Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Discuss all general (i.e. non-personal) investing questions and issues, investing news, and theory.
User avatar
willthrill81
Posts: 6110
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 3:17 pm
Location: USA

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by willthrill81 » Fri Oct 05, 2018 10:42 pm

Dude2 wrote:
Fri Oct 05, 2018 10:19 pm
banhbao wrote:
Fri Oct 05, 2018 10:31 am
I agree with pokebowl: for some reason there is contempt toward the people who strive for early retirement because it appears they are lazy or something. I don't understand why, if they are using sound investment practices and are prepared for the eventual ups and downs.
God bless them if they choose to retire early, but I think the contempt is for the idea that you can actually plan for it. This is the analogy of running a race, and FIRE is where you have somehow determined that you've ran far and fast enough that you can just stop running and walk/crawl to the finish line. However, nobody knows where the finish line is or what's going to happen for the next few miles. A better plan would be to run at your own pace for as long as you can.
So are you advocating that 75 year olds still capable of working in their careers do so?
“It's a dangerous business, Frodo, going out your door. You step onto the road, and if you don't keep your feet, there's no knowing where you might be swept off to.” J.R.R. Tolkien,The Lord of the Rings

Slacker
Posts: 627
Joined: Thu May 26, 2016 8:40 am

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by Slacker » Fri Oct 05, 2018 11:44 pm

AlphaLess wrote:
Fri Oct 05, 2018 10:32 pm
All the talk about FIRE is overblown.

Statistically and economically speaking, FIRE is not possible for the vast majority of the population.
There is a type of market efficiency argument against FIRE: if most people (heck, even if 10%) were able to FIRE, then who is going to work and produce stuff?

Modern day capitalism as well as changing laws will ensure that 99% of the population HAVE to work. That is just how it works.

For the 1% who can FIRE: who cares. It is like a blip, error, noise.

As for the popularity of FIRE blogs. Ah, that only makes one segment of population 'FI': the bloggers. That's the same thing with travel bloggers, with the bloggers on beauty, nutrition, dating, etc.
If 10% of people FIRE in the "mustachian" method of anti consumerism, you don't need as many people producing "stuff" because there won't be as big of a market for as many consumer trappings...

AlphaLess
Posts: 814
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 11:38 pm
Location: Kentucky
Contact:

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by AlphaLess » Sat Oct 06, 2018 12:48 am

Slacker wrote:
Fri Oct 05, 2018 11:44 pm
AlphaLess wrote:
Fri Oct 05, 2018 10:32 pm
All the talk about FIRE is overblown.

Statistically and economically speaking, FIRE is not possible for the vast majority of the population.
There is a type of market efficiency argument against FIRE: if most people (heck, even if 10%) were able to FIRE, then who is going to work and produce stuff?

Modern day capitalism as well as changing laws will ensure that 99% of the population HAVE to work. That is just how it works.

For the 1% who can FIRE: who cares. It is like a blip, error, noise.

As for the popularity of FIRE blogs. Ah, that only makes one segment of population 'FI': the bloggers. That's the same thing with travel bloggers, with the bloggers on beauty, nutrition, dating, etc.
If 10% of people FIRE in the "mustachian" method of anti consumerism, you don't need as many people producing "stuff" because there won't be as big of a market for as many consumer trappings...
Haha.

Where are the stock market gains and GDP growth going to come from, then?
"You can get more with a kind word and a gun than with just a kind word." George Washington

User avatar
JoMoney
Posts: 6120
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 5:31 am

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by JoMoney » Sat Oct 06, 2018 12:54 am

AlphaLess wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 12:48 am
Slacker wrote:
Fri Oct 05, 2018 11:44 pm
AlphaLess wrote:
Fri Oct 05, 2018 10:32 pm
All the talk about FIRE is overblown.

Statistically and economically speaking, FIRE is not possible for the vast majority of the population.
There is a type of market efficiency argument against FIRE: if most people (heck, even if 10%) were able to FIRE, then who is going to work and produce stuff?

Modern day capitalism as well as changing laws will ensure that 99% of the population HAVE to work. That is just how it works.

For the 1% who can FIRE: who cares. It is like a blip, error, noise.

As for the popularity of FIRE blogs. Ah, that only makes one segment of population 'FI': the bloggers. That's the same thing with travel bloggers, with the bloggers on beauty, nutrition, dating, etc.
If 10% of people FIRE in the "mustachian" method of anti consumerism, you don't need as many people producing "stuff" because there won't be as big of a market for as many consumer trappings...
Haha.

Where are the stock market gains and GDP growth going to come from, then?
From the Baby Boomers working until 80
"To achieve satisfactory investment results is easier than most people realize; to achieve superior results is harder than it looks." - Benjamin Graham

AlphaLess
Posts: 814
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 11:38 pm
Location: Kentucky
Contact:

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by AlphaLess » Sat Oct 06, 2018 12:56 am

JoMoney wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 12:54 am

From the Baby Boomers working until 80
But then you have JUST contradicted yourself, and proven my point:
- if baby boomers (and I mean by that the vast majority) HAVE to work until 80,
- then there is no real FIRE.
"You can get more with a kind word and a gun than with just a kind word." George Washington

Starfish
Posts: 370
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2018 6:33 pm

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by Starfish » Sat Oct 06, 2018 2:14 am

Dude2 wrote:
Thu Oct 04, 2018 11:34 pm
Sorry if this seems derisive against FIRE proponents, but I just don't see it as possible. I'm in tech and make a good living, hopefully something that continues. However, I briefly went back to school to bone-up on fresh tech, and I used ACA to do so. Even my crappy ACA insurance that did nothing for me but was there for "just in case" cost me 10x what I now pay working for the mother-ship. COBRA is always so exorbitantly priced out of reach as to be laughable. To me health care is always going to be the biggest sticking point, and so the argument about the possibility (bull or bear markets aside) ends at health care costs. I assume I'm working until Medicare age. Period.

You assume everybody wants to retire in US. But why would you do such a thing? I know, I know, mental comfort.
I was raised by my mother. My parents divorced when I was 2. When I was 14 my mother retired at 53. Not early, that was normal age, after 35 years of work. That number is my absolute maximum.
If I cannot do in America what my mother with a highschool kid did in a poorer country, then I failed somewhere.

User avatar
randomizer
Posts: 1531
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:46 pm

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by randomizer » Sat Oct 06, 2018 4:13 am

finite_difference wrote:
Wed Oct 03, 2018 9:25 pm
I don’t know when the next crash will be, but I know it will be painful. I’m sure that many of the FIRE folks will be fine, but maybe not those who cut it too close.
Seems that all too many of them do cut it close.
87.5:12.5, EM tilt — HODL the course!

finite_difference
Posts: 1044
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2015 7:00 pm

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by finite_difference » Sat Oct 06, 2018 9:14 pm

moneyman11 wrote:
Thu Oct 04, 2018 12:28 pm
FIRE is not growing .... what is growing is being a stay-at-home Dad while your wife works and provides employer healthcare benefits, while you blog about it and get income from that and call it all "Early Retirement".
True. When Dad does it, Dad calls it “early retirement”, but when Mom does it, Dad calls it “stay at home Mom”. Never mind Moms did everything Dad does, including managing the finances (except likely did an even better job by not becoming obsessed with budgeting and forecasting) and moreover didn’t feel compelled to post all the gory details online.

:mrgreen:
The most precious gift we can offer anyone is our attention. - Thich Nhat Hanh

finite_difference
Posts: 1044
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2015 7:00 pm

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by finite_difference » Sat Oct 06, 2018 9:25 pm

Starfish wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 2:14 am
Dude2 wrote:
Thu Oct 04, 2018 11:34 pm
Sorry if this seems derisive against FIRE proponents, but I just don't see it as possible. I'm in tech and make a good living, hopefully something that continues. However, I briefly went back to school to bone-up on fresh tech, and I used ACA to do so. Even my crappy ACA insurance that did nothing for me but was there for "just in case" cost me 10x what I now pay working for the mother-ship. COBRA is always so exorbitantly priced out of reach as to be laughable. To me health care is always going to be the biggest sticking point, and so the argument about the possibility (bull or bear markets aside) ends at health care costs. I assume I'm working until Medicare age. Period.

You assume everybody wants to retire in US. But why would you do such a thing? I know, I know, mental comfort.
I was raised by my mother. My parents divorced when I was 2. When I was 14 my mother retired at 53. Not early, that was normal age, after 35 years of work. That number is my absolute maximum.
If I cannot do in America what my mother with a highschool kid did in a poorer country, then I failed somewhere.
America is lagging many other countries in terms of pension benefits, retirement age, and maternity benefits, so don’t be too hard on yourself. In many countries, if you were lucky enough to have a decent job, then you were pretty much taken care of in retirement. The US was like that too before pensions started getting dropped.

That said, clearly we are near the top, and I think we’ll surpass all other countries eventually — a little friendly competition never hurt! — but we are not yet the promised land :beer
The most precious gift we can offer anyone is our attention. - Thich Nhat Hanh

MRMN
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2018 9:22 pm

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by MRMN » Sat Oct 06, 2018 9:26 pm

I find that most FIRE’s say they’ve retired early, yet maintain blogs or write books/articles....which seems to me like they are still working, passively, yes, but still time and effort to generate income while claiming they’re financially independent.

Starfish
Posts: 370
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2018 6:33 pm

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by Starfish » Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:19 pm

Being on track to retire before 50 (although I started paid work at 30 and my wife at 32) America is doing alright for me.
The fact that you can arrange your life for yourself (instead of having the government dictating how long you should be employed) worked well for me.
Being a citizen of both EU and USA makes the geographic arbitrage to have a lot of potential: get excellent education for free, get well paid work, get education for kids for free, retire cheap, use cheaper medical care (no such a thing as "universal healthcare" in EU AFAIK but I might be wrong, I did not research it).

User avatar
watchnerd
Posts: 1432
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:18 am
Location: Seattle, WA, USA

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by watchnerd » Sun Oct 07, 2018 1:18 am

Suze Orman gives her opinion on FIRE and why she hates it:

https://youtu.be/JbeLhKKg9RI



Image
Tax Sheltered: 35% US Stock | 35% ex-US Stock | 30% TTM || Taxable: 35% US Stock | 35% ex-US Stock | 15% TTM | 15% Munis

User avatar
willthrill81
Posts: 6110
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 3:17 pm
Location: USA

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by willthrill81 » Sun Oct 14, 2018 2:47 pm

watchnerd wrote:
Sun Oct 07, 2018 1:18 am
Suze Orman gives her opinion on FIRE and why she hates it:

https://youtu.be/JbeLhKKg9RI
There was an excellent rebuttal to Suze's fearmongering on the Choose FI podcast. They don't have a transcript, but it's worth a listen. Here are some of the high points.
JL Collins, a.k.a., the Godfather of FI, talks about two recent interviews on the “Afford Anything” podcast with Suze Orman (personal finance expert and former CNBC talk show host).

Although Suze opposes the overall idea of FIRE, she advocates for many similar personal finance concepts and principles.

Brad and Jonathan wonder whether anyone would ever be able to retire based on the FI numbers that Suze suggested.

JL suggests that fear of what might happen in the future informs Suze’s mindset more than necessary.

Continuing to work doesn’t mitigate uncertainty about the future.

The only truly non-renewable resource is wasting decades of your life.

Is the FI community more prepared than most for bad things that might happen in the future?

Jonathan and JL wonder if Suze’s wealth has been accumulated through sound investing, or from a variety of businesses and her work as a TV personality.

It’s easy to sell books and products based on fear.

The amount of money someone actually needs to retire is entirely dependent on the lifestyle that someone chooses to live.

Does the “FIRE” acronym add some concern and confusion about the FI community?

Being financially independent just means that you can do whatever you want.

Trying to pick individual stocks is a loser’s game.
https://www.choosefi.com/096r-the-money ... collinsnh/
“It's a dangerous business, Frodo, going out your door. You step onto the road, and if you don't keep your feet, there's no knowing where you might be swept off to.” J.R.R. Tolkien,The Lord of the Rings

User avatar
Rowan Oak
Posts: 277
Joined: Mon May 09, 2016 2:11 pm
Location: Yoknapatawpha

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by Rowan Oak » Sun Oct 14, 2018 7:17 pm

willthrill81 wrote:
Sun Oct 14, 2018 2:47 pm
watchnerd wrote:
Sun Oct 07, 2018 1:18 am
Suze Orman gives her opinion on FIRE and why she hates it:

https://youtu.be/JbeLhKKg9RI
There was an excellent rebuttal to Suze's fearmongering on the Choose FI podcast. They don't have a transcript, but it's worth a listen. Here are some of the high points.
JL Collins, a.k.a., the Godfather of FI, talks about two recent interviews on the “Afford Anything” podcast with Suze Orman (personal finance expert and former CNBC talk show host).

Although Suze opposes the overall idea of FIRE, she advocates for many similar personal finance concepts and principles.

Brad and Jonathan wonder whether anyone would ever be able to retire based on the FI numbers that Suze suggested.

JL suggests that fear of what might happen in the future informs Suze’s mindset more than necessary.

Continuing to work doesn’t mitigate uncertainty about the future.

The only truly non-renewable resource is wasting decades of your life.

Is the FI community more prepared than most for bad things that might happen in the future?

Jonathan and JL wonder if Suze’s wealth has been accumulated through sound investing, or from a variety of businesses and her work as a TV personality.

It’s easy to sell books and products based on fear.

The amount of money someone actually needs to retire is entirely dependent on the lifestyle that someone chooses to live.

Does the “FIRE” acronym add some concern and confusion about the FI community?

Being financially independent just means that you can do whatever you want.

Trying to pick individual stocks is a loser’s game.
https://www.choosefi.com/096r-the-money ... collinsnh/
Always good to hear Jim Collins' take.

Also, Suze has now changed her opinion a little: https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_ ... 72409&_rdr
“If you can get good at destroying your own wrong ideas, that is a great gift.” – Charlie Munger

User avatar
willthrill81
Posts: 6110
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 3:17 pm
Location: USA

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by willthrill81 » Sun Oct 14, 2018 7:42 pm

Rowan Oak wrote:
Sun Oct 14, 2018 7:17 pm
willthrill81 wrote:
Sun Oct 14, 2018 2:47 pm
watchnerd wrote:
Sun Oct 07, 2018 1:18 am
Suze Orman gives her opinion on FIRE and why she hates it:

https://youtu.be/JbeLhKKg9RI
There was an excellent rebuttal to Suze's fearmongering on the Choose FI podcast. They don't have a transcript, but it's worth a listen. Here are some of the high points.
JL Collins, a.k.a., the Godfather of FI, talks about two recent interviews on the “Afford Anything” podcast with Suze Orman (personal finance expert and former CNBC talk show host).

Although Suze opposes the overall idea of FIRE, she advocates for many similar personal finance concepts and principles.

Brad and Jonathan wonder whether anyone would ever be able to retire based on the FI numbers that Suze suggested.

JL suggests that fear of what might happen in the future informs Suze’s mindset more than necessary.

Continuing to work doesn’t mitigate uncertainty about the future.

The only truly non-renewable resource is wasting decades of your life.

Is the FI community more prepared than most for bad things that might happen in the future?

Jonathan and JL wonder if Suze’s wealth has been accumulated through sound investing, or from a variety of businesses and her work as a TV personality.

It’s easy to sell books and products based on fear.

The amount of money someone actually needs to retire is entirely dependent on the lifestyle that someone chooses to live.

Does the “FIRE” acronym add some concern and confusion about the FI community?

Being financially independent just means that you can do whatever you want.

Trying to pick individual stocks is a loser’s game.
https://www.choosefi.com/096r-the-money ... collinsnh/
Always good to hear Jim Collins' take.

Also, Suze has now changed her opinion a little: https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_ ... 72409&_rdr
Thanks for that link. It's interesting indeed to see how quickly Suze changed her tune. She wasn't listening to what Paula was saying at all on the Afford Anything episode, but all of the negative feedback may have convinced her to take a second look at FIRE.

I still think that her insistence that the math behind FIRE "makes absolutely no sense" is itself nonsensical. Apparently she values the money derived from employment in a qualitatively different way than the money derived from a portfolio. Perhaps she needs to learn that money is fungible. And she seems to not fully understand the concept of insurance either.
Last edited by willthrill81 on Sun Oct 14, 2018 8:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
“It's a dangerous business, Frodo, going out your door. You step onto the road, and if you don't keep your feet, there's no knowing where you might be swept off to.” J.R.R. Tolkien,The Lord of the Rings

User avatar
CyclingDuo
Posts: 1781
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2017 9:07 am

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by CyclingDuo » Sun Oct 14, 2018 8:16 pm

pokebowl wrote:
Thu Oct 04, 2018 9:39 pm
Reading the comments here puts it into perspective why many of us currently pursuing FIRE tend to keep quiet about it in general. Even on here the concept is met with contempt, while one could argue FIRE is the result of using the very core Boglehead concepts, in other words, have a large save rate and utilize low cost index funds.

An upcoming bear market has nothing to do with FIRE, most of us have planned for it the same as anyone else. What makes FIRE more attractive now in my opinion is access to rediculous sector based salaries and the awareness those jobs are not meant to be permanent things. For those attempting FIRE we welcome a bear market. For those who already hit their number, hopefully their SWR shelters them from the storm. What doesn't get mentioned is even if their SWR fails or needs additional padding, retiring young allows them to re-enter the job market as needed. It gives you options.

/My two cents
Curious which prior bear markets you have lived through as an investor with a full portfolio (regardless of the AA)?
"Everywhere is within walking distance if you have the time." ~ Steven Wright

tarmangani
Posts: 106
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2017 10:14 am

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by tarmangani » Sun Oct 14, 2018 8:42 pm

Great podcast link, thanks. Really enjoyed that.

WanderingDoc
Posts: 1148
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 8:21 pm

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by WanderingDoc » Mon Oct 15, 2018 12:18 am

CyclingDuo wrote:
Sun Oct 14, 2018 8:16 pm
pokebowl wrote:
Thu Oct 04, 2018 9:39 pm
Reading the comments here puts it into perspective why many of us currently pursuing FIRE tend to keep quiet about it in general. Even on here the concept is met with contempt, while one could argue FIRE is the result of using the very core Boglehead concepts, in other words, have a large save rate and utilize low cost index funds.

An upcoming bear market has nothing to do with FIRE, most of us have planned for it the same as anyone else. What makes FIRE more attractive now in my opinion is access to rediculous sector based salaries and the awareness those jobs are not meant to be permanent things. For those attempting FIRE we welcome a bear market. For those who already hit their number, hopefully their SWR shelters them from the storm. What doesn't get mentioned is even if their SWR fails or needs additional padding, retiring young allows them to re-enter the job market as needed. It gives you options.

/My two cents
Curious which prior bear markets you have lived through as an investor with a full portfolio (regardless of the AA)?
It's a new popular trend. Much like CrossFit in the 2000s and veganism in the 2010s. I am waiting for the 2020s trend to hop on for 6 months, then realize it's overhyped :P
Don't wait to buy real estate. Buy real estate, and wait. | Rent where you live, buy where others pay your mortgage for you.

visualguy
Posts: 837
Joined: Thu Jan 30, 2014 1:32 am

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by visualguy » Mon Oct 15, 2018 1:38 am

If FIRE means being able to switch to a lower paying occupation, but not necessarily being able to retire, then it's a misnomer. It's not financial independence, and it's not early retirement. I can't blame Suze Orman for being confused about it - I think many are (including myself).

michaeljc70
Posts: 3746
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2015 3:53 pm

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by michaeljc70 » Mon Oct 15, 2018 8:33 am

When Orman said you need at least $5 million to retire early, I dismissed her whole argument. $5 million - regardless of what you spend.

User avatar
Rowan Oak
Posts: 277
Joined: Mon May 09, 2016 2:11 pm
Location: Yoknapatawpha

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by Rowan Oak » Mon Oct 15, 2018 8:58 am

willthrill81 wrote:
Sun Oct 14, 2018 7:42 pm
Rowan Oak wrote:
Sun Oct 14, 2018 7:17 pm
willthrill81 wrote:
Sun Oct 14, 2018 2:47 pm
watchnerd wrote:
Sun Oct 07, 2018 1:18 am
Suze Orman gives her opinion on FIRE and why she hates it:

https://youtu.be/JbeLhKKg9RI
There was an excellent rebuttal to Suze's fearmongering on the Choose FI podcast. They don't have a transcript, but it's worth a listen. Here are some of the high points.
JL Collins, a.k.a., the Godfather of FI, talks about two recent interviews on the “Afford Anything” podcast with Suze Orman (personal finance expert and former CNBC talk show host).

Although Suze opposes the overall idea of FIRE, she advocates for many similar personal finance concepts and principles.

Brad and Jonathan wonder whether anyone would ever be able to retire based on the FI numbers that Suze suggested.

JL suggests that fear of what might happen in the future informs Suze’s mindset more than necessary.

Continuing to work doesn’t mitigate uncertainty about the future.

The only truly non-renewable resource is wasting decades of your life.

Is the FI community more prepared than most for bad things that might happen in the future?

Jonathan and JL wonder if Suze’s wealth has been accumulated through sound investing, or from a variety of businesses and her work as a TV personality.

It’s easy to sell books and products based on fear.

The amount of money someone actually needs to retire is entirely dependent on the lifestyle that someone chooses to live.

Does the “FIRE” acronym add some concern and confusion about the FI community?

Being financially independent just means that you can do whatever you want.

Trying to pick individual stocks is a loser’s game.
https://www.choosefi.com/096r-the-money ... collinsnh/
Always good to hear Jim Collins' take.

Also, Suze has now changed her opinion a little: https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_ ... 72409&_rdr
Thanks for that link. It's interesting indeed to see how quickly Suze changed her tune. She wasn't listening to what Paula was saying at all on the Afford Anything episode, but all of the negative feedback may have convinced her to take a second look at FIRE.

I still think that her insistence that the math behind FIRE "makes absolutely no sense" is itself nonsensical. Apparently she values the money derived from employment in a qualitatively different way than the money derived from a portfolio. Perhaps she needs to learn that money is fungible. And she seems to not fully understand the concept of insurance either.
I agree.

Her argument failed from the start, because she obviously thinks anyone with aspirations to become financially independent wants to live in a high cost of living area and will never work another day in their lives.
“If you can get good at destroying your own wrong ideas, that is a great gift.” – Charlie Munger

michaeljc70
Posts: 3746
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2015 3:53 pm

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by michaeljc70 » Mon Oct 15, 2018 9:07 am

visualguy wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 1:38 am
If FIRE means being able to switch to a lower paying occupation, but not necessarily being able to retire, then it's a misnomer. It's not financial independence, and it's not early retirement. I can't blame Suze Orman for being confused about it - I think many are (including myself).
Part of the issue is some of the well known FIRE people have blogs, do consulting work, etc. Then, even outside of FIRE, you have a general dispute over the term "retire". To me, it means not working. To some, and this is somewhat based on the past where people worked at one place most of their life, you can retire from your career/long term job and do something else like work part-time, consulting or whatever.

User avatar
willthrill81
Posts: 6110
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 3:17 pm
Location: USA

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by willthrill81 » Mon Oct 15, 2018 9:27 am

michaeljc70 wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 9:07 am
visualguy wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 1:38 am
If FIRE means being able to switch to a lower paying occupation, but not necessarily being able to retire, then it's a misnomer. It's not financial independence, and it's not early retirement. I can't blame Suze Orman for being confused about it - I think many are (including myself).
Part of the issue is some of the well known FIRE people have blogs, do consulting work, etc. Then, even outside of FIRE, you have a general dispute over the term "retire". To me, it means not working. To some, and this is somewhat based on the past where people worked at one place most of their life, you can retire from your career/long term job and do something else like work part-time, consulting or whatever.
I'd say that the disagreement is over the term itself, financially independent - retired early. Most of the focus is justly on the financial independence side of that, with far less emphasis on the retire early. As JL Collins pointed out on the above podcast, most people who reach FI don't stop doing something that produces some kind of income. They may "retire" for a few years, but most return to doing something productive that happens to also give them an income. But the important aspect is that they don't need the income; it's just a byproduct, like the person who has a hobby that they love that makes a little money on the side. The retirement police are quick to point out that many FI people 'still work' and call them and the whole FIRE movement a fraud, but this is unwarranted.

Being financially independent means that you do not have to trade your time for money in order to pay for your expenses. Whether that means that you actually stop doing anything that produces money is a separate issue. You can be FI without being RE.
“It's a dangerous business, Frodo, going out your door. You step onto the road, and if you don't keep your feet, there's no knowing where you might be swept off to.” J.R.R. Tolkien,The Lord of the Rings

User avatar
Scott S
Posts: 1423
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 3:28 am
Location: SE CR IA US NA PE

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by Scott S » Mon Oct 15, 2018 9:48 am

willthrill81 wrote:
Sun Oct 14, 2018 7:42 pm
Thanks for that link. It's interesting indeed to see how quickly Suze changed her tune. She wasn't listening to what Paula was saying at all on the Afford Anything episode, but all of the negative feedback may have convinced her to take a second look at FIRE.

I still think that her insistence that the math behind FIRE "makes absolutely no sense" is itself nonsensical. Apparently she values the money derived from employment in a qualitatively different way than the money derived from a portfolio. Perhaps she needs to learn that money is fungible. And she seems to not fully understand the concept of insurance either.
Judging by the Facebook post, she still doesn't get it. In order to get behind it, she had to mentally redefine FIRE as "oh, you just get a different job." Uh, no. ;)
My Plan: (Age-10)% in bonds until I reach age 60, 50/50 thereafter. Equity split: 50/50 US/Int'l, Bond split: 50/50 TBM/TIPS.

michaeljc70
Posts: 3746
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2015 3:53 pm

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by michaeljc70 » Mon Oct 15, 2018 9:51 am

willthrill81 wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 9:27 am
michaeljc70 wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 9:07 am
visualguy wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 1:38 am
If FIRE means being able to switch to a lower paying occupation, but not necessarily being able to retire, then it's a misnomer. It's not financial independence, and it's not early retirement. I can't blame Suze Orman for being confused about it - I think many are (including myself).
Part of the issue is some of the well known FIRE people have blogs, do consulting work, etc. Then, even outside of FIRE, you have a general dispute over the term "retire". To me, it means not working. To some, and this is somewhat based on the past where people worked at one place most of their life, you can retire from your career/long term job and do something else like work part-time, consulting or whatever.
I'd say that the disagreement is over the term itself, financially independent - retired early. Most of the focus is justly on the financial independence side of that, with far less emphasis on the retire early. As JL Collins pointed out on the above podcast, most people who reach FI don't stop doing something that produces some kind of income. They may "retire" for a few years, but most return to doing something productive that happens to also give them an income. But the important aspect is that they don't need the income; it's just a byproduct, like the person who has a hobby that they love that makes a little money on the side. The retirement police are quick to point out that many FI people 'still work' and call them and the whole FIRE movement a fraud, but this is unwarranted.

Being financially independent means that you do not have to trade your time for money in order to pay for your expenses. Whether that means that you actually stop doing anything that produces money is a separate issue. You can be FI without being RE.
Yes. I think of it as financial independence, ability to retire early.

WanderingDoc
Posts: 1148
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 8:21 pm

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by WanderingDoc » Mon Oct 15, 2018 10:26 am

michaeljc70 wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 8:33 am
When Orman said you need at least $5 million to retire early, I dismissed her whole argument. $5 million - regardless of what you spend.
'A life well lived' is very different to 'getting by'. $3M today is what $1M was to my parents.
Don't wait to buy real estate. Buy real estate, and wait. | Rent where you live, buy where others pay your mortgage for you.

Jags4186
Posts: 2541
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2014 7:12 pm

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by Jags4186 » Mon Oct 15, 2018 10:28 am

Absolutely—it is a combination of bull market, tech boom, and real estate boom bust cycle.

Although most FIRE bloggers are in that 30-40 year old range for obvious reasons—(no one is “FIREing” at 63 years old)—you should keep in mind that a 25-30 year old who didn’t lose their job in 2008 made out like a bandit. You got to buy real estate at distressed prices, especially in markets that have exploded (Boston for example) and you’ve compounded at like 15% YoY for 10 years.

User avatar
willthrill81
Posts: 6110
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 3:17 pm
Location: USA

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by willthrill81 » Mon Oct 15, 2018 10:40 am

WanderingDoc wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 10:26 am
michaeljc70 wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 8:33 am
When Orman said you need at least $5 million to retire early, I dismissed her whole argument. $5 million - regardless of what you spend.
'A life well lived' is very different to 'getting by'. $3M today is what $1M was to my parents.
You can live a well lived life with $1 million, especially if you have no debt.
“It's a dangerous business, Frodo, going out your door. You step onto the road, and if you don't keep your feet, there's no knowing where you might be swept off to.” J.R.R. Tolkien,The Lord of the Rings

Minderbinder
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2018 3:41 pm

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by Minderbinder » Mon Oct 15, 2018 10:47 am

I think there is a huge component of the bull market to this.

Came across this post explaining the causes of why FIRE is so popular and touches on the bull market as a cause. Thought it pretty accurate.

https://fattailedandhappy.com/the-finan ... ing-early/

WanderingDoc
Posts: 1148
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 8:21 pm

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by WanderingDoc » Mon Oct 15, 2018 10:55 am

willthrill81 wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 10:40 am
WanderingDoc wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 10:26 am
michaeljc70 wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 8:33 am
When Orman said you need at least $5 million to retire early, I dismissed her whole argument. $5 million - regardless of what you spend.
'A life well lived' is very different to 'getting by'. $3M today is what $1M was to my parents.
You can live a well lived (selfish) life with $1 million, especially if you have no debt.
Fixed for you. $1M is short changing yourself. Its having low expectations for yourself because you think you can't do better/afraid to do better. $100,000 in net cash flow on $1M in real estate equity is a nice start though :D
Don't wait to buy real estate. Buy real estate, and wait. | Rent where you live, buy where others pay your mortgage for you.

lukestuckenhymer
Posts: 71
Joined: Wed May 30, 2018 11:53 am

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by lukestuckenhymer » Mon Oct 15, 2018 12:20 pm

watchnerd wrote:
Sun Oct 07, 2018 1:18 am
Suze Orman gives her opinion on FIRE and why she hates it:

https://youtu.be/JbeLhKKg9RI
I've been skeptical of Suze Orman in the past, but this is a great interview. I applaud her for calling out the FIRE movement, but I wish she would have gone farther in calling out the silliness of MMM inaccurately claiming he's retired when he runs a profitable blog for a living. The "RE" portion is an illusion.

stoptothink
Posts: 4459
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2010 9:53 am

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by stoptothink » Mon Oct 15, 2018 12:28 pm

WanderingDoc wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 10:55 am
willthrill81 wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 10:40 am
WanderingDoc wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 10:26 am
michaeljc70 wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 8:33 am
When Orman said you need at least $5 million to retire early, I dismissed her whole argument. $5 million - regardless of what you spend.
'A life well lived' is very different to 'getting by'. $3M today is what $1M was to my parents.
You can live a well lived (selfish) life with $1 million, especially if you have no debt.
Fixed for you. $1M is short changing yourself. Its having low expectations for yourself because you think you can't do better/afraid to do better. $100,000 in net cash flow on $1M in real estate equity is a nice start though :D
Why do you keep projected your own beliefs on others? What was the point of injecting the word "selfish" into willthrill81's post?

User avatar
Rowan Oak
Posts: 277
Joined: Mon May 09, 2016 2:11 pm
Location: Yoknapatawpha

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by Rowan Oak » Mon Oct 15, 2018 1:44 pm

SUZE ORMAN – A BLANKET ON FIRE

New post from Vicki Robin October 2018
1) Early retirees are not withdrawing from life. They’re embracing a purposeful life MORE fully than ever.

2) Early retirees are not wild risk-takers. They are calculated risk-takers. They see the old bargain of a 9-to-5 job until they’re 70 as riskier than an early-retirement.

3) The retirement plans of most early retirees aren’t naive, fragile castles built on sand. At least the ones I know of are anti-fragile, multilayered, flexible plans built on a combination of investment savings, retirement accounts, side businesses, and backup plans.
“If you can get good at destroying your own wrong ideas, that is a great gift.” – Charlie Munger

Day9
Posts: 626
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 6:22 pm

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by Day9 » Mon Oct 15, 2018 2:33 pm

Unfortunately I believe FIRE is only for people who can afford an "above-modest" lifestyle, and are willing to downgrade to merely "modest" in case investments do poorly in critical years. It does not work for people who have barely enough to live a modest lifestyle because you cannot downgrade to below-modest, that would be unacceptable.

This is just due to the nature of the risks of a stock & bond portfolio.

I learned this from reading Mr Swedroe's books. He suggests preparing for retirement by having a "Plan B" in case markets tank. Things like selling a second home, reducing international vacations to once every 3 years instead of every year, and going back to work. He emphasizes you only include things you would actually do.

I infer from this that the kind of FIRE person who wants to live off $30k/year on a $750k portfolio at age 40, this does not work. Because while a rich person can lower their standards to merely affluent, a modest person cannot lower his standards to below-modest. That would be unacceptable.
I'm just a fan of the person I got my user name from

User avatar
willthrill81
Posts: 6110
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 3:17 pm
Location: USA

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by willthrill81 » Mon Oct 15, 2018 2:45 pm

stoptothink wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 12:28 pm
WanderingDoc wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 10:55 am
willthrill81 wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 10:40 am
WanderingDoc wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 10:26 am
michaeljc70 wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 8:33 am
When Orman said you need at least $5 million to retire early, I dismissed her whole argument. $5 million - regardless of what you spend.
'A life well lived' is very different to 'getting by'. $3M today is what $1M was to my parents.
You can live a well lived (selfish) life with $1 million, especially if you have no debt.
Fixed for you. $1M is short changing yourself. Its having low expectations for yourself because you think you can't do better/afraid to do better. $100,000 in net cash flow on $1M in real estate equity is a nice start though :D
Why do you keep projected your own beliefs on others? What was the point of injecting the word "selfish" into willthrill81's post?
It may stem from a belief that the only way to help others, something that I firmly espouse we should when possible, is by giving them money. This is a robustly false notion.

It's also a very sad belief. I suppose he believes that Justin at www.rootofgood.com and his family of five have led miserable lives since he retired about five years ago with 'only' $1.3 million and a home owned outright. All the trips to Europe, the cruises, the afternoons spent taking his children to the park, volunteering at the local school, entertaining friends at home, etc., doesn't really mean anything worthwhile.

This belief is all too common among BHs. When I mention that Justin's family only spends $30-$40k, many quickly assume (because they refuse to see how they really live) that that's almost child abuse. :oops:
“It's a dangerous business, Frodo, going out your door. You step onto the road, and if you don't keep your feet, there's no knowing where you might be swept off to.” J.R.R. Tolkien,The Lord of the Rings

tarmangani
Posts: 106
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2017 10:14 am

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by tarmangani » Mon Oct 15, 2018 2:57 pm

willthrill81 wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 2:45 pm
stoptothink wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 12:28 pm
WanderingDoc wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 10:55 am
willthrill81 wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 10:40 am
WanderingDoc wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 10:26 am


'A life well lived' is very different to 'getting by'. $3M today is what $1M was to my parents.
You can live a well lived (selfish) life with $1 million, especially if you have no debt.
Fixed for you. $1M is short changing yourself. Its having low expectations for yourself because you think you can't do better/afraid to do better. $100,000 in net cash flow on $1M in real estate equity is a nice start though :D
Why do you keep projected your own beliefs on others? What was the point of injecting the word "selfish" into willthrill81's post?
It may stem from a belief that the only way to help others, something that I firmly espouse we should when possible, is by giving them money. This is a robustly false notion.

It's also a very sad belief. I suppose he believes that Justin at www.rootofgood.com and his family of five have led miserable lives since he retired about five years ago with 'only' $1.3 million and a home owned outright. All the trips to Europe, the cruises, the afternoons spent taking his children to the park, volunteering at the local school, entertaining friends at home, etc., doesn't really mean anything worthwhile.

This belief is all too common among BHs. When I mention that Justin's family only spends $30-$40k, many quickly assume (because they refuse to see how they really live) that that's almost child abuse. :oops:
It's shockingly out of touch as well. Many folks have nowhere near $1 million in assets and are absolutely not leading "selfish" or unfulfilling lives. I suppose in WanderingDoc's mind these poor indigent sods on $800k portfolios huddle indoors, terrified to leave home in case they drift into a restaurant and order some takeout.

User avatar
fortfun
Posts: 1077
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 7:31 pm

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by fortfun » Mon Oct 15, 2018 3:05 pm

Mike Scott wrote:
Thu Oct 04, 2018 10:52 am
Things change. Joe Dominguez and Vicki Robin of the original "Your Money or Your Life" advocated buying high interest government bonds. There is a new rewrite but I have not read it to know how those recommendations have changed.
Vanguard total index stocks (mostly).

Jags4186
Posts: 2541
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2014 7:12 pm

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by Jags4186 » Mon Oct 15, 2018 3:18 pm

willthrill81 wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 2:45 pm
stoptothink wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 12:28 pm
WanderingDoc wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 10:55 am
willthrill81 wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 10:40 am
WanderingDoc wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 10:26 am


'A life well lived' is very different to 'getting by'. $3M today is what $1M was to my parents.
You can live a well lived (selfish) life with $1 million, especially if you have no debt.
Fixed for you. $1M is short changing yourself. Its having low expectations for yourself because you think you can't do better/afraid to do better. $100,000 in net cash flow on $1M in real estate equity is a nice start though :D
Why do you keep projected your own beliefs on others? What was the point of injecting the word "selfish" into willthrill81's post?
It may stem from a belief that the only way to help others, something that I firmly espouse we should when possible, is by giving them money. This is a robustly false notion.

It's also a very sad belief. I suppose he believes that Justin at www.rootofgood.com and his family of five have led miserable lives since he retired about five years ago with 'only' $1.3 million and a home owned outright. All the trips to Europe, the cruises, the afternoons spent taking his children to the park, volunteering at the local school, entertaining friends at home, etc., doesn't really mean anything worthwhile.

This belief is all too common among BHs. When I mention that Justin's family only spends $30-$40k, many quickly assume (because they refuse to see how they really live) that that's almost child abuse. :oops:
Justin at RootofGood also has approximately $4000/mo of income from his blog and consulting business. Certainly helps. I’ve always held that it’s much easier to live frugally when you have tons of cushion. I’m not bashing him by any means, I’m just saying that having income that covers your expenses while also having a $1.3 million portfolio that continues to grow and isn’t used is much different than having $1,000,000 in investments and retiring on a $40,000 withdrawal from that money.

We are also living in an age where two people with assets can easily earn $10,000/yr from credit card, bank account, and brokerage bonuses. Justin (and I, and many others) do this. There’s no guarrantee this will continue.

WanderingDoc
Posts: 1148
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 8:21 pm

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by WanderingDoc » Mon Oct 15, 2018 3:39 pm

willthrill81 wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 2:45 pm
stoptothink wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 12:28 pm
WanderingDoc wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 10:55 am
willthrill81 wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 10:40 am
WanderingDoc wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 10:26 am


'A life well lived' is very different to 'getting by'. $3M today is what $1M was to my parents.
You can live a well lived (selfish) life with $1 million, especially if you have no debt.
Fixed for you. $1M is short changing yourself. Its having low expectations for yourself because you think you can't do better/afraid to do better. $100,000 in net cash flow on $1M in real estate equity is a nice start though :D
Why do you keep projected your own beliefs on others? What was the point of injecting the word "selfish" into willthrill81's post?
It may stem from a belief that the only way to help others, something that I firmly espouse we should when possible, is by giving them money. This is a robustly false notion.

It's also a very sad belief. I suppose he believes that Justin at www.rootofgood.com and his family of five have led miserable lives since he retired about five years ago with 'only' $1.3 million and a home owned outright. All the trips to Europe, the cruises, the afternoons spent taking his children to the park, volunteering at the local school, entertaining friends at home, etc., doesn't really mean anything worthwhile.

This belief is all too common among BHs. When I mention that Justin's family only spends $30-$40k, many quickly assume (because they refuse to see how they really live) that that's almost child abuse. :oops:
Your statements are condescending and elitist. Probably stems from your personal belief that the FIRE crowd is someone more "aware" and enlightened than us mere mortals who want to contribute more to this world than earning $1M then stopping.

I have dreamt of FIRE myself, believe me. When I hit my target number are age 31, I realized I was being selfish if I quit work and just stopped contributing. It took 14.5 years of training for me to develop basic proficiency at my craft, but It would do thousands of patients a disservice if I quit today.. and instead start shopping at Costco, churning credit cards, and writing a FI/RE blog.

Spending the rest of your life travel hacking, using discounts, saving on gas, etc. in order to make $1M last in perpetuity is living below ones means and true potential. I believe each person has more to give.
Don't wait to buy real estate. Buy real estate, and wait. | Rent where you live, buy where others pay your mortgage for you.

Chadnudj
Posts: 729
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 11:22 am

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by Chadnudj » Mon Oct 15, 2018 3:48 pm

Whakamole wrote:
Thu Oct 04, 2018 4:26 pm

I think this explains the rather dismal outlook of the 2000 "early retiree" cohort: https://earlyretirementnow.com/2017/01/ ... ase-study/
I find that post interesting insofar as the data seems to go AGAINST their very own conclusions.

For example, they find:
Kitces used a 60/40 Stock/Bond mix and now it looks like the year 2000 cohort is back to maybe $930,000. Doesn’t look so bad, right? That proves the 4% succeeded during that time! Not so fast: read the fine print! This is the nominal value. $930,000 in nominal terms means that the real value is down to somewhere in the low $600,000s, consistent with our calculations.....

Update 2/27/2018
I ran the simulations all the way to the end of 2017. Now the nominal value is almost back to $1,000,000! But the real value is still depressed at less than $700,000 and below the peak in early 2015. Despite the impressive equity performance in 2016 and 2017!
But isn't the bigger point that after 17 years of retirement (including two of the worst downturns in history in the Dotcom crash and the Great Recession)....you still have nearly 70% of your money in real terms? Put another way, you made it over halfway through the "Trinity Study" time period, but still have well over half of your money. So, right now if you have $700k in real terms and continued taking out $40k in real terms, assuming your growth only matched inflation, you'd have enough to last....another 17.5 years. Which means your withdrawal strategy would work not just for the 30 years of the Trinity Study, but actually for nearly 35 years.

I get that the point of the article is that 4% SWR doesn't work for periods longer than 30 years (it wasn't designed to), and of course anyone would be smart to use a variable withdrawal rate and/or build in safety margins rather than blindly following 4%.....but I don't think that article is as convincing as it thinks it is that the 4% rule is no longer sound.

User avatar
Rowan Oak
Posts: 277
Joined: Mon May 09, 2016 2:11 pm
Location: Yoknapatawpha

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by Rowan Oak » Mon Oct 15, 2018 3:55 pm

WanderingDoc wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 3:39 pm
...us mere mortals who want to contribute more to this world than earning $1M then stopping.
From what I've seen many don't "stop". In fact they're probably contributing "more to this world" after becoming financially independent.
“If you can get good at destroying your own wrong ideas, that is a great gift.” – Charlie Munger

visualguy
Posts: 837
Joined: Thu Jan 30, 2014 1:32 am

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by visualguy » Mon Oct 15, 2018 4:08 pm

Rowan Oak wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 3:55 pm
WanderingDoc wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 3:39 pm
...us mere mortals who want to contribute more to this world than earning $1M then stopping.
From what I've seen many don't "stop". In fact they're probably contributing "more to this world" after becoming financially independent.
Yeah, but if they're blogging or consulting or whatever for money, they shouldn't be calling themselves retired. Also, if they're relying on this earned income from work to maintain their lifestyle, even the "financially independent" part is questionable.

bhsince87
Posts: 1856
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2013 1:08 pm

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by bhsince87 » Mon Oct 15, 2018 4:13 pm

Chadnudj wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 3:48 pm
Whakamole wrote:
Thu Oct 04, 2018 4:26 pm

I think this explains the rather dismal outlook of the 2000 "early retiree" cohort: https://earlyretirementnow.com/2017/01/ ... ase-study/


I find that post interesting insofar as the data seems to go AGAINST their very own conclusions.

For example, they find:
Kitces used a 60/40 Stock/Bond mix and now it looks like the year 2000 cohort is back to maybe $930,000. Doesn’t look so bad, right? That proves the 4% succeeded during that time! Not so fast: read the fine print! This is the nominal value. $930,000 in nominal terms means that the real value is down to somewhere in the low $600,000s, consistent with our calculations.....

Update 2/27/2018
I ran the simulations all the way to the end of 2017. Now the nominal value is almost back to $1,000,000! But the real value is still depressed at less than $700,000 and below the peak in early 2015. Despite the impressive equity performance in 2016 and 2017!
But isn't the bigger point that after 17 years of retirement (including two of the worst downturns in history in the Dotcom crash and the Great Recession)....you still have nearly 70% of your money in real terms? Put another way, you made it over halfway through the "Trinity Study" time period, but still have well over half of your money. So, right now if you have $700k in real terms and continued taking out $40k in real terms, assuming your growth only matched inflation, you'd have enough to last....another 17.5 years. Which means your withdrawal strategy would work not just for the 30 years of the Trinity Study, but actually for nearly 35 years.

I get that the point of the article is that 4% SWR doesn't work for periods longer than 30 years (it wasn't designed to), and of course anyone would be smart to use a variable withdrawal rate and/or build in safety margins rather than blindly following 4%.....but I don't think that article is as convincing as it thinks it is that the 4% rule is no longer sound.
I agree with you. It seems some folks just can't accept the concept of spending down principal in retirement.

It's like, "Gee, look at these poor folks. Their $1,000,000 is down to $700,000!"

But spending 17 years of income already and being down only $300,000 seems like a pretty good deal to me.
Retirement: When you reach a point where you have enough. Or when you've had enough.

bhsince87
Posts: 1856
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2013 1:08 pm

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by bhsince87 » Mon Oct 15, 2018 4:15 pm

visualguy wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 4:08 pm
Rowan Oak wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 3:55 pm
WanderingDoc wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 3:39 pm
...us mere mortals who want to contribute more to this world than earning $1M then stopping.
From what I've seen many don't "stop". In fact they're probably contributing "more to this world" after becoming financially independent.
Yeah, but if they're blogging or consulting or whatever for money, they shouldn't be calling themselves retired. Also, if they're relying on this earned income from work to maintain their lifestyle, even the "financially independent" part is questionable.
So in your opinion, someone like Peyton Manning shouldn't tell people he's retired?
Retirement: When you reach a point where you have enough. Or when you've had enough.

User avatar
Rowan Oak
Posts: 277
Joined: Mon May 09, 2016 2:11 pm
Location: Yoknapatawpha

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by Rowan Oak » Mon Oct 15, 2018 4:21 pm

visualguy wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 4:08 pm
Rowan Oak wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 3:55 pm
WanderingDoc wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 3:39 pm
...us mere mortals who want to contribute more to this world than earning $1M then stopping.
From what I've seen many don't "stop". In fact they're probably contributing "more to this world" after becoming financially independent.
Yeah, but if they're blogging or consulting or whatever for money, they shouldn't be calling themselves retired. Also, if they're relying on this earned income from work to maintain their lifestyle, even the "financially independent" part is questionable.
Many don't consider themselves "retired". That really is the overall misconception. For many they would probably prefer it be called the "FI (Financial Independence)" movement and be rid of the RE (retire early) part of the FIRE acronym all together.
Last edited by Rowan Oak on Mon Oct 15, 2018 4:26 pm, edited 2 times in total.
“If you can get good at destroying your own wrong ideas, that is a great gift.” – Charlie Munger

WanderingDoc
Posts: 1148
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 8:21 pm

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by WanderingDoc » Mon Oct 15, 2018 4:22 pm

bhsince87 wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 4:15 pm
visualguy wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 4:08 pm
Rowan Oak wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 3:55 pm
WanderingDoc wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 3:39 pm
...us mere mortals who want to contribute more to this world than earning $1M then stopping.
From what I've seen many don't "stop". In fact they're probably contributing "more to this world" after becoming financially independent.
Yeah, but if they're blogging or consulting or whatever for money, they shouldn't be calling themselves retired. Also, if they're relying on this earned income from work to maintain their lifestyle, even the "financially independent" part is questionable.
So in your opinion, someone like Peyton Manning shouldn't tell people he's retired?
You've never heard of a basketball or football player having to work after their career because of an upper class lifestyle while they were playing? That's the norm not the exception.
Don't wait to buy real estate. Buy real estate, and wait. | Rent where you live, buy where others pay your mortgage for you.

WanderingDoc
Posts: 1148
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 8:21 pm

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by WanderingDoc » Mon Oct 15, 2018 4:25 pm

visualguy wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 4:08 pm
Rowan Oak wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 3:55 pm
WanderingDoc wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 3:39 pm
...us mere mortals who want to contribute more to this world than earning $1M then stopping.
From what I've seen many don't "stop". In fact they're probably contributing "more to this world" after becoming financially independent.
Yeah, but if they're blogging or consulting or whatever for money, they shouldn't be calling themselves retired. Also, if they're relying on this earned income from work to maintain their lifestyle, even the "financially independent" part is questionable.
Precisely. This (the FIRE bloggers) is akin to Tim Ferriss putting in 80-100 work weeks while on book deadline, writing a book called "Four Hour Work Week"..! Umm... errrrr. Irony much? 8-)
Don't wait to buy real estate. Buy real estate, and wait. | Rent where you live, buy where others pay your mortgage for you.

visualguy
Posts: 837
Joined: Thu Jan 30, 2014 1:32 am

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by visualguy » Mon Oct 15, 2018 4:26 pm

bhsince87 wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 4:15 pm
visualguy wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 4:08 pm
Rowan Oak wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 3:55 pm
WanderingDoc wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 3:39 pm
...us mere mortals who want to contribute more to this world than earning $1M then stopping.
From what I've seen many don't "stop". In fact they're probably contributing "more to this world" after becoming financially independent.
Yeah, but if they're blogging or consulting or whatever for money, they shouldn't be calling themselves retired. Also, if they're relying on this earned income from work to maintain their lifestyle, even the "financially independent" part is questionable.
So in your opinion, someone like Peyton Manning shouldn't tell people he's retired?
Not if he's currently working a gig that earns him money. If he's working for money, then his working career is continuing even if it's not playing football anymore.

Otherwise, I could call myself retired too even though I'm very much working. I used to be in academia, but I quit that, and now I have a different type of job. Am I retired?

visualguy
Posts: 837
Joined: Thu Jan 30, 2014 1:32 am

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by visualguy » Mon Oct 15, 2018 4:37 pm

Rowan Oak wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 4:21 pm
Many don't consider themselves "retired". That really is the overall misconception. For many they would probably prefer it be called the "FI (Financial Independence)" movement and be rid of the RE (retire early) part of the FIRE acronym all together.
In that case, it's a misleading misnomer. Even the FI part is misleading if they need the money from work to maintain their lifestyle. I could stop working if I was willing to reduce my standard of living and bet that certain bad things that would require money will not happen. Am I FI? Not really...

User avatar
Rowan Oak
Posts: 277
Joined: Mon May 09, 2016 2:11 pm
Location: Yoknapatawpha

Re: Correlation between the FIRE movement and one of the greatest bull markets

Post by Rowan Oak » Mon Oct 15, 2018 5:26 pm

visualguy wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 4:37 pm
Rowan Oak wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 4:21 pm
Many don't consider themselves "retired". That really is the overall misconception. For many they would probably prefer it be called the "FI (Financial Independence)" movement and be rid of the RE (retire early) part of the FIRE acronym all together.
In that case, it's a misleading misnomer. Even the FI part is misleading if they need the money from work to maintain their lifestyle. I could stop working if I was willing to reduce my standard of living and bet that certain bad things that would require money will not happen. Am I FI? Not really...
By definition if you're FI (financially independent) you don't "need the money from work to maintain your lifestyle", but you may still work and earn money. Why wouldn't you if "retirement"/not working was never the primary goal?
“If you can get good at destroying your own wrong ideas, that is a great gift.” – Charlie Munger

Post Reply