Am I alone here?

[Brodysan]

Before I knew anything about the FIRE Movement or Mr. Money Mustache, I had a plan to retire early...a good plan.

To me, it was simple - either make more money, or spend less.  Either way, I knew I had to invest a greater portion of my income.

In a nutshell, my wife & I gross about $230K.  However, we only spend $47K a year on total expenses.  100% of every net dollar over $47K is being invested.  We live very comfortably and want for nothing.  But this is probably because we never lived a lifestyle that matches our income.  So, investing came easy.

That being said, the goal is to mass enough money to be able to comfortably spend $60K annually...leaving a nice cushion for the weird things that come up in life.

Fast forward to today...people are talking about FAT FIRE, LEAN FIRE, BARISTA FIRE, etc...  I don't think I fit into any of those categories.  Sure, there are components from each one that fit into my narrative, but why does a person have to live in a shoe-box or have a private jet.

Am I an anomaly to the FIRE movement?

[ender]

No, you aren't alone.

People on here tend to not talk about their anticipated annual spend once it gets higher, but there are people planning on all sorts of yearly spend targets.

Our target annual spend is close to yours, probably a bit lower but not enough lower that it's too significant.

[Brodysan]

Thanks for saying that.  It is a little disheartening that there are people who are reluctant to talk about money on a website entirely dedicated to financial independence.  I guess it's just too taboo.

[bacchi]

Barrista FIRE is saving enough so that a part-time/low-paid job is needed to live a desired life. Ie., save $500k and then make $10k/year playing music around town or whatever. The $500k either grows or is used to supplement the $10k.

Lean FIRE means saving just enough for what is considered a bare bones life. Ie., saving $300k and living in a van by a crag and climbing every day.

Regular FIRE means saving enough to simulate a typical middle-class lifestyle. Spending $60k would do that in a lot of neighborhoods.

(The actual dividing line between lean and regular FIRE is vague.)


They're labels, sure, and some people disdain labels, but it's unclear on how you're doing a barrista FIRE when you're saving $1.5M. Or do you plan to withdraw $60k and work at a bookstore for an extra $10k/year because you want to spend $70k?



Eta: Changed definition of Fat FIRE to regular FIRE.

[FIRE 20/20]

Before I knew anything about the FIRE Movement or Mr. Money Mustache, I had a plan to retire early...a good plan.

To me, it was simple - either make more money, or spend less.  Either way, I knew I had to invest a greater portion of my income.

In a nutshell, my wife & I gross about $230K.  However, we only spend $47K a year on total expenses.  100% of every net dollar over $47K is being invested.  We live very comfortably and want for nothing.  But this is probably because we never lived a lifestyle that matches our income.  So, investing came easy.

That being said, the goal is to mass enough money to be able to comfortably spend $60K annually...leaving a nice cushion for the weird things that come up in life.

Fast forward to today...people are talking about FAT FIRE, LEAN FIRE, BARISTA FIRE, etc...  I don't think I fit into any of those categories.  Sure, there are components from each one that fit into my narrative, but why does a person have to live in a shoe-box or have a private jet.

Am I an anomaly to the FIRE movement?

I'm not sure I understand the question.  Do you think you plan to live on more than most in the FIRE movement or less?  Or do you think you're in a gap between Lean and Fat FIRE?  Living on 47k but having enough saved to spend 60k seems like it's right in the main part of the current FIRE movement.  It seems to me that 5 years ago these would have been pretty high numbers, but as the movement became more popular (or at least this forum became more popular) the average spend amounts moved up to around 40-70k/year.  But that's just a gut feel from reading the forums regularly.  There are plenty of people on here at almost every level of income, wealth, and annual spend. 

[terran]

I guess I kind of consider the $40-60k range to just be regular FIRE. I'd say anything within spitting distance of median income wherever you live, which I think is about $55k in the US counts. We currently spend less, so we could lean FIRE if we wanted. If the markets do super well and we have no personal setbacks (while planning for the opposite to be true) we could probably fat FIRE. In the end we'll probably end up right around the same range you're looking at though. Basically, what I'm saying is that I think what we're all talking about in this thread is the default version of FIRE so it doesn't get talked about as much since the extremes are where people feel the need to put a label on it and talk about strategies and justifications for their choices to not go with the default.

[Brodysan]

Love this.  I think that's where I'm lost.  It seems like there are a lot of people putting very specific labels on ways-to-FIRE.  But my way doesn't really match up to anyone's, which is why I guess I feel alone, or doing something wrong...if that makes sense?

For example, every time LEAN FIRE is mentioned, it comes with this connotation that people are living a very simplistic lifestyle (i.e. riding a bike everywhere they go & eating berries they grew from their garden).  I'm not doing that (and don't get me wrong, I commend people that do/can)...but what I am doing does fit into a lot of the principles of LEAN FIRE (i.e. living significantly below my means).

But on the flip side, because my end-game is $60K, I feel that pigeon-holds me into the FAT side of the community.  Minus the private jets, of course.

I suppose that's where I feel lost.  Maybe it's a sense of wanting to belong, or a sense of feeling I am doing something wrong.

[RetiredAt63]

Don't worry about labels.  You do you.  What levels others are comfortable with, and what they call them, doesn't matter to your plans.

Plus, spending in retirement can be more or less what you originally planned for.  Some years will be higher, some lower.  The biggest strength is to be flexible, and mindful of your spending.

[Brodysan]

I'm not sure I understand the question.  Do you think you plan to live on more than most in the FIRE movement or less?  Or do you think you're in a gap between Lean and Fat FIRE?  Living on 47k but having enough saved to spend 60k seems like it's right in the main part of the current FIRE movement.  It seems to me that 5 years ago these would have been pretty high numbers, but as the movement became more popular (or at least this forum became more popular) the average spend amounts moved up to around 40-70k/year.  But that's just a gut feel from reading the forums regularly.  There are plenty of people on here at almost every level of income, wealth, and annual spend.

Thanks for writing.  I don't think this is where I was trying to go with my original post.  It seems like everyone has very different goals & lifestyles, which can absolutely be celebrated.  I think it's awesome that there are so many people that are working towards some sort of goal as it pertains to financial freedom.

I suppose I just feel alone in what I'm doing.  It just seems that I haven't found a single person out there that is making $200+ income with a plan to live off $60K.  And I guess I feel detached, because if i bring this up to the 'Leanies' or 'Fatties' of the bunch, I'm feel shunned on both ends of the spectrum.  Does that make sense?

[Kris]

I'm not sure I understand the question.  Do you think you plan to live on more than most in the FIRE movement or less?  Or do you think you're in a gap between Lean and Fat FIRE?  Living on 47k but having enough saved to spend 60k seems like it's right in the main part of the current FIRE movement.  It seems to me that 5 years ago these would have been pretty high numbers, but as the movement became more popular (or at least this forum became more popular) the average spend amounts moved up to around 40-70k/year.  But that's just a gut feel from reading the forums regularly.  There are plenty of people on here at almost every level of income, wealth, and annual spend.

Thanks for writing.  I don't think this is where I was trying to go with my original post.  It seems like everyone has very different goals & lifestyles, which can absolutely be celebrated.  I think it's awesome that there are so many people that are working towards some sort of goal as it pertains to financial freedom.

I suppose I just feel alone in what I'm doing.  It just seems that I haven't found a single person out there that is making $200+ income with a plan to live off $60K.  And I guess I feel detached, because if i bring this up to the 'Leanies' or 'Fatties' of the bunch, I'm feel shunned on both ends of the spectrum.  Does that make sense?

Most people here don’t really bother with the lean and fat labels.

If it makes you feel any better, your income/live on levels are similar to ours. Our income was somewhat higher, but still in the ballpark.

[ender]

Not very many people talk about incomes.

Especially on the higher side of things.

I'm pretty sure though there are a lot more people in the $200k/$60k category than you might think.

[Brodysan]

Not very many people talk about incomes.

Especially on the higher side of things.

I'm pretty sure though there are a lot more people in the $200k/$60k category than you might think.

I hope so!  So, why aren't more people talking about this?  A simple Google search turns up absolutely nothing.

[Rdy2Fire]

Nope not alone.. and Ironically plays into this thread I posted earlier

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/post-fire/annual-spend/

In all my reading here many circle around numbers and I was kind of curious what the real spends are. I get it varies from LCOL to HCOL areas and how you live. I didn't care about the categories FAT, BARISTA etc was just kind of looking to see what people actual spend in FIRE. I have been FIRE'd for a year and with a couple of big, semi-expensive trips still managed to be under 60K.

[MoseyingAlong]

I suspect there are quite a few people here in your situation of $200K+ income with a goal of regular FIRE. I also suspect you trying to find that exact match to chat with is like dating.
Instead maybe focus on the community that wants to regular FIRE with the thought that higher income people can just get there faster.
Or if there is something in particular that you want to discuss, post about that. For instance, are you currently spending more than $60K and worry about the decrease in annual spending?
Because if you're already spending less than $60K and saving the rest, there's a whole lot of commonality already. I.e. You are not alone.

And that's before we even get into the old discussion that $200K in NYC/SF/LA/London is not high income compared to most parts of the world.

[ender]

Not very many people talk about incomes.

Especially on the higher side of things.

I'm pretty sure though there are a lot more people in the $200k/$60k category than you might think.

I hope so!  So, why aren't more people talking about this?  A simple Google search turns up absolutely nothing.

A lot of this takes place in journals, I think. And honestly, we save a lot every year but is it really that impressive or worth bragging about? I mean, once you make a ton of money you can be really lazy in how frugal you are and still save a lot and accumulate a ton of wealth. As my journal is just talking about we bought a house recently. We are spending what feels like a ton. And we're still going to save after maxing 401k

It's far more interesting to me to read about people making $50k and FIREing on $30k spend than it is on $200k with $50k spend. Spending a bit less than median US household income isn't super interesting to me when I make so much more, so I personally am feel inclined to post about it. A post along the lines of "I make $200k and can save $75k/year!" isn't particularly motivational/interesting. I doubt I'm alone.

[MrThatsDifferent]

You’re not alone, adjust your frame. You save more than you spend with the desire to retire before you’re 62. Great, you’ve found your people. Everyone has a different situation, with different goals but end of the day, we’re all on the same journey. So, now that you found your people, what specifically do you want to discuss? There’s something for everyone here and lots of wisdom, so maybe try to find solace in the variety here, instead of the quest for sameness. Just my 2 cents...

[bacchi]

You’re not alone, adjust your frame. You save more than you spend with the desire to retire before you’re 62. Great, you’ve found your people. Everyone has a different situation, with different goals but end of the day, we’re all on the same journey. So, now that you found your people, what specifically do you want to discuss? There’s something for everyone here and lots of wisdom, so maybe try to find solace in the variety here, instead of the quest for sameness. Just my 2 cents...

Name fits.

[Buffaloski Boris]

Naah. You’re not alone. This is a very odd and eclectic group. It runs the gamut. Some folks are FIREd on very little. Some aren’t FIREd and are striving for a few mil before they pull the plug. Others don’t even care about RE. Others such as myself don’t even have a FIRE number. A lot of us aren’t much into the various labels. Welcome to the Twilight Zone.

[beekayworld]

Regular FIRE means saving enough to simulate a typical middle-class lifestyle. Spending $60k would do that in a lot of neighborhoods.

This reminds me of an article I read about the basket of goods and services used to calculate a middle-class life.  When Social Security started it was tied to a certain set of goods and services to mimic a middle-class life *at-that-time* but as our standard of living improved, that lifestyle was below the norm.

For example, there was nothing budgeted to buy or operate a refrigerator because you would have had an icebox.  Like it or not, you probably cannot get by with just an ice box nowadays because the iceman stopped delivering a long time ago.

Also, air conditioning wasn't considered a normal middle-class expense.  My ex-husband was born in Dallas in 1950 and grew up without A.C. He swears that Dallas is hotter now, not just from global warming but also  because everyone else has air conditioners expelling hot air out; and there's more concrete and less grass and trees. House sizes have increased.

Someone in Dallas today without air conditioning certainly wouldn't be considered middle class.

Add in microwaves and DVD players or cable tv; having a computer and smart phone.  If your grandparents only had a landline and network tv you wouldn't consider them living a middle class lifestyle.  Some expanded entertainment and connection to the worldwide web are part of normal life today.  It's how we order from Amazon or book a spot in the gym's yoga studio.

We don't know what the future will hold, but it's likely that we will have more expenses over time just to have an average lifestyle as the bar for "average" creeps up.  it's not "keeping up with Joneses".  It's just everyone else moving ahead with some new improvement and you being stuck living an older lifestyle.  (who wants to whittle wood to pass the time? or sit in the parlor enjoying a view-master when the gentlemen callers call on your daughter?)

[Greystache]

You are definitely not alone here. Your income and retirement budget goals are nearly the same as ours when we retired 5 years ago.  We never really thought about a label for our budget, it was just what worked for us. With a paid off home and cars, you'll be pleasantly surprised how much fun you can have with $60K a year, even in a HCOL area like southern California.

[Metalcat]

I'm not sure I understand the question.  Do you think you plan to live on more than most in the FIRE movement or less?  Or do you think you're in a gap between Lean and Fat FIRE?  Living on 47k but having enough saved to spend 60k seems like it's right in the main part of the current FIRE movement.  It seems to me that 5 years ago these would have been pretty high numbers, but as the movement became more popular (or at least this forum became more popular) the average spend amounts moved up to around 40-70k/year.  But that's just a gut feel from reading the forums regularly.  There are plenty of people on here at almost every level of income, wealth, and annual spend.

Thanks for writing.  I don't think this is where I was trying to go with my original post.  It seems like everyone has very different goals & lifestyles, which can absolutely be celebrated.  I think it's awesome that there are so many people that are working towards some sort of goal as it pertains to financial freedom.

I suppose I just feel alone in what I'm doing.  It just seems that I haven't found a single person out there that is making $200+ income with a plan to live off $60K.  And I guess I feel detached, because if i bring this up to the 'Leanies' or 'Fatties' of the bunch, I'm feel shunned on both ends of the spectrum.  Does that make sense?

There are literally a ton of us here making high incomes and spending only middle class amounts, and planning to retire in those same amounts.

Who on earth is shunning you? I have literally never felt anything other than totally fitting in here, most people, regardless of their plan or finances are made to be very very welcome as long as they contribute to the forum.

Lean-FIRE actually kind of has two different meanings:
1: to retire on a relatively small amount
2: to reach a savings amount that would cover your "lean" expenses, but leave very little wiggle room.

Likewise, Fat-FIRE also has these two meanings
1: a retirement savings goal that covers a high spend
2: a savings amount reached that has a lot of "fat" in it, meaning, a ton of extra padding

If you're trying to say that you don't feel you fit in with the extremes...well yeah, few people do. We all mostly use those terms relative to our own goals.

So if your spend is 47K, but you could get by on 30K, then you would say that you reached lean-FIRE once you had saved 750K. Then, if your goal is to have a 60K spend in order to have some extra, but then you managed to save 2.5M instead of 1.5M, you would be quite fat-FIRE relative to your target.

So it's a little bit about the actual numbers, and a lot about what those numbers mean to you, which will depend on your location, your living situation, etc, etc. But basically, lean-FIRE means "I have enough to pay my bills, but I need to be careful, and may need avenues for generating income in the future"; FIRE means "I have enough to maintain my comfortable lifestyle with minimal risk of ever needing to earn future income"; fat-FIRE means "I have so much money that I can not only afford a fair amount of luxury, but I also have more than enough buffer to ever have to worry about going back to work"

Now, if you're on either extreme of low or high spend, then people here will be very confused if you use some of those terms. So if your annual spend is 12K, and you have saved 750K, and you call yourself fat-FIRE, you would probably want to qualify that. Likewise if you're Financial Samurai and finding that 3M+ is not nearly enough to cover your expenses, then people here would cringe at calling that lean-FIRE.

Otherwise, pretty much anything that falls in "normal" middle class range? Go ahead and freely define for yourself what those terms mean for your own situation.

Oh, and welcome to the forum, and trust me, no one is judging you for this, and you aren't even a little unusual here.

[yakamashii]

A lot of posters refer to the levels of FIRE as a progression, i.e. "We're almost to our Lean FIRE number of $xxx,xxx. Three more years to our Fat FIRE number of $x,xxx,xxx," and the actual numbers are entirely dependent on location and personal factors, as many have already said. To me, the levels of FIRE are nothing more than benchmarks.

Another thread on here prompted me to look at our spending sans travel and outings, and I was surprised to find that our 'stache would cover our spending during this pandemic if we weren't working and paying taxes and income-based social insurance premiums. So I guess we've reached Pandemic FIRE.

[Bloop Bloop]

I get what the OP is saying. If you're earning $200k+ you're at the low end of traditional "fat fire" territory but if you have absolutely no taste for fancy houses / jet-setting lifestyle / private schools / expensive hobbies then it can be rather alienating to go on those Fat Fire forums.

At the same time if you're earning a fair bit about average while only spending "average person" amounts then a lot of the "normal FIRE" discussion doesn't stack up. E.g., you can't do anything with your stimulus cheque because you'll never get one; you have to (if you live in a country that's not America) deal with higher taxes and the uncertainty of governments increasing your taxes every time there's a recession or pandemic; a lot of basic savings advice like maximising retirement accounts etc is of limited relevance (at least here in Australia, beyond a moderate threshold of $25k a year maximising retirement accounts comes with a massive tax penalty).

Also a lot of the cost vs time savings advice doesn't make sense if you're on $250k a year as opposed to $60k a year.

So you're stuck a little bit in limbo but it just takes some adjustment to sort it out. Plus it's a good/privileged position to be in so there's also that.

[Zikoris]

Here's my understanding of how some of the other groupings came into play, as a FIRE old-timer.

In the early days, there was only one FIRE. People who spent a lot of money and wanted a very lavish lifestyle post-retirement frequently got called out for being environmentally destructive and wasteful, so they branched off to their own group, fat-FIRE, for like-minded high earning, high spending people. People with simple lifestyles and low spending frequently got called out for being unrealistic and monk-ish, and frequently accused of lying about their numbers, so they branched off to form lean-FIRE. Fat-FIRE forums/discussion groups tend to focus more on increasing income, building businesses, and tax strategy. Lean-FIRE discussion places tend to focus more on things like stoicism, environmentalism, frugality, and alternative lifestyles. Both are good places for people at the fringes of FIRE.

Your situation honestly sound just like regular FIRE, which means you're in the right place, because the MMM forums seem to be right smack in the middle of the two extremes. You can feel free to ignore those two groups.

[Brodysan]

I get what the OP is saying. If you're earning $200k+ you're at the low end of traditional "fat fire" territory but if you have absolutely no taste for fancy houses / jet-setting lifestyle / private schools / expensive hobbies then it can be rather alienating to go on those Fat Fire forums.

At the same time if you're earning a fair bit about average while only spending "average person" amounts then a lot of the "normal FIRE" discussion doesn't stack up. E.g., you can't do anything with your stimulus cheque because you'll never get one; you have to (if you live in a country that's not America) deal with higher taxes and the uncertainty of governments increasing your taxes every time there's a recession or pandemic; a lot of basic savings advice like maximising retirement accounts etc is of limited relevance (at least here in Australia, beyond a moderate threshold of $25k a year maximising retirement accounts comes with a massive tax penalty).

Also a lot of the cost vs time savings advice doesn't make sense if you're on $250k a year as opposed to $60k a year.

So you're stuck a little bit in limbo but it just takes some adjustment to sort it out. Plus it's a good/privileged position to be in so there's also that.

You summed up what I was trying to say perfectly.  I feel like I'm doing the right thing, but in "the real world" people look at me like I'm a weirdo.  I'm sure those emotions bleed into the interwebs.

[Bloop Bloop]

I also feel a bit out of place both online and in the "real world" because people who earn as much as me frequently will spend a lot more than me - not necessarily because they're massive spendaholics, addicted to spendahol, but because they have big families or generous dispositions or a different background or whatever - and that doesn't attract me; but then people who are frugal (without being poor) often have an environmentally conscious disposition or some broader ethical framework which also doesn't greatly interest me.

So it's hard to find likeminded people who just want what I would call "efficient, limited overheads Fire" where we want to take advantage (within reason) of networking/business opportunities like Fat Fire folk but we want nothing to do with the lifestyle, and meanwhile we also want to be financially astute like normal Fire folk but without the purposeful frugality. But, it's a bit of a snowflake stance to be taking in the first place.

[Metalcat]

I get what the OP is saying. If you're earning $200k+ you're at the low end of traditional "fat fire" territory but if you have absolutely no taste for fancy houses / jet-setting lifestyle / private schools / expensive hobbies then it can be rather alienating to go on those Fat Fire forums.

At the same time if you're earning a fair bit about average while only spending "average person" amounts then a lot of the "normal FIRE" discussion doesn't stack up. E.g., you can't do anything with your stimulus cheque because you'll never get one; you have to (if you live in a country that's not America) deal with higher taxes and the uncertainty of governments increasing your taxes every time there's a recession or pandemic; a lot of basic savings advice like maximising retirement accounts etc is of limited relevance (at least here in Australia, beyond a moderate threshold of $25k a year maximising retirement accounts comes with a massive tax penalty).

Also a lot of the cost vs time savings advice doesn't make sense if you're on $250k a year as opposed to $60k a year.

So you're stuck a little bit in limbo but it just takes some adjustment to sort it out. Plus it's a good/privileged position to be in so there's also that.

You summed up what I was trying to say perfectly.  I feel like I'm doing the right thing, but in "the real world" people look at me like I'm a weirdo.  I'm sure those emotions bleed into the interwebs.

MMM forums are not the real world, issues of judgement that you face IRL just aren't relevant here. Not that this place is free of judgement, quite the contrary, just that, you won't be judged for not spending most of your income.

Honestly, you really are just normal here. You're not finding a sub group to fit into here, because you belong to the main group.

Some people here are low income, low spend. Some are high income, high spend. However, tons of people are high income, low spend. It's so normal here, your concern is almost funny.

Honestly, spend more time participating here before you assume that you don't fit it, you're literally worried about nothing.

[flyingaway]

I don't know what the OP wants to say. You make $230k a year, but just want to spend  $60k a year. What is wrong with that?
You can spring more if you want.
You can make less if you want.
You can retire early if you want.
You can donate the money if you want.

[charis]

As stated above, this forum is not the real world. You're situation is very common here - upper middle class earners who save a large percent of their income.

[Dr. Pepper]

We are doing the same as you, your not alone, our AGI was moderately higher, but the same idea applies. We are saving significantly more then we spend, with a target of 60-70k spend in retirement. No set date for retirement, but will be nice to have the option.

[Villanelle]

If I had to make up numbers, I'd guess that probably ~~~75% of people here plan on budgets between $40k and $75k. 

I think you see those others terms in part because there have names.  Barista FIRE, fat FIRE (though some would argue that those in the high end of that 45-75k spectrum have gone fat), Lean FIRE.  There isn't a cute pet name for normal FIRE. 

So what would you even google?

There isn't even consensus on what fat FIRE means (and it probably also depends somewhat on location, paid off house or not, etc.) .  To me, less than $100k/yr isn't fat (though yes, a bit chubby!), but to some, that's obese. 

But in the end, it hardly matters.  If you are living a well-examined life and it seems to be working for you and your family, then fabulous.  Soldier on.

[terran]

in "the real world" people look at me like I'm a weirdo.

You are a weirdo, just like literally everyone who posts on this forum, you are taking a very unconventional path.

[BDWW]

     who wants to whittle wood to pass the time?

What have you got against whittling?

[asauer]

Before I knew anything about the FIRE Movement or Mr. Money Mustache, I had a plan to retire early...a good plan.

To me, it was simple - either make more money, or spend less.  Either way, I knew I had to invest a greater portion of my income.

In a nutshell, my wife & I gross about $230K.  However, we only spend $47K a year on total expenses.  100% of every net dollar over $47K is being invested.  We live very comfortably and want for nothing.  But this is probably because we never lived a lifestyle that matches our income.  So, investing came easy.

That being said, the goal is to mass enough money to be able to comfortably spend $60K annually...leaving a nice cushion for the weird things that come up in life.

Fast forward to today...people are talking about FAT FIRE, LEAN FIRE, BARISTA FIRE, etc...  I don't think I fit into any of those categories.  Sure, there are components from each one that fit into my narrative, but why does a person have to live in a shoe-box or have a private jet.

Am I an anomaly to the FIRE movement?

You're not alone.  We project our annual spend is going to be around 55k/ year and are planning accordingly.  I see all the different flavors of FIRE to be just a description of individuals' approach to money, not necessarily a category.  For example, my husband and I are currently Lean FIRE but we plan to surpass that in 2021 at which point we will be Coast FIRE- I will quit my job, hubs will work and cover bills/ health insurance for another 5-ish years when we will be Fat FIRE.  See- they're approaches or points on a continuum.

[John Galt incarnate!]

in "the real world" people look at me like I'm a weirdo.

You are a weirdo, just like literally everyone who posts on this forum, you are taking a very unconventional path.

Agree.

At bottom, I think most Mu$tachian$ are nonconformist.

[BTDretire]

Love this.  I think that's where I'm lost.  It seems like there are a lot of people putting very specific labels on ways-to-FIRE.  But my way doesn't really match up to anyone's, which is why I guess I feel alone, or doing something wrong...if that makes sense?

For example, every time LEAN FIRE is mentioned, it comes with this connotation that people are living a very simplistic lifestyle (i.e. riding a bike everywhere they go & eating berries they grew from their garden).  I'm not doing that (and don't get me wrong, I commend people that do/can)...but what I am doing does fit into a lot of the principles of LEAN FIRE (i.e. living significantly below my means).

But on the flip side, because my end-game is $60K, I feel that pigeon-holds me into the FAT side of the community.  Minus the private jets, of course.

I suppose that's where I feel lost.  Maybe it's a sense of wanting to belong, or a sense of feeling I am doing something wrong.

 I norm at all. I'm right in the $60k range also, although, our nest egg will generate a little more than that, a 4%.
  Yes there are those that want to retire earlier and that means less time to save and less saved. I have argued against that idea and have put forth my opinion that they should work a little longer so they don't have to live in poverty. I have been chastised for using the term poverty.
 Many welfare programs start at 133% of the poverty level, and that is $17k for a single person, $23k for two people and $29k for a family of three. Why setup your life for that, if you are healthy enough to support yourself and not rely on the 51% of people that pay Federal income taxes?

[John Galt incarnate!]

I don't think I fit into any of those categories. 

What matters most is that your pursuit of FIRE, and your life as a FIREee,  include you in the  category of people who are happy and content.

Am I an anomaly to the FIRE movement?

Hardly.

[DirtDiva]

I don't think I fit into any other those categories.

w

1.  Reassurance: we have similar income and outgo.

2.  Reassurance:  fitting in is overrated.

Are you feeling more like part of the tribe now?

[Buffaloski Boris]

in "the real world" people look at me like I'm a weirdo.

You are a weirdo, just like literally everyone who posts on this forum, you are taking a very unconventional path.

I dunno. I think the OP needs to up his weird game. I mean there’s weird, and then there’s really weird, and then there’s the MMM forums. 😆

[terran]

in "the real world" people look at me like I'm a weirdo.

You are a weirdo, just like literally everyone who posts on this forum, you are taking a very unconventional path.

I dunno. I think the OP needs to up his weird game. I mean there’s weird, and then there’s really weird, and then there’s the MMM forums. 😆

Well yes, there's a normal distribution in every population. This forum is definitely at the tail end of the distribution of the "the real world."

[Chrissy]

Hi @Brodysan !  How are you?  Husband and I made $202k in 2019.  I catalogue every folly and windfall over at my journal:  https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/i-live-on-bananas/msg2623618/#msg2623618

Sometime in 2028, we could retire to our Money Pit of lake house in a LCOL area on an annual spend of $75k, or we could retire in our current HCOL area in 2030/31 on an annual spend of $105k.  Of course, we have kids, and sometimes we're just plain stupid (SEE:  Money Pit), so we spend a LOT, but, like you, we have the income and we have the dream.

See you around sometime.

[Fomerly known as something]

Color me the same, except with not so high of an income since I’m single so only one income.  Earning 150k and pending about 60k isn’t as dramatic sounding.  I tend to call the Fire I’m aiming for skinny-FatFire or slightly overweight Fire.  I like some luxuries, but I don’t generally see the value in 5* hotels when a 3* gives you 90% of the luxury.  But really I plan on that 50-60k spend but with enough wiggle room that I really don’t have to think about how much I’m spending if I don’t want to.

[LoanShark]

Not out of the norm for these parts...

[HBFIRE]

I was under the impression this is most of us in this community?  High earners living on lower than typical spending levels?  Shrug.

[use2betrix]

I'm not sure I understand the question.  Do you think you plan to live on more than most in the FIRE movement or less?  Or do you think you're in a gap between Lean and Fat FIRE?  Living on 47k but having enough saved to spend 60k seems like it's right in the main part of the current FIRE movement.  It seems to me that 5 years ago these would have been pretty high numbers, but as the movement became more popular (or at least this forum became more popular) the average spend amounts moved up to around 40-70k/year.  But that's just a gut feel from reading the forums regularly.  There are plenty of people on here at almost every level of income, wealth, and annual spend.

Thanks for writing.  I don't think this is where I was trying to go with my original post.  It seems like everyone has very different goals & lifestyles, which can absolutely be celebrated.  I think it's awesome that there are so many people that are working towards some sort of goal as it pertains to financial freedom.

I suppose I just feel alone in what I'm doing.  It just seems that I haven't found a single person out there that is making $200+ income with a plan to live off $60K.  And I guess I feel detached, because if i bring this up to the 'Leanies' or 'Fatties' of the bunch, I'm feel shunned on both ends of the spectrum.  Does that make sense?

While my spending is higher, my ratios are similar. Right now I spend about $6k-$7k/month and we are saving around $15k-$18k/month. I’ll probably take home around $270k-$290k this year. We spend way more now because I work and make so much. We’re buying “nice” things that should last us decades, and enjoying nice meals. Not stressing about anything money related.

My FIRE number will likely be closer to $60k/yr. Less if we have a paid off house. During our sabbaticals, we’ve learned that we are easily happy spending far less when we have more free time.

[thesis]

I have a "FIRE number", but it doesn't really mean anything because I'd like to get married and have a kid or two, and who knows how that FIRE number could change.

I tend to think of it in terms of levels, kind of like mentioned above. At certain amounts invested, various bills may be paid for such as car insurance, food, possibly rent, or health insurance. I'm not sure I really want to spend another 15 years in software just to hit "the number", so I try to think of it in terms of which slices of life my stash could pay for on a monthly basis. I hope to get more creative eventually, or at least decrease my hours.

I do occasionally enjoy a good laugh at the people on this forum who need millions to be content. But ultimately, everyone's life is their own, and my laughs are my own :-)

[Steeze]

I'm not sure I understand the question.  Do you think you plan to live on more than most in the FIRE movement or less?  Or do you think you're in a gap between Lean and Fat FIRE?  Living on 47k but having enough saved to spend 60k seems like it's right in the main part of the current FIRE movement.  It seems to me that 5 years ago these would have been pretty high numbers, but as the movement became more popular (or at least this forum became more popular) the average spend amounts moved up to around 40-70k/year.  But that's just a gut feel from reading the forums regularly.  There are plenty of people on here at almost every level of income, wealth, and annual spend.

Thanks for writing.  I don't think this is where I was trying to go with my original post.  It seems like everyone has very different goals & lifestyles, which can absolutely be celebrated.  I think it's awesome that there are so many people that are working towards some sort of goal as it pertains to financial freedom.

I suppose I just feel alone in what I'm doing.  It just seems that I haven't found a single person out there that is making $200+ income with a plan to live off $60K.  And I guess I feel detached, because if i bring this up to the 'Leanies' or 'Fatties' of the bunch, I'm feel shunned on both ends of the spectrum.  Does that make sense?

Our household income is (was?) 200k with current annual spend at 35k-40k with 60k planned for FIRE. Fire will involve owning cars and higher health costs which is why 60k and not 40k.

[trollwithamustache]

The internet has to classify and codify everything. And its F^%&ing exhausting sometimes.

OP- just keep doing what you doing.

[Zikoris]

I was under the impression this is most of us in this community?  High earners living on lower than typical spending levels?  Shrug.

That's what I was thinking. This is so typical it is literally the FIRE stereotype - high earner spending like an average earner, and saving the excess.

[goat_music_generator]

I also feel a bit out of place both online and in the "real world" because people who earn as much as me frequently will spend a lot more than me - not necessarily because they're massive spendaholics, addicted to spendahol, but because they have big families or generous dispositions or a different background or whatever - and that doesn't attract me; but then people who are frugal (without being poor) often have an environmentally conscious disposition or some broader ethical framework which also doesn't greatly interest me.

So it's hard to find likeminded people who just want what I would call "efficient, limited overheads Fire" where we want to take advantage (within reason) of networking/business opportunities like Fat Fire folk but we want nothing to do with the lifestyle, and meanwhile we also want to be financially astute like normal Fire folk but without the purposeful frugality. But, it's a bit of a snowflake stance to be taking in the first place.

I relate to this a lot, actually. Frugality for the sake of efficiency and living a happier life, not for environmental reasons.