Comments by "" (@Green__one) on "The Plain Bagel"
channel.
-
45
-
34
-
16
-
15
-
9
-
9
-
6
-
5
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
FIRE isn't one homogenous group. Keep in mind that "early" really just means before traditional retirement age, and FI just means you have enough money saved up that you can live off it. If you chose to live in a cardboard box and eat nothing but Ramen noodles your FI number will be lower than if you like nice things, but that doesn't make one approach more "right" than the other.
I believe myself to be part of FIRE. I'm in my early 40s and have hit the minimum FI number I'd need to stop working and live off my investments for the rest of my life. I haven't stopped working, I've instead switched to a more rewarding career and fewer hours per week. I've never made the 6 figure incomes many FIRE proponents talk about. I own a nice house, and drive a nice car, I buy whatever food I want, and I even eat out on occasion (though rarely), I buy various tech "toys", go on vacations, etc. What makes me frugal (rather than cheap) is that I think about my purchases. I don't spend on things that bring me no value, I research what I buy, I fix things myself rather than paying someone to do it or throwing things out and replacing them.
Not going "all in" on cutting costs will have delayed my FIRE by quite a few years, but I don't think it makes it any less FIRE, and the tradeoffs have been worth it.
I think the biggest component to FIRE is simply being thoughtful and purposeful with your income/expense decisions.
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
The 4% rule does account for inflation. It's expecting that the return on your investment will be over 7%, but that 3% of that will be eaten by inflation. The full 4% rule states that if you withdraw 4% from your portfolio in the first year, and adjust that number by inflation each year after the first year, there is a 95% chance that you won't run out of money over the course of a 30 year retirement. (e.g. if you have a portfolio of 1,000,000 you'd withdraw 40,000 the first year. If inflation the first year is 3%, you'd withdraw 41,200 the second year, if inflation is 1% the second year, you'd withdraw 41,612 the third year, and so on for 30 years total adjusting each year for inflation based on the previous year's withdrawal)
There are legitimate concerns with the 4% rule, but lack of inflation adjustment isn't one of them. The biggest issue with the 4% rule tends to be that people take a rule designed to be 95% successful over 30 years, and claim it as 100% successful over 50-70 years.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I'm married, I have a daughter, and depending on your definition, I've achieved FIRE. Now "early" is my early 40s, not my early 30s, and I chose to switch careers to something more rewarding and with fewer hours per week (and paying half as much) rather than just live on my nest egg (though technically I could, it just wouldn't be generous).
I wouldn't say I had a "really high" income, I made decent money at my previous job (as a tradesman), but not the 6 figures or more of many FIRE proponents.
I also wouldn't say I received significant financial support from my parents. They did cover my education (2 years trade school, not university), and an inheritance did cover a portion of the downpayment on my house, but I didn't live with them beyond age 21, (and I paid them rent after I graduated until I moved out).
Even more importantly, I wouldn't say I've really sacrificed to get here. I have a reasonably sized 3 bedroom house in a decent sized city, we buy whatever food we want to eat, eat out on occasion (though admittedly not that often), I buy various tech toys, our daughter has far more toys than she knows what to do with, and we keep her busy with extracurricular activities, we take vacations, and I even splurged on a nice car. Saving is mostly about priorities, I don't spend on meaningless stuff, and I do research what I buy. I'm happy to buy used things often, I also do a lot of stuff myself when it comes to home repairs, keeping appliances running, etc.
All depends on your definition, but FIRE is definitely achievable, even for those married with kids.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@AussieMoneyMan not according to any actual research. The research for the 4% rule, and I have yet to see any research disproving this, states that if you withdraw 4% of your portfolio the first year, and adjust that number for inflation each year thereafter, you have a 95% chance of not running out of money during a 30 year retirement based on all available historical data.
Many people on both sides of the issue love to twist and misrepresent this. Either by stating that the 4% rule means that they're guaranteed not to run out of money during a 50-70 year retirement (it's only a 95% chance over 30 years), or by stating that 4% doesn't account for inflation (it does), or by simply stating that the 4% number is really too high or too low (all based on "this time is different", which is never a good argument).
If you take the 4% rule, as originally written, and use it as such, I've never seen anything that disproves it.
1
-
The odd part about economics is that what's great for the individual, is lousy for the society. Any one person is better off following this advice, but if everyone followed it, the economy would be in trouble, and with it, the investments that we count on to make FI possible. For an individual the best advice is always to save lots, spend little, and stay out of debt. For society as a whole though the best advice is if people take on as much debt as they can reliably service, to spend as much as they can, and save nothing.
The bright side for the responsible people out there, is that the irresponsible ones are likely to continue to outnumber us for the foreseeable future!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I got just about 11 cents worth of bitcoin about 11 or 12 years ago for free. A few years ago I sold $1,000 of it, a year later I sold $1,000 more of it, the remainder peaked in value at about 4,500 back in December, it's now worth closer to 1500. I still think I'll hold on to it, after all it didn't cost me anything in the first place, and I've already gotten a free $2,000 out of it. If it goes back up, I'll probably sell another thousand when it hits 5000.
I have to agree though about the underlying value, that free Bitcoin is all I hold, and I'm not willing to put my own money into it. Bitcoin is lousy as a currency, for multiple reasons, the extreme value fluctuations, the long transaction times, and the high transaction fees. I know some other cryptos have addressed some of these concerns, but with nothing backing them, it's still pretty risky. There's also the computational aspect, every one of these coins is just one security flaw or one computational breakthrough away from being completely 100% worthless.
1
-
1
-
1