc. I had a coworker point me the right way when I was 23, and soon after read Millionaire Next Door. At some point I read something by Bogle. That was really about it. Just slow and steady.

[bmjohnson35]

I started saving at 20 and walked away from work at 50.  I wouldn't consider 30 yrs of steady saving and investing as a game. 

I can see how some may approach it that way, but that wasn't my personal experience.

 

[Roots&Wings]

Yeah, when you're FI, you've "won the game" as the saying goes. There's no more excuses for not living the life you want, though you could have all along. MadFIentist came to this realization in a recent interview, it was great to hear.

[Metalcat]

Yeah, when you're FI, you've "won the game" as the saying goes. There's no more excuses for not living the life you want, though you could have all along. MadFIentist came to this realization in a recent interview, it was great to hear.

Pete did as well, he said that he didn't have to be nearly as conservative as he was before making a change to the lifestyle he really wanted.

I often refer to FI as a "security blanket".

[Cool Friend]

At what point do you feel it's just a game and you don't need to do anymore...?

We don't need to do any of this. In 100 years we'll all be dead and no one will remember our names, let alone how we earned, saved, and spent our money.

[Metalcat]

At what point do you feel it's just a game and you don't need to do anymore...?

We don't need to do any of this. In 100 years we'll all be dead and no one will remember our names, let alone how we earned, saved, and spent our money.

Exactly.

Also, don't need to do *what* anymore?

Most of us are trying to live our best lives, what is it that I'm supposed to be fed up doing exactly??? What part is supposed to be a waste of my time and energy?

[charis]

At what point do you feel it's just a game and you don't need to do anymore...?

We don't need to do any of this. In 100 years we'll all be dead and no one will remember our names, let alone how we earned, saved, and spent our money.

Exactly.

Also, don't need to do *what* anymore?

Most of us are trying to live our best lives, what is it that I'm supposed to be fed up doing exactly??? What part is supposed to be a waste of my time and energy?

Is that the question(s)?

There are lots of differing perspectives on the OP apparently. I don't read "game" as being so negative. FI is essentially a personal competition that eventually frees us from work. We build a stache, many of us tracking our progress to get there as quickly as we can. 

[Mmm_Donuts]

I guess I see it as "I've won the game" when I reach a feeling of FI and don't need to work anymore. I'm not fully RE yet and of course it's all just numbers, estimates and projections, but there is an emotional component to reaching a goal number.

The feeling of freedom was my original goal with FI, and in life, and I have (more or less) reached it, so I supposed reaching a long-held goal feels something like winning. If I am understanding the question... But "game" is maybe the wrong term, because it seems too frivolous. It's more like - the rat race is over. The race is complete. There was a lot of striving to reach a goal, and now there isn't.

Beyond FI I don't see as a game at all. But I'm not doing the behaviours OP is talking about - I am not investing for fun. I'm also not a gamer, so who knows. People who are into gamification of everything might see investing as a game, but I just don't.

The interesting thing about this question to me is - people seem to be getting into investing now as if it's a game. It's great that investing has become accessible and more democratized and available to all, but I'm not sure the gamification of investing is really all that healthy or sustainable. There will be more and more apps that make it easy to buy single stocks, based on social media buzz rather than company fundamentals. Like the whole Gamestop thing, buying a stock just to mess up the hedge funds who've shorted it; or the aftermath of this - jumping into a stock as it's going up to try to catch some of the upswing without knowing anything about the company, etc. I'm going to sound really old here for a minute but - because my DH and I have talked about investing with people (in general terms) for many years, now a couple of our nieces and nephews (i.e. kids in their 20s) are asking him for investment advice. But they're not looking for the type of advice we have - buy etfs and hold them for a long time - they're looking for hot stock tips. What's the next Gamestop? What stock that's low right now can I jump into and watch it go up 1300%? That kind of thing. Umm.... Sorry kids, don't have an answer for you. I've read a lot of articles about this like it's a new trend, but to me it just seems like a new version of the get rich quick scheme. It's gambling. And it's all fun and games until you lose your life savings!

[Metalcat]

At what point do you feel it's just a game and you don't need to do anymore...?

We don't need to do any of this. In 100 years we'll all be dead and no one will remember our names, let alone how we earned, saved, and spent our money.

Exactly.

Also, don't need to do *what* anymore?

Most of us are trying to live our best lives, what is it that I'm supposed to be fed up doing exactly??? What part is supposed to be a waste of my time and energy?

Is that the question(s)?

There are lots of differing perspectives on the OP apparently. I don't read "game" as being so negative. FI is essentially a personal competition that eventually frees us from work. We build a stache, many of us tracking our progress to get there as quickly as we can.

When someone uses language like "nothing more than a game" and "just a game you don't need to do anymore", that sounds pretty negative to me.

I don't find the term "game" inherently negative, I find the phrasing negative.

[bigblock440]

I was watching some youtube video from lucky investors and these guys are multi-millionaires. They definitely have over $3M although they didn't disclose their net worth.

During the discussion, the guys were saying that they were just trying to earn more by trading stock but they are wealthy enough to not need any more money.

Trading was just a game, they said. Just like a video game to get a higher score. Nothing else.

I was wondering if it's the same with FIRE. At what point do you feel it's just a game and you don't need to do anymore...?

That's the point, right there.  Trading isn't FIRE, trading is their hobby.  That's the whole point of FI, to have enough that money isn't something you have to really worry about anymore, you have enough.  Do whatever you like, if you get more money, ok, if you don't, that's ok too, you already have enough.

[nirodha]

I think past a couple years of living expenses saved, if FIRE is the primary goal, you are gamifying. It might also be a mistake.

I say this having tracked net worth and spending for about 2 decades now, getting all the way to FIRE. I definitely missed out on aspects of life, focused on maximizing that savings percentage. Re-using tea bags wasn't strictly necessary. Nor was working all those evenings and weekends. I spent a lot of time unhappy and stressed out, determined to win.

In hindsight, after a couple years expenses saved, I would have said no to a lot more at work. I would have been more open to spending and consuming, especially small things. I would have used the extra time to learn skills and have experiences, instead of getting all the money.

Frankly, that would have been a lot harder than playing the FIRE game. Chasing money is an easy metric, a substitute for developing worth. It misses the more challenging and rewarding parts of life.

[keyvaluepair]

Well, I made my money the slow and steady way and sold a couple of companies along the way. While I am technically FIRE'd, my 3 fund portfolio hasn't changed - FIRE to me means that I am free to seek the meaning in my lfe that I want unencumbered (mostly) by financial considerations. Since that generally means (for me) hiking. biking and working on interesting technical problems, FIRE isn't a "game", rather it is a re-awakening.

[secondcor521]

However... i'm thinking there must be a stage where there is no reason to accumulate more.. and that continuing to increase net worth becomes just an achievement, a milestone, or a game.

I think after you know you have more than enough for yourself, then it becomes a game.

Unless you have heirs, in which case you may work to make sure there will be more than enough for them.  Then it becomes a game.

Then you get to decide if it's still fun to play.  If so, then you can just run up the score.  That can get boring because you are probably pretty good at the game so there's really not much challenge left and having more is frankly irrelevant in any practical sense.  Or you can decide not to play anymore, and do something else with that time and energy.  I think at that point you've earned the right to do as you like.

[Metalcat]

However... i'm thinking there must be a stage where there is no reason to accumulate more.. and that continuing to increase net worth becomes just an achievement, a milestone, or a game.

I think after you know you have more than enough for yourself, then it becomes a game.

Unless you have heirs, in which case you may work to make sure there will be more than enough for them.  Then it becomes a game.

Then you get to decide if it's still fun to play.  If so, then you can just run up the score.  That can get boring because you are probably pretty good at the game so there's really not much challenge left and having more is frankly irrelevant in any practical sense.  Or you can decide not to play anymore, and do something else with that time and energy.  I think at that point you've earned the right to do as you like.

This all assumes that the only reason someone might still make money after reaching FI is just to become more wealthy. That ignores the ENORMOUS range of reasons why someone might continue to do profitable activities despite not needing to.

That's kind of rich on an MMM forum where Pete himself makes dump trucks worth of money without needing it. Are we assuming he's just accruing wealth for the sake of being more wealthy??

Someone continuing to do a job they despise just for the money, despite them being FI, now that's just stupid. But there are a ton of valid reasons to do profitable work.

I don't need to work anymore for money, but I'm currently debating between 3 different graduate programs so that I can start another career or two. Am I "playing a game" just to make more money so that I can substitute that for self worth? Absolutely not.

For some of us, work is a key part of an ideal life, for others it isn't.

[secondcor521]

However... i'm thinking there must be a stage where there is no reason to accumulate more.. and that continuing to increase net worth becomes just an achievement, a milestone, or a game.

I think after you know you have more than enough for yourself, then it becomes a game.

Unless you have heirs, in which case you may work to make sure there will be more than enough for them.  Then it becomes a game.

Then you get to decide if it's still fun to play.  If so, then you can just run up the score.  That can get boring because you are probably pretty good at the game so there's really not much challenge left and having more is frankly irrelevant in any practical sense.  Or you can decide not to play anymore, and do something else with that time and energy.  I think at that point you've earned the right to do as you like.

This all assumes that the only reason someone might still make money after reaching FI is just to become more wealthy. That ignores the ENORMOUS range of reasons why someone might continue to do profitable activities despite not needing to.

That's kind of rich on an MMM forum where Pete himself makes dump trucks worth of money without needing it. Are we assuming he's just accruing wealth for the sake of being more wealthy??

Someone continuing to do a job they despise just for the money, despite them being FI, now that's just stupid. But there are a ton of valid reasons to do profitable work.

I don't need to work anymore for money, but I'm currently debating between 3 different graduate programs so that I can start another career or two. Am I "playing a game" just to make more money so that I can substitute that for self worth? Absolutely not.

For some of us, work is a key part of an ideal life, for others it isn't.

I wasn't trying to say any of that, and I don't think I did.  I was limiting my discussion to the financial part of life.  From the point of view of finances, there is a point at which it can become a game.

But of course, as you well point out, finances is only a part of life, and not the be all end all.  Certainly it doesn't need to be the motivation for everything for every person at all times, whether they are FI or not.  So your pursuit of an additional degree or career doesn't have to be about the money, and in your case if you're FI and don't want to run up the score, then I believe that it isn't and wouldn't assert otherwise.

[Metalcat]

However... i'm thinking there must be a stage where there is no reason to accumulate more.. and that continuing to increase net worth becomes just an achievement, a milestone, or a game.

I think after you know you have more than enough for yourself, then it becomes a game.

Unless you have heirs, in which case you may work to make sure there will be more than enough for them.  Then it becomes a game.

Then you get to decide if it's still fun to play.  If so, then you can just run up the score.  That can get boring because you are probably pretty good at the game so there's really not much challenge left and having more is frankly irrelevant in any practical sense.  Or you can decide not to play anymore, and do something else with that time and energy.  I think at that point you've earned the right to do as you like.

This all assumes that the only reason someone might still make money after reaching FI is just to become more wealthy. That ignores the ENORMOUS range of reasons why someone might continue to do profitable activities despite not needing to.

That's kind of rich on an MMM forum where Pete himself makes dump trucks worth of money without needing it. Are we assuming he's just accruing wealth for the sake of being more wealthy??

Someone continuing to do a job they despise just for the money, despite them being FI, now that's just stupid. But there are a ton of valid reasons to do profitable work.

I don't need to work anymore for money, but I'm currently debating between 3 different graduate programs so that I can start another career or two. Am I "playing a game" just to make more money so that I can substitute that for self worth? Absolutely not.

For some of us, work is a key part of an ideal life, for others it isn't.

I wasn't trying to say any of that, and I don't think I did.  I was limiting my discussion to the financial part of life.  From the point of view of finances, there is a point at which it can become a game.

But of course, as you well point out, finances is only a part of life, and not the be all end all.  Certainly it doesn't need to be the motivation for everything for every person at all times, whether they are FI or not.  So your pursuit of an additional degree or career doesn't have to be about the money, and in your case if you're FI and don't want to run up the score, then I believe that it isn't and wouldn't assert otherwise.

But my point is that there's a whole spectrum of human motivation as to why people might continue working and making money despite not having to.

You said that you think that if someone has more than enough for themselves that it becomes a game. Well, that assumes that the only reason they are earning more is *just* for the money, which assumes that they get nothing out of continuing to work.

Also, my post was quoting you, but making reference to some other previous posters comments as well.

"Making money" doesn't occur in a vacuum. One has to engage in an activity to do so. The value of that activity needs to be accounted for when assessing whether or not someone is doing something meaningful or "just running up the score".

[secondcor521]

But my point is that there's a whole spectrum of human motivation as to why people might continue working and making money despite not having to.

Understood, and I agree with you.

You said that you think that if someone has more than enough for themselves that it becomes a game. Well, that assumes that the only reason they are earning more is *just* for the money, which assumes that they get nothing out of continuing to work.

Yes, I wrote that, but by "it" I meant finances, not life in general.  So your following assertion about my assumption is inaccurate because it is based on a misunderstanding.  I did not, and do not, assume any such thing.

Also, my post was quoting you, but making reference to some other previous posters comments as well.

OK, no worries.

"Making money" doesn't occur in a vacuum. One has to engage in an activity to do so. The value of that activity needs to be accounted for when assessing whether or not someone is doing something meaningful or "just running up the score".

Again, I agree with you.

[clarkfan1979]

Don't hate the player, hate the game.

[wageslave23]

If I was single, I'd probably have already FIREd just for the challenge to see how cheaply and resourcefully I could live.  And I'd feel like I was giving a big F you to the system.   So that is another way FIRE could be a game