Re: Deliberately coasting to FI?
Posted: Tue Jan 03, 2023 12:25 pm
Ah, ok I was missing the definition of coastFIRE, mainly that it relies solely on investment returns.
Given that I have no faith in the stock market returning 4% per year I pretty obviously don't think that relying on that is a good idea.
But I see what Jacob is saying now since he is arguing using the assumptions and conclusions of the Trinity Study.
To me this comes down how confident you are in your skill as an investor. If you've got a proven track record you are confident in, then it makes sense that you could coast to FI on returns.
From a working perspective, your new job is managing your investments so it makes sense that you could have a savings rate with that return.
And ya, I think this strategy is more interesting and feasible with semi-ERE, but I agree that since you are dialing up the knob of "work" it's hard to argue that you are coasting.
If you are using the semi-ERE + investment returns strategy, what you are gaining is increased optionality and robustness. If you end up having favorable market conditions, you could possibly dial down work in periods where you realize those returns and conversely dial up work when the market is down to take advantage of favorable conditions (of course this flies in the face of @WFJ's strategy, so it basically assumes that the market and available job opportunities aren't that correlated).
Also, super agree with Jacob's point about semi-ERE and absolute numbers. Part of the reason I wrote my semi-ERE stuff on this forum and also called it semi-ERE and not semi-FIRE is bc most of my conclusions assume low or very low COL to begin with. I don't think this is totally necessary for semi-ERE in general or for some of the arguments I make for semi-ERE to hold true, but I agree that absolute amounts come into play more with semi-ERE.
Given that I have no faith in the stock market returning 4% per year I pretty obviously don't think that relying on that is a good idea.
But I see what Jacob is saying now since he is arguing using the assumptions and conclusions of the Trinity Study.
To me this comes down how confident you are in your skill as an investor. If you've got a proven track record you are confident in, then it makes sense that you could coast to FI on returns.
From a working perspective, your new job is managing your investments so it makes sense that you could have a savings rate with that return.
And ya, I think this strategy is more interesting and feasible with semi-ERE, but I agree that since you are dialing up the knob of "work" it's hard to argue that you are coasting.
If you are using the semi-ERE + investment returns strategy, what you are gaining is increased optionality and robustness. If you end up having favorable market conditions, you could possibly dial down work in periods where you realize those returns and conversely dial up work when the market is down to take advantage of favorable conditions (of course this flies in the face of @WFJ's strategy, so it basically assumes that the market and available job opportunities aren't that correlated).
Also, super agree with Jacob's point about semi-ERE and absolute numbers. Part of the reason I wrote my semi-ERE stuff on this forum and also called it semi-ERE and not semi-FIRE is bc most of my conclusions assume low or very low COL to begin with. I don't think this is totally necessary for semi-ERE in general or for some of the arguments I make for semi-ERE to hold true, but I agree that absolute amounts come into play more with semi-ERE.