Has anyone here on a normal income successfully FIREd?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you can't handle working and having a serious girlfriend at the same time, how are you going to handle having two kids and a marriage at the same time?

OP I think you need to accept that you need professional help for your social skills and ability to manage life. Most people are able to manage a job and a relationship or a marriage. It's going to be very hard for you dating because women will catch on that you can't handle more than one thing at a time. Life is full of surprises and you can't un-do having kids, so if it turns out the kids have really challenging needs you may need to get a job again. Will you be able to handle it?

DCUM when I say I’d like to marry a woman who is naturally a saver, possibly (though not a requirement) with $1 million saved by age 33: “OMG, that is extremely rare and difficult. Any woman who achieves that is going to be very accomplished and ambitious and is not going to be interested in a man who retires early.”

DCUM when I say I’ve saved $1.1 million and paid off my condo at age 33: “That’s it? You’re not able to do that while simultaneously navigating the modern dating scene, getting married and having kids (with 50/50 parenting and household work, of course), and keeping up with the requirements of a single-family home? You really need see a medical professional to address your inability to manage life.”

Lol, GTFOH!

Yes the expectations and career trajectory for men and women tend to be different, as you seem to have already internalized by the fact that you expect your wife to be the primary parent despite the fact that in your fantasy world you both won’t be working.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will she also do the majority of cooking, cleaning and household chores? Because your budget doesn't allow for a cleaning service or much takeout/restaurants.

You guys are trying to bait me, but it's not going to work.

I'd expect we'd split cooking, laundry, etc. 50/50. Real cleaning we'll outsource - as frugal as I am, a monthly house cleaner is something I've always splurged on. Currently, it's only $90 for my condo and I know it will obviously be more in a house - we'll budget for that.

Regarding parenting, I do expect she'd take the lead there. Yes, if I'm bringing most of the money to the marriage, I'd expect her to contribute in other ways. But, primarily, I'd expect her to do the majority of the parenting because I would only be attracted in the first place to a woman who is nurturing and would enjoy taking care of the kid(s). Similarly, I'd expect the lawn mowing to fall 100/0 to me since that's traditionally a male activity.

LOL. A 38 y/o man targeting a 29-30 y/o woman and then preemptively charging her a lifetime of servitude to make up for the fact that he's been in the workforce twice as long.

You know what's not traditionally a male activity? Intentional unemployment. Good luck out there, I suspect you're going to learn a little too late that FIRE isn't sustainable for the divorced.

No worries, as I highly doubt he will find a spouse

Apparently, what I’d be offering is a terrible deal for women.

But also, my scenario of a 33-year-old woman having $1 million saved is unrealistic. So let’s say she only has $200,000 saved. At that time, I have $2 million saved. As I mentioned earlier, the math of compounding is such that it only takes on average three years to get from $2 million to $3 million if one adds $100,000 in contributions annually (I contribute $75,000 now and could contribute more if I were doing pretax accounts, so that should not be a problem at all with both of us working). So we work and save for 2.5-3 years before having kids and retiring with $3 million.

As I broke down earlier, the $90,000 in passive income from our $3 million is exactly the same as that of a couple earning $240,000 (after they pay $60,000 in taxes, $45,000 in mortgage payments, and put $45,000 in 401(k)s). Do this in a LCOL area and it’s easily a top 10% lifestyle. The “downside” for her is that she does the majority of the parenting—but this is not actually a downside because I’m not imposing it on her and would have self-selected for the type of woman who would enjoy doing that.

So she goes from having a 9-5 job with $200,000 saved at age 33 to having a top 10% lifestyle while never having to work again at age 36. I don’t know, it sounds OK to me—maybe not for a $400,000 DC lawyer but for a lot of women.

Good luck finding a woman who "will do all the parenting" while you sit around and do literally nothing. The 1950s are calling and they'd desperately life you to return

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you can't handle working and having a serious girlfriend at the same time, how are you going to handle having two kids and a marriage at the same time?

OP I think you need to accept that you need professional help for your social skills and ability to manage life. Most people are able to manage a job and a relationship or a marriage. It's going to be very hard for you dating because women will catch on that you can't handle more than one thing at a time. Life is full of surprises and you can't un-do having kids, so if it turns out the kids have really challenging needs you may need to get a job again. Will you be able to handle it?

DCUM when I say I’d like to marry a woman who is naturally a saver, possibly (though not a requirement) with $1 million saved by age 33: “OMG, that is extremely rare and difficult. Any woman who achieves that is going to be very accomplished and ambitious and is not going to be interested in a man who retires early.”

DCUM when I say I’ve saved $1.1 million and paid off my condo at age 33: “That’s it? You’re not able to do that while simultaneously navigating the modern dating scene, getting married and having kids (with 50/50 parenting and household work, of course), and keeping up with the requirements of a single-family home? You really need see a medical professional to address your inability to manage life.”

Lol, GTFOH!

OP - you can do whatever the heck you want. What we're telling you is that the woman who's saved that much so young seems unlikely to want to marry a guy who's earned that much - and intends never to earn another penny. Most people who've saved that much will be ambitious, while your ambition is to mow the lawn and let her raise some kids while you hike. At least as you've described it.

You seem like a pretty difficult person, OP. I'm sure there is someone out there for you. But it's not just like plugging some coins into a vending machine and out comes the spouse of your dreams, just when you're ready for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's equally reckless to delay dating and parenthood. What if you run out of time before you meet the right person?

I'm really not sure why you can't go on, say, one date every two weeks just to get started and practice relationship skills. FIRE women won't be expecting you to spend much.

Dating is expensive (both in terms of money and time)! The guys I know that are successful at it treat it like a part-time job.

Also, I think it’s going to be very difficult, if I do find the right person, to say, “Hey, I like you a lot. Let’s put a pin in this for five years—or tread water until then—and then we can move forward with our lives.” I think it just makes more sense to date when I can really commit to someone.

If you find the right person you can cut a lot of costs by moving in together. It can actually accelerate your FIRE.

It's really important that you develop some relationship skills. Your plan to go from zero to marriage at age 38 with no dating experience is unrealistic. It will be a red flag to your potential dates.

"I'm unemployed and have nothing to do but obsess about our relationship" is creepy and will put people off. It's not a good feeling to be the only activity in someone's life. It's a lot of pressure and it's not going to be a healthy relationship.

Jesus, I’m not a socially-inept autist who has “no dating experience” and needs to “develop some relationship skills.” I had a girlfriend in college. I didn’t date after college when I moved in with my parents (logistics were untenable), and by the time I bought my condo, I was fully immersed in savings mode and was not interested in dating. However, I have slept with two women in my building (I’m not sure why I have to get into that, but you all have taken a thread in the money forum in a completely different direction than intended.)

You guys are misattributing all sorts of characteristics to me when the truth is just that I have a laser-like focus on getting to $2 million and therefore everything else has taken a backseat. And yes, I understand there could be some potential savings from moving in with a girlfriend. But that would involve a huge life shift and I just don’t want to rock the boat in any way or potentially break anything right now. My job appears stable, and I have a pathway to achieving nirvana within 4-5 years—while, as I stated in the OP, I am starting to get restless, five years still seems a reasonable amount of time to defer gratification for this end.

You seem very nice. It's hard to see why some great woman hasn't snatched you up yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will she also do the majority of cooking, cleaning and household chores? Because your budget doesn't allow for a cleaning service or much takeout/restaurants.

You guys are trying to bait me, but it's not going to work.

I'd expect we'd split cooking, laundry, etc. 50/50. Real cleaning we'll outsource - as frugal as I am, a monthly house cleaner is something I've always splurged on. Currently, it's only $90 for my condo and I know it will obviously be more in a house - we'll budget for that.

Regarding parenting, I do expect she'd take the lead there. Yes, if I'm bringing most of the money to the marriage, I'd expect her to contribute in other ways. But, primarily, I'd expect her to do the majority of the parenting because I would only be attracted in the first place to a woman who is nurturing and would enjoy taking care of the kid(s). Similarly, I'd expect the lawn mowing to fall 100/0 to me since that's traditionally a male activity.

LOL. A 38 y/o man targeting a 29-30 y/o woman and then preemptively charging her a lifetime of servitude to make up for the fact that he's been in the workforce twice as long.

You know what's not traditionally a male activity? Intentional unemployment. Good luck out there, I suspect you're going to learn a little too late that FIRE isn't sustainable for the divorced.

No worries, as I highly doubt he will find a spouse

Apparently, what I’d be offering is a terrible deal for women.

But also, my scenario of a 33-year-old woman having $1 million saved is unrealistic. So let’s say she only has $200,000 saved. At that time, I have $2 million saved. As I mentioned earlier, the math of compounding is such that it only takes on average three years to get from $2 million to $3 million if one adds $100,000 in contributions annually (I contribute $75,000 now and could contribute more if I were doing pretax accounts, so that should not be a problem at all with both of us working). So we work and save for 2.5-3 years before having kids and retiring with $3 million.

As I broke down earlier, the $90,000 in passive income from our $3 million is exactly the same as that of a couple earning $240,000 (after they pay $60,000 in taxes, $45,000 in mortgage payments, and put $45,000 in 401(k)s). Do this in a LCOL area and it’s easily a top 10% lifestyle. The “downside” for her is that she does the majority of the parenting—but this is not actually a downside because I’m not imposing it on her and would have self-selected for the type of woman who would enjoy doing that.

So she goes from having a 9-5 job with $200,000 saved at age 33 to having a top 10% lifestyle while never having to work again at age 36. I don’t know, it sounds OK to me—maybe not for a $400,000 DC lawyer but for a lot of women.[/quote

Well to start with you at least seem to have cut your salary expectations for said dream woman by 4/5 since your op of a couple of days ago so at least it’s a start in the right direction.

What I think you’re failing to account for is that you’re seeking to attract a successful woman but are yourself coming to the partnership not only with a pretty basic salary but are also making it clear that this is the best it’s going to get, whereas most people (particularly women) pursuing marriage have an implicit expectation that their partner’s salary is going to continue to increase and are seeking someone with drive and ambition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will she also do the majority of cooking, cleaning and household chores? Because your budget doesn't allow for a cleaning service or much takeout/restaurants.

You guys are trying to bait me, but it's not going to work.

I'd expect we'd split cooking, laundry, etc. 50/50. Real cleaning we'll outsource - as frugal as I am, a monthly house cleaner is something I've always splurged on. Currently, it's only $90 for my condo and I know it will obviously be more in a house - we'll budget for that.

Regarding parenting, I do expect she'd take the lead there. Yes, if I'm bringing most of the money to the marriage, I'd expect her to contribute in other ways. But, primarily, I'd expect her to do the majority of the parenting because I would only be attracted in the first place to a woman who is nurturing and would enjoy taking care of the kid(s). Similarly, I'd expect the lawn mowing to fall 100/0 to me since that's traditionally a male activity.

LOL. A 38 y/o man targeting a 29-30 y/o woman and then preemptively charging her a lifetime of servitude to make up for the fact that he's been in the workforce twice as long.

You know what's not traditionally a male activity? Intentional unemployment. Good luck out there, I suspect you're going to learn a little too late that FIRE isn't sustainable for the divorced.

No worries, as I highly doubt he will find a spouse

Apparently, what I’d be offering is a terrible deal for women.

But also, my scenario of a 33-year-old woman having $1 million saved is unrealistic. So let’s say she only has $200,000 saved. At that time, I have $2 million saved. As I mentioned earlier, the math of compounding is such that it only takes on average three years to get from $2 million to $3 million if one adds $100,000 in contributions annually (I contribute $75,000 now and could contribute more if I were doing pretax accounts, so that should not be a problem at all with both of us working). So we work and save for 2.5-3 years before having kids and retiring with $3 million.

As I broke down earlier, the $90,000 in passive income from our $3 million is exactly the same as that of a couple earning $240,000 (after they pay $60,000 in taxes, $45,000 in mortgage payments, and put $45,000 in 401(k)s). Do this in a LCOL area and it’s easily a top 10% lifestyle. The “downside” for her is that she does the majority of the parenting—but this is not actually a downside because I’m not imposing it on her and would have self-selected for the type of woman who would enjoy doing that.

So she goes from having a 9-5 job with $200,000 saved at age 33 to having a top 10% lifestyle while never having to work again at age 36. I don’t know, it sounds OK to me—maybe not for a $400,000 DC lawyer but for a lot of women.[/quote

Well to start with you at least seem to have cut your salary expectations for said dream woman by 4/5 since your op of a couple of days ago so at least it’s a start in the right direction.

What I think you’re failing to account for is that you’re seeking to attract a successful woman but are yourself coming to the partnership not only with a pretty basic salary but are also making it clear that this is the best it’s going to get, whereas most people (particularly women) pursuing marriage have an implicit expectation that their partner’s salary is going to continue to increase and are seeking someone with drive and ambition.

LOL, progress!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If OP has learned anything from this thread it’s that he can’t date 50 year olds that need Vitamin C treatments to assuage their aging skin.

Such a loss.

+1
All of the extremely hot women of DCUM have come out of the woodwork simply to tell OP that they are too hot and accomplished for OP.

Guess what? OP isn't looking for an unpleasant troll so buzz off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If OP has learned anything from this thread it’s that he can’t date 50 year olds that need Vitamin C treatments to assuage their aging skin.

Such a loss.

+1
All of the extremely hot women of DCUM have come out of the woodwork simply to tell OP that they are too hot and accomplished for OP.

Guess what? OP isn't looking for an unpleasant troll so buzz off.

Just curious which women you think won't want some expensive skincare one day? The ones who never age a day?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If OP has learned anything from this thread it’s that he can’t date 50 year olds that need Vitamin C treatments to assuage their aging skin.

Such a loss.

+1
All of the extremely hot women of DCUM have come out of the woodwork simply to tell OP that they are too hot and accomplished for OP.

Guess what? OP isn't looking for an unpleasant troll so buzz off.

Just curious which women you think won't want some expensive skincare one day? The ones who never age a day?

OP is 33 and being lectured by AARP members about how he can’t possibly find a girlfriend / wife because he can’t pay for some Vitamin C cream for aging skin that costs $180 for 3 months. We are not making this up lol!!

The self deluded arrogance of these PPs to think that anyone who OP would be interested in (25-33 year old women presumably, or somewhere there about) would have the same concerns or dating preferences as them is baffling. The average young adult woman would think she struck the jackpot dating a man with a paid off house and $2M in the bank. That the Golden Girls in this thread can’t step outside of themselves and acknowledge that is weird.

And then we have a contingent of PPs who are concerned with OP being in the house all the time. Newsflash: a large percentage of employed men are in the house all the time right now working from home on a full or partial WFH schedule. OP is going to be as much of an annoyance as anyone who works in IT these days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's equally reckless to delay dating and parenthood. What if you run out of time before you meet the right person?

I'm really not sure why you can't go on, say, one date every two weeks just to get started and practice relationship skills. FIRE women won't be expecting you to spend much.

Dating is expensive (both in terms of money and time)! The guys I know that are successful at it treat it like a part-time job.

Also, I think it’s going to be very difficult, if I do find the right person, to say, “Hey, I like you a lot. Let’s put a pin in this for five years—or tread water until then—and then we can move forward with our lives.” I think it just makes more sense to date when I can really commit to someone.

If you find the right person you can cut a lot of costs by moving in together. It can actually accelerate your FIRE.

It's really important that you develop some relationship skills. Your plan to go from zero to marriage at age 38 with no dating experience is unrealistic. It will be a red flag to your potential dates.

"I'm unemployed and have nothing to do but obsess about our relationship" is creepy and will put people off. It's not a good feeling to be the only activity in someone's life. It's a lot of pressure and it's not going to be a healthy relationship.

Jesus, I’m not a socially-inept autist who has “no dating experience” and needs to “develop some relationship skills.” I had a girlfriend in college. I didn’t date after college when I moved in with my parents (logistics were untenable), and by the time I bought my condo, I was fully immersed in savings mode and was not interested in dating. However, I have slept with two women in my building (I’m not sure why I have to get into that, but you all have taken a thread in the money forum in a completely different direction than intended.)

You guys are misattributing all sorts of characteristics to me when the truth is just that I have a laser-like focus on getting to $2 million and therefore everything else has taken a backseat. And yes, I understand there could be some potential savings from moving in with a girlfriend. But that would involve a huge life shift and I just don’t want to rock the boat in any way or potentially break anything right now. My job appears stable, and I have a pathway to achieving nirvana within 4-5 years—while, as I stated in the OP, I am starting to get restless, five years still seems a reasonable amount of time to defer gratification for this end.

OMG. Dude. "I had a girlfriend 10 years ago" is not an argument in favor of your social skills. "I had the poor judgment to sleep with two different women in my building", same.

There's really no reason you need to have $2 million by a particular age. You've made up that goal and you've made up the need to hyper-focus on it. And dating in the FIRE-sphere isn't really that expensive. It really does seem like you're someone who simply can't manage both a job and a relationship simultaneously, or else you're someone who's really, really uncomfortable with social relationships and is using FIRE as an excuse. Either way, that's going to make marriage and parenting very very hard for you. That is why I think professional help would be beneficial.

Try to understand what most women in their 30s understand: That life gets complicated. Yes, people are expected to save money, have jobs, raise kids, maintain a marriage, and also deal with home maintenance and health problems and caring for aging parents and special needs of their kids and whatever else comes up, all at the same time. Most people get a bit stressed by this, but overall most people find it manageable. It seems like you think this is unreasonable. But really it's normal life, and anyone you date will be concerned about your inability to handle it.

The downside for anyone you marry is considerable:

Stuck in a LCOL forever.
Low budget forever (I know you think it's a good amount, but it isn't, your estimate of expenses is way too low). No increase in income ever.
Limited to 2 kids and expected to do most of the parenting while you... sit around? That's not what women have in mind when they say they're ok with being the primary parent-- they expect you to be working equally hard at other stuff.
Low budget means she doesn't spend much time with her family, if they don't live in the area.
Your negative attitude towards paid work means that if anything more costly comes up (like IVF, kids special needs, major health problems), you'll have a meltdown over it or else she has to get a job.
You'll be an old dad.

Remember, the FIRE-sphere is weighted towards men, and many of them have more money than you, or have a later target quit date than you. She could marry one of those guys and be a SAHM with a higher quality of life. The downside for her is missing out on what the other guys are offering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If OP has learned anything from this thread it’s that he can’t date 50 year olds that need Vitamin C treatments to assuage their aging skin.

Such a loss.

+1
All of the extremely hot women of DCUM have come out of the woodwork simply to tell OP that they are too hot and accomplished for OP.

Guess what? OP isn't looking for an unpleasant troll so buzz off.

Just curious which women you think won't want some expensive skincare one day? The ones who never age a day?

OP is 33 and being lectured by AARP members about how he can’t possibly find a girlfriend / wife because he can’t pay for some Vitamin C cream for aging skin that costs $180 for 3 months. We are not making this up lol!!

The self deluded arrogance of these PPs to think that anyone who OP would be interested in (25-33 year old women presumably, or somewhere there about) would have the same concerns or dating preferences as them is baffling. The average young adult woman would think she struck the jackpot dating a man with a paid off house and $2M in the bank. That the Golden Girls in this thread can’t step outside of themselves and acknowledge that is weird.

And then we have a contingent of PPs who are concerned with OP being in the house all the time. Newsflash: a large percentage of employed men are in the house all the time right now working from home on a full or partial WFH schedule. OP is going to be as much of an annoyance as anyone who works in IT these days.

Not a "red pill" guy (see my desire to get married and have kids) but this made me lol. And the last bolded is a good point -- I don't really see how this could be a problem for her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If OP has learned anything from this thread it’s that he can’t date 50 year olds that need Vitamin C treatments to assuage their aging skin.

Such a loss.

+1
All of the extremely hot women of DCUM have come out of the woodwork simply to tell OP that they are too hot and accomplished for OP.

Guess what? OP isn't looking for an unpleasant troll so buzz off.

Just curious which women you think won't want some expensive skincare one day? The ones who never age a day?

OP is 33 and being lectured by AARP members about how he can’t possibly find a girlfriend / wife because he can’t pay for some Vitamin C cream for aging skin that costs $180 for 3 months. We are not making this up lol!!

The self deluded arrogance of these PPs to think that anyone who OP would be interested in (25-33 year old women presumably, or somewhere there about) would have the same concerns or dating preferences as them is baffling. The average young adult woman would think she struck the jackpot dating a man with a paid off house and $2M in the bank. That the Golden Girls in this thread can’t step outside of themselves and acknowledge that is weird.

And then we have a contingent of PPs who are concerned with OP being in the house all the time. Newsflash: a large percentage of employed men are in the house all the time right now working from home on a full or partial WFH schedule. OP is going to be as much of an annoyance as anyone who works in IT these days.

Not a "red pill" guy (see my desire to get married and have kids) but this made me lol. And the last bolded is a good point -- I don't really see how this could be a problem for her.

Because someone who is working, is working. They're busy with that. Not roaming the house seeking attention, critiquing your SAHM-ing, and generally being unhelpful.

And because if she has less total leisure time than he does, that's annoying no matter what time of day it is and where he's having it.

And because all the sacrifices she has to make to live on $90K (yes I know OP thinks it's a lot, but it isn't) are going to really grate on her when they could be alleviated by him getting even a wee little part-time job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If OP has learned anything from this thread it’s that he can’t date 50 year olds that need Vitamin C treatments to assuage their aging skin.

Such a loss.

+1
All of the extremely hot women of DCUM have come out of the woodwork simply to tell OP that they are too hot and accomplished for OP.

Guess what? OP isn't looking for an unpleasant troll so buzz off.

Just curious which women you think won't want some expensive skincare one day? The ones who never age a day?

OP is 33 and being lectured by AARP members about how he can’t possibly find a girlfriend / wife because he can’t pay for some Vitamin C cream for aging skin that costs $180 for 3 months. We are not making this up lol!!

The self deluded arrogance of these PPs to think that anyone who OP would be interested in (25-33 year old women presumably, or somewhere there about) would have the same concerns or dating preferences as them is baffling. The average young adult woman would think she struck the jackpot dating a man with a paid off house and $2M in the bank. That the Golden Girls in this thread can’t step outside of themselves and acknowledge that is weird.

And then we have a contingent of PPs who are concerned with OP being in the house all the time. Newsflash: a large percentage of employed men are in the house all the time right now working from home on a full or partial WFH schedule. OP is going to be as much of an annoyance as anyone who works in IT these days.

Not at all. My DH is home 6 days a week between WFH and weekends, but he does 50%+ of housework and parenting tasks. It's a very different kettle of fish being in the house all day with an actual partner and being in the house all day with a bum who expects you to be constantly working because you have a uterus while he tools around on the guitar and disappears for hikes.

You can keep cherry picking 1/8 of each post to try to make OP's demands look realistic, and accusing everyone who is trying to talk some sense into him into being old/ugly/a golddigger/a harpy/a corporate slave, but you're not actually doing him any favors. If he genuinely wants to meet someone to share his life with (and I share upthread PP's read that maybe he just doesn't, and all of this decades-long stalling and list of requirements is a way of staving off the life he thinks he's *supposed* to want), then he should be dating now and meeting actual humans to see where he will need to compromise. Because the reality is that we all do have to compromise, and most people realize that through real-life dating experience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If OP has learned anything from this thread it’s that he can’t date 50 year olds that need Vitamin C treatments to assuage their aging skin.

Such a loss.

+1
All of the extremely hot women of DCUM have come out of the woodwork simply to tell OP that they are too hot and accomplished for OP.

Guess what? OP isn't looking for an unpleasant troll so buzz off.

Just curious which women you think won't want some expensive skincare one day? The ones who never age a day?

OP is 33 and being lectured by AARP members about how he can’t possibly find a girlfriend / wife because he can’t pay for some Vitamin C cream for aging skin that costs $180 for 3 months. We are not making this up lol!!

The self deluded arrogance of these PPs to think that anyone who OP would be interested in (25-33 year old women presumably, or somewhere there about) would have the same concerns or dating preferences as them is baffling. The average young adult woman would think she struck the jackpot dating a man with a paid off house and $2M in the bank. That the Golden Girls in this thread can’t step outside of themselves and acknowledge that is weird.

And then we have a contingent of PPs who are concerned with OP being in the house all the time. Newsflash: a large percentage of employed men are in the house all the time right now working from home on a full or partial WFH schedule. OP is going to be as much of an annoyance as anyone who works in IT these days.

Not a "red pill" guy (see my desire to get married and have kids) but this made me lol. And the last bolded is a good point -- I don't really see how this could be a problem for her.

Because someone who is working, is working. They're busy with that. Not roaming the house seeking attention, critiquing your SAHM-ing, and generally being unhelpful.

And because if she has less total leisure time than he does, that's annoying no matter what time of day it is and where he's having it.

And because all the sacrifices she has to make to live on $90K (yes I know OP thinks it's a lot, but it isn't) are going to really grate on her when they could be alleviated by him getting even a wee little part-time job.

My favorite part of this entire thread might be OP continually acting like he's going to be *gifting* this hypothetical woman with a "top 10%" income when his imaginary 90k would actually only be 60k without her imaginary million-dollar contribution. But nevermind that, he's doing her a favor of providing this lifestyle with her own money. Which is now his, in all of his calculations, and the reason he doesn't have to work anymore. She needs to keep working because she's getting this great gift of him taking all of her money and putting her on a budget so he can watch her work while he hobbies. It's so circular and bizarre.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If OP has learned anything from this thread it’s that he can’t date 50 year olds that need Vitamin C treatments to assuage their aging skin.

Such a loss.

+1
All of the extremely hot women of DCUM have come out of the woodwork simply to tell OP that they are too hot and accomplished for OP.

Guess what? OP isn't looking for an unpleasant troll so buzz off.

Just curious which women you think won't want some expensive skincare one day? The ones who never age a day?

OP is 33 and being lectured by AARP members about how he can’t possibly find a girlfriend / wife because he can’t pay for some Vitamin C cream for aging skin that costs $180 for 3 months. We are not making this up lol!!

The self deluded arrogance of these PPs to think that anyone who OP would be interested in (25-33 year old women presumably, or somewhere there about) would have the same concerns or dating preferences as them is baffling. The average young adult woman would think she struck the jackpot dating a man with a paid off house and $2M in the bank. That the Golden Girls in this thread can’t step outside of themselves and acknowledge that is weird.

And then we have a contingent of PPs who are concerned with OP being in the house all the time. Newsflash: a large percentage of employed men are in the house all the time right now working from home on a full or partial WFH schedule. OP is going to be as much of an annoyance as anyone who works in IT these days.

Not a "red pill" guy (see my desire to get married and have kids) but this made me lol. And the last bolded is a good point -- I don't really see how this could be a problem for her.

Because someone who is working, is working. They're busy with that. Not roaming the house seeking attention, critiquing your SAHM-ing, and generally being unhelpful.

And because if she has less total leisure time than he does, that's annoying no matter what time of day it is and where he's having it.

And because all the sacrifices she has to make to live on $90K (yes I know OP thinks it's a lot, but it isn't) are going to really grate on her when they could be alleviated by him getting even a wee little part-time job.

$90,000 without taxes is $7,500 a month. And there is no mortgage on top of that so it’s mostly all disposable income. You must live a very privileged life if you think having $7,500/month without a mortgage isn’t a nice life.