We are living a lie...

[Winemaker]

This is the biggest crap of financial garbage that I ever saw printed.


https://due.com/fire-movement-financial-independence-retire-early-method-doesnt-work/

mod edit: The headline of the linked article: FIRE Movement (Financial Independence, Retire Early) Method Doesn’t Work

 

[Car-Guy]

And I thought I was doing great all these years since I retired. I'm going to call my old boss today and see if I can get my old job back...

Wait a minute he died 10 years ago while "on the job". Maybe I'll try his boss, he knew me pretty well to... Wait a minute, he died while still employed too. Come to think of it, maybe this retired "living" isn't so bad.

 

[dknighd]

I think maybe the problem is the acronym.
FI is a good thing! RE may not be for some people.
Deciding when you are FI, could be tricky.
People get paid to write this stuff. Perhaps they are partially retired and this is their side gig?
I think the secret might be just becoming FI, what ever that means, then you can pretty much do whatever you want . . .


Edit: At least within reason.

 

[Aerides]

"Due dot com" ?

It's a blog that is a front for pushing annuities and other financial products. It's not a place I'd go to read anything, much less share or give them any audience, good or bad.

 

[Lewis Clark]

An interesting mix of real facts and pure garbage. He clearly does not understand the "Rule of 25" he mentions so prominently, for example.

If he is considered a personal finance expert, it is no wonder that much of the public has a poor understanding of personal finance.

 

[Andre1969]

I wish we could get back to, for a lack of a better term, "Neutral-speak journalism." If, such a thing did ever exist?

For instance, instead of speaking in a biased absolute, such as "FIRE Movement (Financial Independence, Retire Early) Method Doesn’t Work", why not try "The FIRE Movement isn't for Everyone," or even "Not Everyone is cut out for the FIRE Movement."

Reading through the article, there actually is some good information in there, although there's a lot of stuff that needs work or is just flat-out wrong.

For instance, the "Rule of 25" section. Isn't that just another way of saying "The 4% Rule?" The article says it doesn't take inflation into account, but I always thought that it did? Their formula also takes SS into account, but in my opinion, if you're counting on SS from the get-go, then you're not really retiring early. Unless, you plan on collecting before your FRA, but even that would put you at age 62 at the youngest. So while early, it's not really "super-early".

As for unexpected expenses? Well, most people don't budget for them even while working, so not budgeting for them while retired is a bit of a wash, in my opinion.

So, there's some good stuff in there, but other stuff, you need to take with a grain of salt. And admittedly, quoting Suze Orman doesn't give the article much street cred.

 

[Gumby]

The great thing about the FIRE movement is that it is voluntary. If John Rampton, the author of the post, wants to keep working, no one will stop him or even look askance.

 

[Exchme]

I wish we could get back to, for a lack of a better term, "Neutral-speak journalism." If, such a thing did ever exist?

For instance, instead of speaking in a biased absolute, such as "FIRE Movement (Financial Independence, Retire Early) Method Doesn’t Work", why not try "The FIRE Movement isn't for Everyone," or even "Not Everyone is cut out for the FIRE Movement."

Reading through the article, there actually is some good information in there, although there's a lot of stuff that needs work or is just flat-out wrong.

For instance, the "Rule of 25" section. Isn't that just another way of saying "The 4% Rule?" The article says it doesn't take inflation into account, but I always thought that it did? Their formula also takes SS into account, but in my opinion, if you're counting on SS from the get-go, then you're not really retiring early. Unless, you plan on collecting before your FRA, but even that would put you at age 62 at the youngest. So while early, it's not really "super-early".

As for unexpected expenses? Well, most people don't budget for them even while working, so not budgeting for them while retired is a bit of a wash, in my opinion.

So, there's some good stuff in there, but other stuff, you need to take with a grain of salt. And admittedly, quoting Suze Orman doesn't give the article much street cred.

Yes, the 4% "rule" explicitly takes inflation into account, if the article author didn't know that, there is no purpose in clicking through, it will simply lead to more nonsense writing.

It's not surprising if these are annuity sales people that they would write a biased article meant to mix people up by including information and dis-information in such a mash-up that average readers can't sort through it. Worse, I'd bet the site would either not allow comments or would remove those they don't like, so no one can truly rebut them.

I made the mistake of clicking through and reading a little. The part I read was mixing in things like extreme early retirement where you live in near poverty while working for a few years and then retire into near poverty once you've saved a bit. There may be folks that advocate that, but's it's certainly not a mainstream thought here.

 

[dknighd]

John Rampton

John Rampton is an entrepreneur and connector. When he was 23 years old, while attending the University of Utah, he was hurt in a construction accident. His leg was snapped in half. He was told by 13 doctors he would never walk again. Over the next 12 months, he had several surgeries, stem cell injections and learned how to walk again. During this time, he studied and mastered how to make money work for you, not against you. He has since taught thousands through books, courses and written over 5000 articles online about finance, entrepreneurship and productivity. He has been recognized as the Top Online Influencers in the World by Entrepreneur Magazine and Finance Expert by Time. He is the Founder and CEO of Due.

 

[TheWizard]

There are a few caveats mixed in with the garbage.

Determining your "expenses" and Desired Retirement income properly is important. My girlfriend just bought a new refrigerator to replace the broken one and I'm in process of buying a new hot tub for the same reason.

And I travel quite a bit more with 52 weeks a year available.

So how do you figure your sustainable retirement income need?
It's not that easy...

 

[Huston55]

If he can’t even get the grammar right, much less all the facts, he has little credibility with me.

 

[youbet]

DW and I sure weren’t cut out for the “FIRE MOVEMENT “ as it’s defined in the article. Didn’t retire until 55 and 58, very late by their standards. We raised a family, spent carefully but were not austeer by any means never saving a high percentage of our income. DW retired but I got canned and just never went back to work, so I’m actually long term unemployed.

 

[youbet]

The great thing about the FIRE movement is that it is voluntary. If John Rampton, the author of the post, wants to keep working, no one will stop him or even look askance.

Most here work on and on and on past today’s millennial definition of FIRE, myself included. Many here seem to be following Rampton’s lead and holding off on RE until their 50’s and, yes, some even into their 60’s.

Why?

 

[Aerides]

John Rampton

John Rampton is an entrepreneur and connector. When he was 23 years old, while attending the University of Utah, he was hurt in a construction accident. His leg was snapped in half. He was told by 13 doctors he would never walk again. Over the next 12 months, he had several surgeries, stem cell injections and learned how to walk again. During this time, he studied and mastered how to make money work for you, not against you. He has since taught thousands through books, courses and written over 5000 articles online about finance, entrepreneurship and productivity. He has been recognized as the Top Online Influencers in the World by Entrepreneur Magazine and Finance Expert by Time. He is the Founder and CEO of Due.

I found this more interesting:

John is studying and working on hours to become a CFP – Certified Financial Planner. He is also working on becoming ChFC – Chartered Financial Consultant.

Good for him, "working on" getting some actual financial creds.

He has a bachelors, appears to have dropped his plans for his Masters in his first year, and yet, " He is an expert at finance"

Ah, grant me the confidence of underachieving dudes who are experts at everything.

 

[jollystomper]

Seems like something written to get clicks. So I ain't clicking on the link .

 

[audreyh1]

Seems like something written to get clicks. So I ain't clicking on the link .

Exactly!

 

[MarieIG]

It doesn't appear as if the author spent a lot of time on this site . . .

 

[aja8888]

More clickbait!

 

[PERSonalTime]

The great thing about the FIRE movement is that it is voluntary. If John Rampton, the author of the post, wants to keep working, no one will stop him or even look askance.

+1

 

[youbet]

An interesting mix of real facts and pure garbage. He clearly does not understand the "Rule of 25" he mentions so prominently, for example.

Could you comment on that further? I didn’t see a real issue with his discussion of the “Rule of 25.” I’m sure you’re right, I’d just like a little help understanding what I’m missing.

 

[Texas Proud]

I kinda stopped reading in the first section...



Nobody said you had to RE after 10 years... so many strawmen here...


You do not have to save 50 to 70% of your money..



I bet there are more down the article but I never got to them... this is just bad.. and I bet people will read it and say 'well, I will never FIRE so why save anything'...



I wish this kind of drivel could be banned... at least in the normal mainstream sites...

 

[youbet]

It doesn't appear as if the author spent a lot of time on this site . . .

Agree. He is talking about the much younger (Millennial definition) of RE which only shows up on rare occasions here. Most here are very much into “FI” but not so much true “RE” as the youngsters define it these days.

I think the issues of today’s youngsters trying to get it together financially in the first decade or so of working and then retire early on passive income are very different than those usually discussed here.

We’re (with some interesting exceptions) a forum of geezers discussing FI issues and the life of the over 50 and retired set, A good fit for me.

 

[dknighd]

It doesn't appear as if the author spent a lot of time on this site . . .

That is the magic. They spend more time developing it. Then one day they can retire for real.

 

[Gumby]

Could you comment on that further? I didn’t see a real issue with his discussion of the “Rule of 25.” I’m sure you’re right, I’d just like a little help understanding what I’m missing.

The biggest problem is that the Rule of 25 or 4% rule, drawn from the Trinity Study, actually does account for maintaining spending power over 30 years by increasing the draw by the rate of inflation every year. He clearly does not know that.

 

[dknighd]

The biggest problem is that the Rule of 25 or 4% rule, drawn from the Trinity Study, actually does account for maintaining spending power over 30 years by increasing the draw by the rate of inflation every year. He clearly does not know that.

Unfortunate. But at least he understands the 4% rule might not work for 50 years. On the other hand, it might work just fine. Or, it might not work for 30 years Who knows what the future might hold.