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.
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 bothThere is no insurance in life that one maintains their level of wealth or earnings.
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.
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
There is no insurance in life that one maintains their level of wealth or earnings. 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.
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
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 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.
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.
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.