Has FIRE become “spendy”?

[frugalecon]

Listening to Pete on the Choose FI podcast, it occurred to me I have been hearing a lot of discussion in the FI and FIRE podcast universe about the importance of spending and not just being so frugal all of the time. They are referencing the “Die with Zero” book, among other things. Is it my imagination, or is this an emerging strain of philosophy in the FIRE universe? How on board are people with it? I can see the argument to be open to spending where there is a good payoff to it, but it seems a little inconsistent with Pete’s earlier focus on living lightly because of environmental concerns.

[curious_george]

There are some threads floating around here about buying teslas and million dollar houses. I'm waiting for the quarter million dollar boat thread.

I think it has slowly turned into a lifestyle design and lifestyle optimization movement.

[BeanCounter]

I’ve noticed this too and for me it’s been a good thing. I’ve found it hard to turn off all the frugal habits after years of reading finance sites and books and saving. We are FI and it’s hard to relax and enjoy it once you get there. I read Die with Zero and have listened to some of Remit Sethi and have found this new point of view to be refreshing and helpful. I’m grateful the frugal habits got us to this point but I don’t want to hoard money.

[Log]

Many FIRE devotees are too focused on escaping work, and don't have a clear plan of what they're going to do with all that time when they get there. Once you have the position of strength in negotiating your working conditions (FU money), you can work fewer hours, at better rates, with people you enjoy associating with. The most powerful bit of the FIRE strategy is "save most aggressively when you're young so that it has more time to compound." Get that step sorted out, and then you have the freedom to choose between RE, or working more and getting rich.

Retiring early makes sense if you have a vision that requires maximum flexibility and time off. If you want to backpack around the world or homeschool multiple children, that's a good reason to retire. If you want to reskill into an entirely different form of work (or take on work that isn't as lucrative), FI buys you that freedom, but you're still likely to be earning some money. If you just want to travel, hike, or hang out with friends more often... you can do all those things while you have a job. The problem preventing those things isn't work, it's internal.

As far as environmental costs are concerned, there are a lot of things you can spend more money on that aren't imposing any environmental costs. In fact, a lot of fancy expensive things can be better for the environment. Get richer and you can move to a more expensive walkable neighborhood. You can pay a premium for things that were produced in more sustainable ways, or were made locally and didn't need to be shipped across the ocean on a carbon-belching container ship.

I think FIRE had it's moment, and most people realized that FI is the best part, and RE is only really worth it for

• people who really, really hate their jobs, or
• people with really clear (and generally somewhat eccentric) visions for what they're going to fill all that time with

.
For most people who achieve FI and don't want to live in a van or run a weird Catholic/Mormon homeschool operation, the real path to living your best life is to use that leverage to

• downshift into some kind of related work role with fewer hours and greater flexibility, or
• take on some other kind of work that provides lower compensation, but is deeply meaningful/enjoyable.

Work gets a bad name around here, but the idea that work provides a sense of meaning and purpose is not something to be scoffed at. There are lots of great jobs in the world. Once money is no object, it becomes a lot easier to get one of those desirable and competitive jobs. Lots of people are attracted to FIRE because they were pushed by financial desperation into jobs they hate. Well once you're not financially desperate, you can get a job you don't hate. For the big FIRE content creators, they found flexibility, reduced hours, and sense of purpose in providing educational content on the internet about lifestyle and personal finance. Now they're trying to figure out what to do with that money.

I think FIRE is attractive to people who received lots of guilt/shame messages about money as children. If you were conditioned to believe frugality is a virtue and opulent spending is shameful and/or stupid, and then you grind your way through school to get a high-paying career... Well then the FIRE approach lets you exemplify those "virtues" you internalized as child without ever confronting the internal scripts around scarcity. Then someday you realize you're rich and you never exercised the muscle of spending money well to make your life more beautiful. Will second @BeanCounter that Ramit Sethi's stuff is a great counter-balance to the scarcity mindset.

[ChpBstrd]

It may be a generational thing. Thousands of people who read FIRE blogs in the 2010-2020 decade got very wealthy and found themselves with a lot of time on their hands, wondering how to change their habits once they became multi-millionaires in the last several years.

Newer entrants don't read blogs, they watch short internet videos with mandatory ads designed to increase their consumption and sabotage their FIRE plans.

They are also accumulating in a very different environment than the post-GFC world from which MMM, 1500Days, and many others emerged. In that timeframe housing got a lot more unaffordable, cars got more unaffordable, inflation spiked to 9%, and stocks got a lot more expensive. Who'd have thought ten years ago that iBonds would be the hot investment of 2022!

As a result, a lot of the old advice is falling flat:

• Buy a reasonably-priced house with a sub-5% mortgage? Uh.. not available any more.
• Hold a 90% or 100% stock portfolio now that bonds are yielding 5% and we've had 4.75% in rate hikes within the last 13 months? Maybe not.
• Focus on paying off that student loan debt at an interest rate less than you can earn on treasuries? No.
• Buy a bunch of houses and earn 5x the mortgage payment by putting them on AirBNB? Too late. Now that market is saturated.
• Buy a bunch of houses conforming to the 1% rule with a 4% mortgage rate? Just let me know when you find those things, lol!

The switch to a less-intellectual communication media led to a reduced "market" for all that boring responsible talk about how to cut one's expenses and invest, and an expanded market for crypto-scams, get-rich-quick influencers, let-me-inspire-you-then-show-you-an-ad influencers, and of course the video naysayers who say it can't be done. The change in market conditions made much of the 10-year advice seem irrelevant and de-motivating, since those deals are no longer available.

The world is still full of opportunities, they're just different than a decade ago. I bought $13k worth of 6-month CDs yielding 4.9% just now, and I'm going to try to do another round of iBonds before rates reset on 4/30/23. Meanwhile I'm poised to pounce when the next recession and real estate crisis rolls around within the next couple of years and creates another 7% SWR opportunity or real estate empire building opportunity. In the meantime, the thing to do is apply for promotions, as competition for the best jobs is at an all-time low!

[patchyfacialhair]

I used to be "FIRE as soon as we hit 25x spending" but life has had a funny way of changing that.

I found MMM as a young single guy. Now, I'm married, a couple of kids, a house, private school for the kids, so now those original FIRE priorities maybe look a little different. We've got college savings to consider, inflation "feels" gross, and the housing market doesn't inspire confidence. Despite how awesome we are currently doing, it doesn't "feel" good. Hence...that YOLO spending impulse creeps in a little bit. We keep most of it at bay, but occasionally we find ourselves looking at brand new awesome houses on Zillow, or checking out that new TRD PRO Sequoia...let's just say that we've not made major spending changes...but it's tempting, especially as our incomes have gone up.

Here's the other thing...FIRE attracts well paid, but also diligent folks. Well paid diligent folks tend to earn more and more in many cases as the years go by. My wife may end up making 7 figures by herself when we look at a 10-15 year future from today. If she's fulfilled and wants to keep working...well then...it's possible the spending increases without impacting today's FIRE timeline projection.

The truly frugal ones were destined to die off on this forum and in the FIRE movement. At least visibly. What's more exciting to read about than a frugal FIRE? FIRE with a sweet car/yacht/house/vitamix.

[frugalecon]

I guess it isn’t my imagination, then. Being FI, but not RE, and open to spending fairly freely for things I feel are good value and enhance my life, I have always been more aligned with Bogleheads than MMM, but I guess that the FIRE movement is evolving and growing up. It makes sense that it needs to evolve since it emerged during a very particular set of conditions, and if those are no longer relevant it will change.

[ChpBstrd]

I guess it isn’t my imagination, then. Being FI, but not RE, and open to spending fairly freely for things I feel are good value and enhance my life, I have always been more aligned with Bogleheads than MMM, but I guess that the FIRE movement is evolving and growing up. It makes sense that it needs to evolve since it emerged during a very particular set of conditions, and if those are no longer relevant it will change.

I think the needs are still there, even if markets and social media have changed. Someone in their 20s could do a lot worse than socking away a few thousand dollars in VTI instead of financing a car or being fashionable.

People do need reinforcement of the idea that $50k SUVs = financial suicide, McMansions = lifetime of debt, and drive through fast food = time waste + painful early death + poverty. Marketing tells us that all these things are good ideas that will transform our lives for the better, and somebody need to counter that messaging with a facepunch.

To the extent people are feeling hopeless and burned out on careerism and consumerism, they'll seek out these kinds of messages. Also, I think we'll soon enough be back in the same environment as we were in after the GFC, with new influencers on new types of social media preaching the same gospel that has worked for generations before them.

[Chris Pascale]

They are referencing the “Die with Zero” book

I remember an early Pete interview where he said he didn't have any ideas about leaving a legacy with his money, but it seemed more in the realm of "I stopped working at a young age and there might not be much left beyond a respectable inheritance for the kid(s)."

Having said that, people change, and while Pete once wrote about what I thought was a very weird respectably unconventional road trip where he used a spray bottle on the dash instead of the AC, he may simply want to do lots of cool stuff that costs more money, not less right now.

Lastly, romantic partners can influence behavior, too.

[Paper Chaser]

I think the early part of Pete's FIRE journey was mostly him finding ways to reframe austerity to seem like a good thing so he could avoid spending and escape an unfulfilling career sooner. It was a means to an end. His highest priority was FIRE, and after he achieved that, he relaxed. He and most others have softened more than a little as they've got older and wealthier through the longest bull market/asset bubble in history. That's understandable. Like ChpBstrd, I think that the current economic environment (and any potential downturn) could allow a new generation of determined individuals to scrap and focus their efforts on their individual betterment. Maybe it's buying a house, or paying off student loans, or FIRE. There are plenty of financial goals for young people to achieve that will require disciplined spending and grit over time.

[deborah]

The forum has changed, but I see the changes as including a bigger range of people. When the forum started, just about everyone hadn’t retired, and didn’t have enough to even contemplate retirement, so everyone was trying to become FI. There are now a lot of people who’ve reached FI, and so the dilemmas now include those of people who have enough as well as people who are just at the beginning of their journey.

If we break it into two phases - those who are heading towards FI and those who are FI - the first group still have all the questions about frugality and how to get to FI. Although the economic situation has changed and some older solutions may not work now, there have always been a large variety of ways to become FI. There is no one path.

In the main, I think the people in the FI phase are the ones who are questioning FIRE. Do I really want to leave work? What do I do with all this money? How do I build a life after retiring? And they’re the ones thinking about “Die with Zero”. They’ve become more spendy. I’ve been retired for over 13 years, and my stash has increased considerably from when I left work, and a lot of other FIREd people have the same dilemma. On the other hand, because practising frugality for years has made me value a simpler life, I actually prefer not spending as much on a lot of stuff. I think this is part of the spendiness discussion.

I also think there are a lot more reasons to remain FIRE than people are mentioning in previous posts. I certainly don’t fit into any of those mentioned.

[Log]

It may be a generational thing. Thousands of people who read FIRE blogs in the 2010-2020 decade got very wealthy and found themselves with a lot of time on their hands, wondering how to change their habits once they became multi-millionaires in the last several years.

Newer entrants don't read blogs, they watch short internet videos with mandatory ads designed to increase their consumption and sabotage their FIRE plans.

They are also accumulating in a very different environment than the post-GFC world from which MMM, 1500Days, and many others emerged. In that timeframe housing got a lot more unaffordable, cars got more unaffordable, inflation spiked to 9%, and stocks got a lot more expensive. Who'd have thought ten years ago that iBonds would be the hot investment of 2022!

As a result, a lot of the old advice is falling flat:

• Buy a reasonably-priced house with a sub-5% mortgage? Uh.. not available any more.
• Hold a 90% or 100% stock portfolio now that bonds are yielding 5% and we've had 4.75% in rate hikes within the last 13 months? Maybe not.
• Focus on paying off that student loan debt at an interest rate less than you can earn on treasuries? No.
• Buy a bunch of houses and earn 5x the mortgage payment by putting them on AirBNB? Too late. Now that market is saturated.
• Buy a bunch of houses conforming to the 1% rule with a 4% mortgage rate? Just let me know when you find those things, lol!

The switch to a less-intellectual communication media led to a reduced "market" for all that boring responsible talk about how to cut one's expenses and invest, and an expanded market for crypto-scams, get-rich-quick influencers, let-me-inspire-you-then-show-you-an-ad influencers, and of course the video naysayers who say it can't be done. The change in market conditions made much of the 10-year advice seem irrelevant and de-motivating, since those deals are no longer available...

I think this is a little bit beside the point. The majority has always been and will always be people who lack financial literacy. Crypto ponzi schemes, TikTok influencers, and /r/antiwork aren't really anything new in the ecosystem of financially illiterate people externalizing their locus of control and either giving up or resorting to scams.

The people falling for the dumb bullshit wouldn't be on track to FIRE if only they'd been born 10 years earlier so that they'd seen MMM instead of TikTok "entrepreneurs." They would have simply fallen for the dumb bullshit of 10 years ago. Could be Crypto meme-coins, could be lottery tickets, it makes no difference.

The baseline of financially literacy is "spend less than you earn, invest the difference." The promise of FIRE is "reach 25x your annual spend in investments and you can do whatever you want." The question is, how many people choose retirement as the answer to "do whatever you want?" Around the 2010s, FIRE had a big moment and a lot of people got really enthusiastic about retiring early. Then a lot of them got to the goal, realized retirement wasn't all it's cracked up to be, and decided to go back to work.

A lot of people realize that even if they never want a stupid SUV and a stupid wristwatch or handbag that shouts to the world that they have a lot of money, there are plenty of things they can spend money on that do provide a meaningful difference in quality of life.

The baseline questions are pretty binary: whether or not someone is financially literate, and whether someone who's financially literate chooses retirement at a low spend, or more work to support a richer life.

---

A separate aside: I think in retrospect, we'll realize those real estate examples you gave are not that different from people who got rich off the crypto boom. Real estate "investing" has been having a real moment because of NIMBYism and a bunch of shitty policy choices. Governments have basically regulated "line go up" for the whole housing market. A society where housing prices constantly outpace inflation is axiomatically a society headed towards a whole lot of suffering and dysfunction, and we're now reaping what we've sown in terms of homelessness, financial despair, and lost productivity in booming regions due to housing constraints.

Ultimately, people like JL Collins will be proven right in the long term: a house is not an "investment," it's a form of consumption. You can choose to buy or rent based on lifestyle preferences, but in a world where we actually build enough damn houses, people won't get rich merely by buying and holding a house, and landlords/property managers will actually have to compete on price and quality to attract tenants.

[Freedomin5]

To me, FIRE has always been about optimization, not spending. FIRE, or specifically financial independence, simply provides the means or pathway to optimize other areas of my life, such as health, relationships, etc., and not just finances.

In addition, FIRE provides a different mindset, a different way to make financial decisions.

We are one of those families looking for a million dollar house -- well, in Canadian dollars, so more like a $750K house. Not because we are trying to be more spendy, but because the $1M house allows us to be close to nature (which we value), be in a good public school district (which we value), be close to family so that we can help when needed (which we value).

At the same time, because of the FIRE mindset, we are also considering how to optimize the $1M house. Is there an ADU or a basement unit that can be rented out for additional income? Is it close to a university so that we can rent out rooms if necessary? Is the space flexible enough that we can section of part of it for a home business? Is there a back garden where we can grow some of our own food? Is there some way my $1M house can become an income generator and not just an expense?

[Ron Scott]

I don’t understand why people think of being frugal in absolute dollars. I’ve always thought of it in percentages.

I am frugal because I live on a very low % of my invested assets, far below any definition of SWR.

When I stop for chips at Dollar Tree and refuse to buy pineapple when it’s not on sale (which I do) I’m not being frugal. I’m being cheap.

I live frugally because I feel like it, not because I have to.

What car you drive is relative. One person’s loaded Taycan is another’s used Civic.

Retirees who NEED to spend 4-6% of their stash just to get by in a subsistence lifestyle aren’t frugal, they’re poor.

[ChpBstrd]

The forum has changed, but I see the changes as including a bigger range of people. When the forum started, just about everyone hadn’t retired, and didn’t have enough to even contemplate retirement, so everyone was trying to become FI....

...If we break it into two phases - those who are heading towards FI and those who are FI - the first group still have all the questions about frugality and how to get to FI. Although the economic situation has changed and some older solutions may not work now, there have always been a large variety of ways to become FI. There is no one path.

And of course the people who are RE have more time available to chat in the MMM forum. And they aren't as interested in $2/plate noodle recipes, the question of whether to DCA monthly or weekly, or how to sew ripped jeans.

In the main, I think the people in the FI phase are the ones who are questioning FIRE. Do I really want to leave work? What do I do with all this money? How do I build a life after retiring? And they’re the ones thinking about “Die with Zero”. They’ve become more spendy. I’ve been retired for over 13 years, and my stash has increased considerably from when I left work, and a lot of other FIREd people have the same dilemma.

A good correction / recession might knock some of the paper-rich FIREees back into thinking about frugality when their WR suddenly exceeds 4% or 5% or 6%. A prolonged downturn hasn't happened since 2009. That was 14 years ago! It was certainly an excellent era in which to FIRE. I suspect anyone suffering from early retirement boredom will soon have fresh things to be anxious about.

Younger people seem to be feeling more frustration and doom, as opposed to MMM's optimism and opportunism. There's a lot more talk about student loan debt, unaffordable housing, and destined-to-fail musical chairs investment scams like crypto. To them, prosperity seems like something you get after gambling big and winning (e.g. on Gamestop stock, or Dogecoin).

Yet now is a measurably much easier time to pursue FIRE than 2009-2015. Now it is possible to earn decent returns in bonds or CDs. Now the job market is so tight complete dipshits are nailing promotions. All one has to do is avoid buying too much house (or perhaps a house at all), avoid speculating in dumb media ideas, and avoid falling into the trap of lifestyle creep. The best advice to people starting out: pay more attention to your spreadsheets than your media / social media apps.

[GuitarStv]

There are some threads floating around here about buying teslas and million dollar houses. I'm waiting for the quarter million dollar boat thread.

I think it has slowly turned into a lifestyle design and lifestyle optimization movement.

The average price of a house in Toronto is currently 1,091,300$ . . . down 17% from last year.  :P

[ChpBstrd]

There are some threads floating around here about buying teslas and million dollar houses. I'm waiting for the quarter million dollar boat thread.

I think it has slowly turned into a lifestyle design and lifestyle optimization movement.

The average price of a house in Toronto is currently 1,091,300$ . . . down 17% from last year.  :P

This is an example of where 20-30 year old mantras no longer make sense. If you as a middle class person buy that average home, and drop 40% or more of your income on a mortgage payment (or rent), you have destined yourself to a life of being house poor. It doesn't matter what everyone else is doing - you just got on a treadmill that will never stop.

The realm of HCOL areas has expanded from areas like NYC and Silicon Valley to most large North American and European metro areas. Not only does home ownership not make sense in such areas, but even living there doesn't make sense when you compare the salary-COL difference to LCOL areas. LCOL areas are easier to FIRE in, and leave one with a larger monthly surplus for investing or contingencies. Yet nobody wants to live there.

[VanillaGorilla]

I think that for many, if not most, people, full time work is desirable.

And MMM principles can easily be repurposed for building massive wealth instead of retiring early. Once work is optional it becomes a lot more fun.

The further along I get the more I realize how little interest I have in several high profile FIRE advocates' lifestyles. In fact, I find them increasingly tedious.

[Ron Scott]

I think that for many, if not most, people, full time work is desirable.

And MMM principles can easily be repurposed for building massive wealth instead of retiring early. Once work is optional it becomes a lot more fun.

The further along I get the more I realize how little interest I have in several high profile FIRE advocates' lifestyles. In fact, I find them increasingly tedious.

Yeah, that’s a Bingo.

The whole thing here about hating your job and feeling good about giving your boss the big FU sounds immature to me.

[Philociraptor]

Echoing what has already been said, the principles behind FIRE lead to incredible wealth generation; what each person decides to do with that wealth is up to them.

[curious_george]

There are some threads floating around here about buying teslas and million dollar houses. I'm waiting for the quarter million dollar boat thread.

I think it has slowly turned into a lifestyle design and lifestyle optimization movement.

The average price of a house in Toronto is currently 1,091,300$ . . . down 17% from last year.  :P

This is an example of where 20-30 year old mantras no longer make sense. If you as a middle class person buy that average home, and drop 40% or more of your income on a mortgage payment (or rent), you have destined yourself to a life of being house poor. It doesn't matter what everyone else is doing - you just got on a treadmill that will never stop.

The realm of HCOL areas has expanded from areas like NYC and Silicon Valley to most large North American and European metro areas. Not only does home ownership not make sense in such areas, but even living there doesn't make sense when you compare the salary-COL difference to LCOL areas. LCOL areas are easier to FIRE in, and leave one with a larger monthly surplus for investing or contingencies. Yet nobody wants to live there.

hmmm...

I just checked, and the city where I grew up STILL has $20,000 dollar houses available, and the city I currently live in still has $50,000 dollar houses for sale.

These places are just fine to live in. I live in one of those places that no one wants to live and I'm still alive. I just have some crazy, dumb, red neck neighbors. lol.

[Laura33]

Well, of course it's become more spendy -- I'm here, after all.  ;-)

Joking/not joking.  I've been reading MMM since almost the beginning.  But I've never wanted to live on $24K/yr -- hell, I've worked my whole life specifically so I did not have to worry about scraping by on the lowest-possible expenses -- so the blog had limited appeal.  But once he started focusing on things like stoicism and optimization, things clicked more for me; the idea that you don't actually need XYZ to be happy, that everything is a choice, all really resonated.  And that all happened for me at a time when work/young kids were overwhelming and my stepdad had just died, so I was questioning a lot and working through a pretty major depression.  And I can't tell you how powerful it was for me to realize at that point in my life that I could be FI already if I cut back on some of the total fluff in the budget that wasn't really making me happy anyway.  Knowing that I could walk away from my job at any point meant everything.

That's when I started to feel like I could belong here, too, even though I'm never going to be one of the serious budgeting badasses (I still do admire the hell out of them, even though I don't want to be them).  The first several years after I started posting, I felt like a total imposter and expected to be booed off the board (still do sometimes!).  So the fact that I've been accepted here at all demonstrates how the focus has changed.  Then again, if everything were still focused on how to live on $24K, vs. some of the more theoretical/mindset things that it has developed into, it wouldn't have that much appeal to me.  But I also hope it doesn't change so much that our badasses get turned off and stop posting, because that would be a very serious loss.

ETA:  I also want to reaffirm that more spending does not necessarily equal anti-environmentalism.  We're spending seven figures to rebuild post-literal-fire (luckily, it's insurance money!), and my number one priority was adding new insulation (with number two being more efficient/effective HVAC); the new siding is also going to allow us to add housewrap for further protection against air infiltration.  And this is after we've already paid an absolutely ridiculous amount of $$ to replace every single leaky vinyl 1980s-era window in the house with energy-efficient ones and add an external charging station when DH bought a hybrid.  And if we didn't have a hipped roof with a whole bunch of dormers, we'd absolutely have added solar, too (instead, we've signed up for the BGE solar program, so we're paying them to develop/use solar as part of their energy sourcing). 

I do agree that the key element of being environmentally-friendly is to buy/do less; a long daily driving commute is going to be environmentally costly no matter how efficient your vehicle is.  But there are also a number of areas where the environmentally-friendliest option costs more, and so having more income/cash than you need can be very helpful (believe me, the super-insulated windows cost a shit-ton more!).  Like anything else, it's all about your priorities.

[Ron Scott]

There are some threads floating around here about buying teslas and million dollar houses. I'm waiting for the quarter million dollar boat thread.

I think it has slowly turned into a lifestyle design and lifestyle optimization movement.

The average price of a house in Toronto is currently 1,091,300$ . . . down 17% from last year.  :P

This is an example of where 20-30 year old mantras no longer make sense. If you as a middle class person buy that average home, and drop 40% or more of your income on a mortgage payment (or rent), you have destined yourself to a life of being house poor. It doesn't matter what everyone else is doing - you just got on a treadmill that will never stop.

The realm of HCOL areas has expanded from areas like NYC and Silicon Valley to most large North American and European metro areas. Not only does home ownership not make sense in such areas, but even living there doesn't make sense when you compare the salary-COL difference to LCOL areas. LCOL areas are easier to FIRE in, and leave one with a larger monthly surplus for investing or contingencies. Yet nobody wants to live there.

It is true that a greater percentage of homeowners in cities, the Northeast/West Coast, and near the oceans spend more of their income on housing. But it is also true that many millions of households in these areas, a third or so, are spending only about a third of their income on housing.

Many more are so attracted to what these areas offer they’re willing to give up savings to enjoy it.

There is nothing wrong with any of this. People are different and differences should be celebrated instead of scorned. Better to ask “Why don’t people want to live in my LCOL area?”

[ChickenStash]

I never strongly adhered to the idea some seem to have about extreme frugality and I'm not really sure that was ever a major part of MMM's schtick. Granted, I've only read a handful of the blog articles so I might have missed something.

I've always had (and will have) a fairly spendy lifestyle with many facepunch-worthy purchases and I'm perfectly OK with that. I like nice things and I'm willing to work for them. I can balance my desire for luxuries with my desire to be FI or RE. I like fast cars and semi-fancy vacations. I will not choose when or how often to wash myself or my clothes to save a few dollars a year in water or soap.

The real benefit I get from the forum and MMM, in general, is helping to define what is really a luxury. It's too easy to get caught up in rampant consumerism from exposure to ads, social media, hobby forums, and spendy friends. This place keeps me "grounded" and helps me focus on just the luxuries I want to consume my money (working time, really).

[chasesfish]

This has been a great thread to read.

I wonder what my "FIRE" end game would have looked like if I were 10 years younger.   ZIRP sent index funds to the moon, corporate culture was intolerable, remote work wasn't a thing.

I was glad I quit without any plans, it gave me tons of time / space to recover from burnout.   Today there are nice location flexible jobs I am qualified for and low spending equals plenty of freedom.

[YttriumNitrate]

There are some threads floating around here about buying teslas and million dollar houses. I'm waiting for the quarter million dollar boat thread.

Here's the half million dollar catamaran thread. Close enough?
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/case-studies/are-you-a-sailor-what-advice-do-you-have-do-these-finances-seem-feasible

[GodlessCommie]

The realm of HCOL areas has expanded from areas like NYC and Silicon Valley to most large North American and European metro areas. Not only does home ownership not make sense in such areas, but even living there doesn't make sense when you compare the salary-COL difference to LCOL areas. LCOL areas are easier to FIRE in, and leave one with a larger monthly surplus for investing or contingencies. Yet nobody wants to live there.

Someone touched on it earlier in the thread: how you live while working on FI matters. It will not do anybody any good to add soul-crushing environment to a soul-crushing job. A lot of places that used to be LCOL and attractive are not LCOL anymore - remote jobs took care of that.

[Must_ache]

I used to be "FIRE as soon as we hit 25x spending" but life has had a funny way of changing that.

Two years ago my minimum retirement goal was about $1.5M, allowing for a spend of $60K per year hoping to retire around 57 years old.  But according to the CPI Index inflation is up 14% during that time.  So, do I adjust my goal to $1.7M to retain the same purchasing power, or maintain my goal knowing that the purchasing power has eroded to $52,600? 

To be fair, I certainly don't need $60K to live on.  And I will probably work part-time for a couple of years or do some online tutoring when I quit my current job.  I do plan to stay active.  But if someone is 20 years out and thinks they need $40K to live on (in today's dollars) and $1M to retire, then assuming only 2%/yr inflation what they really need is $60K per year and $1.5M to retire when they arrive at that point 20 years later. 

[GuitarStv]

There are some threads floating around here about buying teslas and million dollar houses. I'm waiting for the quarter million dollar boat thread.

I think it has slowly turned into a lifestyle design and lifestyle optimization movement.

The average price of a house in Toronto is currently 1,091,300$ . . . down 17% from last year.  :P

This is an example of where 20-30 year old mantras no longer make sense. If you as a middle class person buy that average home, and drop 40% or more of your income on a mortgage payment (or rent), you have destined yourself to a life of being house poor. It doesn't matter what everyone else is doing - you just got on a treadmill that will never stop.

The realm of HCOL areas has expanded from areas like NYC and Silicon Valley to most large North American and European metro areas. Not only does home ownership not make sense in such areas, but even living there doesn't make sense when you compare the salary-COL difference to LCOL areas. LCOL areas are easier to FIRE in, and leave one with a larger monthly surplus for investing or contingencies. Yet nobody wants to live there.

Interestingly, my mom lives in a smaller city north of Toronto and has home worth half of what ours in TO is . . . but actually pays more in yearly costs to own since her property taxes are so much more expensive.

[LifeHappens]

Work gets a bad name around here, but the idea that work provides a sense of meaning and purpose is not something to be scoffed at. There are lots of great jobs in the world. Once money is no object, it becomes a lot easier to get one of those desirable and competitive jobs. Lots of people are attracted to FIRE because they were pushed by financial desperation into jobs they hate. Well once you're not financially desperate, you can get a job you don't hate.

This is more or less what I have settled on. When I found MMM I was working very long hours, had a repetitive stress injury from too much desk time and was allowing my health to slip to unacceptable levels. I was also living in a lower COL area that was bad fit for my preferred lifestyle.

Nearly 10 years (!!!) later, I am effectively working part time. Some of the tasks I perform are sort of dumb, but the organization I work for does genuinely good things in the world. I have moved to a higher COL place that is much better fit for me and my spouse. We spend more money, but the trade off is definitely worth it to us. I also have tremendous flexibility in my work schedule. If I want to take 1/2 a random Wednesday off to go for a 20 mile bike ride, I can do that.

At this point I am more or less coasting. My job is a net good for the world and my family. My net worth continues to grow. I live a lifestyle that nearly always good and often great. The knowledge I gained and the human connections I've built through MMM are a big part of those positive changes.

[bacchi]

It's the times, man.

* The unemployment rate is low. When it starts to rise, and employers tighten the screws, more people will seek FIRE when they realize that working at the behest of a benevolent employer is risky.

* Anyone close to or near FI in the last few years has faced some volatile times. Completely quitting, and withdrawing from the stash, is tough even in the best of times. It's scary when the market dropped 20% last year and inflation is high. Best to adapt at work and let the paychecks roll on.

We'll be back to our normal schedule in a few years.

[ChpBstrd]

The realm of HCOL areas has expanded from areas like NYC and Silicon Valley to most large North American and European metro areas. Not only does home ownership not make sense in such areas, but even living there doesn't make sense when you compare the salary-COL difference to LCOL areas. LCOL areas are easier to FIRE in, and leave one with a larger monthly surplus for investing or contingencies. Yet nobody wants to live there.

Someone touched on it earlier in the thread: how you live while working on FI matters. It will not do anybody any good to add soul-crushing environment to a soul-crushing job. A lot of places that used to be LCOL and attractive are not LCOL anymore - remote jobs took care of that.

Is the perception of a "soul-crushing environment" what leads people to pay finance $300-500k extra to own a home in a HCOL area with brutal traffic and dirty air, to suffer hour-long commutes, to have no time to enjoy whatever touristy amenities a HCOL place has to offer, and to have a harder time getting to retirement?

I would be very nervous if my home equity depended on such a perception, especially in this era of WFH jobs. It is becoming less and less true that one has to live in a large city to obtain professional employment. It's also becoming easier than ever to find one's own tribe and define one's own environment anywhere you go.

It's the times, man.

* The unemployment rate is low. When it starts to rise, and employers tighten the screws, more people will seek FIRE when they realize that working at the behest of a benevolent employer is risky.

* Anyone close to or near FI in the last few years has faced some volatile times. Completely quitting, and withdrawing from the stash, is tough even in the best of times. It's scary when the market dropped 20% last year and inflation is high. Best to adapt at work and let the paychecks roll on.

We'll be back to our normal schedule in a few years.

Very insightful, @bacchi. Recessions are rough on the surviving employees, who are asked told coerced to do more with less and to work longer hours to make up for their laid-off colleagues. Recessions are also rough on the people who are laid off and have difficulty making ends meet while begging for work in a high-unemployment environment. These forces will focus the minds of both sets of people away from the "I work so I can make payments on a nice SUV to pull my RV" mentality and back toward the "I want to be independent from all this shit" mentality. The job that buys nice things becomes a problem, and the ongoing costs of the nice things themselves become a problem.

Better to ask “Why don’t people want to live in my LCOL area?”

Whatever the reason, people are now paying six-figure sums of money to avoid LCOL areas. I suspect that anyone moving from a big metro area to a LCOL place feels like they've traded down. Yet such moves are not without precedent. Florida is now largely populated by transplants from the Northeast, and it's a backward southern state with 99% relative humidity and quarter-sized mosquitos carrying Zika virus.

Most people who live there only visit a beach a few times per year. But apparently the convenience of those beach visits outweighs the politics, the heat/humidity combo, the rednecks and illiterate drivers of pretty trucks, the racism, and every other factor Florida shares with Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi, Louisiana, Tennessee, and other places on many people's "never" list. It's also worth a couple hundred thousand dollars to drive instead of fly to a beach.

[GuitarStv]

especially in this era of WFH jobs

I'd be very careful about assuming that we are in an era of WFH jobs.  An awful lot of companies have been forcing people back to work at an increasing pace with no signs of slowing down.  The moment that employees have less of an upper hand (higher unemployment) it seems reasonable to expect this trend to only accelerate.

[ChpBstrd]

especially in this era of WFH jobs

I'd be very careful about assuming that we are in an era of WFH jobs.  An awful lot of companies have been forcing people back to work at an increasing pace with no signs of slowing down.  The moment that employees have less of an upper hand (higher unemployment) it seems reasonable to expect this trend to only accelerate.

On the other hand, companies that have just laid off employees, and are still paying the lease for empty offices, will wonder what they can do to further cut costs. Sales are going down and the stock/bond markets are not offering attractive terms. They will look out the conference room window upon a mostly empty cubicle farm and then it will hit them.

When it's time to grow again, they'll learn that the most astute candidates are unwilling to relocate because they locked in <4% mortgages back in 2020-2021 and aren't willing to let them go. The early adopters will be snatching up all the best candidates while the companies still footing the bill for empty offices will have to pay extra compensation to persuade people to drive to work. In the long run, the early adopters beat their officehead competitors because they have lower costs.

[GodlessCommie]

Is the perception of a "soul-crushing environment" what leads people to pay finance $300-500k extra to own a home in a HCOL area with brutal traffic and dirty air, to suffer hour-long commutes, to have no time to enjoy whatever touristy amenities a HCOL place has to offer, and to have a harder time getting to retirement?

I would be very nervous if my home equity depended on such a perception, especially in this era of WFH jobs. It is becoming less and less true that one has to live in a large city to obtain professional employment. It's also becoming easier than ever to find one's own tribe and define one's own environment anywhere you go.

It's not a perception. The market has spoken. If a place was good and LCOL - millions of very advanced organic computers (also known as people) analyzed all the factors, decided to move in, and drove up the prices, and made it MCOL or even HCOL. Places that are still LCOL? There is a reason for that. 47% of American counties and towns are losing people. Most of those places are rural (although there is an outflow from inner cities, too).

You'll be surprised, but I looked at the air quality, and it's bad in many (if not most) rural places. Agriculture is one of the biggest polluters. My air is cleaner than in any lower-COL areas that I considered, which is one of the reasons I'm staying put.

Long commutes? Many people commute from a bedroom to a living room (lucky ones to a home office).

A LCOL area and a big city aren't the only two options. US is the land of suburbs. Better ones are expensive, yet are not big cities.

[farmecologist]

I used to be "FIRE as soon as we hit 25x spending" but life has had a funny way of changing that.

Two years ago my minimum retirement goal was about $1.5M, allowing for a spend of $60K per year hoping to retire around 57 years old.  But according to the CPI Index inflation is up 14% during that time.  So, do I adjust my goal to $1.7M to retain the same purchasing power, or maintain my goal knowing that the purchasing power has eroded to $52,600? 

To be fair, I certainly don't need $60K to live on.  And I will probably work part-time for a couple of years or do some online tutoring when I quit my current job.  I do plan to stay active.  But if someone is 20 years out and thinks they need $40K to live on (in today's dollars) and $1M to retire, then assuming only 2%/yr inflation what they really need is $60K per year and $1.5M to retire when they arrive at that point 20 years later.

I think too many hear the inflation headlines and freak out, but don't stop to consider their personal rate of inflation. 

If you are lucky enough to own a house, especially if it is paid off, or own your car, etc... your personal rate of inflation is likely much less than the headlines.   And I suspect this is true for many MMM'ers, especially those of us that have been around for a while.

[Ron Scott]

Whatever the reason, people are now paying six-figure sums of money to avoid LCOL areas. I suspect that anyone moving from a big metro area to a LCOL place feels like they've traded down. Yet such moves are not without precedent. Florida is now largely populated by transplants from the Northeast, and it's a backward southern state with 99% relative humidity and quarter-sized mosquitos carrying Zika virus.

Most people who live there only visit a beach a few times per year. But apparently the convenience of those beach visits outweighs the politics, the heat/humidity combo, the rednecks and illiterate drivers of pretty trucks, the racism, and every other factor Florida shares with Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi, Louisiana, Tennessee, and other places on many people's "never" list. It's also worth a couple hundred thousand dollars to drive instead of fly to a beach.

LOL, looks like you speak with experience.

I’m in coastal south Florida a few months a year. They call it “snowbird”. I find it easy to avoid the climactic and social ills you refer to. Most here are like me or at least originally from the northeast. A bunch of New Yorkers have seized and now occupy a large section of the coast and pay our own police force to keep the locals off our beaches and make sure the area is nice.

[Zikoris]

I'm not crazy about it. In addition to the environmental issues, the human rights abuses you participate in by buying most consumer goods are pretty horrific, especially for electronic things. I don't like the mindset that any spending is okay if you're mindful about it or whatever the latest crap getting peddled is, because all spending is not equal, and as a society we need to reduce our consumption.

Some interesting reading material if anyone's interested in learning more:

Dying for an iPhone by Jenny Chan
The Rare Metals War by Guillaume Pitron
Cobalt Red: How the Blood of the Congo Powers Our Lives by Siddharth Kara

[mistymoney]

It may be a generational thing. Thousands of people who read FIRE blogs in the 2010-2020 decade got very wealthy and found themselves with a lot of time on their hands, wondering how to change their habits once they became multi-millionaires in the last several years.

Newer entrants don't read blogs, they watch short internet videos with mandatory ads designed to increase their consumption and sabotage their FIRE plans.

They are also accumulating in a very different environment than the post-GFC world from which MMM, 1500Days, and many others emerged. In that timeframe housing got a lot more unaffordable, cars got more unaffordable, inflation spiked to 9%, and stocks got a lot more expensive. Who'd have thought ten years ago that iBonds would be the hot investment of 2022!

As a result, a lot of the old advice is falling flat:

• Buy a reasonably-priced house with a sub-5% mortgage? Uh.. not available any more.
• Hold a 90% or 100% stock portfolio now that bonds are yielding 5% and we've had 4.75% in rate hikes within the last 13 months? Maybe not.
• Focus on paying off that student loan debt at an interest rate less than you can earn on treasuries? No.
• Buy a bunch of houses and earn 5x the mortgage payment by putting them on AirBNB? Too late. Now that market is saturated.
• Buy a bunch of houses conforming to the 1% rule with a 4% mortgage rate? Just let me know when you find those things, lol!

The switch to a less-intellectual communication media led to a reduced "market" for all that boring responsible talk about how to cut one's expenses and invest, and an expanded market for crypto-scams, get-rich-quick influencers, let-me-inspire-you-then-show-you-an-ad influencers, and of course the video naysayers who say it can't be done. The change in market conditions made much of the 10-year advice seem irrelevant and de-motivating, since those deals are no longer available.

The world is still full of opportunities, they're just different than a decade ago. I bought $13k worth of 6-month CDs yielding 4.9% just now, and I'm going to try to do another round of iBonds before rates reset on 4/30/23. Meanwhile I'm poised to pounce when the next recession and real estate crisis rolls around within the next couple of years and creates another 7% SWR opportunity or real estate empire building opportunity. In the meantime, the thing to do is apply for promotions, as competition for the best jobs is at an all-time low!

Why are you focused on buying hte ibonds before the reset? Where do you anticipate them going? I've heard other people waiting till after the reset anticipating a higher fixed rate.

[Dicey]

There are some threads floating around here about buying teslas and million dollar houses. I'm waiting for the quarter million dollar boat thread.

Here's the half million dollar catamaran thread. Close enough?
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/case-studies/are-you-a-sailor-what-advice-do-you-have-do-these-finances-seem-feasible

Are they going to live on it? Much cheaper than a house in my neck of the woods.

[mistymoney]

I used to be "FIRE as soon as we hit 25x spending" but life has had a funny way of changing that.

I found MMM as a young single guy. Now, I'm married, a couple of kids, a house, private school for the kids, so now those original FIRE priorities maybe look a little different. We've got college savings to consider, inflation "feels" gross, and the housing market doesn't inspire confidence. Despite how awesome we are currently doing, it doesn't "feel" good. Hence...that YOLO spending impulse creeps in a little bit. We keep most of it at bay, but occasionally we find ourselves looking at brand new awesome houses on Zillow, or checking out that new TRD PRO Sequoia...let's just say that we've not made major spending changes...but it's tempting, especially as our incomes have gone up.

Here's the other thing...FIRE attracts well paid, but also diligent folks. Well paid diligent folks tend to earn more and more in many cases as the years go by. My wife may end up making 7 figures by herself when we look at a 10-15 year future from today. If she's fulfilled and wants to keep working...well then...it's possible the spending increases without impacting today's FIRE timeline projection.

The truly frugal ones were destined to die off on this forum and in the FIRE movement. At least visibly. What's more exciting to read about than a frugal FIRE? FIRE with a sweet car/yacht/house/vitamix.

Now hold up there! Vitamix is totally worth the investment! I bought one for 320/5 from someone received it for a wedding gift and didn't want it. Nearly 20 years ago and it is going strong!

And - it saves sooooo much money! I don't need a pancake mix. I buy buckwheat groats in bulk, soak for a bit, rinse, then blend with fresh water in the vitamix, add baking soda, etc. give a low whirr in the vitamix, then let sit while I get the griddle ready.

dito on red lentil flat bread.

Easy peasy!

[wageslave23]

To me, FIRE has always been about optimization, not spending. FIRE, or specifically financial independence, simply provides the means or pathway to optimize other areas of my life, such as health, relationships, etc., and not just finances.

In addition, FIRE provides a different mindset, a different way to make financial decisions.

We are one of those families looking for a million dollar house -- well, in Canadian dollars, so more like a $750K house. Not because we are trying to be more spendy, but because the $1M house allows us to be close to nature (which we value), be in a good public school district (which we value), be close to family so that we can help when needed (which we value).

At the same time, because of the FIRE mindset, we are also considering how to optimize the $1M house. Is there an ADU or a basement unit that can be rented out for additional income? Is it close to a university so that we can rent out rooms if necessary? Is the space flexible enough that we can section of part of it for a home business? Is there a back garden where we can grow some of our own food? Is there some way my $1M house can become an income generator and not just an expense?

Oh just find a job that pays 7 figures with a great work life balance in a location I enjoy?  Why didn't I think of that? Duh!

[patchyfacialhair]

I used to be "FIRE as soon as we hit 25x spending" but life has had a funny way of changing that.

I found MMM as a young single guy. Now, I'm married, a couple of kids, a house, private school for the kids, so now those original FIRE priorities maybe look a little different. We've got college savings to consider, inflation "feels" gross, and the housing market doesn't inspire confidence. Despite how awesome we are currently doing, it doesn't "feel" good. Hence...that YOLO spending impulse creeps in a little bit. We keep most of it at bay, but occasionally we find ourselves looking at brand new awesome houses on Zillow, or checking out that new TRD PRO Sequoia...let's just say that we've not made major spending changes...but it's tempting, especially as our incomes have gone up.

Here's the other thing...FIRE attracts well paid, but also diligent folks. Well paid diligent folks tend to earn more and more in many cases as the years go by. My wife may end up making 7 figures by herself when we look at a 10-15 year future from today. If she's fulfilled and wants to keep working...well then...it's possible the spending increases without impacting today's FIRE timeline projection.

The truly frugal ones were destined to die off on this forum and in the FIRE movement. At least visibly. What's more exciting to read about than a frugal FIRE? FIRE with a sweet car/yacht/house/vitamix.

Now hold up there! Vitamix is totally worth the investment! I bought one for 320/5 from someone received it for a wedding gift and didn't want it. Nearly 20 years ago and it is going strong!

And - it saves sooooo much money! I don't need a pancake mix. I buy buckwheat groats in bulk, soak for a bit, rinse, then blend with fresh water in the vitamix, add baking soda, etc. give a low whirr in the vitamix, then let sit while I get the griddle ready.

dito on red lentil flat bread.

Easy peasy!

Was going for the meta reference :)

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/reader-recommendations/vitamix-blender/

[Freedomin5]

To me, FIRE has always been about optimization, not spending. FIRE, or specifically financial independence, simply provides the means or pathway to optimize other areas of my life, such as health, relationships, etc., and not just finances.

In addition, FIRE provides a different mindset, a different way to make financial decisions.

We are one of those families looking for a million dollar house -- well, in Canadian dollars, so more like a $750K house. Not because we are trying to be more spendy, but because the $1M house allows us to be close to nature (which we value), be in a good public school district (which we value), be close to family so that we can help when needed (which we value).

At the same time, because of the FIRE mindset, we are also considering how to optimize the $1M house. Is there an ADU or a basement unit that can be rented out for additional income? Is it close to a university so that we can rent out rooms if necessary? Is the space flexible enough that we can section of part of it for a home business? Is there a back garden where we can grow some of our own food? Is there some way my $1M house can become an income generator and not just an expense?

Oh just find a job that pays 7 figures with a great work life balance in a location I enjoy?  Why didn't I think of that? Duh!

A house that’s worth $1M doesn’t necessarily require a 7-figure annual salary. All the other stuff - aim for work-life balance, try to be in a location you enjoy - well, yeah, that part I agree with. It’s about designing the life you want.

For us, it’s not about being spendy or not. It’s about figuring out what we want in life and how to go about achieving it in a fiscally responsible way.

[obstinate]

MMM provides a path to FIRE for people of moderate means, relatively speaking. There's another set of people who can get to FIRE easily and quickly just by not doing extremely stupid spending. I'm in that set personally, and I know a bunch of other people like that (think, tenured engineer at large tech company, banker, successful lawyer or doctor, etc.). I think that this group of people have become more aware of FIRE and are putting their own spin on it, and that is intermingled with the low spend approach that MMM advocates.

[frugalecon]

As the OP, I just wanted to thank everyone for the incredibly thoughtful responses to my post. There is a lot here to chew on. I remember when some scoffed at MMM and FIRE as kind of cultish, but this thread shows how much diversity of thought there is here. I guess this shouldn’t be too surprising, since this forum attracts people who probably overindex for analytic skills and independent thinking.

[RWD]

To me, FIRE has always been about optimization, not spending. FIRE, or specifically financial independence, simply provides the means or pathway to optimize other areas of my life, such as health, relationships, etc., and not just finances.

In addition, FIRE provides a different mindset, a different way to make financial decisions.

We are one of those families looking for a million dollar house -- well, in Canadian dollars, so more like a $750K house. Not because we are trying to be more spendy, but because the $1M house allows us to be close to nature (which we value), be in a good public school district (which we value), be close to family so that we can help when needed (which we value).

At the same time, because of the FIRE mindset, we are also considering how to optimize the $1M house. Is there an ADU or a basement unit that can be rented out for additional income? Is it close to a university so that we can rent out rooms if necessary? Is the space flexible enough that we can section of part of it for a home business? Is there a back garden where we can grow some of our own food? Is there some way my $1M house can become an income generator and not just an expense?

Oh just find a job that pays 7 figures with a great work life balance in a location I enjoy?  Why didn't I think of that? Duh!

A house that’s worth $1M doesn’t necessarily require a 7-figure annual salary. All the other stuff - aim for work-life balance, try to be in a location you enjoy - well, yeah, that part I agree with. It’s about designing the life you want.

For us, it’s not about being spendy or not. It’s about figuring out what we want in life and how to go about achieving it in a fiscally responsible way.

A mortgage on a $1M house is around $6,200/month right now (PITI with 20% down). Would be affordable on anything over $300k income. Doable probably on $200k as long as a decent stash was already built up. Agreed that a 7-figure salary would be overkill.

[GuitarStv]

To me, FIRE has always been about optimization, not spending. FIRE, or specifically financial independence, simply provides the means or pathway to optimize other areas of my life, such as health, relationships, etc., and not just finances.

In addition, FIRE provides a different mindset, a different way to make financial decisions.

We are one of those families looking for a million dollar house -- well, in Canadian dollars, so more like a $750K house. Not because we are trying to be more spendy, but because the $1M house allows us to be close to nature (which we value), be in a good public school district (which we value), be close to family so that we can help when needed (which we value).

At the same time, because of the FIRE mindset, we are also considering how to optimize the $1M house. Is there an ADU or a basement unit that can be rented out for additional income? Is it close to a university so that we can rent out rooms if necessary? Is the space flexible enough that we can section of part of it for a home business? Is there a back garden where we can grow some of our own food? Is there some way my $1M house can become an income generator and not just an expense?

Oh just find a job that pays 7 figures with a great work life balance in a location I enjoy?  Why didn't I think of that? Duh!

A house that’s worth $1M doesn’t necessarily require a 7-figure annual salary. All the other stuff - aim for work-life balance, try to be in a location you enjoy - well, yeah, that part I agree with. It’s about designing the life you want.

For us, it’s not about being spendy or not. It’s about figuring out what we want in life and how to go about achieving it in a fiscally responsible way.

A mortgage on a $1M house is around $6,200/month right now (PITI with 20% down). Would be affordable on anything over $300k income. Doable probably on $200k as long as a decent stash was already built up. Agreed that a 7-figure salary would be overkill.

Yeah, but who puts only 20% down?  We put 70% down, which significantly reduces the weekly payments.

[wageslave23]

To me, FIRE has always been about optimization, not spending. FIRE, or specifically financial independence, simply provides the means or pathway to optimize other areas of my life, such as health, relationships, etc., and not just finances.

In addition, FIRE provides a different mindset, a different way to make financial decisions.

We are one of those families looking for a million dollar house -- well, in Canadian dollars, so more like a $750K house. Not because we are trying to be more spendy, but because the $1M house allows us to be close to nature (which we value), be in a good public school district (which we value), be close to family so that we can help when needed (which we value).

At the same time, because of the FIRE mindset, we are also considering how to optimize the $1M house. Is there an ADU or a basement unit that can be rented out for additional income? Is it close to a university so that we can rent out rooms if necessary? Is the space flexible enough that we can section of part of it for a home business? Is there a back garden where we can grow some of our own food? Is there some way my $1M house can become an income generator and not just an expense?

Oh just find a job that pays 7 figures with a great work life balance in a location I enjoy?  Why didn't I think of that? Duh!

A house that’s worth $1M doesn’t necessarily require a 7-figure annual salary. All the other stuff - aim for work-life balance, try to be in a location you enjoy - well, yeah, that part I agree with. It’s about designing the life you want.

For us, it’s not about being spendy or not. It’s about figuring out what we want in life and how to go about achieving it in a fiscally responsible way.

Sorry I quoted the wrong person. I meant to quote redhotdog. I think they said they save $1m per year with a job that allows them to enjoy life and live in a wonderful area.

[wageslave23]

Many FIRE devotees are too focused on escaping work, and don't have a clear plan of what they're going to do with all that time when they get there. Once you have the position of strength in negotiating your working conditions (FU money), you can work fewer hours, at better rates, with people you enjoy associating with. The most powerful bit of the FIRE strategy is "save most aggressively when you're young so that it has more time to compound." Get that step sorted out, and then you have the freedom to choose between RE, or working more and getting rich.

Retiring early makes sense if you have a vision that requires maximum flexibility and time off. If you want to backpack around the world or homeschool multiple children, that's a good reason to retire. If you want to reskill into an entirely different form of work (or take on work that isn't as lucrative), FI buys you that freedom, but you're still likely to be earning some money. If you just want to travel, hike, or hang out with friends more often... you can do all those things while you have a job. The problem preventing those things isn't work, it's internal.

As far as environmental costs are concerned, there are a lot of things you can spend more money on that aren't imposing any environmental costs. In fact, a lot of fancy expensive things can be better for the environment. Get richer and you can move to a more expensive walkable neighborhood. You can pay a premium for things that were produced in more sustainable ways, or were made locally and didn't need to be shipped across the ocean on a carbon-belching container ship.

I think FIRE had it's moment, and most people realized that FI is the best part, and RE is only really worth it for

• people who really, really hate their jobs, or
• people with really clear (and generally somewhat eccentric) visions for what they're going to fill all that time with

.
For most people who achieve FI and don't want to live in a van or run a weird Catholic/Mormon homeschool operation, the real path to living your best life is to use that leverage to

• downshift into some kind of related work role with fewer hours and greater flexibility, or
• take on some other kind of work that provides lower compensation, but is deeply meaningful/enjoyable.

Work gets a bad name around here, but the idea that work provides a sense of meaning and purpose is not something to be scoffed at. There are lots of great jobs in the world. Once money is no object, it becomes a lot easier to get one of those desirable and competitive jobs. Lots of people are attracted to FIRE because they were pushed by financial desperation into jobs they hate. Well once you're not financially desperate, you can get a job you don't hate. For the big FIRE content creators, they found flexibility, reduced hours, and sense of purpose in providing educational content on the internet about lifestyle and personal finance. Now they're trying to figure out what to do with that money.

I think FIRE is attractive to people who received lots of guilt/shame messages about money as children. If you were conditioned to believe frugality is a virtue and opulent spending is shameful and/or stupid, and then you grind your way through school to get a high-paying career... Well then the FIRE approach lets you exemplify those "virtues" you internalized as child without ever confronting the internal scripts around scarcity. Then someday you realize you're rich and you never exercised the muscle of spending money well to make your life more beautiful. Will second @BeanCounter that Ramit Sethi's stuff is a great counter-balance to the scarcity mindset.

Excellent post and actually puts into words how I lately struggle to align with the FIRE community. We are very fortunate to accumulate wealth at a rate of nearly 1M/year and we are squarely FI. When FIRE community gets notion of that, it immediately turns into a “run dont walk the hell outta there” thing. We see it a bit different. After FI we losened more up, putting in even more trips and experiences while working - in our case totally possible with plenty of holidays and flexibilty with wfh. We dont need RE to live incredibles lives! In fact, if that is the case you likely waste many or even most years! In our case, very soon, our wish to travel full time for 2-3 years will trigger RE. But man, even before that so many things to do and see even when working, family and friends to visit and fulfilling projects. If your job does not allow you to enjoy life, change that first! Imo, more important than to double down in jobs you hate and climb out of that mine at 45, 40, or even 35 years of age feeling those 10, 15, 20 years were not fulfilling your idea of a good life. You dont have to love your job, but ensure it leaves you space to do things you enjoy - a soul crushing job wont btw

One aspect I think is often overlooked is the quality of location while working (and living while working!). I have been offered bigger jobs with 2-3X more money but in crappy boring places with nothing to do but shooting golf balls and ducks, screw that! Likewise, been offered more money moving to congested, polluted and crime-ridden cities, screw that too! What good is a “good” job if you cant enjoy where you live? Our environment is so extremely important for our mental health and also the attainable life quality.
Happiness for us is somewhere inbetween FI, maximizing experiences, decent job that you at least dont hate or crushes your soul and creating an environment that brings you joy every day

This is what I was trying to quote. Accumulating $1 million per year? And could be accumulating 2-3x that but decided to stick with good work life balance? Ok good advice. Next time I have the choice, I'll be sure to pick the $1 million per year job that has more flexibility over the 3 million per year job I wouldn't enjoy as much.