Cool FIRE article in MSN Money

[FI by 2024]

Quote:

Originally Posted by purplesky Because they don't have that much investment income to go off and explore the world. World(any) Travel can be expensive. There will be $$ limitations at 40k a year. If they let that $1 million ride for a decade thats where the portfolio magic really happens. Plus the continued savings would equal big money. We are talking about a huge difference in lifestyle choice. That is financial freedom that they will want and need if they have kids. Its not to buy stuff. It will give them freedom to maybe not sleep in a car at age 40. Who the heck wants to retire at 30 with that little voice in your head wondering about your portfolio all the time. With the thought of going back to work at age 40 and starting over competing with college grads to get your old job back. Most people on here laugh at a $1 million retirement. Not sure about the amassing more wealth than necessary idea. Maybe this couple is expecting a big inheritance. :face palm:

Your bias is showing.

Not everybody wants big money. Not everybody travels expensively (their method seems exceedingly cheap).

Who the heck wants to retire this way? This couple.

And while some (maybe not most) people on here would laugh at a 1M retirement, in the real world there are a lot of people who would kill to have that much money.

Again, just because it's not what you would want doesn't make it a bad idea, and it certainly doesn't make it a lie like you've been arguing. To claim these articles are lies when there are clearly people living this way is, in itself, a lie. Why do you care so much how this couple lives? Let it be.

[rodi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by purplesky We are talking about a huge difference in lifestyle choice.

Just emphasizing a word you used, but don't seem to understand.

And international travel can be cheap - especially if you drive and sleep in the car some of the time. My husband did that for 6 months when he was younger. He and friends pooled money and bought a used hatchback and some sleeping bags. They traveled on the cheap and had a GREAT time. When they got to France, headed to England, they sold the car and made a profit. It's not a choice you'd make (I assume) but it is possible to enjoy travelling like that.

Networth polls done here periodically - one less than a month ago here) That one included non-spendable assets (primary home for example) and didn't ask whether responders were retired.

More on point is a poll done a few years ago (2013) asking people what their "number" is - in other words - how much did they need to retire. Several ER.org members felt it was ok to retire with less than a million.

Not everyone needs a lifestyle of $100k or more. Heck - my family of 4 lives on $80k very comfortably in a super high COL area. Fuego's numbers impress the heck out of me - a family of 5 for 1/3 of what we're living on. There's a reason the dryer sheet thing lives on... Many folks here have figured out how to live very frugally (not me, necessarily... I have some significant trims I could make). And they've made the trade off of TIME > MONEY. It's a choice.

[purplesky]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FI by 2024 Your bias is showing. Not everybody wants big money. Not everybody travels expensively (their method seems exceedingly cheap). Who the heck wants to retire this way? This couple. And while some (maybe not most) people on here would laugh at a 1M retirement, in the real world there are a lot of people who would kill to have that much money. Again, just because it's not what you would want doesn't make it a bad idea, and it certainly doesn't make it a lie like you've been arguing. To claim these articles are lies when there are clearly people living this way is, in itself, a lie. Why do you care so much how this couple lives? Let it be.

The lie is they are not retired. MSN money claims they are.

In the real world $1 million only produces a low middle-class wage. Not to mention inflation.

Its a trendy millennial gold rush fantasy that you can now just work 10 years and just ride off into the sunset and not work.

I think its actually funny people are buying this. Theres gold in them hills.

And travel gets expensive eventually.

They can do what they want. No worries.

[RobbieB]

So, the real problem is that they are traveling the world and having fun and making 50 grand a year writing about it and you're not?

[purplesky]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rodi Just emphasizing a word you used, but don't seem to understand. And international travel can be cheap - especially if you drive and sleep in the car some of the time. My husband did that for 6 months when he was younger. He and friends pooled money and bought a used hatchback and some sleeping bags. They traveled on the cheap and had a GREAT time. When they got to France, headed to England, they sold the car and made a profit. It's not a choice you'd make (I assume) but it is possible to enjoy travelling like that. Networth polls done here periodically - one less than a month ago here) That one included non-spendable assets (primary home for example) and didn't ask whether responders were retired. More on point is a poll done a few years ago (2013) asking people what their "number" is - in other words - how much did they need to retire. Several ER.org members felt it was ok to retire with less than a million. Not everyone needs a lifestyle of $100k or more. Heck - my family of 4 lives on $80k very comfortably in a super high COL area. Fuego's numbers impress the heck out of me - a family of 5 for 1/3 of what we're living on. There's a reason the dryer sheet thing lives on... Many folks here have figured out how to live very frugally (not me, necessarily... I have some significant trims I could make). And they've made the trade off of TIME > MONEY. It's a choice.

Many people on here have pensions. I remember a thread where most people said no to just 40k in retirement income.

By age 40 most people do not enjoy the sleeping in the car thing.
Maybe for a few days but that gets old real quick.

Yes they chose time and thats cool. But is age 40 that big of a deal? They could still travel some during that time working longer.

They left maybe 2 million on the table. Its only money. But money does give people more options.

[purplesky]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobbieB So, the real problem is that they are traveling the world and having fun and making 50 grand a year writing about it and you're not?

I have been to many parts of the world.

There is no problem. They should have fun.

[RobbieB]

I think he's seen the light!

You have fun too purp, and don't worry about those young'uns -

[FUEGO]

I'm going to make it my goal this year to earn $50k writing about travel and retirement. Except that sounds way too much like work. And might interfere with, you know, actual travel and retirement pursuits. I bet Travis and Amanda at FreedomwithBruno would agree with me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by purplesky I have been to many parts of the world. There is no problem. They should have fun.

You should write about it. $50k easy money, no problem, no skills required. Show those millennials what a little effort, hard work and dedication can do.

[papadad111]

Quote:

Originally Posted by purplesky The lie is they are not retired. MSN money claims they are. In the real world $1 million only produces a low middle-class wage. Not to mention inflation. Its a trendy millennial gold rush fantasy that you can now just work 10 years and just ride off into the sunset and not work. I think its actually funny people are buying this. Theres gold in them hills. And travel gets expensive eventually. They can do what they want. No worries.

+1.

Didn't boomers do this whole routine in the late 1960's and early 1970's in a VW Westphalia bus ? (Queue Woodstock super-8 video clips)

They weren't retired then ... and finally ....figured it out that living in a VW bus wasn't all that ...and so moved to the suburbs and got real jobs.

They worked for 30 years and retired "early" at 58....

Play it again, Sam!

[RobbieB]

Yeah, but they were hippies and didn't have anything but the bus and a lid of grass and some sleeping bags.

[purplesky]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUEGO I'm going to make it my goal this year to earn $50k writing about travel and retirement. Except that sounds way too much like work. And might interfere with, you know, actual travel and retirement pursuits. I bet Travis and Amanda at FreedomwithBruno would agree with me. You should write about it. $50k easy money, no problem, no skills required. Show those millennials what a little effort, hard work and dedication can do.

FUEGO if you can earn 50k doing what you love to do that is awesome.
More power to you.

Same with FreedomwithBruno.

Everyone chooses their own path. I am taking the more boring longer path.

[purplesky]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobbieB Yeah, but they were hippies and didn't have anything but the bus and a lid of grass and some sleeping bags.

Have you been to Colorado lately?

[Fedup]

Who needs a million to retire? The bums in LA and SF surely don't. They have prime view of the SF bay that some of us don't have. Have anybody try clinking on their blogs yet?
Edit to add, there are actually blogs for homelessness.

Honestly when I accidentally had to read MMM, I found it hard work, it was not even entertainment. Too hard as a matter of fact. I hate pinching pennies, I rather work a little bit longer.

[FUEGO]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobbieB Yeah, but they were hippies and didn't have anything but the bus and a lid of grass and some sleeping bags.

According to the logic displayed in this thread by some, there is no substantial difference between a hippie with no assets other than a beat up VW van and a half cashed bong and the same hippie with a million dollars in income producing assets (plus the van and bong).

[JoeWras]

Quote:

Originally Posted by YVRRocketSurgery I was pretty shocked myself when my sibling told me my nephew who is 25yo, struggled through school but did make it through post secondary yet has a great personality and is fearless pulled in $90k last year in a sales and marketing postion. He's apparently living it up instead of saving. YOLO?

When I started, I was making in the 30's, and it was good money. I lived extremely frugally those first few years.

I remember a co-w*rker saying to me: "You got it right. Here I am buying a $20k sportscar, blowing it all for that. You are building a life."

It was an interesting conversation, but he was admitting that he was blowing it.

So your nephew is nothing new since the dawn of time. There's a few biblical stories with the same theme.

[aim-high]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUEGO According to the logic displayed in this thread by some, there is no substantial difference between a hippie with no assets other than a beat up VW van and a half cashed bong and the same hippie with a million dollars in income producing assets (plus the van and bong).

I think you're misrepresenting the opinion expressed by the naysayers.

[FUEGO]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aim-high I think you're misrepresenting the opinion expressed by the naysayers.

You mean the ones that equate homelessness and sleeping in one's car with camping in an upfitted 4x4 on a multi-month overland trip while you have a million bucks in the bank?

Or were there other naysayers with more reasonable objections?

If Bill Gates decided to sleep on the beach on Richard Branson's private island because the weather was perfect (and because he could!), I imagine some here would say "not the lifestyle for me / no way would I retire to a life of deprivation like that! / shoulda saved more, Bill!".

[Fedup]

There are lot of homelessness in Hawaii, I was told they wait for happy hours to get free food. Some of them came from socialist country like Sweden. They've got it made, there's no need for millions. But it's still not a permanent life style I want.
If it's for one day, one week, I don't see a problem. But if it's permanent basis, what's the difference between the homeless with billions and the homeless without billions? Not much. Except the ones with billions should have his brain examined, possibly mental health problem. I don't think anybody wants him to save more.

[papadad111]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUEGO You mean the ones that equate homelessness and sleeping in one's car with camping in an upfitted 4x4 on a multi-month overland trip while you have a million bucks in the bank? Or were there other naysayers with more reasonable objections? If Bill Gates decided to sleep on the beach on Richard Branson's private island because the weather was perfect (and because he could!), I imagine some here would say "not the lifestyle for me / no way would I retire to a life of deprivation like that! / shoulda saved more, Bill!".

Fuego - you're a super smart guy with a plan and your blog income offsets expenses.

That's very different than these Bruno's

I am a naysayer- because the math just doesn't work. I'm doubtful any couple can keep their spending consistently below a draw down of 4% on their $670k spendable portfolio for 40 to 50 years. Especially when market is projected to not return 7%!look at the historic market return since 2000... And Trinity was only for a 25 year time frame. They are not currently adding to assets.

These kids will grow up and figure it out. Either find a way to augment portfolio ( which is called work) or get really lucky. My bet is they go back to some form of work.

It's why the mustache guy isn't too popular here. A little too risky for most ... Borderlines on an improbable chance of success and selling this idea to a generation is irresponsible.

[Big_Hitter]

The asset mix necessary to generate a long-term target (50th percentile) of 7% return has a huge standard deviation - like 16% or something, maybe higher

These kids think they can draw off a million and have a bad year or two, they'll be eating alpo