2 ms·
There’s another way to look at it too: a waste of time. If what you enjoy is lowering costs for the sake of it, living an extremely minimalists lifestyle, and f
by bradlys 6y ago
There’s another way to look at it too: a waste of time. If what you enjoy is lowering costs for the sake of it, living an extremely minimalists lifestyle, and focusing all your energy on finding ways to avoiding spending money then good for you. But for the rest of people? Probably a waste of time. And most individuals will never accrue the level of wealth necessary to live a FIRE life. After all, you can’t actually reduce your costs to anywhere close to $0 in the US. Healthcare, food, shelter, and more can cost a lot. God forbid you want to live a somewhat normal life and have children who grow up with some normality.
- pushrax 6y agoThe post above is explicitly not advocating attempting to cut costs to $0, but to consider survival time when evaluating expenses. The extreme example is just useful for projecting an intuition of the relationship between spending and survival. Same as how "You can generate revenue to infinity, but you can only cut costs to zero." shows the edge cases to build the intuition.