5 ms·

> Or even if you're not changing track, if you're developer ~20%++ of the track changes on you every year, can you maintain this pace when you're older, maybe w

> Or even if you're not changing track, if you're developer ~20%++ of the track changes on you every year, can you maintain this pace when you're older, maybe with a family, and don't have the time or motivation to learn yet another way of doing <x> for the umpteenth time. For younger people I would recommend keeping a close eye on that situation over the long term and if possible have a plan B if you want to get off the treadmill. The plan B is always saving enough money to bail early on employment and retiring at 50-55. Switching careers is always going to be an earnings hit. Imo anyway.

mistermann 11y ago
Agreed, and try not to lose all that money in the market.
- fweespeech 11y ago
  Yeah, I just dump it into full market funds. If the whole market sinks, we are all fucked anyway.
JoshTriplett 11y ago
> The plan B is always saving enough money to bail early on employment and retiring at 50-55. Or 35-40, which is not that hard in this field. Live like a college student, earn like a professional, and you'll be able to retire pretty quickly. Which doesn't mean you need to retire at that point, but it means you can. See https://networthify.com/calculator/earlyretirement https://networthify.com/calculator/earlyretirement and http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/01/13/the-shockingly-simple-math-behind-early-retirement/ http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/01/13/the-shockingly-sim... . The number of years you have to work before retiring depends entirely on what fraction of your income you save.
- fweespeech 11y ago
  Both of those make some very, very optimistic assumptions about how reality works. Pretty much any major negative event will add a decade and pretty much everyone has at least a one of those. A single one can wipe out years of savings, even at a 50%+ savings rate. In the real world, you aren't in control of your savings rate for decades on end. No one is. I understand the illusion of that control is appealing but it simply isn't how reality works. There is a reason the majority of the bankruptcies are from medical issues with 5 figures out of pocket and into the 6 figures when you count lost income.
  - JoshTriplett 11y ago
    > Pretty much any major negative event will add a decade and pretty much everyone has at least a one of those. A single one can wipe out years of savings, even at a 50%+ savings rate. Define "major negative event" here. Assuming you have insurance for catastrophic events, few things should be able to wipe out hundreds of thousands in savings, which is what you'd quickly build up with a high savings rate, especially in a high-paying field. On insurance, see http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2011/09/21/i-can-never-retire-because-of-health-insurance-waaah-waaah/ http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2011/09/21/i-can-never-retire... and http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/11/01/our-new-237-per-month-health-insurance-plan/ http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/11/01/our-new-237-per-mo... . More importantly, on safety margins in general, see http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2011/10/17/its-all-about-the-safety-margin/ http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2011/10/17/its-all-about-the-... . And even if one of your desired safety margins is a pile of savings, the higher your savings rate the sooner you build up those buffers. If you assume one of those events will happen and wipe out a pile of savings, that's an added drain that you'd have to account for, but a high savings rate still means you'll retire sooner than you would have with a lower savings rate.
    - fweespeech 11y ago
      > Define "major negative event" here. Assuming you have insurance for catastrophic events, few things should be able to wipe out hundreds of thousands in savings, which is what you'd quickly build up with a high savings rate, especially in a high-paying field. Health insurance never provided 100% coverage and you can get into 5 figures with health insurance. I'm not sure why you disbelieve it given its a pretty accepted fact when talking about medical bankruptcies with insurance. Similarly, if you are having a major medical event, if you cannot work for months...failure to earn income is a cost. Other major negative events are extended bouts of unemployment that will chew through savings while creating a failure to earn income for months, etc. Hell, even being sued can be a problem if you have a high networth because you have access to resources. In the past 12 months, I've literally had people track me down to drag me into such fights over money. > And even if one of your desired safety margins is a pile of savings, the higher your savings rate the sooner you build up those buffers. If you assume one of those events will happen and wipe out a pile of savings, that's an added drain that you'd have to account for, but a high savings rate still means you'll retire sooner than you would have with a lower savings rate. I'm saying he is selling you a dream that you can do it at the age you stated. Black swan events do happen to people and you have no real safety margin for them with his lifestyle advice after you retire. A "silver plan" is 70% coverage. If you have a 6 figure medical event, that wipes out your entire planned income for the year. The 4% rule has been found to be overly optimistic. Similarly, RoI greater than safe withdrawal rates are assumed. [Hint: SWR and RoI are equal and equivalent in real terms over an extended period. MMM claims otherwise and I find it depressing people believe him, especially given that isn't what happened to him. ] The reality is, for most people, even with a high savings rate you are looking at 25+ years of work. 1400000 [35*40k] 2015 40,000 2016 81,600 2017 124,864 2018 169,859 2019 216,653 2020 265,319 2021 315,932 2022 368,569 2023 423,312 2024 480,244 2025 539,454 2026 601,032 2027 665,074 2028 731,676 2029 800,944 2030 872,981 2031 947,900 2032 1,025,817 2033 1,106,849 2034 1,191,123 2035 1,278,768 2036 1,369,919 2037 1,464,716 Assuming everything goes perfectly, it takes you 22 years. However, you are going to be unemployed for at least a couple of those years and you are likely to have some kind of major medical expense [or your wife, or your kid] in that time as well. The ability to do it faster is an illusion created by a bull market and lucky timing.
tomjen3 11y ago
Patio11 is my plan B. A startup at 40 is too risky but I am more and more convinced that if I took some problem domain that could be solved with code and then made that a SASS I could make quite a nice living for myself. Unlike Patio11 my first attempt would be to go for business clients first, and not sell any plan less than 99 usd.
- mooreds 11y ago
  The issue there is that you need to spend some time working/understanding the domain of your SaaS app (unless you aim at developers, like so many many folks do), and that eats up time if you are going to do it right. I am nearing 40 and can only think of 3-4 domains that I'd feel comfortable doing a SaaS app for.
- shostack 11y ago
  Be wary of falling into the trap of magical thinking with SaaS businesses. It isn't as simple as "oh, I'll just solve a problem and build a small SaaS business around, then live off the recurring income indefinitely." Competitors come and go, the value of your solution comes and goes with market changes, cost of doing business and customer acquisition fluctuates, churn happens, etc. Businesses are never at equilibrium. They are not magical passive revenue streams.

mistermann 11y ago

Agreed, and try not to lose all that money in the market.

fweespeech 11y ago
Yeah, I just dump it into full market funds. If the whole market sinks, we are all fucked anyway.

JoshTriplett 11y ago

> The plan B is always saving enough money to bail early on employment and retiring at 50-55. Or 35-40, which is not that hard in this field. Live like a college student, earn like a professional, and you'll be able to retire pretty quickly. Which doesn't mean you need to retire at that point, but it means you can. See https://networthify.com/calculator/earlyretirement https://networthify.com/calculator/earlyretirement and http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/01/13/the-shockingly-simple-math-behind-early-retirement/ http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/01/13/the-shockingly-sim... . The number of years you have to work before retiring depends entirely on what fraction of your income you save.

fweespeech 11y ago
Both of those make some very, very optimistic assumptions about how reality works. Pretty much any major negative event will add a decade and pretty much everyone has at least a one of those. A single one can wipe out years of savings, even at a 50%+ savings rate. In the real world, you aren't in control of your savings rate for decades on end. No one is. I understand the illusion of that control is appealing but it simply isn't how reality works. There is a reason the majority of the bankruptcies are from medical issues with 5 figures out of pocket and into the 6 figures when you count lost income.
- JoshTriplett 11y ago
  > Pretty much any major negative event will add a decade and pretty much everyone has at least a one of those. A single one can wipe out years of savings, even at a 50%+ savings rate. Define "major negative event" here. Assuming you have insurance for catastrophic events, few things should be able to wipe out hundreds of thousands in savings, which is what you'd quickly build up with a high savings rate, especially in a high-paying field. On insurance, see http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2011/09/21/i-can-never-retire-because-of-health-insurance-waaah-waaah/ http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2011/09/21/i-can-never-retire... and http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/11/01/our-new-237-per-month-health-insurance-plan/ http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/11/01/our-new-237-per-mo... . More importantly, on safety margins in general, see http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2011/10/17/its-all-about-the-safety-margin/ http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2011/10/17/its-all-about-the-... . And even if one of your desired safety margins is a pile of savings, the higher your savings rate the sooner you build up those buffers. If you assume one of those events will happen and wipe out a pile of savings, that's an added drain that you'd have to account for, but a high savings rate still means you'll retire sooner than you would have with a lower savings rate.
  - fweespeech 11y ago
    > Define "major negative event" here. Assuming you have insurance for catastrophic events, few things should be able to wipe out hundreds of thousands in savings, which is what you'd quickly build up with a high savings rate, especially in a high-paying field. Health insurance never provided 100% coverage and you can get into 5 figures with health insurance. I'm not sure why you disbelieve it given its a pretty accepted fact when talking about medical bankruptcies with insurance. Similarly, if you are having a major medical event, if you cannot work for months...failure to earn income is a cost. Other major negative events are extended bouts of unemployment that will chew through savings while creating a failure to earn income for months, etc. Hell, even being sued can be a problem if you have a high networth because you have access to resources. In the past 12 months, I've literally had people track me down to drag me into such fights over money. > And even if one of your desired safety margins is a pile of savings, the higher your savings rate the sooner you build up those buffers. If you assume one of those events will happen and wipe out a pile of savings, that's an added drain that you'd have to account for, but a high savings rate still means you'll retire sooner than you would have with a lower savings rate. I'm saying he is selling you a dream that you can do it at the age you stated. Black swan events do happen to people and you have no real safety margin for them with his lifestyle advice after you retire. A "silver plan" is 70% coverage. If you have a 6 figure medical event, that wipes out your entire planned income for the year. The 4% rule has been found to be overly optimistic. Similarly, RoI greater than safe withdrawal rates are assumed. [Hint: SWR and RoI are equal and equivalent in real terms over an extended period. MMM claims otherwise and I find it depressing people believe him, especially given that isn't what happened to him. ] The reality is, for most people, even with a high savings rate you are looking at 25+ years of work. 1400000 [35*40k] 2015 40,000 2016 81,600 2017 124,864 2018 169,859 2019 216,653 2020 265,319 2021 315,932 2022 368,569 2023 423,312 2024 480,244 2025 539,454 2026 601,032 2027 665,074 2028 731,676 2029 800,944 2030 872,981 2031 947,900 2032 1,025,817 2033 1,106,849 2034 1,191,123 2035 1,278,768 2036 1,369,919 2037 1,464,716 Assuming everything goes perfectly, it takes you 22 years. However, you are going to be unemployed for at least a couple of those years and you are likely to have some kind of major medical expense [or your wife, or your kid] in that time as well. The ability to do it faster is an illusion created by a bull market and lucky timing.

tomjen3 11y ago

Patio11 is my plan B. A startup at 40 is too risky but I am more and more convinced that if I took some problem domain that could be solved with code and then made that a SASS I could make quite a nice living for myself. Unlike Patio11 my first attempt would be to go for business clients first, and not sell any plan less than 99 usd.

mooreds 11y ago
The issue there is that you need to spend some time working/understanding the domain of your SaaS app (unless you aim at developers, like so many many folks do), and that eats up time if you are going to do it right. I am nearing 40 and can only think of 3-4 domains that I'd feel comfortable doing a SaaS app for.
shostack 11y ago
Be wary of falling into the trap of magical thinking with SaaS businesses. It isn't as simple as "oh, I'll just solve a problem and build a small SaaS business around, then live off the recurring income indefinitely." Competitors come and go, the value of your solution comes and goes with market changes, cost of doing business and customer acquisition fluctuates, churn happens, etc. Businesses are never at equilibrium. They are not magical passive revenue streams.