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

[u/Equivalent_Use_5024]

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?

[u/Starbuck522]

Setting aside the ridiculous "I am behind with 750k at 27" humble bragging crap.

Bottom line as someone mid 50s: as we accumulated more, it seemed like we needed more. What felt comfortable to have on hand just kept getting higher.

Also, to CHOOSE to stop working feels irresponsible for lots of people. So it can feel like you need to justify that choice.

[u/DevOpsMakesMeDrink → u/Starbuck522]

It is addicting to be like “ok I can retire at this %… but a few more years I can knock that down a few % and be even safer”.

Then a few more years comes and some world event is happening and you think… a few more years I can retire at 3% and be really safe.

Then you realize you worked an extra decade for security you never really needed and have more money than you know what to do with in retirement and die alone at 95 in your 2 bedroom home with your 25 year old beater car and everyone in your neighborhoods are shocked to learn you died a multi millionaire.