Midpack
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
This is not meant to be provocative as you might think on first read, but I expect I might get blasted anyway.
Why not work as long as possible even after you reach FI to further enhance your security and standard of living in retirement, even if it's 200-300% of what you think FI is? I am not advocating living a much grander lifestyle in retirement --- the point is the long term future a retiree faces is uncertain to be sure, a lot can (and will IMO) change in 30-40 years. A larger nest egg invested more conservatively would be preferable if possible no? Wouldn't it be very hard if not impossible to generate meaningful income to recover at 80 or 90 years of age if you were wrong with your FIRE assumptions? As I've pointed out before, I read all these gleeful posts here from folks who are thrilled with RE after months or years into it - the proof on the decision to RE is decades away, not 10 years or less.
There are quite a few people here (not all by any means) who sound like they RE mostly because they despise their jobs and they've reached some level of FI. I realize it's not easy, but I can't remember seeing finding another employer or career as an alternative if you don't like your work instead of RE. I find it hard to believe anyone dislikes work in general, but maybe I'm wrong.
Again, I hope you can see the question and not focus on the RE observation. I am not thinking of anyone in particular or asking anyone to defend their particular case - it's a general question.
Why not work as long as possible even after you reach FI to further enhance your security and standard of living in retirement, even if it's 200-300% of what you think FI is? I am not advocating living a much grander lifestyle in retirement --- the point is the long term future a retiree faces is uncertain to be sure, a lot can (and will IMO) change in 30-40 years. A larger nest egg invested more conservatively would be preferable if possible no? Wouldn't it be very hard if not impossible to generate meaningful income to recover at 80 or 90 years of age if you were wrong with your FIRE assumptions? As I've pointed out before, I read all these gleeful posts here from folks who are thrilled with RE after months or years into it - the proof on the decision to RE is decades away, not 10 years or less.
There are quite a few people here (not all by any means) who sound like they RE mostly because they despise their jobs and they've reached some level of FI. I realize it's not easy, but I can't remember seeing finding another employer or career as an alternative if you don't like your work instead of RE. I find it hard to believe anyone dislikes work in general, but maybe I'm wrong.
Again, I hope you can see the question and not focus on the RE observation. I am not thinking of anyone in particular or asking anyone to defend their particular case - it's a general question.