Early Retirement Extreme Forums

Well considering she thinks it's normal to pay someone 350k in a year to help take care of your mom...

Yeah that's something the median household is going to be able to afford. If you think that's normal it's quite clear you have lost touch with what is normal for the vast majority of your fellow citizens.

jacob wrote: ↑

Tue Oct 02, 2018 4:31 pm

Once you have many million dollars, it'll easily cost you 4-5 figures to pay for someone to swing a hammer for you.

You nailed it. (pun very much intended)

An enterprising playwright could easily write a nice script for "The Mexican Fisherman" casting SO as the businessman.

She starts out by saying the jobs will disappear due to AI and then argues that we need to keep working at those non-existing jobs to save 10 to 100 million. Apparently the contradiction was lost on her. And making the point that you need to save 100 million is silly when you know the average retirement savings in the US. Living on a private island is not good for her perspective.

Suze made the case for FIRE without even realizing it, because she clearly doesn't understand the concept. Maybe Jacob can send her a copy of his book.

Discussion right now on the Retirement Investing forum at the Motley Fool. “$5 M is a reasonable savings goal.” Pfft.

Mister Imperceptible wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 05, 2018 6:59 am

“Typical leftist beta cuck”

(jk lol)

If 1% takes 60% of the pie and you aren't part of said 1%, but support system which propagates such atrocities... who is real cuck?

(no kidding)

Optimal_Solution wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 07, 2018 9:46 pm

I was hoping for more maturity from this crowd.

Thanks for speaking up. I often wonder if some here even realize how misogynistic they are. Getting a laugh doesn't mean you aren't being a M.P.. Women don't exist solely to be judged for not being in every way the perfect male sex toy, nor do they exist to be the victims in some "clever" (taste the sarcasm) flash fiction.

I cleaned up a bunch of stuff above.

Remember, it's always possible to hit the "!" button. This ensures I will see the issue as soon as I log on.
I do not continuously monitor all threads and I also sometimes sleep or step away from the computer even if it's hard to believe.

Yes it was getting awfully vulgar.

So the problem with early retirement is not having universal healthcare?

I listened to the whole interview podcast, and the whole follow-up podcast.

I'm sure Suze has helped a whole lot of "financially illiterate" folks in the past.

That being said...

What I heard from her in that interview was pretty ridiculous. Her entire argument against FIRE seemed to revolve around "black swan" events that can ruin your life. These same "black swan" events are the things that dominate FIRE discussion boards with obsessive analysis, spreadsheets, charts, software simulations, etc.

The audience for Suze's TV shows and books is clearly not the same as the FIRE audience. She should have known this going into the interview. Otherwise, she wouldn't have made herself sound so ridiculous.

I ran into this on seekingalpha

https://seekingalpha.com/article/421098 ... e-movement

"The problem with Ms. Orman's argument is she's only looking at one side of the equation - the financial cost of retirement. For the sake of logical consistency, she ought to be looking at BOTH sides of the work/ retirement equation. What about the financial costs of working and earning money?"

Financial Samurai says Suze Orman is right about needing five million to retire

I feel a rant coming on ...

She says she was working from "bad information".
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_ ... 2681919550

I mean I think she was wrong when at first thinking everyone in FIRE just wanted to sit sipping margaritas on a beach was wrong, but I also don't think everyone in the FIRE movement wants to pursue other forms of income after either.

Also it still fails to address that someone who for example retires early, but makes an income from investments similar to that which most american's make is in effect no worse off than those making that income fromW-2 income(better yet they have a bunch of time on top of that which is also worth something).

I suspect she wanted to make a slightly controversial statement for PR reasons to help her comeback and it backfired as the backlash was stronger and more coherent than expected.

Another article on Market Watch,
this time defending FIRE.

One comment jumped out at me ... "Saving early and often is very important, but retiring early robs the rest of us of your contributions." I think it foretells a shifting attitude towards early retirees. It will only get worse as Social Security runs out of money.

jennypenny wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 12, 2018 5:28 pm

Another article on Market Watch,
this time defending FIRE.

One comment jumped out at me ... "Saving early and often is very important, but retiring early robs the rest of us of your contributions." I think it foretells a shifting attitude towards early retirees. It will only get worse as Social Security runs out of money.

Better ER now then.

but retiring early robs the rest of us of your contributions.

Wow, I'm not sure what to make of that attitude.

It’s certainly a factually correct observation.
Also a factually correct observation: our parents generation (let’s say for simplicity “the boomers”) is mortgaging our future to preserve outdated and unjustified privileges (see: incoming pension crisis).

I don’t think “avoiding to contribute more” is worse than “taking out more than what was contributed”.

In the aggregate, the math would suggest gen X and Millennials will have to cover the gaps left by the boomers (= contribute more than we will take out as a result of them taking out more than they contributed) , so while I adore my parents and feel that in many ways they were better than us, I would certainly not feel guilty pulling the plug.