FIRECalc

Author
Discussion

FunkyCEO

158 posts

182 months

Thursday 23rd May
quotequote all
Good thread revival

https://blackandwhitefire.com/

This looks like a good stab at a UK calc (nothing to do with me, i picked it up from a reddit post) - challenge as always is trying to figure out what budget i might want/need at retirement


okgo

38,527 posts

200 months

Thursday 23rd May
quotequote all
James Shack has just done a video that some may find useful.

https://youtu.be/S9y8tsaZ3b4?si=aifigM9KTU8VIeex


leef44

4,566 posts

155 months

Thursday 23rd May
quotequote all
fat80b said:
WayOutWest said:
I've been experimenting by jacking up salary sacrifice pension contributions progressively each couple of months (e.g. 20-30-40-50%) to see how little I can comfortably survive on.

But you'd be amazed how much you are being robbed in income tax and NICs, so the hit to your take home pay is often a lot less than you might think.
It's even better if your employer chucks in some of the employer NICs they've saved - but this really does vary from employer to employer.
If you are not planning on FIREing before 55 anyway it is a no brainer to use an SS pension over ISAs, unless you can afford to max out both.
This is kindof where I find myself almost by accident - I have the option of taking *any amount of salary sacrifice and they will pay the 13.8% NI into my pension as well. After putting a spreadsheet together and modelling the options, I'm sacrificing almost the max amount I can per year into the pension.

It makes paying off the mortgage seem like a very poor idea when you can have 2.4 x as much money in your pension instead!

I think this means that I am FIREing by accident.




Edited by fat80b on Tuesday 14th May 20:27
I think that's a good plan. Admittedly I was too old fashioned that I paid off my mortgage first then got so used to not spending that amount that after the mortgage was paid off I started plugging that money into an AVC/SIPP.

Effectively half my salary was either going into savings/pensions/mortgage payments.

By the time I retired, I only had half the income but didn't need to save anymore so there was no drop in living standard.

Olivera

7,315 posts

241 months

Thursday 23rd May
quotequote all
It's curious that FIRE used to imply retiring very early (30s or 40s), now it's for people saving diligently to retire in their 50s, about the same age that boomers retired without a care in the world, and with fk all personal provision (DB schemes) biggrin

Condi

17,417 posts

173 months

Thursday 23rd May
quotequote all
Olivera said:
It's curious that FIRE used to imply retiring very early (30s or 40s), now it's for people saving diligently to retire in their 50s, about the same age that boomers retired without a care in the world, and with fk all personal provision (DB schemes) biggrin
hehe

FIRE is now just being able to retire. Not early. Not with a big pension. Just being able to stop working before you die....

bitchstewie

Original Poster:

52,318 posts

212 months

Thursday 23rd May
quotequote all
Olivera said:
It's curious that FIRE used to imply retiring very early (30s or 40s), now it's for people saving diligently to retire in their 50s, about the same age that boomers retired without a care in the world, and with fk all personal provision (DB schemes) biggrin
Remember historically it used to also involve a lot of people who earned massive salaries (often in tech) but then "stopped working" but setup a "side hustle" of a blog telling everyone how easy FIRE is if you can just invest 90% of your $2M salary during one of the longest and best bull runs in history for 10 years.

The principles apply to everyone but the reality is a bit different for most people.

lizardbrain

2,134 posts

39 months

Thursday 23rd May
quotequote all
For me FIRE isn't related to age, it's the combination of reducing your expenses FOR LIFE to way below societal average, in combination with an above average income leading to an earlier retirement than average.

The frugality reducing expenses below average thing seems to have been lost and FIRE adopted by those who simply want to retire in their 50s on the back of rampant HPI

Even the likes of MMM are out there buying brand new cars.

Condi

17,417 posts

173 months

Thursday 23rd May
quotequote all
lizardbrain said:
For me FIRE isn't related to age, it's the combination of reducing your expenses FOR LIFE to way below societal average, in combination with an above average income leading to an earlier retirement than average.

The frugality reducing expenses below average thing seems to have been lost
Maybe because they realised it was an utterly depressing way to live, and if you're only here once (which we likely are!) then you may as well make the most of the world and enjoy the relatively short time you have.

okgo

38,527 posts

200 months

Thursday 23rd May
quotequote all
I think the key thing around FIRE now is avoiding lifestyle creep as much as possible, however that presents at the salary level of said person. Doesn't mean you can't still live a fairly pleasant life if you're a higher earner of course.

But I think on lower salaries it wouldn't be a lifestyle many would find enjoyable, and because you've restricted yourself for so long, when you do finally call it a day, because you've sat in your bedroom for 15 years are you going to have the first idea how to spend all this new found time? Perhaps not biggrin

Edited by okgo on Thursday 23 May 12:26

lizardbrain

2,134 posts

39 months

Thursday 23rd May
quotequote all
Condi said:
Maybe because they realised it was an utterly depressing way to live, and if you're only here once (which we likely are!) then you may as well make the most of the world and enjoy the relatively short time you have.
It's not clear which life you are stating is depressing.

Living a frugal life, retiring early spending your healthy years with family going hiking etc

Or keeping the high paid job and cramming your holidays and family into the gaps

Zj2002

168 posts

2 months

Thursday 23rd May
quotequote all
lizardbrain said:
Condi said:
Maybe because they realised it was an utterly depressing way to live, and if you're only here once (which we likely are!) then you may as well make the most of the world and enjoy the relatively short time you have.
It's not clear which life you are stating is depressing.

Living a frugal life, retiring early spending your healthy years with family going hiking etc

Or keeping the high paid job and cramming your holidays and family into the gaps
What if you die young after living a frugal lifestyle?

There has to be a balance. I’m sure my kids would be delighted if we never went on holiday just so I can Jack work in early to travel.

okgo

38,527 posts

200 months

Thursday 23rd May
quotequote all
And thats the key, I think you have to now be a high earner to still be able to do things AND be frugal. On a lower salary, being frugal could be entirely joyless, especially with a family, doing THINGS in the UK is expensive by and large.

Most people don't die young, so no point planning for that.

Olivera

7,315 posts

241 months

Thursday 23rd May
quotequote all
Condi said:
Maybe because they realised it was an utterly depressing way to live, and if you're only here once (which we likely are!) then you may as well make the most of the world and enjoy the relatively short time you have.
Indeed. For most I would say FIRE is a batst crazy scheme based on an utterly foolish interpretation of life's priorities. Or more likely just a flat out scam.

bigandclever

13,851 posts

240 months

Thursday 23rd May
quotequote all
I hate these calculators, mainly because they're not appropriate for me so when I plug my numbers in they're always "red" or "danger" or "massive shortfall" or "no". I'm knackered, what I need is a time machine laugh

leef44

4,566 posts

155 months

Thursday 23rd May
quotequote all
Condi said:
Olivera said:
It's curious that FIRE used to imply retiring very early (30s or 40s), now it's for people saving diligently to retire in their 50s, about the same age that boomers retired without a care in the world, and with fk all personal provision (DB schemes) biggrin
hehe

FIRE is now just being able to retire. Not early. Not with a big pension. Just being able to stop working before you die....
Yes when Gen Z says I've adopted FIRE and plan to retire early in my 70's

xeny

4,453 posts

80 months

Thursday 23rd May
quotequote all
Olivera said:
For most I would say FIRE is a batst crazy scheme based on an utterly foolish interpretation of life's priorities. Or more likely just a flat out scam.
Depends how you end up there. I spent two years unemployed after University (amazing what graduating into a recession will do for you), As a consequence I've always tended to live below my means and put money away, as I hated having no free cash to go with the free time.

I have a perfectly enjoyable life, albeit I spend too much of it working (which I generally enjoy), but as a side effect have continued putting money away,

By most metrics I have probably achieved FI. I haven't done the RE (yet) but my goodness does it make work less stressful knowing it is entirely discretionary. Nothing like your outgoing manager warning your incoming manager not to annoy you.

loafer123

15,501 posts

217 months

Thursday 23rd May
quotequote all
FunkyCEO said:
Good thread revival

https://blackandwhitefire.com/

This looks like a good stab at a UK calc (nothing to do with me, i picked it up from a reddit post) - challenge as always is trying to figure out what budget i might want/need at retirement
That's really well designed.

Slowboathome

3,723 posts

46 months

Thursday 23rd May
quotequote all
Condi said:
lizardbrain said:
For me FIRE isn't related to age, it's the combination of reducing your expenses FOR LIFE to way below societal average, in combination with an above average income leading to an earlier retirement than average.

The frugality reducing expenses below average thing seems to have been lost
Maybe because they realised it was an utterly depressing way to live, and if you're only here once (which we likely are!) then you may as well make the most of the world and enjoy the relatively short time you have.
I live very happily on a below-the-national average income. I run a car and a motorbike, live in a nice area, member of a good local gym, eat out at least once a week.

Just not into shiny things.

PSRG

672 posts

128 months

Thursday 23rd May
quotequote all
loafer123 said:
FunkyCEO said:
Good thread revival

https://blackandwhitefire.com/

This looks like a good stab at a UK calc (nothing to do with me, i picked it up from a reddit post) - challenge as always is trying to figure out what budget i might want/need at retirement
That's really well designed.
It’s well designed, but insists that I don’t get my state pensions until 68 and can’t access my personal pension until 57. But as I’m already 54 I think those numbers should be 67 and 55…

https://www.gov.uk/early-retirement-pension/person...

irc

7,585 posts

138 months

Thursday 23rd May
quotequote all
Part time is a good balance. After stopping full time work at 49 the last 14 years have been 3 days per week. Also able to take unpaid time off so managed a few 2 or 3 month bike touring holidays. My current shift pattern is irregular in that sone series I work 6 days other weeks no shifts. So easy to fit in good hobby time while saving actual holidays for big breaks.

Not wealthy enough to have multiple foreign holidays but run 2 cars2 dogs and don't need to count pennies.