removed

[tmd012]

.

[bacchi]

1) He doesn't understand that the 4% rule includes inflation.
2) Working for a corporation isn't the only way to get health insurance (for now).
3) Like a lot of high earners, he discounts that living on $40k is pretty good money. Most Americans aren't living in Silly Valley making a Google tech lead's salary.
4) The "career path" defense of working has gotta be sarcasm, right? "As you're on the beach, and your classmates are getting promoted...." Hahahahaha.
5) No social status?! My friends won't respect me because I'm backpacking instead of being in a planning meeting at 9am? OMG!
6) Etc. I've seen enough.

He's criticizing FIRE from the position of someone who likes his career, his title, and his income. It has little bearing on those who don't care about career paths and know what the value of "enough" is.

Nothing new here.

[JZinCO]

I think you took this a little too seriously.  I think he made some good points overall.  I think we tend to glamorize the FIRE life a little too much sometimes.  I think you mean life. You know that thing that people are always trying to make sure work doesn't consume (how many emails are in my work inbox about maintaining work/life balance). At least that's how I view FIRE: The ability to make a decision whether to do this job or that job or however many hours, or not work a job but work on yourself or for volunteer for others..He made a good point saying that anyone can be financially independent if you lower your standards enough.  Just have nothing and be homeless.  boom!  you are financially independent.  Everything in life is a trade-off.  Yeah. That sounds like a Pete thing to say: spend money where your values lie. If a dollar buying financial freedom means more, then save or invest. Otherwise buy that thing. He was clear that he likes to live in a very comfortable home for example. He also has an environmentalist motivation but he also makes it clear that he isn't a staunch minimalist. He just doesn't think that most consumerist behaviors actually add value (and are thus a net drag) a lot of people around here get so obsessed with obtaining the RE part of FIRE that they start to look at their job as a prison sentence.  It usually sounds like the other way around. FIRE attracts them because of low job satisfaction. I think it helps to realize that we all need nothing outside of the basic necessities for survival but we can choose to work in order to improve our situation past that point.  Me working right now isn't a prison sentence, it is something that I am choosing to do to improve my situation and work towards me goal. That's great that you love your current job. So do I. But do you have tenure at your job?

Speaking for myself, I know that I sometimes have a hard time "enjoying the ride" or the "boring middle" and not wanting to just skip to the end of the ride when I am FI and RE.  This video just kind of spoke to me in a way that others didn't and made me realize that I can get carried away sometimes wanting to be FIRED at all costs.  So I thought I would share it.  I definitely LOLed when he said he was financially independent because he left his family and lives in that shed.  Also that his dog is financially independent. 

I just found his channel the other day so I don't know for sure, but I think he might actually be FIRED.  I know he doesn't work at google anymore, I think he might just do some freelance stuff.

In other words I think you missed the point. By far the most common misinterpretation is that you are sacrificing now so you can sacrifice indefinitely.
For me FIRE as an aim is part of a purposeful evaluation of how money can or cannot contribute to creating 'the good life'. Given that, what situation would you rather be in: at your baseline level of happiness without alot invested/saved or at your baseline level of happiness with alot invested/saved? The longer you reach towards FIRE, the greater flexibility you have to choose the life you want to live.

[JZinCO]

tyd450 ,
Hope I wasn't too critical earlier. It's just, now that FIRE is in the mainstream discussion, I commonly read things that distill down to 'FIRE is a dumb idea, instead you should reevaluate your spending, save and invest more, improve your income (or don't if the tradeoff is worth it), and also focus on what makes you happy'. In other words, there are only so many ways to live a financially-secure life so I fail to see how FIRE is damningly worse than other personal finance approaches. Where I think the friction occurs is perhaps more that specific behaviors (like frugality), and attitudes that are correctly, or falsely, attributed to the FIRE community. But FIRE is just a mental model that is build on top of a set of equations.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. By the way, I didn't recognize the first time I read that you had said you are using your job to work towards a goal. That's amazing. I think alot of people are just working because.. that's how bills are paid. Having a goal in mind keeps everything more tolerable. Also, from what others on the forum have posted, I think it is commonplace to not put up with tiny work BS once you are closer to FI. I myself have become more apathetic and career driven (in a way that I don't want to do the things that might ensure a long, successful career. Now I just pursue building professional skillsets that I want to do because its what makes me happy at work).

I also think Arebelspy was correct. I hop back into thinking about FIRE whenever life circumstance change and necessitate a reevaluation. Otherwise I'm on autopilot. Personally, I'm the INTJ type so in every arena of my life I'm going to spend too much time planning and not enough time living. I think FIRE kind of selects for those types of people but it shouldn't reflect on the utility of the principle's behind FIRE. Therefore I reject the critique that FIRE emphasizes putting off today for tomorrow.