If you're saving lots of money and waiting on happiness, you're doing it wrong!

[cbr shadow]

Regarding the "too old" argument, one of my favorite counterpoints is that research suggests the folks who live the longest and are still active (e.g., living independently) are almost never folks who retired early, but folks who worked physical / active jobs pretty much all their lives.

There may be correlation, but you need to be careful about which conclusions to draw. Another plausible explanation would be that people who get sick need to retire because they are no longer able to work. So it might not be the working that keeps them young, it might simply be that most people work as long as they feel fit to, and the fit people are just able to do it longer. Sounds much more obvious this way, too.

And even then, a FIRE retiree and and a regular early  retiree will likely be very different groups of people. It would be hard to draw general conclusions from one and apply it to the other.

Great points!!  Correlation vs Causation

[asauer]

I totally agree.  However, I do think many of these comments you refer to come from frustration of not making fast enough progress towards FIRE (me included!).  I can certainly be bogged down in "why can't I FIRE now!!" and lose sight of all the other things in my life that make me happy.  I'm getting better, but it still happens.

[startbyservingothers]

I agree as well.   However there is a hurdle for people like me to get over: 

Spending money itself makes me unhappy.

Sometimes you just have to get out of your own head. (Not worry so much about the details, etc.).  Research on Stoicism has helped me immensely in this regard.  - I still have a long way to go.

[Cranky]

I think I was blessed with contentment when I was born without the urge to travel. ;-) I'm always surprised at how many people have that as a goal (and if it's your favorite thing to do, why aren't you doing it? Does everybody work in sweatshops with no days off??)

I actually think it's as important to find out how to have a wonderful life with less money as it is to heap up the money, and for many people it's probably more important.

[steveo]

I actually think it's as important to find out how to have a wonderful life with less money as it is to heap up the money, and for many people it's probably more important.

I agree with you. I don't see the correlation between spending money and happiness past pretty much basic expenses.

[FINate]

I actually think it's as important to find out how to have a wonderful life with less money as it is to heap up the money, and for many people it's probably more important.

I agree with you. I don't see the correlation between spending money and happiness past pretty much basic expenses.

Yep. The science is very clear on this. You need a certain amount of money for essentials, but beyond that money (and spending) has very little impact on happiness and wellbeing. This basic income level is usually estimated at around $75,000 though I can image a number of factors that might move this in either direction.

Most of us are conditioned from a very young age to associate spending with happiness when, in fact, again and again the research shows that (beyond essential needs) things like close relationships, sleep, healthy diet, exercise, and such are the primary predictors of happiness.  In other words, the things ER makes possible to a greater degree.

My guess is that people who feel deprived by being frugal have yet to break the spending==happiness association -- they have not changed the way they think about money. So they go around always thinking about when they can reward themselves with more spending. This is similar to someone on a diet fantasizing about when they can treat themselves again rather than making a fundamental lifestyle change.

[JLee]

I actually think it's as important to find out how to have a wonderful life with less money as it is to heap up the money, and for many people it's probably more important.

I agree with you. I don't see the correlation between spending money and happiness past pretty much basic expenses.

Yep. The science is very clear on this. You need a certain amount of money for essentials, but beyond that money (and spending) has very little impact on happiness and wellbeing. This basic income level is usually estimated at around $75,000 though I can image a number of factors that might move this in either direction.

Most of us are conditioned from a very young age to associate spending with happiness when, in fact, again and again the research shows that (beyond essential needs) things like close relationships, sleep, healthy diet, exercise, and such are the primary predictors of happiness.  In other words, the things ER makes possible to a greater degree.

My guess is that people who feel deprived by being frugal have yet to break the spending==happiness association -- they have not changed the way they think about money. So they go around always thinking about when they can reward themselves with more spending. This is similar to someone on a diet fantasizing about when they can treat themselves again rather than making a fundamental lifestyle change.

Keep in mind though, "this basic income level" is ~50% higher than the median household income in the US.

[FINate]

Keep in mind though, "this basic income level" is ~50% higher than the median household income in the US.

Correct. As I mentioned, however, there are probably factors that influence the basic income level: HCOL vs LCOL areas, debt, etc. MMM certainly thrives on much less.

[tobitonic]

Regarding the "too old" argument, one of my favorite counterpoints is that research suggests the folks who live the longest and are still active (e.g., living independently) are almost never folks who retired early, but folks who worked physical / active jobs pretty much all their lives.

There may be correlation, but you need to be careful about which conclusions to draw. Another plausible explanation would be that people who get sick need to retire because they are no longer able to work. So it might not be the working that keeps them young, it might simply be that most people work as long as they feel fit to, and the fit people are just able to do it longer. Sounds much more obvious this way, too.

And even then, a FIRE retiree and and a regular early  retiree will likely be very different groups of people. It would be hard to draw general conclusions from one and apply it to the other.

Oh, certainly. But we don't get to simply ignore longevity studies simply because we don't agree with their conclusions. Well, I suppose one can do anything, but it seems rather self-deceiving to me.

Most of the other points I mentioned are ones held in high esteem by many forum members here, and by Mr. MMM himself (eating plant-based, unprocessed foods, having a strong sense of purpose, moving naturally, building a strong social network).

There has literally been a front-page blog post praising the folks of Ikaria for being "the original Mustachians" due to their relaxed, social, connected, and simple lives. There are threads every day asking how to make friends, eat healthy, develop post-FIRE life habits, and exercise well.

However, the points about living in relative poverty, retiring normally (or late!), and having very little in savings run directly against the values of the forum (although the relative poverty point would find kinship with ERE folks).

If we're going to pick and choose which parts of research we agree with, let's at least be honest about it instead of taking some bits as common sense and hiding behind the "correlation is not causation" argument for the bits we find distasteful.

[tobitonic]

And for the record, I don't think I've got this figured out myself. I think the longevity research is solid, and it's a big part of why we live the way we do (in terms of diet, family time, outdoor time, etc). It's a big part of why I work a day job even though we've been "day job FIRE" for more than a year now. However, we don't have lots of friends or live very close to family or live in a warm climate or go to church regularly or...etc. But I don't try to delude myself into believing that the parts of the research I agree with are good and the parts of the research I don't abide by are bad. And if I were to decide my day job weren't worth it next year and stay at home full time, I wouldn't tell myself that the longevity research was flawed on early retirement because of XYZ...I'd just own it.

[steveo]

I actually think it's as important to find out how to have a wonderful life with less money as it is to heap up the money, and for many people it's probably more important.

I agree with you. I don't see the correlation between spending money and happiness past pretty much basic expenses.

Yep. The science is very clear on this. You need a certain amount of money for essentials, but beyond that money (and spending) has very little impact on happiness and wellbeing. This basic income level is usually estimated at around $75,000 though I can image a number of factors that might move this in either direction.

While I totally agree with the sentiment that money doesn't equal happiness I do think $75k is a butt load of money and the average person - whether retired or still working - can find bliss on much much less. I retired at 42 on a fraction of that amount and am pretty darn happy! Of course everyone's mmv.

We (myself, wife and 3 kids) spend about $40k per year excluding the mortgage. I think $40k is probably an over inflated figure as well. I suppose rent in our house would be about $40k per year but we own the house. Still I think $75k is a tonne of money.

I think forgetting about money and making it about things that are required is a better way to look at happiness. So you need healthy food and shelter. Once you get that it's the other stuff that provides happiness such as your relationships and the hobbies/fun that you have. For me personally the lifestyle that makes me happy doesn't require a lot of money.

[SomedayStache]

I think there are two different kinds of happiness people on these forums struggle with, and they have different challenges.

One is the "how am I ever going to make it to retirement?" syndrome where life now is fine, but the prospect of a better life ahead that they have to wait for is depressing them. For this, I think the best way can be to optimize as much as possible (arrange the short commute, reasonably priced housing, moderate insurance rates, habits of eating at home etc.) and then forget about it. (Of course check in occasionally, and when financial decisions come around, apply Mustachian principles, but overall, day to day, just go about your business and enjoy life).

The other is "I don't like the choices I have to make to meet this goal."  I think there are two ways to figure out the right balance to current happiness and distant goals. You can either start cutting back slowly on a given habit, until you get to the right balance point of goal vs. current (ie, if you eat out three times a week, try two times, then once, then once every other week, then once a month, until you miss eating out more than you value adding to the stash.) Or you can cut out something totally and then add it back slowly until you get to the right balance. The most powerful way to do it is also simultaneously look for other less expensive ways to meet the same need (learning to cook, or becoming an expert on local happy hours). What sometimes seems to happen is that people do the "cut it all out" step, but not the "slowly add it back in, or find something else that meets the desire/need" step.

Very insightful.  Posting so I can follow up and read the rest of the thread at a later time.

[FINate]

While I totally agree with the sentiment that money doesn't equal happiness I do think $75k is a butt load of money and the average person - whether retired or still working - can find bliss on much much less. I retired at 42 on a fraction of that amount and am pretty darn happy! Of course everyone's mmv.

Totally agree, $75k is overkill. But it's not a discrete function, and that seems to be the point of diminishing returns for most people. Also this is for your average consumer who instinctively believes, probably without much thought, that more money means more happiness. For those of us who realize that more is not always better it's very likely that the point of diminishing returns is much lower.

[FINate]

And for the record, I don't think I've got this figured out myself. I think the longevity research is solid, and it's a big part of why we live the way we do (in terms of diet, family time, outdoor time, etc). It's a big part of why I work a day job even though we've been "day job FIRE" for more than a year now. However, we don't have lots of friends or live very close to family or live in a warm climate or go to church regularly or...etc. But I don't try to delude myself into believing that the parts of the research I agree with are good and the parts of the research I don't abide by are bad. And if I were to decide my day job weren't worth it next year and stay at home full time, I wouldn't tell myself that the longevity research was flawed on early retirement because of XYZ...I'd just own it.

Retirement is a funny term. I was caught up on it for a couple of years before finally pulling the trigger on ER. At some point I realized that work is not the same thing as earning a paycheck. I still work: volunteer, help friends and family with projects, raise my kids, DIY stuff. I also spend a good deal of time engaging in fun and enriching activities: visiting people, biking, reading, baking, working out. The difference is now I'm free to focus on those things that are the most meaningful to me. No more commute, pointless meetings, office politics, or any of that other garbage. So I still work, but I work on my terms and I get to set the balance between work and play. I know it's antidotal, but my health improved significantly after ER because I now get more exercise, sleep better (guessing less stress), and drink less.

That said, if you're happy with your job and everything that goes with it, and your work-life balance is where you want it, I see no reason to stop working.

[RetiredAt63]

Work =/= paid job, so true.  There is a huge difference (even for those of traditional retirement age) between those who veg out in retirement and those who keep working (volunteer activities, more home projects, etc.).

Re validity of studies - I used to point out to my students that when reading a research paper the most important section was Materials and Methods and the next was Results.  If the research protocol was not well thought out, the results were not very meaningful.  If the research was well done, look at the results and form your own conclusions before reading the Discussion, your take will not necessarily match theirs, for perfectly legitimate reasons.

And for the record, I don't think I've got this figured out myself. I think the longevity research is solid, and it's a big part of why we live the way we do (in terms of diet, family time, outdoor time, etc). It's a big part of why I work a day job even though we've been "day job FIRE" for more than a year now. However, we don't have lots of friends or live very close to family or live in a warm climate or go to church regularly or...etc. But I don't try to delude myself into believing that the parts of the research I agree with are good and the parts of the research I don't abide by are bad. And if I were to decide my day job weren't worth it next year and stay at home full time, I wouldn't tell myself that the longevity research was flawed on early retirement because of XYZ...I'd just own it.

Retirement is a funny term. I was caught up on it for a couple of years before finally pulling the trigger on ER. At some point I realized that work is not the same thing as earning a paycheck. I still work: volunteer, help friends and family with projects, raise my kids, DIY stuff. I also spend a good deal of time engaging in fun and enriching activities: visiting people, biking, reading, baking, working out. The difference is now I'm free to focus on those things that are the most meaningful to me. No more commute, pointless meetings, office politics, or any of that other garbage. So I still work, but I work on my terms and I get to set the balance between work and play. I know it's antidotal, but my health improved significantly after ER because I now get more exercise, sleep better (guessing less stress), and drink less.

That said, if you're happy with your job and everything that goes with it, and your work-life balance is where you want it, I see no reason to stop working.

[shelivesthedream]

This $75k number is a new one. I have also seen $40k and $50k posited as the maximum income for increased happiness - somewhat above the median HHI but not vastly. The description that stuck with me the most is "enough income to live securely in a modest home, comfortably pay your bills, go on a modest annual holiday and have one or two small treats each week (e.g. go to the cinema or buy a fancy cake)" Beyond that level of financial security and occasional treats is where more money stops being worth it.

I have always wondered whether they take into account how the money comes in. For example, it can't be too hard for a moderately experienced professional to find a low-stress job for $40k. But a low-stress job for $100k would be more of a problem. So is it also that jobs get shittier as you move from the middle to the top of the pay scale? Could it be that $40k gets you enough money to feel secure and happy... without also getting you a ton of stress, very long hours and lots of corporate bullshit? Whereas $100k is significantly more money but you have to put yourself through more to get it so you are less happy - whereas all things being equal the two sums would be independent of any workplace characteristics. Then you could truly measure money and happiness independently.

[Le Poisson]

I've been thinking about this thread in context of my boat. Some background...

Pre-mustachianism, I owned a small (25 foot) sailboat in a local yacht club. I paid about $400 a month in slip/storage fees (annualized) and had an annual maintenance budget of around $2500 - $5000 depending on what went wrong (a new mainsail = $2500, an engine rebuild = $1,000). The boat itself had a bluebook value of around $6,000, but book values on boats are pretty crap. Its hard to find a buyer for a sailboat, so folks end up giving them away cheap. I sold mine complete for $2500 once we got serious about stopping the holes in our budget. Parting it out I would have made more money on the sale, but that would have meant paying storage longer.

Anyways, I went out every Wednesday night for race night, and a couple weekends a year for cruises/regattas. I loved the boat and had a lot of fun on it. My wife hated it and refused to step aboard, and the kids were ambivalent. I got a lot of happiness out of it while I was on the water, but the rest of the time, it was a thorn in our side. But I still loved it. The boat is the only thing I look back on with regrets since we made wholesale changes and stopped living in deepening debt (still digging out of that hole).

The boat was clearly a money-hole. But it made me happy. Many folks will say 'go sail someone else's boat and avoid the costs' but its not the same as being master and commander, and you don't have the same responsibility and decision making powers.

But... every month we are now paying down debt at a ridiculous rate, and I no longer carry the stresses of ownership, and my marriage is better for not having the boat in the background. Plus the savings allow us to do things as a family that we couldn't when I was finding my fun in a very Dad-centric (selfish?) pursuit. Of course, had Momma been more involved in sailing this equilibrium might be different. I dunno.

For me this is a case of a passion/pursuit/hobby that I gave up to save cash and bring peace to the family pure and simple, and I am waiting on the right time to get back into saililng/racing and buy another boat - but only once our footing is right. We will never be a liveaboard family, and we will never sail together (Momma is afraid of boats in general), but I'm waiting. In the interim we've bought a canoe - its as close as we are getting to yachting for a long time.

[rubybeth]

I think there are two different kinds of happiness people on these forums struggle with, and they have different challenges.

One is the "how am I ever going to make it to retirement?" syndrome where life now is fine, but the prospect of a better life ahead that they have to wait for is depressing them. For this, I think the best way can be to optimize as much as possible (arrange the short commute, reasonably priced housing, moderate insurance rates, habits of eating at home etc.) and then forget about it. (Of course check in occasionally, and when financial decisions come around, apply Mustachian principles, but overall, day to day, just go about your business and enjoy life).

The other is "I don't like the choices I have to make to meet this goal."  I think there are two ways to figure out the right balance to current happiness and distant goals. You can either start cutting back slowly on a given habit, until you get to the right balance point of goal vs. current (ie, if you eat out three times a week, try two times, then once, then once every other week, then once a month, until you miss eating out more than you value adding to the stash.) Or you can cut out something totally and then add it back slowly until you get to the right balance. The most powerful way to do it is also simultaneously look for other less expensive ways to meet the same need (learning to cook, or becoming an expert on local happy hours). What sometimes seems to happen is that people do the "cut it all out" step, but not the "slowly add it back in, or find something else that meets the desire/need" step.

Well said Noodle.

There is also 'normalization.' I recall reading studies that showed how after about 6 months anyone's level of happiness will normalize to their conditions, so that they no longer recognize their life as outstanding or different or special.

For some folks that leads to despondency, while for others it stresses them to make changes. SO your savings rate is an incredible 85%, and you feel good about yourself, but after 6 months in your mind, that's just how life is, and you start to look for opportunities to wring out a few more percent, or you feel like there is nothing special about what you are doing, and the self-defeat talk kicks in.

Its important to keep reminding yourself that even in the 9-5 grind, there are outstanding things you are doing, regardless how normal it feels to dump so much cash into savings, and that wringing those extra 2% of savings out of your paycheque may be satisfying for a time, but doing something spectacular with it may also be rewarding.

Our family does not have a stellar savings rate, but we do make it a point to infuse our lives with punctuation marks that push us outside our comfort zone and allow us to feel excited about the lives we live.

Noodle and Prospector, I wanted to thank you both for your posts, they helped me a lot today as I checked our stash amount and felt kind of meh, and thought, "What's it all for?"

DH and I never really went through the 'cut back' phase that Noodle mentioned, because when we got married, we were in a lot of debt and taking on more as we both completing second degrees, and we just lived very simply, as students do. Our one 'splurge' when I got a promotion at work was to buy an XBox 360 (we had already replaced two very old vehicles with somewhat less old vehicles).

We paid off the debts in 2013 and are now stashing money like crazy, even with my husband back in graduate school, but I've reached what Prospector calls the "normalization" phase. It's no longer all that impressive to me that we are saving over $1,000/month (though I do know that if I told people IRL that we are doing this, their minds would be boggled). After a health scare for a family friend, we decided we were going to try to do fun things within reason, and the savings rate be damned--so we have taken some trips (travel rewards card and good planning help to keep costs down), purchased some replacement items that affect quality of life (a new couch this fall has also alleviated some back issues for both of us), and we don't feel guilty about our season tickets to the orchestra or my music lessons, which are both fun and help our stress levels (having an awesome concert to look forward to each month has been surprisingly beneficial, and I absolutely love singing so working to improve my technique brings me a lot of joy).

We also started doing "date nights" which may sound hokey, but we've found frugal things to do where the focus is more on the time spent together (Chinese takeout and cross-country skiing in the park last week). I try not to feel too badly about spending an extra $15 on some takeout, but there is that niggling little voice that says, "You could have saved that." I think I'm now ready to let that go and look at our accomplishments intead.

[Chris22]

This $75k number is a new one. I have also seen $40k and $50k posited as the maximum income for increased happiness - somewhat above the median HHI but not vastly. The description that stuck with me the most is "enough income to live securely in a modest home, comfortably pay your bills, go on a modest annual holiday and have one or two small treats each week (e.g. go to the cinema or buy a fancy cake)" Beyond that level of financial security and occasional treats is where more money stops being worth it.

I have always wondered whether they take into account how the money comes in. For example, it can't be too hard for a moderately experienced professional to find a low-stress job for $40k. But a low-stress job for $100k would be more of a problem. So is it also that jobs get shittier as you move from the middle to the top of the pay scale? Could it be that $40k gets you enough money to feel secure and happy... without also getting you a ton of stress, very long hours and lots of corporate bullshit? Whereas $100k is significantly more money but you have to put yourself through more to get it so you are less happy - whereas all things being equal the two sums would be independent of any workplace characteristics. Then you could truly measure money and happiness independently.

Having moved from a $50k job to over $100k, I find that as you move up the food chain, satisfaction increases rather than decreases.  Sure, there is some more stress, but there is also A LOT more control over your own destiny, a lot more visibility into the overall strategy of the company that helps you understand things not always apparent at the "grunt level", and the work you do tends to be more meaningful than the tedious drudgery at the entry level.  Sure, at some point work takes over your life, but from my experience that's in the executive level, at the $100k middle manager level you still aren't dedicating your life to the company 24/7.  Maybe my experience is unique, but it's been constant across the 3-4 places I've worked.

[tobitonic]

This $75k number is a new one. I have also seen $40k and $50k posited as the maximum income for increased happiness - somewhat above the median HHI but not vastly. The description that stuck with me the most is "enough income to live securely in a modest home, comfortably pay your bills, go on a modest annual holiday and have one or two small treats each week (e.g. go to the cinema or buy a fancy cake)" Beyond that level of financial security and occasional treats is where more money stops being worth it.

I have always wondered whether they take into account how the money comes in. For example, it can't be too hard for a moderately experienced professional to find a low-stress job for $40k. But a low-stress job for $100k would be more of a problem. So is it also that jobs get shittier as you move from the middle to the top of the pay scale? Could it be that $40k gets you enough money to feel secure and happy... without also getting you a ton of stress, very long hours and lots of corporate bullshit? Whereas $100k is significantly more money but you have to put yourself through more to get it so you are less happy - whereas all things being equal the two sums would be independent of any workplace characteristics. Then you could truly measure money and happiness independently.

Having moved from a $50k job to over $100k, I find that as you move up the food chain, satisfaction increases rather than decreases.  Sure, there is some more stress, but there is also A LOT more control over your own destiny, a lot more visibility into the overall strategy of the company that helps you understand things not always apparent at the "grunt level", and the work you do tends to be more meaningful than the tedious drudgery at the entry level.  Sure, at some point work takes over your life, but from my experience that's in the executive level, at the $100k middle manager level you still aren't dedicating your life to the company 24/7.  Maybe my experience is unique, but it's been constant across the 3-4 places I've worked.

This is hilarious, because this is exactly what the money / happiness research I've read says: happiness essentially flatlines at a certain income level (which seems to be the 67th percentile if you use the 75k figure relative to the 50k median HHI), but life satisfaction continues to increase with income / wealth and doesn't seem to stop. I find it hard to tease apart happiness vs satisfaction (they seem like the same thing expressed in different ways), but perhaps satisfaction is really "agency" or "sphere of influence."

I also have a theory that the more you make, the less work you actually do. But thinking things over, perhaps it's not so much that you do less work with more money, but that you get to make more decisions over how you work, when you work, and what you're working on compared to folks who make less, which would also tie into my theory on greater satisfaction coming from greater levels of agency with greater levels of income / wealth. After all, the agency is the predominant reason we're all aiming for FI, if not for FIRE outright; we want to be able to decide how, where, when, and why we spend as much of our time as possible.

[Ralph2]

I actually think it's as important to find out how to have a wonderful life with less money as it is to heap up the money, and for many people it's probably more important.

I agree with you. I don't see the correlation between spending money and happiness past pretty much basic expenses.

Yep. The science is very clear on this. You need a certain amount of money for essentials, but beyond that money (and spending) has very little impact on happiness and wellbeing. This basic income level is usually estimated at around $75,000 though I can image a number of factors that might move this in either direction.

While I totally agree with the sentiment that money doesn't equal happiness I do think $75k is a butt load of money and the average person - whether retired or still working - can find bliss on much much less. I retired at 42 on a fraction of that amount and am pretty darn happy! Of course everyone's mmv.

We (myself, wife and 3 kids) spend about $40k per year excluding the mortgage. I think $40k is probably an over inflated figure as well. I suppose rent in our house would be about $40k per year but we own the house. Still I think $75k is a tonne of money.

Like you we lived on $35-40k a year, but that included house payments. We now pull more $, kids moved out and we save the excess.
Although I think the boss would spend it all if allowed.

[Cookie78]

I totally agree.  However, I do think many of these comments you refer to come from frustration of not making fast enough progress towards FIRE (me included!).  I can certainly be bogged down in "why can't I FIRE now!!" and lose sight of all the other things in my life that make me happy.  I'm getting better, but it still happens.

This is the source of my occasional finance related unhappiness too. I have no problems with my lifestyle and low spending, I'm just impatient to get to the point where I can FIRE. I know I need to focus on the other things that make me happy, but in my case so many of the things that make me happy are not possible while I'm stuck in this office/city.

[Chris22]

One thing I've always wondered, that $75k number...is it per person?  Household?  Clearly what works for a single person on $75k won't necessarily translate to a family of 5, but you probably don't need 5 x $75k either.  I've always thought $75k is BS, but on the other hand, $75k x 2 for a couple works out pretty well for us even without adjusting for the kid.

[arebelspy]

Read the OP, questioned if this was news or controversial at all, and then skimmed the replies just from the first page.

Approximately 100% of them that I saw agreed (so, confidence level for whole threadat maybe 80% level).

I think basically everyone agrees with the message.

BUT, perhaps some need to be reminded sometimes.

Yeah, I've been seeing a lot of these lately - posts about how to stay motivated, how to keep working towards your goals, being envious of other people's things, the works. That's not how you do it, geez people! How much "motivation" would it take to eat a big plate of your favourite food? That's how much motivation it should take to live your day to day life as a Mustachian.

THIS.  Great analogy.

The people who are stressing about staying motivated don't yet have the mindset.  They're depriving themselves, in their mind, which leads to unhappiness.

They're the ones that need to be reminded of the OP's message, but, more importantly, need to look into where happiness comes from and examine their values.

Happiness should never be put off.

But that doesn't necessarily mean you need to spend to achieve it.  Sometimes spending helps.  Less often than people think though.

Each day of life should be an eager plunge into excitement.  Mustachianism is a tool that makes this much easier.

[shelivesthedream]

Thank you, Zikoris, for articulating what I can never quite get into words! I'm always slightly confused when I see posts that say things like "Only have to suffer through four more years of frugality!" I wonder what they think will be different for them when they have to live off investments - unless their income:savings rate:SWR spending is truly out of whack. No doubt there are a few people who are doing super hardcore frugality to the point of suffering as a well-thought-out plan to seriously accelerate FIRE or pay off major debt, but with most of them I think "Have you even read the blog?"

However, I feel sorry for people who talk about struggling to stay motivated at work. You can't just stop working forever before you have enough saved, just because you feel like it. Sure, there are different jobs out there but if I earned £100k a yer and was two years out from FIRE, I would struggle with motivation but also wouldn't want to quit my job. So close but yet so far!

[CanuckExpat]

Thanks OP for posting this. I agree with the sentiment, and also I love the steak analogy that was mentioned later.

Browsing the forum I've seen the sacrificing happiness sentiment a few times, for example people talking about taking a quality of life hit to reach FIRE faster; I usually just ignore the sentiment and message, but it's handy to now have this thread to link to.

[arebelspy]

I love the steak analogy that was mentioned later.

I love how literally the first time steak was mentioned in this thread was you.  But that you read the message of Zik and just put in "STEAK" and that's what his message meant to you.  That must have been one visually stimulating steak image.  :D

[CanuckExpat]

I love the steak analogy that was mentioned later.

I love how literally the first time steak was mentioned in this thread was you.  But that you read the message of Zik and just put in "STEAK" and that's what his message meant to you.  That must have been one visually stimulating steak image.  :D

Wow, your right. Good catch. Don't know how that happened, but it's amusing.

[shelivesthedream]

I love the steak analogy that was mentioned later.

I love how literally the first time steak was mentioned in this thread was you.  But that you read the message of Zik and just put in "STEAK" and that's what his message meant to you.  That must have been one visually stimulating steak image.  :D

Wow, your right. Good catch. Don't know how that happened, but it's amusing.

Hah, my mind subbed in "cake" the first time I read it.

[Le Poisson]

However, I feel sorry for people who talk about struggling to stay motivated at work. You can't just stop working forever before you have enough saved, just because you feel like it. Sure, there are different jobs out there but if I earned £100k a yer and was two years out from FIRE, I would struggle with motivation but also wouldn't want to quit my job. So close but yet so far!

The pain is real. Sometimes the zaniness here is all I have to hold on to.

[Zikoris]

I love the steak analogy that was mentioned later.

I love how literally the first time steak was mentioned in this thread was you.  But that you read the message of Zik and just put in "STEAK" and that's what his message meant to you.  That must have been one visually stimulating steak image.  :D

Wow, your right. Good catch. Don't know how that happened, but it's amusing.

It's particularly funny since I'm a vegan. Inspiring people to eat more steak. LOL!