- Joined
- Apr 14, 2006
- Messages
- 23,293
The young wife and I are FI with respect to our current expenses. We are essentially working for First Class airplane seats right now. But not much longer.
You aren't kidding about old pets! We are lucky in that we have a family friend that's our vet, so we get a nice discount. Nonetheless, we spend a not insignificant amount of money on those bastages!Fuego: thanks for telling how you do it. I don't travel hack and we like to eat out, etc and spend about 400/month on that. We have 2 cars but when one dies will go down to one because some days our cars just sit in driveway. Our house is paid for and our taxes low too. our biggest expenses are our old pets and our health insurance -10k/year. WE also live in a walkable neighborhood. It was one of the reasons we down sized to this home.
he's fine with that as long as we don't sacrifice our food budget. I'm a cook so supper was a curry tomatoe shrimp bisque.. he would not be ok if we switched to campbells tomato soup.
Fuego: thanks for telling how you do it. I don't travel hack and we like to eat out, etc and spend about 400/month on that. We have 2 cars but when one dies will go down to one because some days our cars just sit in driveway. Our house is paid for and our taxes low too. our biggest expenses are our old pets and our health insurance -10k/year. WE also live in a walkable neighborhood. It was one of the reasons we down sized to this home.
I don't relate to this "they are wrong and we are right" way of thinking at all. It is not a virtue, in my opinion, to live on a very modest income, neither is it a grave misdoing to live on a larger income. If I had a portfolio that would support a high income, I'm pretty sure I could find ways to spend it - not to blow it, but to use it to purchase goods and experiences that I would enjoy and derive satisfaction from. My portfolio, at ~$780K, with a modest amount of SS coming online in the future, will only support a very modest income, so I find a way to live on that. I am a happy and content soul at heart and whether I have a lot of money or (more likely) a little, there will still be a base level of contentment in my life.And I'm surprised at how many people waste money by poor choices, too much house, too many new cars, etc., and spend $80k - $100k a year when they can live just as good on $50k with nothing more than a few simple smart painless choices. But they don't and then they can't retire in their late 40's or early 50's like many of us.
They are doing it wrong...the rest of us did it right.
Thanks Ha, but it is not such a difficult thing to do, if needs and desires are simple, and one has the good fortune (as I did) to find cheap accommodations. If I am one day no longer able to live in this characterful old house in Oakland , I will most likely have to move further afield to find affordable living options, which is what I will do.This is an amazing achievement, to live in the close-in SF Bay in easy reach of BART and spend so little. Your discipline is impressive. And that is a wonderful place to live. Last few days we have had beautiful Indian Summer weather in Seattle, but while your pleasant weather will continue, ours will get rainy before long.
Ha
We're not at super low spending levels compared to many posters here, but a lot lower for us than where we used to be. A big deal for us was simply optimizing our spending. We can live pretty much the same lifestyle as before but on a lot less money now. But some of it was chicken and the egg. We wouldn't have had time to analyze all our expenses without the free time we have now. Like we got rid of the landline for Ooma, cut most of the cable TV channels no one was watching anyway, switched the cell phones to Consumer Cellular, made the house energy efficient, joined some rush ticket memberships for concert and theater tickets, learned how to get free travel with the credit card point hacks, have time to cook more from scratch, and probably a hundred or more other expense improvements. And living on less means a lower withdrawal rate so lower income taxes.
If we had known how much we could cut relatively painlessly, we probably would have semi-ERed many years ago and both just worked part-time.
I don't relate to this "they are wrong and we are right" way of thinking at all. It is not a virtue, in my opinion, to live on a very modest income, neither is it a grave misdoing to live on a larger income. If I had a portfolio that would support a high income, I'm pretty sure I could find ways to spend it - not to blow it, but to use it to purchase goods and experiences that I would enjoy and derive satisfaction from.
Has anyone on here found themselves wanting more after FIRE? Basically the numbers worked for an X K/yr RE but then you wanted more so those numbers no longer worked? I would like so much of a cushion that I could support a wide range or RE options.
Then I apologize, and partially retract my comment. It wasn't apparent to me from your post that you were referring to folk with modest means who want to retire early. It could be that I was taking your comment out of context, and not considering it in the frame of reference of the discussion in the thread. I've seen a fair amount of inverse snobbery in this forum - folk who live on smaller incomes, and seem to think that somehow makes them more virtuous than those here who spend more, even when they have the means to support their larger incomes. Likewise, if anyone wants to spend the majority of what they make, and accept the consequences of that decision (inability to retire early, and other possible problems due to lack of emergency funds), that is OK with me too. It's only when anyone is unwilling to accept the consequences of their actions that I get a bee in my bonnet - particularly if I know them. I tend to care much less about people I don't know!Don't forget that not everyone has the opportunity to earn a large income. Those with modest means who want to retire early must learn to live less expensively than others. That was my point when I said that some "do it right and others do it wrong". If someone only makes $40k - $50k a year, then brand new cars every 3-4 years, too much house, etc., are the things that must be addressed to achieve the early retirement goal.
Yeah, no problem. We spend about $100/mo on dining out which isn't more than 2-3x with a family of 5. Probably chinese restaurant 1-2x/month and/or some chinese takeout. Maybe pizza. Sometimes a lunch or two out with an old friend to catch up.
I'm on an ACA plan, and with family of 5 you get subsidies up to $115k income. At $42k AGI we pay about $125/mo for a $0 deductible plan, so we're "saving" about $10k/yr on health insurance premiums from the ACA tax credit, plus several thousand $ worth of not having a deductible (probably saved us $0.5-1k this year).
We drove the car once this week so far to pick up a prescription at walmart and go downtown to a museum. The museum is directly on the bus line and we almost walked to walmart, so a car wasn't really necessary, but it needs its exercise too so we drove it to both places on one trip on Monday. I think I have 14 miles on the current tank of gas that I bought last week sometime. I see enough 70-80 year olds out and about walking around my neighborhood, and I hope I'm one of them too (in another 34-44 years).
I feel exactly the opposite. I want much less than I did 10 or 15 years ago- also I care far less about what anyone thinks of how I dress, what I drive or how I live. I'd downsize if I could after the kids leave for college, but hubby says they're carrying him out of this house in a pine box, so I guess we're staying...
Has anyone on here found themselves wanting more after FIRE? Basically the numbers worked for an X K/yr RE but then you wanted more so those numbers no longer worked?
Occasionally, but then I think "would buying 'x' materially affect my happiness or overall satisfaction?" The answer is always no. For example, while I enjoy photography and have a nice DSLR and several lenses for it, would spending $40k+ on a Hasselblad improve my photography? Most definitely not.
We generally don't like travel because of the crowding and hassles involved but I suppose if we were at the level of private jets we'd travel more. Again, speculation, maybe not. We certainly don't feel deprived because we don't travel much.
More often than not I'd prefer eating hamburger at home than filet Mignon in a fancy restaurant, but have been known to occasionally spring for the filet both at home and in a restaurant.
But we are very much aware that we have what matters, that being friends and family, a comfortable lifestyle, (at least for us) and generally good health.
BTW, if you're feeling down because your income isn't in the top 1% take a look at this site: Global Rich List.
On a global scale we are quite wealthy indeed.