6 ms·

At some point the question is - "is it really worth it?" Sure, if you save 10-20% on a regular basis, you're just being prudent. But if you go out of your way t

by jstx1 5y ago

At some point the question is - "is it really worth it?" Sure, if you save 10-20% on a regular basis, you're just being prudent. But if you go out of your way to save 50-80% of your income and lower your quality of life significantly, just so you can have more money in your investment account, or so you can not go to work (but still live that same extremely restrictive lifestyle)... it really doesn't seem worth it to me. But some people obviously disagree.

the-dude 5y ago
Then there is lots of people who just die before they are even retired.
- nemo44x 5y ago
  It’s a good thing you can will that wealth to people and organizations you care about. This means a lot to many people - legacy.
rwmj 5y ago
> lower your quality of life significantly I'm quite happy not owning a huge house, a Tesla and the latest iPhone.
- ku-man 5y ago
  It's not so much about gadgets, it's more about pretty women. Pretty women (and women in general) don't like to date poor devils.
bko 5y ago
No one says you have to save 50-80% of your income. The savings rate in the US is 5-10% historically (ignore the 33% spike in 2020). If you're saving 10-20% you're well ahead https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PSAVERT https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PSAVERT
- ac29 5y ago
  I suspect that 5-10% number is actually a bit deceptive - a huge number of people are saving 0%, so among those who do save, the average must be significantly higher.
  - nly 5y ago
    One of the biggest things not counted in these stats is that if you have a mortgage you're banking equity. Instead of paying say $2000/mo on rent you could be paying say $2500/mo on a mortgage but only $1000/mo of that might actually be interest. So even without capital appreciation on property you're ahead of the renter.
toast0 5y ago
The easy way to increase your savings rate is to save most of your raises. Most people working in decent jobs will get raises as they gain experience or increase their billing rates. Certainly, I expect most people on HN working in tech to make significantly more in year 5 than year 1. If you can save most of that, pretty soon you'll have a good savings rate and pretty soon have some good savings. Also, when you start thinking about retirement and look at rules of thumb about savings amount vs income, you can discount your income significantly if you have a high savings rate. (Looking at needed savings vs predicted expenses is a better methodology though)
JohnJamesRambo 5y ago
Very little gives me more pleasure than seeing my investments and net worth grow. Certainly very few things I could buy. The sense of peace and security it gives is worth more than any gadget.
throwaway-8c93 5y ago
I'm one of those that save/invest 70% of their take-home income. It's not about frugality at all - I would gladly pay for an increased quality of life - but it's simply not on offer. Past a certain threshold, a threshold well within the reach of western upper-middle-class households, the exchange rate between money and the quality of life becomes essentially zero. What's left are pointless status seeking games, scams and useless trinkets. The Bible's Book of Ecclesiastes describes it poignantly: > I denied myself nothing my eyes desired; I refused my heart no pleasure[...] Yet when I surveyed all that my hands had done and what I had toiled to achieve, everything was meaningless, a chasing after the wind; nothing was gained under the sun
- EEREPRESENT 5y ago
  same experience here. i can afford everythihg but i dont need much. i dont think people understand what kind of stress relief is to say that u can live the life you want for 30-40 years without having to work.
- bradlys 5y ago
  You must live in a LCOL and/or make an extremely high amount of money and/or like to live an unusually low quality of life for your income. Saving 70% of your take-home in some place like the SFBA is saying you're an extremely high earner and/or you really like studio apartments.
- fleddr 5y ago
  Fully agree with you. I believe a few years ago there was research stating that roughly speaking, 70K per year (in spending) is the happiness threshold. Any spending above it leads to no, marginal, or only temporary extra happiness. I put that bar far lower, personally. We already have the stuff we need and don't enjoy shopping. We're basically stuck at a particular spending level whilst income grows over time. Saving a large portion of our income is effortless, and not at all a sacrifice of quality of life. The secret to life is to not want so much. It makes life so much easier and better.
  - devonkim 5y ago
wing-_-nuts 5y ago
There's a saying on the fire subreddits 'live the life you want, and save for it'. No one is suggesting one should live a miserly, miserable life just so they can retire in their 30s. For me, FIRE is a side effect of trying to live a fairly simple life with little impact on the environment. I don't deprive myself. I genuinely struggle to find things worth spending money on.

by jstx1 5y ago

the-dude 5y ago

Then there is lots of people who just die before they are even retired.

nemo44x 5y ago
It’s a good thing you can will that wealth to people and organizations you care about. This means a lot to many people - legacy.

rwmj 5y ago

> lower your quality of life significantly I'm quite happy not owning a huge house, a Tesla and the latest iPhone.

ku-man 5y ago
It's not so much about gadgets, it's more about pretty women. Pretty women (and women in general) don't like to date poor devils.

bko 5y ago

No one says you have to save 50-80% of your income. The savings rate in the US is 5-10% historically (ignore the 33% spike in 2020). If you're saving 10-20% you're well ahead https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PSAVERT https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PSAVERT

ac29 5y ago
I suspect that 5-10% number is actually a bit deceptive - a huge number of people are saving 0%, so among those who do save, the average must be significantly higher.
- nly 5y ago
  One of the biggest things not counted in these stats is that if you have a mortgage you're banking equity. Instead of paying say $2000/mo on rent you could be paying say $2500/mo on a mortgage but only $1000/mo of that might actually be interest. So even without capital appreciation on property you're ahead of the renter.

toast0 5y ago

The easy way to increase your savings rate is to save most of your raises. Most people working in decent jobs will get raises as they gain experience or increase their billing rates. Certainly, I expect most people on HN working in tech to make significantly more in year 5 than year 1. If you can save most of that, pretty soon you'll have a good savings rate and pretty soon have some good savings. Also, when you start thinking about retirement and look at rules of thumb about savings amount vs income, you can discount your income significantly if you have a high savings rate. (Looking at needed savings vs predicted expenses is a better methodology though)

JohnJamesRambo 5y ago

Very little gives me more pleasure than seeing my investments and net worth grow. Certainly very few things I could buy. The sense of peace and security it gives is worth more than any gadget.

throwaway-8c93 5y ago

I'm one of those that save/invest 70% of their take-home income. It's not about frugality at all - I would gladly pay for an increased quality of life - but it's simply not on offer. Past a certain threshold, a threshold well within the reach of western upper-middle-class households, the exchange rate between money and the quality of life becomes essentially zero. What's left are pointless status seeking games, scams and useless trinkets. The Bible's Book of Ecclesiastes describes it poignantly: > I denied myself nothing my eyes desired; I refused my heart no pleasure[...] Yet when I surveyed all that my hands had done and what I had toiled to achieve, everything was meaningless, a chasing after the wind; nothing was gained under the sun

EEREPRESENT 5y ago
same experience here. i can afford everythihg but i dont need much. i dont think people understand what kind of stress relief is to say that u can live the life you want for 30-40 years without having to work.
bradlys 5y ago
You must live in a LCOL and/or make an extremely high amount of money and/or like to live an unusually low quality of life for your income. Saving 70% of your take-home in some place like the SFBA is saying you're an extremely high earner and/or you really like studio apartments.
fleddr 5y ago
Fully agree with you. I believe a few years ago there was research stating that roughly speaking, 70K per year (in spending) is the happiness threshold. Any spending above it leads to no, marginal, or only temporary extra happiness. I put that bar far lower, personally. We already have the stuff we need and don't enjoy shopping. We're basically stuck at a particular spending level whilst income grows over time. Saving a large portion of our income is effortless, and not at all a sacrifice of quality of life. The secret to life is to not want so much. It makes life so much easier and better.
- devonkim 5y ago

wing-_-nuts 5y ago

There's a saying on the fire subreddits 'live the life you want, and save for it'. No one is suggesting one should live a miserly, miserable life just so they can retire in their 30s. For me, FIRE is a side effect of trying to live a fairly simple life with little impact on the environment. I don't deprive myself. I genuinely struggle to find things worth spending money on.