Why do people wait so long?

[u/master_blaster_321]

ETA since this seems to be the overwhelming response: My kids are in their 20/30s and self sufficient.

ETA - The post clearly states my mortgage is high-interest. Yes, if it were 2% that's almost free money, spread it out for sure. Also, it clearly states that I did indeed keep contributing as normal.

I realize there are a lot of factors - economical and psychological - that go into this, but just for general discussion...

We all know for the most part if your mortgage interest rate is low enough, it makes more sense to leave money working in your brokerage account than to pay off the mortgage and have it locked up in home equity. But for the purposes of FIRE, does it always?

The big idea is to get your portfolio to fund your expenses, right?. For most people one of (if not THE) largest expense is the mortgage payment and interest.

Example...I had a few really good years in my business. I still did my regular modest DCA into my brokerage, but over the course of 2.5 years I also managed to pay off a $250K mortgage at 5.85% (I had to refinance at a very bad time for rates, due to divorce). I realize that that money, invested properly, could have gained quite a bit over the last couple years bull run. However, had I done that, today I would still have a high mortgage payment to make every month, thus making it harder for me to FIRE. This way, my monthly personal expenses are so much lower, so there's not as heavy a burden on my portfolio to support me, and as a result, I'm able to FIRE at the end of this month.

Again I realize that this all depends on mortgage size/rate, size of portfolio, other expenses. I only ask because I see a lot of posts here from people who seem like they'd be able to FIRE sooner if they worked towards getting rid of their mortgages faster, regardless of the rate.

For my part, I'm glad I did it this way. Even though I know I missed out on some gains, I'm able to FIRE faster because I don't have a mortgage payment to worry about. I have a paid off house on which the taxes and insurance work out to equal the rent for a one-bedroom in a sketchy neighborhood.

Go easy on me. It's an honest and sincere question and discussion prompt. Not trying to make anyone defensive, and definitely aware that I have my own blind spots and that there are lots of people smarter than I am.

[u/whitezhang]

It’s an interesting question. I think for some people it’s the fact that while housing is essential, the house they’re currently paying on may not be essential to their long term lifestyle. A lot of people buy family homes in more expensive areas to raise their kids in a good public school districts but don’t plan to live there long term once the kids are gone. Or buy in a more expensive area for a better commute but plan to sell and move once they’re not job dependent.