FIREville

[Watchmaker]

A thought experiment:
What could a town/city do to make itself more attractive to the FIREd community?

Follow-up question:
Is attracting FIREd people good for the overall community?

*I'd like to keep this discussion focused on things that can be controlled-- not really talking about things like the weather or geography.

[Watchmaker]

What could a town/city do to make itself more attractive to the FIREd community?

To start things off, a few fairly obvious ones--

Bike friendly.
High walkability.
Good Parks.
Good Library.
Actually, good and plentiful civic spaces in general.

[Cranky]

Do bikes really have to be an integral issue? For me, that would leave out the entire northern half of the US, and probably the Deep South, too.

Instead, I live in a place where housing is cheap and there's not much traffic, so it's just a lot faster to drive than it would be to bike. We've got great parks and an excellent library system. (The weather isn't so hot, though!)

[BrightFIRE]

I don't see how those amenities are specific to people who want to FIRE. I think nice civic spaces are popular everywhere and we could use more of them nationwide.

[Watchmaker]

Do bikes really have to be an integral issue? For me, that would leave out the entire northern half of the US, and probably the Deep South, too.

Instead, I live in a place where housing is cheap and there's not much traffic, so it's just a lot faster to drive than it would be to bike. We've got great parks and an excellent library system. (The weather isn't so hot, though!)

They may not be integral, but a city designed to incorporate meaningful human powered transport (walking, biking) should be able to offer a lower cost of living, all else being equal.

It's faster for you to drive places, but it isn't cheaper.

[Watchmaker]

I don't see how those amenities are specific to people who want to FIRE. I think nice civic spaces are popular everywhere and we could use more of them nationwide.

I also don't think interest in them is limited to those who are FIREd, but that's not really the question. Many things that would attract a FIREd person would also be valuable to a non-FIREd person.

[Loren Ver]

Favorable taxes of all sorts (income and buying stuff).  Favorable doesn't mean none, but it can't be egregious as it eats the stash.  It also helps if it is linked to services.

Areas that invite community.

All the services one might need as they grow older, several of them so prices are competitive.

Places that need volunteers, that the community needs.

[nippycrisp]

Link from the last time someone trotted out the same question: https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/creating-'mustachian-ville'/

[Watchmaker]

Link from the last time someone trotted out the same question: https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/creating-'mustachian-ville'/

Thanks for the link, but I've seen it and it's not really the same question I'm asking. I'm not interested in talking about building a FIRE community, but rather whether existing communities benefit from having FIREd residents (vs "normal" residents), and if they do, how could they make themselves more attractive to that demographic?   

I've been getting some responses to the one part, but I'm equally interested in the other part--are FIREd people a net good for the community?

I have my own opinion, but I'll reserve that for now.

[Watchmaker]

Areas that invite community.

Any more specific thoughts around this? I know it can be a nebulous thing, but I'm interested in hearing about concrete things that could be done. Starting a community garden, perhaps? Tool lending library?

[simonsez]

A thought experiment:
What could a town/city do to make itself more attractive to the FIREd community?

Follow-up question:
Is attracting FIREd people good for the overall community?

It's not necessarily one or the other - but I could see two schools of thought that are essentially the opposite of one another.  On one hand having civic amenities, frequent community events, infrastructure geared toward mass transit and pedestrians, etc. would be fantastic provided that type of FIREd person is okay with higher local and/or state taxes.  On the other end, nothing at all or very minimal standards would be ideal for those that like to spend most of the time enjoying their own space and would not be utilizing much in the community and thus would not want to spend tax dollars on that.

At large, I expect those that had the financial strength and whatever brains and/or luck required to retire earlier than the norm would be good for an area.  The more FIREes you have in an area, the more services and jobs would be created, perhaps less so than the average citizen consuming goods but still a positive effect.  But, I don't think it matters that much on a micro level.  I'd rather have a neighbor who is FIRE'd compared to an average Joe only because:
a) their career/life story is probably interesting or they have hobbies that benefit me in a direct or indirect way
2) their peripherals are better (likely to be more informed as a citizen, lower odds of petty criminal activities, etc.)
d) if they aren't traveling they can make sure my Amazon packages don't get stolen ;-)
but I'm fine with my current neighbors (not FIREd).

In short, YMMV.

[Cranky]

Do bikes really have to be an integral issue? For me, that would leave out the entire northern half of the US, and probably the Deep South, too.

Instead, I live in a place where housing is cheap and there's not much traffic, so it's just a lot faster to drive than it would be to bike. We've got great parks and an excellent library system. (The weather isn't so hot, though!)

They may not be integral, but a city designed to incorporate meaningful human powered transport (walking, biking) should be able to offer a lower cost of living, all else being equal.

It's faster for you to drive places, but it isn't cheaper.

But it's actually not very expensive to drive, once you get outside of big cities. Our car insurance is cheap and nothing is very far away so we don't spend much on gas. Biking/walking win out in congested areas, but are just slow ways to get around in bad weather in other places.

[bacchi]

They may not be integral, but a city designed to incorporate meaningful human powered transport (walking, biking) should be able to offer a lower cost of living, all else being equal.

It's faster for you to drive places, but it isn't cheaper.

But it's actually not very expensive to drive, once you get outside of big cities. Our car insurance is cheap and nothing is very far away so we don't spend much on gas. Biking/walking win out in congested areas, but are just slow ways to get around in bad weather in other places.

It's not that expensive to drive in a city, either (unless you're talking Manhattan and $$$ parking spots), but it's not about the direct individual costs.

No state in the US can afford its roads through only the gas tax. Some part of any municipality's general funds go to roads and bridges.

There's also the fact that increased density, which human powered transport would encourage, is cheaper than a sprawling city running pipes and roads everywhere.

[Cranky]

Define "good for". The bottom line is what's "good for" an area is residents who pay lots of taxes and don't need many services, and that doesn't seem to fit the FIRE ideal. Those great schools and bike paths and parks and public libraries are expensive to run.

Honestly, I think that my area is great for retirement because housing is cheap and the overall COL is so low. Employment is iffy, but if you're retiring, who cares. Nothing is very far away, so driving is not using up lots of resources.

But what people really want is San Francisco, but super cheap. Not gonna happen.

[bacchi]

* Sales taxes would take a hit simply because there would be fewer consumer purposes. If the town/state is income tax dependent, that would hurt even more.

* There would be more active citizens working to make the community better. Mustachians are good with finances and more civic engagement is always better.

* Motivated, thoughtful, people may be more inclined to think of innovative solutions for problems. Instead of rebuilding near the flooding river every 2-3 years, mustachians may vote to just make the riverside into a (floodplain) park. https://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/19/science/earth/as-coasts-rebuild-and-us-pays-again-critics-stop-to-ask-why.html

[Zikoris]

Well, we're in the process of finding our FIRE home, and here are some of the (controllable) things that really appeal to us in a potential location:

- Totally walkable, bikeable, and suitable for car-free living.
- Lax-ish bylaws that allow us to build exactly what we want to live in, which is a tiny house or cabin that's around 400-500 square feet (minimum square footage can be a problem in a lot of places).
- Lots of green spaces - parks, hiking trails, nice places to bike, etc.
- Some sort of connections to a major center that don't require a car. For example, one community I looked at had a daily shuttle service to the nearest city, and some island communities have a frequent 20 minute ferry to the nearest city.
- Really good quality food available. A couple of the islands we're looking at have local farmers who sell produce directly from their farms, which is a huge plus.
- A strong sense of community.
- An abundance of free and low cost options for entertainment.

I think FIREd people are awesome myself, so of course they're great for overall communities :) But seriously, I think early retirees are way more likely to get involved in their local communities just by virtue of having more time an energy. And we're a particularly good addition to smaller towns with more unemployment, because we don't take jobs from people who are already there, but still contribute to the local economy by buying stuff and paying taxes.

[jim555]

Sounds like The Villages in Florida, everyone rides around in golf carts.

[EnjoyIt]

Great question. 

Personally I think a great area to retire in should have an easily accessible grocery store with good fresh produce and meats.  A market would be better but not necessary.  The area also needs to have ways of entertaining yourself such as a good movie theater, local park, maybe bike trails.  I would also need a nearby gym facility with a pool.  Lastly, I need nature that is easily accessible for hiking, maybe skiing and/or maybe paddling.

Is FIRE good for a community?  I would say people who FIRE because they have the Social Security and wealth to do so are excellent for the community as they bring in money without taking up jobs.  Someone who lives totally on social services is a blight on the community as they absorb more resources than they bring in. This statement excludes Social Security and Medicare since those are resources the person has paid for via years of working. Just a very basic example are retirement communities in Florida vs trailer parks full of unemployed and factitiously disabled people.  One is good for the area while the other is a blight.

[moof]

But it's actually not very expensive to drive, once you get outside of big cities. Our car insurance is cheap and nothing is very far away so we don't spend much on gas. Biking/walking win out in congested areas, but are just slow ways to get around in bad weather in other places.

50 cents a mile, give or take a bit.   Adds up, gieven than most folks drive 10-15k miles a year per car.  My biking runs me about half that, and I get great excercise to boot.

[PhilB]

A thought experiment:
What could a town/city do to make itself more attractive to the FIREd community?

For me a small town where local government that wherever possible focussed on enabling and encouraging volunteers rather than providing services itself - lower taxes, better sense of community, etc, etc.

[Cranky]

But it's actually not very expensive to drive, once you get outside of big cities. Our car insurance is cheap and nothing is very far away so we don't spend much on gas. Biking/walking win out in congested areas, but are just slow ways to get around in bad weather in other places.

50 cents a mile, give or take a bit.   Adds up, gieven than most folks drive 10-15k miles a year per car.  My biking runs me about half that, and I get great excercise to boot.

And do you bike 15,000 miles/year?

[Freedomin5]

My parents live in a community with lots of well-heeled FIRE-ees. What attracted them was:

- Reaosnable housing prices
- Clean green spaces
- Relaxing park-like setting
- “Free” leisure activities such as indoor pool, tennis courts, squash courts, exercise room, community center with interest groups and social clubs, library (I say “free” but there is a monthly maintenance fee that’s reasonable)
- Community support - e.g., bereavement groups, meals on wheels type services, helping hand volunteer group where you can ask someone to drive you to appointments
- Friendly residents/neighbors
- Closr to major city with airport, hospital, grocery stores

I think a town can really benefit from attracting FIRE-ees. They tend to be well-educated and accomplished professionals in their respective career fields. They also tend to be younger and have the energy and passion to use their talents and expertise to serve their community. They tend to be driven and because they have the time and energy, they tend to care about their community and get involved in making it a better place through serving on committees or otherwise volunteering their time.

Apparently, my parents’ community has become so popular that prices have tripled in the past five years so housing prices aren’t quite so reasonable any more.

[Loren Ver]

Areas that invite community.

Any more specific thoughts around this? I know it can be a nebulous thing, but I'm interested in hearing about concrete things that could be done. Starting a community garden, perhaps? Tool lending library?

Various, as FIREd people are all kinds of people (this forum also only represents a part of the whole).  Others have mentioned libraries.  Others like walking or hiking/biking paths.  Other will want splash pads for kids, and community gardens.  Few of those things actually appeal to me personally, but I want an area and is good for lots of types of people, not people just like me.  DH and I are more home bodies than going out bodies, but having a town that is designed for that wouldn't be good for others.

Link from the last time someone trotted out the same question: https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/creating-'mustachian-ville'/

  I've been getting some responses to the one part, but I'm equally interested in the other part--are FIREd people a net good for the community?

I have my own opinion, but I'll reserve that for now.

So for your other part, I don't think they are good or bad.  100% either way would be bad.  Not all FIREd people are civic minded, low spenders, friendly to others or good parents.  All working people aren't un-civic minded, high spenders. unfriendly to others or bad parents.  People are who and what they are, money just exacerbates the personality types.   

Look at places that attract retirees, sure there is some age bias, but they are people being people.

LV

[Gyosho]

My parents live in a community with lots of well-heeled FIRE-ees. What attracted them was:

- Reaosnable housing prices
- Clean green spaces
- Relaxing park-like setting
- “Free” leisure activities such as indoor pool, tennis courts, squash courts, exercise room, community center with interest groups and social clubs, library (I say “free” but there is a monthly maintenance fee that’s reasonable)
- Community support - e.g., bereavement groups, meals on wheels type services, helping hand volunteer group where you can ask someone to drive you to appointments
- Friendly residents/neighbors
- Closr to major city with airport, hospital, grocery stores

I think a town can really benefit from attracting FIRE-ees. They tend to be well-educated and accomplished professionals in their respective career fields. They also tend to be younger and have the energy and passion to use their talents and expertise to serve their community. They tend to be driven and because they have the time and energy, they tend to care about their community and get involved in making it a better place through serving on committees or otherwise volunteering their time.

Apparently, my parents’ community has become so popular that prices have tripled in the past five years so housing prices aren’t quite so reasonable any more.

Where is this place? I'm ready to move there.

[simonsez]

Is FIRE good for a community?  I would say people who FIRE because they have the Social Security and wealth to do so are excellent for the community as they bring in money without taking up jobs.  Someone who lives totally on social services is a blight on the community as they absorb more resources than they bring in. This statement excludes Social Security and Medicare since those are resources the person has paid for via years of working. Just a very basic example are retirement communities in Florida vs trailer parks full of unemployed and factitiously disabled people.  One is good for the area while the other is a blight.

Yikes!  If someone lives in a trailer regardless of FIRE status I would not judge them one iota.  There are plenty of great people from all walks of life that live in vastly different domiciles.  Maybe trailer parks do have a higher proportion of societal warts but I wouldn't condemn the whole lot.  If anyone is receiving dubious disability payments, then sure - fuck 'em.  Yes, if someone is able-bodied and of sound mind and chooses not to work and simply live off the government teat their entire adult lives, they are a blight and it's unfortunate they weren't terminated for a few hundred bucks many moons ago instead of costing taxpayers an order or two of magnitude more.  But then again I also wouldn't call them FIREd and relevant to this discussion.  From the bolded above, I don't think someone can live totally on social services AND be FIRE.  I think the FI part of the equation is missing there.

Generally I don't worry too much about what services, if any, a FIREd person is receiving due to the hundreds of thousands they paid in taxes during their main working career.  Plus, the instance of a FIREd person living mainly on social assistance has to be pretty rare as there are some program requirements that would be hard to follow without outright deceit - which is a different story.  For example, if I was FIREd and qualified for SNAP via meeting the low income requirement I still would not want to participate in that program since that would also mean I could not have more than $2250 (!) in a bank account in order to satisfy the resource requirement.  I am much too lazy and don't want to worry about such a low threshold when I will have much better things to worry about during retirement.  But if someone does want to go that route and can navigate those waters, good for them.  I personally don't understand the delineation with SS and Medicare.  You pay into those over many years and receive a benefit at a later point.  I mean, if you got a pie chart breaking down the programs your tax dollars go to fund in a given year while working - would that somehow give someone more legitimacy to other programs and any potential benefit received down the road since it can be "proven" they paid into a system?  If someone qualifies, so be it.  If too many are qualifying for a system not intended for them, change the rules of the system.

[simonsez]

My parents live in a community with lots of well-heeled FIRE-ees. What attracted them was:

- Reaosnable housing prices
- Clean green spaces
- Relaxing park-like setting
- “Free” leisure activities such as indoor pool, tennis courts, squash courts, exercise room, community center with interest groups and social clubs, library (I say “free” but there is a monthly maintenance fee that’s reasonable)
- Community support - e.g., bereavement groups, meals on wheels type services, helping hand volunteer group where you can ask someone to drive you to appointments
- Friendly residents/neighbors
- Closr to major city with airport, hospital, grocery stores

I think a town can really benefit from attracting FIRE-ees. They tend to be well-educated and accomplished professionals in their respective career fields. They also tend to be younger and have the energy and passion to use their talents and expertise to serve their community. They tend to be driven and because they have the time and energy, they tend to care about their community and get involved in making it a better place through serving on committees or otherwise volunteering their time.

Apparently, my parents’ community has become so popular that prices have tripled in the past five years so housing prices aren’t quite so reasonable any more.

Where is this place? I'm ready to move there.

Where is this place?  I'm ready to invest in it!

[letsdoit]

What could a town/city do to make itself more attractive to the FIREd community?

To start things off, a few fairly obvious ones--

Bike friendly.
High walkability.
Good Parks.
Good Library.

Actually, good and plentiful civic spaces in general.

be like Bend OR

[Watchmaker]

It's not necessarily one or the other - but I could see two schools of thought that are essentially the opposite of one another.  On one hand having civic amenities, frequent community events, infrastructure geared toward mass transit and pedestrians, etc. would be fantastic provided that type of FIREd person is okay with higher local and/or state taxes.  On the other end, nothing at all or very minimal standards would be ideal for those that like to spend most of the time enjoying their own space and would not be utilizing much in the community and thus would not want to spend tax dollars on that.

I think you are right that there are probably two groups with opposing desires: the "civic" wing and the "libertarian wing" of FIRE-ees. What attracts one group probably puts the other one off.

At large, I expect those that had the financial strength and whatever brains and/or luck required to retire earlier than the norm would be good for an area.  The more FIREes you have in an area, the more services and jobs would be created, perhaps less so than the average citizen consuming goods but still a positive effect.

As you say, they still participate in the local economy-- probably at a lower rate then average. But they do so without "taking up" a job.

[Watchmaker]

I think FIREd people are awesome myself, so of course they're great for overall communities :) But seriously, I think early retirees are way more likely to get involved in their local communities just by virtue of having more time an energy.

This is related to how I got on the subject. My experience of towns and small cities in America is that many of them don't have the "critical mass" of engaged citizens necessary to maintain a vital community. FIRE-ees, on average, would have more time available, so they might be more prone to civic engagement, though I think the point made above that is is only a subset of FIRE-ees is true. 

And we're a particularly good addition to smaller towns with more unemployment, because we don't take jobs from people who are already there, but still contribute to the local economy by buying stuff and paying taxes.

I should have read this before my last post, as I've just repeated you.

[moof]

But it's actually not very expensive to drive, once you get outside of big cities. Our car insurance is cheap and nothing is very far away so we don't spend much on gas. Biking/walking win out in congested areas, but are just slow ways to get around in bad weather in other places.

50 cents a mile, give or take a bit.   Adds up, given than most folks drive 10-15k miles a year per car.  My biking runs me about half that, and I get great exercise to boot.

And do you bike 15,000 miles/year?

About 4k miles a year.  I do a lot more things like grabbing groceries on the way home, where as when I drove more it would be a separate trip.  I also take light rail a lot more when going places like the local zoo with my kid.  My biking has changed a number of behaviors and is not simply a replacement for driving.  I don't drive to the gym mid-week for example.

The ease of hopping in a car encourages racking up miles if you have the "driving is cheap" mindset.  The eventual replacement cost of the car is rarely factored into people's though process, and once you look at every trip in total dollars instead of just cost of gas it becomes alarming how much a side trip to buy onsie-twosie items really costs.

YMMV.

[EnjoyIt]

Is FIRE good for a community?  I would say people who FIRE because they have the Social Security and wealth to do so are excellent for the community as they bring in money without taking up jobs.  Someone who lives totally on social services is a blight on the community as they absorb more resources than they bring in. This statement excludes Social Security and Medicare since those are resources the person has paid for via years of working. Just a very basic example are retirement communities in Florida vs trailer parks full of unemployed and factitiously disabled people.  One is good for the area while the other is a blight.

Yikes!  If someone lives in a trailer regardless of FIRE status I would not judge them one iota.  There are plenty of great people from all walks of life that live in vastly different domiciles.  Maybe trailer parks do have a higher proportion of societal warts but I wouldn't condemn the whole lot.  If anyone is receiving dubious disability payments, then sure - fuck 'em.  Yes, if someone is able-bodied and of sound mind and chooses not to work and simply live off the government teat their entire adult lives, they are a blight and it's unfortunate they weren't terminated for a few hundred bucks many moons ago instead of costing taxpayers an order or two of magnitude more.  But then again I also wouldn't call them FIREd and relevant to this discussion.  From the bolded above, I don't think someone can live totally on social services AND be FIRE.  I think the FI part of the equation is missing there.

I guess I should have emphasized the living off the government teat part as opposed to the whole lot of people living in trailer parks which is was poorly trying to say.

In my line of work I get to meet these people regularly.  Young, able bodied people living their lives on government handouts with no real desire to work.  They are a blight on a community.

[Freedomin5]

My parents live in a community with lots of well-heeled FIRE-ees. What attracted them was:

- Reaosnable housing prices
- Clean green spaces
- Relaxing park-like setting
- “Free” leisure activities such as indoor pool, tennis courts, squash courts, exercise room, community center with interest groups and social clubs, library (I say “free” but there is a monthly maintenance fee that’s reasonable)
- Community support - e.g., bereavement groups, meals on wheels type services, helping hand volunteer group where you can ask someone to drive you to appointments
- Friendly residents/neighbors
- Closr to major city with airport, hospital, grocery stores

I think a town can really benefit from attracting FIRE-ees. They tend to be well-educated and accomplished professionals in their respective career fields. They also tend to be younger and have the energy and passion to use their talents and expertise to serve their community. They tend to be driven and because they have the time and energy, they tend to care about their community and get involved in making it a better place through serving on committees or otherwise volunteering their time.

Apparently, my parents’ community has become so popular that prices have tripled in the past five years so housing prices aren’t quite so reasonable any more.

Where is this place? I'm ready to move there.

Where is this place?  I'm ready to invest in it!

Canada. It’s a gated, planned “active living” community just north of Toronto. When my parents bought it was $350-$400k for a house. Houses now go for $700k (for the older first phase homes) all the way up to over a million for the newer phases. Maintenance fees are about $400/month and include free use of all the amenities. Attracts a lot of white collar FI types, as well as active retirees.

[Gyosho]

My parents live in a community with lots of well-heeled FIRE-ees. What attracted them was:

- Reaosnable housing prices
- Clean green spaces
- Relaxing park-like setting
- “Free” leisure activities such as indoor pool, tennis courts, squash courts, exercise room, community center with interest groups and social clubs, library (I say “free” but there is a monthly maintenance fee that’s reasonable)
- Community support - e.g., bereavement groups, meals on wheels type services, helping hand volunteer group where you can ask someone to drive you to appointments
- Friendly residents/neighbors
- Closr to major city with airport, hospital, grocery stores

I think a town can really benefit from attracting FIRE-ees. They tend to be well-educated and accomplished professionals in their respective career fields. They also tend to be younger and have the energy and passion to use their talents and expertise to serve their community. They tend to be driven and because they have the time and energy, they tend to care about their community and get involved in making it a better place through serving on committees or otherwise volunteering their time.

Apparently, my parents’ community has become so popular that prices have tripled in the past five years so housing prices aren’t quite so reasonable any more.

Where is this place? I'm ready to move there.

Where is this place?  I'm ready to invest in it!

Canada. It’s a gated, planned “active living” community just north of Toronto. When my parents bought it was $350-$400k for a house. Houses now go for $700k (for the older first phase homes) all the way up to over a million for the newer phases. Maintenance fees are about $400/month and include free use of all the amenities. Attracts a lot of white collar FI types, as well as active retirees.

Shucks. I'm American. AND I don't like cold weather.

[Bird In Hand]

Canada. It’s a gated, planned “active living” community just north of Toronto. When my parents bought it was $350-$400k for a house. Houses now go for $700k (for the older first phase homes) all the way up to over a million for the newer phases. Maintenance fees are about $400/month and include free use of all the amenities. Attracts a lot of white collar FI types, as well as active retirees.

Shucks. I'm American. AND I don't like cold weather.

Nor (presumably) paying $700k-$1MM+ for housing?  Unless you're coming from a very HCOL area during your working years, that kind of housing cost would put an outsized dent in many (most?) people's FIRE budgets.

[Watchmaker]

Is having independently wealth, smart, hardworking people with decent amounts of free time good for a community? I think the answer is self evident.

It's not completely obvious to me (hence the question). My opinion is that more FIRE-ees, particularly civic-minded ones, would be a positive thing for most communities. But I'm interested in challenging that belief.

It seems fairly plausible that the average FIRE-ee would pay less local and state taxes than the average citizen (through lower consumption and better planning). It also seems plausible that they would consume just as many services, or even more, than the average citizen (I'm much less certain about this part).

In an area with a tight labor market and small housing stock, you could argue that FIRE-ees would be driving up the housing costs and preventing potential workers from living there.   

You could also question the apparent positives you talked about. An independently wealthy, smart, hard working person with decent amounts of free time would be a good thing for a community if they act as a member of the community. But not all FIRE-ees are in that "civic-minded" mold, and some are pretty much going to keep to themselves--which is totally fine, but would negate some of the positives you talked about.

[Gyosho]

Canada. It’s a gated, planned “active living” community just north of Toronto. When my parents bought it was $350-$400k for a house. Houses now go for $700k (for the older first phase homes) all the way up to over a million for the newer phases. Maintenance fees are about $400/month and include free use of all the amenities. Attracts a lot of white collar FI types, as well as active retirees.

Shucks. I'm American. AND I don't like cold weather.

Nor (presumably) paying $700k-$1MM+ for housing?  Unless you're coming from a very HCOL area during your working years, that kind of housing cost would put an outsized dent in many (most?) people's FIRE budgets.

I live in a very HCOL with fantastic weather. I can't imagine paying what I pay here to have to endure SNOW!

But it's getting kind of crowded here.

[Just Joe]

I think you are right that there are probably two groups with opposing desires: the "civic" wing and the "libertarian wing" of FIRE-ees. What attracts one group probably puts the other one off.

Would the libertarian not prefer the boonies since they may not want to pay for gov't services such as libraries, bike paths and parks? If that be the case then there are more places for people like that than well equipped towns with public services and comforts. 

[Freedomin5]

Canada. It’s a gated, planned “active living” community just north of Toronto. When my parents bought it was $350-$400k for a house. Houses now go for $700k (for the older first phase homes) all the way up to over a million for the newer phases. Maintenance fees are about $400/month and include free use of all the amenities. Attracts a lot of white collar FI types, as well as active retirees.

Shucks. I'm American. AND I don't like cold weather.

Nor (presumably) paying $700k-$1MM+ for housing?  Unless you're coming from a very HCOL area during your working years, that kind of housing cost would put an outsized dent in many (most?) people's FIRE budgets.

Yup, that's why I ended with saying it's not quite so reasonable any more. It used to be reasonable if you got in when housing was only $250K (first phase), even up to $350K, which is around what my parents paid. But the other things still hold true in terms of attracting FIRE-ees.

[Freedomin5]

Canada. It’s a gated, planned “active living” community just north of Toronto. When my parents bought it was $350-$400k for a house. Houses now go for $700k (for the older first phase homes) all the way up to over a million for the newer phases. Maintenance fees are about $400/month and include free use of all the amenities. Attracts a lot of white collar FI types, as well as active retirees.

Shucks. I'm American. AND I don't like cold weather.

Nor (presumably) paying $700k-$1MM+ for housing?  Unless you're coming from a very HCOL area during your working years, that kind of housing cost would put an outsized dent in many (most?) people's FIRE budgets.

Yup, that's why I ended with saying it's not quite so reasonable any more. It used to be reasonable if you got in when housing was only $250K (first phase), even up to $350K, which is around what my parents paid. But the other things still hold true in terms of attracting FIRE-ees.

My Mom lived in a gated "Active 55 plus" retirement community in SoCal and it was/is very inexpensive (under $200k) to buy a one or two bedroom co-OP apt or condo there and pretty much has everything mentioned in this thread - including that warm SoCal beach weather (www.lwsb.com). But, while its a cool comunnity of approx 10k people with tons of activities, recreation, etc I doubt it would appeal to a lot of younger FIREees who may want more diversity in age and social lives. There are gazillion other "Active 55 plus" types of communities out there plus a lot of co-housing and Intentional communities ( https://www.ic.org) younger people and families/couples which share a lot of mustashian values. Neither would appeal to me as a single childless FIREee but I can see the attraction.

ETA: to many Americans Canada is a "gated planned active-living community" in and of itself ;-).

Yes, there are some active living communities that do not have the age requirement. My parents' community is one of those. We are starting to see younger families in the community.

[letsdoit]

i like canada but i cant move there bc i've never taken a wrist shot from the blue line
sorry that was cheap