A while back I posted about my brother-in-law.
viewtopic.php?t=494
Over the weekend I met a guy (good friend of my wife) who lives his life as such:
-early 30s, lives in Toronto
-he's handy, so he's the superintendent of a low-rise (~6-8 apartments). His total housing cost (rent, utilities, etc) is about $120
-uses bicycle only to get around (public transportation in the coldest months)
-his total monthly cost is about $500/month
-he is a naval reservist and makes just a bit more than $500/month, only working 1-2 3hr shifts a week + a weekend a month, which he loves ("I get paid to use guns and boats" type sentiment)... I think the pay is around $20/hr
-this gives him total freedom to do what he wants with the rest of his time
-so his chief "occupation" is his dream job... an online enterainment blogger for a fairly popular toronto "whats going on" blog (500k visitors/month)
-this nets him an additional few hundred dollars per month... and also lands him free tickets, and has him out seeing shows 4-5 nights a week...
-additionally, he goes on 4-8 week long paid training programs with the navy and has a few other side gigs as he's generally handy/useful...
-this extra income has allowed him to build up about $60k in savings over the past 6 years living like this
So generally hobbling together a few part-time gigs has left him free 70% of his days. Also he's a 280lb muscular, 50 cal machine gun trained, entertainment blogger... which I find funny.
So an interesting note. The two people who I have met in person who have been successful at "low-cost" living both read nothing online nor read books that changed their views on finance/life. They instead decided out of the gate - "this is the life and job I want" and then engineered their lives around that decision on how they want to live their life.
I think the fact that many people do not understand these type of "life choices" being available points to a general failure in our parenting/school system.
Another Low-Cost Living Example
One more quick note on this. Also he gets benefits + a pension through the naval reserves. And a free "crossfit" membership (i.e. real military training).
He spent his last week piloting a patrol boat off the coast doing "intercept" excercises. I spent my last week integrating to the twitter API.... siggghhhhh
He spent his last week piloting a patrol boat off the coast doing "intercept" excercises. I spent my last week integrating to the twitter API.... siggghhhhh
@dpmorel -- many people do not understand these type of "life choices" being available points to a general failure in our parenting/school system.
"Life choices" advice from adults to students change with the times. Back in the 1960s, for example, the advice I received was to get a good education so that I could get a good job with a stable employer and retire with a pension and gold watch after 40 years of service.
I spent the next couple of decades trying to make this work. Then I did a major mid-course correction (otherwise known as "having my mid-life crisis") and spent the last couple of decades working mostly as an independent contractor. It was only when I realized "my last paycheck is really my last paycheck" did I figure out that I needed to take my financial future into my own hands.
My living expenses are probably higher than they need to be due to this legacy life path (who knew?). But I'm looking at the next few decades as a time when I can be entrepreneurial (i.e., have "profitable hobbies") and enjoy lifestyle freedom.
"Life choices" advice from adults to students change with the times. Back in the 1960s, for example, the advice I received was to get a good education so that I could get a good job with a stable employer and retire with a pension and gold watch after 40 years of service.
I spent the next couple of decades trying to make this work. Then I did a major mid-course correction (otherwise known as "having my mid-life crisis") and spent the last couple of decades working mostly as an independent contractor. It was only when I realized "my last paycheck is really my last paycheck" did I figure out that I needed to take my financial future into my own hands.
My living expenses are probably higher than they need to be due to this legacy life path (who knew?). But I'm looking at the next few decades as a time when I can be entrepreneurial (i.e., have "profitable hobbies") and enjoy lifestyle freedom.
-
jeremymday
- Posts: 132
- Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2010 1:06 am
- Contact:
I have a good friend who lives this way too. He has a bunch of little side projects and lives frugally. He spends most of his time mountain biking, playing volleyball, ultimate frisbee, skiing, and anything else active.
Like your friend, he never read anything about this lifestyle, he just choose it.
I think there are plenty of people like this around if you are looking...
BTW, what is this guys website???
Like your friend, he never read anything about this lifestyle, he just choose it.
I think there are plenty of people like this around if you are looking...
BTW, what is this guys website???
really??? health care??? That stops people from living outside of the world of day jobs?
How little do you have to make to get medicaid/care?
I wonder if being a reservist in the US armed forces provide benefits/health care? Could be a good way around it?
Also, isn't the Jacob-esque HSA a good tactic to manage health care costs as well. I had a HSA during my first stint in the US with my employer... seemed pretty useful/cheap if you are generally healthy.
BTW - Canadian health care is not quite "universal". Its not uncommon for cancer patients to run up drug bill of $20k... drugs of course not being covered by health care. Having said that, additional benefits to cover drugs start quite small, $100/month, not like the $600/month avg in NYC.
How little do you have to make to get medicaid/care?
I wonder if being a reservist in the US armed forces provide benefits/health care? Could be a good way around it?
Also, isn't the Jacob-esque HSA a good tactic to manage health care costs as well. I had a HSA during my first stint in the US with my employer... seemed pretty useful/cheap if you are generally healthy.
BTW - Canadian health care is not quite "universal". Its not uncommon for cancer patients to run up drug bill of $20k... drugs of course not being covered by health care. Having said that, additional benefits to cover drugs start quite small, $100/month, not like the $600/month avg in NYC.
-
AlexOliver
- Posts: 461
- Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2010 7:25 pm
Healthcare is a big issue for american ERs. If you are healthy and young it can be inexpensive, but it is a problem if you have a pre-exisitng condition (or develop one).
Medicaid includes a means test for assets so it is not a solution.
Finally, high deductible plans may be going away. In 2014, with the new ppaca legislation i believe the highest amount allowed is only $2000/year. Older plans may be grandfathered in but no new people can join.
Medicaid includes a means test for assets so it is not a solution.
Finally, high deductible plans may be going away. In 2014, with the new ppaca legislation i believe the highest amount allowed is only $2000/year. Older plans may be grandfathered in but no new people can join.
-
AlexOliver
- Posts: 461
- Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2010 7:25 pm
the highest amount allowed is $2k/yr. What's high-deductible defined as?-
AlexOliver
- Posts: 461
- Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2010 7:25 pm
@AlexOliver
The income threshold for Medicaid may be approx. $14K, but anyone who has amassed an ERE fund of $100K+ will be disqualified based on an asset threshold.
While the insurance exchanges that will come into existence in 2014 for those with pre-existing conditions may hold promise, look for the newly ascendant Republican House to withhold appropriations to fund the subsidies. Without funding, the subsidized insurance is an empty promise.
The stark fact is that a practioner of ERE with a pre-existing condition either forgoes coverage and accepts the risk of catastrophic illness with stoic equanimity, or we as a country move to a true single-payer universal coverage system. The latter is unlikely in the next five-year horizon.
The income threshold for Medicaid may be approx. $14K, but anyone who has amassed an ERE fund of $100K+ will be disqualified based on an asset threshold.
While the insurance exchanges that will come into existence in 2014 for those with pre-existing conditions may hold promise, look for the newly ascendant Republican House to withhold appropriations to fund the subsidies. Without funding, the subsidized insurance is an empty promise.
The stark fact is that a practioner of ERE with a pre-existing condition either forgoes coverage and accepts the risk of catastrophic illness with stoic equanimity, or we as a country move to a true single-payer universal coverage system. The latter is unlikely in the next five-year horizon.
-
AlexOliver
- Posts: 461
- Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2010 7:25 pm
@Maus: I'm not talking about the exchanges.
"Insurers are prohibited from discriminating against or charging higher rates for any individuals based on pre-existing medical conditions"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_Pr ... _1.2C_2014
"Insurers are prohibited from discriminating against or charging higher rates for any individuals based on pre-existing medical conditions"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_Pr ... _1.2C_2014
@AlexOliver
OK. I see what you're driving at with the prohibition on price discrimination contained in the PPAC. But, outside the federally subsidized exchanges, the price of individual policies will be going up for all applicants, regardless of health status, precisely because insurance companies can no longer medically underwrite people with cancer, diabetes, etc. who tend to have large recurring claims. These are the pre-existing conditions that currently result in either outright denial of an individual policy, or a Tier III premium that is 3-4 times higher than the Tier I premium offered a healthy applicant. While a high-deductible policy that qualifies for an HSA may now be fairly reasonable for a healthy 20- or 30-something person, in 2014 the same will no longer be the case. And if you are in your late forties, as I am, the price of even a catastrophic care policy quickly approaches $1000 per month on the open market in California. By comparison, the federally subsidized exchange just created in California is offering a benefit-rich, HMO-style plan for about $500 per month for a 50-55 y.o. male in the Bay Area.
Any way you slice it, trying to maintain health insurance in the years after 50 but before one qualifies for Medicare at 65 (if it is still solvent in 20 years) will be a huge financial challenge for anyone trying to live off assets of <$500K at a 4% safe withdrawal rate. The premiums would consume half or more of your annual income from investments.
OK. I see what you're driving at with the prohibition on price discrimination contained in the PPAC. But, outside the federally subsidized exchanges, the price of individual policies will be going up for all applicants, regardless of health status, precisely because insurance companies can no longer medically underwrite people with cancer, diabetes, etc. who tend to have large recurring claims. These are the pre-existing conditions that currently result in either outright denial of an individual policy, or a Tier III premium that is 3-4 times higher than the Tier I premium offered a healthy applicant. While a high-deductible policy that qualifies for an HSA may now be fairly reasonable for a healthy 20- or 30-something person, in 2014 the same will no longer be the case. And if you are in your late forties, as I am, the price of even a catastrophic care policy quickly approaches $1000 per month on the open market in California. By comparison, the federally subsidized exchange just created in California is offering a benefit-rich, HMO-style plan for about $500 per month for a 50-55 y.o. male in the Bay Area.
Any way you slice it, trying to maintain health insurance in the years after 50 but before one qualifies for Medicare at 65 (if it is still solvent in 20 years) will be a huge financial challenge for anyone trying to live off assets of <$500K at a 4% safe withdrawal rate. The premiums would consume half or more of your annual income from investments.
Example - we recently switched from a traditional plan with co-pays, $1,500 per person deductible and 20% coinsurance with a $6,000 annual out of pocket limit to a HDHP/HSA setup with a $5,000 family deductible. We are paying $400/month (half what the old policy cost) for a family of 4 ages 35, 29, 3 and newborn. We got the preferred rate. The increased cash flow is nice, plus we actually have a lower max out of pocket than previous. Count me as a HDHP/HSA supporter.
-
starshard0
- Posts: 45
- Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 1:29 pm
- Contact: