How is the FIRE movement doing?

[AnalyticalEngine]

Consider a situation where the cultural API has come to a point where it only interfaces with "friends, family, and pop-culture icons" or some other narrow restrictions in terms of who someone is willing to accept input from. Where does that leave us relative to Web1.0 where anyone on it were willing to connect with anyone as long as they made rational sense.

I'd argue that this has been the historical norm for human behavior and we're seeing mean reversion now that the "golden age" of Internet connectivity is ending. Another possible explanation is that the early internet was largely compromised of NASA-geek types due to barriers to entry, and this has dwindled, leaving the internet now full of lowest-common-denominator content, with NASA-geeks now disliked as gatekeepers. If the goal is to keep FIRE popular on the internet, then it has to be sold better, essentially, by some popular sexy video maker etc. However, I think ERE might see more bang for the buck if we could get more traction in meat space, as the lack of meat space presence hinders many internet movements.

[Seppia]

Semi serious question to Jacob

You really seem to care about ERE “popularity”, but what is your desired level of popularity?
Where do you set the bar and why?

Doing a music parallel: it’s impossible to become “Taylor Swift popular” if your band plays satanic black metal.
Is Darkthrone popular? By Taylor Swift standards, definitely not, but every person who has listened to heavy metal has at least heard of Darkthone.

ERE is already VERY popular within the FIRE crowd, even the most mainstream articles about FIRE recognize the seminal importance of it, and your name is always mentioned.

If you want “bigger numbers” you need to sell a different product.

[jacob]

You really seem to care about ERE “popularity”, but what is your desired level of popularity?
Where do you set the bar and why?

I see the FIRE movement as the most effective bottom-up strategy for dealing with the poly/metacrisis. Most other strategies, like "forming community" or "protesting the system" are top-down. It's rather annoying to know a global solution and not only have it resisted by the status-quo but even from the kind of people who could benefit from it personally if they just dropped their ideology or presumptions. I wish that the movement got substantially more popular than it is to the point where it is at least 1) something that everybody knows about; and 2) a material fraction see it as a option and adopt it accordingly.

In that regard, I don't really relate to those who see FIRE as some kind of lifehack that is best kept secret lest the governments crack down on it. However, I consider resistance to the second point a much bigger problem. This is where people are poisoning the well arguing that FIRE is only for rich tech bros or still arguing that "it's impossible to make the budget or math work in these trying economic times" while not even trying to make a difference despite being in what is arguable the healthiest economy (at least in the US) in the last two decades.

In terms of personal popularity, I hail from the academic tradition. As long as ERE gets some credit/citations, I'm personally happy to keep out of the limelight.

[Jin+Guice]

@jacob: I think the issue is that not that many people are that interested in personal finance and/ or frugality. I think FIRE did get big enough that people who are interested in the intersection of these two things have probably heard of it and are likely to adopt it.

Asking people to stop bitching about not having enough money and to stop buying shit is like asking them to lose their religion twice. Unless people are already interested in personal finance and frugality, you're asking them to dissolve their ego identities. Only those who see the cracks in the religion of consumerism and financial exceptionalism are going to adopt it. This is a significant minority, but still a very small minority.


I think it's usual for fringe movements to get pigeon-holed by some superficial quality that keeps the status quo moving forward.


In so much as FIRE is a strategy for the metacrisis, it's also a slight of hand*. More people are interested in financial independence than solving the metacrisis because financial independence directly benefits them now. It has an obvious and achievable goal. One can copy others who are already successfully doing it.

*I don't mean this in a negative way.

I think to expand much further you either need to:

Get the climate symposium people to acknowledge FIRE as the solution and advise everyone to implement it asap

and/ or

Come up with yet another "trick" (or set of tricks) to get people to adopt various parts of ERE.

[7Wannabe5]

I'm not sure what your storm drain metaphor is getting at? Where my mind goes is that storm drains were a source of intrigue and wonder available to all, where as designer jeans are not?

Ken Wilber suggests that only humans who have achieved Formal Operational level of functioning can think/behave in terms of "as if." If I can see myself in a model in which I am an organism among other organisms in an abiotic environment in which water flows, then I am perhaps more free to walk into a social gathering and behave "as if" Toughskins confer as much status as Calvin Klein. IOW, the rules of society are not as "concrete" for me as for those who have not yet mastered Formal Operational. IOW, concrete thinkers lack the imagination necessary to make Toughskins the next cool thing, because they can only function in the world as they find it.

She doesn't like Jordan Peterson and doesn't think anything he says is deep (as in particularly meaningful) or correct.

It's true that I don't like him, and I don't think his thinking is particularly deep, but I do agree with some of his pointers-to-problems in most general terms. For instance, if I didn't agree with him that the Modern/Post-Modern take on gender is somewhat problematic, why would I have been arguing with you elsewhere from the stance that "Pull-ups are for boys. I am not a boy. Ergo, I will not be doing pull-ups." Instead of watching Peterson & Co., I would recommend reading "Gender" by Ivan Illich, which some have suggested is in alignment with Peterson's philosophy; but it is truly a deeply intellectual, brilliant, beautiful book. And, I would also suggest reading "Masculine Domination" by Pierre Bourdieu, the originator of the concept of cultural capital, another deep book by a brilliant mind which offers a post-modern perspective on the topic, which is more in opposition to Peterson's take, but fathoms beyond his provincial piecemeal perspective.

This is where people are poisoning the well arguing that FIRE is only for rich tech bros

I think maybe the problem is that you went too far in a certain direction not likely to integrate well with the sort of touchy-feely eco-Green groups you reached out to initially. Two groups I can think of that you might have better luck integrating towards making the movement sexier than "rich tech bros" would be sex workers and the BDSM community. Sex Workers think a lot like tech bros in terms of finances, because their field is also dominated by the young and short-term quite lucrative. The BDSM community is already full of nerds who are used to thinking outside of the box of social convention, and they're also a pretty mixed group across the social/political spectrum. Obvious joint book-group choice would be "An Economist Walks Into a Brothel" and obvious first skill share meet-up topic would be Ropes and Knots.

[Seppia]

It's rather annoying to know a global solution and not only have it resisted by the status-quo but even from the kind of people who could benefit from it personally if they just dropped their ideology or presumptions. I wish that the movement got substantially more popular than it is to the point where it is at least 1) something that everybody knows about; and 2) a material fraction see it as a option and adopt it accordingly.

Then maybe what you need is some sort of megaphone with incredible people skills who, by dumbing it down a little, spreads the message.
I think MMM was great, but paradoxically he was so good that he got huge too quick, transitioning from a fun scrappy guy with a startup family to divorced multimillionaire in a flash.
He wasn't relatable to most people for long enough.
I was lucky I caught him at the peak of his powers, and I am thankful he brought me here as a "destination".

Your best bet is probably to find a Milei/Trump equivalent (in their ability to connect with "the people") and be the mastermind behind a political party somewhere.
I think your home country and Northern Europe in general would probably be your best bet for success, since they seem to be the most receptive to making personal sacrifices* for the greater good.

*I don't perceive the ERE lifestyle to be "a sacrifice" (actually, the best part is how much better one lives), but addressing the masses, many people will - so it's something that has to be dealt with.

[Jin+Guice]

I agree with @Seppia if spreading FIRE is the goal.

But personal finance is the means, not the end, correct?

There are other benefits to ERE/ anti-(post-)consumerism than financial independence. Promote that?

No reason I can think of not to do both.

[grundomatic]

Jacob, have you read "Amusing Ourselves to Death" by Neil Postman? It was written in the 90s about television culture replacing print culture...

I haven't read the book, but I remember discussing TV at length in my AP US History class. From what I remember, at the outset it was thought that it would be an amazing educational tool, but as we know that's not how it turned out. I think it's pretty analogous to what is happening on the internet. I think you nail it with your response here:

I also don't think people have changed that much, it's just that they have now all arrived on the internet, which, yes, changes the culture from what it used to be.

“Jacob Lund Fisker is an astrophysicist, and the book is written like one. It’s dense, academic and difficult to read.”

I may have read a different book.

I am probably turning into a grumpy old man who yells at clouds, but I see so much mediocrity and adjusting to the minimum common denominator in everything that is mainstream* that I am not sure it’s a bad thing if ERE/FIRE go back to being a niche/weird thing.

*from food to movies to music to education to the political discourse, anything that is thought for mass consumption

I think saying the book is dense is a compliment, but hard to read? I’ll send that guy my copy of In Over Our Heads by Robert Kegan to show him what hard to read looks like. I don’t have my copy of Early Retirement Extreme on hand (like @slevin, it’s loaned out), but I’m pretty sure there’s even a part in the book about your movement being popularized and bastardized.

It's rather annoying to know a global solution and not only have it resisted by the status-quo but even from the kind of people who could benefit from it personally if they just dropped their ideology or presumptions.

Judging from reading the blog and the FAQ, this isn't anything new, though, is it? From the outside, it seems as if there has always been resistance to your ideas. How has your personal, lived experience changed because of these larger cultural changes being discussed? It sure seems like you've been dismissed and misunderstood plenty since the very beginning.

[zbigi]

@Seppia

I don't think it's likely a serious political party will ever adopt FIRE as its solution to the meta-crisis. As a policy (and not a personal solution used by the minority), it would so easy to be torn to shreds. This has been discussed here many times before, but the contrargument could be summarized as: if suddenly even half the people retire after working only 10 years, instead of the usual 45, companies will lose almost half of the workforce, which will translate into almost halving their output, which translates into prices almost doubling. This will send all the people in early retirement back to work, as they now won't be able to afford to live on their capital.

A crazy solution would be to advise people to invest in a foreign assets denominated in foreign currency as a part of their buildup to FIRE. When people mass-retire early, this will be a mass economic depression, mass inflation and a large devaluation of local currency (caused by the economy contraction). But, if people kept money in say overseas stocks, they could just buy more of the local currency with them, and not be hurt with local inflation. Obviously, no political party would ever advise this.

[J_]

Books with unusual (but highly attractive points of view) about how to live are inspiring. Those books let people aspire to reach such a life.
After years and years, after centuries even, those books are revived by contemporary writers. Writers who translate them, who paraphrase them who make introductions which make the reader curious to read the original. They keep those books, every-time anew, in the center of attention. And reach youth as well as curious people of all ages.
I am convinced that the ERE book is such a book. TMHO it is in no need to be changed or be simplified. That would not do good.(Jacob has put his soul in it)

What should help are introductions, in an inviting and rousing curiosity style. It can be a translation of the english ERE book in one of the big other languages, another book enlightening it, a podcast, a youtube film, a ted story or even a VR tale. Let a communication- skilled man or woman (in or out our group of forumites) be found to take on such a task.

[grundomatic]

Judging from reading the blog and the FAQ, this isn't anything new, though, is it? From the outside, it seems as if there has always been resistance to your ideas. How has your personal, lived experience changed because of these larger cultural changes being discussed? It sure seems like you've been dismissed and misunderstood plenty since the very beginning.

Nevermind, you were answering a direct question and the thread is about the movement in general. Is it a feeling of frustration that your good, rational ideas from 2008 were taken and spread with good writing from other bloggers through 2015 resulting in the FIRE movement, but now you are being told "whatever, boomer", which especially bugs you because it's not even accurate?

[jacob]

I don't think it's likely a serious political party will ever adopt FIRE as its solution to the meta-crisis. As a policy (and not a personal solution used by the minority), it would so easy to be torn to shreds. This has been discussed here many times before, but the contrargument could be summarized as: if suddenly even half the people retire after working only 10 years, instead of the usual 45, companies will lose almost half of the workforce, which will translate into almost halving their output, which translates into prices almost doubling. This will send all the people in early retirement back to work, as they now won't be able to afford to live on their capital.

Note that if the savings rates increased by 50% in order to retire in 10 years, then spending will also be cut in half. This will result in half demand and so prices will stay the same. In short, supply and demand are both cut in half, so the price level stays the same.

But yes, arguments like this quickly degenerate into the "simple, accurate, well-received" as per the trilemma. There are just so many factors that get ignored since the popular preference is for "simple & well-received".

Beyond that I'm not sure that what is essentially just wiser spending can be solved politically. This is more a cultural problem than anything.

[jacob]

Nevermind, you were answering a direct question and the thread is about the movement in general. Is it a feeling of frustration that your good, rational ideas from 2008 were taken and spread with good writing from other bloggers through 2015 resulting in the FIRE movement, but now you are being told "whatever, boomer", which especially bugs you because it's not even accurate?

It's a more general frustration. (Overall, I'm happy with where the FIRE movement has gone. I'd sad that it hasn't gone further and seemingly also can not go further even if it wanted to.)

I think it's just a cultural variation of "it's not about the nail", where my frustration is first that people prefer to complain and be confirmed in their beliefs rather than even take one step that would actually remove the nail. And second, that truth has become an intersubjective concept that depends on whether the group insiders agree on it (often determined by soft values and politics) even to the point where objectivity or outsider-arguments are deliberately excluded. I suppose more specifically, we used to deal with complainypants as individuals and eventually figured out that the way to do this was to provide hundreds of different counter-examples when people rejected the solution because had children, were short, lived on a cliff, were addicted to their cafe grande, or whatever. Now the problem is dealing with complainypants in groups or tribes, where the solution is rejected because it doesn't solve for the entire group, didn't originate within the group, hasn't been conversed about, is too hard, goes against the "beliefs we all agreed to when we joined the group", ... and so on.

I'm not used to group-think, neither do I have any talent for it. I'd loath to figure it out. I'd rather just give up on it.

[7Wannabe5]

Since I dwell somewhere in the Venn overlap of the individualist vs. group thinkers, it seems to me that the obvious, simple way to overcome the argument of "doesn't solve for the entire group" is for some people to take responsibility for making it work for two or three people. For theoretical example (not meant to be an actual thing), the adult humans with IQ in top quintile could take responsibility for doing the personal finance math for the adults with IQs in lowest quintile. AND/OR in addition to lowering individual spending to 1 eco-Jacob, funds could be channeled to impoverished young global humans whose per capita income/spending is significantly less than 1 eco-Jacob. AND/OR nature preserve could additionally be created that processes 1 eco-Jacob worth of carbon. ERE could adopt a village in Africa. ERE could obliterate a butt-ugly abandoned strip-mall in opioid addiction country and build a community garden. ERE could start a math and practical skill tutoring center in the inner city. etc. etc. etc. Obviously, a lot of the members of the forum do already engage in such efforts, but efforts like these which would make it work for everybody aren't directly embedded in the movement. I mean Top Down (entire population in complete consensus inclusive of all our spirit animals) vs. Bottom Up (just me, maybe my dead-weight spouse/kids) is a false dichotomy. How about just moving it out a bit sideways to the Me and My Buddy plan?

[AxelHeyst]

@7 I like your line of thinking. I was just thinking this morning about how one way to solve the ‘ere is too individualistic’ knee jerk is to frame it in terms of… something like ‘ere for my squad’. So instead of Freeing Myself it’s about Freeing Us. Create an affinity group of a small handful of people(2-8?) and frame the goal as squad emancipation from The Man (possibly so that the crew can then get on with The Work, however they define that).

Yeah, I quite like your notion of moving it a bit sideways. New thread, maybe…

[guitarplayer]

I'm not used to group-think, neither do I have any talent for it. I'd loath to figure it out. I'd rather just give up on it.

I am competent at navigating amidst it, but, using some of the forum's parlance, trying to be ironic about it too. In fact recently I called it out in a training at work, literally asking the question 'so how do you counteract group-think [when getting all this collaboration going]?' There was a bit of silence but also curiosity I feel, those giving the training did not know that groupthink is but were curious enough to hear my description. Who knows, maybe somewhere down the line it'll resurface for them.

As to the more general phenomenon of inter-subjective truths, it saddens me occasionally and then I resolve to the good old natural selection theory moving things forward. That said, I still think that green environment trumps orange environment in that it unlocks more possibility for live playing (sorry this is a bit of a dense couple of sentences, I can expand).

[Scott 2]

'so how do you counteract group-think [when getting all this collaboration going]?'

Diversity and inclusion. There's a department for that.

[jacob]

Are we being ironic now?

[Seppia]

WRT “spreading the word” I will offer my anecdotal personal experience.
I have brought 5 people onboard the basic ideas of FIRE (usually, light-fire).
The most complicated part is figuring out who would be receptive to it, but after that, either the MMM blog or Your Money or Your Life are the easy gateway drugs into it.

It required 1to1 “selling”, but the benefits of basic, light FIRE principles implementation became quickly apparent* and all 5 people were happy to discover that one is not obliged to spend all or most the money they make.
Due to the enthusiasm, I managed to convince 3/5 to read the ERE book.
One thought the book was crazy
Another thought “well I’m kinda already living like that” (true)
The third person is currently reading the book.
The other 2 were like “well, thanks for the tip, really improved my life, but I’m happy where I am and don’t need/want to hear more”

The most immediate application of FIRE / ERE is financial, and, for most college educated people making above average salary, there is a huge benefit to be reaped with very little effort.
They essentially can go on living lives almost indistinguishable from their peers and save 50%+ of their salary.
Going further down the rabbit hole takes effort, so they normally stop there.

I think it’s a fairly normal outcome - and one destined to remain relatively unchanged.
The only change that is quickly accepted and implemented is the change that costs no effort and brings immediate, tangible benefits (think smartphones).
Anything that either takes a time or effort will be mostly discarded by the masses.
I don’t think you can change that unless you manage to sell people on the idea in terms that are similar to religions/cults (which is why I suggested the political party thing above)

*in fairness, all 5 people are college educated, and 4/5 probably make more than 2x the median salary in their age group, so we’re talking about people that seem to be in the typical “fire receptive” subset already.

[7Wannabe5]

That said, I still think that green environment trumps orange environment in that it unlocks more possibility for live playing

Yes!

I was just thinking this morning about how one way to solve the ‘ere is too individualistic’ knee jerk is to frame it in terms of… something like ‘ere for my squad’.

I'm not sure where your head is at, but the way I'm visualizing my "squad" for myself is along the lines of highly diverse and somewhat "virtual" in the sense that nobody except me would have to know that they are part of my "squad." For instance, I could decide that one of the extremely disadvantaged kids I tutor is a representative on my "squad" and one of the quite affluent, fairly conservative grouchy old men I date is also a representative on my "squad" and my red/green angry-punk-activist-lawyer younger sister is also a representative on my "squad" and one other member of this forum is also a representative on my "squad" and one other member of my local community gardening group is also a representative on my "squad", and a grandmother of 6 in an African village is also a representative on my "squad" and my task is to somehow co-ordinate this "squad" so that they are all moving more towards lean/happy eco-sustainable-ERE.

Just putting together 6 member of this forum as a "squad" would create too much of a sharp drop-off boundary due to similarity of components, or something like that...Like 6 members of this forum would be nesting dolls that only vary within 3 sizes max, so the possibilities for "nesting" savings would be quite limited or extremely marginal; like Jacob's suggestion for forum members buying in semi-bulk together for tool-project parts . But, for instance (once again not an actual suggestion) if Jacob adopted a teenage kid out of Chicago's prison-like foster-care system and integrated that kid into his frugal household, that would be a huge "nesting doll" move!