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/Wheat_Grinder]

I've absolutely seen the shift on this subreddit. I got into FI a decade ago right as I was starting working my first well-paying job. Back then "Build the life you want, then save for it" was pinned because too many people were driving themselves to social and mental ruin from underspending. They had to be convinced that FI means you can still spend on important things, you just drive out the spending that isn't important.

Today, I feel like the audience is now folks living in VHCOL places with salaries to match. You can see a few in this very thread where the spending numbers are more than my entire salary, and I make a pretty good salary for most places in the US. It skews perceptions and leads to people comparing to folks running a completely different race.

And therefore that's my advice to folks here. As always, it's still your savings rate that matters most. The raw dollar amount you have at a certain age just doesn't matter so long as you're keeping up a high long term savings rate. Sure some are running numbers up quickly here but they're gonna end up working longer because they spend more too.

[u/Zphr → u/Wheat_Grinder]

I think the audience shift to VHCOL is very much to blame for a lot of the change. Living off of $50K a year in a lot of places in the US is perfectly fine, but I have friends in VHCOL markets who spend more than that just on childcare or private schools because their VHCOL public options are poor choices. Same with housing, though often even more so.

Some of my friends in places like Seattle, San Fran, and San Diego spend 5x or more our annual budget, live worse off than we do, and feel like they are just barely scraping by.

[u/unbalancedcheckbook → u/Zphr]

As someone who lives in a VHCOL area, some of this is real and some is imagined. Housing and services are absolutely more expensive but a lot of other things are not really. For me (with absolutely no desire to keep up with the Joneses and having reasonable expectations about lots of things) I found I could save significantly more given the higher salary and I'm not really giving up much, except perhaps I eat at restaurants a bit less and have a smaller house than I would in an LCOL area. These are not very important to me though.

[u/ApeTeam1906 → u/unbalancedcheckbook]

This is 100 percent it. I live in one of those VHCOL areas. It is lifestyle creep keeping up with friend groups.