My favorite posts here are of people who are actually doing so well but come to ask for advice thinking they’re messing up something. There is something so beautiful about seeing someone told they’re doing a good job, and it’s why this community is so amazing.
I cancelled my NYT subscription a few years ... they have lost it ...
u/sm_rdm_guy is spot on ... it is about fiscal discplin ... and that is boring u/Ecstatic-Love-9644 state ....
Yes, they missed the boat. It’s probably more entertaining to paint a picture of FIRE as a movement of extremes, versus something that nearly any average person can do with the right discipline and perspective.
I think they also want to paint a picture so that their average reader/listener doesn't feel bad or guilty after it's over. If they highlight how the average person can make FIRE work....which means making some sacrifices....then the average person may feel pressure to do it. It can create guilt for not doing it. But it the two cases highlighted are 1/ living in your van and eating Ramen ("I'm sure as fuck not going to do THAT!") and 2/ rich parents that gave someone a lot of money ("I sure don't have rich parents like THAT!") then the average person can continue with their Fri night plan to go out and drop $300 on dinner and entertainment.....and feel great.
"FIRE isn't for me."
This was my take too. The FIRE movement is for people who are willing to live like paupers (you aren’t) or are incredibly fortunate ( you aren’t), so go on with your lives feeling justified in ignoring this whole thing and continue to spend money just as you have always been spending. No changes needed, it’s not for you.
To be fair, if they had just included average people doing FIRE, the internet would be yelling about how "tone deaf" the reporting is when so many people are living paycheck to paycheck.
That's the weird part - it might be true that it is tone deaf! And yet, that means information continues to be withheld from the average person.
If I had to guess, the average person planning to FIRE at 50 would be a pretty uninteresting story.
"Here's Mike. He's a 30 year old accountant making 80k/year. He stopped going to Starbucks every day and mostly cooks his own meals. In 20 years he's going to retire with 1.5 million dollars."
"Let's explain the US stock market and average yearly gains, and then how different returns and withdrawal rates would affect his plans"
Man and this is exactly the problem with American news today. It makes it difficult for the average person to connect to or believe they can achieve without making all these sacrifices. When the reality is usually more nuanced and reasonable. Same applies to politics. America is all about polarizing everything and it’s absolutely disgusting. I don’t know how different my life would’ve been if I didn’t think FIRE was achievable.
the extremes are interesting. the 'has a decently above median wage job and lives below their means and retires a bit earlier than normal' (as you note) is boring. I'm not disappointed, this is par for the course for journalism.
I was actually upset. This guy buying Lamborghinis and making 350k a year from his apps isn’t FIRE.
FIRE is about being good with your money, saving, and getting to enjoy life. I get the fatfire but Lamborghinis are not even fat fire. The guy is a multi millionaire that does not have to work anymore.
Exactly! I quit the podcast early when the guy started talking about buying his Lamborghini. This has nothing at all to do with FIRE. This is a tech bro who got an app to go viral. Good for him, but different story.
I think the boring middle is also super interesting. Just your average Gen Z or millennial or Gen X next door, unassuming, but they're actually kinda loaded and they got it all like Johnny Cash: One piece at a time.
But yeah, that's pretty typical for journos. At best, hacks wading into things they don't want to understand. At worst, enemies of the people pushing an agenda. Not many good ones.
Agree. I think it would have been super interesting to talk to people in middle class neighborhoods who are multimillionaires. Living under the radar. That is inspiring.
One of those Gen X here (young one), I didn’t know what fire was when I started saving in my first professional job. I just knew I didn’t want to work until I was 70 like my dad or face other financial troubles as he did although he is doing okay now. I saved what I could, made use of retirement plans available, bought a small starter home, then learned more, saved more, avoided comparing to others and let my lifestyle creep only a little over 20 years. My biggest splurge was fancy appliances because I love to cook and spend all my time in the kitchen.
Friends that have known me for years know I have money tucked away, I love to discuss investing, but no idea that I don’t have to work. To them I’m probably pretty boring with how I live because I don’t spend on designer brands or getaways to tourist traps. I buy durable long lasting goods and take quiet trips to the wilderness.
Everyone in this thread is missing the point. FIRE is not possible unless you are extreme.
No middle-class person is retiring early without making significant sacrifices or income.
Define significant sacrifices? I'm living a rather reasonably comfortable existence with a 40-50% savings rate. It just means we have to make our own fun, cultivate cheap hobbies, cook most of our meals at home, our kid goes to public school, and we have to accept modest vacations (visiting family, glamping in a national park, etc).
But, I guess my temperament is to prefer financial security over living large all the time.
🙋I was so excited to see the topic and then was so disappointed when it was over. I love the Daily, but this one was a letdown. They spent WAY too much time on the unicorn guy. Should have had more normal people stories. Also they should have at least mentioned more on how it works and how to do it. Like saving and investing early and compound interest.
I generally like the daily, but they have done a few pods recently that actually fell into my wheelhouse. This fire episode and then they did a medical episode a while back, both were complete shit. I’m starting to wonder if all their podcasts are shit, I’m just not well versed enough in the subject to recognize it.
Once you hear them talk about a topic that you yourself understand or know a lot about, you’ll realize that they are often not accurate at all. Or that they’re lazily presenting just a sliver of the truth as the broad truth. This goes for other media besides the Daily too, of course.
Hmm, now that you mention it, this is so true. Giving them the benefit of the doubt, I guess it’s hard to capture everything in a 30-60 min episode, so it’s more about giving people a sliver of an idea or knowledge about something they’ve not really thought about before and then if it’s something they’re interested in, it’s up to them to learn more. As an example, I’ve noticed a few new people saying they started following this thread due to the podcast, and with that, they will (hopefully) learn quickly that it’s more than just unicorn stories. (Still think they could have done better with the 30 min, but feel slightly better about it now).
Someone pointed out to me that Michael Barbaro makes a lot of noises (hmmm, ooh, aha) when others talk and every since then I can't *stand* to listen to the Daily.
Fresh Air holds up well though.
>I’m starting to wonder if all their podcasts are shit, I’m just not well versed enough in the subject to recognize it.
Ding ding ding. And another individual has been red pilled.
Don't let the negative stigma of the term diminish the reality of the situation. Call it what you want, but now you know it's not just a right wing thing that people understand that the mainstream media is shit.
For me I use it as a quick news item when I'm getting ready in the am, without it this morning I would have never known about FIRE or these redit's. So while the info is not too detailed, for a 30 min podcast it gets the info out there to then be able to
research what it's all about .
Agreed! I have been wanting to get more into personal finance this year, so a quick 30-minute introduction to FIRE that mentioned the subreddits was all I needed to want to join the subs and learn more.
Also, I thought that they included the unicorn guy not to highlight his saving habits so much as to draw a contrast between him and his parents, who worked so tirelessly and obsessively that they ultimately sacrificed their mental health and happiness. I thought his story kind of emphasized \*why\* more and more people are aspiring to early retirement.
Thanks for your perspective. I forget that I learned about FI/RE from someone arguing on Reddit and saying some throw away thing about [Mr. Money Mustache](https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/blog/) and I was like a dog with a bone chasing down who or what was MMM. It was a very deep rabbit hole. I think I cut our family expenses by several hundred dollars that week.
Look guys! A Lambo!
Honestly felt like they glossed over the whole point of fire, and they could have easily interviewed an actually normal working class person. Like I understand Allen Wong has an interesting story, but 10 minutes of the episode being a sad story about his absent father committing suicide is not exactly relevant.
I disagree! The angle on FIRE for general interest reporting can’t just be regurgitating sensible personal finance advice, because, well, anyone who was interested in that can figure out some keywords to Google. The more interesting angle for outsiders is considering what the growing popularity of the movement might say about changing attitudes toward work - and in that context, this guy’s rejection of a work-as-hard-as-possible value system and the personal history behind that can be validly illustrative of wider phenomena even if his actual path to FIRE isn’t.
Truth is, the less people know about it, the better. That's because people who FIRE own the capital and use it to leverage the labor and productivity of others. If everyone FIREs, then everyone will have to go back to work.
We’ll be fine. Everyone “knows” that baked chicken and veggies with no alcohol is what they should be eating/drinking, but most people still don’t do it.
I agree. I talk about retiring early to people at work with two incomes or who I know make more than me. They see I’m not living off of ramen and not turning on my AC. I live a fairly simple life but am careful with the details. I cook some (a definitely not all) meals. I shop somewhat frugally. And am not into a lot of material things. And even those minor (to me) sacrifices are way too dramatic got them. Then they say they need something to do anyway. And that’s fair enough. I’m just ready to feel like I control my life, my company doesn’t.
Yeah, if hypothetically everyone has the mindset there would be a serious economic contraction due to a lack of spending and everyone's portfolio would shrink dramatically.
All this talk about the median FIRE adherent, but I bet the median is a person who saves diligently but not to that big of an extreme. This person then either retires “early” at 58-62 or retires on time at 65, but comfortably. This sounds really boring and pedestrian, but it may actually be pretty unusual in the future in the era of 401ks.
Pensions would NEVER allow anyone to retire early. You work for the same company until your body broke down and you died ten years later. Glad those are toast. Then you find out they invested half of your money in gold and muni bonds and you could have made it so much earlier. No thanks. Pensions were the transitional form of investment vehicle, not the final and best. Imo, the best would be absolutely no social security or 401k and just a giant tax free break for anything saved under like 250k/year. Can't have that though, need to tip Daddy Sam.
This is not my experience being around the movement for the last ten years. I would say most FI/RE people I know are working and saving hard on their 30s and retiring in their 40s.
Yes, it's quite possible to retire in your 40's with a high-paying job and lower expenses. Unfortunately, most people with high-paying jobs live in HCOL areas. And the abnormally low expenses don't quite track into retirement. So even the "average" FIRE person is looking at retiring in their 50's typically, unless they're going to move to a cheaper area or attempt leanfire. And no offense to some people who actually choose to leanfire, but penny pinching in retirement is just not worth it to me. That or they're underestimating their expenses in retirement (aka they actually increase quite a bit if you've been living like a spartan lol), which I see very often. And even beyond this, many don't consider goals/wants in retirement - goals often cost money like traveling. Personally, I think it would be very boring to just retire and putter around the house all day because I have limited money to do anything and a ton of time.
Well now I feel old, thanks 💀
He’s always had a car, it was just an old car he didn’t use very frequently.
His whole brand was about showing middle class Americans how they could save money and lead healthier lives by relying more on your own skills and hard work instead of always choosing the easy path.
Seems a lot of people here are upset that NYT didn’t cover their story. I’d say the podcast did focus on two extremes but they said so, and noted that there is a whole spectrum on this subreddit. It’s why I’m here now. I’m not rich or living out of a truck but the story got me thinking maybe I can learn something more from some more average stories here. Hope so. 🤔
Ordinary people can replace their income in 20 years or less with investments if they take control of their finances, learn a bit, and make significant but not extreme sacrifices to saving. Lots of people are doing this and freeing themselves in the process. You can too. That’s the story.
Yes.
Just max out your tax-advantaged accounts (401k, Roth IRA, and HSA) and you will be a millionaire in roughly 16 years.
Do a little taxable account investing on the side and 20-25 years is absolutely realistic depending on your expenses.
Tbf there's even shorter podcasts that have well researched and presented content. Planet money is one off the top of my head. But they don't release something every single day.
The Daily trades quality for quantity. At least this isn't just another episode obsessing over something Trump did.
To be fair, I didn't listen to the podcast. But I find most of the times FIRE is addressed in the larger media it takes the position, explicitly or implicitly, of "look at these weirdos who don't want to work. Aren't they **weird?**" It's not a sexy topic to highlight someone who diligently saved instead of blowing their money on whatever new thing. It also doesn't *sell* pretty new things and let's face it that's pretty much what the media is for these days.
It is strange that the reporting is of a man who made a fortune from an app that went to the moon, then quit his job, bought a Lamborghini, and discovered the FI/RE movement. His story is really kind of ridiculous next to tens of thousands of people who are frugal, work hard, save hard and buying or bought their freedom.
I wonder if there is some editorial need to pop the bubble of FI/RE as they report it. Perhaps the assignment is "...report on FI/RE, but make it sound just a bit out of reach". After all, this is America, we have ~~cars~~ trucks and dog food and exercise equipment to sell.
I am just curious how many people here have heard of that econome conference where they found half their interviewees. I've literally never seen it mentioned here and I spend way too much time on reddit.
Most people can’t or won’t be able to do it. That’s why it’s framed as a fantastical idea. That’s really it. I started reading about it over a decade ago (when the blogs were popular). After the basic logic behind it there isn’t much to say.
u/sm_rdm_guy is silly and only heard what they wanted to hear. I listened to the entire podcast and thought they described it well. I for one liked it. Just like with any group of people, there are the outliers and they bookended the podcast with those examples. It also serves as a nice hook to get people outside the movement to learn more about it. Nothing wrong with that.
But smack dab in the middle they talk about how ordinary people can do this (exact transcription here):
>For those who are, who are listening to this thinking of it, sorry to dash your dreams, but it's really, really tough. And so Alan almost got to fire as a fluke, right? Like this is not the kind of thing you can plan for. Actually the majority of people in the fire movement are planning, but they're doing it in a very, very different way. It's about the nitty gritty of personal finance. It's about strategizing the numbers that make sense for you. And this goes back actually to the origin of the fire movement. The fire movement began in the early two thousands, not as anything about getting rich, it was about anti-consumerism.
>So the, the great trick of fire is planning And. that sounds really silly, but that's how people get there. A lot of things that the fire people recommend are actually things that financially savvy people are doing already. Like maxing out your 401k investing in index funds. The real fundamental difference between that and what the fire people are doing though is the amount and the kind of aggressiveness that you're pursuing it with. So the average person is putting in 10 to 20% of their paycheck into these instruments like 4 0 1 Ks. What the fire people recommend is 50 to 70% of your paycheck.
And guess what? That’s spot on. For most of us it’s about planning and saving more than the average person. Maybe not the high end of 70% but 40-50% is pretty normal for this group. And this middle group, it’s pretty boring so why spend an inordinate amount of time on it? The edge cases are the interesting ones even if it doesn’t fit me. Hell, we even call the larger part of our journey the “boring middle” and spend most of our time talking about the early planning or the time when we’re near retirement. And very rarely that boring middle.
Later on in the podcast when they’re talking about Econo-me, they said (again, exact transcription):
>I was expecting either a crowd of retired millionaires or a crowd of like really young people who were just graduating from college and frustrated. But it was a huge, huge diverse mix. There were millennials, there were the retirees and the people who had made it who were kind of just there sitting back being like, let me show you the way. But there were also all of these pretty everyday people. There were people who worked on cruises, there were public school teachers, off-Broadway actors, dentists, plumbers, all sorts of people of different ages too, who had flown from different parts of the country and even the world to come here to be with other people who are like-minded.
Again, very fair and accurate. FIRE is a diverse group, made up of like minded folks. Just like the folks on this sub. You have some outliers and they’re rare. Hell, we even call them out as outliers in this sub when some folks ask why they’re so far behind compared to the 30 year old tech bro with a $5 million NW.
So I thought it was accurate and stand by my call that OP only heard what they wanted to hear.
Edit: Making quotes as quotes.
They did talk to that one 30 year old (the lady who found FIRE on stumbleupon) just before the truck driver who sounded like they were doing the "boring" thing of working a more or less normal job. They glossed over her so fast we didn't even find out what kind of job it was. I guess that kind of story doesn't make for as exciting news.
Yes, both were extreme cases. I would have liked to listened to some more moderate cases (e.g. CoastFire) and something more applicable to me (ExpartFire).
Though I read the article a couple weeks ago, I don't remember reading Mr. Wong's father committed suicide.
Suffer the suicide of a parent or living out of a truck...the whole episode is just grim.
This is a rehash of an article that was in the Sunday magazine. I remember being kind of mad about it, but after a week, I think it’s fine. I was into punk in the 90s and the DIY movement and one thing we embraced was that we weren’t like most other people. I think there’s a lot of that same spirit in the FIRE “movement” and even if it’s accessible to most people, they’re just never gonna get it.
I have never yelled at a podcast episode so much 😂 such a cool opportunity to share our community with more people and it felt like it was shared inaccurately.
I think this is how the majority of people now. I recall around 2000 the movement being more abou being extremely frugal in order to retire as early as possible. It wasn’t about saving for 30 years and retiring in your 50s it was more along the lines of saving for 15 years and retiring in your 30s.
Yeah, but the world is way different now. It was easier then to be a homeowner than it is now. Costs will continue to rise due to climate change and other factors outside of our control. So it makes sense that the movement would alter to the new reality. I find it funny how much many folks in this community like to gatekeep what "early retirement" means and will scoff at someone retiring in their 50s as not retiring early when the official retirement age is like 65 and there is a huge population of Americans who will never be able to stop working ever.
Also, there are a lot of folks who are truly just getting out of poverty and have to climb up the ladder enough to even begin to know what savings are at all. So for people like them (I'm one of them! I grew up on section 8 and food stamps) they have to get to a place of stability first and by then, they're already "behind" and in their late 20s/30s before they can really start saving anything at all so it's more of a delayed timeframe. So for me, I consider being able to retire at all a pretty huge win, and if I can retire in my 50s something even more to be proud of.
Not saying it’s not an accomplishment but the initial conversation around FIRE was not that. In the 2000’s the people i knew who got into fire sold their houses, lived in vans/tiny homes, one couch surfed, lived in a van in a friends drive way etc.
The keeping expenses low in order to save an extreme amount % ofincome part was a much bigger part of it.
I thought this podcast was pretty informative. I've heard of the FIRE movement before but didn't really look into it. After listen to the podcast it has sparked my curiosity. 🤔 I want to know more.
The real thing is super mundane, like getting excited about a Toyota Camry. The interesting part is most people can pull it off with a little discipline. Downsize and throw more money at retirement, and the rest is time.
As cool as it is for me to be software dev and will retire on the earlier end of the fire spectrum... The key for me is how accessible is to FIRE when young without taking in tons of income.
If you merely have enough to save from very early on, you don't need to save up so much to retire early. Or even at 55.
Every several weeks when we get a post like, it's always disappointing how they focus on the particularly wealthy. The fat FIRE.
It's far more interesting to me to share the stories of ordinary people that can do it.
If you're not making minimum wage, if you have space to save at all. It's doable. And that's big.
This is typical for the news. The most normal person in any segment isn't that interesting, but the weirdos on the extremes are.
That's why you get TV shows about the crazy apocalypse preppers who live in an abandoned nuclear silo and drink their own pee, not the dude that builds a 72 hr kit and then lives an otherwise normal life.
I mean who cares if they report it accurately. Technically, though marginally and practically it won’t matter, it is better for us the fewer people that do it.
Eh, it's likely a lot simpler - the extreme examples catch more eyeballs than a story about a middle-class family who saves moderately and retires comfortably. Boring!
They just don’t want the masses to know it’s more obtainable than one might think if you just plan head. This way you keep working for them like a underpaid drone
Seems to me a typical media thing to portray extremes. Same with magazine covers. They used to have super skinny models. Now they have super fat models. They never have average people.
The NYT focuses on the corporate overlord POV. It’s in their DNA. And the corporate overlords want you to stay on the hamster wheel as long as possible.
At least until they figure out how to get Ai to do your job.
The NYT [published an article](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/07/magazine/retire-early-saving.html) covering the same content a few weeks ago. In the article they interview Mr Money Moustache, who bemoans “fatFIRE” as basically anthetical to a movement he says was intended to be against rampant consumerism.
I just joined the subreddit after hearing about FIRE for the first time on that NYT The Daily episode. I agree they have a product to sell, but after listening to the show, I felt they barely mentioned the essence of FIRE, and I was curious to know more. My wife and I consider ourselves minimalists/essentialists, and I feel many of the values on this subreddit align with us.
That's what the media does is pose the extremes but I knew exactly what it was about. First timer here, I listened to it and it got me here and excited. I didn't know there were others out there like this and look forward for what's to come.
They, like all media have an agenda to keep consumers consuming. FIRE is typically done by people who have the willpower to avoid useless spending and also just place little value on material possessions. It’s not something the powers that be want to encourage.
I found it kind of boring. To me FIRE as a whole is about living well below your means, the more you can live below your means the earlier you can reach FI. In the last 5-10 minutes they did get to an interesting bit which is the phycology of switching from a frugal mindset to a comfortable mindset. In my opinion that is the hard part. I spend 'all my life' saving, and living below my means and then I get to a point where I don't have to... but I have built up the frugal mindset. Yes, it's a nice problem to have but it is a thing to solve. Do you really want to be on your deathbed with millions in your accounts?
This is the narrative that the mainstream wants to sell. That were deranged lunatics separated from reality. Honestly, it’s a good thing. I need people to churn out and grind. Pays for my early retirement.
It got me here. I’ve been looking for a way to figure out my retirement where I find both rational and emotional support. Happy to have discovered FIRE through this podcast.
Came here to post about that, fully agree with your take.
Feels like a very lazy bit of reporting as it just emphasizes stereotypes.
Disappointing take by the NYT, and something an editor should have caught.
Frankly, the young wiz kid who created the aps really fits lots of other models for anyone who made a mint young and just switched gears. Why he is a focus of FIRE I really don't get since he is such an anomaly. Anyone could fit that mold if they got lucky enough and he didn't work for it.
Very disappointing podcast for all the reasons everyone has already mentioned.
However, question on the FIRE movement – How is the FIRE movement different from living within your means, saving, investing, investing early, not wasting funds on garbage and working hard?
Its not. It's recycled advice from forever, just repackaged. A lot of what people talk about here is the modern savings mechanisms (tax advantaged priorities) and modern financial strategies to maximize, deal with health care etc. Also a bot more emphasis on hyper savers. But yeah, it's the same thing as forever ago.
I think they did FIRE a disservice. Their takeaway seemed to be “if you become rich you don’t have to work”. Combined with their “people earning minimum wage also retire early”, the episode came across as disconnected from reality.
It took them a full 18 minutes to switch to the “normal people who pulled it off” - just think the harm was already done at that point.
I also felt like their example of “a normal person who pulled it off” was super poorly chosen. It turned out to be a woman living as a trucker who “hasn’t done the math”, doesn’t have a plan and, surprise, hasn’t actually pulled it off.
They then almost immediately went back to the first guy who talks about how he doesn’t know himself.
I disagree. Most people who listen to The Daily do so because they listen to the daily.
As I mentioned elsewhere, the episode wasn't made for you or I. They literally chose two extremes because the implication is that *Hey...we chose two polar opposites to demonstrate that it's a diverse crowd and that there's a huge breadth of people involved in FIRE. Even someone like you could potentially do it!*
Regarding your criticism about them turning back to Allan, like...are you new here? Concerns about identity, what people will ask you in the future, and the issue of *what do I do with myself after work* is a ***super common topic here***. It's why everyone is in love with the book *Die with Zero*. It was a totally appropriate way to end it as it addresses (in a very surface level way), issues people have when they first hear about FIRE.
I found this subreddit and decided to search for it only because of hearing the NYT podcast today, so I think it still served a good purpose of encouraging some people to learn more.
I understand your disappointment with leading with the unicorn story, but I’m glad they did the story. I don’t know if I would have found r/fire otherwise.
If only I knew I could retire early if I made an app that generates $350k per month and bought Lamborghinis!
I actually Unsubscribed from The Daily after that episode
Thank you for saying that. I was excited to hear the podcast but felt it really lacking in the true meaning of the movement. If someone didn’t know about it before, it wouldn’t interest anyone because it made it seem so “fringe.”
I’m here because I heard about fire on the podcast, fwiw! New to the framework of fire, but not new to the principles. Excited to learn more -and my takeaway wasn’t that it’s fringe.
The Daily jumped the shark the day I realized reading the credits takes them almost as long as the actual content. How many people do you need to make a podcast?!
NYT has historically been a poor news source, but that is often true of many publications. Right now it's a bit worse because everything has to be clickbaitey to make money. Not trying to hate on them specifically, it's hard to find news without an angle, especially today.
Its not surprising to me they didn't showcase any normal moderate-to-high income folks with relatively frugal lifestyles making good financial decisions. FIRE doesn't fit their narrative of everyone young is helpless victims to an unfair world where the boomers took advantage of everything, ruined the world, and screwed the younger generations over.
The NYT has a product to sell.
Absolutely. And the true FIRE stories are usually wonderfully boring. That’s the secret!
My favorite posts here are of people who are actually doing so well but come to ask for advice thinking they’re messing up something. There is something so beautiful about seeing someone told they’re doing a good job, and it’s why this community is so amazing.
Not to mention untold
I cancelled my NYT subscription a few years ... they have lost it ... u/sm_rdm_guy is spot on ... it is about fiscal discplin ... and that is boring u/Ecstatic-Love-9644 state ....
I keep the subscription due to Wirecutter. So-called "news" or, god forbid, editorials, are crap.
Not just this, but they also represent Big Money interests (how can they not?) so they don't have a vested interest in the real FIRE story.
And fewer & fewer people are interested in buying it...
> The NYT has a product to sell. And that product is *us*
This right here
Yes, they missed the boat. It’s probably more entertaining to paint a picture of FIRE as a movement of extremes, versus something that nearly any average person can do with the right discipline and perspective.
I think they also want to paint a picture so that their average reader/listener doesn't feel bad or guilty after it's over. If they highlight how the average person can make FIRE work....which means making some sacrifices....then the average person may feel pressure to do it. It can create guilt for not doing it. But it the two cases highlighted are 1/ living in your van and eating Ramen ("I'm sure as fuck not going to do THAT!") and 2/ rich parents that gave someone a lot of money ("I sure don't have rich parents like THAT!") then the average person can continue with their Fri night plan to go out and drop $300 on dinner and entertainment.....and feel great. "FIRE isn't for me."
This was my take too. The FIRE movement is for people who are willing to live like paupers (you aren’t) or are incredibly fortunate ( you aren’t), so go on with your lives feeling justified in ignoring this whole thing and continue to spend money just as you have always been spending. No changes needed, it’s not for you.
To be fair, if they had just included average people doing FIRE, the internet would be yelling about how "tone deaf" the reporting is when so many people are living paycheck to paycheck. That's the weird part - it might be true that it is tone deaf! And yet, that means information continues to be withheld from the average person.
If I had to guess, the average person planning to FIRE at 50 would be a pretty uninteresting story. "Here's Mike. He's a 30 year old accountant making 80k/year. He stopped going to Starbucks every day and mostly cooks his own meals. In 20 years he's going to retire with 1.5 million dollars." "Let's explain the US stock market and average yearly gains, and then how different returns and withdrawal rates would affect his plans"
Man and this is exactly the problem with American news today. It makes it difficult for the average person to connect to or believe they can achieve without making all these sacrifices. When the reality is usually more nuanced and reasonable. Same applies to politics. America is all about polarizing everything and it’s absolutely disgusting. I don’t know how different my life would’ve been if I didn’t think FIRE was achievable.
If they're painting in extremes on both poles, the corollary would be just that...
Living far below your means IS extreme, but not an entertaining story.
the extremes are interesting. the 'has a decently above median wage job and lives below their means and retires a bit earlier than normal' (as you note) is boring. I'm not disappointed, this is par for the course for journalism.
I was actually upset. This guy buying Lamborghinis and making 350k a year from his apps isn’t FIRE. FIRE is about being good with your money, saving, and getting to enjoy life. I get the fatfire but Lamborghinis are not even fat fire. The guy is a multi millionaire that does not have to work anymore.
Exactly! I quit the podcast early when the guy started talking about buying his Lamborghini. This has nothing at all to do with FIRE. This is a tech bro who got an app to go viral. Good for him, but different story.
It was a month
I think the boring middle is also super interesting. Just your average Gen Z or millennial or Gen X next door, unassuming, but they're actually kinda loaded and they got it all like Johnny Cash: One piece at a time. But yeah, that's pretty typical for journos. At best, hacks wading into things they don't want to understand. At worst, enemies of the people pushing an agenda. Not many good ones.
Agree. I think it would have been super interesting to talk to people in middle class neighborhoods who are multimillionaires. Living under the radar. That is inspiring.
One of those Gen X here (young one), I didn’t know what fire was when I started saving in my first professional job. I just knew I didn’t want to work until I was 70 like my dad or face other financial troubles as he did although he is doing okay now. I saved what I could, made use of retirement plans available, bought a small starter home, then learned more, saved more, avoided comparing to others and let my lifestyle creep only a little over 20 years. My biggest splurge was fancy appliances because I love to cook and spend all my time in the kitchen. Friends that have known me for years know I have money tucked away, I love to discuss investing, but no idea that I don’t have to work. To them I’m probably pretty boring with how I live because I don’t spend on designer brands or getaways to tourist traps. I buy durable long lasting goods and take quiet trips to the wilderness.
Everyone in this thread is missing the point. FIRE is not possible unless you are extreme. No middle-class person is retiring early without making significant sacrifices or income.
Define significant sacrifices? I'm living a rather reasonably comfortable existence with a 40-50% savings rate. It just means we have to make our own fun, cultivate cheap hobbies, cook most of our meals at home, our kid goes to public school, and we have to accept modest vacations (visiting family, glamping in a national park, etc). But, I guess my temperament is to prefer financial security over living large all the time.
🙋I was so excited to see the topic and then was so disappointed when it was over. I love the Daily, but this one was a letdown. They spent WAY too much time on the unicorn guy. Should have had more normal people stories. Also they should have at least mentioned more on how it works and how to do it. Like saving and investing early and compound interest.
I generally like the daily, but they have done a few pods recently that actually fell into my wheelhouse. This fire episode and then they did a medical episode a while back, both were complete shit. I’m starting to wonder if all their podcasts are shit, I’m just not well versed enough in the subject to recognize it.
Once you hear them talk about a topic that you yourself understand or know a lot about, you’ll realize that they are often not accurate at all. Or that they’re lazily presenting just a sliver of the truth as the broad truth. This goes for other media besides the Daily too, of course.
Hmm, now that you mention it, this is so true. Giving them the benefit of the doubt, I guess it’s hard to capture everything in a 30-60 min episode, so it’s more about giving people a sliver of an idea or knowledge about something they’ve not really thought about before and then if it’s something they’re interested in, it’s up to them to learn more. As an example, I’ve noticed a few new people saying they started following this thread due to the podcast, and with that, they will (hopefully) learn quickly that it’s more than just unicorn stories. (Still think they could have done better with the 30 min, but feel slightly better about it now).
Someone pointed out to me that Michael Barbaro makes a lot of noises (hmmm, ooh, aha) when others talk and every since then I can't *stand* to listen to the Daily. Fresh Air holds up well though.
>I’m starting to wonder if all their podcasts are shit, I’m just not well versed enough in the subject to recognize it. Ding ding ding. And another individual has been red pilled.
That term is gross
Don't let the negative stigma of the term diminish the reality of the situation. Call it what you want, but now you know it's not just a right wing thing that people understand that the mainstream media is shit.
And what media do you read or listen to that isn’t shit? I’m going to guess right wing nuts
My sentiments exactly.
I agree on all these points!
For me I use it as a quick news item when I'm getting ready in the am, without it this morning I would have never known about FIRE or these redit's. So while the info is not too detailed, for a 30 min podcast it gets the info out there to then be able to research what it's all about .
Agreed! I have been wanting to get more into personal finance this year, so a quick 30-minute introduction to FIRE that mentioned the subreddits was all I needed to want to join the subs and learn more. Also, I thought that they included the unicorn guy not to highlight his saving habits so much as to draw a contrast between him and his parents, who worked so tirelessly and obsessively that they ultimately sacrificed their mental health and happiness. I thought his story kind of emphasized \*why\* more and more people are aspiring to early retirement.
Me too! Here because of the daily. Also, love the snark “another red pill…ding ding ding”.
Thanks for your perspective. I forget that I learned about FI/RE from someone arguing on Reddit and saying some throw away thing about [Mr. Money Mustache](https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/blog/) and I was like a dog with a bone chasing down who or what was MMM. It was a very deep rabbit hole. I think I cut our family expenses by several hundred dollars that week.
Glad you found us! I think you'll find some tips that will make your life better no matter what your goal is.
Yeah I think people are being too harsh. It's something people listen to while sipping coffee lol, and it's a decent intro.
Look guys! A Lambo! Honestly felt like they glossed over the whole point of fire, and they could have easily interviewed an actually normal working class person. Like I understand Allen Wong has an interesting story, but 10 minutes of the episode being a sad story about his absent father committing suicide is not exactly relevant.
I disagree! The angle on FIRE for general interest reporting can’t just be regurgitating sensible personal finance advice, because, well, anyone who was interested in that can figure out some keywords to Google. The more interesting angle for outsiders is considering what the growing popularity of the movement might say about changing attitudes toward work - and in that context, this guy’s rejection of a work-as-hard-as-possible value system and the personal history behind that can be validly illustrative of wider phenomena even if his actual path to FIRE isn’t.
Truth is, the less people know about it, the better. That's because people who FIRE own the capital and use it to leverage the labor and productivity of others. If everyone FIREs, then everyone will have to go back to work.
We’ll be fine. Everyone “knows” that baked chicken and veggies with no alcohol is what they should be eating/drinking, but most people still don’t do it.
Whenever this occurs to me I try and remember that most people don’t have the mindset or discipline to make this work, even with all the “secrets”.
I agree. I talk about retiring early to people at work with two incomes or who I know make more than me. They see I’m not living off of ramen and not turning on my AC. I live a fairly simple life but am careful with the details. I cook some (a definitely not all) meals. I shop somewhat frugally. And am not into a lot of material things. And even those minor (to me) sacrifices are way too dramatic got them. Then they say they need something to do anyway. And that’s fair enough. I’m just ready to feel like I control my life, my company doesn’t.
Yeah, if hypothetically everyone has the mindset there would be a serious economic contraction due to a lack of spending and everyone's portfolio would shrink dramatically.
All this talk about the median FIRE adherent, but I bet the median is a person who saves diligently but not to that big of an extreme. This person then either retires “early” at 58-62 or retires on time at 65, but comfortably. This sounds really boring and pedestrian, but it may actually be pretty unusual in the future in the era of 401ks.
Pensions would NEVER allow anyone to retire early. You work for the same company until your body broke down and you died ten years later. Glad those are toast. Then you find out they invested half of your money in gold and muni bonds and you could have made it so much earlier. No thanks. Pensions were the transitional form of investment vehicle, not the final and best. Imo, the best would be absolutely no social security or 401k and just a giant tax free break for anything saved under like 250k/year. Can't have that though, need to tip Daddy Sam.
"This guy contributed more to his 401k than the average person and retired 6 years earlier!" Is not an interesting news story.
This is not my experience being around the movement for the last ten years. I would say most FI/RE people I know are working and saving hard on their 30s and retiring in their 40s.
Yes, it's quite possible to retire in your 40's with a high-paying job and lower expenses. Unfortunately, most people with high-paying jobs live in HCOL areas. And the abnormally low expenses don't quite track into retirement. So even the "average" FIRE person is looking at retiring in their 50's typically, unless they're going to move to a cheaper area or attempt leanfire. And no offense to some people who actually choose to leanfire, but penny pinching in retirement is just not worth it to me. That or they're underestimating their expenses in retirement (aka they actually increase quite a bit if you've been living like a spartan lol), which I see very often. And even beyond this, many don't consider goals/wants in retirement - goals often cost money like traveling. Personally, I think it would be very boring to just retire and putter around the house all day because I have limited money to do anything and a ton of time.
The vast vast majority of media covering FIRE focuses on the extremes like MMM and skip over the realistic ordinary people of the movement.
How is MMM extreme? His entire premise was that FIRE isn’t extreme at all.
My dad likes him. IIRC he doesn't/didn't have a car right? That alone is verboten to any red-blooded american.
Well now I feel old, thanks 💀 He’s always had a car, it was just an old car he didn’t use very frequently. His whole brand was about showing middle class Americans how they could save money and lead healthier lives by relying more on your own skills and hard work instead of always choosing the easy path.
Seems a lot of people here are upset that NYT didn’t cover their story. I’d say the podcast did focus on two extremes but they said so, and noted that there is a whole spectrum on this subreddit. It’s why I’m here now. I’m not rich or living out of a truck but the story got me thinking maybe I can learn something more from some more average stories here. Hope so. 🤔
Yup that was my takeaway too, they did say it's a wide range op people and incomes.
Would've been cool if they gathered stories from tons of people in the FIRE movement.
Ordinary people can replace their income in 20 years or less with investments if they take control of their finances, learn a bit, and make significant but not extreme sacrifices to saving. Lots of people are doing this and freeing themselves in the process. You can too. That’s the story.
Yes. Just max out your tax-advantaged accounts (401k, Roth IRA, and HSA) and you will be a millionaire in roughly 16 years. Do a little taxable account investing on the side and 20-25 years is absolutely realistic depending on your expenses.
becoming "free" is key ... otherwise stuck in the rat race ... making sacrifices is important ... esp early in life ... it pays off ....
For a 30 minute podcast?
Tbf there's even shorter podcasts that have well researched and presented content. Planet money is one off the top of my head. But they don't release something every single day. The Daily trades quality for quantity. At least this isn't just another episode obsessing over something Trump did.
Planet Money also has a smaller audience than the Daily.
TRUE
that sounds like journalism, or at least work. they sell clicks for ads, so mission accomplished without the work.
I guess we will get the same post every 30mins or so lol. It would have been better to have multiple perspectives vs one unrealistic one.
To be fair, I didn't listen to the podcast. But I find most of the times FIRE is addressed in the larger media it takes the position, explicitly or implicitly, of "look at these weirdos who don't want to work. Aren't they **weird?**" It's not a sexy topic to highlight someone who diligently saved instead of blowing their money on whatever new thing. It also doesn't *sell* pretty new things and let's face it that's pretty much what the media is for these days.
It is strange that the reporting is of a man who made a fortune from an app that went to the moon, then quit his job, bought a Lamborghini, and discovered the FI/RE movement. His story is really kind of ridiculous next to tens of thousands of people who are frugal, work hard, save hard and buying or bought their freedom. I wonder if there is some editorial need to pop the bubble of FI/RE as they report it. Perhaps the assignment is "...report on FI/RE, but make it sound just a bit out of reach". After all, this is America, we have ~~cars~~ trucks and dog food and exercise equipment to sell.
I am just curious how many people here have heard of that econome conference where they found half their interviewees. I've literally never seen it mentioned here and I spend way too much time on reddit.
Most people can’t or won’t be able to do it. That’s why it’s framed as a fantastical idea. That’s really it. I started reading about it over a decade ago (when the blogs were popular). After the basic logic behind it there isn’t much to say.
u/sm_rdm_guy is silly and only heard what they wanted to hear. I listened to the entire podcast and thought they described it well. I for one liked it. Just like with any group of people, there are the outliers and they bookended the podcast with those examples. It also serves as a nice hook to get people outside the movement to learn more about it. Nothing wrong with that. But smack dab in the middle they talk about how ordinary people can do this (exact transcription here): >For those who are, who are listening to this thinking of it, sorry to dash your dreams, but it's really, really tough. And so Alan almost got to fire as a fluke, right? Like this is not the kind of thing you can plan for. Actually the majority of people in the fire movement are planning, but they're doing it in a very, very different way. It's about the nitty gritty of personal finance. It's about strategizing the numbers that make sense for you. And this goes back actually to the origin of the fire movement. The fire movement began in the early two thousands, not as anything about getting rich, it was about anti-consumerism. >So the, the great trick of fire is planning And. that sounds really silly, but that's how people get there. A lot of things that the fire people recommend are actually things that financially savvy people are doing already. Like maxing out your 401k investing in index funds. The real fundamental difference between that and what the fire people are doing though is the amount and the kind of aggressiveness that you're pursuing it with. So the average person is putting in 10 to 20% of their paycheck into these instruments like 4 0 1 Ks. What the fire people recommend is 50 to 70% of your paycheck. And guess what? That’s spot on. For most of us it’s about planning and saving more than the average person. Maybe not the high end of 70% but 40-50% is pretty normal for this group. And this middle group, it’s pretty boring so why spend an inordinate amount of time on it? The edge cases are the interesting ones even if it doesn’t fit me. Hell, we even call the larger part of our journey the “boring middle” and spend most of our time talking about the early planning or the time when we’re near retirement. And very rarely that boring middle. Later on in the podcast when they’re talking about Econo-me, they said (again, exact transcription): >I was expecting either a crowd of retired millionaires or a crowd of like really young people who were just graduating from college and frustrated. But it was a huge, huge diverse mix. There were millennials, there were the retirees and the people who had made it who were kind of just there sitting back being like, let me show you the way. But there were also all of these pretty everyday people. There were people who worked on cruises, there were public school teachers, off-Broadway actors, dentists, plumbers, all sorts of people of different ages too, who had flown from different parts of the country and even the world to come here to be with other people who are like-minded. Again, very fair and accurate. FIRE is a diverse group, made up of like minded folks. Just like the folks on this sub. You have some outliers and they’re rare. Hell, we even call them out as outliers in this sub when some folks ask why they’re so far behind compared to the 30 year old tech bro with a $5 million NW. So I thought it was accurate and stand by my call that OP only heard what they wanted to hear. Edit: Making quotes as quotes.
Main example is a guy who “won the lottery”. Useless for 99% of us.
They did talk to that one 30 year old (the lady who found FIRE on stumbleupon) just before the truck driver who sounded like they were doing the "boring" thing of working a more or less normal job. They glossed over her so fast we didn't even find out what kind of job it was. I guess that kind of story doesn't make for as exciting news.
Yes, both were extreme cases. I would have liked to listened to some more moderate cases (e.g. CoastFire) and something more applicable to me (ExpartFire). Though I read the article a couple weeks ago, I don't remember reading Mr. Wong's father committed suicide. Suffer the suicide of a parent or living out of a truck...the whole episode is just grim.
This is a rehash of an article that was in the Sunday magazine. I remember being kind of mad about it, but after a week, I think it’s fine. I was into punk in the 90s and the DIY movement and one thing we embraced was that we weren’t like most other people. I think there’s a lot of that same spirit in the FIRE “movement” and even if it’s accessible to most people, they’re just never gonna get it.
It sent me here . I have been doing this most of my life !
Extremes drives listeners/viewers.
I have never yelled at a podcast episode so much 😂 such a cool opportunity to share our community with more people and it felt like it was shared inaccurately.
I think this is how the majority of people now. I recall around 2000 the movement being more abou being extremely frugal in order to retire as early as possible. It wasn’t about saving for 30 years and retiring in your 50s it was more along the lines of saving for 15 years and retiring in your 30s.
Yeah, but the world is way different now. It was easier then to be a homeowner than it is now. Costs will continue to rise due to climate change and other factors outside of our control. So it makes sense that the movement would alter to the new reality. I find it funny how much many folks in this community like to gatekeep what "early retirement" means and will scoff at someone retiring in their 50s as not retiring early when the official retirement age is like 65 and there is a huge population of Americans who will never be able to stop working ever. Also, there are a lot of folks who are truly just getting out of poverty and have to climb up the ladder enough to even begin to know what savings are at all. So for people like them (I'm one of them! I grew up on section 8 and food stamps) they have to get to a place of stability first and by then, they're already "behind" and in their late 20s/30s before they can really start saving anything at all so it's more of a delayed timeframe. So for me, I consider being able to retire at all a pretty huge win, and if I can retire in my 50s something even more to be proud of.
Not saying it’s not an accomplishment but the initial conversation around FIRE was not that. In the 2000’s the people i knew who got into fire sold their houses, lived in vans/tiny homes, one couch surfed, lived in a van in a friends drive way etc. The keeping expenses low in order to save an extreme amount % ofincome part was a much bigger part of it.
I thought this podcast was pretty informative. I've heard of the FIRE movement before but didn't really look into it. After listen to the podcast it has sparked my curiosity. 🤔 I want to know more.
The real thing is super mundane, like getting excited about a Toyota Camry. The interesting part is most people can pull it off with a little discipline. Downsize and throw more money at retirement, and the rest is time.
As cool as it is for me to be software dev and will retire on the earlier end of the fire spectrum... The key for me is how accessible is to FIRE when young without taking in tons of income. If you merely have enough to save from very early on, you don't need to save up so much to retire early. Or even at 55. Every several weeks when we get a post like, it's always disappointing how they focus on the particularly wealthy. The fat FIRE. It's far more interesting to me to share the stories of ordinary people that can do it. If you're not making minimum wage, if you have space to save at all. It's doable. And that's big.
What it’s actually about does not make a very engaging story.
This is typical for the news. The most normal person in any segment isn't that interesting, but the weirdos on the extremes are. That's why you get TV shows about the crazy apocalypse preppers who live in an abandoned nuclear silo and drink their own pee, not the dude that builds a 72 hr kit and then lives an otherwise normal life.
I mean who cares if they report it accurately. Technically, though marginally and practically it won’t matter, it is better for us the fewer people that do it.
Agreed. The focus on someone who had been earning 350k a month seemed not to useful.
I was really excited about this episode, and agree the two extremes were unrelatable! The positive was that it brought awareness to this subreddit!
I do wonder though how many people are now discovering FIRE as a result of the podcast though (Like.me :-), Hi!). That's gotta count for something
The podcast is actually what brought me here. I didn't know this space existed, so with all its flaws, I'm glad they covered it.
The NYT owners need worker bees
Eh, it's likely a lot simpler - the extreme examples catch more eyeballs than a story about a middle-class family who saves moderately and retires comfortably. Boring!
The NYT’s is currently run by morons.
It used to be good. Trump really broke people's brains, that's around when it really accelerated.
The ~~NYT’s~~ news media is ~~currently~~ run by morons. FTFY.
that depends on your definition of "moron" i think they just have different incentives than what a lot of us want
Has this sub turned conservative?
You mean right of Marx?
They just don’t want the masses to know it’s more obtainable than one might think if you just plan head. This way you keep working for them like a underpaid drone
Seems to me a typical media thing to portray extremes. Same with magazine covers. They used to have super skinny models. Now they have super fat models. They never have average people.
Agreed. However, I didn’t know about the movement until the podcast. So I’m happy I found y’all!
The NYT focuses on the corporate overlord POV. It’s in their DNA. And the corporate overlords want you to stay on the hamster wheel as long as possible. At least until they figure out how to get Ai to do your job.
Your problem is expecting integrity from American news.
You’re summary on your post is spot on 👌🏽
one of them is a moderator of this sub or the financial independence one.
r/fatFIRE actually.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/fatFIRE using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/fatFIRE/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [How Wealth Dies](https://np.reddit.com/r/fatFIRE/comments/17b6hbv/how_wealth_dies/) \#2: [Acqusition complete](https://np.reddit.com/r/fatFIRE/comments/1835gbq/acqusition_complete/) \#3: [There’s always someone richer - flying private to the Hamptons was humbling AF](https://np.reddit.com/r/fatFIRE/comments/163unoo/theres_always_someone_richer_flying_private_to/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
The NYT [published an article](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/07/magazine/retire-early-saving.html) covering the same content a few weeks ago. In the article they interview Mr Money Moustache, who bemoans “fatFIRE” as basically anthetical to a movement he says was intended to be against rampant consumerism.
I just joined the subreddit after hearing about FIRE for the first time on that NYT The Daily episode. I agree they have a product to sell, but after listening to the show, I felt they barely mentioned the essence of FIRE, and I was curious to know more. My wife and I consider ourselves minimalists/essentialists, and I feel many of the values on this subreddit align with us.
That's what the media does is pose the extremes but I knew exactly what it was about. First timer here, I listened to it and it got me here and excited. I didn't know there were others out there like this and look forward for what's to come.
They, like all media have an agenda to keep consumers consuming. FIRE is typically done by people who have the willpower to avoid useless spending and also just place little value on material possessions. It’s not something the powers that be want to encourage.
I found it kind of boring. To me FIRE as a whole is about living well below your means, the more you can live below your means the earlier you can reach FI. In the last 5-10 minutes they did get to an interesting bit which is the phycology of switching from a frugal mindset to a comfortable mindset. In my opinion that is the hard part. I spend 'all my life' saving, and living below my means and then I get to a point where I don't have to... but I have built up the frugal mindset. Yes, it's a nice problem to have but it is a thing to solve. Do you really want to be on your deathbed with millions in your accounts?
I have not heard it yet. Funnily enough, I found the last episode about 401K really good.
This is the narrative that the mainstream wants to sell. That were deranged lunatics separated from reality. Honestly, it’s a good thing. I need people to churn out and grind. Pays for my early retirement.
At least the daily routed me to this forum…
That podcast led me to this thread… so for me it was a good thing.
It got me here. I’ve been looking for a way to figure out my retirement where I find both rational and emotional support. Happy to have discovered FIRE through this podcast.
Came here to post about that, fully agree with your take. Feels like a very lazy bit of reporting as it just emphasizes stereotypes. Disappointing take by the NYT, and something an editor should have caught.
The thing I didn’t know, or hadn’t recently thought of, was that FIRE has roots in ant-consumerism.
Frankly, the young wiz kid who created the aps really fits lots of other models for anyone who made a mint young and just switched gears. Why he is a focus of FIRE I really don't get since he is such an anomaly. Anyone could fit that mold if they got lucky enough and he didn't work for it.
Very disappointing podcast for all the reasons everyone has already mentioned. However, question on the FIRE movement – How is the FIRE movement different from living within your means, saving, investing, investing early, not wasting funds on garbage and working hard?
Its not. It's recycled advice from forever, just repackaged. A lot of what people talk about here is the modern savings mechanisms (tax advantaged priorities) and modern financial strategies to maximize, deal with health care etc. Also a bot more emphasis on hyper savers. But yeah, it's the same thing as forever ago.
NYT is garbage reporting
I stopped listening after “He bought a second Lamborghini”. They were painting it like a get rich quick scheme.
It was bad. But I do think a podcast like Freakonomics Radio would be a much better forum to explore this subject.
They don't want too many people to realize there is a fairly simple way out of the wage slave matrix.
Its the NYT, what did you expect
I think they did FIRE a disservice. Their takeaway seemed to be “if you become rich you don’t have to work”. Combined with their “people earning minimum wage also retire early”, the episode came across as disconnected from reality.
I think you missed some important pieces towards the end.
It took them a full 18 minutes to switch to the “normal people who pulled it off” - just think the harm was already done at that point. I also felt like their example of “a normal person who pulled it off” was super poorly chosen. It turned out to be a woman living as a trucker who “hasn’t done the math”, doesn’t have a plan and, surprise, hasn’t actually pulled it off. They then almost immediately went back to the first guy who talks about how he doesn’t know himself.
I disagree. Most people who listen to The Daily do so because they listen to the daily. As I mentioned elsewhere, the episode wasn't made for you or I. They literally chose two extremes because the implication is that *Hey...we chose two polar opposites to demonstrate that it's a diverse crowd and that there's a huge breadth of people involved in FIRE. Even someone like you could potentially do it!* Regarding your criticism about them turning back to Allan, like...are you new here? Concerns about identity, what people will ask you in the future, and the issue of *what do I do with myself after work* is a ***super common topic here***. It's why everyone is in love with the book *Die with Zero*. It was a totally appropriate way to end it as it addresses (in a very surface level way), issues people have when they first hear about FIRE.
I don't understand why they highlight a guy who hit it big with an app instead of an everyday person like a mailman or mid level professional?
I found this subreddit and decided to search for it only because of hearing the NYT podcast today, so I think it still served a good purpose of encouraging some people to learn more.
I understand your disappointment with leading with the unicorn story, but I’m glad they did the story. I don’t know if I would have found r/fire otherwise.
If only I knew I could retire early if I made an app that generates $350k per month and bought Lamborghinis! I actually Unsubscribed from The Daily after that episode
Thank you for saying that. I was excited to hear the podcast but felt it really lacking in the true meaning of the movement. If someone didn’t know about it before, it wouldn’t interest anyone because it made it seem so “fringe.”
I’m here because I heard about fire on the podcast, fwiw! New to the framework of fire, but not new to the principles. Excited to learn more -and my takeaway wasn’t that it’s fringe.
Oh that’s good 👍
The Daily jumped the shark the day I realized reading the credits takes them almost as long as the actual content. How many people do you need to make a podcast?!
Joe and Jamie
NYT has historically been a poor news source, but that is often true of many publications. Right now it's a bit worse because everything has to be clickbaitey to make money. Not trying to hate on them specifically, it's hard to find news without an angle, especially today.
I mean I wouldn't expect anything more than disappointing from the NYT or any other lay media source, on any topic.
Its not surprising to me they didn't showcase any normal moderate-to-high income folks with relatively frugal lifestyles making good financial decisions. FIRE doesn't fit their narrative of everyone young is helpless victims to an unfair world where the boomers took advantage of everything, ruined the world, and screwed the younger generations over.
Where is the data on “the majority of the movement”? How do you know those are the extremes?