Jump to content

The 28 year old retiree


rukawa
 Share

Recommended Posts

This was probably posted before:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/mayakachroolevine/2016/11/14/how-this-28-year-old-retired-in-nyc-with-a-net-worth-of-more-than-2-million/

 

The 28-year old retiree has a blog:

http://www.themoneyhabit.org

 

From the limited amount I've read I am a fan. I'm particularly interested in the career advice since its pretty obvious that to retiree at 28 with 2 million you must be making a lot of money...I would guess in the order of 500k a year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 126
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

"My husband still works even though our nest egg covers all our expenses."

 

So she's a stay-at-home wife then. I mean, sure, you could call that retired, but a regular full-time salary for the household is pretty significant.

 

Also: "Blogging is my number one recommendation as a hobby and the best kept secret for generating side income."

 

So she is really not at all retired. She is a housewife with a part-time job.

 

Good on her for saving that much money anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Retired doesn't mean doing nothing and earning no money, in this context. It just means you don't *have* to work and are in control of your time, don't have a boss, etc. There really should be a better word for it because you always get the same comments, but I haven't seen that word yet (financially independent is another good term, but not quite there either).

 

The most popular role model in the field is MrMoneyMustache.com (I recommend reading the sites archives chronologically... It takes a few posts for him to find his voice).

 

The fact that her husband has a job doesn't change anything. If she was a man, I doubt we'd get the stay-at-home-husband label.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The most popular role model in the field is MrMoneyMustache.com (I recommend reading the sites archives chronologically... It takes a few posts for him to find his voice).

 

There are a few components to early retirement

 

1) Increasing your income

2) Decreasing your expenses

3) Investing

 

I feel like I have 2) and 3) completely covered and they are the focus of most advice. My focus these days is 1) which in my opinion is more difficult. She has pretty good advice for 1). I particularly like this post:

http://www.themoneyhabit.org/whats-important-netting-high-paying-job/

 

So she's a stay-at-home wife then. I mean, sure, you could call that retired, but a regular full-time salary for the household is pretty significant.

 

They way you have put it (though you probably didn't intend too) is that she is just some woman who has the luxury of retiring because she depends on her husband. The even worse way its often put when the gender roles are reversed is that the husband is just some loser depending on his working wife.

 

That isn't the way I viewed it. My view is that she has essentially saved enough that both her and her husband don't have to work. But that her husband CHOSE to work. Choosing to work is very different than having to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we're only getting half the information here and are jumping to conclusions. What was her salary during those working years? Is her entire nest egg just from working/ investing, or did she have a trust fund or something? Was her husband also an I-banker and saving everything as well? Why is he still working? What was their return on investment and expected ROI going forward? Etc etc etc.

 

Also I'll present another angle: working as not a bad thing. After 7 years of working some shit jobs, I found a job that is mentally stimulating, coworkers who I am genuine friends with, and a work situation (fully remote) which removes all the related annoyances associated with the job (commuting, daily 9-5 set hours, fixed location, etc). I wouldn't give it up to "retire".

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with the stay at home whatever.  The way I view it, she (or he) can afford to "retire" cause they have money and they other spouse works.  And I assume no kids.  And I assume white (sorry for getting political) and uber educated, so it's more of a career pause or redirect than "retiring".

 

There really should be a better word for it

 

She works for herself?  Of course it doesn't have the marketing cache of saying "retired."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that her husband has a job doesn't change anything. If she was a man, I doubt we'd get the stay-at-home-husband label.

 

Yes, it does. It's a pretty giant cushion in the the actual decision to "retire". Would he/she/it/they have done it without a completely gender neutral significant other still bringing an income of unknown size to the household? We have no idea, but it certainly didn't hurt.

 

They way you have put it (though you probably didn't intend too) is that she is just some woman who has the luxury of retiring because she depends on her husband. The even worse way its often put when the gender roles are reversed is that the husband is just some loser depending on his working wife.

 

That isn't the way I viewed it. My view is that she has essentially saved enough that both her and her husband don't have to work. But that her husband CHOSE to work. Choosing to work is very different than having to.

 

No matter how you slice it, it is significant that one of them still works. You can't evaluate the choices without knowing more about this. Is he also an investment banker bringing in $500k a year? Or is he bagging groceries just to get out and talk to people? This was not addressed. You can put spin on it and say he works because he wants to, but it provides no actual information about the situation.

 

Just because it would be theoretically possible for him to quit work too according to their withdrawal rate or whatever, that doesn't mean that he necessarily has the same level of actual freedom to choose. One thing that immediately strikes me as a complication is their living space and the future of the family.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sounds a lot better from a marketing standpoint to say "retired" than stay-at-home spouse- especially when you're starting a blog. I'd assume her husband's company handles her health insurance. I wouldn't be surprised at all either if his income covered their expenses and she let her savings build up.  Still over $2 million at 28 is pretty impressive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever. Just another zero content clickbait early retirement blog. If you use *this link* to open a brokerage account and *this link* to buy a few books and *this link* for webhosting and *this link* to book a hotel you'll soon be a millionaire (read: I'll soon be a millionaire). All headlines are straight from the buzzfeed generator. Lots of hype, zero content. Just specifically engineered to make you click.

 

The only two ways to make money!

The two metrics you must track!

The secret to how blogging really makes money!

Seven hidden gems to kickstart your journey to early retirement!

One trick to combat social pressure!

The 5 minute plan that could save you $5000!

How to write a $3000 letter!

 

Only thing that is missing is a sign-up form for a new cryptocurrency ICO ..

 

Spoiler: you don't get rich with tricks, secrets and hidden gems (unless you can sell them to gullible people). Ignore & move on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Spoiler: you don't get rich with tricks, secrets and hidden gems (unless you can sell them to gullible people). Ignore & move on.

 

+1. This is exactly what the "early retired" community of MMM and others are selling to these people who hate their jobs and plot their escape from the cubicles. The gist is, look at me I'm retired and now spend all my time mowing my lawn, hacking credit cards and shoving the electrometer to figure out which of my refrigerator is burning more energy. Its such a cult that now every new entrant has a  click baitey blog about his/her journey supported by the click baits of the other aspirants. A giant pyramid scheme only possible in a developed country where the fellow citizens can fund their healthcare and make them money from the index funds. No thanks genius.

 

What they are really saying is that I escaped from the  shitty career choices that I made earlier and now I'm so tired and scared that I can't do anything else. Instead of aspiring for a better career or more earning potential, they sit around and judge the cubicle dwellers who slog it out. A drain on the society.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that her husband has a job doesn't change anything. If she was a man, I doubt we'd get the stay-at-home-husband label.

 

Yes, it does. It's a pretty giant cushion in the the actual decision to "retire". Would he/she/it/they have done it without a completely gender neutral significant other still bringing an income of unknown size to the household? We have no idea, but it certainly didn't hurt.

 

No it doesn't, because this isn't a competition with set rules at which she's cheating. That's the way they're doing it, and reducing it to a "stay at home wife" is condescending because she's saved 2 million at 28, is financially independent, and is doing better than 99.9999% people of her cohort.

 

I "retired" last year at 34. My wife is still working, she likes it. I earn money from investing, but I could very well index it all and go to the beach. Whatever, to each their own. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Spoiler: you don't get rich with tricks, secrets and hidden gems (unless you can sell them to gullible people). Ignore & move on.

 

+1. This is exactly what the "early retired" community of MMM and others are selling to these people who hate their jobs and plot their escape from the cubicles. The gist is, look at me I'm retired and now spend all my time mowing my lawn, hacking credit cards and shoving the electrometer to figure out which of my refrigerator is burning more energy. Its such a cult that now every new entrant has a  click baitey blog about his/her journey supported by the click baits of the other aspirants. A giant pyramid scheme only possible in a developed country where the fellow citizens can fund their healthcare and make them money from the index funds. No thanks genius.

 

What they are really saying is that I escaped from the  shitty career choices that I made earlier and now I'm so tired and scared that I can't do anything else. Instead of aspiring for a better career or more earning potential, they sit around and judge the cubicle dwellers who slog it out. A drain on the society.

 

You've clearly never read what MMM wrote and don't know anything about this area. It doesn't have to be for you, but you also don't have to totally misrepresent the idea.

 

If you have a few minutes to educate yourself, this is a good start:

 

The rest is here: http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/all-the-posts-since-the-beginning-of-time/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that her husband has a job doesn't change anything. If she was a man, I doubt we'd get the stay-at-home-husband label.

 

Yes, it does. It's a pretty giant cushion in the the actual decision to "retire". Would he/she/it/they have done it without a completely gender neutral significant other still bringing an income of unknown size to the household? We have no idea, but it certainly didn't hurt.

 

No it doesn't, because this isn't a competition with set rules at which she's cheating. That's the way they're doing it, and reducing it to a "stay at home wife" is condescending because she's saved 2 million and is doing better than 99.9999% people of her cohort.

 

Why are you arguing against a point I didn't make? I never accused her of "cheating" but of using words according to non-standard definitions. I said the whole story was not told and provided quotes from her to back that up. Whether you find that condescending or not, I couldn't give one toss about. That she is doing better than most others is another complete irrelevance.

 

I'm her age and I have never had regular employment. Yey I wouldn't desribe myself as retired because that is not an accurate description, despite me having no safety net in a second income to draw upon nor a side income from a part-time job. It's not hard to use words as they are generally used, at least not if you have no product to sell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that her husband has a job doesn't change anything. If she was a man, I doubt we'd get the stay-at-home-husband label.

 

Yes, it does. It's a pretty giant cushion in the the actual decision to "retire". Would he/she/it/they have done it without a completely gender neutral significant other still bringing an income of unknown size to the household? We have no idea, but it certainly didn't hurt.

 

No it doesn't, because this isn't a competition with set rules at which she's cheating. That's the way they're doing it, and reducing it to a "stay at home wife" is condescending because she's saved 2 million and is doing better than 99.9999% people of her cohort.

 

 

 

Why are you arguing against a point I didn't make? I never accused her of "cheating" but of using words according to non-standard definitions. I said the whole story was not told and provided quotes from her to back that up. Whether you find that condescending or not, I couldn't give one toss about. That she is doing better than most others is another complete irrelevance.

 

I think we're probably talking about different things. When I wrote: "The fact that her husband has a job doesn't change anything. If she was a man, I doubt we'd get the stay-at-home-husband label." I meant it doesn't change anything to the fact that she retired.

 

I think you took it as meaning that it doesn't change anything PERIOD. Of course it does. Everything does. What city she lives in/cost of living, do they have kids, do they have other safety nets (family), what salary she had, etc. Everything changes something. But it doesn't make her go from FIRE ("financially independent, retired early", in the meaning of the word in that context) to "stay-at-home wife".

 

I'm saying calling her a "stay-at-home-wife" is condescending because the standard definition of that is of a woman who is supported by her partner, and she is financially independent and can support both of them. I'm saying that if it was a man - like me - not having a job while a partner works, with enough financial resources to cover the whole family, that the same label probably wouldn't be applied (and surprise, people don't apply it to me).

 

If you didn't make the argument that having a partner who works somehow diminishes what she accomplished, then that's fine. It did seem implied by your choice of words, but in any case, I'm just pointing out that calling her a "stay-at-home wife" kind of sucks because it reduces something uncommon and difficult to something very common that generally isn't the same situation at all.

 

I'm her age and I have never had regular employment. Yey I wouldn't desribe myself as retired because that is not an accurate description, despite me having no safety net in a second income to draw upon nor a side income from a part-time job. It's not hard to use words as they are generally used, at least not if you have no product to sell.

 

Every community has its own jargon with words that have specific meaning in their context. That's why at the top I said it would be great if there was a new word for this, but I haven't seen it yet. Maybe it'll come.

 

It all reminds me of this:

 

http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2013/02/13/mr-money-mustache-vs-the-internet-retirement-police/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm saying calling her a "stay-at-home-wife" is condescending because the standard definition of that is of a woman who is supported by her partner

 

Or you know, it is a wife who stays at home and her husband works. Exactly this situation. Well, except that she does work for income with her blog despite describing herself as retired, that is. So either she is a housewife or she is not retired. Simple syllogisms give this answer.

 

If you didn't make the argument that having a partner who works somehow diminishes what she accomplished, then that's fine. It did seem implied by your choice of words, but in any case

 

To you it did, but you seem to bring a lot of personal baggage to your interpretation of certain words, including "retired" and "housewife". I really don't care about the gender politics implications you draw from what words are used or not, so I don't think we have anything more to talk about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm saying calling her a "stay-at-home-wife" is condescending because the standard definition of that is of a woman who is supported by her partner

 

Or you know, it is a wife who stays at home and her husband works. Exactly this situation. Well, except that she does work for income with her blog despite describing herself as retired, that is. So either she is a housewife or she is not retired. Simple syllogisms give this answer.

 

If you didn't make the argument that having a partner who works somehow diminishes what she accomplished, then that's fine. It did seem implied by your choice of words, but in any case

 

To you it did, but you seem to bring a lot of personal baggage to your interpretation of certain words, including "retired" and "housewife". I really don't care about the gender politics implications you draw from what words are used or not, so I don't think we have anything more to talk about.

 

You are trying to have your cake and eat it too: You pretend that you can ignore the commonly accepted meaning of certain words AND force others into the commonly accepted meaning of certain words. Congrats on the mental gymnastics.

 

See my link above about the retirement police, it sums her situation well. She's retired. She doesn't have to work for money (even if her husband didn't work), she's in control of her time, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm saying calling her a "stay-at-home-wife" is condescending because the standard definition of that is of a woman who is supported by her partner

 

Or you know, it is a wife who stays at home and her husband works. Exactly this situation. Well, except that she does work for income with her blog despite describing herself as retired, that is. So either she is a housewife or she is not retired. Simple syllogisms give this answer.

 

If you didn't make the argument that having a partner who works somehow diminishes what she accomplished, then that's fine. It did seem implied by your choice of words, but in any case

 

To you it did, but you seem to bring a lot of personal baggage to your interpretation of certain words, including "retired" and "housewife". I really don't care about the gender politics implications you draw from what words are used or not, so I don't think we have anything more to talk about.

 

You are trying to have your cake and eat it too: You pretend that you can ignore the commonly accepted meaning of certain words AND force others into the commonly accepted meaning of certain words. Congrats on the mental gymnastics.

 

See my link above about the retirement police, it sums her situation well. She's retired. She doesn't have to work for money (even if her husband didn't work), she's in control of her time, etc.

 

I'm glad we could move beyond me being "condescending". There were two separate threads: one is the side income/job and the other is the question of the partner still working. One is directly relevant to the retired status (whether MMM thinks I'm a mean internet police or not) and the other could conceivably be relevant (for others' ability to copy her) due to the extra freedom of choice associated with it; we just don't have enough information to decide. Yes, according to the assumptions she makes publically she could be "retired" either way, but given that the husband does work it is perhaps not the assumptions made in actuality, but the assumptions used for the purpose of the blog, which is written for profit.

 

As for the definition of housewife, there are lots of separately financially indepedent housewives in the upper echelons of society and we don't have another unique word for them, we still call them housewives too, which syncs perfectly with how I used the word. Disparaging connotations were in the heads of the reader.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm saying calling her a "stay-at-home-wife" is condescending because the standard definition of that is of a woman who is supported by her partner, and she is financially independent and can support both of them. I'm saying that if it was a man - like me - not having a job while a partner works, with enough financial resources to cover the whole family, that the same label probably wouldn't be applied (and surprise, people don't apply it to me).

Nope, that's called jobless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Liberty, really enjoyed this link. Thank you.

 

http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2013/02/13/mr-money-mustache-vs-the-internet-retirement-police/

 

Not sure why this 28 year old is generating such strong responses. Good for her; well done! I found her post on how to start a blog to be quite interesting; it helped me understand how the monetization process for a blog works.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some of what people on this forum consider obvious and clickbait may not be so to someone less financially literate. I haven't spent any time on her blog, but don't think it's a bad thing to have more people teaching basic financial gimmicks. Hopefully more people decide to pay off credit cards on time and save as a result. Self-employed is probably more accurate than retired, but Forbes has to get in on the clickbait game too (sidebar: their print mag is the only magazine I pay for, but their website is impossible to read with all the moving objects).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. Its interesting the level of hostility this whole idea of early retirement provokes.

 

The comments are fascinating. My explanation for what is going on here is that society is setup as a game that people have been hugely socialized to believe in. Anybody who refuses to play or plays by different rules than the ones that are accepted is going to be ostracized. That is what I think is going on here.

 

I suppose this happens regardless of how society is configured but I still wonder at how this all happens. I mean its not centrally planned. Elites don't get together and decide "We must make wage slavery the foundation of society and educate people accordingly". But somehow everybody enforces this system on their own for some reason.

 

I suppose its a good thing. In a sense those who retire early can be thought of as taking advantage of the rest of society. After all who would produce products and services that early retiree's consume if everyone retired early? Its the same as value investing...it wouldn't work if everyone did it.

 

So Liberty you should be thanking all these hostile commenters. They make your lifestyle possible :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Early retirement is great! I think the issue is we don't have any real details on how this person did it. Contrast with MMM, who pretty much laid out all the nuts and bolts of how he got to his current lifestyle.

 

I mean, not everyone can graduate Harvard in 3 years, become a banker and save a million+ in 7 years of working. If that's what this person even did. Maybe her family gave her $1mm as a graduation present. Maybe her husband makes 500k annually.

 

Whereas MMM's blog and advice is much more attainable for the average American, this one reads more like a self help book called, "I was born rich, and here's how you can too!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share




×
×
  • Create New...