It's official we are all wrong about fire

[MRG]

Suze says we're all wrong. Most of us don't have enough to retire early.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/t...-ever-make-according-to-suze-orman-2018-10-02


Then, Orman, with a net worth estimated to be in the neighborhood of $30 million, dropped a reality bomb of self awareness.
“Listen, if you have 20, 30, 50 or 100 million dollars, be like me, OK?” she said. “If you have that kind of money and you want to retire, fine.”

If not, and that’s most of us, better build that cushion, because, she says, if you stop stashing money, you’re losing the compounding years of your life.

 

[aja8888]

Suze says we're all wrong. Most of us don't have enough to retire early.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/t...-ever-make-according-to-suze-orman-2018-10-02


Then, Orman, with a net worth estimated to be in the neighborhood of $30 million, dropped a reality bomb of self awareness.
“Listen, if you have 20, 30, 50 or 100 million dollars, be like me, OK?” she said. “If you have that kind of money and you want to retire, fine.”

If not, and that’s most of us, better build that cushion, because, she says, if you stop stashing money, you’re losing the compounding years of your life.

I'm doomed!

 

[Helena]

.

Oh dear, I broke all the experts' rules. I retired early at age 55 with only half a million. In the past 11 years of comfortable retirement, that has almost doubled.

.

 

[Dawg52]

She says 5, 6 maybe 10 mil minimum. Maybe so if you're married and live in CA or NY. Certainly not in Mississippi.

 

[aja8888]

She says 5, 6 maybe 10 mil minimum. Maybe so if you're married and live in CA or NY. Certainly not in Mississippi.

In Texas one could be driving a big truck and have a big hat with that kind of dough!

 

[Dtail]

She says 5, 6 maybe 10 mil minimum. Maybe so if you're married and live in CA or NY. Certainly not in Mississippi.

Plus she appears to reference FIRE to be retiring in one's 20's and 30's, which is also not typical for this site.

 

[Aerides]

If she's objecting to the "I'm 32 and I have $300k saved and I'm gonna live in my RV and be fine with no health insurance and no plans for my kids education", then I'm with her.

That extreme flavor, while it works for some, is what you read about these days so often. Those are the kind of "FIRE's" that even most of us agree are way too risky.

I can't even remember the last thread started by someone under 50, asking "am I ready" that didn't get a resounding YES with under 2mil in assets. So for someone in her reddit audience of 20's and 30's, just starting to get the idea, saying to them, eh plan for 5Mil isn't THAT out of touch.

So if her overall message is caution, you'll need more than the cool kids say, and don't rush, it's far better than the alternative.

 

[W2R]

I used to be one of the few who really liked Suze, and thought she had good advice for the masses. Segments like "Can you afford it?" were great and I thought they raised listeners' awareness of what they could, and couldn't, afford to buy.

But this is the last straw!!! Mark this day on your calendar - - I have officially jumped off the Suze bandwagon as of today.

My 9 years of retirement have been, BY FAR, the happiest years of my life. And, apparently my WR is low enough that my nestegg could last for eternity. My projected WR for this year is 0.58% and you can't tell me that my nestegg wouldn't last a good long time at that rate. (I know, gotta Blow that Dough a little better! Yikes.)

ER Forum members all know about how much I have, spend, and need, since I am pretty public about that (here, only). I don't have anywhere near the $5 million she thinks I would need for a successful retirement. I live like the Queen of Sheba IMO.

And Suze? She can go and
[-]jump in a pond[/-]
[-]suck an egg[/-]
[-]stand in a corner[/-]
think about THAT.

 

[ponyboy]

This is a repost. I saw something about Susan in another thread.

 

[MRG]

Plus she appears to reference FIRE to be retiring in one's 20's and 30's, which is also not typical for this site.

I think she's talking to the Reddit crowd. They tend to get a younger group and some go with a "lean fire" approach, however there are many who are closer to this group in age and desired assets.

 

[Bestwifeever]

Plus she appears to reference FIRE to be retiring in one's 20's and 30's, which is also not typical for this site.

Yes, she’s talking to <35 year olds, per the article:

“Listen everybody. I know you want to retire at 25. At 30. At 35,” Orman told the “Afford Anything” podcast. “But... as you get older, things happen.”

I think her advice in this case is valid. Nothing wrong with hearing her viewpoint vs the typical extreme early retirees’ enthusiasm.

 

[Dtail]

Yes, she’s talking to <35 year olds, per the article:



I think her advice in this case is valid. Nothing wrong with hearing her viewpoint vs the typical extreme early retirees’ enthusiasm.

Well using Dawg52's example of Mississippi applied to and extending your statement for a spending example, does one really need 5mil even at age 30 to live a lean fire lifestyle of let's say 30k spending a year? Of course not.

 

[MRG]

This is a repost. I saw something about Susan in another thread.

I'm sorry if it is. It's new to me. My apologies.

 

[Bestwifeever]

Well using Dawg52's example of Mississippi applied to and extending your statement for a spending example, does one really need 5mil even at age 30 to live a lean fire lifestyle of let's say 30k spending a year? Of course not.

Probably talking more to young’uns living in hip HCOL areas. Starbucks and vodka tonic crowd.

 

[RunningBum]

There needs to be a rule here that Suze Orman "advice" needs to be identified in the thread title so I won't bother clicking on it!

 

[NW-Bound]

Yes, Suze was talking to young'uns who want to retire at 25 or 30.

She would not recommend a 70-year-old to work to get $5M. What for?

So that the geezers who have only as many years left as their millions can get to "blow the dough" by spending $1M/year?

 

[RobbieB]

Never listened to a word she said. Or any other financial gurus either.

 

[GalaxyBoy]

Regarding listening to her advice, I think I'll tell Suze, "DENIED!"

 

[Bestwifeever]

I don’t think there’s much of a problem today with too many people retiring with more money than they’ll ever need—quite the contrary. So overly conservative people like Orman pointing that out doesn’t bother me.

 

[Markola]

She is like a lot of commentators who seem to view retirement as a simplistic, binary on/off switch concept. You must work full tilt for maximum compounding and never touch your stash until you can quit and rely completely on it for whatever years you have left. There’s no idea that one can reduce work hours and fill the gap with modest portfolio draws. No selling or renting out a house and downsizing. No moving to a LCOL area. No simplifying. No LBYM. No muddling through enjoyably on a conservative AA until maximum Social Security kicks in. Nope, she’s gonna parachute in from the 1990s to inform us we’re wrong, she’s right and the only choice is work, work, work until we each have $5 million[emoji857]. It’s really not hard to make the argument to most Americans that accumulating more money through more wage slavery is always the best choice. We’re the world’s thoroughbreds in that regard.

Enough. These days I’ve graduated well beyond attention-needy, alarmist personal finance shouters like her and instead seek out the few guides who view post-career as more of a creative “thermostat” phase that can be turned up and down throughout life as wanted and needed. That seems a more sane and interesting trail for me but YMMV.

 

[daylatedollarshort]

She represents the interests of her advertisers, our corporate overlords who benefit from us working until we drop, continually buying more and more consumer goods along the way.

Her numbers are pretty ridiculous. One can look at the U.S. Consumer Expenditure Survey to see that pretty easy.

 

[RobbieB]

Yup, follow the money. Not to mention you need to work until you are 70.

Hopefully you'll be dead by then and won't have to worry about it anyway.

Drivel

 

[Just_Steve]

She says 5, 6 maybe 10 mil minimum. Maybe so if you're married and live in CA or NY. Certainly not in Mississippi.

Not even in NY, well maybe Manhattan.

 

[jollystomper]

Yes, she’s talking to <35 year olds, per the article:...

I think her advice in this case is valid. Nothing wrong with hearing her viewpoint vs the typical extreme early retirees’ enthusiasm.

One factor is few of those <35 have access to a pension. I recall there being a poll here of the number of FIREd folks with pension and I think it was greater than half. Most folks do not include a pension in their NW (I don't), but in truth its value can be in the millions and push ones MW closer to $5m.


As I think about, when I was <35 the popular sentiment was that you should work until at least your 50s to maximize your pension, you would need a million to retire with a pension, health care expenses were not predicted to be what they are today, and SS running out and being cut was not on the radar. So while her statements are outrageous, maybe they are designed to get folks to think.

 

[youbet]

.

Oh dear, I broke all the experts' rules. I retired early at age 55 with only half a million. In the past 11 years of comfortable retirement, that has almost doubled.

.

But....... but....... you waited long after the 25 - 35 yrs of age Suz advised not to retire with less than 5 million. You (and I) seem to have taken her advise and waited until our 50’s. Can’t think of many (any?) folks on this forum who 100% retired before 35.