How smart does one need to be to retire early?

[OutBy40]

I blogged about this, but would like to get your take as well.  It seems that with investments, people seem to think that it takes more mental brain power than it really does in order to retire early.

But seriously, how smart do you have to be to retire early?

[RFAAOATB]

I would say it relies on trust and stubbornness more than intelligence.  Do you trust that low cost stock heavy ETFs are the right ratio of risk tolerance for you to build your retirement income stream?  Do you trust the person giving you this advice is correct?  Are you stubborn enough to stick with the plan?

I would venture to guess the brain power needed is someone of average intelligence who can do basic math, envision the future, and be wary of scam artists.

[sol]

Depends on how early you want out, compared to your SWR.

If it's just "save 25x expenses and then use the Roth pipeline" it would be easy. Add in some more complications like juggling capital gains on multiple rental property sales and managing income for the FAFSA and maximizing ACA subsidies and shooting for an EITC refund, and suddenly it requires some facility with a spreadsheet.

Now that I'm down to the brass tacks of actually trying to forecast monthly income with all of those complications, it's turning out to be a challenge even for a dude with a PhD.

[OutBy40]

I would venture to guess the brain power needed is someone of average intelligence who can do basic math, envision the future, and be wary of scam artists.

Especially if you keep it simple.  I refuse to day trade, for example.  I like my targeted retirement funds to keep things relatively straight forward, plus a brokerage account for everything else.

[MrFancypants]

I believe discipline is more important than intelligence when it comes to retiring early.

[OutBy40]

I believe discipline is more important than intelligence when it comes to retiring early.

Agreed.  Discipline is absolutely critical.

[arebelspy]

Depends on how early you want out, compared to your SWR.

If it's just "save 25x expenses and then use the Roth pipeline" it would be easy. Add in some more complications like juggling capital gains on multiple rental property sales and managing income for the FAFSA and maximizing ACA subsidies and shooting for an EITC refund, and suddenly it requires some facility with a spreadsheet.

Now that I'm down to the brass tacks of actually trying to forecast monthly income with all of those complications, it's turning out to be a challenge even for a dude with a PhD.

Indeed.  I've found the more I learn, the more I realize I don't know.

You can do it simply (and suboptimally), but to really excel takes a lot of knowledge in various things (tax planning, investing, psychology, spending, etc.)

Anyone can do the first, and end up way ahead and it's "good enough".  The second is what you move towards and the further you go on that scale, the ore likely you need to be a super intelligent pedant.

[brooklynguy]

Depends on how early you want out, compared to your SWR.

If it's just "save 25x expenses and then use the Roth pipeline" it would be easy. Add in some more complications like juggling capital gains on multiple rental property sales and managing income for the FAFSA and maximizing ACA subsidies and shooting for an EITC refund, and suddenly it requires some facility with a spreadsheet.

Now that I'm down to the brass tacks of actually trying to forecast monthly income with all of those complications, it's turning out to be a challenge even for a dude with a PhD.

Indeed.  I've found the more I learn, the more I realize I don't know.

You can do it simply (and suboptimally), but to really excel takes a lot of knowledge in various things (tax planning, investing, psychology, spending, etc.)

Anyone can do the first, and end up way ahead and it's "good enough".  The second is what you move towards and the further you go on that scale, the ore likely you need to be a super intelligent pedant.

I wholeheartedly agree.  The FIRE trailblazers have already done all the hard work and research, and the fruits of their labor are now so easily accessible that any dummy can do it (which is a great thing!). But the advanced life-hacking optimization many of us engage in requires lots of intelligence (to echo sol's statement, I'm a corporate lawyer who works on similar types of issues on billion dollar transactions day in and day out, and I still find it challenging).  It's no coincidence that this forum is populated by some of the smartest people on the internet.

[Allen]

You have to have enough intelligence to understand compounding which is non-intuitive.  If you don't really believe that small amounts consistently saved and invested can turn into ridiculous giant amounts then "saving a million dollars" is an insurmountable hurdle.

Also, you have to learn at least enough about investing to feel comfortable sending away a lot of money.  Even today at work there are a lot of people in the company 401k invested in cash / money market 100% because 'the stock market is too risky'.

Also, I believe willingness to sacrifice in the present to gain in the future is a sign of intelligence.  Slowing consumption is difficult.

[OutBy40]

Also, you have to learn at least enough about investing to feel comfortable sending away a lot of money.  Even today at work there are a lot of people in the company 401k invested in cash / money market 100% because 'the stock market is too risky'.

Completely agree, although that might be more of a state of mind than anything else.  A cursory look at history illustrates how consistent and reliable the market is in the long term.  Maybe a simple Stock Market 101 class is all they'd need to make that realization.

[Eric]

The FIRE trailblazers have already done all the hard work and research, and the fruits of their labor are now so easily accessible that any dummy can do it (which is a great thing!).

And thank god for that!  Can you imagine trying to figure this stuff out 30 years ago?  Before the internet?


I agree with Mykl above, that discipline is way more important than intelligence.  You don't really have to know shit.  If you're confused about anything, ask this board and one of the other posters here will give you the answer.  If you can't delay gratification though, you'll never make it.

[dragoncar]

I would say it relies on trust and stubbornness more than intelligence.  Do you trust that low cost stock heavy ETFs are the right ratio of risk tolerance for you to build your retirement income stream?  Do you trust the person giving you this advice is correct?  Are you stubborn enough to stick with the plan?

I would venture to guess the brain power needed is someone of average intelligence who can do basic math, envision the future, and be wary of scam artists.

There's probably a sweet spot for intelligence.  If you are too intelligent, you'll start second guessing yourself with models and enumerating risks.  For example, I don't think Jacob at ERE would be fine with a 4% SWR going forward

[deborah]

Indeed.  I've found the more I learn, the more I realize I don't know.

You can do it simply (and suboptimally), but to really excel takes a lot of knowledge in various things (tax planning, investing, psychology, spending, etc.)

Anyone can do the first, and end up way ahead and it's "good enough".  The second is what you move towards and the further you go on that scale, the ore likely you need to be a super intelligent pedant.

I'm not so sure about simply being suboptimal. Every time I look at more complicated ways of investing, the simpler ways work better. For instance, you could argue that buying an index is simple and share trading is more complex - yet it appears that buying the index tends to be optimal. The secret appears to be consistency, and simpler methods can be applied more consistently.

[arebelspy]

Indeed.  I've found the more I learn, the more I realize I don't know.

You can do it simply (and suboptimally), but to really excel takes a lot of knowledge in various things (tax planning, investing, psychology, spending, etc.)

Anyone can do the first, and end up way ahead and it's "good enough".  The second is what you move towards and the further you go on that scale, the ore likely you need to be a super intelligent pedant.

I'm not so sure about simply being suboptimal. Every time I look at more complicated ways of investing, the simpler ways work better. For instance, you could argue that buying an index is simple and share trading is more complex - yet it appears that buying the index tends to be optimal. The secret appears to be consistency, and simpler methods can be applied more consistently.

Doing things simply on purpose can be elegant.  Simplistic (dumbed down) because you don't know better is suboptimal.

[Cheddar Stacker]

I agree with sol. I'll add that to retire early you just need discipline and awareness. To retire optimally (at the most opportune time, down to the day and with a miniscule safety margin) you need to do what sol said, and likely need to be extremely smart, or growth minded.

[Davids]

I believe discipline is more important than intelligence when it comes to retiring early.

I 100% agree with that. Discipline, patience, those are the most important factors. Intelligence can tell you what you need to do but discipline and patience are needed to execute.

[Zikoris]

I think you need to be fairly intelligent to design your system to begin with and get it set on autopilot, since there are currently very few templates or competent professionals in that area.

After that, my ideal is for the system to require as little ongoing brainpower/intelligence as possible. Shovel money into the index funds every payday and otherwise forget about it for a decade.

[marty998]

I agree with sol. I'll add that to retire early you just need discipline and awareness. To retire optimally (at the most opportune time, down to the day and with a miniscule safety margin) you need to do what sol said, and likely need to be extremely smart, or growth minded.

So you need to pick the right day to retire and 57.396 years later spend your last couple of dollars on the tea and biscuits at your wake?

I think someone has just thrown down a gauntlet!

[Rural]

I agree with sol. I'll add that to retire early you just need discipline and awareness. To retire optimally (at the most opportune time, down to the day and with a miniscule safety margin) you need to do what sol said, and likely need to be extremely smart, or growth minded.

So you need to pick the right day to retire and 57.396 years later spend your last couple of dollars on the tea and biscuits at your wake?

I think someone has just thrown down a gauntlet!

I need a little more as I plan to have whiskey at my wake. :-)

[Dances With Fire]

Depends on how early you want out, compared to your SWR.

If it's just "save 25x expenses and then use the Roth pipeline" it would be easy. Add in some more complications like juggling capital gains on multiple rental property sales and managing income for the FAFSA and maximizing ACA subsidies and shooting for an EITC refund, and suddenly it requires some facility with a spreadsheet.

Now that I'm down to the brass tacks of actually trying to forecast monthly income with all of those complications, it's turning out to be a challenge even for a dude with a PhD.

Indeed.  I've found the more I learn, the more I realize I don't know.

You can do it simply (and suboptimally), but to really excel takes a lot of knowledge in various things (tax planning, investing, psychology, spending, etc.)

Anyone can do the first, and end up way ahead and it's "good enough".  The second is what you move towards and the further you go on that scale, the ore likely you need to be a super intelligent pedant.

+1....Lake Wobegon "where all the children are above average."

  On a serious note: I have been in business for many (many) years, but I don't have an MBA or Phd.
When younger I had a "gift" of numbers, formulas, percentages, profit and loss statements etc. But I am not an accountant nor did I excel in math at school.

 I am self-taught in investing. Read everything I could get my hands on. Found Vanguard (by accident) in my late 20's and now this forum, where everyone is Above average....

[Gone Fishing]

I think most of the people on this forum would have IQ's of 120-130+.

I consider the three legs of early retirement to be saving, investing, and taxes.

Saving like a monk is pretty simple, you just don't buy stuff.

Saving like a mustachian, where you live a pretty normal middle class life for a whole lot less than everyone else, takes quite a bit of intelligence and problem solving abilities.  Intelligence will certainly help you get that $50-75-100k+ job that will fuel your savings.

Investing is potentially the simplest/easiest of the three, buy the S&P 500 via Vanguard and let it ride.  Life cycle funds are also simple solution for the simple minded.

Taxes-I don't care how smart you are, this one can twist you in knots if you let it (and was my personal weak spot for a long time).  Being able to find and understand an IRA ladder could accelerate ER by several years but you will not see it on the cover of Money magazine or the Wall Street Journal. Hence my signature line.

My advice to anyone who is admittedly less than average but desires ER would be to keep things as simple as possible.  Save, invest, and defer taxes by funding non-roth retirement accounts.  Give it 10-15 years for stache building, then we can help you figure out how to access your money.  Might not be quite "perfect" but it will work as long as the discipline is there.               

[OutBy40]

I think most of the people on this forum would have IQ's of 120-130+.

I consider the three legs of early retirement to be saving, investing, and taxes.

Saving like a monk is pretty simple, you just don't buy stuff.

Saving like a mustachian, where you live a pretty normal middle class life for a whole lot less than everyone else, takes quite a bit of intelligence and problem solving abilities.  Intelligence will certainly help you get that $50-75-100k+ job that will fuel your savings.

Investing is potentially the simplest/easiest of the three, buy the S&P 500 via Vanguard and let it ride.  Life cycle funds are also simple solution for the simple minded.

Taxes-I don't care how smart you are, this one can twist you in knots if you let it (and was my personal weak spot for a long time).  Being able to find and understand an IRA ladder could accelerate ER by several years but you will not see it on the cover of Money magazine or the Wall Street Journal. Hence my signature line.

My advice to anyone who is admittedly less than average but desires ER would be to keep things as simple as possible.  Save, invest, and defer taxes by funding non-roth retirement accounts.  Give it 10-15 years for stache building, then we can help you figure out how to access your money.  Might not be quite "perfect" but it will work as long as the discipline is there.             

Well said, So Close. 

[dragoncar]

I think most of the people on this forum would have IQ's of 120-130+.

I consider the three legs of early retirement to be saving, investing, and taxes.

Saving like a monk is pretty simple, you just don't buy stuff.

Saving like a mustachian, where you live a pretty normal middle class life for a whole lot less than everyone else, takes quite a bit of intelligence and problem solving abilities.  Intelligence will certainly help you get that $50-75-100k+ job that will fuel your savings.

Investing is potentially the simplest/easiest of the three, buy the S&P 500 via Vanguard and let it ride.  Life cycle funds are also simple solution for the simple minded.

Taxes-I don't care how smart you are, this one can twist you in knots if you let it (and was my personal weak spot for a long time).  Being able to find and understand an IRA ladder could accelerate ER by several years but you will not see it on the cover of Money magazine or the Wall Street Journal. Hence my signature line.

My advice to anyone who is admittedly less than average but desires ER would be to keep things as simple as possible.  Save, invest, and defer taxes by funding non-roth retirement accounts.  Give it 10-15 years for stache building, then we can help you figure out how to access your money.  Might not be quite "perfect" but it will work as long as the discipline is there.             

Careful, look what happened here: http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/what's-your-iq-according-to-this-online-test/?nowap

[Tyler]

I'd trust my life savings with a wise man over a smart man every time. If you think you have it all figured out, you're neither.

Don't get cocky, kid.

[frugalnacho]

I can't believe I just read that whole IQ thread only to find out on the last post it was locked!  I had so much bragging to do!

[DoubleDown]

Depends on how early you want out, compared to your SWR.

If it's just "save 25x expenses and then use the Roth pipeline" it would be easy. Add in some more complications like juggling capital gains on multiple rental property sales and managing income for the FAFSA and maximizing ACA subsidies and shooting for an EITC refund, and suddenly it requires some facility with a spreadsheet.

Now that I'm down to the brass tacks of actually trying to forecast monthly income with all of those complications, it's turning out to be a challenge even for a dude with a PhD.

Indeed.  I've found the more I learn, the more I realize I don't know.

You can do it simply (and suboptimally), but to really excel takes a lot of knowledge in various things (tax planning, investing, psychology, spending, etc.)

Anyone can do the first, and end up way ahead and it's "good enough".  The second is what you move towards and the further you go on that scale, the ore likely you need to be a super intelligent pedant.

I have also found this to be true, and have determined to apply some version of the 80:20 rule. I feel like if I get it about 80% optimal, that's good enough. Trying to optimize beyond that takes a lot more effort and you hit the law of diminishing returns. Plus, there are enough unknowns (e.g., future of ACA, future of exact Social Security payouts, future inflation figures, exact FAFSA calculations) that smaller and smaller optimizations become more like guesswork -- the margin of error is bigger than you can make accommodations for.

Besides, having some (informed) attitude of "Let's just throw up the sail and see where we go" can be fun. Trying to calculate every last nth degree of optimization -- not so much IMO. I'll be perfectly content if I overpay $200 in taxes during the year because I'm outside enjoying the weather, or inside building a bookcase for my daughter.

[brooklynguy]

And thank god for that!  Can you imagine trying to figure this stuff out 30 years ago?  Before the internet?

Amen.  I think it's safe to say that without the resources we now have at our fingertips, practically none of us would be doing this.

[deborah]

You need to be a tortoise. Slow and steady - not bounding from one idea to another, like smart people often do. Maybe optimization works better, but you can also make more mistakes while you are optimizing.  Anyway, the method that MMM explains can work for anyone - they are still going to become ER if they follow it.

[OutBy40]

You need to be a tortoise. Slow and steady - not bounding from one idea to another, like smart people often do. Maybe optimization works better, but you can also make more mistakes while you are optimizing.  Anyway, the method that MMM explains can work for anyone - they are still going to become ER if they follow it.

I agree, slow and steady definitely wins this race, and it's because the majority of us are relying on our investments to continue to pay off throughout the years and that certainly comes slowly - but surely.

[dude]

Depends on how early you want out, compared to your SWR.

If it's just "save 25x expenses and then use the Roth pipeline" it would be easy. Add in some more complications like juggling capital gains on multiple rental property sales and managing income for the FAFSA and maximizing ACA subsidies and shooting for an EITC refund, and suddenly it requires some facility with a spreadsheet.

Now that I'm down to the brass tacks of actually trying to forecast monthly income with all of those complications, it's turning out to be a challenge even for a dude with a PhD.

Indeed.  I've found the more I learn, the more I realize I don't know.

You can do it simply (and suboptimally), but to really excel takes a lot of knowledge in various things (tax planning, investing, psychology, spending, etc.)

Anyone can do the first, and end up way ahead and it's "good enough".  The second is what you move towards and the further you go on that scale, the ore likely you need to be a super intelligent pedant.

I have also found this to be true, and have determined to apply some version of the 80:20 rule. I feel like if I get it about 80% optimal, that's good enough. Trying to optimize beyond that takes a lot more effort and you hit the law of diminishing returns. Plus, there are enough unknowns (e.g., future of ACA, future of exact Social Security payouts, future inflation figures, exact FAFSA calculations) that smaller and smaller optimizations become more like guesswork -- the margin of error is bigger than you can make accommodations for.

Besides, having some (informed) attitude of "Let's just throw up the sail and see where we go" can be fun. Trying to calculate every last nth degree of optimization -- not so much IMO. I'll be perfectly content if I overpay $200 in taxes during the year because I'm outside enjoying the weather, or inside building a bookcase for my daughter.

Agree with DoubleD.  Fortunately, I'll be a pensioned retiree with SS and a robust 401k, so things should be pretty simple for me.  The underlying principle in retirement will remain the same as it was during my working life -- don't live beyond your means.

[mak1277]

It's interesting...one of the things that initially caught my attention about MMM was the discussion around index funds.  I had read ERE in the past, and one of my takeaways was the idea that managing a gaggle of dividend-paying investments in retirement sounded like a lot of work...more work than I wanted to sign up for in retirement.

Once I read about "set it and forget it" indexing, RE became real for me. 

Beyond that, I think you have to be smart enough to adapt when circumstances change, both before and after retirement.  Smart enough to add a side hustle or part time job...or cut back spending...if things aren't going as planned.

[Jeremy]

Thankfully not too smart, or we never would have made it

[libertarian4321]

I think most of the people on this forum would have IQ's of 120-130+.

I consider the three legs of early retirement to be saving, investing, and taxes.

Saving like a monk is pretty simple, you just don't buy stuff.

Saving like a mustachian, where you live a pretty normal middle class life for a whole lot less than everyone else, takes quite a bit of intelligence and problem solving abilities.  Intelligence will certainly help you get that $50-75-100k+ job that will fuel your savings.

Investing is potentially the simplest/easiest of the three, buy the S&P 500 via Vanguard and let it ride.  Life cycle funds are also simple solution for the simple minded.

Taxes-I don't care how smart you are, this one can twist you in knots if you let it (and was my personal weak spot for a long time).  Being able to find and understand an IRA ladder could accelerate ER by several years but you will not see it on the cover of Money magazine or the Wall Street Journal. Hence my signature line.

My advice to anyone who is admittedly less than average but desires ER would be to keep things as simple as possible.  Save, invest, and defer taxes by funding non-roth retirement accounts.  Give it 10-15 years for stache building, then we can help you figure out how to access your money.  Might not be quite "perfect" but it will work as long as the discipline is there.             

Careful, look what happened here: http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/what's-your-iq-according-to-this-online-test/?nowap

Ahh the power of Bull Shitting on the internet.  According to that poll, 78.4% of the people on this forum had an IQ above 130, which is pretty astounding given that only slightly above 2% if the general populace has an IQ that high.

Damn, either MMM attracted the cream of the crop of Mensa eligible folks, or there is a FUCK TON of Bull shitting going on.  Hmm, which is more likely, everyone here is a genius, or the bull shitting has hit epic proportions?  I'll let y'all decide.

Based on this, I suspect if we polled the penis length of male MMM users, we'd come up with an average of something in the range of 9.5-11" (which is actually slightly less ridiculous than the MMM "IQ" claims).

Look, you don't need to have an extraordinary IQ to "get it."   My parents "got it," and neither of them was ever labeled with a ridiculously high IQ (they were both well above average, but certainly not "130+").

Live well below your means, save and invest for the long term.

No 135 IQ or 11" penis required to understand that.  Just some common sense and discipline and you will do fine.

[soccerluvof4]

Discipline it the most important factor imho,  there are a lot of intellectual idiots out there!

[Zikoris]

I think most of the people on this forum would have IQ's of 120-130+.

I consider the three legs of early retirement to be saving, investing, and taxes.

Saving like a monk is pretty simple, you just don't buy stuff.

Saving like a mustachian, where you live a pretty normal middle class life for a whole lot less than everyone else, takes quite a bit of intelligence and problem solving abilities.  Intelligence will certainly help you get that $50-75-100k+ job that will fuel your savings.

Investing is potentially the simplest/easiest of the three, buy the S&P 500 via Vanguard and let it ride.  Life cycle funds are also simple solution for the simple minded.

Taxes-I don't care how smart you are, this one can twist you in knots if you let it (and was my personal weak spot for a long time).  Being able to find and understand an IRA ladder could accelerate ER by several years but you will not see it on the cover of Money magazine or the Wall Street Journal. Hence my signature line.

My advice to anyone who is admittedly less than average but desires ER would be to keep things as simple as possible.  Save, invest, and defer taxes by funding non-roth retirement accounts.  Give it 10-15 years for stache building, then we can help you figure out how to access your money.  Might not be quite "perfect" but it will work as long as the discipline is there.             

Careful, look what happened here: http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/what's-your-iq-according-to-this-online-test/?nowap

Ahh the power of Bull Shitting on the internet.  According to that poll, 78.4% of the people on this forum had an IQ above 130, which is pretty astounding given that only slightly above 2% if the general populace has an IQ that high.

Damn, either MMM attracted the cream of the crop of Mensa eligible folks, or there is a FUCK TON of Bull shitting going on.  Hmm, which is more likely, everyone here is a genius, or the bull shitting has hit epic proportions?  I'll let y'all decide.

Based on this, I suspect if we polled the penis length of male MMM users, we'd come up with an average of something in the range of 9.5-11" (which is actually slightly less ridiculous than the MMM "IQ" claims).

Look, you don't need to have an extraordinary IQ to "get it."   My parents "got it," and neither of them was ever labeled with a ridiculously high IQ (they were both well above average, but certainly not "130+").

Live well below your means, save and invest for the long term.

No 135 IQ or 11" penis required to understand that.  Just some common sense and discipline and you will do fine.

Without reading the thread I would assume the average IQ here is way above average just by the fact that this group is predominately engineers, doctors, lawyers, business owners, and other types of high-paid professionals. You don't end up with those job titles or credentials by being average intelligence.

[mak1277]

IQ is a pretty silly concept. I wouldn't assign any value to it or to a test that measures it.

You don't think intelligence is valuable?  Or you don't think IQ is an apporpriate measure of intelligence?

I sure wish I could give an IQ test to everyone who I interview to work for me.

[sol]

Without reading the thread I would assume the average IQ here is way above average just by the fact that this group is predominately engineers, doctors, lawyers, business owners, and other types of high-paid professionals. You don't end up with those job titles or credentials by being average intelligence.

The whole point of that IQ thread was to highlight the apparent (but false) correlation between IQ and income. 

I think we all like to believe that if you are paid an above-average wage, it is because you are of above average IQ.  At least those of us who are paid an above-average wage like to believe it.

And in the middle third of the IQ or income spectrum, I might believe there is at least weak correlation.  But if you spend any time out at the fringe of either one, you'll quickly convince yourself the relationship doesn't hold.  Some of the richest people I know aren't very bright.  Some of the smartest people I know aren't very rich. 

Americans in particular tend to assess value in terms of the almighty dollars, as if a price tag was the ultimate arbiter of quality.  By that metric a GMC Yukon is a better car than a Chevy Tahoe because it costs thousands more, even though they are identical vehicles manufactured in the same factory by the same workers.  This mistake is deliberately planted in us by marketers, and it partly explains why we like to think that some people, like some cars, are better than others just because they cost more.

Snap out of it, people!  Learn to judge things, and people, on the metrics that you decide are important.  The guy running the soup kitchen does more good for the world than the guy running the hedge fund, despite the thousand fold difference in paycheck.  Isn't that worth something?

[Rezdent]

Without reading the thread I would assume the average IQ here is way above average just by the fact that this group is predominately engineers, doctors, lawyers, business owners, and other types of high-paid professionals. You don't end up with those job titles or credentials by being average intelligence.

The whole point of that IQ thread was to highlight the apparent (but false) correlation between IQ and income. 

I think we all like to believe that if you are paid an above-average wage, it is because you are of above average IQ.  At least those of us who are paid an above-average wage like to believe it.

And in the middle third of the IQ or income spectrum, I might believe there is at least weak correlation.  But if you spend any time out at the fringe of either one, you'll quickly convince yourself the relationship doesn't hold.  Some of the richest people I know aren't very bright.  Some of the smartest people I know aren't very rich. 

Americans in particular tend to assess value in terms of the almighty dollars, as if a price tag was the ultimate arbiter of quality.  By that metric a GMC Yukon is a better car than a Chevy Tahoe because it costs thousands more, even though they are identical vehicles manufactured in the same factory by the same workers.  This mistake is deliberately planted in us by marketers, and it partly explains why we like to think that some people, like some cars, are better than others just because they cost more.

Snap out of it, people!  Learn to judge things, and people, on the metrics that you decide are important.  The guy running the soup kitchen does more good for the world than the guy running the hedge fund, despite the thousand fold difference in paycheck.  Isn't that worth something?

+1

For the most part,  I believe anyone of average intelligence can grasp the basic concepts of FI and RE if they are exposed to the ideas.
Whether or not they act on the information seems more predicated on how highly they value autonomy  and delayed gratification over societal norms and peer pressure.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist for the basics.  It doesn't exclude rocket scientists either.

[Zikoris]

Without reading the thread I would assume the average IQ here is way above average just by the fact that this group is predominately engineers, doctors, lawyers, business owners, and other types of high-paid professionals. You don't end up with those job titles or credentials by being average intelligence.

The whole point of that IQ thread was to highlight the apparent (but false) correlation between IQ and income. 

I think we all like to believe that if you are paid an above-average wage, it is because you are of above average IQ.  At least those of us who are paid an above-average wage like to believe it.

And in the middle third of the IQ or income spectrum, I might believe there is at least weak correlation.  But if you spend any time out at the fringe of either one, you'll quickly convince yourself the relationship doesn't hold.  Some of the richest people I know aren't very bright.  Some of the smartest people I know aren't very rich. 

Americans in particular tend to assess value in terms of the almighty dollars, as if a price tag was the ultimate arbiter of quality.  By that metric a GMC Yukon is a better car than a Chevy Tahoe because it costs thousands more, even though they are identical vehicles manufactured in the same factory by the same workers.  This mistake is deliberately planted in us by marketers, and it partly explains why we like to think that some people, like some cars, are better than others just because they cost more.

Snap out of it, people!  Learn to judge things, and people, on the metrics that you decide are important.  The guy running the soup kitchen does more good for the world than the guy running the hedge fund, despite the thousand fold difference in paycheck.  Isn't that worth something?

I make average wage myself, but I think that just the process of getting the credentials required for most high-paying fields would weed out anyone except the very intelligent in most cases. Getting an engineering degree or a medical degree, for example, would be pretty much impossible without significantly above average brainpower.

[Rezdent]

Without reading the thread I would assume the average IQ here is way above average just by the fact that this group is predominately engineers, doctors, lawyers, business owners, and other types of high-paid professionals. You don't end up with those job titles or credentials by being average intelligence.

The whole point of that IQ thread was to highlight the apparent (but false) correlation between IQ and income. 

I think we all like to believe that if you are paid an above-average wage, it is because you are of above average IQ.  At least those of us who are paid an above-average wage like to believe it.

And in the middle third of the IQ or income spectrum, I might believe there is at least weak correlation.  But if you spend any time out at the fringe of either one, you'll quickly convince yourself the relationship doesn't hold.  Some of the richest people I know aren't very bright.  Some of the smartest people I know aren't very rich. 

Americans in particular tend to assess value in terms of the almighty dollars, as if a price tag was the ultimate arbiter of quality.  By that metric a GMC Yukon is a better car than a Chevy Tahoe because it costs thousands more, even though they are identical vehicles manufactured in the same factory by the same workers.  This mistake is deliberately planted in us by marketers, and it partly explains why we like to think that some people, like some cars, are better than others just because they cost more.

Snap out of it, people!  Learn to judge things, and people, on the metrics that you decide are important.  The guy running the soup kitchen does more good for the world than the guy running the hedge fund, despite the thousand fold difference in paycheck.  Isn't that worth something?

(Snipped). Getting an engineering degree or a medical degree, for example, would be pretty much impossible without significantly above average brainpower.

I believe brain power (IQ) is an overrated attribute for success.
Willpower and determination will get a person so much farther than brain power.

I know a lovely young lady who had to have emergency surgery at birth.  The surgery caused her brain to be without oxygen for 45 minutes.  She was developmentally delayed for years.  She scored poorly in multiple areas including IQ in her first ten years of life.

However, she worked harder than all of her peers.  She studied constantly.  She graduated #5 in her class.  She is now in college and doing very well.  I have no doubt that she will get her engineering degree if she chooses.  Her stubborn persistence has served her well.

The brilliant valedictorian of the same class?  Flunked out of college first semester and now working in food service.  Brilliant, but not disciplined.

Im not saying that IQ isn't helpful but it is less of a determinant than most people believe.   The process of getting credentials depends heavily on persistence and hard work.

[Paul der Krake]

It takes a balance of outside the box thinking and analytical skills to project oneself into the future and realize that it is indeed possible. MMM has done a fantastic job of helping people connect the dots and unequivocally declare that all of this is within the reach of the masses.

The hard work has been done. We're like students in a cooking class: the ingredient mix and step by steps instructions have been figured out for us. You're allowed to deviate from the instructor's steps if you wish to create your customized dish that fits your taste more, but it's also okay to go the easy way and blindly follow instructions. As long as you don't let the stove completely unnattended you will be fine.

[Zikoris]

I believe brain power (IQ) is an overrated attribute for success.
Willpower and determination will get a person so much farther than brain power.

I know a lovely young lady who had to have emergency surgery at birth.  The surgery caused her brain to be without oxygen for 45 minutes.  She was developmentally delayed for years.  She scored poorly in multiple areas including IQ in her first ten years of life.

However, she worked harder than all of her peers.  She studied constantly.  She graduated #5 in her class.  She is now in college and doing very well.  I have no doubt that she will get her engineering degree if she chooses.  Her stubborn persistence has served her well.

The brilliant valedictorian of the same class?  Flunked out of college first semester and now working in food service.  Brilliant, but not disciplined.

Im not saying that IQ isn't helpful but it is less of a determinant than most people believe.   The process of getting credentials depends heavily on persistence and hard work.

Well yeah, you obviously have outliers. Once in a while you have some really short basketball player kick ass in the NBA. I'm an outlier myself, in that I'll be retiring young without ever having gotten a degree or earned a high salary. That doesn't change the reality for the majority. Software engineers as a whole are going to have higher IQs than ditch diggers as a whole, and make more money.

[Rezdent]

Well yeah, you obviously have outliers. Once in a while you have some really short basketball player kick ass in the NBA. I'm an outlier myself, in that I'll be retiring young without ever having gotten a degree or earned a high salary. That doesn't change the reality for the majority. Software engineers as a whole are going to have higher IQs than ditch diggers as a whole, and make more money.

I agree that intelligence is a factor.
I just believe that it is not THE deciding factor.  Other personality traits are more important for success - at least for attaining credentials.  No matter how smart, the work has to be done.
I also believe the same to be true of FIRE concepts.  The concepts are fairly simple and people like MMM have organized them into easily understood steps.  No need for genius, but the work has to be done.
Just my opinion.