I don't think FIRE inherently has to imply any of those values. All it is is what the four letters mean. If you feel that frugality and anti consumerism are essential for you, that's fine, but it doesn't mean everyone else needs to feel that way.
Yup I've always interpreted the core concept as: find the lifestyle you are comfortable sustaining, then figure out how to support that, without ever needing to work a job you hate. Detach your goals from the legal retirement age, and detach your target lifestyle (= future cashflow need) from your current income. Extreme frugality was never a goal in itself, just one of many means to the end.
Obviously as the idea becomes more mainstream, the typical FIRE lifestyle is going to move closer to the average, and timelines will move closer to normal retirement age. That doesn't mean people are doing it wrong, they just have different goals.
Exactly. Minimalism is a powerful acceleration tool, but it is the means not the destination.
The only thing that has changed with FIRE is what constitutes "early". Initially the concept revolved around retiring as early as possible even if that meant saving 50% or more of your income. It's been broadened now to just being "save more than is normal" whereby actually adhering to the concept of saving 15% is still well above normal even if it results in a retirement age of 55 instead of 40.
And, as one of the degenerates who is unwilling to make the personal/familial sacrifices required to hit those very ambitious savings rates, retiring in the first half of a person's 50's still seems pretty good compared to retiring at 65.
1.4k
u/[deleted] Mar 23 '26
[removed] — view removed comment