POLL: Accelerating FI vs. Quality of Life

[tooqk4u22]

Topic was raised on another post and I was surprised by the number of people that didn't want to make major adjustments to lifestyle to achieve FI - I am one of them.  This is surprising given MMM but I also recognize that most here live far more frugally than the greater population. 

Personally I am not willing to give up living in decent area and kids activities. 


******the original poll was not received well (see comments below) so i used dark's recommendation so it is more clear and less controversy***********

the original poll is below which deeply offended rice & bean consumers and those without kids and any polls going forward will be more generic so as not to alienate anyone----did I just offend any aliens by using alienate (if you are in the area with your UFO let me know and I will amend it).

What is your timeframe/tradeoff to reach FI?
 FI ASAP by giving up fun/joy (eating Rice& Beans and living in a shack, and no kids activities.
 FI Medium Term (5-10 years) by adjusting down lifestyle, reducing kids activities
 FI Long Term (10+ Years) by maintaining quality of life and kids activities

[grantmeaname]

That's an awful poll! You can be extremely frugal without giving up quality of life. That's the whole point of MMM. You can have fun and joy in your life and eat beans, and your kids can have activities that aren't expensive. You're measuring two totally separate variables here as if they run together.

Not to mention this leaves out all of the people without kids or waiting to have kids.

[darkelenchus]

You can have fun and joy in your life and eat beans.

Not if they give you indigestion. ;-)

[tooqk4u22]

That's an awful poll! You can be extremely frugal without giving up quality of life. That's the whole point of MMM. You can have fun and joy in your life and eat beans, and your kids can have activities that aren't expensive. You're measuring two totally separate variables here as if they run together.

Not to mention this leaves out all of the people without kids or waiting to have kids.

I don't believe that is the sole point of MMM.  FI and Frugality are not one in the same - definition of FI (and also quality of life) is different for everyone and is more of a mission whereas Frugality is one of the tools you can use to get there and obviously the less you spend the less you will need in to be FI. 

The descriptions in the poll are merely to give an idea of the range.  If living extremely frugal, in a shack and eating rice&beans all the time is your desired quality of life then that is good for you (but I doubt it is for most) however if you are doing that and still not FI then would you choose option 1 and downgrade from a shack to a tent -surely this would impact even your low standard of quality living or would you say I don't want to live in a tent so I will delay FI a bit so I can keep my shack and then choose maybe option 2.   

I agree that there are free activities with the kids but sports, music lessons, tutors, a trip to an amusement park, the zoo, and stuff like that all costs money - just like I want my kids to have a good education I also want them to be well rounded and exposed to a broad amount of things, some are free and some are not - even MMM had his kid in pre-school which is not necessary but it is up to him and I am sure he does some activities being the good dad that he is. Not to mention his kid is still young when organized activities haven't been introduced an a meaningful way and the freebies are stimulating enough. 

Also the Poll applies to those who don't have kids - if you are planning on them you may as well think about this stuff because they cost money and it should be factored into your FI budget and what you are or are not willing to do for them.  And if you have no intention on having kids you can still translate it in the same way. 

My goodness I put in a little illustration to help with the point and you take it so literally - I could have just left it as:

1 - FI ASAP but sacrifice quality of life
2 - FI Medium while making some sacrifices quality of life.
3 - FI Long but make no sacrifice to quality of life. 

 

[AJ]

I'm not sure which to pick. We want to FI asap by eating rice & beans, etc. But it will also take us 5-10 years to get there even doing that. ??

[arebelspy]

That's an awful poll! You can be extremely frugal without giving up quality of life. That's the whole point of MMM. You can have fun and joy in your life and eat beans, and your kids can have activities that aren't expensive. You're measuring two totally separate variables here as if they run together.

Not to mention this leaves out all of the people without kids or waiting to have kids.

+1.  The intent makes sense, it's just worded.. poorly.

The hardest part of a poll is the wording. 

EDIT: apparently the OP has changed the wording of the poll, making this comment and the one I'm quoting make quite a bit less sense. 

[darkelenchus]

Frugality is one of the tools you can use to get there and obviously the less you spend the less you will need in to be FI.

Greater frugality accelerates time to FI, and, all things being equal, less frugality decelerates time to FI. The issue, however, is that the poll mistakenly presumes a 1:1 correlation between level of frugality and quality of life, such that the more frugal one is, the more one's quality of life is diminished, and vice versa.

[tooqk4u22]

I give up....maybe I'll take it down.  You either are willing to scrap your quality of life, or not, or somewhere inbetween which translates into shorter, longer, or sometime inbetween to get to FI.  The poll is not suggesting it is 1:1 but more that to each his own. EVERYBODY HAS THEIR THRESHOLD and even those that live in a shack and eat rice and beans and love it may not want to adjust down any further.

For fucks sake I like rice and beans too but I DONT want to eat them every day...you would think the concept along with living in a shack would make some sense. 

Next thing you know somebody will chime in that I live in a tent and eat pine needles and I my quality of life is great. 

[darkelenchus]

I give up....maybe I'll take it down. 

No need to do that... let's try to think of how to make the wording more clearly so that people don't misunderstand.

Here's my suggestion:

Assuming that accelerating FI will lead to a reduction in quality of life, how much are you willing to sacrifice?

#1: As much as possible.
#2: A lot.
#3: Some.
#4: Very little.
#5: None.

This avoids treating acceleration of FI as necessarily leading to diminishing returns on quality of life.

[grantmeaname]

I'm an Americorps volunteer/college student making significantly less than minimum wage and not receiving any real benefits, while trying to save a large proportion of my peensy income for my remaining college expenses. I am not less happy than I was when I lived in my parents' house in high school, could buy everything new, and could choose to dispose any or all of my income on whatever I pleased.

Learning to put a trailer hitch on your own car doesn't make your quality of life any lower, and learning how to cook at home and cut eating out out of your budget doesn't make life any less fun or any less joyful. Learning to check movies out from the library doesn't make you somehow sadder than renting them from a Redbox. The point is, decreases in quality of life aren't a great way to measure decreases in spending. I am totally unwilling to scrap my quality of life to retire sooner, but I am relentlessly focused on decreasing my expenses.

[tooqk4u22]

I'm an Americorps volunteer/college student making significantly less than minimum wage and not receiving any real benefits, while trying to save a large proportion of my peensy income for my remaining college expenses. I am not less happy than I was when I lived in my parents' house in high school, could buy everything new, and could choose to dispose any or all of my income on whatever I pleased.

Learning to put a trailer hitch on your own car doesn't make your quality of life any lower, and learning how to cook at home and cut eating out out of your budget doesn't make life any less fun or any less joyful. Learning to check movies out from the library doesn't make you somehow sadder than renting them from a Redbox. The point is, decreases in quality of life aren't a great way to measure decreases in spending. I am totally unwilling to scrap my quality of life to retire sooner, but I am relentlessly focused on decreasing my expenses.

Once again that is not the point.  Everybody who is not frugal or anti-mustachian assumes that people who are frugal are sacrificing their quality of life.  One this site however it is the exact opposite as everybody assumes that when I say sacrifice your quality of life it means you are currently a spendthrift, not frugal, lover of material things.  Both assumptions are equally wrong. 

You are young and don't think about it, but I assure you that not having health care is, or will be, affecting your quality of life and it does cost money to get it and whether you know it or not that is being to frugal. 

[grantmeaname]

So if the assumption that being frugal is sacrificing quality of life is wrong, and its opposite is wrong, doesn't that mean that quality of life and spending level don't go together? I'm afraid I just don't get the poll then... Are you saying that there are lots of cost-saving measures that don't affect quality of life, and everyone is obviously doing those already, and then you want to know about the cost saving measures that do affect quality of life? In that case, my answer's very little. I'm willing to sacrifice organic food but not actual fresh produce, for example. I have a whole mess of roommates but still live in a beautiful 100-year-old house with a responsible landlord in a nice neighborhood (which doesn't come with as much markup as you'd think. Everything is expensive in college towns, from shitholes to palaces).

Also, let me assure you that I have health care. That ER visit two weeks ago would have been like 8 months of my income without it. I have almost a dozen surgeries to my name, come from three generations of healthcare professionals, and have a genetic condition that could deny me insurance if my coverage lapses. Not all 19 year olds are dumb, and we don't all think we're invincible, either.

[arebelspy]

So we put none if we've already done so?  This poll seems like it would make sense for someone just starting to be Mustachian and thinking about giving up cable, etc. etc.... but for someone already on their way to FI, already being frugal, and possibly already having lowered their standard of living (though this is separate from the previous point)... they'd put none?  That just seems to give counter-intuitive poll results.

[darkelenchus]

Decreases in quality of life aren't a great way to measure decreases in spending. I am totally unwilling to scrap my quality of life to retire sooner, but I am relentlessly focused on decreasing my expenses.

Supposing no change or a rise in income, some decreases in spending will accelerate time to FI without affecting, or possibly even increasing, quality of life, whereas other decreases in expenses could lead to a decrease in quality of life. Someone may be perfectly willing to make that sacrifice, take on a little temporary pain, and reduce their quality of life in order to reach FI sooner.

The rub is that most people vastly exaggerate the affect that decreasing expenses will have on their lives, convinced it's all just pain and misery. This seems to be the root of complanypants psychology.

[tooqk4u22]

dark - i thought you had it nailed but clearly even your help didn't prevail.

So we put none if we've already done so?  This poll seems like it would make sense for someone just starting to be Mustachian and thinking about giving up cable, etc. etc.... but for someone already on their way to FI, already being frugal, and possibly already having lowered their standard of living (though this is separate from the previous point)... they'd put none?  That just seems to give counter-intuitive poll results.

If you are already FI then this poll doesn't apply to you, unless mayby you check the method that you took.  If you are ok with it taking longer, whatever that means (is it 5, 10, 50 years), then yes click none.  It is a subjective poll not an objective one - it is really about your individual view.  No matter how you live there is almost always a lower or higher quality of life for you as an individual.  MMM talks about vacations, sure they are done inexpensively, and that seems to be part of is quality of life but he could have said that wasn't important and cut that out and acheived FI at 31 who knows. 

In that case, my answer's very little. I'm willing to sacrifice organic food but not actual fresh produce, for example. I have a whole mess of roommates but still live in a beautiful 100-year-old house with a responsible landlord in a nice neighborhood (which doesn't come with as much markup as you'd think. Everything is expensive in college towns, from shitholes to palaces).

Also, let me assure you that I have health care.

You made my point...there is always some self-determined quality of life level...you don't want to give up fresh produce but will sacrifice organic.  Also your standard for quality of life may or may not change...you may not want to live in a house with a bunch of roomates or you might who knows but your costs will likely increase if you don't want to.

You said you don't have benefits, which typically includes insurance...good that you have it and my guess is that you are on your parents plan.  At some point you will need to decide if YOU want to pay for this or not, and if you won't go without insurance (which I would not advise) then at that time you will be making a quality of life choice to take a bit longer to get to FI.  There are others that may say screw it and give up insurance to get to FI a year earlier...foolish yes.

[darkelenchus]

So we put none if we've already done so?  This poll seems like it would make sense for someone just starting to be Mustachian and thinking about giving up cable, etc. etc.... but for someone already on their way to FI, already being frugal, and possibly already having lowered their standard of living (though this is separate from the previous point)... they'd put none?  That just seems to give counter-intuitive poll results.

Good point. Perhaps the poll should be a survey with three questions:
     A) "How far along on your FI journey?",
     B) What is your level of frugality?, and
     C)"Assuming that accelerating FI any further will lead to a reduction in quality of life, how much are you willing to sacrifice?"

Options for (A):
    #1: <1 year
    #2: 1-3 years
    #3: 4-7 years
    #4: 7-10 years
    #5: >10 years

Options for (B):
   #1: Extremely Frugal
   #2: Very Frugal
   #3: Moderately Frugal
   #4: Slightly Frugal
   #5: Not Frugal

Options for (C) remain the same.

The problem with (A) is not everyone who wants to participate in the poll may know when they'll projected to reach FI. The problem with (B) is that "Extreme, Very, etc..." are vague. I suppose we can't do much about (A). We could provide a precising definition for the vague terms in (B) to increase the odds that the poll takers use them in a similar enough way to get accurate data.

[AJ]

I don't mean this as antagonistic at all, but I just wanted to point out that you could flip the question around and ask: how much quality of life you are willing to give up via working in exchange for material luxuries? Personally, I'm not seeking FI for FI's sake, but because I see "wage-slavery" as a drain on my quality of life. I feel that decreasing my material expenditures in exchange for owning my own time is a net gain on quality of life.

[darkelenchus]

I just wanted to point out that you could flip the question around and ask: how much quality of life you are willing to give up via working in exchange for material luxuries? Personally, I'm not seeking FI for FI's sake, but because I see "wage-slavery" as a drain on my quality of life. I feel that decreasing my material expenditures in exchange for owning my own time is a net gain on quality of life.

Hear, Hear! That's the gestalt switch that you'll get after carefully considering MMM/ERE/YMOYL, isn't it!?

[arebelspy]

If you are already FI then this poll doesn't apply to you, unless mayby you check the method that you took.

I don't mean if you are already FI, I mean if you are already frugal/Mustachian.  With that in mind, reread my post and I think you'll see the current issue. 

Even dark's latest idea has issues (how long along your current FI journey?  Is that based on when you started saving for retirement? When you started working? When you got more Mustachian about it?).. plus his C has the same issues as I have with the current (new) one.. If you've already reduced your standard of living to the limit you want, you may put that you're unwilling to reduce it further, but that doesn't mean much, as you may already be at a more frugal level than someone who's a spendthrift willing to sacrifice a lot.

Plus the issue with equating standard of living with quality of life.  You should probably replace the latter phrase with the former.

Like I said earlier, wording polls is really tricky.

[grantmeaname]

Plus the issue with equating standard of living with quality of life.  You should probably replace the latter phrase with the former.

Here's the improvement we need! I understand what the poll is trying to say, but I think the fundamental premise that stuff changes your quality of life is fatally flawed. I mean, Bakari lives in an RV and hypermiles a 1980s biodiesel truck and he's got a sunnier disposition than anybody! ERE's Jacob literally lived in a shack and ate rice and lentils (because they're cheaper than beans) for years, and I don't think you could argue he was giving up quality of life to do so.

MMM's What is Hedonic adaptation and How Can it Turn You Into a Sukka? covers this well. It's not consuming that really makes you happy, it's increasing your consumption, because if you don't continually increase it it stops providing new happiness. So instead of continually consuming more, find non-consumptive things to bring you happiness. That's the point.

I can think of literally nobody I know who would financially benefit from foregoing health insurance because HMOs provide so many savings for such an expensive category of expenditures, so I don't get how you can conceive of that as a luxury to be done without, or not, depending on how serious you are about retiring early.
I'm also a bit insulted that I've explained why health insurance is important to me (after your offensive presumption that I go without it because I'm 19) and you still feel the need to lecture me about how important it is. Let me put this in bold this time, and maybe you'll read it: Not all 19 year olds are dumb, and we don't all think we're invincible, either.

[tooqk4u22]

grant - i think it is great that you are on this site and recognize that consumerism is all that great, and seeing it so early puts you at a great advantage.  I wasn't lecturing you or implying 19 year olds are dumb, but there are plenty of people who don't have insurance (a lot because they can't afford it), or are under insured, choose not to have insurance because they don't think they will get sick, choose high deductible plans to avoid the premiums even though they don't yet have the coin to cover the deductible, whatever.  Bottom line is at some point you and everyone else will have to choose an option to pay for it or not - it is still a choice and is big part of FI. It may not be luxury, and it may be stupid to go without it, but in USA it is optional and the choice is on the individual and some may not put it as a high priority.

Quality of life and standard of living are the same thing to me and everyone has individual view on what works for them - You keep missing the point and keep accusing me of implying that "Stuff" is important to quality of life.  By the way isn't a computer (like the one you are using) simply just stuff - you can't eat it, can't sleep in it, doesn't meet any basic need - you must not be frugal and need stuff to be happy.  We all have stuff...Bakari's RV is stuff, ERE's shack is stuff, etc.  Everyone here has stuff at some level.  Your confusing standard of living/quality of life (again, interchangeable in my view) with basic human needs.  There is also non-stuff that adds to quality of life/standard of living for me such as travel - even taking a small camping trip costs some additional money even it is only the little bit of gas it takes to get there or the gear - should I forego that because it is not frugal as I am spending on something that is not a need.  My kids also add to the quality of my life, which is completely un-frugal and were very much optional, should I get rid of them - is that what you are saying.

Likewise, you are volunteering for Americorp which is terrific and I think is great or organization but it is a luxury that has been afforded to you by your basic needs being met likely by some other means (scholarships, stipends, parents, hopefully not loans) - I don't mean to be condescending but I know very few 19 YO who can volunteer, go to school and meet all their needs without some assistance.

[darkelenchus]

Plus the issue with equating standard of living with quality of life.  You should probably replace the latter phrase with the former.

The intent of the poll/survey is to determine whether mustachians sacrificed anything they value or are willing to sacrifice more of it in order to gain FI sooner, and if so, how much. Using standard of living would seem just as likely to run into problems as quality of life, seeing as a mustachian could enjoy a higher income, have better health coverage, live in a nicer area with access to better facilities, and be able to purchase better or equal quality goods & services at the same or lower prices than in their pre-mustachian state.

I've already hinted at this, but I think the main problem with the poll is with the notion of "sacrifice" in this context. As mentioned previously, adopting a MMM/ERE/YMOYL perspective and actually living it leads to a gestalt switch. It reorients one's values such that what may seem like a sacrifice from a pre-mustachian consumer-oriented perspective may be liberating for and valued by the mustachian.

When the consumer-oriented pre-mustachian is confronted with the possibility that the way things are is not the way things have to be, he/she likely simultaneously experiences a) excitement at the prospect of accumulating enough savings that she can support his/herself or his/her household without having to work if he/she doesn't want to, and b) anguish at the inevitable revaluation of his/her habits, stuff, and activities that comes with adopting a mustachian way of life. The effect of anguish on one's reasoning is gravitation-like in keeping him/her complacent. He/she focuses disproprotionately on the apparent loss of benefits afforded him/her by his/her spend-happy and comfort/convenience-seeking ways, and on the amount of effort it'll take to live a different life.

On the other hand, the mustachian has already escaped the gravitational pull, made those valuations and changed his/her habits, etc.. He/she understands that there's no real loss of benefits. If anything, mustachianism leads to a gain in benefits.  And the effort involved in making the change, though sometimes trying, is actually quite fun. When the pre-mustachian asks what sacrifices the mustachian has to make, the general reaction will be "Sacrifices? What sacrifices? No need to worry. Jump on in. The water's fine!"

Presumably what the pre-mustachian would be after in seeking out a poll like the one we've been discussing is to determine whether pursuing mustachianism is worth it, especially if FI is what really attracts him/her.  The only thing he/she would need to give up is consumer-oriented, spend-happiness. Every mustachian, pretty much by definition, is/was willing to sacrifice that! If the pre-mustachian wants to know whether pursuing mustachian is worth it, then, it's not by collecting data from a poll, but by asking mustachians whether it's really that bad, listening to their responses why its not, seeking out their reasons why they're mustachians, and listening to their advice on how to make the transition smoothly.

If after careful deliberation he/she finds that mustachianism isn't for him/her (i.e. he/she is like Cypher in the Matrix and wants to remain plugged in to consumer, spend-happy "reality") but he/she still seeks FI, there's still ways to get that, viz., by increasing income. Then the mustachians can turn him/her over to folks like the Millionare Fastlane guy.

Like I said earlier, wording polls is really tricky.

NEW POLL:

Wording polls is really tricky. Agree or disagree?

#1: Agree
#2: Disagree

:-)

[tooqk4u22]

NEW POLL:

Wording polls is really tricky. Agree or disagree?

#1: Agree
#2: Disagree

:-)

#1

While the number of votes is not sufficient to be a statistically relevant sample over 50% are willing to give up some but not at the expense of quality, which is what I suspected in the initial post.  Basically there are very few people that want to be Jacob from ERE as that would not meet their quality/value standard - that's not to say that if needed more people here couldn't live like that to survive

[AJ]

Quality of life and standard of living are the same thing to me...

These are not the same. Google their definitions:

Quality of life: "your personal satisfaction (or dissatisfaction) with the cultural or intellectual conditions under which you live (as distinct from material comfort);" (emphasis mine)

Standard of Living: "A level of material comfort as measured by the goods, services, and luxuries available to an individual, group, or nation."

A rich but lonely person will have a higher standard of living, but lower quality of life, than a lower-middle-class homemaker with extended family within walking distance. Standard of living refers specifically to the level of material comfort, while quality of life refers to personal satisfaction. They may or may not be correlated, but they are not the same, and that is causing some issues here.

[tooqk4u22]

That is somewhat semantics but when the two are compared it is typically at the macroeconomic level (i.e. comparing one country to another) but at the individual level they go together and are interchangeable.  Also the true definition of standard of living does not just refer to material wants and possessions it also includes access to quality healthcare, life expectancy, environment, climate, safety, vacation days. 

To grant's point you don't need high dollar stuff or high income (at the individual level) to have a high standard of living.

[AJ]

Yes, it is literally semantics, and in this case the semantics are germane to the discussion. Simply repeating that they are the same does not make it so.

[darkelenchus]

Not all 19 year olds are dumb, and we don't all think we're invincible, either.

My 19 year old self concurs! ;-)

[darkelenchus]

Quality of life and standard of living are the same thing to me...

These are not the same. ...

It doesn't matter whether they're the same or not. What matters is whether either are relevant to the general issue.

[KittyWrestler]

So I'd like to ask a question...
If i want my children to learn how to play piano, but I don't know music. Should I tell them, "no mama doesn't want to spend money on you" or open up the wallet and pay for it?

. Yes, there are many other free ways to enjoy life. But some experiences and learning opportunities do cost money. For example, I have never heard an absolutely free University education. Should I tell my kids, "no, mama wants FI so you guys don't get to go to college.Too bad you got into Harvard, you better find a way to pay for it cuz mama ain't got a penny for you.."..

I guess that's what OP was trying to find out.. At what expense will you willing to give up in exchange for total FI, your child's learning and education too?

For me, I will give up everything including my own retirement in order to give my kids a good future. That's what my parents did and I will do the same for my own. And I am saving their Harvard fund.

[Jamesqf]

For example, I have never heard an absolutely free University education. Should I tell my kids, "no, mama wants FI so you guys don't get to go to college.Too bad you got into Harvard, you better find a way to pay for it cuz mama ain't got a penny for you.."

Depends on your definitions, but I could easily argue that my university education was not only free, but profitable.  Sure, I had to invest a bit in the first couple of years, but by junior year got an internship with a local company, and earned more than enough to cover tuition & living expenses.  By graduation, I had saved enough to repay the student loans.

As for getting into Harvard, why?  Unless you have your heart set in getting into one of the handful of fields where social connections are more important than what you actually learn, you'll be far better off at the local state university.

-----

As to the poll question, like a lot of other posters I think there's a lot of confusion between spending and quality of life.  For me, there are a lot of instances where spending less improves my QoL - and yes, I admit it's subjective.  For instance, I could drive a new Escalade or similar - I have the money to buy one and pay for gas - but then I'd be stuck driving an oversized handles-like-a-waterbed SUV.  Instead I drive a Honda Insight (when I'm not biking) or my old Toyota pickup.  I get there just as fast, have more fun driving, spend less money - and best of all, don't see a typical Escalade owner when I look in the mirror :-)

[darkelenchus]

So I'd like to ask a question...
If i want my children to learn how to play piano, but I don't know music. Should I tell them, "no mama doesn't want to spend money on you" or open up the wallet and pay for it?

First, it's not clear that you're spending money on them, if it's only you who wants to see them learn to play piano. If they want to learn to play piano, then this a false dichotomy. You could offer to pay for some while they fund the rest. Or they could fund it all. It's simply not the case that either you pay for the piano lessons or they don't get any.

I have never heard an absolutely free University education.

Now you can say that you have: http://www.ocwconsortium.org/

Should I tell my kids, "no, mama wants FI so you guys don't get to go to college?"

This doesn't follow. They can still go to college without you paying for them.

[ivorydisco]

I think it's best to try to find a balance. Enjoy the work you do so you won't feel the need to retire as quickly.

And pay for your children's learning expenses if they are serious about it. But don't feel pressured that you have to give your kids the best everything. They will be thankful if you tried your best.

[KittyWrestler]

So I'd like to ask a question...
If i want my children to learn how to play piano, but I don't know music. Should I tell them, "no mama doesn't want to spend money on you" or open up the wallet and pay for it?

First, it's not clear that you're spending money on them, if it's only you who wants to see them learn to play piano. If they want to learn to play piano, then this a false dichotomy. You could offer to pay for some while they fund the rest. Or they could fund it all. It's simply not the case that either you pay for the piano lessons or they don't get any.

I have never heard an absolutely free University education.

It's MY responsibility to show them things to learn and figure out what they are interested. So yes, I WANT them to learn as much as possible and I am going to make damn sure I have money to pay for those..

Now you can say that you have: http://www.ocwconsortium.org/

Should I tell my kids, "no, mama wants FI so you guys don't get to go to college?"

This doesn't follow. They can still go to college without you paying for them.

Hell no. Not under my watch. It's my responsible as a parent to off load their education cost burden. I don't believe burden my own kids with heavy student loans. My parents paid off all my private college education.. I am eternally grateful. I will do the same for my kids.

BTW, I am Chinese. Very different mentality comparing to the local Americans.. Our families always helped each other... I don't get this whole concept that kids are on their own thing...

[AJ]

BTW, I am Chinese. Very different mentality comparing to the local Americans.. Our families always helped each other... I don't get this whole concept that kids are on their own thing...

I can only speculate, since I am no expert on cultural differences, but I know that there is little (if any) cultural expectation in America that children will support their parents in their old age. Many don't even visit their elderly parents on a regular basis, let alone provide financial support. Of course, that isn't at all universal, but it is a trend here more so than other cultures (and a sad one, IMO). I expect that goes hand in hand with pushing kids out of the nest. Everyone is expected to carry their own on their own, young and old alike.

There are also those (like me) that paid for their own education and felt it was a beneficial experience (for a variety of totally off-topic reasons). I guess it's not uncommon to want to recreate your experiences for your children, whatever those were.

[KittyWrestler]

BTW, I am Chinese. Very different mentality comparing to the local Americans.. Our families always helped each other... I don't get this whole concept that kids are on their own thing...

I can only speculate, since I am no expert on cultural differences, but I know that there is little (if any) cultural expectation in America that children will support their parents in their old age. Many don't even visit their elderly parents on a regular basis, let alone provide financial support. Of course, that isn't at all universal, but it is a trend here more so than other cultures (and a sad one, IMO). I expect that goes hand in hand with pushing kids out of the nest. Everyone is expected to carry their own on their own, young and old alike.

There are also those (like me) that paid for their own education and felt it was a beneficial experience (for a variety of totally off-topic reasons). I guess it's not uncommon to want to recreate your experiences for your children, whatever those were.

My parents were college professors and they washed dishes in Chinese restaurant to make extra income to pay for my college. And they never expected me to take care of them now they are in their 70's. And of course, I will do anything to help them if they ever need me.

We give our kids what we have because we bought them into the world and it's our responsibility to give them the best opportunities we can give to them. To place my own benefits ahead of our kids is just not acceptable in my book.. If I have the financial means to give them a Harvard education, I will do it even if that means I will have to sell my house and move to a studio apartment.

[grantmeaname]

But a Harvard education is not the only college education, the only worthwhile college education, or even the best college education. And piano lessons aren't the only way to learn piano. You're conflating good experiences with spending money (spending money out the ass, in the first case), and they are not the same things.

[AJ]

My parents were college professors and they washed dishes in Chinese restaurant to make extra income to pay for my college. And they never expected me to take care of them now they are in their 70's. And of course, I will do anything to help them if they ever need me.

We give our kids what we have because we bought them into the world and it's our responsibility to give them the best opportunities we can give to them. To place my own benefits ahead of our kids is just not acceptable in my book.. If I have the financial means to give them a Harvard education, I will do it even if that means I will have to sell my house and move to a studio apartment.

That's very noble of you and your parents. I wasn't trying to imply that they would expect anything of you in your specific case, just speculating that the atmosphere of individualism might lead to both results (children and elderly on their own).

In my own case (and this is purely personal and anecdotal) I would have felt obligated to study law if my parents had been paying for my education. They wouldn't have forced it on me, but in appreciation of their gift I would have felt the burden of obligation to follow their dream for my life. The best opportunity they could give me was the opportunity to make it on my own without them as a safety net, and the best gift I ever received from them was wise advice. YMMV.

[KittyWrestler]

That's very noble of you and your parents. I wasn't trying to imply that they would expect anything of you in your specific case, just speculating that the atmosphere of individualism might lead to both results (children and elderly on their own).

In my own case (and this is purely personal and anecdotal) I would have felt obligated to study law if my parents had been paying for my education. They wouldn't have forced it on me, but in appreciation of their gift I would have felt the burden of obligation to follow their dream for my life. The best opportunity they could give me was the opportunity to make it on my own without them as a safety net, and the best gift I ever received from them was wise advice. YMMV.

That's actually a really good point! And since I married an American, I am slowing learning the "free thinking", 'creativity", "let the kids make their own choices" aspect of the philosophy. Funny thing you mentioned this, since my mom did drag me to the admission office to make me change my major from biology to computer science. Her argument is that my lack of English ability would not survive any other degrees but engineering.. and plus, mommy is paying for it, you do what mommy says!! LOL!!!

[AJ]

Funny thing you mentioned this, since my mom did drag me to the admission office to make me change my major from biology to computer science. Her argument is that my lack of English ability would not survive any other degrees but engineering.. and plus, mommy is paying for it, you do what mommy says!! LOL!!!

Well, now I'm curious: are you glad she did? :)

[KittyWrestler]

Funny thing you mentioned this, since my mom did drag me to the admission office to make me change my major from biology to computer science. Her argument is that my lack of English ability would not survive any other degrees but engineering.. and plus, mommy is paying for it, you do what mommy says!! LOL!!!

Well, now I'm curious: are you glad she did? :)

You bet I am glad she dragged my ass to change my major.. I am lov'in technology.. I just didn't know better when I was 18!!!.. Hence, sometimes mom and dad do need to play hard ball with the kids ... LOL!!

[TLV]

For example, I have never heard an absolutely free University education.

My college education was practically free - I had scholarships that covered tuition and books in full, and because it was the local school I was able to live with my parents so I had no required living costs. I did move out after freshman year and paid for rent/groceries by working part-time, but I didn't have to. I'm not saying everyone can get a free education, just showing that it's possible.

It wasn't a top-tier school by any means, but 2 years after graduating I'm making 6 figures doing work I enjoy (and no more than 40 hours per week of it, either), so I think it was good enough.

I could have gotten into MIT or Stanford, I'm sure, and my parents could have even paid for most of it, but I don't regret going to the local school for an instant.

Funny thing you mentioned this, since my mom did drag me to the admission office to make me change my major from biology to computer science. Her argument is that my lack of English ability would not survive any other degrees but engineering.. and plus, mommy is paying for it, you do what mommy says!! LOL!!!

Well, now I'm curious: are you glad she did? :)

You bet I am glad she dragged my ass to change my major.. I am lov'in technology.. I just didn't know better when I was 18!!!.. Hence, sometimes mom and dad do need to play hard ball with the kids ... LOL!!

It's great that you ended up enjoying what your parents pushed on you, and I would agree that most 18-year-olds don't really know what they want to do, but not everyone is as lucky as you were (having read your working experience in the other thread, I mean "lucky" only in the sense that you enjoy what your parents picked - I recognize that you worked incredibly hard). I knew a girl in college whose parents did the exact same thing - pushed her to change from biology to computer science - and even though she was good at it, she hated it. She ended up going to grad school in biology anyway.


Back to the original topic: I'm not willing to sacrifice much in the way of "quality of life" to reach FI faster, but I'm finding that most frugal behaviors have actually increased my quality of life. I love living close to work and biking or walking everywhere I can. I have a growing repertoire of meatless recipes that are delicious. Smaller apartment means less cleaning. And so on.

I only have an 8-month-old child, so the issues of costly activities haven't come up yet. I expect we'll pay for some things for sure(eg preschool), but I'm not too keen on the various "lessons" unless the kid is actually motivated to work at them. Most of the reason for that is that I hated all the lessons my parents made me do (music, gymnastics, swimming), and everything I excelled at was something I picked up or worked at on my own, because I enjoyed it. Even with music lessons, I made more progress in the 2 years after they finally let me quit than I did in the 8 years of lessons I hated.

[liquidbanana]

There are plenty of things that I consider "luxuries" that I've never been willing to give up for faster FI. Like organic foods and Internet at home. However, I would be willing to give up much more now if I didn't already have a child. My initial intention for gaining FI was so that I could be a full-time parent without worrying about money. But then I got knocked up before I got very far on that journey......so...now I'm willing to give up much, much less than I would have if I was childless at this point.

I think the thing I'm least willing to give up now is time. As in...time working a j-o-b to get closer to FI. Before, I would be willing to work 60-80+ hours a week to get there quicker. Now, I don't even work 40 because these are years I'll never get back with my child.

Private Monetossi school is another big one that will put FI farther off into the future. Also, not living in the 'hood with 10 other people in a 2 bedroom apartment. lol

I guess none of this directly affects my personal quality of life, but it affects how I perceive my child's quality of life.

[grantmeaname]

Private Monetossi school is another big one that will put FI farther off into the future.

Montessori is the term you're looking for. I went to a non-graded public school for the first four years, which was similar in instructional style. If you're just after the instructional style, you should see if one of the big or big-ish school districts around you has a non-graded school. If not, it may be worth moving a reasonably large distance to get the same thing and avoid paying private-school tuition. Then again, some people value private school because it's private school, and some areas of the country don't have the exceptional public schools that others of us have come to expect, so your mileage with that tip may vary.

I guess none of this directly affects my personal quality of life, but it affects how I perceive my child's quality of life.

At the risk of convincing everyone on the forum that I'm a horribly broken record player, I want to repeat what I've said a million times elsewhere: quality of life isn't the same as standard of living. Parents who are there and invested in a child's future are a million times more important than organic salmon or private schools and music lessons. MMM pretty much comes out and says as much every time he posts about parenting.

[Jamesqf]

Montessori is the term you're looking for.

No, I'm pretty sure that Mone(y)tossi is correct :-)

[liquidbanana]

Yeah, I think spell check changed Montessori to whatever that other word is. Or maybe I was drunk.

I've considered moving to places with public Montessori schools, but considering all the factors of costs of living, it appears that paying for private school in this uber cheap area I live works out better long term.

I will check out the possibility of public non-graded schools, though. I don't have an issue with public school except for the learning paradigm and teaching style.  Thanks for the suggestion.