Kiplinger Personal Finance magazine story on how you did it

[Kim Clark]

Hi. I'm a staff writer for Kiplinger Personal Finance magazine. I'm researching a story on that we hope will inspire investors by featuring some folks who have achieved their goals of building up enough of an investment nest egg to retire. If you have retired, we'd love to hear your advice for anyone who is trying to build a retirement fund now. We hope you would be willing to share details on how you managed your portfolio (such as what stocks, funds or ETFs you chose), and any investing lessons you learned along the way. We are looking for folks who would be ok about having their picture published in the magazine. My email address is Kim dot Clark (at) Futurenet dot com. Thanks! (p.s. Pete said it was ok to post this.)

[Metalcat]

Can confirm, MMM popped in her other identical thread and gave her permission to solicit our stories.

Hi Kim, folks here tend to get a little hostile to journalists/writers popping into our community, contributing nothing, and then profiting off of our contributions, so it is helpful that Pete specifically invited you.

Perhaps you could tell us a bit more about your magazine? Your question is extremely broad, so it might also help to understand what kind of stories you are looking for. What angle you are going for.

Are you looking more for investment strategies? Most of us are index investors, so that's dull as dirt, some of us in real estate, and a very small minority are active investors.

Are you looking for early retirees and want to know savings rates? Strategies for saving more than average? How people made a lot a dm saved a lot or how people on modest incomes spent very little??

Essentially are you looking more for financial stories or lifestyle stories? Because all retirement savings stories are stories of both, one side being much more interesting, but also more complex than the other.

Then there are the stories of *why* people want to save for financial independence, and the ones who do retire vs the ones who choose to keep working.

What angle are you looking for, because there are tons of fascinating stories here. Who of them are willing to talk to you is another matter. I'm not, I value my privacy and my story is too complicated to be readable.

[spartana]

I've read several of @Kim Clark's articles over the years in Kiplingers and elsewhere (Bogelheads?) and she seems very even handed and positive towards early retirees. So I hope some of the FIREees here (not me though) share their stories and help get the word out that we really aren't a bunch crazy people living in a cardboard box under a bridge ;-).  It seems like it's been a while since a mainstream financial magazine has written anything positive about early retirees.

[Kim Clark]

Hi everybody: I understand your suspicion of journalists just dropping in. You can check me out on my Kiplinger author page https://www.kiplinger.com/author/kim-clark. I've been covering personal finance and investing issues for decades. I had the pleasure of chatting with Mr. Money Mustache many years ago when I worked for Money magazine. And I've read his writing over the years since then. So I thought he and his followers might be interested in my current assignment. This group does a great job of encouraging and inspiring members. I'm hoping my story will also serve as inspiration and assistance to Kiplinger readers who are saving up and investing for retirement. It would be great to get some real-world investing advice from people who have achieved their retirement savings goal. Did you do it through "boring" index funds? Great! People need to hear about that. I'll be asking about your experiences and lessons learned. Did you change your investment portfolio as you approached your number? Have you changed it since retiring? I hope this helps. Thanks!

[GilesMM]

Is there compensation to respondents (or to Pete) since KPF is a for-profit concern as opposed to journalism?

[Tass]

@Zikoris has historically been interested in doing interviews, although she is in Canada (not sure if that matters).

[Kim Clark]

Alas, no, we do not pay our sources. I understand your point of view, and if that is a dealbreaker for you, I'll understand. In our defense, I'm sure you can imagine questions that might be raised if we started paying sources. Readers might wonder what incentive somebody might have for making any particular statement, for example. But you are correct that Kiplinger magazine is owned by a for-profit company, and that I do receive a salary. (Though there is a very strict wall between the business-oriented departments like advertising and the reporters such as myself.)

[Kim Clark]

Also, an organization's tax status doesn't imply anything about the the quality or amount of journalism it produces.  I'll bet many or most of your favorite sources of news are for-profit organizations (For example: Bloomberg, WSJ, and, yes, Kiplinger!) I'm pretty proud of the work we do at Kiplinger. We do original research (as I am doing right now), and the editors are very knowledgeable and careful.

[secondcor521]

I wonder if your editors would be interested in a story angle of why people here generally don't want to talk to reporters.  It could be privacy concerns, a realization that our time is valuable to us and we're busy with our fulfilled lives, or the sentiment that FIRE has been generally maligned in the media (although not by OP or their magazine).  Could be other reasons.

Just a thought.  I'd be willing to contribute my thoughts on that story angle, but not the originally suggested one.

[Telecaster]

Unfortunately, most stories are pretty boring, mine especially so.   I tried to max out my 401(k) and not spend money on stuff I didn't want or need.    I invested almost entirely in boring low cost index funds and checked the balance about once a year.   Eventually compound interest took over.   Like I say, not very exciting.  Good luck on your article though!   

[Tass]

I'm just not ready to put my name and picture next to a public discussion of my financial details. (Also I'm not FIRE yet.) I hope someone else is, because I do think this kind of article is interesting and can be useful.

[Metalcat]

Also, an organization's tax status doesn't imply anything about the the quality or amount of journalism it produces.  I'll bet many or most of your favorite sources of news are for-profit organizations (For example: Bloomberg, WSJ, and, yes, Kiplinger!) I'm pretty proud of the work we do at Kiplinger. We do original research (as I am doing right now), and the editors are very knowledgeable and careful.

I don't think anyone implied otherwise, and I suspect we're all aware that some of our favourite publications are for-profit. I also think it's totally reasonable to ask about compensation.

We all openly share our stories here where we have total editorial control and whatever degree of anonymity we desire, so it takes a lot to incentive us to share our stories with a journalist who we don't know.

[uniwelder]

I'd be happy to tell my story.  I'm definitely in the lower spending and lower earning crowd, but proud of our accomplishments and always trying to get more people to listen about saving + spending.  Perhaps you can't give monetary compensation, but you could probably offer a free year's subscription! :)

I graduated college in 2003 from a top engineering school, with very little debt.  This is because I had gone to community college (while working 30 hr/week and living at home) for 2 years prior to transferring, plus did a co-op (series of 3 paid internships) in my final 2 years.  Because of the recession, few companies were hiring, so I got a job in a super cool testing laboratory at the university for very little money (35k/year), while buying a really cheap house (60k) a little ways out of town.  The job was awesome, so I stayed for the following 17 years (17 full time + 3 very part time), reaching a maximum salary of around 60k. 

Along the way, I met my wife, who also worked at the university, equally underpaid for her skills.  As a Phd biochemist, she was making 40k/year in 2014, and is currently around 70k.  She was working for an abusive/manipulative professor and would come home complaining (sometimes crying) and asking how much longer we need to keep doing this.  Since we only spent about 30k/year at the time, we were stashing away a good bit of money.  I started reading online, found MMM, did some calculations, and discussed with friends.  We realized (2015) we could save all the money we would need in less than 10 years, and in 2017 came up with the 5 year plan for retirement.

We bought 3 rental properties (first in 2010, another 2019, third in 2021) that provide half our projected income.  The other (800k) is in boring index funds through various means--- 403b, 457, hsa, roth ira.  I'm still officially an employee of the university, but work very limited hours (about 20/month), while my wife is staying until her boss (different professor and really supportive) retires later this year.

[spartana]

I wonder if your editors would be interested in a story angle of why people here generally don't want to talk to reporters.  It could be privacy concerns, a realization that our time is valuable to us and we're busy with our fulfilled lives, or the sentiment that FIRE has been generally maligned in the media (although not by OP or their magazine).  Could be other reasons.

Just a thought.  I'd be willing to contribute my thoughts on that story angle, but not the originally suggested one.

I agree. I do think it's mostly a combo wanting to remain anonymous and not willing to deal with the often negative, and sometimes personal, attacks and comments about early retirement and our choosen lifestyles by readers (and sometimes by authors) we've seen others interviewees  have to deal with - including MMM himself as well as others here. Especially if the interview subjects are retired fairly young. It's too bad as I'd like to see more positive things written about younger retirees - especially those who had low or median incomes - and being a long term fan of Kiplingers I think it would be great. Although we are mostly a boring bunch who just saved more then we spent ;-).

[Metalcat]

I wonder if your editors would be interested in a story angle of why people here generally don't want to talk to reporters.  It could be privacy concerns, a realization that our time is valuable to us and we're busy with our fulfilled lives, or the sentiment that FIRE has been generally maligned in the media (although not by OP or their magazine).  Could be other reasons.

Just a thought.  I'd be willing to contribute my thoughts on that story angle, but not the originally suggested one.

I agree. I do think it's mostly a combo wanting to remain anonymous and not willing to deal with the often negative, and sometimes personal, attacks and comments about early retirement and our choosen lifestyles by readers (and sometimes by authors) we've seen others interviewees  have to deal with - including MMM himself as well as others here. Especially if the interview subjects are retired fairly young. It's too bad as I'd like to see more positive things written about younger retirees - especially those who had low or median incomes - and being a long term fan of Kiplingers I think it would be great. Although we are mostly a boring bunch who just saved more then we spent ;-).

No one here is boring. But how we invest is probably the most painfully dull thing about most of our stories.

[spartana]

I wonder if your editors would be interested in a story angle of why people here generally don't want to talk to reporters.  It could be privacy concerns, a realization that our time is valuable to us and we're busy with our fulfilled lives, or the sentiment that FIRE has been generally maligned in the media (although not by OP or their magazine).  Could be other reasons.

Just a thought.  I'd be willing to contribute my thoughts on that story angle, but not the originally suggested one.

I agree. I do think it's mostly a combo wanting to remain anonymous and not willing to deal with the often negative, and sometimes personal, attacks and comments about early retirement and our choosen lifestyles by readers (and sometimes by authors) we've seen others interviewees  have to deal with - including MMM himself as well as others here. Especially if the interview subjects are retired fairly young. It's too bad as I'd like to see more positive things written about younger retirees - especially those who had low or median incomes - and being a long term fan of Kiplingers I think it would be great. Although we are mostly a boring bunch who just saved more then we spent ;-).

No one here is boring. But how we invest is probably the most painfully dull thing about most of our stories.

Well we must be boring because we aren't spending all our money and maxing out our CCs to buy all the shiney things and apparently do nothing but watch TV all day (assuming we can afford a TV and find an outlet to plug it in near our "home" aka a van down by the river"!) At least that's what I've been told ;-). Just kidding of course but we've all seen that implied to FIREed people. And probably a main reason people here don't like to do interviews.

[Zikoris]

I'd say the interesting things about me are:

* My extensive and adventurous travel record
* My wide range of knowledge and ideas from reading 365+ books a year
* My more unusual hobbies (hunting for labyrinths, ballroom dancing, naturism, etc)
* My really unorthodox lifestyle decisions (extreme frugality/minimalism, anticonsumption, beauty industry is a scam, anti-car, anti-smartphone, etc)

The finance aspect of my life, particularly investing, is almost certainly the most boring thing about me because I do absolutely nothing for the most part and automated stuff 10+ years ago.

[Metalcat]

I'd say the interesting things about me are:

* My extensive and adventurous travel record
* My wide range of knowledge and ideas from reading 365+ books a year
* My more unusual hobbies (hunting for labyrinths, ballroom dancing, naturism, etc)
* My really unorthodox lifestyle decisions (extreme frugality/minimalism, anticonsumption, beauty industry is a scam, anti-car, anti-smartphone, etc)

The finance aspect of my life, particularly investing, is almost certainly the most boring thing about me because I do absolutely nothing for the most part and automated stuff 10+ years ago.

Yup, you are easily one of the most interesting stories here, probably why there are articles written about you, but I never once gave a flying fuck about how you invested your money, lol.

[wenchsenior]

Unfortunately, most stories are pretty boring, mine especially so.   I tried to max out my 401(k) and not spend money on stuff I didn't want or need.    I invested almost entirely in boring low cost index funds and checked the balance about once a year.   Eventually compound interest took over.   Like I say, not very exciting.  Good luck on your article though!

Yeah, our financial 'story' is the least interesting thing about us. Did it the same way you did.

[lhamo]

Not in a situation where I'd want to be profiled at the moment -- but it is probably the one thing about my story that might be interesting to a wider readership (how to navigate a mostly amicable divorce that leaves both parties with enough for a decent retired lifestyle). 

We did invest consistently in the standard vehicles (retirement accounts and 529s), and that money is our long term retirement money (STBX and I have around 1 mill each).  But what REALLY fueled our FIRE was what I call our "lottery ticket in the sky" -- a condo in Beijing that nearly tripled in value between when we bought it in early 2009 (bottom of the global economic crisis dip) and when we sold it in early 2017.  And the down payment on that property came from the sale of NYC co-op that more than doubled in value from 2000-2003.  So we were VERY lucky with our real estate choices in some pretty crazy markets that most people are not going to be in.

[spartana]

Not in a situation where I'd want to be profiled at the moment -- but it is probably the one thing about my story that might be interesting to a wider readership (how to navigate a mostly amicable divorce that leaves both parties with enough for a decent retired lifestyle). 

We did invest consistently in the standard vehicles (retirement accounts and 529s), and that money is our long term retirement money (STBX and I have around 1 mill each).  But what REALLY fueled our FIRE was what I call our "lottery ticket in the sky" -- a condo in Beijing that nearly tripled in value between when we bought it in early 2009 (bottom of the global economic crisis dip) and when we sold it in early 2017.  And the down payment on that property came from the sale of NYC co-op that more than doubled in value from 2000-2003.  So we were VERY lucky with our real estate choices in some pretty crazy markets that most people are not going to be in.

My divorce was extremely amicable too and we continued to be in a loving living together marriage until the moment he "shipped out" - aka transferred - to some remote place halfway around the world and I chose not to quit my job and follow. A DIY divorce for around $150 and no need to split our assets as we never combined our investments and both were FI or close independently.

Unfortunately I do think most marriages, especially those with many shared assets and kids, can wreak FI and RE so that would be a great topic to write/read about in personal finance article. And then there retiring as a single person in your late 30s and trying to explain to dates why you don't have a job and how you're not a gold digger or a welfare queen and "no" you're not interested in being someone's Sugar Mama lol.

[blueberrybushes]

Our story, like others, isn't glamorous like investing $10,000 in Nvidia in 1999 and being worth $23MM today.

Collectively, DW and I earned about $1MM between 1974 - 1997 and were worth about $650K (no debt) when we first walked away from working.  Went all in in 1997 and net worth became $1.7MM in 2009.  Net worth is now about $3.5MM (age 70).

I knew nothing about investing, but knew alot about controlling expenses and my DW is like-minded:

• No kids,
  Never spent more than we earned,
  Never incurred debt (except our first mortgage in 1981) we could not pay off immediately

Our AGI is about $90K (with SS about $55K) and expenses are $75K.  Our tax liability is close to $0.


Investment concepts I wished I had understood in 1978:

• Time horizon of investments
  How quickly downturns rebound
  Beware and never trust Financial Planners (FP) - lost $150K to bad buys before waking up
  Asset Allocation is actually quite simple - it is FP who, unnecessarily, complicate it
  A domestic Index Funds is the best diversification (who needs international?)
  Never chase the extra 1% return - lost $250K in 2009 to a failed promissory note paying 1% more than Fidelity MM

In the early 90s, I stopped funding IRAs and ROTHs with pre-tax dollars.  Only about 10% of our net worth is in Traditional IRAs and QCD will off-set RMDs when the time comes.

We did inherit $550K from Mom/Dad in 2015 which helped.


So, although we regularly worked after 1997, the jobs were of our choosing and on our terms.  Of the FIRE acronym, FI is by far the most important because it gives you options.
[/list]

[jim555]

Do you really want a story about a guy living in a van down by the river?  LOL.

[Lews Therin]

I invested 80% of my salary for 7 years in canadian, internal and US etfs.

How about reporting on the shockingly simple math of early retirement and using us the forum for data points?

The average is boring and not really newsworthy.

[Tass]

To be fair, y'all, what's boring to us is still radical to many "mainstream" people. The fact that it's a radically different approach is what drew many of us here in the first place.

[Metalcat]

To be fair, y'all, what's boring to us is still radical to many "mainstream" people. The fact that it's a radically different approach is what drew many of us here in the first place.

Our point is that, yes, that is interesting, but how we invest isn't. At least not for most of us.

[Tass]

To be fair, y'all, what's boring to us is still radical to many "mainstream" people. The fact that it's a radically different approach is what drew many of us here in the first place.

Our point is that, yes, that is interesting, but how we invest isn't. At least not for most of us.

But this is exactly my point. Index investing is boring to us (that's what I love about it), but is still novel for many others. Discovering it, along with FIRE, is what converted me from "The stock market is just gambling" to realizing there was a way to invest responsibly. Yeah, it's not going to make good clickbait, but that doesn't mean it's not still worth good journalistic coverage.

[Metalcat]

To be fair, y'all, what's boring to us is still radical to many "mainstream" people. The fact that it's a radically different approach is what drew many of us here in the first place.

Our point is that, yes, that is interesting, but how we invest isn't. At least not for most of us.

But this is exactly my point. Index investing is boring to us (that's what I love about it), but is still novel for many others. Discovering it, along with FIRE, is what converted me from "The stock market is just gambling" to realizing there was a way to invest responsibly. Yeah, it's not going to make good clickbait, but that doesn't mean it's not still worth good journalistic coverage.

Fair enough, I guess I assume that folks who read financial magazines already know about index funds. But perhaps that's not a valid assumption?

[Sanitary Stache]

A conversation with family the other night got me realizing that index fund investing isn't as straight forward as "I'm an index fund investor".  Well, first we had to establish that the S&P500 is an example of an index, which took the majority of our communication. I am not convinced I conveyed the value of a total stock market index.  I didn't get into my asset allocation or how it might change as I approach retirement, beyond responding to "I hope you're diversified" with "I own all the US stocks". 

The conversation started with "Do you have a financial planner"  to which I proudly stated, "No, I do it myself".  Later on in the evening I boasted about how I out earned my full time jobs hourly wage the day before by $4 when I spent an hour cutting my own hair.  I never considered my hourly wage on the time I spend managing my own investments.

There is much more to index fund investing than just just buying VTSAX: Bond allocation, the right amount of cash, real estate (even just my primary residence), my personal investment statement, the investment order, not to mention tax advantaged buckets, or other tax considerations.  At least everyone understands what 401k and IRA are even if they don't understand how to use them to reduce taxes and build wealth and then there are CD ladders and Roth ladders, Mega backdoor Roth contributions and RMDs. One family member was fully behind dollar cost averaging, but wasn't familiar with the term. I could actually learn a thing or two from my family about insurance, but we settled on agreeing that term insurance is good until we can self insure.

I definitely don't think its boring (case in point, right).  I was sold on index fund investing early in this journey by J.L. Collins Stock Series.  Then I read Burton Malkiel's A Random Walk Down Wall Street and John Bogle's Common Sense on Mutual Funds to really drive home the point:  A mutual fund manager isn't going to beat the total stock market index over the long term and if they are one of the vanishingly few managers that do, then they will take anything extra in fees and taxes.

I am not FI, and don't know if I will be able to RE.  But I have full confidence that I will retire (I think of it as Retire Eventually), though I am not clear if I will ever be FI if I rely on society for my security. I have FU money and I feel like I know what I am doing saving and investing without a financial advisor.  One question that has come up with neighbors about retirement is deciding "the number".  I know what my family spends. I have guesses on what we will spend over the next 20 years.  I know what we need.  It isn't easy figuring that out.  There are many threads on here where the gist of the advice is "25X is a starting point".  And many more hedging the 25X number with 3% or 2.5% withdrawal rates or huge lump sums for a new car or whatever.  And then there are multiple threads talking about having too much money.

I like to read about these things, that's why I spend so much time reading here.  The content here is overwhelming.  But the lessons are thoughts are also extremely valuable.

[Midwest_Handlebar]

We started with "boring" index funds, but learned about real estate investing and have allocated more time/resources over the years. Our story:

2005- I bought a cheap condo with money working in food service.
2006- Graduated college, got a job making $42k
2008- I got an advanced degree to be more competitive in a terrible job market. Lost ~$60k trading options
2009- I moved to a bigger city with my now girlfriend, making maybe $70k and she started at $36k. We moved into a 320sq ft studio apartment and started renting the old condo since I was now underwater on the mortgage.
2010-2012 - Drank too much, spent most of my money but had a lot of fun.
2012- Got married, got fired and found a new job a week later. I worked for 4 companies in 6 years and was struggling to find stable employment. Wife's career was the same. We were making maybe $150k total.
2013- Got sick of the larger city rat race and moved back to our hometown into the small condo. Finally got serious about saving money and started saving up for a down payment on a house.
2014- Found MMM, and REALLY got serious about saving money. Net worth during this time was approximately $200k.
2015- We bought a fixer upper family house and spent the next two years working on it. We started maxing out all retirement accounts (were able to do this from 2015-2023)
2017-2019- Had two kids. Started churning credit cards (80+ over 3 years) and cleared $50k after fees, etc. My wife traveled every other week for a year+ and I took care of our young kids.
2020-2022- I started buying fixer upper condos during Covid. During the WFH era I would set up my office in each condo and fix them up during my downtime. (I bought and renovated 5 condos in 2 1/2 years). We hit $1M in Net Worth in 2020.
2022- My wife nearly died from a bacterial infection, had three invasive surgeries and had $200k in medical bills that we had to fight with the insurance company to pay. She is doing fine now. Hit $2M at the end of 2022.
2023- Used the tax code to our advantage and claimed bonus depreciation to pay minimal taxes on $300k in W2 income and a 401k to Roth conversion of $265k. Bought a 3 plex (needed $100k+ of work) and a 4 plex that year. Quit my corporate job and went full time into real estate.

We're 40 and 37, and now worth $2.6M not including private equity (worth between $200k-$1M in 2 years). The last 10 years have been crazy, but I would attribute our success to the following:

1. Hard work (life doesn't owe you anything and you will not become rich working only 40 hours a week)
2. Look for opportunities and take them (we would have 1/2 the net worth if we didn't take advantage of real estate, and even the credit card churning paid for a couple down payments.)
3. Educate yourself (I started listening to personal finance podcasts in 2012)

[bacchi]

Of course you can become rich working only 40 hours/week! We both worked fewer than 40 hours/week for most of our careers and we're rich.

----
I agree with others that the investing isn't usually the interesting part. The interesting part is the lifestyle of how we got there.

* 2 daily driver cars -- one eco and one sports car, kept a long time
* inexpensive house -- this is probably the biggest factor. SO moved into my "starter" home and we didn't move to a larger, more expensive, house.
   * when I was single, I had roommates.
* generally inexpensive travel -- camping, backpacking, road trips. we did fly occasionally but points paid for it.

Ok, that's really not that interesting.

But investing? Pile it in index funds. Maximize retirement accounts (being self employed helped here). Avoid trendy investments.

[Midwest_Handlebar]

Of course you can become rich working only 40 hours/week! We both worked fewer than 40 hours/week for most of our careers and we're rich.

Ok, maybe it was a bit of hyperbole. As we know on this site, it all depends on your savings rate. However many of us on here worked far more than 40 hours a week in the accumulation phase to speed up the process. I think this concept is still news worthy to the "average Joe".

[Zikoris]

Another anti-hard-work person here. It's interesting because if you ask a group of FIRE people if it's hard work it seems like about half will say YES very hard work, I busted ass, etc, and the other half will say NO, what are you talking about, I automated all that stuff a decade ago, why TF would I want to work hard when I can get the same results from automation and not buying crap.

[dividendman]

Another anti-hard-work person here. It's interesting because if you ask a group of FIRE people if it's hard work it seems like about half will say YES very hard work, I busted ass, etc, and the other half will say NO, what are you talking about, I automated all that stuff a decade ago, why TF would I want to work hard when I can get the same results from automation and not buying crap.

Yeah, I'm in the anti-hard-work camp. It's easier to not spend money than to spend it if you really think about it (after the essentials like a roof and basic food are met). You literally have to DO NOTHING to not spend. If you want to spend money you gotta find restaurants, cars, clothes/misc items, activities, trips, research all of that etc. It's exhausting just thinking about it.

[spartana]

Of course you can become rich working only 40 hours/week! We both worked fewer than 40 hours/week for most of our careers and we're rich.

Ok, maybe it was a bit of hyperbole. As we know on this site, it all depends on your savings rate. However many of us on here worked far more than 40 hours a week in the accumulation phase to speed up the process. I think this concept is still news worthy to the "average Joe".

Many of us worked hard WAY more than 40 hours a week but our pay remained exactly the same. Salary in my case courtesy of Dear Uncle Sam via the military. So many hours, so many days working, so little pay compared to hourly wage earners. Still managed to save around 50% or more (75% or more some years) because what are you going to spend your money on while floating around in the ocean on a tiny tin can most of the time lol.

After I got out at age 30 (I had enlisted in the coast guard at 18) I had a Gov job with an hourly wage and plenty of O.T. - much of which I took as comp time instead of extra pay. Saved a lot, maxed out everything I could and had done that since age 18 so able to pull the plug on lean FIRE at 36. I took two years to travel then back to old job part time/on call for about 3 or 4 years before quitting again and haven't worked since then. I became chubby FIRE after selling my paid off house and down sizing. Dear Uncle Sam paid to have me learn a valuable trade and set of job skills while in, and 2 college degrees using the GI Bill once out and working my civilian job. That job offered a public safety pension I could tap once age 50 and I could buy back (tax deferred) 4 years of my military time to add to that pension. Since I quit working so early it's not much though and didn't pay into SS so that won't be much either.

[Tass]

Yeah, the only time either me or my partner worked over 40 hours/week was the time I was paid the worst (yay grad school).

Admittedly, I'm pursuing a side gig right now, but only because I can complete my full-time job in less than 40 hours/week.

I love working less.

[Midwest_Handlebar]

The problem is that you can only be frugal up to a point. If you want to eat, drive a car, live with a roof over your head, have kids.... it costs a certain amount of money. You can obviously optimize those expenses, which I did obsessively in the early years, but after a certain point you have to make more money to increase your savings rate and speed up your time to retirement.

I maxed out my earning potential at work early on and then turned to credit card hacking and later real estate to make more. There are a million ways to reach FI.

[Tass]

But the other way to do it is to find chill work that you don't mind doing so the time to FI isn't such a slog.

I'm happy to work extra and make more if it doesn't compromise my quality of life, but I feel no need to put my nose to the grindstone and suffer now just to get to FI faster.

[Midwest_Handlebar]

But the other way to do it is to find chill work that you don't mind doing so the time to FI isn't such a slog.

I'm happy to work extra and make more if it doesn't compromise my quality of life, but I feel no need to put my nose to the grindstone and suffer now just to get to FI faster.

Cool, there are many ways to do it so "you do you". At least you're making a conscience decision rather than the mindless masses.

I don't have any regrets. It gave us the capital to start a family business that my kids will grow up around. It wouldn't have been possible if I took the 40 hour a week route.

[Tass]

Yeah, I also agree that you should do you; not trying to say that you did/are doing it wrong. Just agreeing with other commenters that "40 hours a week won't make you rich" doesn't describe us all.

[Midwest_Handlebar]

What is your FI number and time frame? Just out of curiosity.

Your gatekeeping got me thinking. After 10 years of following this site I really don't know what I'm getting out of it, either in education or motivation. I wonder if my experience is shared with others and why it's gotten progressively more quiet over the years....

Not sure I'll be here much longer.

[Tass]

Am I gatekeeping?? I would think "It's possible to reach FI with a relaxed, frugal life, just as it's possible to reach it by working hard to make money fast" would make the message accessible to more people, not less. Or did you mean to say I'm watering the message down?

You seem to have perceived something I said as rude, which was not my intention.

I don't have a number to give you because my partner and I are figuring out what the life we want costs (where to live, having kids) and how hard we want to work. The number is between $1.2 and $2 mil, and the timelines range from 1.5 to 10 years. My partner recently quit his high-earning job to take care of his mental health and happiness, and our frugality and savings made that possible. This is just as much an FI story as someone who goes all out to get it done in record time.

[Metalcat]

Who is gatekeeping what??

I would say that insisting that FIRE can't be achieved while working only 40hrs/week sounds more like gatekeeping.

How is arguing that there are a diverse range of experiences reaching FI gatekeeping??

I made 6 figures working 3 days a week and lived like a college student. I would have hit FI in under a decade had we not had close to a half million in debt to tackle first.

I briefly worked 60hrs/wk and actually made a lot less per hour because it wasn't sustainable.

I'm back to work now and yet again aiming for 6 figures while working part time because I can bill a lot more if I focus on quality over quantity. And I can only bill at the top range if I'm able to give a full 100%, which I can't do working more than part time.

Different people have very different work realities.

[Zikoris]

Between the two of us, I work 38 hours a week and my partner probably like 15-20 tops (self-employed), and the quality of life upgrade that comes from that is just unreal. I highly recommend taking advantage of probably the biggest benefit of not buying crap, which is not not needing to work long hours to buy crap.

[Reddleman]

Another anti-hard-work person here. It's interesting because if you ask a group of FIRE people if it's hard work it seems like about half will say YES very hard work, I busted ass, etc, and the other half will say NO, what are you talking about, I automated all that stuff a decade ago, why TF would I want to work hard when I can get the same results from automation and not buying crap.

Quotes like this are why I always come back to MMM forums!

Seems like there are a few options and the predicted responses from a mainstream media article:
1. Yep, some people hustled.  Media loves to focus on this.  Goes right along with that American dream angle, keeps people motivated, and conveniently doesn't question anything about someone's consumption habits. Good line for financial press to tow and that's why you see it all the time. 
2. Some people got lucky investing in something at the right time (crypto, housing in 2008-2012, etc.)  It allows people who are already wealthy to feel justified in how they got that way.  It's just because they're smart, right?  Financial press likes this one, too because it makes wealthy people feel good, doesn't question consumption, and provides plenty motivation for other people to engage in risky activities in the hopes of doing the same.  This churn is the heart of the finance economy.
3. Some people had many advantages (like family wealth/stability/connections) and just got a high-paying job that in no way reflects reality for 90+% of people in the U.S. This reality is something you rarely see financial press actually report on.  Although you will always find people "whining" about it in the comments. 
4. And some people just automated their finances, had a reasonably steady work history for a few decades, and with a bit of luck (like not having major health events) and not buying crap, retired.  This is closer to the reality for most people who successfully retire.  Kind of that "millionaire next door" angle.  We tend to consider it boring, and it kinda is.  Financial media passes over it mostly because there's no real drama there, but also because these people are not really monetizeable.  You can't sell much to them with advertising, and most of them are financially comfortable because they avoided consumption, financial advisors, and products that are the bread and butter of the financial system.  Nothing to see here, kids!

So keep on keeping it boring! 

[solon]

Another anti-hard-work person here. It's interesting because if you ask a group of FIRE people if it's hard work it seems like about half will say YES very hard work, I busted ass, etc, and the other half will say NO, what are you talking about, I automated all that stuff a decade ago, why TF would I want to work hard when I can get the same results from automation and not buying crap.

Quotes like this are why I always come back to MMM forums!

Seems like there are a few options and the predicted responses from a mainstream media article:
1. Yep, some people hustled.  Media loves to focus on this.  Goes right along with that American dream angle, keeps people motivated, and conveniently doesn't question anything about someone's consumption habits. Good line for financial press to tow and that's why you see it all the time. 
2. Some people got lucky investing in something at the right time (crypto, housing in 2008-2012, etc.)  It allows people who are already wealthy to feel justified in how they got that way.  It's just because they're smart, right?  Financial press likes this one, too because it makes wealthy people feel good, doesn't question consumption, and provides plenty motivation for other people to engage in risky activities in the hopes of doing the same.  This churn is the heart of the finance economy.
3. Some people had many advantages (like family wealth/stability/connections) and just got a high-paying job that in no way reflects reality for 90+% of people in the U.S. This reality is something you rarely see financial press actually report on.  Although you will always find people "whining" about it in the comments. 
4. And some people just automated their finances, had a reasonably steady work history for a few decades, and with a bit of luck (like not having major health events) and not buying crap, retired.  This is closer to the reality for most people who successfully retire.  Kind of that "millionaire next door" angle.  We tend to consider it boring, and it kinda is.  Financial media passes over it mostly because there's no real drama there, but also because these people are not really monetizeable.  You can't sell much to them with advertising, and most of them are financially comfortable because they avoided consumption, financial advisors, and products that are the bread and butter of the financial system.  Nothing to see here, kids!

So keep on keeping it boring!

Hey @Kim Clark these four points seem like the basis for a really good article. You should write this!

[Lews Therin]

The fifth point would be those who really had high savings rates and low expenses, and retired fast. I never made 80k and retired after 12 years.

[spartana]

The fifth point would be those who really had high savings rates and low expenses, and retired fast. I never made 80k and retired after 12 years.

Ditto for me. Well not really fast (approx 20 years of F/T work not counting teenage jobs) but even with lower pay it was doable. I think lots of average people would be able to go this route and retire early - well before 65ish - if they can cut out a lot of consumer spending and save more despite not having the advantages of the other 4 points. Barring something critical in their lives of course.

[Fomerly known as something]

Add me into the camp of Spartana where I don’t want to be featured anywhere.  I’m temped but prefer to hide out anonymously.

I’m not retired yet, 16 months 2 days away.  (Pension from a federal law enforcement career give me an exact date).  But I’ve been shaking my head at how much I’ve got and how much more I’ve accumulated since I hit my non pension money goals in 2019.  On that other money, early on in my career a senior person told me there is this thing called TSP shove money into it, and then someone talked about a ROTH IRA, and then I discovered there were things called mutual funds. 

I was not “perfect” with any of these investments.   I’ve diversified by just buying different funds.  I kept more money in cash early on that would have been better invested. I’ve tried to time the market because of other opinions.   I bought a co-op in 2004 that I couldn’t get rid of in 2008 and became an involuntary landlord for 8 years.  I bought said co-op in part to “save on taxes”.  What saved me was that I always, always lived below my mean and funded my tax advanced accounts even when it was tight.


I am very outright with my coworkers about retiring the day I’m eligible and not getting a “retirement” job.  The biggest difference I see is how I see money and money use in general.   

Early on in my career I looked at what I was making and what I would be making and realized I was HENRY, at least as my definition of “Rich” so long as I just kept on living below my means and saving/investing the difference. 

I also often think of what is my enough.  A boss in my office just retired to a 2nd career with a salary of $450k.  For me it made me think, what would that kind of money do for my life and the answer was it wouldn’t bring enough margin over what I have to be worth it.  Sure I could upgrade to a nicer/bigger house, I could buy more stuff and car and head to 5 star hotels, but my home is great, while not a minimalist, my inner environmental hippy keeps me more toward it, my car is fine and I’m perfectly happy at a 3 star hotel.  On some of those things like the house I think of what a bigger house that I don’t need will cost me as well, higher energy prices, more time spent cleaning it or the yard up etc.  Everyone else seemed to think, well even for just a few years think about what you could have, me but to what end.

[uniwelder]

@Kim Clark have you given up on us?