Anonymous wrote:OP is talking about nut to maintain a current standard of living. I do the same but for early retirement. As long as I have my nut I will early retire around age 50. However, not getting a low pay job until then, but sometimes dream about it. Not a high earner relative to DCUM.

Some other threads talking about saving 4M-6M to retire at age 65. I think half is enough and will retire early. At age 65 my body will be messed up from sitting a desk most of adult life and how I can I travel the world then?

OP is talking about nut to maintain a current standard of living. I do the same but for early retirement. As long as I have my nut I will early retire around age 50. However, not getting a low pay job until then, but sometimes dream about it. Not a high earner relative to DCUM.

My nuts are the size of peanuts, so they are very easy to cover. You do you, OP.

So, we kind of do this I guess? We keep our expenses low -- we live in a dumpy house and drive a 10yo car, etc. WE try to keep our expenses such that if either one of us decided that we wanted to walk out of our jobs tomorrow we could. Obviously we would have to scale back on things like vacations and savings, etc but our "nut" would be covered.

Then live it, Op. Save the rest. See if you *really* can do it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your question doesn't make any sense. If cutting back still allows you to save enough to meet your goals then your question is really does everyone just max out their earning potential and the answer is obviously no.

OP here. First of all, the responses have made me laugh - yes I am nutty! lol

You actually phrased it what I was asking. I just don't think I have met anyone that was open about not maxing out their earning potential without family money.

I don’t. I earn 250k and hubby around 500k. It just isn’t good balance for us as a family if I start moving jobs every 3-5 years like hubby. I want to be available for my kids with a predictable 40 hr job. We are at $3M net worth in mid 40’s and this income is enough to sustain our needs, some wants and a ton of retirement and college savings

Anonymous wrote:I focus on saving enough for 20x nuts, then I can quit and feed myself on the saved nuts.

Lol

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"nut" and "cover your nut" are common terms, people

To "cover your nut" in the US, is a slang term for meeting your financial obligations; the basic bills and obligations that you have to pay.

"You've Got to Know Your 'Monthly Nut'"
https://www.foxbusiness.com/features/youve-got-to-know-your-monthly-nut

Never heard of it. Sounds vulgar. Your increasing medical needs, aging-in-place costs, nursing home, etc, need to be factored in, OP, and that is an area that's really challenging to assess.

In current culture it is vulgar. You “nut”, your “load” is referring to a males ejaculation. It’s a misogynistic term referring to what a man can provide.

What? No. In the current context, it refers to your stashed away safe amount, like a squirrel buries a nut for winter.

Anonymous wrote:My take is not to assume a 90k a year job is a lot easier than your current job. Salary is not the best indicator of workload.

+1000. I downsized to a “lesser role” and long term, it didn’t turn out to be less work or stress just different

I think a lot more people do the opposite - stay in jobs that give them enough to cover their needs instead of rising as far and fast as they can. Going from a high to low earning job is less common. I guess think about what your life would look like with an HHI of $160k; that's what mine is and we're OK, I'd happily earn $100k more if I still saw my kids at night and on weekends, but wouldn't trade it to be traveling 3 weeks a month or working 12 hours a day.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your question doesn't make any sense. If cutting back still allows you to save enough to meet your goals then your question is really does everyone just max out their earning potential and the answer is obviously no.

OP here. First of all, the responses have made me laugh - yes I am nutty! lol

You actually phrased it what I was asking. I just don't think I have met anyone that was open about not maxing out their earning potential without family money.

Plenty of people do it. The jobs forum is filled with people that left biglaw for govt or in house. Sure, most wouldn't make partner but they could have landed at a midsized firm but still putting in significant hours.

+1 We both resigned big law partnerships, cut our annual income more than in half. We have more than enough saved, more than enough to live on, donate a ton, volunteer a ton, kids are set. People killing themselves to make more than more-than-anyone-needs are ridiculously stuck on Lucy's assembly line.