I have always wondered what the point was to set an extreme goal for financial independence and retirement.
You know, retiring at 40 with $500,000 saved. Or something similar.
It goes in a circular logic for me.. but maybe I am just not seeing the benefit because I enjoy my job too much.
People work hard now, to save all this money…
… so that they can have free time in the future …
… to do all the things that they wish they could be doing now …
… instead of working.
Me, I’d rather just do this semi-retired thing I’ve been on.
Work a bit, relax. Work a bit, relax… and do it until I want to retire.
On average, it would be nice to work every other year or so, and still reach my retirement goals ($1 million at a minimum by the time I am 65), without having regretted anything, such as not having had time to spend with my children or missing out on trips because of money.
The only true way to achieve financial independence is basically to make JUST enough money so that it JUST covers your expenses each year, and you don’t drain much of your capital (if at all).
This is not appealing to me either mostly because I’d want a little extra just in case something happens.
I don’t want to save let’s say half a million and have to live on beans, taking cold showers, walking everywhere instead of taking the car or the bus, and tell myself:
But you don’t have any extra money to go on a nice vacation or eat meat.
This is your “financial independence” remember?!?
Kind of an awful way to live if you think about it.
I wonder how many people who go into early retirement end up getting jobs again at the age of 55 after realizing it was not sustainable for the long-term.