Comments by "" (@Green__one) on "The Truth About FIRE - Is Early Retirement Actually Possible?" video.

You'll find most people who have achieved FIRE focus on the FI part, and minimize the RE part. Most people listening to their message however focus on the RE part, and minimize the FI part. Sitting on your couch all day gets old really quickly, and many studies have shown that people don't have much of a lifespan after retirement if they don't have something engaging to keep them going. The important part of FIRE isn't the freedom to do nothing, it's the freedom to do anything. Financial Independence allows you to follow your passions. Nothing says you can't make money from that, but the key is that you can afford not to.
34
I was laid off 2 years ago. Because I had a sizeable nest egg saved up, and because I didn't really like that job, my first feeling wasn't anger, or fear, or sadness. My first feeling when I was told I was laid off was relief. I've been a happier person ever since. I haven't stopped working, I just switched to a more rewarding career and fewer hours per week. I make half as much money, but I'm much happier, and my nest egg allows me to do that (technically I have enough to stop working and live off of for the rest of my life, though it wouldn't be generous)
16
The key isn't RE, too many people focus on that, the key is FI. The ability to choose who you work for, when you work, and what you do. When you aren't desperate to pay the bills, you are in a much better negotiating position to find the work you want to do, and on the terms you want to do it. As for the inheritance, that can go other ways as well. I knew someone who inherited enough money we were sure he'd never have to work again. it was all gone in just a couple years and he was working 2 jobs just to try to make ends meet. Seems he got accustomed to a lifestyle he just couldn't afford. Studies on people who've won the lottery, or inherited sums of money consistently show that the majority of them are like that, and the money's all gone far sooner than you'd expect.
15
And this video actually explains that well. FIRE doesn't always mean not working, it just means the flexibility to work at things you are passionate about. I'm teetering on the edge of FIRE right now, I could technically stop working altogether, and live frugally on my investments for the rest of my life. But instead I used the flexibility to switch careers to one that's more rewarding, all while cutting back the number of hours I work. My new income is around half what I used to make, but I'm much happier overall.
9
I know this is mostly in jest, but it's also a huge misconception. Sure, there are many leaders of the FIRE movement who are very vocal about it, but I think you'll find that there are many more people who follow it, but don't really talk about it. This is true of any movement really, the leaders are vocal by the very nature of leading a movement, but just because you don't hear much from their followers doesn't mean they don't exist.
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
This is actually one of the few videos that seems to have gotten it right (even though he didn't go too deep into it). I'm impressed because so many people (on both sides) misrepresent the 4% rule, I'm sick of FIRE people claiming that the 4% rule means you'll never run out of money in a 50-70 year retirement, and I'm equally sick of the anti-FIRE people saying the 4% rule doesn't work because it doesn't account for inflation, or because it might fail if you get exactly the wrong sequence of returns. The 4% rule simply says that if you take 4% of your portfolio the first year, and adjust that amount by inflation every year after that, you have a 95% chance of not running out of money for a 30 year retirement when looking at historical data. Both sides love to twist it to fit an agenda, but the rule itself seems to be well researched if you take it at face value and don't try to make it do something it was never intended for.
2
That's exactly where I'm at. I just made a career change to something more rewarding, and fewer hours per week. Technically I could retire on my current nest egg, but it wouldn't be generous, I'd rather it grew more, and I need something to keep busy anyway. I've heard this called "Coast FIRE" before, you're not retiring yet, but you can coast the rest of the way without pedalling :)
2
Very few people are willing to follow your advice. Most commonly people don't want to work hard, nor do they want to spend wisely, that leads them to not be able to save a lot. That said, even if they did, it appears most people don't know how to invest either, so even if they did do the rest, they'd stash their money in a savings account paying the current going rate of approximately 0% interest.
2
@cliftt This part is huge. If you can earn your money in a high paying jurisdiction, and then retire in a low cost of living one, you have it made.
2
Dividends are irrelevant. Every time a dividend is issued, the value of that stock drops by exactly the amount of the dividend that was paid. The end result is that you are simply converting capital gains into dividend income. All other things being equal, taking the principle, or the dividends, would make no difference at all to your portfolio. Unfortunately all other things aren't equal because dividend income is generally not taxed as efficiently as capital gains, so you're actually better off if the companies you're invested in use that money to grow their business, rather than paying you a dividend.
2
Pretty much all the FIRE advocates count on the idea that if you've developed frugal habits when young, they will continue in retirement. You won't see those people advocating Porsches and beach houses. In fact, the ones advertising lavish lifestyles in retirement while retiring early tend to be selling a scam and you should run away as fast as you can, that's not FIRE.
2
One of the best, and most balanced FIRE videos I've ever seen. Most are either the proponents, or the opponents, both with their own agendas. Good to see a balanced approach describing what it is, how it can work, and what the risks/pitfalls are. Also one of the few to correctly represent both FIRE and the 4% rule. So many otherwise intelligent people misrepresent both (in either direction).
2
I hit FIRE while driving a nice car, having a kid, and enjoying the occasional restaurant meal with my wife. I also did it without making the 6 figures often touted by the FIRE movement, and without feeling like I've sacrificed anything. FIRE isn't unachievable. Just be purposeful with your spending, research what you buy, and only spend on things that give you value. You get to choose what value means to you.
2
I agree this was a very balanced view, but I'd say I'm more tired of the die hard anti-FIRE crowd "arguably misleading viewers". FIRE isn't for everyone, but it's also not unachievable, even for relatively normal people.
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
The US is quite varied. If you insist on living in New York, or San Francisco, you'll probably find 50k very tight. You live in some of the more rural parts though and 50k could be extremely generous. This is one of the biggest problems with example numbers, and why this video tells you that the numbers shouldn't be used for everyone; everywhere is different, and every person's situation is different. You say Central Europe, even within Europe you'd find a big difference between the cost to live in say rural Greece vs downtown Paris for example.
1
That depends on how you define "low income", sure, the more income you make, the easier it is to FIRE (assuming you keep your spending in check!), but you'll find people at all levels of income that live paycheque to paycheque and class themselves as "low income", even when they could probably use their money more efficiently and manage to save more than they think. Yes, some people really do make too little to put any noticeable amount of money away, but it's not as large a portion of the workforce as many people assume.
1
Once habits are established, they tend to continue. Once people are in the habit of being frugal, it's often hard for them to start spending significantly more, and research shows that spending usually drops as you age rather than increases. The one thing not always taken into account though is medical bills as you age, but this can be offset with insurance, or dedicated savings, and depends greatly on what country you live in.
1
People focus too much on RE, and not enough on FI. For most people who've achieved FIRE it's not about sitting on the couch all day, it's about following their passions. If you love your current work, then keep doing it. If you don't, then FI gives you the freedom to pursue something you do. Even if you do love your current work, FI gives you a safety net in case of unexpected financial hardship (layoffs, medical bills, major car or house repairs, etc), and the ability to choose your own hours or your own work.
1
Nothing "get rich quick" about FIRE. In fact it's mostly the opposite, FIRE preaches spending less, and letting time in the market grow your money. Not sure how much further from "get rich quick" you can get to be honest.
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
Although he doesn't go into detail on it, he does basically say that in this video as he does mention inflation in relation to it.
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
That's economics for you. Society needs people to spend as much as possible and take on as much debt as they can reliably service to do so, but that's horrible advice for any individual who is always better off to avoid debt, spend less, and save more. The bright side is that the irresponsible people will likely continue to outnumber the responsible ones for the foreseeable future.
1
Depends a lot on where you live, but honestly that $25k is about average for me, and I wouldn't say I deprive myself of anything. I have a nice house, drive a nice car, eat whatever I want, including going to restaurants (though admittedly not that often), I buy various tech toys, and we go on vacations. And I'm married with a kid, without the kid it would be a lot less! Could I find ways to spend more? sure I could, but I certainly don't feel hard done by!
1
I'm not sure what video you were watching, because while I agree with everything you say here, I don't see anything in the video that disagrees with you. He specifically says that FIRE is possible, that 30 may be too early to be desirable, and that there are good lessons to be learned from the FIRE movement. There are a lot of FIRE folks promoting ultra-frugality, or talking about how easy it is to FIRE and then you find out that they make 6 figures a year, and there are also a lot of anti-FIRE people talking about how FIRE is impossible and nobody can, or should, do it. Both of those groups are wrong in my opinion. This video I thought presented a very balanced view of the whole thing.
1
As someone with a wife and child, and who has reached FIRE in my early 40s without a super high income, or any real sacrifices, I have to disagree with you. It helps that I had a child in my mid 30s instead of early 20s, but beyond that I don't think I've done anything special. Sure children can be expensive, but they don't have to be as expensive as you might think. Our daughter has everything she could possibly want, but it hasn't cost us all that much as we get most of her things second hand (kids outgrow clothing and toys so quickly, it's a waste to buy it all brand new!). Be purposeful with your spending, but you don't have to be super frugal and deny yourself everything to hit FIRE.
1
This is probably the first time I've heard someone describe saving money and investing it as "immature". Most of the time doing that is considered the most responsible decision, far more so than the usual decision of going into debt to fund mindless purchases that provide no real long term value. I also have not heard from any FIRE advocate that could be described as a "trust fund bab(y)" in fact they have all achieved what they have by working, and usually working hard.
1
For most people, I think that's a far more reasonable goal. That's still FIRE though, focus on the FI part, not so much the RE part.
1
If managing your money is enough work that you consider it "working", you're doing it wrong. Statistically your money will do far better if you "manage it" far less.
1
Many do. Focus on the FI part, not the RE part.
1
One of the dirty secrets of the economy in general is that what's best for any individual, is often what's worst for the economy as a whole. The best advice for any individual is to live within your means, avoid debt, save as much as you can. The best thing for the economy as a whole is for people to have as much debt as they can reliably service (no more, bankruptcy is bad for the economy!), and spend every penny. The good news for responsible people is that most people are irresponsible.
1
I've never really heard from someone who's achieved FIRE, and focuses on the RE part. FI is always the important part, it gives you the flexibility to follow your passions. Nothing says you can't make money doing that, but the key is that you don't have to.
1