Author Topic: These people left their jobs behind to retire early — then life got in the way.  (Read 15993 times)

Monkey Uncle

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1740
  • Location: West-by-god-Virginia
http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/retirement/these-people-left-their-jobs-behind-to-retire-early-%e2%80%94-then-life-got-in-the-way-here%e2%80%99s-how-they-coped-with-fire-plans-gone-wrong/ar-BBQftZW?li=BBnbfcL

Another FIRE-hating article.  Seems like there's a new one every week now.

News flash: if you plan poorly, start out with a stash that is half the size that you calculated you would need, and/or invest a chunk of your net worth in unsecure speculative junk, FIRE probably isn't going to work out for you.

Miss Piggy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1549
News flash: if you plan poorly, start out with a stash that is half the size that you calculated you would need, and/or invest a chunk of your net worth in unsecure speculative junk, FIRE probably isn't going to work out for you.

I'll add: If your backup plan is moving back in with your parents, maybe you haven't planned well enough.

chemistk

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1739
  • Location: Mid-Atlantic
Fear! Doom! Caution!

Then at the end:   

Quote
Advice for those considering ‘FIRE’
No matter what age you’re planning to retire, spend time beforehand imagining what you want your life to look like, Norris of SoFi said. That will help you “assign a price tag to your retirement goal,” she said.

And if you save too little, it doesn’t have to be a disaster.

You may be able to re-enter the workforce. You may have to reduce your spending as much as you can. Homeowners might have to consider a reverse mortgage, which means converting part of your home equity to cash.

Just consider the unknowns that could come up, including market volatility, long-term care needs and any changes in the tax code that could come up, Norris said.

And if you’re like Merz, you can take it in stride.

I get that it's an easy article to write that will generate a number of guaranteed hits, but why...why does every one of these miss the point? Heck, the author actually touched on it a few times, and with some simple narrative rearrangement, it could have been an article about a few success stories and a few "we tried, failed, but are better for it" pieces.

None of the quoted regret their decisions....

Chuck Ditallin

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 67
I can't see any harm in taking a huge risk in your 20s, with a small chance that you end up with the lifestyle you covet. Ending up living with your parents again is no worse than never having left in the first place.

It's a very different thing to the considered FIRE of a more mature person.

Otherwise, the article featured some people with varying degrees of bad luck and bad planning. Hey ho, them's the breaks.

In my life, I would still rather take the risk and accept the chance of failure than sit around too scared and paralysed by 'what if..?'s to take any action. It took me until I was 50 to have been in the same job/school, house and relationship/relationship status for 5 consecutive years. Some of the changes were predictable (going to a different school at various ages), some self-inflicted (becoming self-employed, moving business premises) and some were unplanned (divorce). The best I have managed is 8 years of stability in all three... and having semi-retired with full FIRE next year, I won't beat my record until I'm 62 (if all goes well..!)

I don't think that I'm unusual; in fact, my career choice aged 7 turned out to be my career til this day. Risk and change is good!

(edit: clarity and a spelling)
« Last Edit: November 30, 2018, 06:21:43 AM by Chuck Ditallin »

use2betrix

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2492
]

Another FIRE-hating article.  Seems like there's a new one every week now.


Seems like there’s a thread like every week to talk about it, too. If people are worried about articles like this giving them second thoughts on FIRE, they probably shouldn’t.

Milizard

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 769
  • Location: West Michigan
I spotted this story yesterday, and it reeks of an author fishing for the most pathetic examples to prove a point.

mathlete

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2070
I'm a fan of these cautionary tales. I'm on the record as thinking that there are a good number of people out there "doing it wrong". Maybe even some in this community.

YttriumNitrate

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1836
  • Location: Northwest Indiana
It's unfortunate the author did such a superficial review of multiple people rather than probing more into their individual circumstances. For example, why did the person with just $60,000 in non-401(k) assets think it would be a good idea to retire in their 20s?

Monkey Uncle

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1740
  • Location: West-by-god-Virginia
]

Another FIRE-hating article.  Seems like there's a new one every week now.


Seems like there’s a thread like every week to talk about it, too. If people are worried about articles like this giving them second thoughts on FIRE, they probably shouldn’t.

I'm not worried.  I just like piling on. ;)

Monkey Uncle

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1740
  • Location: West-by-god-Virginia
Ending up living with your parents again is no worse than never having left in the first place.

Tell that to the parents. Yikes.

Cassie

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7946
Most of the people didn’t have enough to retire so it was just dumb.

coppertop

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 458
Most of the people didn’t have enough to retire so it was just dumb.

Exactly.  Who can retire in their 20s with no more than $200,000 total assets?  That was a disaster just waiting to happen.

jim555

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3235
Millennials screwing up early retirement, not surprising. 

Disclaimer: GenX poster

soccerluvof4

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7161
  • Location: Artic Midwest
  • Retired at 50
    • My Journal
Safe to say you can find success and failure in anything, any business etc.. Bottom line she said she didnt regret it and learned from it. The Couple where she died of Cancer there plan worked out, its sad what happened but they planned and everyone can go back and say it should of done this , this or this. Was a pretty weak article and somehow all these articles now are including Suzie Ormans ridiculous statements. Like anything it comes down to preparing best you can and calculating the risk. No matter when you retire even at what "Social society" might seem acceptable there is risk.

brooklynmoney

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 707
  • Location: Crooklyn
I like how the author throws in at the end that you might have to take out a reverse mortgage to tap your home equity. Oh ok /s.

TomTX

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5345
  • Location: Texas
I like how the author throws in at the end that you might have to take out a reverse mortgage to tap your home equity. Oh ok /s.

Or a HEL(OC).

2Birds1Stone

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7916
  • Age: 1
  • Location: Earth
  • K Thnx Bye
I'm a fan of these cautionary tales. I'm on the record as thinking that there are a good number of people out there "doing it wrong". Maybe even some in this community.

Would you mind elaborating on that? I may be one of those people -_-

Much Fishing to Do

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1140
I guess I dont understand what went wrong in the initial story.

"The rental property was too complicated to manage from far away." (So sell it and buy one closer...or sell it and invest the proceeds in another way?)

She found that she hated freelancing. (So the problem with FIRE is you might hate your job that you need for income?  Huh?)

Because of some technicalities, she wasn’t able to access her pension yet. (She expected to draw a pension that pays any significant amount for any significant period after retiring at the age of 27? Really?)

There were fewer bites than expected on her Etsy projects. (So the problem with FIRE is your business might not be profitable?  Huh?)

And she and her boyfriend broke up. (So living off a boyfriend is considered being FI?, as I assume anyone just needing to share expenses can get a roommate. Heck, I'd think the 'backup plan' of living off your parents is probably a better one)

I guess I dont understand the next story.

They "FIRE'd" with half of what they thought they needed?  (Did the cut their expenses in half or just say what the heck?)
Losing 3% of their investments thru the crypto hack destroyed them?  (Pretty sure I lost 3% of my investments Thanksgiving week...and that was just market fluctuations)

For the Liz story all I can think is thank goodness they were planning for FIRE...losing one income would destroy most families financially.  They were probably already living off of just one.  Or is this just a "reaching FIRE may be tougher than you initially think and you may have to adapt and it may take longer" story, which sounds right........

For the losing your partner story...Heck, isnt not needing eitehr parents' income the best place to be for when this happens?  Or is this just a "reaching FIRE may be tougher than you initially think and you may have to adapt and it may take longer" story, which sounds right........

alright, tired of reading this article now

TomTX

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5345
  • Location: Texas
I guess I dont understand what went wrong in the initial story.

"The rental property was too complicated to manage from far away." (So sell it and buy one closer...or sell it and invest the proceeds in another way?)
Or pay a management company ~7% to deal with the hassles. You should have enough cash flow margin to cover it.

tralfamadorian

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1217
Ugh. I remember stumbling onto the first person's blog during the first couple months after she quit her job. In no shape or form was she ever FIRE or even "barista" FIRE. Her rental was a POS D class multifamily with lots of expensive deferred maintenance that she managed herself. Then she took in tenants without doing any credit or reference check so, of course, they had to be evicted after a short period of time. Her non-retirement funds were in the five figures.

MrThatsDifferent

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2317
What lazy reporting. Those were not case studies of FIRE. They had 2 stories out of 6 I think that would even fall under FIRE and neither of those followed any of the rules. Both examples under saved and under invested. The second somewhat on point example, the couple who had their crypto money stolen under saved and haven’t been ruined, they just are pissed at losing that money. What an odd article. The author could have contacted actual FIRE people and found ones who had to deal with death, divorce and any number of shit things happen to see how people actually cope. Or do some articles about people who work their whole lives, retire when they’re supposed to and have nothing to show or have to deal with life getting in the way. Stupid article.

Monkey Uncle

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1740
  • Location: West-by-god-Virginia
I guess the thing that ticks me off the most about this article is the implication that the "FIRE community" is somehow encouraging 20-somethings with a couple hundred grand to quit their jobs and call themselves retired, or encouraging 30-somethings to retire on a 7% withdrawal rate.  It's just extremely sloppy journalism.  If the author had paid any attention at all to forums like this one, it would have been clear that nothing could be further from the truth.  Maybe MMM should sue for libel and give the proceeds to the unfortunate subjects of the article.

YttriumNitrate

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1836
  • Location: Northwest Indiana
Here's the response from the first person featured in the story. Sounds like she's not too pleased with the lazy MarketWatch reporting either.
https://www.fierymillennials.com/decisions-decisions/

Capt j-rod

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 338
It's funny how they only pick the people that failed but never the ones who succeed. Everyone thinks that in FIRE you are going to lay around, sleep in, and wait for checks. I'm not FIRE and neither is my wife. I don't have a date on the wall or a magic number that I am striving to reach. We do however save more money each year than all of our friends combined and spend less money than the rest. These authors make it sound like FIRE is saving $1000 and living in a card board box is our goal LOL. I no longer work 9-5 for a company. I own five properties and three are paid off cash. The others are financed so low on a fixed rate that I'd be a fool to pay them off early. I own all of my vehicles. I grow a garden for healthy delicious vegetables and fruits and I could care less about Applebee's or any other chain. We have a growing passive income that shelter's my wife's job so that she can work with no pressure or fear in the event her employer wants to change terms. I work harder now than I ever did when I had a 9-5. I actually love doing it because I get to keep all of my work. I still do jobs for others when I want to. I don't have to take the next job or be low bid because the man is knocking on my door trying to collect money. That to me is the real power of MMM and this lifestyle. This author needs to go put another vacation on a charge card and go lease a new BMW. Wash that all down with a $250 bottle of wine and a $7 cup of coffee and then cry poor me when the company lets him or her go at age 55. Their version of fire is when everything burns down due to piss poor planning!

Mr. Green

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4494
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Wilmington, NC
Article summary: A couple people took a break from work and for various life reasons went back to work.

This happens all the time whether people are pursuing FIRE or not. It's really not even news worthy.

Monkey Uncle

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1740
  • Location: West-by-god-Virginia
Article summary: A couple people took a break from work and for various life reasons went back to work.

This happens all the time whether people are pursuing FIRE or not. It's really not even news worthy.
I think the reason it was considered newsworthy by the authors is that the people it was written about claimed to be FI and also RE not just on a sabbatical or doing p/t work to supplement their not-enough-to-be-FI investment income. Several had FIRE blogs too or lived non-mainstream lives. If the people hadn't called themselves FIRE I doubt the media would write about them.

Where's the IRP when you need them?  ;)

clifp

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 890
It's funny how they only pick the people that failed but never the ones who succeed.

I don't think that is even close to truth, in the last few months MMM has been on the PBS Newshour, and the FIRE movement has been generally positively portrayed in the NY TImes, BBC and WSJ.
I'd say that's far more important than click bait article on MSN.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 23129
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Most of the people didn’t have enough to retire so it was just dumb.

Exactly.  Who can retire in their 20s with no more than $200,000 total assets?  That was a disaster just waiting to happen.

Anyone can!

You just have to be willing to end your life when the money runs out . . . and most people are WAAAYYY to complainy pants to follow through.

austin944

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 120
  • Age: 62

How many people here have accounted for the possibility of divorce (or if single, getting married in the future and then divorced) in their FIRE plans?  Would you be able to cope with the loss of at least 50% of your NW and still maintain your planned withdrawal rate?

DreamFIRE

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1593
I like how the author throws in at the end that you might have to take out a reverse mortgage to tap your home equity. Oh ok /s.
And that's assuming you can make your current 40 year long early retirement at 20 on $60k last until you're old enough to even get a reverse mortgage (which I think you can't do until 62).  I think selling a house and downsizing or moving to a LCOL area are great ways to get RE faster and younger but most in this article aren't in positions to do that. Retiring at 62 and depending on a HELOC or reverse mortgage and SS doesn't really count as FI or even RE imho.

62 is early - In the U.S. for most workers now, the full retirement age is 67 for full SS benefits.  SS is a legitimate benefit just like a pension, and a reverse mortgage is just another way to tap into your equity.  Heck, some people don't even have their own homes, so I don't take anything away from those who do that might want to tap into that equity when they are older.

DreamFIRE

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1593

How many people here have accounted for the possibility of divorce (or if single, getting married in the future and then divorced) in their FIRE plans?  Would you be able to cope with the loss of at least 50% of your NW and still maintain your planned withdrawal rate?

I'm single, but if I got married and divorced, I would not lose any of my net worth.  Also, my SWR will be based only on the stash component of my NW.

soccerluvof4

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7161
  • Location: Artic Midwest
  • Retired at 50
    • My Journal

How many people here have accounted for the possibility of divorce (or if single, getting married in the future and then divorced) in their FIRE plans?  Would you be able to cope with the loss of at least 50% of your NW and still maintain your planned withdrawal rate?

I'm single, but if I got married and divorced, I would not lose any of my net worth.  Also, my SWR will be based only on the stash component of my NW.







^+1

MrThatsDifferent

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2317

How many people here have accounted for the possibility of divorce (or if single, getting married in the future and then divorced) in their FIRE plans?  Would you be able to cope with the loss of at least 50% of your NW and still maintain your planned withdrawal rate?

I think if you’re onboard with the basic tenets of mustachianism, self-reliance, low expenses, anti-consumer, save and invest, with a decent job—you’d be able to recover from most setbacks in 3-6 years max. If you plan really well then maybe no impact.

fierymillennials

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 23
  • Location: Washington, DC
    • Fiery Millennials
I guess I dont understand what went wrong in the initial story.

"The rental property was too complicated to manage from far away." (So sell it and buy one closer...or sell it and invest the proceeds in another way?)

She found that she hated freelancing. (So the problem with FIRE is you might hate your job that you need for income?  Huh?)

Because of some technicalities, she wasn’t able to access her pension yet. (She expected to draw a pension that pays any significant amount for any significant period after retiring at the age of 27? Really?)

There were fewer bites than expected on her Etsy projects. (So the problem with FIRE is your business might not be profitable?  Huh?)

And she and her boyfriend broke up. (So living off a boyfriend is considered being FI?, as I assume anyone just needing to share expenses can get a roommate. Heck, I'd think the 'backup plan' of living off your parents is probably a better one)

I guess I dont understand the next story.

They "FIRE'd" with half of what they thought they needed?  (Did the cut their expenses in half or just say what the heck?)
Losing 3% of their investments thru the crypto hack destroyed them?  (Pretty sure I lost 3% of my investments Thanksgiving week...and that was just market fluctuations)

For the Liz story all I can think is thank goodness they were planning for FIRE...losing one income would destroy most families financially.  They were probably already living off of just one.  Or is this just a "reaching FIRE may be tougher than you initially think and you may have to adapt and it may take longer" story, which sounds right........

For the losing your partner story...Heck, isnt not needing eitehr parents' income the best place to be for when this happens?  Or is this just a "reaching FIRE may be tougher than you initially think and you may have to adapt and it may take longer" story, which sounds right........

alright, tired of reading this article now

Wow don't spare any punches. Now I know why people don't share more of the bad stuff online. But yeah basically you're right - I took the leap to Coast Find sooner than I should've and I couldn't make it work. It's shitty but sometimes one has to learn lessons the hard way. Don't worry, I'm going back to work and will stay there until I amass more than enough for FIRE

tipster350

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 345
Bottom line: the people highlighted in the article made bad decisions and didn't have realistic plans. Wanting to be FIRE doesn't mean you are FIRE. To draw any conclusions about FIRE in general except to use this as a cautionary tale about using math and developing plans based on reality is ridiculous.


dude

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2369

How many people here have accounted for the possibility of divorce (or if single, getting married in the future and then divorced) in their FIRE plans?  Would you be able to cope with the loss of at least 50% of your NW and still maintain your planned withdrawal rate?

Oh, I've done these calculations many, many times . . .

Pretty confident I'd be just fine, especially if I'm willing (and I am) to move somewhere with a LCOL -- particularly somewhere out of the country.

TVRodriguez

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 773
The worst (or best?) part of the article is the video that accompanies it. 

At the 00:53 mark, the on-screen advice is

"Eat a home"

Not "Eat at home"  -- that would be too easy.  Really challenge yourself.  Eat the entire home!

austin944

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 120
  • Age: 62
I divorced on the cusp of our planned FIRE in our late 30s and we both were fine. Had kept our investments separate and both earned the same amount so just left with what we brought in and no kids or alimony.  He chose to continue working (main reason for the divorce since he wanted to continue his military career far beyond 20 years) and I FIREd asap. I won't get legally married again or combine finances so assume any relationship won't impact my finances or FIRE status at all. Other than reducing expenses by shared living.

You can choose to keep separate investments, choose not to get married, choose a mate who is already FI, choose somebody who will accept a prenup agreement, but every one of those choices is going to limit your pool of potential partners.  Is FI more important than the choice of a partner?

Nicholas Carter

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 145
Exactly.  Who can retire in their 20s with no more than $200,000 total assets?  That was a disaster just waiting to happen.


She found that she hated freelancing. (So the problem with FIRE is you might hate your job that you need for income?  Huh?)

There were fewer bites than expected on her Etsy projects. (So the problem with FIRE is your business might not be profitable?  Huh?)

I imagine that for many millennials, their vision of "retirement" looks like mine:
  • I work at a job I honestly hate, because it pays quadruple my old salary.
  • In 2017, my half of my households spending was about 14,000 USD.
  • The job I've had that I liked best is part-time college lecturer and private tutor, but that job only paid about 11,000 USD.
So my "early retirement" is getting up enough savings (about 200k, funny enough) to bring in about 8,000 a year, then go back to my low paying but highly satisfying job in academic instruction. Ideally I'd start my own accredited tutoring company and provide home-school instruction to my many nieces and nephews, but dependent on how much my family needs/can afford those services, it might not be something I can do without supplementing my income.

Cassie

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7946
Nick you should look into state universities for teaching opportunities. Also some colleges pay a lot more for online classes because the funding source is different. I teach one class each of the 3 semesters and make 22k/year.

jim555

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3235
Without 40 quarters these super early retirees will not qualify for Medicare Part A or Social Security.  Also I think a safer SWR should be lower than 4% due to the number of years involved.

AlexMar

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 262
Most of the people didn’t have enough to retire so it was just dumb.

Exactly.  Who can retire in their 20s with no more than $200,000 total assets?  That was a disaster just waiting to happen.

And you are being generous.  Almost all of those assets were retirement/401k which you wouldn't touch until you are 60.  She retired in her 20's with about $25,000.  Lol.

Nicholas Carter

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 145
Nick you should look into state universities for teaching opportunities. Also some colleges pay a lot more for online classes because the funding source is different. I teach one class each of the 3 semesters and make 22k/year.
You mean that you teach one, three hour section per week? Or you mean you teach multiple sections of the same class per week?
In my situation, I have struggled due to my weak academic performance in college (I became ill the senior year of my undergraduate degree, and required almost a year of medical care). I am routinely out competed for full time positions by people who did better in school, and the third semester of the year classes are only taught by full time faculty, never part time. Which means that part time at one school really means "about 500 hours per year".

mathlete

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2070
I'm a fan of these cautionary tales. I'm on the record as thinking that there are a good number of people out there "doing it wrong". Maybe even some in this community.

Would you mind elaborating on that? I may be one of those people -_-

Sorry, I'm just now seeing this. I'll do my best.

1.) Most people's lives don't map 1 to 1 to those of the most successful FIRE bloggers. There is a limited demand for lifestyle porn on the internet and you shouldn't bank on blog income. Basic stuff. People understand this in the abstract. But most of the bloggers are also probably type-A go getters who can't help but to make money.

Honesty is necessary. Honesty about whether or not you're that kind of person, or say, someone who clicks around on the internet at the office a few hours a day instead of putting in tangible work towards the next big raise. I'm personally not a go-getter on the level of MMM or even some of the more forums famous faces around here. So I factor that in.

Also, a blogger's spending (even if they're being 100% honest and transparent) probably doesn't capture the tangible and intangible benefits of being a web celebrity or thought-leader.

2.) "Income doesn't matter; only spending" doesn't scale to the lowest levels. You have an inelastic demand for things like food, shelter, and life-saving medicine. You can make a concerted choice to live on $10 of coffee a year instead of $1000 of coffee a year. You can't as easily elect to pay $1,000 for world-class cancer treatment instead of $100,000.

People have their plans for medical, and that's all well and good. But a healthy bit of observation shows that the majority party in the United States is trying to defund and destroy public health programs at every level. Or that a wave of nativism in other desirable countries has actual and would-be political leaders championing the tightening of immigration. Maybe that's not a problem if you're retiring well into the seven figures. Potential lean-FIRE expats may be less desirable though. They could find themselves searching for a social safety net that is willing to catch them.. I truly don't know where we're heading over the next few years.

3.) You at 30 is not you at 40, 50, 60, so on.

People change. I'm young, tough, strong, and healthy. I can deal with considerable amounts of bullshit. But stuff happens. A buddy of my tore his ACL playing basketball. He's 29, healthy, active, and recovering as well as can be expected. But that's a risk factor for early-onset arthritis. Will it stop him from leading an active an fulfilling life? Probably not. But it could turn what would be 15 miles a day walking around a new city into half that with a few $30 Uber rides. Back problems can cause you to upgrade from slumming it in hostels, to a hotel with a reliably suitable mattress.

Attitudes change too. You may love the grind now. But eventually it wears on you. That's why it's called the grind. My parents/are boomers. As are their siblings and friends. They spend lavishly on entertainment and comfort in their 60s. Decades ago, they were anti-consumerist hippies who subsisted on cheap pot and free love.

That covers most of it I think.

Cassie

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7946
Nick, I teach one 3 credit class online each semester.  You also need a master’s degree as the minimum to teach. I mentioned that because you only talked about your undergrad degree.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2018, 10:22:01 AM by Cassie »

4alpacas

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1825
I guess I dont understand what went wrong in the initial story.

"The rental property was too complicated to manage from far away." (So sell it and buy one closer...or sell it and invest the proceeds in another way?)

She found that she hated freelancing. (So the problem with FIRE is you might hate your job that you need for income?  Huh?)

Because of some technicalities, she wasn’t able to access her pension yet. (She expected to draw a pension that pays any significant amount for any significant period after retiring at the age of 27? Really?)

There were fewer bites than expected on her Etsy projects. (So the problem with FIRE is your business might not be profitable?  Huh?)

And she and her boyfriend broke up. (So living off a boyfriend is considered being FI?, as I assume anyone just needing to share expenses can get a roommate. Heck, I'd think the 'backup plan' of living off your parents is probably a better one)

I guess I dont understand the next story.

They "FIRE'd" with half of what they thought they needed?  (Did the cut their expenses in half or just say what the heck?)
Losing 3% of their investments thru the crypto hack destroyed them?  (Pretty sure I lost 3% of my investments Thanksgiving week...and that was just market fluctuations)

For the Liz story all I can think is thank goodness they were planning for FIRE...losing one income would destroy most families financially.  They were probably already living off of just one.  Or is this just a "reaching FIRE may be tougher than you initially think and you may have to adapt and it may take longer" story, which sounds right........

For the losing your partner story...Heck, isnt not needing eitehr parents' income the best place to be for when this happens?  Or is this just a "reaching FIRE may be tougher than you initially think and you may have to adapt and it may take longer" story, which sounds right........

alright, tired of reading this article now

Wow don't spare any punches. Now I know why people don't share more of the bad stuff online. But yeah basically you're right - I took the leap to Coast Find sooner than I should've and I couldn't make it work. It's shitty but sometimes one has to learn lessons the hard way. Don't worry, I'm going back to work and will stay there until I amass more than enough for FIRE
@fierymillennials I appreciate your openness with your struggles.  After reading your comments here and in the article, I started listening to your podcast and reading your blog.  Good luck with the next phase of your life.  Don't let the grouchy posters on a message board get you down. 

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8433
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Without 40 quarters these super early retirees will not qualify for Medicare Part A or Social Security.  Also I think a safer SWR should be lower than 4% due to the number of years involved.

40 quarter is only ten years of paychecks.  My paychecks started when I was 16.  Even someone who retires at 30 years old probably has enough.

If you read the 4% SWR thread on this very forum, you will find the charts that show the 30 year time horizon success rates are just barely worse than the 40 year rates, which are basically identical to the 50 and 60 year rates.  After some duration it just doesn't matter anymore, because the only possible failure scenarios are catastrophically bad sequence of return risk realizations right after your retirement date.  Basically, if you survive the first few years of retirement without a major crash, you're golden.  And even if you do get hit with a major crash right off the bat, you typically need to continue robotically withdrawing inflation-adjusted amounts of your depleted portfolio long enough to hit a second major crash 15 or 20 years later in order to actually fail with a 4% SWR.  It's still possible, you just have be pretty stupid for a really long time.

In reality, people who lose 40% or more of their portfolio the year after they retire typically don't withdraw more money the next year without finding more income.  They either go back to work right away while their skills are still relevant, just to be extra safe, or they choose to stay retired but spend less.  Some of them do neither, and that still usually works out okay if they just wait long enough.

Remember that even with a 40% correction in year one of your retirement, a 4% inflation-adjusted SWR should still last you roughly 25 years unless the market never recovers after that 40% drop (which has never happened).  That still qualifies as a "failure" of the 4% rule because it's less than a 30 year timeline, but 25 years is still a loooong time to work out a new plan.  I'm pretty sure I could find a way to make a few bucks if I had 25 years to prepare.  It didn't even take me that long to start earning money after I was born a totally useless baby. 

I'm not surprised the article that started this discussion was able to find people who "failed" at early retirement, because there will always be people who jump into it without first internalizing the body of knowledge that this forum provides.   FIREing on a 9% SWR might work out okay for you, but probably won't.  FIREing on a 6% SWR should work out roughly half of the time, so half of those folks would need to either earn more or spend less later in their lives.

Much Fishing to Do

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1140
I guess I dont understand what went wrong in the initial story.

"The rental property was too complicated to manage from far away." (So sell it and buy one closer...or sell it and invest the proceeds in another way?)

She found that she hated freelancing. (So the problem with FIRE is you might hate your job that you need for income?  Huh?)

Because of some technicalities, she wasn’t able to access her pension yet. (She expected to draw a pension that pays any significant amount for any significant period after retiring at the age of 27? Really?)

There were fewer bites than expected on her Etsy projects. (So the problem with FIRE is your business might not be profitable?  Huh?)

And she and her boyfriend broke up. (So living off a boyfriend is considered being FI?, as I assume anyone just needing to share expenses can get a roommate. Heck, I'd think the 'backup plan' of living off your parents is probably a better one)

I guess I dont understand the next story.

They "FIRE'd" with half of what they thought they needed?  (Did the cut their expenses in half or just say what the heck?)
Losing 3% of their investments thru the crypto hack destroyed them?  (Pretty sure I lost 3% of my investments Thanksgiving week...and that was just market fluctuations)

For the Liz story all I can think is thank goodness they were planning for FIRE...losing one income would destroy most families financially.  They were probably already living off of just one.  Or is this just a "reaching FIRE may be tougher than you initially think and you may have to adapt and it may take longer" story, which sounds right........

For the losing your partner story...Heck, isnt not needing eitehr parents' income the best place to be for when this happens?  Or is this just a "reaching FIRE may be tougher than you initially think and you may have to adapt and it may take longer" story, which sounds right........

alright, tired of reading this article now

Wow don't spare any punches. Now I know why people don't share more of the bad stuff online. But yeah basically you're right - I took the leap to Coast Find sooner than I should've and I couldn't make it work. It's shitty but sometimes one has to learn lessons the hard way. Don't worry, I'm going back to work and will stay there until I amass more than enough for FIRE

Hey, sorry if that sounded like I was attacking any of these folks...the intent was purely to attack the author's conclusion that these are instances of real FIRE failure, but I may not even be interpreting FIRE correctly.  E.g. you are saying you failed at Coast Fire but doesn't Coast Fire just mean saving a lot of money early on and then downshifting or the like? (I admit I don't really know)  So if you did save a ton of money very early on and at some point did downshift I'm not really even sure how you could have failed, wish I would have done both in my 20s...

I wouldn't even try to say there are no legit FIRE failure stories out there that could point out problems with the concept...the article just didn't seem to have any of those to me.

rob in cal

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 333
  I'm highly disturbed about the Suze Orman idea that 5 million is a good retirement number.  What kind of an alternate universe is she living in?

terran

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3796
  I'm highly disturbed about the Suze Orman idea that 5 million is a good retirement number.  What kind of an alternate universe is she living in?

The kind where she owns an island.