4 ms·

As someone who is currently in the “one more year” camp the hardest part isn’t knowing if you’ll have enough. I do. The hardest part is change. If you’ve spent

As someone who is currently in the “one more year” camp the hardest part isn’t knowing if you’ll have enough. I do. The hardest part is change. If you’ve spent your entire life working and saving, suddenly shifting to not working and spending can be a scary thought as weird as that sounds. I used to think the OMY types were foolish or Chicken Little’s but now I kind of understand.

jonah 2y ago
Just switch to not working and not spending. Find hobbies, or better yet, activities that help out your community or the people around you, that don't require a lot of financial outlay. Right before my grandfather retired at 55 he studied ceramics and spent the rest of his long life doing pottery. Endless satisfying learning and experimenting with little capital outlay.
- darkwater 2y ago
  I will be 45 this year, just started a new job after being laid off 8 months ago, when I got a VERY good severance package, and I lived life to the max with my family. And I enjoyed every second of it, minus seeing my saving draining, even if everything was planned and I would not have part of those savings if I weren't laid off. SO ideally I would try to work 10-12 years more and then retire, but not retire in the frugal FIRE way. I like to travel. I like to eat at good restaurant, or buy good groceries and cook them at home. I started playing drums and I will probably buy a better set in the future etc. I want to help my daughters going to university (we live in Europe) or finding their lives and be able to support them economically if needed. So, as I write this, retiring in 12 years is probably a big utopia but... who knows?
  - jebarker 2y ago
    FWIW there is a "fat-FIRE" community that takes this approach. But in the end that just boils down to requiring a huge income for some period of time.
    - ghaff 2y ago
      I've known to greater or lesser degrees a few investment banker who largely retired very young. I'm sure their jobs were very stressful but they made bank and got out young and AFAIK never really regretted it.
      - darkwater 2y ago
        In the end it's the mentality that matters. In my very very humble opinion, there are no big differences, given the same economic landscape and possibilities for 2 individuals, when one obsesses over FIRE and another that obsesses over having to work and feeling bored if not working. What you described seems the right balance, even if they overworked themselves too much for a few years. If they were able to pull the plug and enjoy life afterwards with family, hobbies, travels and pet projects, well, it was worth it IMO.
        ghaff 2y ago
        >possibilities for 2 individuals, when one obsesses over FIRE and another that obsesses over having to work and feeling bored if not workin There are definitely individuals for whom work/salary is a means to acquiring a big enough pile to buy a nice house, travel, educate their kids, etc. I also worked with someone, who was by no means a workaholic, but didn't really like to travel, had a modest set of hobbies, and got bored around the house. So he mostly didn't take vacation and was very content to keep working.
  - grandempire 2y ago
    It sounds like you don’t actually want to retire. You value money too much to make that decision.
    - darkwater 2y ago
      I do want to retire, I just don't want to live frugally, or according to my own definition of frugality. Maybe as others say I just need a big enough income for enough years.
      - grandempire 2y ago
        Of course. Everyone wants more money and more time. Life is about tradeoffs. So short of getting rich, you are signing up for age 65 or 70. Why do you think will change?
- 01HNNWZ0MV43FF 2y ago
  I could live cheap if I was homeless. My cost of living is like 35k per year and I rarely go on vacations or do anything. I eat out about once a week. Bills, mortgage, and healthcare are just huge. After the mortgage is paid off the house will still cost half the mortgage in taxes and insurance The economists are right, luxuries got cheap and necessities got expensive. Maybe I should buy a PlayStation.
  - ghaff 2y ago
    >After the mortgage is paid off the house will still cost half the mortgage in taxes and insurance After the mortgage, the house isn't necessarily cheap though a newish condo may not be as bad depending upon where you live. But I figure my house is easily $15K or so per year for necessary expenses unless you're incurring major maintenance debt. And, for example, I just had a random spontaneous kitchen fire in the middle of the night and, even with good insurance and quick fire response, I'm sure I'll be spending a bunch of money out of pocket related to that.
grandempire 2y ago
Exactly. The real challenge is changing your lifestyle, not money.
ghaff 2y ago
Well, "just another year" can easily become the path of least resistance. And COVID threw something of a wrench into the works. I might have done things differently had I been able to do a bunch of travel a few years earlier. As it was, there wasn't much of an incentive to make the shift.
dehrmann 2y ago
Loss aversion is real. People with 15M will act more conservatively than those with $10k because the loss hurts more.
- jebarker 2y ago
  I don't have 15M, but I know that once I had a decent amount of money in investments I suddenly became more risk averse. The prospect of not having to work forever and/or monitor spending too closely is very alluring. The instability in the world right now is actually a good reminder that in some ways money is a false sense of security though and you've got to seize the day still.

jonah 2y ago

Just switch to not working and not spending. Find hobbies, or better yet, activities that help out your community or the people around you, that don't require a lot of financial outlay. Right before my grandfather retired at 55 he studied ceramics and spent the rest of his long life doing pottery. Endless satisfying learning and experimenting with little capital outlay.

darkwater 2y ago
I will be 45 this year, just started a new job after being laid off 8 months ago, when I got a VERY good severance package, and I lived life to the max with my family. And I enjoyed every second of it, minus seeing my saving draining, even if everything was planned and I would not have part of those savings if I weren't laid off. SO ideally I would try to work 10-12 years more and then retire, but not retire in the frugal FIRE way. I like to travel. I like to eat at good restaurant, or buy good groceries and cook them at home. I started playing drums and I will probably buy a better set in the future etc. I want to help my daughters going to university (we live in Europe) or finding their lives and be able to support them economically if needed. So, as I write this, retiring in 12 years is probably a big utopia but... who knows?
- jebarker 2y ago
  FWIW there is a "fat-FIRE" community that takes this approach. But in the end that just boils down to requiring a huge income for some period of time.
  - ghaff 2y ago
    I've known to greater or lesser degrees a few investment banker who largely retired very young. I'm sure their jobs were very stressful but they made bank and got out young and AFAIK never really regretted it.
    - darkwater 2y ago
      In the end it's the mentality that matters. In my very very humble opinion, there are no big differences, given the same economic landscape and possibilities for 2 individuals, when one obsesses over FIRE and another that obsesses over having to work and feeling bored if not working. What you described seems the right balance, even if they overworked themselves too much for a few years. If they were able to pull the plug and enjoy life afterwards with family, hobbies, travels and pet projects, well, it was worth it IMO.
      - ghaff 2y ago
        >possibilities for 2 individuals, when one obsesses over FIRE and another that obsesses over having to work and feeling bored if not workin There are definitely individuals for whom work/salary is a means to acquiring a big enough pile to buy a nice house, travel, educate their kids, etc. I also worked with someone, who was by no means a workaholic, but didn't really like to travel, had a modest set of hobbies, and got bored around the house. So he mostly didn't take vacation and was very content to keep working.
- grandempire 2y ago
  It sounds like you don’t actually want to retire. You value money too much to make that decision.
  - darkwater 2y ago
    I do want to retire, I just don't want to live frugally, or according to my own definition of frugality. Maybe as others say I just need a big enough income for enough years.
    - grandempire 2y ago
      Of course. Everyone wants more money and more time. Life is about tradeoffs. So short of getting rich, you are signing up for age 65 or 70. Why do you think will change?
01HNNWZ0MV43FF 2y ago
I could live cheap if I was homeless. My cost of living is like 35k per year and I rarely go on vacations or do anything. I eat out about once a week. Bills, mortgage, and healthcare are just huge. After the mortgage is paid off the house will still cost half the mortgage in taxes and insurance The economists are right, luxuries got cheap and necessities got expensive. Maybe I should buy a PlayStation.
- ghaff 2y ago
  >After the mortgage is paid off the house will still cost half the mortgage in taxes and insurance After the mortgage, the house isn't necessarily cheap though a newish condo may not be as bad depending upon where you live. But I figure my house is easily $15K or so per year for necessary expenses unless you're incurring major maintenance debt. And, for example, I just had a random spontaneous kitchen fire in the middle of the night and, even with good insurance and quick fire response, I'm sure I'll be spending a bunch of money out of pocket related to that.

grandempire 2y ago

Exactly. The real challenge is changing your lifestyle, not money.

ghaff 2y ago

Well, "just another year" can easily become the path of least resistance. And COVID threw something of a wrench into the works. I might have done things differently had I been able to do a bunch of travel a few years earlier. As it was, there wasn't much of an incentive to make the shift.

dehrmann 2y ago

Loss aversion is real. People with 15M will act more conservatively than those with $10k because the loss hurts more.

jebarker 2y ago
I don't have 15M, but I know that once I had a decent amount of money in investments I suddenly became more risk averse. The prospect of not having to work forever and/or monitor spending too closely is very alluring. The instability in the world right now is actually a good reminder that in some ways money is a false sense of security though and you've got to seize the day still.