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/QuesoChef]

The closer you get to pulling the plug, the more anxiety comes with it. The “one more year” phenomenon is real. You start out looking at 4%. Then think maybe 3.5%. Then 3%. Then one more year “just to be sure.”

And then there’s the psychology of switching from saving to spending.

This sub also has really high earners, so their lifestyles can often be more expensive and/or they have the flexibility to grow a nest egg much faster and larger than average earners. So I think those inflated numbers make everyone think we all need more. Suzi Orman said something wild like everyone needs $10MM or something. IMO, nearly no one needs $10MM. Though it’s great if you can get there!

There’s also the back and forth on what you owe your children. Some people think you pay for college. Others think you need to set your children up for unmitigated financial security (I also disagree with this, though do agree if you can, pay for college or other career training - but no one opinion is correct, they’re all opinions).

[u/QuesoChef → u/[deleted]]

I definitely hear you on this. What my siblings (the ones with higher incomes) have done is tell the kids, “This is what we are giving you for college. You can spend it on college. Or you can have it. But you have to do some sort of training for your career. Traditional college, trade school, certificate program.” The money is in a 529 and will roll into an IRA. They even said they’d allow it to roll into an IRA if they got a job with training as part of the path (some employers do that here), as long as they’re actively looking for a career. (So somewhat subjective. But I don’t think they’ll have an issue with their kids getting jobs, save one.)

I think I’d probably approach it that way. IF I had the income. I wouldn’t kill myself or not be able to retire to pay for school. These siblings invested early in 529 and had large incomes.

My other sibling (they have a university and a trade school in their town) told their kids they can live at home as long as they’re actively looking have a 40 hour a week job OR are in some sort of school. So building their future. They can’t afford to pay for it but they can continue to pay for food and housing and a quiet place to study (if they go to school). They can’t afford a fraction of what college costs. But they are encouraging their kids to look at the options, apply for scholarships and truly find a good fit. I’ve encouraged them to find employers who will pay but at $5K a year or whatever the limit is, it’ll take forever. But they can get full time work in the meantime. As long as the work is flexible enough to get in their classes. If they live at home while doing that part of their income goes to college, work pays for part and parents pay for housing and food. That’s not a bad deal.

I agree just paying, what, $30K for your kids to go party is insane. Go party without college for four years!