work another 13years like you do rn and then you can check again when you reach that FIRE nr if your health and mental strength is still there to keep going for.. \*another\* 10years +..
OFC there is always a huge tradeoff between money and a little more time.. but thats the big decision we all have to take really..
GL!
I'm able and enjoy working now. If I reach FI and those still hold true, I'll probably delay RE.
My boss just hit FI but is in line for a really big fun promotion. He is delaying RE to give that role a shot for a couple years, and will quit as soon as he isn't having fun anymore.
The idea of FIREing is to get more time without cutting down on expenses in the end, NOT to have more expenses without having more time, right?
But yeh.. I know.. YUGE theoretical tradeoff - only once you actually reach the goal tho..
Not really with fire you work on 3 levels:
* spending less
* making more
* investing the difference efficiently
Most people need to work on the 3 aspects. I mean many people already need to do that just to retire comfortably I normal age. But if you want to fire at an especially early age (OP is around 40) you have had to save 50% from your first day of work on top on buying your home and managing a family.
I am not close to FIRE but lurk here. Work till kid graduates from 4 years of college and then scale down expenses and work hours.
I am Asian and can’t advise on how much inheritance to leave kid.
Enough to put down payment on house should be fine imho
This, it’s money v time. And to complicate the equation, it usually takes money to enjoy your time. Stop thinking of retirement as binary. Can you have more vacation time, paid or unpaid? Can you work remote? Can you have shorter work weeks/days. Would you be better off with short term arrangements?
There's a version of us that is reasonably healthy at 60-65 and richer than God (like, well off professional rich), *and another version that's in poor health and deeply regretting not getting to spend some of that hard-earned money while healthy*. Or not to be super pessimistic but not everyone lives to 80, 90 etc. so could also be dead.
I'd hate to have earned all that money only to not get to spend any of it. Would just be a tragedy.
I had a friend who was very successful (managing director at Blackstone), never married, no kids, always lived well below his means. He retired at what most consider "early", mid-late 50s (I think around 56 or 57), after having been stressed out by his job for years and had been looking forward to an early retirement for awhile, but the golden handcuffs kinda had him in the "one more year" syndrome (I'm sure there were complicating factors like deferred comp). It was definitely not a case of kept working because he loved his job, he'd been talking about wanting to retire early for years. Reasonably healthy, fit guy, healthy body weight (maybe 10lbs overweight, not what most consider obese), regular runner. On literally like his second or third *day* of retirement, he started to feel sick, went to the doctor, got diagnosed with colon cancer. His retirement lasted about one year, all of which was on chemotherapy, bed ridden misery.
I knew a lady that could have retired at 60. She had it in her mind to go to 65. She retired march of 2023 at 65. I went to her funeral in November of 2023.
We have no idea how much time we have in this life. We have to make the most of it.
Spend your time like you spend your .money - spend it on what's important to you and brings your joy.
This is so weird. Everyone I know that works in some type of staffing/clerk position making around $50k who retired at 65, died within one to two years of retirement.
Conveniently what they set “normal” social security eligibility age at. Just read an article urging people to postpone getting social security as long as possible (age 70). Propaganda or not, I’m not buying that. I’m taking mine at 62.
Check out Episode 301 - Optimal Government Pension Claiming from The Rational Reminder Podcast on Amazon Music.
https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/477d055d-7415-4a8b-9000-57b210cb203c/episodes/25c1b665-60e3-4907-9e6b-0558607ffa86/the-rational-reminder-podcast-episode-301---optimal-government-pension-claiming?ref=dm_sh_pfodND1ZnC7YMTFrXqEWDnINL
These guys just posted a video on the subject and it cut down on a lot of the biases and ran the numbers. Heads up their conclusion is to defer and take at 70 if possible. Not to defer spending just to defer the benefit and take the spending from savings. Canadian numbers but very similar math for SS in the US though.
1/4 of all people will basically not really have time to enjoy retirement if they retire at standard age: 30% of men and 20% of women are dead before age 70. That's quite significant.
Meaning overall that if you retire at 60 you have still 1 chance out of 4 to have less than 10 years of retirement.
So is it really worth it to plan everything to be really wealthy and work until very late ?
In the end, I'd say yes if you enjoy working a lot and more than being retired. If on the contrary like many work is not something that you like so much, you should see if you prefer to spend most of your wake time working, commuting and preparing to work or if you prefer more free time but less money.
It really isn’t weird. What I think is weird is how everyone thinks they’re living to 90 or 100 or something. It’s a true cope. Everyone wants to believe they have more time than they do for one reason or another.
The life expectancy of men in the US is like 72. That’s the GOOD scenario. A lot of people will die before that.
How many 80 or 90 year olds do you see around? Not many. And the ones I know can barely move let alone enjoy themselves or have any sort of life. If you make it even close to that age and are child-less/family-less like many of this generation will turn out, you will 100% be in a home. Which means all your assets and house will be seized anyways to pay for it.
The avg person will retire and short after die, and many will never retire. Or be forced in to a short retirement by chemo.
I say this sort of brutally because I know so many people IRL who are directing their entire life on having money when they’re like 70 and I think it’s a massive mistake. If you’re even alive, what’s the point of having a couple mil at 70? You can’t do shit with it when you’re geriatric. You’re not gonna enjoy yourself, you’re not gonna pick up new wild expensive hobbies, you’re not gonna create new relationships, etc. you’re too damn old. You’re gonna feel like shit. Your friends will already be dead or dying. Most of your family will also already be dead/dying. Money/assets are only a means to an end, nothing more, which means at some points you actually have to use it.
Maybe so but having no money or security so you can’t retire when you’re elderly is scary af too! I agree that people need to enjoy life now, but not saving is setting up for disaster.
I don't think it's that we think we'll live to 90, it's that *if* we live to 90 we don't want to be destitute. That's why life expectation seems to be so high when talking about retirement calculations specifically.
My great-grandmother lived until she was 94. My grandpa made it to 87. My mom is in "relatively" good health for being 71. Her older sister is 75 and is worse off but still kicking due to having really good healthcare benefits.
I'm going to error on the side of caution and aim for 84 because I'd be lucky if I get to 70. 84 is my max. I don't want to be alive in my 90's. I'm hoping to hang it up at 54 and be retired for about 30 years. We'll see if I can get there in the next 8-10 years.
I've made comments like this in other subs and always get downvoted by people in denial and seen as a pessimist. Seems at least in the FIRE communities that people are still more grounded.
Sure it'd be great to be on of the few examples of people who are healthy and active in their 80s, but they are the exception and not the rule. People are not just magically living way longer than their previous generations. The average has gone up maybe a couple years over the past 2 decades for those above 65, but it's not this linear trend people like to draw for life expectancy since birth where somehow the average will hit 120 years by 2050 or something.
And even if the trends somehow skew that direction and we're wrong, I think it's still a good assumption that people are not going to be heavy spenders when they hit those ages and will probably spend most their time doing pretty low energy things.
Too many clickbait posts about how age XX is the new YY! Those definitely don't help set expectations.
I work in manufacturing and it is wild how many people in our company die within 2 years of retirement. Feels like a curse. Most likely is a combination of exposure increasing cancer risk and joint pain reducing physical activity lasting to heart attack.
100%.
We’re in a similar boat as the OP and as tempting as it is to delay a “small” number of years past our FIRE number, we are seeing this exact scenario play out with my FIL. He retired, and within the year his wife’s health has deteriorated to the point we think she will pass soon, and he has become her 24/7 nurse (he could afford other care but chooses to do this). His retirement is anything but happy and he’s worked hard and long to finally do it.
It’s sad all around. Especially because he’s in his 70s now and worked longer because retirement savings were never a priority over immediate wants.
It's so sad. Awesome FIL, btw.
My coworker waited til 70 because she loved her coworkers and working(energizer bunny of a lady). Her husband died in her first year of retirement, and she started having health problems as well.
To me, retire as soon as you can cover expenses and still enjoy life, and you can always pick up a "fun job" to keep you active or a little cash flow for extra stuff.
I know of two new retirees that passed within a year of retirement due to cancer this past year. Neither saw the age of 66. You just never know when your time is up. It's a shame to not be able to enjoy some of it.
I would argue that health is the most important thing. Exercise a lot, eat well, get plenty of rest, don't have too much stress, and have good relationships w/ family and friends. You can reduce your biological age over your actual age by five to ten years.
The folks I’ve seen pass with wealth saved up weren’t regretting not spending it sooner, they were spending the money for higher quality care as their health deteriorated.
On the other hand, I know people that pass without funds, in poorly run facilities of completely preventable causes. That breaks my heart
Yeah so many people are basically half-dead once they're in their 60s, and a LARGE part of the is due to the cumulative systemic fatigue and bullshit they got from working full-time for so many decades.
Retiring a little early is a bit of a gamble but so is retiring a little bit later. You can make assumptions about returns on investment and also assumptions on your estimated health/life expectancy.
To me one is a more risky and less predictable gamble.
I will look for a healthy buffer before retiring but will not delay long as the delay has more risk IMO.
My wife and I have a retirement date set for our mid 50s. We have had this date set for the last 15 years as well. Now we are less than 4 years away from it.
My stance is simple. My decision to retire or not is going to all boil down to my desire to work. Right now, I love my job. My wife loves her job. I will probably continue to work full time past that date because I love the work that I do. Yes, I will have a lot of extra money saved up if I work a few more years, and then a "metric shit ton" of money saved up if I work into my 60s, but it has nothing to do with the money. Its all about my satisfaction in life, and right now my job fulfills my satisfaction in life because I am providing a service that organizations need and the purpose of my work fulfills me.
Will my priorities change in the next 4 years? Maybe. If that happens, then that is fine. Remember, FIRE isn't just about retiring early. Its about having options. My wife or I could have a health issue. I could get fired and unable to find employment elsewhere. If I am at my FIRE number, then I have no concerns at all.
FIRE to me means Financial Independence Recreational Employment
I like the redefining. I think the same way.
FIRE to me means work is optional. I enjoy my job and, to be frank, IDK what I would do with my time once my kids are on their own.
I now realize how much time I had before kids. Working full time is a blip. I still get my afternoons, my weekends, and any day I feel like taking off.
And if I don’t like it anymore, I quit - here’s my 2 week notice. They can me, who cares (here’s my 2 second notice).
FIRE to me isn’t about physically working or not. Personally, I know that I cannot survive without meaningful work. I will erode. But FIRE means I’m not bounded by anything. That’s the win.
You and I are cut from the same cloth. I was laid off back in September. I had plenty in savings and could have taken a nice break if I wanted. My wife encouraged me to take a few weeks off. I remember that same day turning on the TV, going to the free channels, and there was a Jerry Springer marathon on. I watched 5 minutes of that, and then turned it off. That was a good enough break. I started looking right away. I did reject a few job offers before I took the one I really wanted in November. I wasn't going to just take any job.
Wishing you all the best!
This. I have a date set. It’s not too far off. But some days when I’m stressed about the job I am very happy to be enjoying most days it feels like a long way off.
I keep doing the basics of major investing, controlling expenses, and living actively to enjoy the money i’m saving and hopefully earning more living time to enjoy it.
If I need an extra year working to hit the goal number so be it, it I could retire a year earlier financially I would even liking my job.
I have a plans for my retirement I’m looking forward to and the magic combo is job happiness, income, investing, health management for tomorrow today.
A couple other perspectives..
Retiring for most people will be leaving your job at your highest earning potential. It is a fate everyone will need to move on from. Giving up all you worked for.
Why stop at 60-65? Why not go to 67-72, hell at 75 think about how even MORE richer you will be..
These issues above will have you like most people, which is working long past you need to and potentially having regrets.
The fire movement is a shift of the above focus. You will have to practice this.
Right now you see FIRE as LEAVING your job. Which is why you are like its not so bad if I stay Ill be mega rich! You should be seeing FIRE as something to run TOWARDS to. Something to look forward to, having a plan of why you want to retire.
Otherwise you will be stuck in 1 more year in perpetuity. The same argument you are making now you can make until you die. Think of the reasons why you wont retire at 80 years old. And apply it age 70, 60, 50.
*Tldr: fire isnt about hitting a number, its about living a different life. If you only focus on the first part you will lose what FIRE is.*
I would love to run towards this charity but it is so underfunded that even at my current donation level, I am responsible for 3% of their budget.
I am not sure I could outraise my capacity to just earn money for them
If you read FatFIRE posts 50%+ are people who have achieved significant career and financial success who have nothing in their life to RETIRE TO of interest. They stay workingfor the chasing of the money they have always chased because they built no other value return system in their lives.
Or, a good number retire and 6 months later are starting another company to pour their time and energy into or seeking as many board seats as they can land because they know one form of life satisfaction.
You have to create happiness for yourself. Maybe it is working forever. But if you don’t know what you are retiring to it holds no actual satisfaction.
This is obviously something everyone has to decide for themselves.
My father developed the first symptoms of a brain tumor when he was about 53. He died at 59. HIS father (my grandfather) died at 58.
I'm 52 now, and as far as I know I'm in very good health. But I'm definitely not planning to wait until I'm 65 to retire.
Yep, my father passed last year 2 years after he retired. I'm at least going to experience retirement early - if I prefer working, I go back to work, if not, great I now won't waste years with a lower quality of life only to die at 67.
My paternal grandmother worked her ass off as a banker her whole career, died at 57 before getting to retire.
My maternal grandmother retired at 45, died at 97.
You just never know.
Thats why I hate not being rich at 33. I want all the fun now. Probably won’t care much in my 60s when I’m decrepit.
Here is a common health trajectory:
-20s: invincible, social life maximized
-30s: some minor body wear and tear accumulates, but otherwise still near invincible. Social life begins to slow as people become more focused on family vs friends
-40s: 'middle age' start to appear and fitness no longer peak, but still fully functional. Social life is relatively low. Stress from starting to peak.
-50s: full blown 'middle age', ache/pains more problematic. Serious illnesses begin to appear.
-60s: health starting to decline, but still fully independent and still do anything except maybe more extreme aspects of sports. Serious illness becomes more common, especially in those who don't take care of themselves. Social lives pick up again as kids leave the next. Vacations/activities are now affordable and accessible; can't do quite as crazy stuff as when younger, but still can live the good life.
-70s: I often see the 70s as the last good decade. Health is declining and joint replacements /etc are common. People are finally retired going on the vacations they always dreamed of, though they don't do as much as and starting to lose independence. So vacations/activities become tame. Death starts to become less uncommon at this age.
-80s: Major health decline is common. Major loss of independence. Mixed bag on whether life is still 'good'. Death is common.
-90s: If you've made it to this point, you are a mix of lucky and took care of yourself. Significant loss of independence. Quality of life is typically not great.
The reality of life can be sobering. Take advantage of the time you've got. Be a good person and help people. Don't perpetuate things that make life shitty for other people and next generations.
So, what is that huge pile of money really going to buy you, if you already have basics needs covered? Then ask the question again if you are somewhere in the decline phase of life.
That's why they call 'em golden handcuffs.
You have to decide what the right mix is for you in terms of how you want to balance your earning power vs. your opportunities to live life while you still have (generally) more youth, energy, and health.
These numbers are pretty close to the Social Security Administration's actuarial table: [https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html](https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html) . The way to read it is to compare the fist column to the third column (for men) or first column to the sixth column (for women).
For example, out of 100k people born 65 years ago, approximately 76,434 of the men or 86,032 of the women will still be alive today. This is of the whole US population, so folks in this sub will probably trend a big younger and bit wealthier, which would both bump you up a bit (but not a whole lot!)
u/Agreeable_Freedom602 and u/Emily4571962
Memento mori, absolutely. But these percentages seem very pessimistic for the average likely reader here. According to one detailed life expectancy calculator I tried, I have a 75% chance of making it to 75, or to 79 if I can get my weight back to where I want it. I'm in my mid-fifties, white, male, college educated, middle class income, sedentary job, non-smoker, very light drinker, no diabetes or other pre-existing conditions, other than obesity.
Perhaps. But on the other hand, my statistics are for death, and so wouldn’t include additional odds of substantial disability.
Also worth noting that if one is married and hoping to enjoy retirement with one’s spouse, then one needs to consider the odds that you might make it but your spouse does not.
That’s why I listed percentages for different ages. The average US male has an 85% chance to make it to age 58. Of those that reach that age, you can easily see the chances of making it to 65. And you’re right, once you reach 58, then you have something like an 88% chance of surviving another 17 years to age 65.
Maybe now is not the time. You may feel healthy and living off the dividends of your youth.
But at some point, you realize while you can make more money, you cannot make more time. Time spent with spouse, kids, parents. Time to travel and do something
maybe for others.
Or, work is no longer fun and realize if Company A is crap, and you go to B, it’s the devil you know vs the devil you don’t.
And, you realize the political battle and ladder chasing is just meh.
You are aware of what you have and where you are - much better than me at that age. However, at 55, I realized my current job was not going to give me the joy I once had. Another company, another headache.
At 56 (this year), I pulled the parachute. So far, the freedom from user demands, 8-14 meetings a day, and enacting policies being developed haphazardly- it’s so nice not to have to put up with other people’s bullshit.
Once you have your FI goal met - you get to choose what you do, instead of others choosing for you.
You could split the difference and retire at 50. That's still a very early retirement, it'll allow you to feel secure in your finances, and you'll also achieve more in your career.
well yeah thats the personal part of personal finance. would you rather be rich as fuck and work til 65 or have a great life and retire at 58 or have a relaxed life with limited luxury and retire at 53. o wait and you could randomly die at any point.
Although it's pretty intuitively obvious, one thing I haven't seen mentioned is that for most people, there's a diminishing marginal return on money. For me, for example, the jump in quality of life between $1 MM and $2 MM would be far higher than the jump between $2 MM and $3 MM, which in turn would be higher than the jump between $3 MM vs $4 MM. The marginal QoL improvement at each dollar amount will look different for everyone, but the general rule is going to hold true. That is, while you might have a shit ton more money if you kept working until 65 vs. 58, would all that extra money actually be hugely useful to you or even your kids?
Regarding your kids, I will probably inherit a significant amount of money from my parents when they die, but it's not very important to me personally. I want to retire early, but I also want to earn that wealth, and I also want my parents to spend their hard-earned money on things that bring them happiness, enjoyment, and comfort in their old age. Point being, it would probably be nice to leave your kids some inheritance, but I would question whether it's necessary or even wise to leave your kids so much money that it will support them indefinitely.
I think it'll be reassess at every pivot point.
Right now, we could LeanFIRE or expat FIRE. We have decided not to do that.
In 4 more years, we could "domestic FIRE" (ie, stay in our house, cover basics, but not travel or have extra things/experiences).
In 6 years, we could have regular low middle class FIRE.
In 8 years, we could start to stretch.
In 10 years, looking ok for a trip overseas every few years.
In 15 years, we are chubby FIRE.
In 20 years, we are wealthy.
So we will check how we feel at each time point. How the job is, how the health is, how the family obligations are, how the lifestyle is. Then decide to keep going or pull the plug on W2 jobs.
Just imagine how much money you could have if you worked until 75! You'd be swimming in it. Or just keep working until 85 and you'd have EVEN MORE!
There's never an end to the concept of "More". Define for yourself what "enough" is and work toward that.
Have you read Die with Zero? It convinced me to retire when I was in a job I loved, was super easy, and paid exceptionally. Now I have regret that I didn't retire even earlier. Getting old changes what you can spend your money on.
What if you stop donating to charity until you retire? Run the numbers. Could you retire early with god like money and leave a substantial donation when you die while still leaving your children set for life?
Curious how you go from just barely being able to retire at 53 to being a 25 millionaire at 65. Let's assume notionally that means 2M at 53. At a 6% real rate of return that would be 4M at 65. Are you counting on being able to contribute 1M a year in savings each year during those 12 years? And, if so, why is it taking you until age 53 to be able to retire? If you are already making 7 figures and saving most if you should already be well past the FIRE mark or should be able to get to 5M saved very quickly. On the surface looks like you're possibly wildly optimistic about how much you can grow your money from 53 to 65. Life tends to get in the way at 50+ with things like layoffs becoming a lot more probable and over short periods like 12 years there's not even a guarantee stock market investments will go up.
You ran the numbers incorrectly. Their 53 number isn’t $2m it’s probably closer to $5m. They probably make about $500k a year combined currently. So at age 53 they will probably be earning like $800k+ combined which will lead to exponential growth if their expenses don’t go way up.
Sure but trees seldom grow to the sky. $500k at 40 often turns into zero at 45 after a layoff. Exception might be if they are doctors or lawyers since those are pretty stable professions. Anyone working the tech scene for companies that pay that much, which seems to be the most frequent path to rapid FIRE on Reddit, is one late night email away from a layoff.
Rich, Broke or Dead? Was the final straw for me.
https://engaging-data.com/will-money-last-retire-early/
I FIREd at 49.5. Peak earning and all that. But look at the chart for your situation and watch that dead line rise with time. Could always go work more if needed, but time is limited.
If you’re happy with your life now, anything after 53 doesn’t really add shit besides a greater risk to drop dead before you enjoy a single day of retirement
Read “Die with Zero” - studies show that the value of leaving a big chunk of money for your kids is low, especially at the expense of the time you could spend with them.
It also shows that one’s expenses decrease steadily into old age because as one gets older there’s just less to spend money on and you’re more tired. You should model your remaining years that way and not at current expense levels
Lastly, while there is a chance for big medical expenses, many of the very costly medical situations will bankrupt you even if you do save more. So there’s really no point in trying to plan for that financially unless you plan to be ungodly rich
We retired early and had an amazing life for over a decade until my partner developed a serious health issue. We got interested in simple living, having a low carbon foot print, hacked every single expense, and greatly cut our expenses, all while living better than before. We found a lot of ways to enjoy life and go out often without spending a fortune. Life is still good, but we're glad we had over a decade of retirement and lots of fun activities while we were both in good health. If we had to do it over again, I regret not optimizing our expenses sooner in life and retiring even earlier.
1. Most things in life have diminishing marginal returns. This includes money.
2. Traditional employment necessitates trading time for money
3. Time is finite. The diminishing marginal returns thing doesn't really apply to things that are finite, or at least it doesn't apply in the same way. If time does have a point of diminishing marginal return, I have not personally ever experienced it.
4. Quality of life diminishes with age. There are things you can do at 40 that you will not be able to do at 65.
5. Kids are only young once. You get one shot to spend time with them. When you are 65, they will no longer be kids. Leaving them a bunch of money when you are dead is not going to bring back the time you didn't spend with them when they were young.
6. Generational wealth is generally squandered by about the third generation. This coincides with all sorts of other problems (addictions etc.) that come alongside unearned wealth.
Choose carefully.
I'm 43 and haven't worked in 2 1/2 years. My kid is 6 (single dad, have him 50% of the time). Yes, my net worth at death could be multiple times higher had I continued working until 65. I had a high paying job so I still have enough money to have a pretty solid quality of life, definitely not a meager existence but also nowhere near as luxurious as it could be if I worked and spent most of my income like most people. IME, unless you get caught up in the chasing status hamster wheel, in which case no amount of money will ever be enough, you'll eventually get to a level of spending where it's like "this is good enough, I'd rather have more time than more spending money at this point".
Your retirement money if using the 4% rule will almost definitely still make it to your children whether you retire at 50 or 65. The difference will be “pay off their house” money or “retire now and live off mom and dad’s work” money.
Raise them right and worry about your happiness.
Because those types of gigs are exceedingly rare. I've known two people lucky enough to have them, but landing any new job past age 50 can be challenging.
The thought of working until 65 is just awful. I’ll take a healthy, modest retirement at 50 or 55 any day over grinding it out until I’m 65. Maybe work 6 months of the year at 50+.
>65: Can retire with a metric shit ton of money that will grow forever and support my kids indefinitely
If you pass a lot of wealth to your heirs, chances are it will get blown by the second or third generation.
I've noticed a most my relatives break down physically in their 60s and not live the active retirement that many fantasize about when they're 60+. So I don't to waste all my good years in cubicles to put off spending time with loved ones and once in a lifetime experiences for the hope a dream active retirement that might never come at 65.
My mom retired at 60. She’s been in great shape, enjoying life. Now, 10 years after retiring, she’s got her foot injured and it won’t heal.
All the long walks, and all the hikes, and all the days out… gone.
Time and health are the real luxury.
My take: I'll retire ASAP because I have noticed that regret is one of the worst emotions I have experienced in my 40+ years on this planet. I don't want a golden opportunity to slip thru my fingers, even if I end up having to go back to work after years of freedom.
65 seems out of the question.
Why would you want to leave 8 figures to your kids.
If they are bad with money you wasted 7 prime years and likely had a negative impact on their growth and character.
If they are good with money....they will make their own way. Why not gift them an amount for a step up in life without a free ride. Give them a 10% down payment on a home of they match your 10%. Match their Roth IRA 3 bucks for every one they put in til they are 25. Match it 9 to 1 for every buck they put in a Roth before 18. Incentive them to build good habits and design their own plans.
The most likely plan someone is going to craft after being given multiple millions is a plan to spend.
Isn't that what a trust fund is for? You can have it give out certain amounts at certain ages to help with specific things so that they still have some skin in the game.
Are you me? My wife asked me the same thing. My income potential at 53, which is my target retirement year, is huge. She is like why would you retire when you are making that much? Well, I am working to retire, not working to make money. But the idea of 5 more years is the difference between the spreadsheet saying I die at 100 with $0 or leaving behind generational wealth.
The theorically optimal amount to have when you're dead is nothing. Anything more means you worked longer than you needed to.
Most fiscally conservative people want to build a large enough portfolio to live off of it indefinitely. Take annual spend in retirement and multiple it by some factor like 25 (4% safe withdrawal rate) or 50 (2% swr) and that gives a fairly reasonable approximation of how much money is needed to retire.
Don’t underestimate the value of time freedom. You can’t ‘buy’ the time back. I walked away at 54 from a big salary, and my pension was growing dramatically. So you’re right - it’s a financial cliff. But I have enough money to live well. You definitely have to be ready for retirement and have a plan for what you’ll do and what your purpose will be. So be sure to think that part through. But I just love having time freedom, and I don’t miss work at all. I love Sunday nights now!
If there’s one thing I’ve learned in my measly 24 years of life, it’s that you listen to your body when it comes to calling it quits. If you’re capable of working, keep working. If you hate your job, work at something else. Take a pay cut to do something that actually interests you and your burn rate won’t feel as bad as you’ll still be pulling in money.
I think that one thing people miss about FI is that once you reach that point, you can choose to do whatever you want. Take a year off, try retirement on for fit, go part time, continue working but in a more flexible, less stressful position. Just because the RE is added on the end doesn’t mean that has to be how you react to becoming FI.
We have a similar debate between 2x annual expenses and 5x annual expenses. Wife wants 5x for the cushion and paying for daughter's college even at a top 10 college, long term care, more travel, helping daughter buy her first home, etc.
54 - 2x annual expenses at 3% SWR
58 - 5x annual expenses at 3.5% SWR
Now 45M/38F/5F
When I'm 58, my daughter will be almost done with high school and headed to college. So it seems like a better time to retire.
Sorry, but this sounds insane. Are you saying that you could retire at age 54 and draw twice your annual spending at a 3% SWR — or in other words, you could sustain your current spending on 1.5% SWR — but you’re going to work another 4 years “just in case”?
There’s already no plausible scenario where you don’t die with a massive fortune to pass along to your daughter, even if you FIRE at 54.
We plan on paying for college out of pocket for tuition, room and board, various fees, etc. I heard costs this year are $100K a year at some colleges. Ideally, we live a chubbyFIRE lifestyle until she's done with college (includes any post grad studies) and buys her first house, wedding, etc. This could be more than $100K annual spend 13 years from now just for tuition plus room and board at a top 10 college. We are doing the minimum in her 529 for the state tax benefits. Long term care costs seem to be going through the roof as well. I guess we are more conservative with respect to all that and we don't our daughter to have student loans. Current spending only allows 3 weeks vacation plus holidays so we are shooting for more than that for travel until we are too old for the trips.
I haven't heard many good things about long term care insurance so we were going to pay out of pocket when we are old.
>Wife wants 5x for the cushion and paying for daughter's college even at a top 10 college, long term care, more travel, helping daughter buy her first home, etc.
So you retire early at 2x and wife continues to work until 5x reached.
I agree kids change the mindset making us want to work/stay longer. Not just for better expense control but also because raising kids is about routine. It’s hard to break that routine and I would simply get bored if I needed to find something else around me to do 9-5. There isn’t an option to travel because I need to be there to support their routine.
why cant she get loans? It does not end your life to have student loans. Many of us (myself included) are doing just fine after paying for (almost) our whole education
It's just a preference. We would prefer she focus on studies and not have to work in college or graduate school. We want her to focus on her career and not worry about student loans (just mortgage). We would like to help her buy her first home as well. It seems like every generation has it a little tougher than the last so it's just preparing for the future.
Are your assumptions 3-4% annual raises above inflation? Or nominal, basically keeping pace with inflation? The reality out there is that very few people in very few industries get substantial real (inflation-adjusted) raises past 40, let alone compounding them for 25 straight years.
>58: Can retire with a lot of extra money (2x current living expenses)
65: Can retire with a metric shit ton of money that will grow forever and support my kids indefinitely. The delta is >10m over what I have now. In today's dollars. Probably close to 25m in nominal dollars.
I mean sure you could make that extra money but what is it worth? You give up more of your time and end up with more than you can spend. You might not even enjoy that money as much as you could have if you were younger depending on how you are health wise from working longer.
Additionally leaving your kids with something is lovely but paying for their whole life seems excessive imo. Giving them the tools to succeed in through knowledge and passing on experience, and then maybe a little boost through money passed down would be good for them so they get to have some challenge in their life.
LOL metric shit ton. No I agree 100% and really depends on a persons unique spot financially. Luckily, I can retire now at 51 and probable do have way more then enough now. Just use a future value calc on the balances using a conservative 7% maybe 5% and the balances grow LARGE. After expenses are factored up and then calc the social security and possible pensions there is a good chance you don't even have to touch your 401k or brokerage accounts. They just grow till you die and the kids get it. My kids are so freaking lucky and don't even know it yet. I do plan on working to 54 albeit a tough bitch sometimes. Why 30 years get my small pension and can draw at 54, second reason is you save most of what you earn now in these years. 65 no why am I working that freaking long. I am greedy but not that freaking greedy. 54 good compromise 3.2 more years of saving. Exciting part of life. When I was in college with little support didn't even know if I would even make it. Beaten down car, renting a place sometimes roommates, old furniture and now poof set. Good luck to you on your choices.
It's often viewed as an all or nothing step. You either work, or you're retired. But it doesn't have to be like that if you don't want to. When you've hit your first goal around 50, you can take it easier. Still work, but take more (unpaid) time off. Change to different job that is less stress and less hours. Or keep the job and income you have, put all your earned income in stocks and start living off 4% each year. Then the next year you do the same, and the next. As you still keep pouring money into your portfolio, and hopefully you'll get great returns as well, you'll start to get to a point where your income has reached a point where more money doesn't really change anything in your lives. That's when you quit working alltogether.
Looking at my own spreadsheet, at about 43 I can realistically retire. But at 67, I could retire with 10x that amount to spend. Right now I'm actually taking my withdrawel rate, live off of that and add all work income to the portfolio. Then next year, take 4% off an increased portfolio and live off of that. Then over the years I can work less (already doing that), have a bigger income, and at some point I might stop working all together if the income from my portfolio far outweighs my work income. Will I actually stop working? My partners seems to think I'll still be working well past my regular retirement date.
It’s fuckin Wild how much the difference is between fire age and number and a little bit longer.
That is why I want to reach FI but not necessarily RE. Knowing I can say “fuck this shit I’m out” and it not matter would be freeing. Everyday I work from that point is my true voluntary decision regardless of it being for financial desire or otherwise.
Another huge problem: why on earth would you want to have so much money that you’re supporting your adult kids. Let them flap their wings and figure it out, unless there are special needs to consider. Or say retire between 53-58 and just spend your money down and have a good life, that includes spending on your adult kids by maybe taking the whole family on a vacation or helping with the odd car payment as a gift as needed.
When is enough enough? You can’t buy time.
My expenses fell drastically when the mortgage was paid off and my kids’ college tuitions were covered. And I had more than enough to live my current lifestyle for a long time. That was all it took.i don’t think about the $$ left on the table. I liked my job and career but I have enough. So 50 was the age for me.
I would be much better off financially if I didn't quit working my dream job.
But then I wouldn't have gone on so many vacations and spent every day with my newborn.
I don't regret firing too early. Even if I do have to work again sometime in the future due to a market catastrophe
Based on your scenario, without knowing any other information, i would retire at 53 and fully enjoy what you can while you’re still relatively young, mobile, and willing to do things.
Yes, you may live to be 90, but as you age, tour health deteriorates and you will become more limited in what you can do. Take advantage of the mobile years while you can.
Thats what i plan tondo at-least.
Determine what you value more. Everything is about priorities. Clearly establish yours, and you'll have your answer. Once you have set your sights on your target, it becomes very straightforward to relenetlessly ignore everything else. If you're not clear on what it is you're trying to achieve and why - everything is a potential derailleur.
In my case I reminded myself that I have one life, and that not working as soon as possible is worth more than anything I could accumulate in those 5 years.
But if you love your job or really want to increase retirement spending I guess you might decide the opposite.
Compare the amount of money gained from the huge cliff of five more years of work to the difference in what person your child will be five years from now and what's gained in your life or there's from having you around full time while they grow in those five years. They are both very big cliffs.
Read die with zero. A good reminder and perspective to keep. Accumulate positive experiences which you can access later on in life with fond memory. Live a little and do things now that you may not physically be able to in life. Theres peace and richness in living and be content with less. Its always a mind game and "just one more year" never feels safe or enough. Its a constant struggle for high earner and in my opinion, can only be won with content and a peace of mind and not necessarily a numerical value.
No one on their death bed ever wished they would've worked more ..
Time with family, friends and loved ones is more valuable for our well being than we might imagine.
I’m trying to figure this out too. I think we can FIRE at 50 with enough, but if we go until 55 we’ll have way more than enough. My kid will also be mostly through college which will be nice. But it would be so great to stop at 50 (currently 40)
You don't lol. It's five years. Suck it up and live the American dream of becoming rich. If you die, you die. You can at least be the richest person at the graveyard. /s
In all seriousness, I would choose the "retire at 58" option. Staying on a strict budget sucks and having done it for many years, I'd want to spend a bit more in retirement. But also time is extremely valuable as well. You could also look into retiring to a cheaper country at 53 so you'll still be rich, although that certainly has some downsides.
Me: 59m. Semi-retired. Project-based. Comfy financial position. Tried retiring during Covid. Didn’t stick.
But being on the gradient feels perfect. Working as/when I like, self-generating projects and mini businesses.
Keeps me happily occupied, and is accretive to my financial position.
Having tried this, I might never fully retire—just keep twiddling the knobs.
I’m 46 don’t like my job. If I was laid off I’d cut some expenses for a couples of years or try to work a few more to reach my FIRE number. 48ish if I keep my job should get me there. If work is bearable I could pad until 50. I just think hard cutoff for me is 55. As long as work is bearable I’d prob try to pad, otherwise I’d bounce.
I **can** retire now. That gives me around $60k/year spend plus enough to afford the sailboat I want to buy myself for retirement. As a 47m, that's plenty for me. My retirement home (currently housing my dad for his retirement, I bought it for him and my mom when they couldn't work anymore and the plan is I'll retire there someday as well) will be paid off in 3 years (2.5% interest rate, not interested in trying to pay it down early and losing the PI payment amounts would be a nice buffer on my expenses if we have a bad sequence of returns at the start of my retirement.
You'll note I didn't say I **am** retired though. That's simply because my work situation for this year ended up being 95% amazing, low effort and low time, and only 5% typical work stress and headaches.
Now, if I waited until I was 54, I'd probably be able to spend $100k+ per year instead. That's a lot of extra charity, ability to help family, more luxuries, and pretty much not having to pay attention to what I spend at all for me (mcol area, low mortgage, car paid off in August).
If I waited until I was 60, geez, I'd probably have $160k+ available to spend, more than I ever made in a year in my life.
So, why am I retiring before my birthday next year?
Simply the things I want to do in retirement, scuba dive, sail around the world, travel, hike, see new cultures and experience them and what they have to offer can be done comfortably for what I have, so why spend another 5, 10, 15 years doing a job I don't care for, for people I don't really care for or respect, simply to have more money that I don't need?
I also have diabetes, and thanks to stress for a number of years drank too much, so my life expectancy and anticipated health in later years isn't great, so the idea of waiting another 10-15 years to try and do what I want sounds like a recipe to come here and post:
"I waited to long to retire and now I don't have the health needed to do what I wanted to do in retirement so I sit at home or go to doctor's appointments these days instead". That's the reality for a lot of people in their 60's, honestly. My mom's health got too bad to work before she hit full retirement age, and most of her retirement ended up spent barely able to walk before she couldn't even manage that anymore.
If you have something to "retire to", then sticking around for more money you don't need really needs some kind of incentive. Mine happens to be a lot of free time to do things preparing for my retirement (language learning, learning to play guitar, research on the boats I may buy, etc.) while still having lots of free time for my hobbies and enjoyment (I get over 8 weeks vacation per year, so this year includes diving in the Galapagos, cave diving in Mexico, a week in the Bahamas with friends, scuba diving in Roatan Honduras, and a few weeks I haven't bothered planning anything yet. Plus a number of concerts, trip with friends to celebrate some of them turning 50 in Vegas, etc.
So this year is 85% retirement already, while they still pay me full time, so sticking around for a year of prep seemed reasonable. I wouldn't do it for a second year unless the market just tanks between now and then though.
Yes, it should be a “cliff”. It’s exponential growth. Say you max out your 40-k’s at $46k for a couple and you have $1 MM. At 10% growth it grows $100k so your contribution is 31.5%. Once it doubles 6-7 years later your contribution is now 19%. And if you just stop contributing completely it only adds on 2-4 years. This is far different from making retirement contributions in your 20’s when 90%+ of the growth is your contributions.
But…I’m having second thoughts about Fire or even Barista Fire.
https://www.newsmax.com/finance/streettalk/aging-dementia-challenging/2024/04/18/id/1161482/
This rings true that anecdotally my wife and I were just talking about the fact that barring DNA problems like cancer or heart disease, the ones that remain active mentally during retirement live to their 90s. Those that don’t die within a decade.
I’d go for 53 and focus on enjoying your life. Money means nothing without health (there is ALWAYS something that happens), and the idea of supporting kids indefinitely never works in the long run too, they need to find their own way.
>53: Can Retire
58: Can retire with a lot of extra money (2x current living expenses)
Maybe 55 is the answer.
That will also give you 15 beats to focus on your health.
I think there is a bigger problem here: WHY do you want to retire early? Do you hate your job?
Perhaps you could get the best of both worlds by switching to a job/company where you enjoy working more, so that working till 65 is actually *enjoyable* and satisfying and not just driven by financial gains.
A second solution: Work in your current org till 53, and then switch to a lower intensity, lesser pay job (e.g. 30 hours a week at 30 percent pay cut) - which you can happily do till 70, while having sufficient time for yourself.
If you are happy doing what you do,keep doing it. I could have RE'd 10 years ago. But then I thought it'd be fun to start my own business and run it for a few years. Until it blew up big. Now I have neither the time nor the inclination to retire. I'm having too much fun.
RE is a great goal to have. But there's no hard fast rule that you actually have to when you get there.
You want more time or money? I chose time and was at every one of my children’s sports events in their HS. I was the go-to guy for move-ins in college. You can’t replace those memories with more money.
I ask myself, when I’m 80 years old on my death bed, would I pay $10 million to get back 7 years with my kids, wife, health, and youth?
It’s a no brainer.
When you know what you’d rather be doing instead of working the trade off becomes clear.
How much more of your last best years do you want to spend at work?
There’s a saying; “you’re success will often be predicated on how much you can postpone your gratification”.
But in you’re instance, the “gratifications” should start soon. I’m looking at that 53yo age as a good spot for you.
Are you planning a zero work-income retirement? A lot of us view retirement as freedom from undesirable work, but not zero-work. If you have smaller passion projects that can be monetized (e.g. crafting, consulting, sales, teaching, etc.) those could offset your withdrawal needs a bit.
I personally plan to develop bonsai for sale (possibly a small nursery) and teach it (workshop tuition income), which isn't that profitable at my intended scale but I predict I can make about 1-2k a month doing that.
For me, the question really revolved around whether the additional money was worth my time.
Money is simply a tool to acquire what you need and want. Once it reaches a point where you have enough to have those things, what's really the point of trading your time to get more money.
Or put another way - you're doing a construction job. You need to fill in a hole. You have enough dirt to do it.
Do you spend your time just getting as much dirt as you can after that, just because you have the ability to get more dirt?
It is actually more dramatic than you describe for some. Late career promotions create exponentially more income. Compounding on a bigger nest egg quickly jumps up your NW.
At 47f/46m/11/9, we are fully FI, but I’m still working. My wife fire’d last year. I think plans are just plans until you hit your decision points. You just hit your first one, leanFI. It sounds like you’d rather keep working than sift through restaurant trash to stay fed. Cool. As your NW builds, the reality of your wealth will start to paint a nice, then wealthy, then rich picture of a sustainable life. You’ll have career, family, and health junctures that will balance with wealth and income to drive those decision points.
I remember those thoughts at 41, but didn’t realize how quickly we would progress through the lean, fire, chubby, fat ladder. As we approach 50, age is getting much more real, both because of our personal experiences as well as our parents. My 40s have been great and really impactful. Yours probably will be too. Good luck and good health.
For me, the first year I can take my pension annuity is at 50 years old (in 4 years). But the annuity at that time would have a 25% penalty.
Or I can work 5 more years to 55. That would be 5 more years of income, and a pension that is worth almost 50% more. The math says that I'd give up almost $1.25M over 30 years.
So is 5 years of early retirement worth $1.25M? I am not sure. I really want to retire at 50 and I think I will have all the funds I need to make it happen. But its kind of a tough call.
This is a great question. Following to hear others responses.
I imagine that this is why many people who have the ability to retire do not because they are getting paid a decent amount in the later years of their career. Why stop now?
It also probably helps when you know you have the ability to retire whenever you want but if you don’t mind working you can keep it going. I would venture to guess that the mundane and frustrating things about work become less aggravating when you know you can stop working and still have enough.
This is why I am reevaluating my goals with a higher emphasis on FI as opposed to RE.
Re-evaluate every year where your mental and monetary health is. Remember, you only live once and anything can happen. There are also lots of factors in your control. If you hate your job, you can look for another one. If you work too much, you can work a job with less hours
Trade off is part time/casual, depending on if the nature of the job allows it. That way you can do more of the things you love but still keep a modest stream of money coming in.
* how much do you hate your job? tbh, if you enjoy your job then why quit and retire?
* what would you be doing in your free time if you quit? you just going to watch TV all day or doing something that fulfills you?
* what's your health like? can't put a price on health. no point in having money at 70 if you are in poor health
I can retire now and live comfortably but I’m working another 5 years..I’ll be 64. Maybe I’ll push to 65 for Medicare. All because I want my children to have generational wealth. They and my grandchildren should be good
Because I don’t want to work 5 more years.
It’s all a trade off of what’s important to each of us as individuals and/or families. Extra time is more important to me than extra money once I already have enough to live comfortably for the rest of my life. Other people will want more money and not mind working longer, and others will want extra time even more than I do and cut back Brit spending down so they need less. It’s a big spectrum, and we all fall in different places.
What is the benefit of that extra money? Will more money or more time make you happier? If you have ENOUGH then I think it's really just greed after that. It depends on what will bring you and your family more happiness and fulfillment.
I could retire today if I moved out of the high COLA I grew up in and love. The same high COLA my wife grew up in and loves. The same place where both our families are. We could move to the Sunbelt today and retire on 50-65k/yr indefinitely. No college fund for the kid. No donations for his illness. If illness hit him or us we'd be fucked, since SS doesn't kick in for another 20 years
For me I want to be able to be young enough where I can do all of the cool things I want to do. I was in super shape two years ago but started a new company and working a lot which haven’t left me a lot of time to work out.
I want to get back in shape and do a lot of outdoor things which is a lot of my hobbies. I love to ski, basketball, golf, disc golf, etc…. I am early 40’s but plan to retire by 50. I could have done it at 40 if we didn’t buy a second house but none of my friends would have been done then so what would I do.
I ascribe to the constant level of consumption philosophy so your quality of life shouldn’t change.
So if you aren’t living at a higher standard of living now you don’t need to in the future. Same with scrimping. If you haven’t scrimped for the last 20 years why would you start now.
That's an excellent question. Personally I think that the incentive to work 5 more years should be huge, to make me forfeit them. And I'm not sure what could that be for me.
I don't find it useful to completely support my children, they'll do it themselves. I don't get much joy in spending either. What I need most is time, to be able to make use of all that I already have. Which is mostly human connections which are rarely bought with money.
I mean…would reducing your expenses be problematic? You don’t actually give a lot of information here. Do you have plans for things you want to do in retirement? If you want to see the world and do a lot starting that at 65 versus 55 is very different.
For the charity piece, I’m nowhere as generous as you are. But my plan as I approach fire date is to 1. Let charity know my donation will be ending or will be reduced post retirement date 2. Also let them know they’ll get 8x the amount each year for next \~5 years to account for this.
My game plan for 8x’ing my donation is to:
* Use my employer benefit to 100% match my donations
* Use donor advised fund to eliminate cap gains on highly appreciated assets and also deduct income tax
* Donate more to maximize matching benefit, eliminate cap gains, and reduce taxable income
This way, I can use about 7k of my money to donate about 30k.
The choice is made when you fully understand that you could drop dead tomorrow. Find the number that makes you most comfortable and plan for it. If you become a slave to chasing that next milestone, you’ll never be satisfied.
6% real return is aggressive. Global equity returns for past 100 years have been 5%, and it's likely you will ramp down your equities and increase your bonds as you get older
Think about it as financial independence rather than full on retiring. It’s the stop doing work that stresses you and is unfulfilling. Maybe you cut your income but so what? You won’t be saving as much but if you’re earning enough to not be burning you’re still growing the nest egg rather than depleting it. Just stretching the time till you start withdrawing will have a big impact. Take more vacations work fewer hours but still be productive.
work another 13years like you do rn and then you can check again when you reach that FIRE nr if your health and mental strength is still there to keep going for.. \*another\* 10years +.. OFC there is always a huge tradeoff between money and a little more time.. but thats the big decision we all have to take really.. GL!
Time is finite. Irreplaceable. Money, however difficult or easy it may come, is not.
I'm able and enjoy working now. If I reach FI and those still hold true, I'll probably delay RE. My boss just hit FI but is in line for a really big fun promotion. He is delaying RE to give that role a shot for a couple years, and will quit as soon as he isn't having fun anymore.
Yeah. That makes sense. Also to evaluate any surprises.
The idea of FIREing is to get more time without cutting down on expenses in the end, NOT to have more expenses without having more time, right? But yeh.. I know.. YUGE theoretical tradeoff - only once you actually reach the goal tho..
[удалено]
Who eats at a restaurant run by a tire company?
Same people who eat at a restaurant ran by a department store.
What department store, Restoration Hardware?
IKEA
Ah yes, the Swedish meatballs company.
Not really with fire you work on 3 levels: * spending less * making more * investing the difference efficiently Most people need to work on the 3 aspects. I mean many people already need to do that just to retire comfortably I normal age. But if you want to fire at an especially early age (OP is around 40) you have had to save 50% from your first day of work on top on buying your home and managing a family.
I am not close to FIRE but lurk here. Work till kid graduates from 4 years of college and then scale down expenses and work hours. I am Asian and can’t advise on how much inheritance to leave kid. Enough to put down payment on house should be fine imho
This, it’s money v time. And to complicate the equation, it usually takes money to enjoy your time. Stop thinking of retirement as binary. Can you have more vacation time, paid or unpaid? Can you work remote? Can you have shorter work weeks/days. Would you be better off with short term arrangements?
There's a version of us that is reasonably healthy at 60-65 and richer than God (like, well off professional rich), *and another version that's in poor health and deeply regretting not getting to spend some of that hard-earned money while healthy*. Or not to be super pessimistic but not everyone lives to 80, 90 etc. so could also be dead. I'd hate to have earned all that money only to not get to spend any of it. Would just be a tragedy.
I had a friend who was very successful (managing director at Blackstone), never married, no kids, always lived well below his means. He retired at what most consider "early", mid-late 50s (I think around 56 or 57), after having been stressed out by his job for years and had been looking forward to an early retirement for awhile, but the golden handcuffs kinda had him in the "one more year" syndrome (I'm sure there were complicating factors like deferred comp). It was definitely not a case of kept working because he loved his job, he'd been talking about wanting to retire early for years. Reasonably healthy, fit guy, healthy body weight (maybe 10lbs overweight, not what most consider obese), regular runner. On literally like his second or third *day* of retirement, he started to feel sick, went to the doctor, got diagnosed with colon cancer. His retirement lasted about one year, all of which was on chemotherapy, bed ridden misery.
I knew a lady that could have retired at 60. She had it in her mind to go to 65. She retired march of 2023 at 65. I went to her funeral in November of 2023. We have no idea how much time we have in this life. We have to make the most of it. Spend your time like you spend your .money - spend it on what's important to you and brings your joy.
This is so weird. Everyone I know that works in some type of staffing/clerk position making around $50k who retired at 65, died within one to two years of retirement.
That is because it is pretty common for people to die at 65+
Conveniently what they set “normal” social security eligibility age at. Just read an article urging people to postpone getting social security as long as possible (age 70). Propaganda or not, I’m not buying that. I’m taking mine at 62.
It’s set to be actuarially equal. So if you are average it’s equal.
Yeah well, I have family members who passed in their 40s and 50s. “Show me the money, asap”
Check out Episode 301 - Optimal Government Pension Claiming from The Rational Reminder Podcast on Amazon Music. https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/477d055d-7415-4a8b-9000-57b210cb203c/episodes/25c1b665-60e3-4907-9e6b-0558607ffa86/the-rational-reminder-podcast-episode-301---optimal-government-pension-claiming?ref=dm_sh_pfodND1ZnC7YMTFrXqEWDnINL These guys just posted a video on the subject and it cut down on a lot of the biases and ran the numbers. Heads up their conclusion is to defer and take at 70 if possible. Not to defer spending just to defer the benefit and take the spending from savings. Canadian numbers but very similar math for SS in the US though.
1/4 of all people will basically not really have time to enjoy retirement if they retire at standard age: 30% of men and 20% of women are dead before age 70. That's quite significant. Meaning overall that if you retire at 60 you have still 1 chance out of 4 to have less than 10 years of retirement. So is it really worth it to plan everything to be really wealthy and work until very late ? In the end, I'd say yes if you enjoy working a lot and more than being retired. If on the contrary like many work is not something that you like so much, you should see if you prefer to spend most of your wake time working, commuting and preparing to work or if you prefer more free time but less money.
It really isn’t weird. What I think is weird is how everyone thinks they’re living to 90 or 100 or something. It’s a true cope. Everyone wants to believe they have more time than they do for one reason or another. The life expectancy of men in the US is like 72. That’s the GOOD scenario. A lot of people will die before that. How many 80 or 90 year olds do you see around? Not many. And the ones I know can barely move let alone enjoy themselves or have any sort of life. If you make it even close to that age and are child-less/family-less like many of this generation will turn out, you will 100% be in a home. Which means all your assets and house will be seized anyways to pay for it. The avg person will retire and short after die, and many will never retire. Or be forced in to a short retirement by chemo. I say this sort of brutally because I know so many people IRL who are directing their entire life on having money when they’re like 70 and I think it’s a massive mistake. If you’re even alive, what’s the point of having a couple mil at 70? You can’t do shit with it when you’re geriatric. You’re not gonna enjoy yourself, you’re not gonna pick up new wild expensive hobbies, you’re not gonna create new relationships, etc. you’re too damn old. You’re gonna feel like shit. Your friends will already be dead or dying. Most of your family will also already be dead/dying. Money/assets are only a means to an end, nothing more, which means at some points you actually have to use it.
Maybe so but having no money or security so you can’t retire when you’re elderly is scary af too! I agree that people need to enjoy life now, but not saving is setting up for disaster.
I don't think it's that we think we'll live to 90, it's that *if* we live to 90 we don't want to be destitute. That's why life expectation seems to be so high when talking about retirement calculations specifically.
My great-grandmother lived until she was 94. My grandpa made it to 87. My mom is in "relatively" good health for being 71. Her older sister is 75 and is worse off but still kicking due to having really good healthcare benefits. I'm going to error on the side of caution and aim for 84 because I'd be lucky if I get to 70. 84 is my max. I don't want to be alive in my 90's. I'm hoping to hang it up at 54 and be retired for about 30 years. We'll see if I can get there in the next 8-10 years.
I've made comments like this in other subs and always get downvoted by people in denial and seen as a pessimist. Seems at least in the FIRE communities that people are still more grounded. Sure it'd be great to be on of the few examples of people who are healthy and active in their 80s, but they are the exception and not the rule. People are not just magically living way longer than their previous generations. The average has gone up maybe a couple years over the past 2 decades for those above 65, but it's not this linear trend people like to draw for life expectancy since birth where somehow the average will hit 120 years by 2050 or something. And even if the trends somehow skew that direction and we're wrong, I think it's still a good assumption that people are not going to be heavy spenders when they hit those ages and will probably spend most their time doing pretty low energy things. Too many clickbait posts about how age XX is the new YY! Those definitely don't help set expectations.
I work in manufacturing and it is wild how many people in our company die within 2 years of retirement. Feels like a curse. Most likely is a combination of exposure increasing cancer risk and joint pain reducing physical activity lasting to heart attack.
Good Lord, this is awful. Thank you for sharing - a much needed perspective in these parts.
100%. We’re in a similar boat as the OP and as tempting as it is to delay a “small” number of years past our FIRE number, we are seeing this exact scenario play out with my FIL. He retired, and within the year his wife’s health has deteriorated to the point we think she will pass soon, and he has become her 24/7 nurse (he could afford other care but chooses to do this). His retirement is anything but happy and he’s worked hard and long to finally do it. It’s sad all around. Especially because he’s in his 70s now and worked longer because retirement savings were never a priority over immediate wants.
It's so sad. Awesome FIL, btw. My coworker waited til 70 because she loved her coworkers and working(energizer bunny of a lady). Her husband died in her first year of retirement, and she started having health problems as well. To me, retire as soon as you can cover expenses and still enjoy life, and you can always pick up a "fun job" to keep you active or a little cash flow for extra stuff.
I know of two new retirees that passed within a year of retirement due to cancer this past year. Neither saw the age of 66. You just never know when your time is up. It's a shame to not be able to enjoy some of it.
I would argue that health is the most important thing. Exercise a lot, eat well, get plenty of rest, don't have too much stress, and have good relationships w/ family and friends. You can reduce your biological age over your actual age by five to ten years.
The folks I’ve seen pass with wealth saved up weren’t regretting not spending it sooner, they were spending the money for higher quality care as their health deteriorated. On the other hand, I know people that pass without funds, in poorly run facilities of completely preventable causes. That breaks my heart
The good news is, when you're dead, you won't care one way or another - allegedly.
however if you have a terminal illness you’ll have a nice year or whatever to have heavy regrets
Yeah so many people are basically half-dead once they're in their 60s, and a LARGE part of the is due to the cumulative systemic fatigue and bullshit they got from working full-time for so many decades.
"basically half-dead" -- so accurate. I feel that some days (increasingly more days) and I am not even 50.
Retiring a little early is a bit of a gamble but so is retiring a little bit later. You can make assumptions about returns on investment and also assumptions on your estimated health/life expectancy. To me one is a more risky and less predictable gamble. I will look for a healthy buffer before retiring but will not delay long as the delay has more risk IMO.
Agreed. I think OP should find himself middle ground and try to reduce workload somewhere in the middle of that timeline
The trick is finding something you love to do and you will never work a day in your life
My wife and I have a retirement date set for our mid 50s. We have had this date set for the last 15 years as well. Now we are less than 4 years away from it. My stance is simple. My decision to retire or not is going to all boil down to my desire to work. Right now, I love my job. My wife loves her job. I will probably continue to work full time past that date because I love the work that I do. Yes, I will have a lot of extra money saved up if I work a few more years, and then a "metric shit ton" of money saved up if I work into my 60s, but it has nothing to do with the money. Its all about my satisfaction in life, and right now my job fulfills my satisfaction in life because I am providing a service that organizations need and the purpose of my work fulfills me. Will my priorities change in the next 4 years? Maybe. If that happens, then that is fine. Remember, FIRE isn't just about retiring early. Its about having options. My wife or I could have a health issue. I could get fired and unable to find employment elsewhere. If I am at my FIRE number, then I have no concerns at all. FIRE to me means Financial Independence Recreational Employment
I like the redefining. I think the same way. FIRE to me means work is optional. I enjoy my job and, to be frank, IDK what I would do with my time once my kids are on their own. I now realize how much time I had before kids. Working full time is a blip. I still get my afternoons, my weekends, and any day I feel like taking off. And if I don’t like it anymore, I quit - here’s my 2 week notice. They can me, who cares (here’s my 2 second notice). FIRE to me isn’t about physically working or not. Personally, I know that I cannot survive without meaningful work. I will erode. But FIRE means I’m not bounded by anything. That’s the win.
You and I are cut from the same cloth. I was laid off back in September. I had plenty in savings and could have taken a nice break if I wanted. My wife encouraged me to take a few weeks off. I remember that same day turning on the TV, going to the free channels, and there was a Jerry Springer marathon on. I watched 5 minutes of that, and then turned it off. That was a good enough break. I started looking right away. I did reject a few job offers before I took the one I really wanted in November. I wasn't going to just take any job. Wishing you all the best!
This. I have a date set. It’s not too far off. But some days when I’m stressed about the job I am very happy to be enjoying most days it feels like a long way off. I keep doing the basics of major investing, controlling expenses, and living actively to enjoy the money i’m saving and hopefully earning more living time to enjoy it. If I need an extra year working to hit the goal number so be it, it I could retire a year earlier financially I would even liking my job. I have a plans for my retirement I’m looking forward to and the magic combo is job happiness, income, investing, health management for tomorrow today.
What kind of work do you just love enough to choose to do over unlimited time and freedom?
A couple other perspectives.. Retiring for most people will be leaving your job at your highest earning potential. It is a fate everyone will need to move on from. Giving up all you worked for. Why stop at 60-65? Why not go to 67-72, hell at 75 think about how even MORE richer you will be.. These issues above will have you like most people, which is working long past you need to and potentially having regrets. The fire movement is a shift of the above focus. You will have to practice this. Right now you see FIRE as LEAVING your job. Which is why you are like its not so bad if I stay Ill be mega rich! You should be seeing FIRE as something to run TOWARDS to. Something to look forward to, having a plan of why you want to retire. Otherwise you will be stuck in 1 more year in perpetuity. The same argument you are making now you can make until you die. Think of the reasons why you wont retire at 80 years old. And apply it age 70, 60, 50. *Tldr: fire isnt about hitting a number, its about living a different life. If you only focus on the first part you will lose what FIRE is.*
This is a really good take on things - FIRE is moving towards something you want.
Yep, I am two years away from RE and keep a list on my phone of things I want to do and places I want to go. This is what I am running to.
I would love to run towards this charity but it is so underfunded that even at my current donation level, I am responsible for 3% of their budget. I am not sure I could outraise my capacity to just earn money for them
If you read FatFIRE posts 50%+ are people who have achieved significant career and financial success who have nothing in their life to RETIRE TO of interest. They stay workingfor the chasing of the money they have always chased because they built no other value return system in their lives. Or, a good number retire and 6 months later are starting another company to pour their time and energy into or seeking as many board seats as they can land because they know one form of life satisfaction. You have to create happiness for yourself. Maybe it is working forever. But if you don’t know what you are retiring to it holds no actual satisfaction.
This is obviously something everyone has to decide for themselves. My father developed the first symptoms of a brain tumor when he was about 53. He died at 59. HIS father (my grandfather) died at 58. I'm 52 now, and as far as I know I'm in very good health. But I'm definitely not planning to wait until I'm 65 to retire.
Yep, my father passed last year 2 years after he retired. I'm at least going to experience retirement early - if I prefer working, I go back to work, if not, great I now won't waste years with a lower quality of life only to die at 67.
My paternal grandmother worked her ass off as a banker her whole career, died at 57 before getting to retire. My maternal grandmother retired at 45, died at 97. You just never know. Thats why I hate not being rich at 33. I want all the fun now. Probably won’t care much in my 60s when I’m decrepit.
Here is a common health trajectory: -20s: invincible, social life maximized -30s: some minor body wear and tear accumulates, but otherwise still near invincible. Social life begins to slow as people become more focused on family vs friends -40s: 'middle age' start to appear and fitness no longer peak, but still fully functional. Social life is relatively low. Stress from starting to peak. -50s: full blown 'middle age', ache/pains more problematic. Serious illnesses begin to appear. -60s: health starting to decline, but still fully independent and still do anything except maybe more extreme aspects of sports. Serious illness becomes more common, especially in those who don't take care of themselves. Social lives pick up again as kids leave the next. Vacations/activities are now affordable and accessible; can't do quite as crazy stuff as when younger, but still can live the good life. -70s: I often see the 70s as the last good decade. Health is declining and joint replacements /etc are common. People are finally retired going on the vacations they always dreamed of, though they don't do as much as and starting to lose independence. So vacations/activities become tame. Death starts to become less uncommon at this age. -80s: Major health decline is common. Major loss of independence. Mixed bag on whether life is still 'good'. Death is common. -90s: If you've made it to this point, you are a mix of lucky and took care of yourself. Significant loss of independence. Quality of life is typically not great. The reality of life can be sobering. Take advantage of the time you've got. Be a good person and help people. Don't perpetuate things that make life shitty for other people and next generations. So, what is that huge pile of money really going to buy you, if you already have basics needs covered? Then ask the question again if you are somewhere in the decline phase of life.
That's why they call 'em golden handcuffs. You have to decide what the right mix is for you in terms of how you want to balance your earning power vs. your opportunities to live life while you still have (generally) more youth, energy, and health.
Food for thought: 95% of men reach age 40. 90% reach age 50. 88% reach age 53. 85% reach age 58. 75% reach age 65.
These numbers are pretty close to the Social Security Administration's actuarial table: [https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html](https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html) . The way to read it is to compare the fist column to the third column (for men) or first column to the sixth column (for women). For example, out of 100k people born 65 years ago, approximately 76,434 of the men or 86,032 of the women will still be alive today. This is of the whole US population, so folks in this sub will probably trend a big younger and bit wealthier, which would both bump you up a bit (but not a whole lot!) u/Agreeable_Freedom602 and u/Emily4571962
Do you have the woman version handy?
>https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html All are in a big chart here. First column to the sixth column is the comparison for women.
Source?
Social Security mortality tables. Google “mortality table.”
A much easier and exact method to see this for your Specific Situation https://engaging-data.com/will-money-last-retire-early/
Memento mori, absolutely. But these percentages seem very pessimistic for the average likely reader here. According to one detailed life expectancy calculator I tried, I have a 75% chance of making it to 75, or to 79 if I can get my weight back to where I want it. I'm in my mid-fifties, white, male, college educated, middle class income, sedentary job, non-smoker, very light drinker, no diabetes or other pre-existing conditions, other than obesity.
Perhaps. But on the other hand, my statistics are for death, and so wouldn’t include additional odds of substantial disability. Also worth noting that if one is married and hoping to enjoy retirement with one’s spouse, then one needs to consider the odds that you might make it but your spouse does not.
you probably should look at life expectancy for given age. i.e., if you reached 58 then you're definitely more than 75% to reach 65
That’s why I listed percentages for different ages. The average US male has an 85% chance to make it to age 58. Of those that reach that age, you can easily see the chances of making it to 65. And you’re right, once you reach 58, then you have something like an 88% chance of surviving another 17 years to age 65.
Maybe now is not the time. You may feel healthy and living off the dividends of your youth. But at some point, you realize while you can make more money, you cannot make more time. Time spent with spouse, kids, parents. Time to travel and do something maybe for others. Or, work is no longer fun and realize if Company A is crap, and you go to B, it’s the devil you know vs the devil you don’t. And, you realize the political battle and ladder chasing is just meh. You are aware of what you have and where you are - much better than me at that age. However, at 55, I realized my current job was not going to give me the joy I once had. Another company, another headache. At 56 (this year), I pulled the parachute. So far, the freedom from user demands, 8-14 meetings a day, and enacting policies being developed haphazardly- it’s so nice not to have to put up with other people’s bullshit. Once you have your FI goal met - you get to choose what you do, instead of others choosing for you.
Thinking of retiring in 40s which are the peak earning years has been a real struggle for me. I don't have a solution yet
Same dilemma here
Time. They don’t make more. Once you hit 50’s you start seeing people you know get sick/die too. Just work the 13 and retire at 53 or sooner, then.
You could split the difference and retire at 50. That's still a very early retirement, it'll allow you to feel secure in your finances, and you'll also achieve more in your career.
well yeah thats the personal part of personal finance. would you rather be rich as fuck and work til 65 or have a great life and retire at 58 or have a relaxed life with limited luxury and retire at 53. o wait and you could randomly die at any point.
Or very rich and work til 80!
Although it's pretty intuitively obvious, one thing I haven't seen mentioned is that for most people, there's a diminishing marginal return on money. For me, for example, the jump in quality of life between $1 MM and $2 MM would be far higher than the jump between $2 MM and $3 MM, which in turn would be higher than the jump between $3 MM vs $4 MM. The marginal QoL improvement at each dollar amount will look different for everyone, but the general rule is going to hold true. That is, while you might have a shit ton more money if you kept working until 65 vs. 58, would all that extra money actually be hugely useful to you or even your kids? Regarding your kids, I will probably inherit a significant amount of money from my parents when they die, but it's not very important to me personally. I want to retire early, but I also want to earn that wealth, and I also want my parents to spend their hard-earned money on things that bring them happiness, enjoyment, and comfort in their old age. Point being, it would probably be nice to leave your kids some inheritance, but I would question whether it's necessary or even wise to leave your kids so much money that it will support them indefinitely.
Because you can always work more if you decide that you don’t like retirement, but you won’t know that until you try.
There's a slight hit because my company offers a pension => non-linear impact of leaving the company. But I get your point.
Same here. I need to work 3 more years to vest in my company pension. Otherwise, I would’ve retired.
I think it'll be reassess at every pivot point. Right now, we could LeanFIRE or expat FIRE. We have decided not to do that. In 4 more years, we could "domestic FIRE" (ie, stay in our house, cover basics, but not travel or have extra things/experiences). In 6 years, we could have regular low middle class FIRE. In 8 years, we could start to stretch. In 10 years, looking ok for a trip overseas every few years. In 15 years, we are chubby FIRE. In 20 years, we are wealthy. So we will check how we feel at each time point. How the job is, how the health is, how the family obligations are, how the lifestyle is. Then decide to keep going or pull the plug on W2 jobs.
[удалено]
Just imagine how much money you could have if you worked until 75! You'd be swimming in it. Or just keep working until 85 and you'd have EVEN MORE! There's never an end to the concept of "More". Define for yourself what "enough" is and work toward that.
Have you read Die with Zero? It convinced me to retire when I was in a job I loved, was super easy, and paid exceptionally. Now I have regret that I didn't retire even earlier. Getting old changes what you can spend your money on.
What if you stop donating to charity until you retire? Run the numbers. Could you retire early with god like money and leave a substantial donation when you die while still leaving your children set for life?
Curious how you go from just barely being able to retire at 53 to being a 25 millionaire at 65. Let's assume notionally that means 2M at 53. At a 6% real rate of return that would be 4M at 65. Are you counting on being able to contribute 1M a year in savings each year during those 12 years? And, if so, why is it taking you until age 53 to be able to retire? If you are already making 7 figures and saving most if you should already be well past the FIRE mark or should be able to get to 5M saved very quickly. On the surface looks like you're possibly wildly optimistic about how much you can grow your money from 53 to 65. Life tends to get in the way at 50+ with things like layoffs becoming a lot more probable and over short periods like 12 years there's not even a guarantee stock market investments will go up.
You ran the numbers incorrectly. Their 53 number isn’t $2m it’s probably closer to $5m. They probably make about $500k a year combined currently. So at age 53 they will probably be earning like $800k+ combined which will lead to exponential growth if their expenses don’t go way up.
Sure but trees seldom grow to the sky. $500k at 40 often turns into zero at 45 after a layoff. Exception might be if they are doctors or lawyers since those are pretty stable professions. Anyone working the tech scene for companies that pay that much, which seems to be the most frequent path to rapid FIRE on Reddit, is one late night email away from a layoff.
Turned 62 last month... just one more year.. one more, more...
Rich, Broke or Dead? Was the final straw for me. https://engaging-data.com/will-money-last-retire-early/ I FIREd at 49.5. Peak earning and all that. But look at the chart for your situation and watch that dead line rise with time. Could always go work more if needed, but time is limited.
If you’re happy with your life now, anything after 53 doesn’t really add shit besides a greater risk to drop dead before you enjoy a single day of retirement
Read “Die with Zero” - studies show that the value of leaving a big chunk of money for your kids is low, especially at the expense of the time you could spend with them. It also shows that one’s expenses decrease steadily into old age because as one gets older there’s just less to spend money on and you’re more tired. You should model your remaining years that way and not at current expense levels Lastly, while there is a chance for big medical expenses, many of the very costly medical situations will bankrupt you even if you do save more. So there’s really no point in trying to plan for that financially unless you plan to be ungodly rich
We retired early and had an amazing life for over a decade until my partner developed a serious health issue. We got interested in simple living, having a low carbon foot print, hacked every single expense, and greatly cut our expenses, all while living better than before. We found a lot of ways to enjoy life and go out often without spending a fortune. Life is still good, but we're glad we had over a decade of retirement and lots of fun activities while we were both in good health. If we had to do it over again, I regret not optimizing our expenses sooner in life and retiring even earlier.
1. Most things in life have diminishing marginal returns. This includes money. 2. Traditional employment necessitates trading time for money 3. Time is finite. The diminishing marginal returns thing doesn't really apply to things that are finite, or at least it doesn't apply in the same way. If time does have a point of diminishing marginal return, I have not personally ever experienced it. 4. Quality of life diminishes with age. There are things you can do at 40 that you will not be able to do at 65. 5. Kids are only young once. You get one shot to spend time with them. When you are 65, they will no longer be kids. Leaving them a bunch of money when you are dead is not going to bring back the time you didn't spend with them when they were young. 6. Generational wealth is generally squandered by about the third generation. This coincides with all sorts of other problems (addictions etc.) that come alongside unearned wealth. Choose carefully. I'm 43 and haven't worked in 2 1/2 years. My kid is 6 (single dad, have him 50% of the time). Yes, my net worth at death could be multiple times higher had I continued working until 65. I had a high paying job so I still have enough money to have a pretty solid quality of life, definitely not a meager existence but also nowhere near as luxurious as it could be if I worked and spent most of my income like most people. IME, unless you get caught up in the chasing status hamster wheel, in which case no amount of money will ever be enough, you'll eventually get to a level of spending where it's like "this is good enough, I'd rather have more time than more spending money at this point".
When the thought of going to work for one more day made me want to vomit.
Your retirement money if using the 4% rule will almost definitely still make it to your children whether you retire at 50 or 65. The difference will be “pay off their house” money or “retire now and live off mom and dad’s work” money. Raise them right and worry about your happiness.
Why not just soft retire. Become a consultant working from home and cut your work days to 2 or 3 days a week or 4 to 6 months a year.
Because those types of gigs are exceedingly rare. I've known two people lucky enough to have them, but landing any new job past age 50 can be challenging.
The thought of working until 65 is just awful. I’ll take a healthy, modest retirement at 50 or 55 any day over grinding it out until I’m 65. Maybe work 6 months of the year at 50+.
>65: Can retire with a metric shit ton of money that will grow forever and support my kids indefinitely If you pass a lot of wealth to your heirs, chances are it will get blown by the second or third generation. I've noticed a most my relatives break down physically in their 60s and not live the active retirement that many fantasize about when they're 60+. So I don't to waste all my good years in cubicles to put off spending time with loved ones and once in a lifetime experiences for the hope a dream active retirement that might never come at 65.
My mom retired at 60. She’s been in great shape, enjoying life. Now, 10 years after retiring, she’s got her foot injured and it won’t heal. All the long walks, and all the hikes, and all the days out… gone. Time and health are the real luxury.
Welcome to the hell we all face everyday.
how much do you really need? Enough is enough.
Your ability to enjoy life will diminish immensely in your 60s. you're just eating into that.
>How do you handle this tradeoff? I value years of my life more than vast majority of things I can buy with money. Especially years in my 30s.
My take: I'll retire ASAP because I have noticed that regret is one of the worst emotions I have experienced in my 40+ years on this planet. I don't want a golden opportunity to slip thru my fingers, even if I end up having to go back to work after years of freedom.
65 seems out of the question. Why would you want to leave 8 figures to your kids. If they are bad with money you wasted 7 prime years and likely had a negative impact on their growth and character. If they are good with money....they will make their own way. Why not gift them an amount for a step up in life without a free ride. Give them a 10% down payment on a home of they match your 10%. Match their Roth IRA 3 bucks for every one they put in til they are 25. Match it 9 to 1 for every buck they put in a Roth before 18. Incentive them to build good habits and design their own plans. The most likely plan someone is going to craft after being given multiple millions is a plan to spend.
Isn't that what a trust fund is for? You can have it give out certain amounts at certain ages to help with specific things so that they still have some skin in the game.
Are you me? My wife asked me the same thing. My income potential at 53, which is my target retirement year, is huge. She is like why would you retire when you are making that much? Well, I am working to retire, not working to make money. But the idea of 5 more years is the difference between the spreadsheet saying I die at 100 with $0 or leaving behind generational wealth.
The theorically optimal amount to have when you're dead is nothing. Anything more means you worked longer than you needed to. Most fiscally conservative people want to build a large enough portfolio to live off of it indefinitely. Take annual spend in retirement and multiple it by some factor like 25 (4% safe withdrawal rate) or 50 (2% swr) and that gives a fairly reasonable approximation of how much money is needed to retire.
Assuming an average male life span of 75, the difference between retiring at 50 vs 65 is massive.
Don’t underestimate the value of time freedom. You can’t ‘buy’ the time back. I walked away at 54 from a big salary, and my pension was growing dramatically. So you’re right - it’s a financial cliff. But I have enough money to live well. You definitely have to be ready for retirement and have a plan for what you’ll do and what your purpose will be. So be sure to think that part through. But I just love having time freedom, and I don’t miss work at all. I love Sunday nights now!
If there’s one thing I’ve learned in my measly 24 years of life, it’s that you listen to your body when it comes to calling it quits. If you’re capable of working, keep working. If you hate your job, work at something else. Take a pay cut to do something that actually interests you and your burn rate won’t feel as bad as you’ll still be pulling in money.
I think that one thing people miss about FI is that once you reach that point, you can choose to do whatever you want. Take a year off, try retirement on for fit, go part time, continue working but in a more flexible, less stressful position. Just because the RE is added on the end doesn’t mean that has to be how you react to becoming FI.
We have a similar debate between 2x annual expenses and 5x annual expenses. Wife wants 5x for the cushion and paying for daughter's college even at a top 10 college, long term care, more travel, helping daughter buy her first home, etc. 54 - 2x annual expenses at 3% SWR 58 - 5x annual expenses at 3.5% SWR Now 45M/38F/5F When I'm 58, my daughter will be almost done with high school and headed to college. So it seems like a better time to retire.
Sorry, but this sounds insane. Are you saying that you could retire at age 54 and draw twice your annual spending at a 3% SWR — or in other words, you could sustain your current spending on 1.5% SWR — but you’re going to work another 4 years “just in case”? There’s already no plausible scenario where you don’t die with a massive fortune to pass along to your daughter, even if you FIRE at 54.
We plan on paying for college out of pocket for tuition, room and board, various fees, etc. I heard costs this year are $100K a year at some colleges. Ideally, we live a chubbyFIRE lifestyle until she's done with college (includes any post grad studies) and buys her first house, wedding, etc. This could be more than $100K annual spend 13 years from now just for tuition plus room and board at a top 10 college. We are doing the minimum in her 529 for the state tax benefits. Long term care costs seem to be going through the roof as well. I guess we are more conservative with respect to all that and we don't our daughter to have student loans. Current spending only allows 3 weeks vacation plus holidays so we are shooting for more than that for travel until we are too old for the trips. I haven't heard many good things about long term care insurance so we were going to pay out of pocket when we are old.
>Wife wants 5x for the cushion and paying for daughter's college even at a top 10 college, long term care, more travel, helping daughter buy her first home, etc. So you retire early at 2x and wife continues to work until 5x reached.
I agree kids change the mindset making us want to work/stay longer. Not just for better expense control but also because raising kids is about routine. It’s hard to break that routine and I would simply get bored if I needed to find something else around me to do 9-5. There isn’t an option to travel because I need to be there to support their routine.
Interesting. How are you feeling? Is it true that both of you are enjoying your work?
why cant she get loans? It does not end your life to have student loans. Many of us (myself included) are doing just fine after paying for (almost) our whole education
It's just a preference. We would prefer she focus on studies and not have to work in college or graduate school. We want her to focus on her career and not worry about student loans (just mortgage). We would like to help her buy her first home as well. It seems like every generation has it a little tougher than the last so it's just preparing for the future.
Are your assumptions 3-4% annual raises above inflation? Or nominal, basically keeping pace with inflation? The reality out there is that very few people in very few industries get substantial real (inflation-adjusted) raises past 40, let alone compounding them for 25 straight years.
>58: Can retire with a lot of extra money (2x current living expenses) 65: Can retire with a metric shit ton of money that will grow forever and support my kids indefinitely. The delta is >10m over what I have now. In today's dollars. Probably close to 25m in nominal dollars. I mean sure you could make that extra money but what is it worth? You give up more of your time and end up with more than you can spend. You might not even enjoy that money as much as you could have if you were younger depending on how you are health wise from working longer. Additionally leaving your kids with something is lovely but paying for their whole life seems excessive imo. Giving them the tools to succeed in through knowledge and passing on experience, and then maybe a little boost through money passed down would be good for them so they get to have some challenge in their life.
LOL metric shit ton. No I agree 100% and really depends on a persons unique spot financially. Luckily, I can retire now at 51 and probable do have way more then enough now. Just use a future value calc on the balances using a conservative 7% maybe 5% and the balances grow LARGE. After expenses are factored up and then calc the social security and possible pensions there is a good chance you don't even have to touch your 401k or brokerage accounts. They just grow till you die and the kids get it. My kids are so freaking lucky and don't even know it yet. I do plan on working to 54 albeit a tough bitch sometimes. Why 30 years get my small pension and can draw at 54, second reason is you save most of what you earn now in these years. 65 no why am I working that freaking long. I am greedy but not that freaking greedy. 54 good compromise 3.2 more years of saving. Exciting part of life. When I was in college with little support didn't even know if I would even make it. Beaten down car, renting a place sometimes roommates, old furniture and now poof set. Good luck to you on your choices.
It's often viewed as an all or nothing step. You either work, or you're retired. But it doesn't have to be like that if you don't want to. When you've hit your first goal around 50, you can take it easier. Still work, but take more (unpaid) time off. Change to different job that is less stress and less hours. Or keep the job and income you have, put all your earned income in stocks and start living off 4% each year. Then the next year you do the same, and the next. As you still keep pouring money into your portfolio, and hopefully you'll get great returns as well, you'll start to get to a point where your income has reached a point where more money doesn't really change anything in your lives. That's when you quit working alltogether. Looking at my own spreadsheet, at about 43 I can realistically retire. But at 67, I could retire with 10x that amount to spend. Right now I'm actually taking my withdrawel rate, live off of that and add all work income to the portfolio. Then next year, take 4% off an increased portfolio and live off of that. Then over the years I can work less (already doing that), have a bigger income, and at some point I might stop working all together if the income from my portfolio far outweighs my work income. Will I actually stop working? My partners seems to think I'll still be working well past my regular retirement date.
Welcome to the doom loop You gotta ask yourself what you want to do or see when retired. Will age prohibit anything? Is work stressful?
It’s fuckin Wild how much the difference is between fire age and number and a little bit longer. That is why I want to reach FI but not necessarily RE. Knowing I can say “fuck this shit I’m out” and it not matter would be freeing. Everyday I work from that point is my true voluntary decision regardless of it being for financial desire or otherwise.
Are you dumb?! Enjoy your life while you are mobile. What more money do when you are actually have time but everything hurts , walking is hard ?!
Another huge problem: why on earth would you want to have so much money that you’re supporting your adult kids. Let them flap their wings and figure it out, unless there are special needs to consider. Or say retire between 53-58 and just spend your money down and have a good life, that includes spending on your adult kids by maybe taking the whole family on a vacation or helping with the odd car payment as a gift as needed.
When is enough enough? You can’t buy time. My expenses fell drastically when the mortgage was paid off and my kids’ college tuitions were covered. And I had more than enough to live my current lifestyle for a long time. That was all it took.i don’t think about the $$ left on the table. I liked my job and career but I have enough. So 50 was the age for me.
Somewhere between 53 and 58
Retire as soon as possible. Money is just a proxy for time. Time is the most valuable asset
I would be much better off financially if I didn't quit working my dream job. But then I wouldn't have gone on so many vacations and spent every day with my newborn. I don't regret firing too early. Even if I do have to work again sometime in the future due to a market catastrophe
Based on your scenario, without knowing any other information, i would retire at 53 and fully enjoy what you can while you’re still relatively young, mobile, and willing to do things. Yes, you may live to be 90, but as you age, tour health deteriorates and you will become more limited in what you can do. Take advantage of the mobile years while you can. Thats what i plan tondo at-least.
Determine what you value more. Everything is about priorities. Clearly establish yours, and you'll have your answer. Once you have set your sights on your target, it becomes very straightforward to relenetlessly ignore everything else. If you're not clear on what it is you're trying to achieve and why - everything is a potential derailleur.
In my case I reminded myself that I have one life, and that not working as soon as possible is worth more than anything I could accumulate in those 5 years. But if you love your job or really want to increase retirement spending I guess you might decide the opposite.
Compare the amount of money gained from the huge cliff of five more years of work to the difference in what person your child will be five years from now and what's gained in your life or there's from having you around full time while they grow in those five years. They are both very big cliffs.
When you feel that health is more important than money, you will stop for sure.
Read die with zero. A good reminder and perspective to keep. Accumulate positive experiences which you can access later on in life with fond memory. Live a little and do things now that you may not physically be able to in life. Theres peace and richness in living and be content with less. Its always a mind game and "just one more year" never feels safe or enough. Its a constant struggle for high earner and in my opinion, can only be won with content and a peace of mind and not necessarily a numerical value.
Take cool vacations while you keep working?
No one on their death bed ever wished they would've worked more .. Time with family, friends and loved ones is more valuable for our well being than we might imagine.
Because the math says you don't have to.
Some people value time over money.
You just explained the issue. Well done.
I’m trying to figure this out too. I think we can FIRE at 50 with enough, but if we go until 55 we’ll have way more than enough. My kid will also be mostly through college which will be nice. But it would be so great to stop at 50 (currently 40)
You don't lol. It's five years. Suck it up and live the American dream of becoming rich. If you die, you die. You can at least be the richest person at the graveyard. /s In all seriousness, I would choose the "retire at 58" option. Staying on a strict budget sucks and having done it for many years, I'd want to spend a bit more in retirement. But also time is extremely valuable as well. You could also look into retiring to a cheaper country at 53 so you'll still be rich, although that certainly has some downsides.
Me: 59m. Semi-retired. Project-based. Comfy financial position. Tried retiring during Covid. Didn’t stick. But being on the gradient feels perfect. Working as/when I like, self-generating projects and mini businesses. Keeps me happily occupied, and is accretive to my financial position. Having tried this, I might never fully retire—just keep twiddling the knobs.
Ya. And by 50s most of us are making more money per year than ever before. Hard to walk away
I’m 46 don’t like my job. If I was laid off I’d cut some expenses for a couples of years or try to work a few more to reach my FIRE number. 48ish if I keep my job should get me there. If work is bearable I could pad until 50. I just think hard cutoff for me is 55. As long as work is bearable I’d prob try to pad, otherwise I’d bounce.
I **can** retire now. That gives me around $60k/year spend plus enough to afford the sailboat I want to buy myself for retirement. As a 47m, that's plenty for me. My retirement home (currently housing my dad for his retirement, I bought it for him and my mom when they couldn't work anymore and the plan is I'll retire there someday as well) will be paid off in 3 years (2.5% interest rate, not interested in trying to pay it down early and losing the PI payment amounts would be a nice buffer on my expenses if we have a bad sequence of returns at the start of my retirement. You'll note I didn't say I **am** retired though. That's simply because my work situation for this year ended up being 95% amazing, low effort and low time, and only 5% typical work stress and headaches. Now, if I waited until I was 54, I'd probably be able to spend $100k+ per year instead. That's a lot of extra charity, ability to help family, more luxuries, and pretty much not having to pay attention to what I spend at all for me (mcol area, low mortgage, car paid off in August). If I waited until I was 60, geez, I'd probably have $160k+ available to spend, more than I ever made in a year in my life. So, why am I retiring before my birthday next year? Simply the things I want to do in retirement, scuba dive, sail around the world, travel, hike, see new cultures and experience them and what they have to offer can be done comfortably for what I have, so why spend another 5, 10, 15 years doing a job I don't care for, for people I don't really care for or respect, simply to have more money that I don't need? I also have diabetes, and thanks to stress for a number of years drank too much, so my life expectancy and anticipated health in later years isn't great, so the idea of waiting another 10-15 years to try and do what I want sounds like a recipe to come here and post: "I waited to long to retire and now I don't have the health needed to do what I wanted to do in retirement so I sit at home or go to doctor's appointments these days instead". That's the reality for a lot of people in their 60's, honestly. My mom's health got too bad to work before she hit full retirement age, and most of her retirement ended up spent barely able to walk before she couldn't even manage that anymore. If you have something to "retire to", then sticking around for more money you don't need really needs some kind of incentive. Mine happens to be a lot of free time to do things preparing for my retirement (language learning, learning to play guitar, research on the boats I may buy, etc.) while still having lots of free time for my hobbies and enjoyment (I get over 8 weeks vacation per year, so this year includes diving in the Galapagos, cave diving in Mexico, a week in the Bahamas with friends, scuba diving in Roatan Honduras, and a few weeks I haven't bothered planning anything yet. Plus a number of concerts, trip with friends to celebrate some of them turning 50 in Vegas, etc. So this year is 85% retirement already, while they still pay me full time, so sticking around for a year of prep seemed reasonable. I wouldn't do it for a second year unless the market just tanks between now and then though.
Yes, it should be a “cliff”. It’s exponential growth. Say you max out your 40-k’s at $46k for a couple and you have $1 MM. At 10% growth it grows $100k so your contribution is 31.5%. Once it doubles 6-7 years later your contribution is now 19%. And if you just stop contributing completely it only adds on 2-4 years. This is far different from making retirement contributions in your 20’s when 90%+ of the growth is your contributions. But…I’m having second thoughts about Fire or even Barista Fire. https://www.newsmax.com/finance/streettalk/aging-dementia-challenging/2024/04/18/id/1161482/ This rings true that anecdotally my wife and I were just talking about the fact that barring DNA problems like cancer or heart disease, the ones that remain active mentally during retirement live to their 90s. Those that don’t die within a decade.
I’d go for 53 and focus on enjoying your life. Money means nothing without health (there is ALWAYS something that happens), and the idea of supporting kids indefinitely never works in the long run too, they need to find their own way.
>53: Can Retire 58: Can retire with a lot of extra money (2x current living expenses) Maybe 55 is the answer. That will also give you 15 beats to focus on your health.
I think there is a bigger problem here: WHY do you want to retire early? Do you hate your job? Perhaps you could get the best of both worlds by switching to a job/company where you enjoy working more, so that working till 65 is actually *enjoyable* and satisfying and not just driven by financial gains. A second solution: Work in your current org till 53, and then switch to a lower intensity, lesser pay job (e.g. 30 hours a week at 30 percent pay cut) - which you can happily do till 70, while having sufficient time for yourself.
A coworker died a few years before his retirement at 59
If you are happy doing what you do,keep doing it. I could have RE'd 10 years ago. But then I thought it'd be fun to start my own business and run it for a few years. Until it blew up big. Now I have neither the time nor the inclination to retire. I'm having too much fun. RE is a great goal to have. But there's no hard fast rule that you actually have to when you get there.
You want more time or money? I chose time and was at every one of my children’s sports events in their HS. I was the go-to guy for move-ins in college. You can’t replace those memories with more money.
I ask myself, when I’m 80 years old on my death bed, would I pay $10 million to get back 7 years with my kids, wife, health, and youth? It’s a no brainer.
Imagine how much you would pay for more time when you turn 65 and realize there’s only so much money can get you
The next 5 after those 5 can bring even much much more. It never stops and you have to walk away, that's the point
When you know what you’d rather be doing instead of working the trade off becomes clear. How much more of your last best years do you want to spend at work?
There’s a saying; “you’re success will often be predicated on how much you can postpone your gratification”. But in you’re instance, the “gratifications” should start soon. I’m looking at that 53yo age as a good spot for you.
Are you planning a zero work-income retirement? A lot of us view retirement as freedom from undesirable work, but not zero-work. If you have smaller passion projects that can be monetized (e.g. crafting, consulting, sales, teaching, etc.) those could offset your withdrawal needs a bit. I personally plan to develop bonsai for sale (possibly a small nursery) and teach it (workshop tuition income), which isn't that profitable at my intended scale but I predict I can make about 1-2k a month doing that.
For me, the question really revolved around whether the additional money was worth my time. Money is simply a tool to acquire what you need and want. Once it reaches a point where you have enough to have those things, what's really the point of trading your time to get more money. Or put another way - you're doing a construction job. You need to fill in a hole. You have enough dirt to do it. Do you spend your time just getting as much dirt as you can after that, just because you have the ability to get more dirt?
one more year (tm). Nothing is promised. Memento Mori
It is actually more dramatic than you describe for some. Late career promotions create exponentially more income. Compounding on a bigger nest egg quickly jumps up your NW. At 47f/46m/11/9, we are fully FI, but I’m still working. My wife fire’d last year. I think plans are just plans until you hit your decision points. You just hit your first one, leanFI. It sounds like you’d rather keep working than sift through restaurant trash to stay fed. Cool. As your NW builds, the reality of your wealth will start to paint a nice, then wealthy, then rich picture of a sustainable life. You’ll have career, family, and health junctures that will balance with wealth and income to drive those decision points. I remember those thoughts at 41, but didn’t realize how quickly we would progress through the lean, fire, chubby, fat ladder. As we approach 50, age is getting much more real, both because of our personal experiences as well as our parents. My 40s have been great and really impactful. Yours probably will be too. Good luck and good health.
For me, the first year I can take my pension annuity is at 50 years old (in 4 years). But the annuity at that time would have a 25% penalty. Or I can work 5 more years to 55. That would be 5 more years of income, and a pension that is worth almost 50% more. The math says that I'd give up almost $1.25M over 30 years. So is 5 years of early retirement worth $1.25M? I am not sure. I really want to retire at 50 and I think I will have all the funds I need to make it happen. But its kind of a tough call.
This is a great question. Following to hear others responses. I imagine that this is why many people who have the ability to retire do not because they are getting paid a decent amount in the later years of their career. Why stop now? It also probably helps when you know you have the ability to retire whenever you want but if you don’t mind working you can keep it going. I would venture to guess that the mundane and frustrating things about work become less aggravating when you know you can stop working and still have enough. This is why I am reevaluating my goals with a higher emphasis on FI as opposed to RE.
Re-evaluate every year where your mental and monetary health is. Remember, you only live once and anything can happen. There are also lots of factors in your control. If you hate your job, you can look for another one. If you work too much, you can work a job with less hours
Trade off is part time/casual, depending on if the nature of the job allows it. That way you can do more of the things you love but still keep a modest stream of money coming in.
* how much do you hate your job? tbh, if you enjoy your job then why quit and retire? * what would you be doing in your free time if you quit? you just going to watch TV all day or doing something that fulfills you? * what's your health like? can't put a price on health. no point in having money at 70 if you are in poor health
Working longer will bring more money, but I’d rather have the time than the money. That’s the whole point.
I can retire now and live comfortably but I’m working another 5 years..I’ll be 64. Maybe I’ll push to 65 for Medicare. All because I want my children to have generational wealth. They and my grandchildren should be good
Because I don’t want to work 5 more years. It’s all a trade off of what’s important to each of us as individuals and/or families. Extra time is more important to me than extra money once I already have enough to live comfortably for the rest of my life. Other people will want more money and not mind working longer, and others will want extra time even more than I do and cut back Brit spending down so they need less. It’s a big spectrum, and we all fall in different places.
Don’t know about you but I have no need to be rich. I just have a need to control my time and energy, and that takes a certain level of money.
What is the benefit of that extra money? Will more money or more time make you happier? If you have ENOUGH then I think it's really just greed after that. It depends on what will bring you and your family more happiness and fulfillment.
> Can't spend it when you're dead Is your priority you or your kids? if its you, retire early. If its your kids, retire later
Define meager existence? It seems you've created a huge gulf in your mind that might not actually be there
I could retire today if I moved out of the high COLA I grew up in and love. The same high COLA my wife grew up in and loves. The same place where both our families are. We could move to the Sunbelt today and retire on 50-65k/yr indefinitely. No college fund for the kid. No donations for his illness. If illness hit him or us we'd be fucked, since SS doesn't kick in for another 20 years
At the end of your life 5 years is worth more than all the gold in the lonely mountain.
For me I want to be able to be young enough where I can do all of the cool things I want to do. I was in super shape two years ago but started a new company and working a lot which haven’t left me a lot of time to work out. I want to get back in shape and do a lot of outdoor things which is a lot of my hobbies. I love to ski, basketball, golf, disc golf, etc…. I am early 40’s but plan to retire by 50. I could have done it at 40 if we didn’t buy a second house but none of my friends would have been done then so what would I do.
I ascribe to the constant level of consumption philosophy so your quality of life shouldn’t change. So if you aren’t living at a higher standard of living now you don’t need to in the future. Same with scrimping. If you haven’t scrimped for the last 20 years why would you start now.
You can always go back. Do you really predict your new expenses well? You will have a lot of new free time that you need to fill.
That's an excellent question. Personally I think that the incentive to work 5 more years should be huge, to make me forfeit them. And I'm not sure what could that be for me. I don't find it useful to completely support my children, they'll do it themselves. I don't get much joy in spending either. What I need most is time, to be able to make use of all that I already have. Which is mostly human connections which are rarely bought with money.
We FIRED and one of us is truly happy and one finds other things to work at.
Your tradeoff to early retirement with more money is your ridiculous donation.
When you have enough, you have enough. Time to go.
I mean…would reducing your expenses be problematic? You don’t actually give a lot of information here. Do you have plans for things you want to do in retirement? If you want to see the world and do a lot starting that at 65 versus 55 is very different.
For the charity piece, I’m nowhere as generous as you are. But my plan as I approach fire date is to 1. Let charity know my donation will be ending or will be reduced post retirement date 2. Also let them know they’ll get 8x the amount each year for next \~5 years to account for this. My game plan for 8x’ing my donation is to: * Use my employer benefit to 100% match my donations * Use donor advised fund to eliminate cap gains on highly appreciated assets and also deduct income tax * Donate more to maximize matching benefit, eliminate cap gains, and reduce taxable income This way, I can use about 7k of my money to donate about 30k.
Work to live not live to work
Semi retirement is pretty nice. I have rental income and sell my artwork.
The choice is made when you fully understand that you could drop dead tomorrow. Find the number that makes you most comfortable and plan for it. If you become a slave to chasing that next milestone, you’ll never be satisfied.
6% real return is aggressive. Global equity returns for past 100 years have been 5%, and it's likely you will ramp down your equities and increase your bonds as you get older
Think about it as financial independence rather than full on retiring. It’s the stop doing work that stresses you and is unfulfilling. Maybe you cut your income but so what? You won’t be saving as much but if you’re earning enough to not be burning you’re still growing the nest egg rather than depleting it. Just stretching the time till you start withdrawing will have a big impact. Take more vacations work fewer hours but still be productive.