How is the FIRE movement doing?

[guitarplayer]

Are we being ironic now?

sincerely

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

No I got a sensible answer actually, mapping onto 'skin in the game'. Something along the lines of 'ensure people's stakes are involved'. Though sensible, in practice this is a dead advise when I look around me at work.

[Scott 2]

It's the principal agent problem. Scale makes aligning incentives increasingly difficult. Live players are exceptional not due to ability, but because they're able to live in alignment.

[Jin+Guice]

Wait.


The overall goal is to decrease production/ consumption by decreasing consumer demand through anti-consumerism?


I'm confused as to why the solution to this is FIRE and only FIRE?



In my mind, FIRE is not spreading further and faster because FIRE is a fringe cultural movement, subject to the things that happen to fringe movements and cultural movements. It is a culture started by a scientist and popularized by software engineers and developers and as such it is popular and relatable amongst those groups of people.






FIRE is not necessary for anti-consumerism. The benefits of anti-consumerism and personal resilience extend beyond FIRE and do not require financial independence. I don't think FIRE is necessarily the right choice for everyone. I think eliminating the myth that happiness MUST be bought is the right choice for everyone.





Consumerism is a huge part of our culture. It's the rare SD green anti-capitalist who still doesn't like to buy useless shit off of the internet. When I ask anti-capitalists why they want eat the rich, the answer has been "so I can be happier having less stuff" exactly 0 times. Their concept of redistributing wealth and saving the planet always includes them having more material wealth and more of their own economic problems solved.

Telling people that consumption is not the key to happiness is not new information. A comprehensive method on how to execute the "less consumption" part, geared towards the present day, is new information. In order to receive that information, people need to be open to it.

We are embedded in the cult of consumerism. We are asking people to leave their cult. Demonstrating to cult members that their cult's beliefs are false has a low success rate.





Do I believe that FIRE is an SD orange carrot and that it is less appealing to SD green members? Yes.

Do I believe that we have exploited all SD orange carrots or reached most SD orange people in the U.S., an SD orange dominant society? No.

Do I think that intelligence is a factor in being able to understand and implement FIRE and ERE? Yes.

Do I think that we have recruited a significant proportion of people in the top quintile of intelligence? No.



I offer a dissenting opinion to the proposition that SD green groupthink or intelligence distribution is THE problem. It is a problem in our quest for world domination that will eventually need to be solved. I'm unconvinced it is the problem that needs to be solved to take our message from convincing 0.5% of the population to 1% of the population.

[guitarplayer]

It's the principal agent problem. Scale makes aligning incentives increasingly difficult. Live players are exceptional not due to ability, but because they're able to live in alignment.

Yes principal agent problem, I am with you on this. Think maybe we are talking about live players meaning something else. In that post I wrote above, in the second paragraph I was being more general and didn't mean any particular organisation, trying to improve one's workplace or business etc. When writing 'live players' I had it as a shorthand for what Carse is talking about in the book 'finite and infinite games' and further, a shorthand for a person who 'sees the water they swim it', or call it 'is a critical thinker' or something like that. Someone that does not only go through the motions but you can actually have a meaningful exchange with. You will know some people like this from the forum.

So the point of that second paragraph is that if you are inclusive et al, you will get more people in the picture overall, and hence more people like what I described here above in absolute terms (though maybe that their proportion will be the same). Goes without saying you will also get more rubbish people.

An excellent thought experiment going for green is the well known veil of ignorance.

Also, I don't think in some immediate sense inclusion or 'green' approach contribute to solving organisational problems. But whatever solutions to problems are even remotely possible, they are more likely to be found with more live players like described above.

Unless I misunderstood and that is what you meant by live players @Scott2.

[7Wannabe5]

I offer a dissenting opinion to the proposition that SD green groupthink or intelligence distribution is THE problem. It is a problem in our quest for world domination that will eventually need to be solved. I'm unconvinced it is the problem that needs to be solved to take our message from convincing 0.5% of the population to 1% of the population.

I agree with your take at the level of math. I disagree with your take at the level of personality-type-distribution. Which personality type best represents Level Orange? It would obviously have to be ENTJ or ESTJ with INTJ/ENFJ coming in third-place. What's the major difference between ENTJ/ESTJ/ENFJ and INTJ? Those guys don't want to be "independent", they want to be "in charge." IOW, they are types who want to extent their realm of responsibility along with their realm of authority to gain dominance rather than retract their realm of responsibility within their realm of authority to gain freedom. Therefore, even just expanding further into those who most typify Level Orange requires consideration of all the other different types who would then constitute the humans whom the ENTJ/ESTJ/ENFJs would like to lead/supervise/coach on their "teams" (not to be confused with 'squads")

[Scott 2]

Unless I misunderstood and that is what you meant by live players @Scott2.

Yes, Carse's live player. I generally agree with you.

My statement in D&I is not entirely a joke. While it fails in a corporate setting, I think that tribe accurately observes an effective mechanic. It's just really really hard to control.

[white belt]

However, I would agree that the trend towards work-from-home has somewhat obliterated the largest carrot offered by FI.

In my social circle of millenial/gen z mostly yuppie peers, this is the biggest factor that stops them from having any interest in FIRE. I'd imagine if MMM lived his younger working years through the 2020-present WFH era rather than Great Recession and aftermath, then he would've never written his blog. He would've had all the time in the world to collect his fat paycheck while biking around, spending 2-3 hours a day making elaborate gourmet meals, fixing up his house with DIY projects, etc. I have numerous friends who basically live a semi-ERE lifestyle while still collecting a full time paycheck and benefits. It's all the pros of semi-ERE with almost none of the downsides. Want to play disc golf on a Tuesday afternoon with friends? Easy, just finish your work the day before or in the morning so you'll be free. Not feeling like working for the Man today? Just call in sick; many companies have virtually limitless sick day policies. Weather looking good for skiing in the mountains or surfing at the beach? As long as there is an internet connection where you're crashing, you can knock out whatever work you need. At some point the pendulum will probably swing back, but as long as the economy runs hot then labor has all the power.

In regards to all of the discussions about social media and how the internet has changed, I'd largely agree. I am someone who spent virtually no time on social media until about a year ago, but now I spend quite a bit since I make YouTube videos. Blogs/articles/websites are basically dead. Nowadays, it's all about pushing your content on the big platforms and building a following there.

Phrased positively, WFH and being a youtuber can't (or often can't) provide the Freedom To Have Yourself To Yourself, spend days and weeks reading quietly, not updating social and being plugged in, etc. FIRE/ERE can.

We might be getting an increase in burnt out refugees from wfh and creator economy soon. I wonder.

I think the creator economy burnout is real. In fact, you can see it happen all the time to even the most popular creators. Even among the top 1% success stories, there are very few creators that can last more than 5 years or so. I theorize that the creators with longevity are ones that can outsource the activities that are the worst parts of the lifestyle. This is essentially what other public figures do with a spokesperson, publicist, PR firm, etc. Of course, content creation is a rockstar business, so almost no one will achieve that level of success. I think content creators sometimes feel like they become a slave to their audience, but in my mind this is not that different than artists/authors/musicians in previous eras. The difference is that nowadays you can put your creation into the world and receive immediate direct feedback from hundreds/thousands/millions of people at the same time in a way you couldn't before. The human brain can't process that.

In my personal experience, I've already tried to figure out ways I could automate/outsource the parts I don't enjoy doing, but at this time my revenue isn't high enough to justify that. Content creation actually isn't terrible; what's terrible is having to 24/7 interact with the world about your content to remain relevant. I'd like to be able to just follow a normal schedule where I film a video, edit it at this time (mostly automated), set it scheduled to post at this time, and then be done with it. In an ideal world, I could just respond to all my comments in a ~30 minute period each day and then never look at those platforms the rest of the day, but the immediacy of content creation means that the first 24-48 hours of a release are critical to success. More comments means more engagement means more clicks means more money. The job is called content creator but really a lot of it is just being a social media manager. I do believe X/Twitter is the most toxic social media platform for mental health because it just algorithmically aligns people with tribes and then shows them the most triggering/outrageous content because that's what engages the brain. My Twitter is strictly related to my content creation and even I still see posts that the algorithm feeds me to try to suck me into the viral outrage of the day.

For most people, having to spend days and weeks reading quietly sounds like a punishment. That sort of thing only appeals to bookish introverts; a number that I vibe is steadily decreasing as many people choose to consume a TV show, movie, video game, etc instead of a book. Also keep in mind that when we are referring to anyone age 30 and under, they can't really remember a world without social media. So doing things in meatspace just for the sake of doing them is a foreign concept to many. But there is also another issue: that kind of thing doesn't look very appealing in video/picture form. That means it's hard to sell the idea on internet 3.0 which is all about visual content. I also believe we reached peak "travel is amazing" content saturation around 2022, which was another big carrot that brought people to FIRE.

[daylen]

I do believe X/Twitter is the most toxic social media platform for mental health because it just algorithmically aligns people with tribes and then shows them the most triggering/outrageous content because that's what engages the brain.

Substitute triggering/outrageous for interesting or entertaining. The algorithm would count it as attention all the same. If you find inter-tribal collaboration engaging, then the algorithm will show you more of that. It is hard to completely avoid low-information density outrage, but I learn a little something nearly every time I use the app.

Everyone likes to hate on social media these days, but I am wondering to what extent social media is just showing our already existing tribal tendencies out in the open? The algorithms tend to amplify certain negative emotions but so does physical violence which can potentially escalate into war.

Maybe I'll make a thread on this.

[white belt]

Substitute triggering/outrageous for interesting or entertaining. The algorithm would count it as attention all the same. If you find inter-tribal collaboration engaging, then the algorithm will show you more of that. It is hard to completely avoid low-information density outrage, but I learn a little something nearly every time I use the app.

Yes, but I believe there has been research on the subject that indicates the negative stuff is more likely to elicit a response and is thus pushed more.

[daylen]

Yes, my point being that it depends more on how you use it since the algorithms personalize for our individual attention. We are still at the early stages of this whole social media thing so perhaps we can learn as a global culture to use these tools better in an increasingly inter-subjective world.

[loutfard]

Yes, my point being that it depends more on how you use it since the algorithms personalize for our individual attention. We are still at the early stages of this whole social media thing so perhaps we can learn as a global culture to use these tools better in an increasingly inter-subjective world.

The social media machine is mostly tuned to be addictive using universally human traits. The personalisation is just on top.

[take2]

Not so sure about FIRE in the traditional sense but the impacts of inflation seem to be bringing frugality back to centre stage. See here: https://www.buzzfeed.com/meganeliscomb/ ... eople-love


I actually wasnt aware Buzzfeed was still around but that popped up on my Apple News feed and I read through it. Much of it on WL1/2 of things to save so not particularly valuable for this group but interesting nonetheless that seemingly “obvious” things are getting media traction.

[AnalyticalEngine]

+1 to everything @white belt said has also been true in my experience. Any anti-social media rant I go on is immediately agreed with by the over 30-crowd but tends to elicit "ok boomer" by anyone under 30, except maybe if they also work in tech.

I do also think the current WFH economic conditions may be making an impact as well. In addition to the flexibility, there's also no real reason to be extremely frugal if you WFH because the job is so cushy. Obviously, stuff like the economy changing, future crisis, whatever may change this, but in our present moment, any salaryman who is capable of FIRE is also capable of downshifting and getting most of the benefits from WFH without the frugality cost. So we might be seeing many people who were in a FIRE cohort before shifting to the WFH cohort and then just not posting about it on the internet (I see this fairly often).

[daylen]

Any anti-social media rant I go on is immediately agreed with by the over 30-crowd but tends to elicit "ok boomer" by anyone under 30, except maybe if they also work in tech.

I am nearly 30 so to me this sounds like everyone is wrong.

Which would make sense because it is hard to know much about a phenomenon so new and so interconnected with society all ready. Without it we wouldn't even be here.

[Jin+Guice]

I do also think the current WFH economic conditions may be making an impact as well. In addition to the flexibility, there's also no real reason to be extremely frugal if you WFH because the job is so cushy.

I know it's been asked before, but how does on acquire one of these cushy wfh jobs where one works only a few hours per day for full pay?

[Seppia]

I know it's been asked before, but how does on acquire one of these cushy wfh jobs where one works only a few hours per day for full pay?

I think the most important question going forward is rather
How does one keep those cushy wfh jobs where one works only a few hours per day.

Many high profile companies have already signaled that no promotions will be given to anybody who is fully remote.
It’s a nice way of saying “you’ll be the first ones to go when we need to do layoffs”.
Companies know how much and how hard you are working from home.
It is incredible the amount of detail that can be captured by the spy softwares installed on all corporate laptops.
All the slackers will be kicked to the curb unless they are the 0.1% who manages to get more work done in 2 hours than a “normal” employee in the same function would get in 8.
And I think this is a good thing. I am all for fighting for better pay, benefits and stuff, but many people “working from home” today are just stealing a big portion of their paycheck.

Covid opened a (probably) once in 10 generations opportunity to supercharge careers with no effort (enough to just show up and be semi decent), and this window is rapidly closing.

[guitarplayer]

I think the ‘a few hours per day’ is the bit that will get people misunderstanding each other a lot. I could easily argue that I work something like 3h a day or 10h a day, depending how I look at it. I think a much more matter of fact bit is the fact that with work from home arrangement you can skip just so much crap associated with work that is as unnecessary as a couple tons of metal to travel a couple miles to do your shopping whilst you can do the same just carrying the flesh and bones of the very you instead. And associated with working from home is, like others mentioned, that you can flexibly do your laundry or run outside to take it back home when it starts raining and all the rest of it.

ETA: to add in relation to what Seppia writes: yes of course it is possible to skive and do next to nothing, but if you’d apply yourself and work does not get better by the physical aspect of it, there’s just much less overhead to deal with. I keep in mind that recommendation of Seppia to use these unique circumstances in an advantageous way, just don’t see the opportunity for it now.

[Jin+Guice]

Covid opened a (probably) once in 10 generations opportunity to supercharge careers with no effort (enough to just show up and be semi decent), and this window is rapidly closing.

I think the most important question going forward is how do I personally tap into this before it dries up entirely?

[Seppia]

Get a corporate middle manager role and actually show up to the office daily. You’ll be ahead of 80% of your peers.

[Jin+Guice]

I think you misunderstand my goal. I'm trying to exploit the loophole while it's open, not get ahead of my peers.

How does one get a corporate middle manager job?