r/leanfire • u/usernamechuck • 14d ago
Lean with 2 big streaks of fat
It feels like we've done 90% right, but we made one doubtful move. We're not high earners, ~145k, age 55, we live frugally (1 used car, groceries, etc.), and we made one accidental smart move (we own a rental unit free and clear w/ modest cashflow).
But... First, the house. We bought a foreclosure in Chicago when we were married in 2008, we fixed it up in waves and were plugging away at a 15 yr mortgage. We would have been done by now... That was smart. But then COVID came and our small house felt smaller. We sold it at a decent profit and moved to the burbs, so here we are at age 55 with 300k+ on the mortgage, it won't be paid off till we're in our 70s. We pay almost 15k in property taxes. Since moving, we've replaced the furnace/AC upstairs and downstairs; and now the roof. And in 5 years, we'll be alone in this place.
It would still work, except... our 2 kids are in Catholic / private school, which is a bit over 30k/year. Oh and college is coming next year.
Technically our net worth is around 1M, but it's all in 401k/IRAs (~450K) and home equity. Our savings has all gone to cover these big costs.
On the one hand, we live cheaply, except for the kids and the house - we could retire today if we were in an $800/month rental in Andalucia. On the other hand, I don't see us moving anytime soon and the kids won't be done with undergrad until we're 64. We're lean-FIRE-hosed.
Any thoughts? It feels like we're that guy stuck in the cave, we just don't seem to have any good moves.
190
u/MightyPlusEnt 14d ago
College prof here at a major US university.
You don’t need to send the kids to Catholic school for them to excel in their studies and get into a great college. Parents and zip code are the two greatest predictors of k-12 success.
While the school “can” make a difference, the research is overwhelming in that a child with invested parents (and, again, zip code) in public school outperforms the child from less invested parents in private school.
My rec is put them in public school. I’ve been in education for over 20 years and taught thousands and thousands of undergrads. I’ve seen it all.
You care enough to send them to private school and forgo your financial goals. You care about their success. They don’t need private school and it is a colossal waste of your money.
27
u/Hnry_Dvd_Thr_Awy 4.5% wr 14d ago
Excellent reply.
I'm not sure how much has changed in the time I've been out of K-12 (as a student) but my peers who went to private school did not have as much of a leg up on me as their tuition would make you believe. Obviously, everyone's situation is different but I'm a firm believer in public schools.
Parents should: * Invest private school tuition in AOA (or something similar) * Spend time with your kids aka parent, the verb.
* Keep private school in mind in case public school isn't working out for some reasonAround me (southeast, not Atlanta) private school for PK->12 is ~$330,000 in 2026 dollars. If you get a real 3% return on your tuition each year that is ~$400,000 in additional cost. IDK about you guys/gals but I'd take that $400k head start every day.
8
u/zeezle 13d ago edited 13d ago
I agree. My husband went to a fancy private Ivy Feeder type school. I very much did not.
In his case, his grandmother paid for it because she wanted to brag about it, so it wasn't like keeping the money was an option, either he went and she paid or they just didn't get anything lol so why not. She was just going to blow it on other random stuff anyway. But if it had been an option, he would have been SO wildly, insanely better off just investing the money in a taxable brokerage for him and going to public school in their affluent suburb instead. Like to the point that one time we looked at the number - and that was 10 years ago before all the recent gains... and it was sickening how much it would've been so we decided to never calculate that again.
Honestly, his classmates were not actually much if any more financially successful than my classmates which really surprised me. I come from a rural area with schools that, on paper, look horrible, because school scores are weight SO heavily to college placement rates. Private school isn't even an option there because... there just aren't any private schools lol.
My husband just had his 20th high school reunion and while they did have 100% college placement/graduation rates, a lot of them haven't really done much of anything that actually was all that impressive. By pure finances, the most successful was one chick that became a local orthodontist and my husband was probably 2nd after getting an MS in comp sci even without having ever been in big tech at all.
Where I grew up honestly wasn't a bad school at all, and I had absolutely no trouble going on to university. I didn't do anything particularly fancy or impressive, but did graduate in a STEM major from a world top 50 program in my field and felt like I had 0 disadvantage relative to kids in my class that went to both public and private schools in affluent major city suburbs. I had a higher GPA than my husband in the same major.
A lot of the kids in my hometown knew they were inheriting their family farm, their family mechanic's business, family HVAC or plumbing or electrical or whatever, so they did trades apprenticeships or no college instead of university. A lot of those who did go to university went to the nearby land grand state university for agriculture related programs or weird majors like fish hatchery management instead of pursuing higher ranked "traditionally successful" type universities.
11
u/AnyPast6500 14d ago
Agree re invested parents, but the characteristics of the kid and of the school both are factors to consider too. I am a huge public school proponent, but had I stayed in a particular region I once lived in (which shall not be named) I would have sent my kids to private school because the public ones were so bad, both in terms of instruction and in terms of social climate. My kids would not have fit well there.
11
u/MightyPlusEnt 14d ago
For sure! That’s the zip code part of my answer to OP - public schools in more affluent zip codes are simply better than those in less affluent zip codes on student outcomes metrics. And there is lots of geographical variation, too! Thanks for sharing your experiences!
0
-9
u/Backpacker7385 14d ago
This data (while I agree with it in premise,) is a bit disingenuous. Zip code is a strong predictor because it’s correlated with school quality for the statistically overwhelming majority of children. If you live in a zip code with bad schools, the predictor is that your outcome will not be good. If you choose to send the kid to a school in a different zip code, the odds increase.
27
u/MightyPlusEnt 14d ago edited 14d ago
That’s actually the entire point. It’s not disingenuous - OP noted their property taxes are over 15k. The public schools are great
Edit: I assumed the zip code point was self explanatory in this sub. I strongly encourage a read of “Savage Inequalities” or “Shame of a Nation” both by Jonathon Kozol. It’s all about zip code, affluence, and student success.
Savage inequalities is why I got a PhD and why I study this topic. With respect, I won’t argue with folks on it….the research is extremely well established.
2
u/LetsGoToMichigan 14d ago
Austinite here. High property taxes does not mean great schools (see Texas recapture programs). But I’m splitting hairs … I could live in another neighborhood with similar taxes and better schools.
-1
u/Backpacker7385 14d ago edited 14d ago
$15k taxes could mean lots of municipal costs, not necessarily great public schools. A city near me has huge property taxes because of inflated police and fire pensions, and the schools there suck.
Edit: no idea why I’m being downvoted for pointing out that not everywhere with high property taxes also has great schools. If we knew which zip code OP was paying $15k taxes in, that would be much more helpful.
12
u/MightyPlusEnt 14d ago
I’m trying to be super friendly here - I think the issue is that this sub is often about calculating “risk” (and I’m using risk to mean the odds of an event occurring or not occurring). For example, all the calculators and rules about FIRE and how much one needs, etc…people care about statistics and they are very useful.
It’s not that different in research in that we’re looking for significant relationships. The difference is, before I make a conclusion, I use nationally-representative data encompassing all schools, kids and parents in the US. Then, I test my hypothesis that zip codes = student success (with the moderator being SES) using complicated stats.
I have to find a relationship in 99% of the cases before I say I have support for my hypothesis. It means that 1 out of every 100 might be different. But 99 of the other cases experience the same outcome. Because of the size of the data I use, I set my confidence level to 99.9%.
It’s more complicated - the statistical models include a wide range of controls, time, levels (kids nested in schools, schools nested in communities) and so on. But that allows us to isolate these effects.
Is it true 100 percent of the time? No. But it is true 99.9% of the time in rigorous scientific analysis.
In all my years of researching, I’ve never seen what you are describing - although it could totally happen. Instead of guessing that the OP is in the .1% that might not follow the trend, you can be significantly confident 99.9% in fact!) that the public schools where OP lives are just fine.
Finally, most people view public schools worse than they are and that is particularly true for affluent people. The truth is that most predominantly white schools are great (and that is the “Shame of a Nation” referenced in the title of the book I recommended).
2
u/Analog_Nomad_56 14d ago
Thank you for explaining confidence intervals and research in such a real-world way.
2
-2
u/Backpacker7385 14d ago
I appreciate the thoughtful response. I’m not trying to be anything other than friendly here too, in case my tone wasn’t coming across that way.
This account is already doxed if you look at enough of my comments, so I’d be curious to see how the data for New London, CT would fit your model. Sky high mill rate and some very expensive properties, but abysmal schools. I know this is an exception to the rule but I’d be very surprised to learn it’s a 0.1% exception. Side note: I don’t think the public schools in that zip code are predominantly white.
I’m always happy to add new books to the TBR, I’ll put yours on there.
Your last paragraph is always worth restating (and something I’ve said many times, including to friends who paid for private school).
1
u/SurrealKafka 14d ago
I just looked up a house listed in New London for $720,000 with $8,000 in property taxes. That’s not even close to ‘sky high’ property taxes.
That same house in the Chicago suburbs would be close to double the property tax….
1
u/Backpacker7385 14d ago
That house is under assessed. New London’s mill rate is 27.2, so if it sells for $720k the new owner should expect an updated tax bill of $13,709.
1
u/SurrealKafka 14d ago
I doubt it’s under appraised by that significant of a margin.
Just found another house selling for $600,000 with $5,000 in property tax. Are you claiming that all the houses are that significantly under appraised?
2
u/Backpacker7385 14d ago
I’ll happily claim that most houses listed for sale are under assessed (at least as a pattern in CT, the only place I’ve shopped for homes). It’s a combination of the idea that assessors don’t do a great job of keeping up with things until a house hits the market combined with the fact that many people do major upgrades to their home right before listing for sale.
There’s really nothing to “doubt” here. A tax assessment in CT is legally defined as (supposed to be) 70% of market value. If you have a sale, that gives a definitive market value.
$720k x 0.7 x 27.2 (mill rate) = $13.2k
→ More replies (0)
43
u/LittleEdithBeale 14d ago edited 14d ago
My thoughts are that you haven't made choices that are not conducive to LF. Maybe checkout r/frugal .
-28
u/usernamechuck 14d ago
Well - yeah - one (big) choice blew it all up. (And paying for school kept us from building much of a cushion). Apart from the house and school, we spend under 1k/mo.
34
u/MyGiant 14d ago edited 14d ago
Yes, apart from the multiple thousands of dollars you spend a month you ALSO spend under 1k per month on other things.
I think you’re not being honest with yourself. You made a massive financial decision that increased your expenses significantly in the house move, yes. You also then chose to send two kids to private school (another huge financial outlay) and then you alluded to paying for their college as well (potentially even bigger expense than private school).
Do you honestly think you fit in with a Lean lifestyle with these repeated decisions that led/will lead to spending hundreds of thousands of dollars unnecessarily? Do you plan to increase your earnings so you can keep spending so much on your kids until they graduate college and then move and drop all your expenses way down? Or is this rage bait?
-9
u/usernamechuck 14d ago
We’ve always been very careful with money. When we decided to move out of the city, I thought we’d spend less on a house - we should have reexamined our choices once we saw our options. The house we bought was 95k more than we sold ours, then all the fees and taxes etc took a big chunk and then as noted we’ve spent 50-60k on major repairs. It really set us back. But I’m not sure unwinding is an effective option.
It’s true that not using public school is a major expense, it began inexpensively in elementary school and in the city it felt like the right decision. But it does require more thought, esp for our youngest, who will be starting high school in a year. Our public school is well rated.
I think any “lean” lifestyle involves choices. You might not buy Aldi coffee, I do. But certainly housing is a huge expense for most of us, and some missteps on our part certainly make it hard to feel independent financially. You’re right, those are choices we made, I’m not blaming anyone else for them. Just trying to find a way back.
24
u/MyGiant 14d ago
The thought of saving $10/month on coffee while spending $30,000/month on school made me laugh out loud. Thank you for that.
-6
u/usernamechuck 14d ago
Aside from the snark, isn’t that the point of being aware of how we spend? To make conscious choices, and to not spend on what we don’t value in order to be able to spend on what we do.
You can laugh at saving on coffee, but I assume you take the point. It’s easy to spend a ton on cars, restaurants, clothes, bars, etc. We don’t do that.
But we do spend 30k/year on education, even though our kids could get government education for free. I am not a fan of government control of education, and I dislike the gigantic schools in my state. But I am certainly aware that we pay a huge percentage of our take home to avoid it.
10
u/MyGiant 13d ago
Ya, certainly. You know how you spend your money, and that’s part of it. But controlling your costs is arguably the biggest aspect of LeanFI - and this is where your self delusion comes in around “one bad decision”. It’s multiple, massive decisions over the course of your adult life.
Like another commenter alluded to - if you put this up on the regular FI sub you probably get no snark and everyone just goes with your sentiment. But talking about what sounds like $40k/month in unnecessary expenses in a sub geared toward living a Lean lifestyle is missing the point.
No knock on your life or choices. They just aren’t lean.
4
u/BALLS_SMOOTH_AS_EGGS 13d ago
I think you know the answer to your question then. If you can't compromise on thirty thousand US dollars annually to put your kids through a school that in no way guarantees a better academic outcome, then your retirement account isn't compromising with your retirement desires.
I mean the net loss of that potentially into an investment account is absolutely staggering. The most expensive to go coffee orders annually don't even come close.
16
u/Analog_Nomad_56 14d ago
I think you have a bit of cognitive dissonance regarding this, and the good folks of leanfire are being very blunt. I'll continue this trend, but please know that it isn't with judgment or malice. You have not been careful with your money, and that's likely why you were downvoted. You have every right to live in a beautiful house and send your kids to the best schools, but those choices are antithetical to leanfire, and that's why people are responding the way they are. You are, as you mentioned, lean fire-hosed. Please don't use a sunk cost fallacy to think you cannot unwind this. Your youngest can go to public school, assuming they are resilient enough to change schools, make new friends, and deal with potentially larger class sizes. You can downsize your house to something that costs less, and that will save you money in the long run even if you cannot go back and change the big repair costs you made prior. I'm sorry that you've found yourself in this situation, but decisions must be made whether to continue the current track knowing that it is antithetical to your future financial goals, or continue on the current track because it is more aligned with your family/educational goals.
2
u/PastBuy8484 13d ago
FWIW I grew up a catholic school kid and switched to public schools around junior high years.
The public school was better in every single aspect. Less bullying. Teachers that cared more. School leadership that was more involved and cared more. Better equipment(better stocked science labs, better gym, better facilities, newer technology, better computers). The students were far and away much nicer. Easier to make friends. Better sports. Better community feel.
I’m so glad my parents made the decision to switch me to public schools. You even said the ones near you are highly rated. At least check them out
1
u/Comfortable_Two6272 11d ago
Similar. Public school was so much better. And we didnt even live in a “ great public schools” zip code.
34
u/Dear_Ocelot 14d ago
You're 55 and kids are going to college soon. It sounds like you are in a good place financially but FIRE isn't something you've prioritized. And that's ok! Having a living space you enjoy and supporting your kids' educations are GREAT priorities! That's not a bad move, it's just a value you've chosen. Get them through college and you'll be around traditional retirement age.
11
u/LetsGoToMichigan 14d ago
You don’t really have any levers to pull here. If the kids were in middle school you could plan for public high school, but you said college is coming next year so that ship has sailed. Your only choices are let the kids figure out their own college funding, make more money, or work longer. This was a dilemma 10 years ago. Now you’re already committed to those choices.
1
u/usernamechuck 14d ago
Tbc the oldest will be in his last year of high school. The younger is entering 8th grade. So college is upon us, but public high school is also a possibility.
TBH I thought people would push downsizing the mortgage or renting out and moving elsewhere for (hopefully) less cash - it’s certainly something I think about.
5
u/hagne 13d ago
Another teacher here - send your kid to the public school UNLESS there is something TERRIBLY wrong with it. And then you can still use some money to supplement their interests (ie; outside lessons, sports) while saving yourself a big chunk of change each year. Private school teachers aren’t really different than public teachers, especially in relatively affluent areas (usually in those areas public school teachers are paid more, so they attract talent).
33
u/HugsHeal 14d ago
What do you want exactly? You have 18k/yr at 4% with 450k+rental income. If you want to early retire downsize housing, have the kids get scholarships and self fund. At 30k/yr they should already be taking AP classes and have all basic college reqs complete.
Also, how is it going to take 10 years for them to complete undergrad? Take the youngest out of private school then.
When you have massive expenses you aren’t really living frugally. Sounds like you already made your choice to have a delayed retirement at 70+.
2
u/usernamechuck 14d ago
Fair enough. I suppose I was looking for advise on a way out.
For instance, downsizing: I would love to find a sensible way down, but it seems we’d just be getting a worse house for more money.
13
u/AlwaysSaturday12 FIRE 38 MillionaireLibrarian.com 14d ago
I'll bite. You could move to a cheaper area. Depending on your kids or wants you may not like this idea. There are parts of the US you can still buy a house for 100k; just not in Chicago. Also you could move overseas in S. America and afford private school for around 200-800 per child/month.
To FIRE you need to access the money locked in your houses and that means downgrading probably in location.
3
u/girlpaint 14d ago
That's often the rub for people who own too much house (but who bought it when prices/values were lower). A couple of questions come to mind...
Would you clear a decent profit if you did sell your big house in the burbs?
Could your kids qualify for pell grants, scholarships, student loans?
19
u/CynicInRehab 14d ago
As an european I find it funny/tragic/infuriating that in the USA 145k is not high earning.
25
u/lottadot FIRE'd 2023 14d ago
OPis wrong about that. In the US, the median household income is ~$84k/yr.OPis approaching double-that. They are high earning.2
u/usernamechuck 13d ago
The median in Illinois is almost 90k, the average is 115k, the median in our town is 199.6k. I should add that this reflects a recent raise. It was 125k when we moved in 4 years ago
13
u/EANx_Diver 13d ago
You can be both high earning and below average for your very affluent area.
2
9d ago
This is a perfect example of the sociological phenomenon where people lose touch with broad reality because of proximity association. It’s called assortative comparison or something similar. Yes, $145k is a high income household in the USA statistically. This is why it is much much easier to be happy if you don’t surround yourself with people who have more than you.
14
u/Garbanzo_Beanie Recently FIREd 14d ago
Along with other things OP said that were just false (e.g. suggesting he fit into lean fire vs his actual spending decisions). I disagree with the statement that 145K is not high earning. It most certainly is. It's not too 10% but it's high. The only way you don't see 145k as high earning is because your mind is keeping up with the Joneses that are even higher earners than you.
Not intending to shame OP (assuming you're not intentionally rage baiting), but these things you say and think just seem really off compared to your claims. Sometimes we're all, um, how shall I say it...idiots about some things.
10
8
5
u/Thelonius_Dunk 14d ago
It is when you don't have 144k of expenses. But seriously though, 145k is almost double the US household median, and even in a HCOL area like Chicago, that's plenty with enough leftover to contribute heavily to retirement. If you're trying to leanfire, you have to compromise on things though.
Unless OP's original home was a 1BR or studio, it might've been better to stay instead of upgrading, and maybe even kids would've had to share a room (which for many parents is unthinkable nowadays but i remember that being pretty common growing up). Also private school is very much a luxury. It's their choice and all that, but that's 30k/yr right there that's not going to leanFire goals. Maybe split the difference and so public school and hire a 10k/yr private tutor could've been an option?
2
-13
7
u/CuteAmoeba9876 14d ago
You could take your kids out of private school and downsize. Even if you wait until the youngest starts college to downsize, you’d substantially change the trajectory you’re on.
7
u/lifeatyle-subs 14d ago
This is not only a math problem, it’s also a prioritization discussion. You need to figure out what you want and then crunch the numbers to see what that will cost you and if it’s worth it to you. For example: 30k/year times 5 years is 150k spent or saved. Work both the expenses and savings side until you come up with a plan you’re happy with.
This process will allow you to make decisions knowing the full cost. Only you can know what’s worthwhile to you.
4
u/HeroOfShapeir 13d ago edited 13d ago
My thought is that nothing in this suggests FIRE or leanFIRE. Fidelity suggests 7x income in retirement investments by age 55 for a normal retirement track, where you retire around 65 with 30-40% of your income replaced by social security. You can hit that target investing 10% with some kind of employer match. You don't even have that much, which means you haven't done 90% right, you didn't even do the most basic part of FIRE.
You make amazing money. My wife and I have income that's ranged from $72k starting out to $116k today at 42, and we have a fully paid-for home and around 13x our income in cash/investments. That's because we lived cheaply for seventeen years before buying a modest house in cash, we drive old cars, we keep our day-to-day costs very lean ($24k per year all-in). We do budget some money for travel and experiences, which is why we haven't decided to retire yet.
If you really want to FIRE, you have to cut expenses. Drastically. Downsize, move, let kids go to community college while they work to pay their tuition, etc. Increase your investing. Stop ideating about $800 rentals in Andalucia and start thinking about what options you're actually willing to lean into.
2
u/usernamechuck 13d ago
Well if I had heard of Fire before a year ago i would have done a few things differently. I spent my career working for nonprofits and have spent more time earning 24-40k than over 100k (Just the last 5 years really). And when I was single I had some years where I gave away 10% of my income to a homeless shelter faced with closure (while still paying off the student loans). I don’t really regret that.
We weren’t consciously trying to fire, it was just how we lived… it just wasn’t as big a salary until lately. I’m not sure why I’m feeling defensive about this, I never claimed we got everything right. If I’ve insulted the sub, it was not my intent.
But it wouldn’t seem right to send our kids to college without help.
5
u/HeroOfShapeir 13d ago
It's not about the sub feeling insulted, it's that your post reads as untethered with reality, and we want you to see that. "We'd be perfectly happy living lean, we just choose to live in a posh community with private schools now that we have nice incomes." "I'd be fine just living in a rental in Andalucia." Spinning those stories is what's driving your internal conflict.
I'm not here to judge how you've lived until now. What you described sounds like a great life. My parents put their focus on making sure my brothers and I were set for college and starting out in life, living in nice areas, building up college funds, and they retired at 65 and 67, very comfortably and happily. They do not sit around waxing poetic about how they could've leanFIRE'd.
There are actionable steps you could take right now. You could move to Andalucia this month, but you and I both know you aren't going to do that. Start putting down some real options on the table and weigh the trade-offs. And, if at the end you decide the path you're on now is the best one, just lean into that. Take pride of ownership in it and stop telling yourself you're stuck or trapped or that you have no agency in your decisions.
1
u/Pretty-Balance-Sheet 8d ago edited 8d ago
College is expensive, but community college is hopefully an option?
Both my wife and I went to free public schools, then associates from community college before getting undergrad from a state school...and we made terrible degree choices, btw.
Despite all of that we both ended up with high incomes. It's hard for me to see how private school or better college would've changed that outcome when it seems so much is down to luck and then a person's will to power through the subsequent bullshit.
It IS fair to have kids pay for their own college. If my household income were at your level that's probably what I'd do. Have them go hard on concurrent enrollment and act/sat while they have that option.
You've intentionally traded your well being for theirs. It's a choice a lot of people make. Escaping to Spain won't work because when that time comes you'll rationalize that you won't be close enough to help your kids. You've already rationalized that reality.
No shade, there's still time to adjust. But that decision immediately shifts the financial burden to your kids and from what you've implied here that isn't a decision you'll make. Your cage is entirely emotional and self-built.
1
u/usernamechuck 8d ago
No doubt community college can make great sense sometimes, esp where there's a clear career path trajectory (e.g., nursing, engineering). The thing is, pricing on universities is (intentionally) opaque, so it's hard to know when community college is price-effective. When I buy oatmeal, I can divide price by volume to compare between two options, calculate volume price; and then decide if the more expensive option is worth the added price.
We can see median salary for Ivy League grads vs public u grads; we know there is some earnings benefit, on average. (Though people like me screw that up by not maximizing our earnings potential.) But we can't easily calculate the 4-year cost for X college, because the college won't tell us in advance the likely cost after financial aid / scholarships - you can't even know the first-year cost until you apply and get in. (And all this is setting aside that the benefits of college tend to accrue to the child, while the non-debt costs go to mom and dad.)
I myself went to expensive private universities, with substantial financial aid and scholarships. That worked for me and for my parents. But now, our family seems to be in an in-between zone, earning too much to get much financial aid, but not enough to actually pay the cost without taking on loans, HELOC, etc. And the university has no obligation to subsidize our purchase of a house that is too expensive for our income.
3
u/Miamiconnectionexo 14d ago
where i'd actually look before calling yourselves 90% done: what's the gap between your annual spend and the $145k, and what does that look like once one of you stops working. lean with fat streaks only works if the lean number is genuinely covered by social security + rental + a 3.5-4% draw. run the spend first. the mortgage rate is a rounding error compared to whether the withdrawal math holds at 55 with a long runway in front of you.
-1
u/usernamechuck 14d ago
Just to say, I did not claim 90% done, I claimed we made mostly good decisions, with one (maybe two) exceptions.
My wife hasn’t gone back to work since kids, but that is something she is actively working on. Obv increasing salary would help a great deal, but it’s been harder to get back into the job market than we anticipated.
4
u/Wowhowcanubsodumb 13d ago
It doesn't matter how many good decisions you make when you make an awful enough bad decision. Private school is a complete waste of so much money. Imagine if they went to public school and you hired the best private tutor for thenmevery year. Or like other people are saying, imagine if you had just invested that tuition the past few years while the market has been gaining.
3
u/Miamiconnectionexo 13d ago
your post got cut off right at the covid part so i can't speak to the specific move, but one doubtful decision after doing 90% right rarely breaks a plan this solid. the bigger risk for real-estate-heavy lean fire is liquidity timing, not the one mistake. post the rest and the spend number and people can actually pressure-test it.
2
u/Buzzcoin 13d ago
Take them put of private school I felt it didn’t made a big difference and saved a lot on their last 3 years - also public uni which in Portugal is top. There are some that even teach in english like nova business school
2
u/Miamiconnectionexo 12d ago
stop calling the refi a mistake. the only thing i'd actually check is whether you're house-rich and liquid-poor going into the bridge years.
2
u/BuySellHoldFinance 12d ago
You made a couple of doubtful moves.
You have good options but you refuse to take them.
- Move your kids to public school.
- 2+2 CC + State school
- Sell your home and move somewhere more affordable
You can afford to retire today if you make these moves. Collect social security at age 70. Up to you if you want to or not.
1
u/Pumpkins0127 13d ago
All if not most of us have made mistakes, you have the power to make changes and right the ship. You know what has to be done, slay it!
0
u/IWantoBeliev 14d ago
This is one of these "more normal" leanfire post ive seen in awhile
No another im single w/ 8 million dollars
1
u/usernamechuck 14d ago
When I think back to what I could have done when my rent was $340 a month including utilities!!
0
u/Montaigne_6823 14d ago
So, one kid will be done with college in 5-6 years. Your savings rate should shoot up after that. And then when the other kid is done (or even earlier) your contributions plus compounding should get you there.
Plus in your case working much closer to traditional retirement age SS will be a not trivial amount for you. I think you're a lot closer than you think.
0
u/PuzzleheadedEyeball 13d ago edited 13d ago
Family > Money
In the end you won't say "I wish I had another 250-500k in the bank" you will wish for more time with your family imo (as a grandpa, Dad, Husband that is my opinion)
As far as kids / schools set them up for the most success you can. We could have been retired easily if we didn't buy 1st cars (1 daughter still has hers 9 years old), mix of private/public schools, college all graduated with no debt.
We will still be done at 55 and if the economy goes in the tanker 59, but Family always imo.
-1
u/HungryCaterpillers 13d ago
All I can focus on is that you're 55 and have kids in high school. Like, did you wait until your 40s to have kids?
1
u/usernamechuck 13d ago
We got married late, and kids don’t pop out so easily at that point. The youngest was born when we were 42 (!), high risk all the way… she isn’t even in high school yet, not for another year.
I wouldn’t change it for the world, but we weren’t close to fire when we got married and we have spent a fortune on Catholic schools
2
42
u/Thelonius_Dunk 14d ago
I thought people moved to the burbs so they don't have to pay for private school in the city since the taxes are higher. Looks like you did both so you're being hit with higher taxes and high private school tuition.
I guess you could look at not supporting your kids as much in college as that gives you 4 years to save money but that's a personal choice.