He's also the guy who says he no longer works but writes a blog for money. So there's that.
Does he not admit that? This is really my first foray onto his site. I know @shoegal is always talking about him so I thought I'd check it out since I'm of a very MM mind lately.
It's been my impression that his advocating "early retirement" is really advocating "early financial freedom." Thus, he did what he needed to do so that writing a blog was financially possible for him.
Wait, he (or a commenter) rehomed the cats for... financial purposes?
I won't deny that at times my cats have been expensive, especially since I have a breed that needs regular grooming, but not EVERYTHING in life is about money.
The dude had enough cashola for he and wifey to quit their regular people 9-to-5 jobs and live a life that was comfortable to them which I am just always going to be in awe of. Until I an do the same.
The forums on MMM can be somewhat extreme at times, but I do like their tough-love approach. The MMM & MM forums are two of my favorites as I suspect IQ is far higher than some of the other internet forums floating around out there. The MMM forums can tend towards extreme frugality, and I absolutely want to join that thread & shame but then I'd be outing my MMM identity, which is basically like crossing the streams in Ghostbusters!
Here's what I love about the MMM site - his blogs keep me focused on financial freedom (motivation and focus always welcome) and I've saved hundreds of dollars annually by acting on tips I've found there - biking, switching to Republic Wireless, going to the library more consistently, etc.
But, he totally has a different "vibe" than MM. His audience is tons of dudes (some women), lots of engineers, and they can verge on pompous at times. But, they are also very analytical and detail-oriented, and like to get to the heart of the matter on specific questions, etc.
I swear I am not a shill for Mr. Money but his site was quite literally life-changing for me - moving my plans to retire "early" at 55 to a target of 40. (heart)
Honestly, I am new to MMM, but the forums and discussions there fascinate me. I am kind of meh on some of it, and rehoming a pet to save money...just no. All forums have crazies and posters who are over the top wacko. I haven't participated, but it's like most things and I will try not to throw the baby out with the bath water. Some of it is a bit drastic for me. However, thinking more about retirement and FI-financial independence is a biggie for me this year, so I am spending more time on it.
I haven't gotten into the MMM forums - I participate in MMMoms and MM here, I don't have time for more. I like Mr Money Mustache's writing style though. He's straightforward, pokes fun at everyone (especially himself), swears a lot, and points out a lot of potential ways to spend a lot less money. I take all of his suggestions with a grain of salt, because he tends to give numbers for the best/worst case to drive the point home, when mostly you're going to end up somewhere in the middle. And yes, he's about financial independence, which is a far better way to think of retirement in my opinion.
I am so over MMM and tired of hearing about him on MM.
Edit: I think you can have "financial freedom" and still live a fulfilling life. Personally, I just do not think his approach is something I can live with.
Post by crashgizmo on Jan 28, 2015 22:11:01 GMT -5
I follow but don't post on the MMM forums, because I always love me a budget post. I take some good points from those folks and ignore the rest. I agree that I would rather work longer than sacrifice to the extreme some of them do, but there are some good themes.
And, @shoegal I am always wondering who you are on MMM when I read the posts there.
Post by tacosforlife on Jan 28, 2015 22:26:52 GMT -5
I find the obsession with financial freedom - as he define it - just...I don't even know...distasteful? Elitist? Something.
The fact is that the VAST majority of people in this country have never and will never earn enough to build the kind of wealth necessary to retire at such a young age. And while I'm sure there are some people who leave the workforce and make amazing contributions to society through philanthropy, I'm sure there are plenty who don't.
There's something about the attitude toward work that rubs me the wrong way. Like all those foolish plebes slaving away at "jobs" don't know true freedom! But you know what? When he gets sick, I bet he's going to be glad his doctor didn't retire at 40 and that there are actually experienced doctors out there.
I just think of all the jobs that make our world go round: teachers educating our kids, medical professionals keeping us healthy, bus drivers getting us from place to place. Not everyone finds their job fulfilling (I don't always), but we actually need people to work.
I'm not even sure I've articulated it right, but his whole worldview and attitude just rubs me so incredibly wrong.
@shoegal is one of those people on MM that I just like and trust (not in politics though and if she thinks something is worth a look, I'll look at it. Plus I just need more money talk, there's not enough here, though I'm looking forward to tax time. There's usually more then.
Hee hee your obama winking siggy is killing me, Stan
And, @shoegal I am always wondering who you are on MMM when I read the posts there.
Trust me, I don't have an expensive shoe as my avatar over there - I'm smarter than that I can't even imagine the flaming I'd get - those engineer dudes would NOT relate!
I find the obsession with financial freedom - as he define it - just...I don't even know...distasteful? Elitist? Something.
The fact is that the VAST majority of people in this country have never and will never earn enough to build the kind of wealth necessary to retire at such a young age. And while I'm sure there are some people who leave the workforce and make amazing contributions to society through philanthropy, I'm sure there are plenty who don't.
There's something about the attitude toward work that rubs me the wrong way. Like all those foolish plebes slaving away at "jobs" don't know true freedom! But you know what? When he gets sick, I bet he's going to be glad his doctor didn't retire at 40 and that there are actually experienced doctors out there.
I just think of all the jobs that make our world go round: teachers educating our kids, medical professionals keeping us healthy, bus drivers getting us from place to place. Not everyone finds their job fulfilling (I don't always), but we actually need people to work.
I'm not even sure I've articulated it right, but his whole worldview and attitude just rubs me so incredibly wrong.
Well, and the fact that he advocates that saving $800k is the kind of wealth needed, but it's not like he's living off only that. I'd like to see the evidence backing up needing only $800k or whatever the number is, not $800k plus the millions he's been able to add to it from his MMM ventures. Because again, putting aside whether that's retirement or not or even if it's FI or not, most people aren't going to be adding principal to that money after they reach "retirement".
I find the obsession with financial freedom - as he define it - just...I don't even know...distasteful? Elitist? Something.
The fact is that the VAST majority of people in this country have never and will never earn enough to build the kind of wealth necessary to retire at such a young age. And while I'm sure there are some people who leave the workforce and make amazing contributions to society through philanthropy, I'm sure there are plenty who don't.
There's something about the attitude toward work that rubs me the wrong way. Like all those foolish plebes slaving away at "jobs" don't know true freedom! But you know what? When he gets sick, I bet he's going to be glad his doctor didn't retire at 40 and that there are actually experienced doctors out there.
I just think of all the jobs that make our world go round: teachers educating our kids, medical professionals keeping us healthy, bus drivers getting us from place to place. Not everyone finds their job fulfilling (I don't always), but we actually need people to work.
I'm not even sure I've articulated it right, but his whole worldview and attitude just rubs me so incredibly wrong.
Well, and the fact that he advocates that saving $800k is the kind of wealth needed, but it's not like he's living off only that. I'd like to see the evidence backing up needing only $800k or whatever the number is, not $800k plus the millions he's been able to add to it from his MMM ventures. Because again, putting aside whether that's retirement or not or even if it's FI or not, most people aren't going to be adding principal to that money after they reach "retirement".
Well, if you look at his yearly posts on how much his family spent that year he shows that it's possible. Now a lot of people nitpick the way he presents the numbers (he excludes a couple of things as business expenses, and renovations don't count because they're building equity), but the point is that you CAN live comfortably on $25k/year if your house is paid off. So $800k is plenty to keep up that standard of living indefinitely. We've been looking seriously at our finances and we might be able to achieve that in 5-10 years, at which point we might well quit one or both of our jobs. But we would probably both bring in a little side income doing something - I've thought about teaching fitness classes part time.
lasagnasshole's perspective is interesting. I hadn't thought of it that way.
I think he's a scam. He's advising people to do something that he isn't doing. "Retiring" at $800k would be easy if by "retiring" you mean "making tons of money writing a blog." His constituents won't have such lucrative opportunities, so his advice may be very bad (and dangerous).
But...MATH! If you only spend about $25k per year, you CAN retire on $800k! 4% SWR gives you $32K, which some people are happy to live on (and many Americans live on today).
Conversely, for those who have higher expenses and choose to spend more, a $3M nest egg equates to $120k annually at 4% SWR!
Those numbers in savings are difficult for many people to achieve, but just as relevant - they ARE possible for so many, who currently waste money on things that they "assume" are "necessary" - I don't see how that's dangerous or harmful to post about and discuss.
(Now - irresponsibly rehoming adult kitties - THAT I can't support - BOO to that forum poster.)
I get that one CAN live on $25k a year, but given the choice I don't understand why one would WANT to. I have zero desire to spend my retirement years cleaning my paid for house while showering at the YMCA and you can pull my iPhone from my cold dead hands.
I think it makes a lot more sense to focus on finding a career (including writing a blog, like MMM) that doesn't make you want to poke your eyes out. Even if that career doesn't pay well. Because then you can keep doing it past age 40 without crying yourself to sleep. And you can be a productive contributor to society.
But...MATH! If you only spend about $25k per year, you CAN retire on $800k! 4% SWR gives you $32K, which some people are happy to live on (and many Americans live on today.)
If you're a family of four, with $25k a year you'll be living at right above the poverty line!
Which yes, a lot of people DO do, though usually not by choice. And is that something to aspire to for your life after 40 if you do have a choice? I don't know...
But...MATH! If you only spend about $25k per year, you CAN retire on $800k! 4% SWR gives you $32K, which some people are happy to live on (and many Americans live on today.)
If you're a family of four, with $25k a year you'll be living at right above the poverty line!
Which yes, a lot of people DO do, though usually not by choice. And is that something to aspire to for your life after 40 if you do have a choice? I don't know...
That is absolutely fair!! I have cut my budget (family of TWO) and am not anywhere near that low
We had our own poster who was worried that things were tight based on a salary of around $32k just this week. Granted, she has to pay rent, car, insurance, etc. but it still doesn't get you very far, even in a LCOL area. So I'm baffled as to how people think that it is enough money to live off of for early retirement.
I just feel that there has to be a middle ground - somewhere between FI/early retirement and making sure every last penny is accounted for.
I've lived on $25k per year. It sucked. I can't imagine doing it with kids. But I guess it would have been much easier if I had a big fat cushion in savings. lol
Also, let's consider what 30k will actually be equal to in 40 years. I'm thinking it will be quite a bit below poverty, which is tough even with a paid off house (you have equity, but you still have taxes and maintenance to consider). I know plenty of people live on 25k a year after taxes, but most don't do so by choice. Which I guess is the point, but... Eh.
I don't think that $25k a year for the typical person is really the same as living off of $25k with no rent/mortgage, no car pmt, and no childcare expenses. Add on top of that a STRONG financial cushion and living off of $25k seems reasonable to me. Is it the lifestyle I'd want? No. But I don't think it would be a miserable life and I don't think it's even comparable to living off of $25k with no financial security.
My dad never made $40k in his life. He went p/t at 62 and "retired" at 64, but his idea of retirement includes picking up some side work when it turns up, growing a lot of his own food, and living many of the budget/frugal tips that MMM does (although I'd like to say that water is very cheap where he lives and I'm confident he showers on a regular basis in his own home. He also owns cats and isn't a cheap heartless bastard who'd give them up)
I like MMM but I am a casual reader. I just enjoy reading some of the articles now and then and the different perspective. It is just like reading any other blog for me, which means I basically skim now and then looking for something interesting but I don't get caught up in anything.
Well, and the fact that he advocates that saving $800k is the kind of wealth needed, but it's not like he's living off only that. I'd like to see the evidence backing up needing only $800k or whatever the number is, not $800k plus the millions he's been able to add to it from his MMM ventures. Because again, putting aside whether that's retirement or not or even if it's FI or not, most people aren't going to be adding principal to that money after they reach "retirement".
Well, if you look at his yearly posts on how much his family spent that year he shows that it's possible. Now a lot of people nitpick the way he presents the numbers (he excludes a couple of things as business expenses, and renovations don't count because they're building equity), but the point is that you CAN live comfortably on $25k/year if your house is paid off. So $800k is plenty to keep up that standard of living indefinitely. We've been looking seriously at our finances and we might be able to achieve that in 5-10 years, at which point we might well quit one or both of our jobs. But we would probably both bring in a little side income doing something - I've thought about teaching fitness classes part time.
But this is entirely my issue with him. He hasn't shown it being done. He's shown it being done for a small snapshot of time. He isn't actually living this as he advocates for everyone. For the average person that he is raking in cash off of, they don't have the ability to manipulate the numbers as he does, and the reality is, they will be pulling principal from that $800k with some regularity. I want to see a model from him that actually shows what happens to normal people when they pull their actual expenses from the golden nest egg and not from his royalties or other "business expenses". As you said, he doesn't count renovations, but real people have to count them and for real people, they come from our savings. Same with cars. I hate the idea that he might be suckering people into believing that $800k is all they need to never work again and people will probably end up shellshocked when that money is gone in 10 years or so. Then they are likely over 50 years old and not necessarily particularly employable...then what?
I get that one CAN live on $25k a year, but given the choice I don't understand why one would WANT to. I have zero desire to spend my retirement years cleaning my paid for house while showering at the YMCA and you can pull my iPhone from my cold dead hands.
Yup. I would prefer to work until I am on my death bed if that is the alternative. Although, I given the amount I work now, I think I am probably just as "retired" as MMM.
I think it makes a lot more sense to focus on finding a career (including writing a blog, like MMM) that doesn't make you want to poke your eyes out. Even if that career doesn't pay well. Because then you can keep doing it past age 40 without crying yourself to sleep. And you can be a productive contributor to society.
I know plenty of people who achieved this, and then had the industry or company change on them such that work didn't remain fulfilling until normal retirement age. Right now, I really enjoy my job. If I could retire right now, I wouldn't. But will I always enjoy my job? I just don't know.
Well, if you look at his yearly posts on how much his family spent that year he shows that it's possible. Now a lot of people nitpick the way he presents the numbers (he excludes a couple of things as business expenses, and renovations don't count because they're building equity), but the point is that you CAN live comfortably on $25k/year if your house is paid off. So $800k is plenty to keep up that standard of living indefinitely. We've been looking seriously at our finances and we might be able to achieve that in 5-10 years, at which point we might well quit one or both of our jobs. But we would probably both bring in a little side income doing something - I've thought about teaching fitness classes part time.
But this is entirely my issue with him. He hasn't shown it being done. He's shown it being done for a small snapshot of time. He isn't actually living this as he advocates for everyone. For the average person that he is raking in cash off of, they don't have the ability to manipulate the numbers as he does, and the reality is, they will be pulling principal from that $800k with some regularity. I want to see a model from him that actually shows what happens to normal people when they pull their actual expenses from the golden nest egg and not from his royalties or other "business expenses". As you said, he doesn't count renovations, but real people have to count them and for real people, they come from our savings. Same with cars. I hate the idea that he might be suckering people into believing that $800k is all they need to never work again and people will probably end up shellshocked when that money is gone in 10 years or so. Then they are likely over 50 years old and not necessarily particularly employable...then what?
Well, he also talks extensively about flexibility and safety margins. This article is a good one: www.mrmoneymustache.com/2011/10/17/its-all-about-the-safety-margin/ or this one: www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/05/29/how-much-do-i-need-for-retirement/ If you're spending only $25k/year, then $800k can be enough because it only takes $700k to produce $25k/year (approximately, depends on your overall tax situation). So every year you spend only $25k your nest egg is actually growing by $4k. So you do have extra savings built in - for things like necessary renovations/repairs. And it's not like you'll wake up one day and your nest egg is gone, you've got years to see it coming and make course corrections like reducing spending further or bringing in a little side income to make up the shortfall.
Maybe this makes him a bad writer, but you have to read a bunch of his blog to get a feel for what he's actually saying, reading random posts they can be taken out of context by those not familiar with his philosophy. And he says many times that he expects most people will probably end up bringing in *some* income in retirement, since his target audience is people like him who don't like being idle. So that's another safety net.
Anyway, I'm not saying I agree with everything he writes, but I like his overall style and philosophy. He prefers to be self-employed and have a lot of freedom and flexibility, and he's happy doing what he's doing. He has the financial freedom to do absolutely nothing if he wants. I am working towards that same freedom, but I haven't decided yet if I'll quit my 40hr/wk desk job or not when I have the option to do so without impacting my quality of life. I'm likely to cut back at some point to spend more time with my kids.