Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Non-investing personal finance issues including insurance, credit, real estate, taxes, employment and legal issues such as trusts and wills
User avatar
Topic Author
willthrill81
Posts: 15148
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 3:17 pm
Location: USA

Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by willthrill81 » Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:36 am

After three years, Suze Orman is apparently coming out of retirement and recently did a rapid fire series of interviews for many podcasts. One of these was Paula Pant's Afford Anything podcast, one that I enjoy and frequently listen to. In the show, Paula began the interview with the question "What do you think of the FIRE movement," to which Suze replied "I hate it. I hate it. I hate it."

There are many reasons Suze provided for her position. But basically, she believes that the likelihood of a person's financial career being derailed is too high for all but the very wealthy (i.e. decamillionaires) to stop working before they have to. She believes that most people should plan on working until age 70. She believes that SS is in real jeopardy, and counting on receiving benefits on almost any level is a mistake. She believes that health and long-term care will become dramatically more expensive as time goes on. She believes that insurance is useful but won't cover all of your risks. She believes that early retirees will spend down their portfolios to the point that by the time they're elderly, they won't have enough funds to cover their needed expenses. She believes that unemployment will be 25% in a decade or two, and that tax rates will increase dramatically.

I personally believe that a thorough risk assessment should be conducted before anyone, regardless of age, actually retires. But I am not opposed to the notion of retirements lasting beyond 20-30 years as Suze clearly appears to be. Further, if things become as bleak as Suze is forecasting, I think that many employed folks will be in dire straits. Further, as Paula noted after the interview, being financially independent does not mean that one should stop working or earning money; it simply provides one with financial flexibility. Hence, even if one agrees with Suze's assessment of risk, being financially independent is a worthwhile goal, even if one doesn't plan on actually retiring.

Some of her comments are obviously speculative regarding future tax law, which we cannot discuss on this forum. But beyond that, I wonder what others think of this.
“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

jehovasfitness
Posts: 553
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2018 2:26 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by jehovasfitness » Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:40 am

So she retired early and is coming out of retirement to say she hates FIRE... seems legit

Swampy
Posts: 770
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 7:16 am
Location: Between gators, rattlers and snowbirds

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by Swampy » Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:41 am

With all due respect, I don't give a damn what Orman says, writes or believes.
If you fail to plan, you plan to fail. | Failure is not an option. | If I have seen further, it is because I was carried on the shoulders of giants.

sailaway
Posts: 932
Joined: Fri May 12, 2017 1:11 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by sailaway » Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:43 am

If things are that bleak, I will have more skills in place than my peers who have been paying to have everything done.

If things are that bleak, I will be starting from zero (because the stock market collapsed if unemployment is 15%), not starting out in the hole with a bunch of debt and too much house and...

I don't even know if she is as religious as Dave Ramsey's, but she has always struck me as the epitome of the Protestant work ethic: it is just wrong to not be earning money. Even full time volunteer work is less worthy than say being a financial advisor to the middle and upper classes.

bloom2708
Posts: 7092
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 2:08 pm
Location: Fargo, ND

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by bloom2708 » Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:44 am

A deca-millionaire telling the "troops" that earned her all her millions to never retire. :shock: :o

Not everyone will be willing/able to FIRE early. But, it sure doesn't hurt to have another path to take. I do not want to work on my "last day". :annoyed
"People want confirmation, not advice" Unknown | "We are here to provoke thoughtfulness, not agree with you" Unknown | Four words: Whole food, plant based

smitcat
Posts: 4635
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2016 10:51 am

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by smitcat » Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:45 am

"There are many reasons Suze provided for her position. But basically, she believes that the likelihood of a person's financial career being derailed is too high for all but the very wealthy (i.e. decamillionaires) to stop working before they have to. She believes that most people should plan on working until age 70. She believes that SS is in real jeopardy, and counting on receiving benefits on almost any level is a mistake. She believes that health and long-term care will become dramatically more expensive as time goes on. She believes that insurance is useful but won't cover all of your risks. She believes that early retirees will spend down their portfolios to the point that by the time they're elderly, they won't have enough funds to cover their needed expenses. She believes that unemployment will be 25% in a decade or two, and that tax rates will increase dramatically."


If my business of making money were the same as Suzie's I would say the same - it is great for business and almost required.
Whether she believes any of this is likely not to be known.

yohac
Posts: 219
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2018 1:42 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by yohac » Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:45 am

So everyone should work till they drop, out of fear. No thanks. If it gets that bad, we're all doomed anyway.

User avatar
Tycoon
Posts: 1500
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 7:06 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by Tycoon » Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:47 am

Swampy wrote:
Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:41 am
With all due respect, I don't give a damn what Orman says, writes or believes.
+1
Emotionless, prognostication free investing. Ignoring the noise and economists since 1979. How consistantly wrong do predictions have to be before the faithful learn?

delamer
Posts: 9484
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 6:13 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by delamer » Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:47 am

Sounds like she is pushing an apocalyptic scenario that will get her attention, whIch translates to money in her bank account.

I am not willing to plan my life around 25% unemployment and no Social Security benefits.

And I say that as someone who thought she generally gave good advice to people on her show.

moehoward
Posts: 270
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2018 10:16 am

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by moehoward » Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:51 am

I'll start off my saying I've never been a Suze Orman fan. I don't think Orman has any idea about the average person, she had made millions and I think lost touch. Telling people to plan on working until 70? It all sounds good as long as everything works out. Yes, SS has problems but I believe the Govt can make a few adjustments to keep it a float. With that said, there are too many people dependent on SS (whole different thread) to take it away. FIRE is just another tool to judge retirement. Talking with a financial planner (like Orman) is like talking to a life insurance salesman. No matter what you say, they will calculate that you don't have enough.

NextMil
Posts: 549
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2017 12:33 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by NextMil » Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:52 am

Thanks for the post, thought provoking for sure.

I agree with you, and think the goal should be FI and then people can make adjustments. Suze, has been doing side projects. I am not a fan of Suze, but I think she raises some good points. I also think the parochial view of FIRE as being black and white is really sort of silly. Even the most staunchest proponents of FIRE who have done it end up still working even if it is part time.

My goal has always been FI and then adjust my work (making money) to focus more on the things I love rather than strictly on the dollar sign.

caffeperfavore
Posts: 267
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2015 11:45 am

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by caffeperfavore » Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:52 am

Financial planning guru hates movement that lessens demand for financial planning gurus.

Shocking.

Mike Scott
Posts: 1342
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 2:45 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by Mike Scott » Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:56 am

Being financially independent only means that you have choices that most people do not have. You don't have to stop working.

It seems to me that some of the extreme FIRE circumstances (young age with minimal resources) are taking a lot of risk into a long unknown future. But maybe they are OK with that. We don't all have to make the same choices in life.

Suze's prediction of 25% unemployment in 10-20 years, dramatically increasing taxes and the death of social security seems a bit apocalyptic. Did she mention zombies? :) If this really happens, I doubt that any of us are ready.

H-Town
Posts: 2250
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 2:08 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by H-Town » Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:01 am

willthrill81 wrote:
Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:36 am
After three years, Suze Orman is apparently coming out of retirement and recently did a rapid fire series of interviews for many podcasts. One of these was Paula Pant's Afford Anything podcast, one that I enjoy and frequently listen to. In the show, Paula began the interview with the question "What do you think of the FIRE movement," to which Suze replied "I hate it. I hate it. I hate it."

There are many reasons Suze provided for her position. But basically, she believes that the likelihood of a person's financial career being derailed is too high for all but the very wealthy (i.e. decamillionaires) to stop working before they have to. She believes that most people should plan on working until age 70. She believes that SS is in real jeopardy, and counting on receiving benefits on almost any level is a mistake. She believes that health and long-term care will become dramatically more expensive as time goes on. She believes that insurance is useful but won't cover all of your risks. She believes that early retirees will spend down their portfolios to the point that by the time they're elderly, they won't have enough funds to cover their needed expenses. She believes that unemployment will be 25% in a decade or two, and that tax rates will increase dramatically.

I personally believe that a thorough risk assessment should be conducted before anyone, regardless of age, actually retires. But I am not opposed to the notion of retirements lasting beyond 20-30 years as Suze clearly appears to be. Further, if things become as bleak as Suze is forecasting, I think that many employed folks will be in dire straits. Further, as Paula noted after the interview, being financially independent does not mean that one should stop working or earning money; it simply provides one with financial flexibility. Hence, even if one agrees with Suze's assessment of risk, being financially independent is a worthwhile goal, even if one doesn't plan on actually retiring.

Some of her comments are obviously speculative regarding future tax law, which we cannot discuss on this forum. But beyond that, I wonder what others think of this.
There is a reason why I don't count SS as part of my retirement income. I also estimate how much I need for retirement and times it by 5 - just to be safe. I will likely have more money than I need, but it will give an option to stop working early around 45-50.

The more you save up front, the less you have to worry about money later.

User avatar
greg24
Posts: 3750
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 10:34 am

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by greg24 » Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:02 am

I have zero respect for her thoughts and projections. Charlatan.

scrabbler1
Posts: 2438
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 2:39 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by scrabbler1 » Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:04 am

Tycoon wrote:
Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:47 am
Swampy wrote:
Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:41 am
With all due respect, I don't give a damn what Orman says, writes or believes.
+1
+2. I have lost a lot of respect for Orman over the years (not that I had much for her to begin with). I am 55 and have been retired for the last 10 years. I also like bond funds a lot, something else she opposes, and they have been financing my retirement pretty easily. So, there's 2 reasons. :mrgreen:

User avatar
Watty
Posts: 18082
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 3:55 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by Watty » Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:05 am

willthrill81 wrote:
Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:36 am
She believes that unemployment will be 25% in a decade or two,.....
All the more reason to plan on being prepared for an involuntary FIRE situation.

I don't have any statistics but my impression that a lot of people that retire more than a few years early decided to after being laid off and realizing that they could retire.

Irisheyes
Posts: 126
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2018 1:36 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by Irisheyes » Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:09 am

I listened to a little of the podcast. As is Orman's tendency, her points were a trifle over the top and melodramatically delivered.

However, her basic point is, for me, worth listening to. People who are in the 30s and 40s (the ages she cites) should not be thinking of retiring if they have even 1-2 million (the precise number she cites as insufficient) because of what can happen with health and unforeseen circumstances over a long retirement.

I think it's a needed pushback to the "I have 500k and can live on 25k a year" Money mustache crowd who are ignoring some of the crises that can decimate a small-medium nestegg.

Jags4186
Posts: 4087
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2014 7:12 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by Jags4186 » Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:11 am

jehovasfitness wrote:
Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:40 am
So she retired early and is coming out of retirement to say she hates FIRE... seems legit
In fairness she said all but the really wealthy, which she undoubtedly is. As she has admitted she keeps all of her money except $1,000,000 in AAA rated, tax backed, municipal bonds because she has no need to take risk. If she lost the $1,000,000 in the stock market it would make no difference to her. She has invested in "herself". She probably makes way more in a year from royalties than she needs.

That said, Suze is in the business of fear mongering. After all, you wouldn't need to buy her money management products if everything was hunky-dory. That said, I used to watch her CNBC show regularly and I felt she did mostly give good personalized advice to people, often erring on the side of overly conservative. There is certainly no "your investments make 12%, you take 8% and 4% for inflation" talk.
Last edited by Jags4186 on Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:13 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Smorgasbord
Posts: 422
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 8:12 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by Smorgasbord » Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:12 am

It seems that Orman's threshold for retirement is being able to spend $350,000 a year in perpetuity. At that spend rate, the vast majority of people would be wiped out pretty fast regardless of whether they continue to work or not. If the outcome is the same either way, I don't really see that as much of a reason to continue to work.

User avatar
Steelersfan
Posts: 3767
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2008 8:47 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by Steelersfan » Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:16 am

caffeperfavore wrote:
Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:52 am

Financial planning g̶u̶r̶u̶ shill hates movement that lessens demand for financial planning g̶u̶r̶u̶s̶ shills.

Shocking.
I fixed that for you. :D

User avatar
BolderBoy
Posts: 4530
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 12:16 pm
Location: Colorado

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by BolderBoy » Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:22 am

willthrill81 wrote:
Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:36 am
Some of her comments are obviously speculative regarding future tax law, which we cannot discuss on this forum. But beyond that, I wonder what others think of this.
I liked some of the things she said in one of her first books. Beyond that, I think she should be ignored. Her oratorical delivery style literally repulses me.
"Never underestimate one's capacity to overestimate one's abilities" - The Dunning-Kruger Effect

User avatar
celia
Posts: 9977
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 6:32 am
Location: SoCal

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by celia » Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:26 am

For those who spent their working years saving as much as they could, once they retire, they don't just turn into spenders. They continue to save and invest since that is what they know best. That said, I think the message is that there are lots of unknowns that could happen and most people have not planned for any of them. I agree with that. For someone who is on the border of being able to retire or not, it is much safer to keep working a few more years and pump up the savings, just in case. By retiring early, your retirement will last for more years than is typical, so there are more years of unknowns. The few extra working years also helps lessen this.

In the case where someone inherited or won the lottery and now has $10 million or more, that is likely to not be enough for them as they may not have the savings and budgeting habit. So just because one is very wealthy, that is no guarantee either.

Rupert
Posts: 4122
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 12:01 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by Rupert » Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:28 am

Okay, I'll play devil's advocate. I don't really see anything wrong with advising people to keep one foot in the employment world just in case things turn out much worse than anticipated. What I've noticed lately in a lot of articles and in threads here at Bogleheads devoted to the FIRE concept are a lot of young men (early 30s, typically) touting FIRE before they have enough life experience to fully appreciate the curveballs that life can throw at them. I also see a lot of magical thinking relating to their physical health and their need for expensive healthcare in the future. So I think FIRE as a concept is becoming a bit of a fad, which is attracting lots of devotees incapable of appreciating the ramifications of their choices. As for Suze's predictions (solvency of Social Security, etc.), her guess is as good as anybody's. They're all guesses that I typically ignore.

User avatar
alpine_boglehead
Posts: 365
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2017 9:51 am
Location: Austria

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by alpine_boglehead » Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:30 am

sailaway wrote:
Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:43 am
If things are that bleak, I will have more skills in place than my peers who have been paying to have everything done.

If things are that bleak, I will be starting from zero (because the stock market collapsed if unemployment is 15%), not starting out in the hole with a bunch of debt and too much house and...

I don't even know if she is as religious as Dave Ramsey's, but she has always struck me as the epitome of the Protestant work ethic: it is just wrong to not be earning money. Even full time volunteer work is less worthy than say being a financial advisor to the middle and upper classes.
+1

Anyone working a job that doesn't have a 95% guarantee that it will be there in 15 years essentially has the same problem. And there's quite some audacious forecasts about jobs getting lost to automation.

User avatar
monkey_business
Posts: 759
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 2:21 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by monkey_business » Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:35 am

You might retire at 45 and due to unforeseen events be forced to go back to work at 55. Or, you might retire at 70 in order to minimize financial risks, and then die at 71.

There is no risk-free time to retire.

User avatar
Nate79
Posts: 5311
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2016 6:24 pm
Location: Delaware

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by Nate79 » Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:39 am

Sounds like she doesnt understand the FIRE movement.

PVW
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2014 11:01 am

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by PVW » Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:40 am

willthrill81 wrote:
Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:36 am

There are many reasons Suze provided for her position. But basically, she believes that the likelihood of a person's financial career being derailed is too high for all but the very wealthy (i.e. decamillionaires) to stop working before they have to. She believes that most people should plan on working until age 70. She believes that SS is in real jeopardy, and counting on receiving benefits on almost any level is a mistake. She believes that health and long-term care will become dramatically more expensive as time goes on. She believes that insurance is useful but won't cover all of your risks. She believes that early retirees will spend down their portfolios to the point that by the time they're elderly, they won't have enough funds to cover their needed expenses. She believes that unemployment will be 25% in a decade or two, and that tax rates will increase dramatically.
These are all good points that should be addressed in anyone's retirement plan. I don't know why this is getting such harsh treatment here. Maybe a bit of hyperbole, and Orman has always been a bit garish in her delivery, but her base is the average American that is having some financial troubles. For that crowd, it's a wake-up call to say retirement won't just work itself out. But lectures like this are just talking down to the Boglehead crowd.

User avatar
bligh
Posts: 1139
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2016 9:13 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by bligh » Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:41 am

I am not sure why she is making the FI podcast circuit promoting her book. The crowd that listens to those types of shows are far too financially savvy and tuned in to be of use to her. Her target audience is the financially uneducated.

Having said that, I did enjoy her Can I afford it segment on her show. But it only ever was entertainment.

jebmke
Posts: 9983
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 2:44 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by jebmke » Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:42 am

Swampy wrote:
Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:41 am
With all due respect, I don't give a damn what Orman says, writes or believes.
FIRE at will! :sharebeer
When you discover that you are riding a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount.

Jags4186
Posts: 4087
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2014 7:12 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by Jags4186 » Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:44 am

Suze saying you need $10 million is no different than the people coming on here saying you can only count on a 2% SWR. Same argument, different framing.

User avatar
Psyayeayeduck
Posts: 189
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2016 7:46 am

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by Psyayeayeduck » Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:48 am

In other words, "don't retire or I can't make money!". If I were her, I would make the same message if my wealth depends on the wallets of the financial illiterate.

User avatar
bligh
Posts: 1139
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2016 9:13 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by bligh » Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:49 am

PVW wrote:
Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:40 am
willthrill81 wrote:
Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:36 am

There are many reasons Suze provided for her position. But basically, she believes that the likelihood of a person's financial career being derailed is too high for all but the very wealthy (i.e. decamillionaires) to stop working before they have to. She believes that most people should plan on working until age 70. She believes that SS is in real jeopardy, and counting on receiving benefits on almost any level is a mistake. She believes that health and long-term care will become dramatically more expensive as time goes on. She believes that insurance is useful but won't cover all of your risks. She believes that early retirees will spend down their portfolios to the point that by the time they're elderly, they won't have enough funds to cover their needed expenses. She believes that unemployment will be 25% in a decade or two, and that tax rates will increase dramatically.
These are all good points that should be addressed in anyone's retirement plan. I don't know why this is getting such harsh treatment here. Maybe a bit of hyperbole, and Orman has always been a bit garish in her delivery, but her base is the average American that is having some financial troubles. For that crowd, it's a wake-up call to say retirement won't just work itself out. But lectures like this are just talking down to the Boglehead crowd.
I disagree. I think that message has a harmful effect on the average financially uneducated American who accepts her doom and gloom projections. The primary reason for this is that it is going to make them want to either keep everything they save in cash. Maybe some ones will plough it into real estate. The second reason is that it makes retirement and financial independence seem attainable. I can speak only from my own experience that when I had little saved, I saved little. It seemed hopeless. The distant, vague future goal of retirement simply didn't have enough of a pull for me to sacrifice on the present. Essentially, this boils down to.. If we *think* we can achieve it, we will try to achieve it... If we *think* the future looks like what Suze is describing, we will stash our cash under our mattress and put it in gold coins, join the prepper movement, and plan to work till we die if civilization doesn't end up collapsing.

Atgard
Posts: 420
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2014 2:02 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by Atgard » Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:58 am

Well, her point that unemployment, investment returns, SS proceeds, or health insurance expenses could all be worse (perhaps dramatically worse) than expected is true. That also needs to be counterbalanced with the fact that nothing can be guaranteed 100% and we shouldn't plan for the 0.00001% probability in a way that worsens our life 99.99999% of the time (in other words, with such thinking, you would NEVER retire with any amount of money).

As some have pointed out, the first part of FIRE -- the "financially independent" part -- is always a good thing, whether you want to keep working, switch to a less-stressful job, quit & travel the world, whether you're part of the 25% unemployment she predicts, etc. Having that flexibility to weather the storm and not be as reliant on your current job can only be a good thing.

The "retire early" part may be what she's really finding issue with, and that seems to me a more personal situation, based on goals, hobbies, family life, health, current job and stress level, other employment options, etc.

Coato
Posts: 169
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2015 4:34 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by Coato » Mon Oct 01, 2018 12:04 pm

There seem to be a lot of ad hominem attacks here instead of looking at what she is saying.

What she seems (I haven't listened) to be saying is that in the middle of good times, it is often hard to remember that bad times happen.

This community isn't immune to that thinking, and there are a lot of posts about staying the course, keeping intl. and bond allocations at their static allocations even though it seems like US sticks are going to rise forever.

When I think of FIRE I think it essentially means getting just enough to live on and retiring. I would like to do this myself.

But I am also aware that if my wife and I did retire we are opening ourselves up to not just "Black Swan/ Deep Risk" events but also things that are pretty much realities, like inflation, health care and changes in taxation. Not sure if this is actionable or violating political views, but a lot of FIRE assumptions are based around capital gains remaining the same and being able to enjoy lower taxes on stock returns, and who knows how that works out over a long life.

If I was going to be retired with no income for 50 years it would be tough to just assume that personal health couldn't get worse / more expensive, that we would continue to tax everything the same way and that inflation would remain between 2-3%. I think she is just repeating Pascal's Wager here.

User avatar
TheAccountant
Posts: 233
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2017 4:21 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by TheAccountant » Mon Oct 01, 2018 12:04 pm

Suze Orman, huh?
  • B.A. in social work in 1976

    In 1980, she borrowed $52,000 from friends and wellwishers to open a restaurant.

    she invested that money through a representative at Merrill Lynch, who promptly lost her entire investment in trading options

    While still employed at the firm, she successfully sued Merrill Lynch

    she published a booklet, The Facts on Single Premium Whole Life
Who cares what this woman thinks? She is past her prime and just needed a publicity stunt to get herself back on the radar.
Making cents out of every dollar.

PVW
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2014 11:01 am

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by PVW » Mon Oct 01, 2018 12:05 pm

bligh wrote:
Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:49 am

I disagree. I think that message has a harmful effect on the average financially uneducated American who accepts her doom and gloom projections.
I can see your point. My perspective is from a DIYer that might listen to her advice and use it as motivation to start serious planning. But there are probably a lot of people that take her literally and blindly follow her directions, which I agree is not good.

Ron Scott
Posts: 1090
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2016 5:38 am

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by Ron Scott » Mon Oct 01, 2018 12:11 pm

Not a fan of Suze per se, and I do think some of her predictions are a bit pessimistic, but compared to the retire-at-55-and-4%-SWR crowd I'll go with her. Overcompensation is a strong strategy in dealing with uncertainty.
Retirement is a game best played by those prepared for more volatility in the future than has been seen in the past. The solution is not to predict investment losses but to prepare for them.

clockman323
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2018 11:05 am

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by clockman323 » Mon Oct 01, 2018 12:15 pm

My thoughts about the biggest flaws in her reasoning is that everyone is in a different situation. How can age 70 be the magic number for everyone? If someone with a low wage job and minimal savings can retire at age 70, why should a good earner with 40-50 years of savings also have to wait until age 70?

marcopolo
Posts: 2787
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2016 10:22 am

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by marcopolo » Mon Oct 01, 2018 12:16 pm

willthrill81 wrote:
Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:36 am
.... She believes that most people should plan on working until age 70. ...

.... She believes that unemployment will be 25% in a decade or two ...
No cognitive dissonance there.
Once in a while you get shown the light, in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

MichCPA
Posts: 851
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2018 9:06 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by MichCPA » Mon Oct 01, 2018 12:19 pm

clockman323 wrote:
Mon Oct 01, 2018 12:15 pm
My thoughts about the biggest flaws in her reasoning is that everyone is in a different situation. How can age 70 be the magic number for everyone? If someone with a low wage job and minimal savings can retire at age 70, why should a good earner with 40-50 years of savings also have to wait until age 70?
Yep, if you didn't graduate with a ton of student loans and were able to save 15% or more of your income through your working life, there is no reason to wait until 70. Most people don't do those types of things, but we are talking about FIRE. I don't think I will retire early, even if I can. But, I have no desire to die at my desk either.

Teague
Posts: 1681
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2015 6:15 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by Teague » Mon Oct 01, 2018 12:24 pm

Just as "Man bites dog" is newsworthy...

Here we have people screaming "theater!" in a crowded FIRE
(environment).
:)
Semper Augustus

User avatar
wabbajack
Posts: 264
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2018 8:05 pm
Location: Indianapolis

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by wabbajack » Mon Oct 01, 2018 12:25 pm

monkey_business wrote:
Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:35 am
You might retire at 45 and due to unforeseen events be forced to go back to work at 55. Or, you might retire at 70 in order to minimize financial risks, and then die at 71.

There is no risk-free time to retire.
Aye. The concept of retirement is barely one century old. There are an immense number of variables that could alter the math to the point that what's reasonable for one person doesn't make sense for another.

Those who have accumulated significant assets stand to lose the most. If you have been retired for awhile and your portfolio goes through a prolonged black swan event, can you survive?

Back to the OP though, I don't care for Suze Orman.

frugalecon
Posts: 356
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2014 12:39 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by frugalecon » Mon Oct 01, 2018 12:35 pm

Commenting generally, my impression is that to FIRE safely it is important to have a clear-eyed view of the risks and foregone opportunities associated with exiting the job market given one's current level of assets. I would be skeptical about the folks in their 30s with a bare-bones portfolio; too much stuff can happen. And there is an option value to having more financial assets...who can predict what wondrous things there could be to purchase in the future? Longer life? Longer life with enhanced functionality?

That said, I find it hard to believe that there will be a collapse of SS and other dire predictions. My assumption is that I will receive the portion of my scheduled benefits that can be covered by projected tax income after the "trust fund" runs dry. That is less than I am "entitled" to, but still significant. Between that, pension, and investments, I don't anticipate dying of starvation.

wrongfunds
Posts: 2148
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 3:55 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by wrongfunds » Mon Oct 01, 2018 12:44 pm

I am shocked, SHOCKED that OP thinks this topic is not begging for a topic lock!

Exactly, what is *actionable* or *personal* about this topic?

User avatar
Mlm
Posts: 431
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2016 6:00 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by Mlm » Mon Oct 01, 2018 12:46 pm

I think Suze got bored with retirement

User avatar
camillus
Posts: 603
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2013 9:55 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by camillus » Mon Oct 01, 2018 12:54 pm

willthrill81 wrote:
Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:36 am
She believes that SS is in real jeopardy, and counting on receiving benefits on almost any level is a mistake...

She believes that unemployment will be 25% in a decade or two, and that tax rates will increase dramatically.
This is a near apocalyptic scenario. Unemployment in 1933 was 25%. Most retirees major source of income is and will be social security. I don't know what justification she has for her beliefs, but it is a pretty wild projection.

bgf
Posts: 1170
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2017 9:35 am

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by bgf » Mon Oct 01, 2018 12:57 pm

I'd be far more interested in hearing how Suze Orman, Dave Ramsey, Tony Robbins, etc. actually have all of their assets invested...

Don't care much for their "advice."
“TE OCCIDERE POSSUNT SED TE EDERE NON POSSUNT NEFAS EST"

Beehave
Posts: 604
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 12:46 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by Beehave » Mon Oct 01, 2018 12:57 pm

Suze Orman's message appears to be:

You may need more (possibly much more) for retirement than you think because of forces outside of your control.
Therefore you should work longer and spend less, which are two things you can control.

chw
Posts: 739
Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 4:22 pm

Re: Suze Orman - "I hate the FIRE movement."

Post by chw » Mon Oct 01, 2018 12:59 pm

Gee, wonder why she came out of retirement...

Locked