Has anyone here on a normal income successfully FIREd?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Yes, I said this earlier. There is no wiggle room and no room for fun. Concert - took expensive. Dinner out - nope. Travel - nope. Vacation - maybe. Kids want to play an instrument- can’t afford it. Want to go on girls weekend,
To a friends wedding. Seems like so tight fisted you can’t enjoy anything even though you could - if you worked and earned something - less stress if something goes wrong or fun opportunities come up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

People broke this down for you several pages ago, OP. It's really not that much for a family of four.

Health insurance is going to cost way more than you think. Bronze plans aren't as good as they look. For a family of 4, you'll be spending $2K a month on the plan plus copays, balance billing, and non-covered services. Little kids have a lot of appointments and you can't skip their annual dental and physicals-- it'll be required by the school. Kids injure themselves, they get ear infections, all kinds of random appointments. $2K a month is the best case scenario-- it could be a lot more if you have a child with special needs.

Home maintenance is more than you think. Really think about this-- calculate that you have to set aside monthly to keep up with big maintenance things like a new roof, boiler, HVAC, exterior paint. Plus all the appliances that wear out every 10 years or so. Even if you DIY, you'll be buying a lot of supplies and renting tools. Also don't forget your exterior landscaping, front walk, gutter cleaning, and proper drainage, and you may also have a garage that needs roof, paint, etc. I suggest budgeting $1000 a month for this-- I know it seems like a lot, but that's my experience. Especially if your home insurance deductible is pretty high.

You'll also be needing to maintain at least one car and replace periodically, most likely two unless your wife enjoys being confined to the home, and more gas and mileage than in a LCOL than a city, so plan $500 a month for gas, maintenance and as a replacement fund.

Property taxes would be about $150-200 a month. But then there's HOA stuff if you're in a HOA, and all the random "assessments" that LOCLs tend to do so they can brag about their low tax rate. Plus, LCOLs have lots of built-in expenses that city condo dwellers can't even begin to list, such as getting your septic tank pumped. Paying for snow plowing. Fallen trees, driveway maintenance if your driveway isn't a town road. So let's guess a total of $500 a month for taxes and other random costs. https://www.frugalwoods.com/2018/01/29/city-vs-country-which-is-cheaper-the-ultimate-cost-of-living-showdown/

Average of $500 a month for kid expenses, because kids cost a lot-- it's not any one item or activity, it's all of it together. They outgrow their clothes and shoes-- you can get used, but that's a time-suck and hard to find the shoes, and they're always losing their mittens and jackets and boots. Then there's their activities-- and I know you think kid activities are stupid, but are you really going to hold them out of a school field trip rather than pay $10? Make them decline all social invitations that have any cost? Never have swimming lessons for safety? Come on. Plus birthday and holiday gifts.

Groceries and household supplies, say $500 a month but it'll be a lot more as the kids grow.

$200 a month utilities and phones-- utilities really depends on the climate though.

Let's not forget travel, since you're insisting on a LCOL your wife will probably want to travel to visit her family twice a year. And do you want to visit your own family who so lovingly supported you after college? So maybe $300 a month for that, depending on if you drive or fly. It could be a lot more if your parents start having health problems and actually need you more frequently, of course.

Don't forget $500 a month for the cleaning service! You'll definitely want it twice a month when you have kids, since you're not even willing to clean your own little condo right now.

Then of course, there's saving for college. I understand you don't see a need for this, but it's really hard to find women who want to do that to their own children if it isn't strictly necessary, so you'll be compromising here. Most mothers would consider their children's education more important than their husband's super-early retirement. So let's do $500 a month for that (across two kids), for part of their tuition, expenses, and room and board.

So, we've already spent $6500 of your monthly $7500 on really basic stuff. We haven't considered, for example, adult clothing and shoes, or replacing computers, or anything you might spend on holidays or religious or civic activities. Surely you'll go to a restaurant now and then, and perhaps you might each have a low-cost hobby. And nothing really bad has happened-- nobody's had a major illness, nobody's needed to see an out-of-network specialist, no kid has required tutoring or developmental interventions. And you've denied your wife a third child, which would be a dealbreaker for some. $7500 a month is really quite tight, and doesn't allow for a lot of fun. To live that way just so a grown-up man can sit around all day... I think a lot of women would say "No thanks". Because remember, women have the upper hand in FIRE dating and she can likely be a SAHM on a more generous budget by marrying someone else instead.

[Anonymous]

New poster here, so sorry if I missed these points.

First off, why do you even want kids OP? I didn't see anything from you about this desire. You can easily achieve your lifestyle being DINKs. I just dont read any real love and desire for kids. Sure, you can provide them with a basic life. I could get that if you intend to spend a lot of time raising them and not want to miss out on any moments, but you want your wife to do that. So...why not just skip kids? You might resent them when they screw up your plans and change your wife's outlooks. No one can prepare for parenthood and there is a good chance your wife, no matter what she was like before kids, may change. So unless you love kids, just don't have any.

Second, life just can't be planned out the way you have. The ability to plan can be a great thing but also a great downfall if it goes too far. To any smart woman, the inflexibility that comes through in your posts would be a giant red flag. That, along with the fact that you already have your own life planned out without input from this woman. You will never find someone who is just willing to step into a role you assigned for her. Certainly not a woman who has already saved a million (or even 200k) by 33. Nope.

Third, life just gets expensive. When we were single, both DH and I were extremely frugal. I might not have planned FIRE like you did but we just didn't spend much. Easy to be frugal when single. A little harder when in a relationship if you even want to attempt to woe your significant other. Then impossible with a family. As a single woman, if you told me how much our family spends now, I would be in shock and would honestly have no idea how it would be possible. But yet here we are.

Very few women want to sign up for such a capped life. You will have to assume your future wife is very poor and desperate or very young and naive and trying to escape her life. Those women might be attracted to your money and life but I can't say that it would be the healthiest or longest lasting marriage.

[Anonymous]

Also adding that it's totally ok to execute your plan and give it your best shot but hopefully this board has prepared you for the possibility that it might not work out or that your wife might change. Hopefully you will have the maturity to choose your future family over your own need for a certain lifestyle. If you are not ready to make that commitment that family comes first (rather than your dream), then maybe reconsider the family.

[Anonymous]

This is the most ridiculous thing I’ve read in a while. I’m an immigrant woman, and I can assure you that no one wants a guy sitting at home at age 40 doing nothing. Neither in USA, neither anywhere. It shows lazyness and that I cannot count on you if something happens to me, like get cancer or become disabled. I don’t care how much money you have. You need to do something productive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is the most ridiculous thing I’ve read in a while. I’m an immigrant woman, and I can assure you that no one wants a guy sitting at home at age 40 doing nothing. Neither in USA, neither anywhere. It shows lazyness and that I cannot count on you if something happens to me, like get cancer or become disabled. I don’t care how much money you have. You need to do something productive.

I’m sorry but if you’re gonna get sick and get cancer then you’re a deadweight to the guy. He shouldn’t want you either

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the most ridiculous thing I’ve read in a while. I’m an immigrant woman, and I can assure you that no one wants a guy sitting at home at age 40 doing nothing. Neither in USA, neither anywhere. It shows lazyness and that I cannot count on you if something happens to me, like get cancer or become disabled. I don’t care how much money you have. You need to do something productive.

I’m sorry but if you’re gonna get sick and get cancer then you’re a deadweight to the guy. He shouldn’t want you either

but seriously

[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.

I almost laugh out loud because it is just so ridiculous. But it is also mean. I feel bad for future wife who has to do everything.

After saving a million dollars by her early 30s, which will STILL not measure up to his savings, so she'll be on the hook for the hard parts of parenting forever. But she'll like it, so no problem!

This is just all so unreasonable. I do know women who always wanted to be a stay at home mom and primary parent. None of them stayed single until their 30s and saved a million dollars first.

Heaven forbid a woman actually wants to raise her children instead of being a corporate drone who does little or nothing for society.

There are Highly educated women who choose to do just that. I have two BS (T10 university) and a MS from a T20 university. When we decided to have kids, figured I'd work PT. Once kid arrived, I changed my mind and stayed home. Loved my time raising the kids and being very involved in their lives/school/volunteering/etc. Glad I choose the right partner to parent with so this was an option for our family

Most women would choose to do just that, but only few have a spouse who can earn enough to support a family in relative comfort. If your spouse were to earn enough for just very basic penny pinching life and you had to struggle would you stay home or go back to your well earning job? If your spouse had volatile career and income was uncertain would you SAH? If your spouse lost tons of money in the market (many do) or got ill and unable to earn well, or developed some addiction would you still be able to SAH? These are real issues people face all the time. I know some women who are wealthy SAHMs or are comfortable financially without constant stress and they acknowledge how lucky they are. It's akin to being a trust fund baby or winning a lottery because this lifestyle is becoming harder and harder to attain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I almost laugh out loud because it is just so ridiculous. But it is also mean. I feel bad for future wife who has to do everything.

After saving a million dollars by her early 30s, which will STILL not measure up to his savings, so she'll be on the hook for the hard parts of parenting forever. But she'll like it, so no problem!

This is just all so unreasonable. I do know women who always wanted to be a stay at home mom and primary parent. None of them stayed single until their 30s and saved a million dollars first.

Heaven forbid a woman actually wants to raise her children instead of being a corporate drone who does little or nothing for society.

There are Highly educated women who choose to do just that. I have two BS (T10 university) and a MS from a T20 university. When we decided to have kids, figured I'd work PT. Once kid arrived, I changed my mind and stayed home. Loved my time raising the kids and being very involved in their lives/school/volunteering/etc. Glad I choose the right partner to parent with so this was an option for our family

Most women would choose to do just that, but only few have a spouse who can earn enough to support a family in relative comfort. If your spouse were to earn enough for just very basic penny pinching life and you had to struggle would you stay home or go back to your well earning job? If your spouse had volatile career and income was uncertain would you SAH? If your spouse lost tons of money in the market (many do) or got ill and unable to earn well, or developed some addiction would you still be able to SAH? These are real issues people face all the time. I know some women who are wealthy SAHMs or are comfortable financially without constant stress and they acknowledge how lucky they are. It's akin to being a trust fund baby or winning a lottery because this lifestyle is becoming harder and harder to attain.

Women assess their mates based on their *future* earning potential unless they are really loaded. OP, you will be perceived by the women in affluent areas as being on a downward trajectory. I suggest moving or looking outside of UMC suburban enclaves or trendy urban areas. It may mean you are going to have to marry a woman of lower class whose standards are not developed in an affluence bubble or a woman of modest means who isn't a millionaire, but shares your values, is educated and will work with you helping to stretch ever dollar. You are going to need it as you get older, things aren't getting cheaper and investing well isn't something everyone can do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the most ridiculous thing I’ve read in a while. I’m an immigrant woman, and I can assure you that no one wants a guy sitting at home at age 40 doing nothing. Neither in USA, neither anywhere. It shows lazyness and that I cannot count on you if something happens to me, like get cancer or become disabled. I don’t care how much money you have. You need to do something productive.

I’m sorry but if you’re gonna get sick and get cancer then you’re a deadweight to the guy. He shouldn’t want you either

This is not something anyone can predict and can happen to either spouse or both There is no insurance in life that one maintains their level of wealth or earnings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op, you need to start meeting and dating actual women before you invent the perfect one in your mind. You have been so focused on your goals that you’ve lost touch with the real world.

Find love first, then find the financial planning and life arrangements that work for you *together.* It’s a fools errand to think you have it all figured out by yourself and then demand that a self-made millionaire waltz in and agree to do everything your way.

I agree there would be some merit in doing this. That’s what prompted the original post in the first place – I’m starting to get a little bit restless.

However, I’m at the point where I’m really starting to see the benefits of compound interest – I can probably go from $1.1 million now to $2.3 million in five years. Assuming 10% growth (which obviously never happens linearly) and $75,000 in contributions per year (in Roth and taxable accounts, not pre-tax), I’ll be at $2 million in four years. I was giving myself an extra year just to be on the safe side.

From the point of view of retiring, there’s a world of difference between $2.3 million and $1.1 million, so I’m loathe to do anything to potentially interrupt the compounding at this point. It’s only 4-5 years and then I’ll have the rest of my life back. It seems reckless to interrupt the compounding at this point.

Oh, well, we wouldn’t want to interrupt the compounding through, like, normal human interaction. You realize that once you’ve found the self-made millionaire who dreams of having a shiftless husband, you’ll still want to be compounding interest? What will you say when your wife and kids want a trip to Disney? Or to get a tricycle for Christmas? Or to spend some quality time with you? “Wish we could but I can’t interrupt the compounding”?

You could get diagnosed with brain cancer tomorrow. Or get hit by a bus. Or lose your job. Or the market tanks. You need to start finding a way to mix some actual life and living in with all that compounding, brother.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the most ridiculous thing I’ve read in a while. I’m an immigrant woman, and I can assure you that no one wants a guy sitting at home at age 40 doing nothing. Neither in USA, neither anywhere. It shows lazyness and that I cannot count on you if something happens to me, like get cancer or become disabled. I don’t care how much money you have. You need to do something productive.

I’m sorry but if you’re gonna get sick and get cancer then you’re a deadweight to the guy. He shouldn’t want you either

This is not something anyone can predict and can happen to either spouse or both There is no insurance in life that one maintains their level of wealth or earnings.

Sounds like a personal problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op, you need to start meeting and dating actual women before you invent the perfect one in your mind. You have been so focused on your goals that you’ve lost touch with the real world.

Find love first, then find the financial planning and life arrangements that work for you *together.* It’s a fools errand to think you have it all figured out by yourself and then demand that a self-made millionaire waltz in and agree to do everything your way.

I agree there would be some merit in doing this. That’s what prompted the original post in the first place – I’m starting to get a little bit restless.

However, I’m at the point where I’m really starting to see the benefits of compound interest – I can probably go from $1.1 million now to $2.3 million in five years. Assuming 10% growth (which obviously never happens linearly) and $75,000 in contributions per year (in Roth and taxable accounts, not pre-tax), I’ll be at $2 million in four years. I was giving myself an extra year just to be on the safe side.

From the point of view of retiring, there’s a world of difference between $2.3 million and $1.1 million, so I’m loathe to do anything to potentially interrupt the compounding at this point. It’s only 4-5 years and then I’ll have the rest of my life back. It seems reckless to interrupt the compounding at this point.

Wait, can you explain specifically how dating would interrupt the compounding? Will your boss pay you less if you date? Will it affect your rate of return? Do you work as an hourly employee literally all of your waking hours? Because dating, FIRE-style, is just not expensive enough to make a noticeable difference in your trajectory.

I really think spending some time improving your social skills and getting a feel for the FIRE dating market will pay off for you. Even if it does delay your retirement by a month or two, it'll give you a much-needed reality check and improve your chances of actually finding someone who is willing to marry you. You can't expect to go from zero to marriage with the first person you date. That's not how it works for 99% of the population.

[Anonymous]

I’m trying to figure out where this thread made the highest jump over the shark. I think it was when OP bragged about sleeping with two women in her building.

[Anonymous]

Frumpy and "highly intelligent" T10 strivers not going to take shiiite from someone like OP! Haha