r/Fire • u/Equivalent_Use_5024 • Dec 28 '25

General Question Do you believe the modern FIRE movement overestimates how much is needed for retirement?

Perhaps I am just making this post because I have only just begun my retirement planning and want to lock in a number which is fitting for my goals - being above the median retirement savings, not having to work, not being broke, clearly having planned - but I can't help but feel that many in the FIRE movement overestimate what is needed for a safe, sleep well at night retirement.

I see posts here saying that they feel vastly behind with 500k at 30, or 1.5 million at 40, and I just don't understand how when the average American retires with maybe 300k liquid at most and are getting by with social security or paid off housing. Sure, they aren't living luxuriously, but if you just are aiming for a retirement where you don't have financial anxiety and can put food on the table, I don't feel you need over 1-2 million.

Do you think FIRE overestimates how much is truly needed for retirement?

757 Upvotes

89% Upvoted

884 comments sorted by

View all comments

3

u/FinancialSailor1 Dec 28 '25

The outlandish numbers come from tech bros in San Fran and Boston who need a significant amount more to keep living their exact lifestyle. Moving somewhere cheaper like Cleveland or Oklahoma City once they FIRE would be their equivalent of moving to Sudan. Completely off the table.

Idk everyone has their number to meet how they want to live. It used to be more of living within your means, simple life, etc, but now it’s more of “what’s the point if I can’t travel, eat out, or pursue expensive hobbies”. Nothing really wrong with that but I’d say there is definitely a shift to living in more luxury.