It's time to start digging up those Squirrelled Nuts!!!!

swindiff

No-one "needs" £50k.  But there is nothing wrong with wanting it.

kimwp

swindiff said:

No-one "needs" £50k.  But there is nothing wrong with wanting it.

If it means accelerating climate change, isn't that a bit wrong?

westv said:

kimwp said:

michaels said:

Sea_Shell said:

Triumph13 said:

Hi Sea_Shell.  It's great to see that your FIRE is going so well.  I FIREd five years ago too, with not too dissimilar gaps until DB and state pensions came on line, so I'm intrigued by how different your strategy is to mine. 

Apologies if this has already been covered at length (400 pages is a bit daunting to catch up on) but do you mind if I ask the reasoning behind your approach?  It's pretty clear that you could probably double your current spending level if you were prepared to spend though more of your funds before the pensions come on line - eg by setting aside £10k a year until DH's pension comes on line, another £10k pa until the first state pension comes on line and then drawing down sustainably from the rest.   Are you particularly wanting to leave a large legacy? No, not really.  We only have S/Niblings, so not our "responsibility" to provide for them.  We will likely gift more as time goes on.  Or just hate the idea of spending capital?  We would happily spend capital on something we need, or want, but we'd still want value for money 😉. Or distrust the future of the state pension?  A little bit.  Maybe it will get pushed back further, meaning we have to wait longer for it.  Or planning to have a really big income in old age to cover care needs?  It's something we are aware of, along with the need for odd-jobs that we'll need doing, once we can't.  I plan to be waited on hand and foot.  Domestic staff aren't cheap 😉.   I'm hoping it's just that you are perfectly happy as you are and can't imagine any higher spending making you happier .  Quite.  Bigger spends don't necessarily mean bigger smiles , plus I really don't like shopping 😁

Answers in bold ^^^

Not forgetting your commitment to minimise your carbon/environmental footprint rather than just spending for spending sake....

This is what I ponder when people talk about needing £50k+ - sure, it's possible to spend any amount of money, but surely there's a point where it's just spending to purchase things that don't really add anything to your life and then there's really no justification for the environmental impact.

It's partly the quality of what you buy too.
You could buy 50 "toothpaste" sausages for £2 or 1 organic local sausage for £2.
When on holiday you could stay at the YHA or you could stay at the best 5 star Hotel.
It soon adds up. Not necessarily to £50k but still a lot.

Most of my food is organic and I buy mid range electronics and white goods (apple Mac air, aeg, viessman boiler), Kuhn rikon pans.... But I get your point

zagfles

swindiff said:

No-one "needs" £50k.  But there is nothing wrong with wanting it.

And there's nothing wrong with not wanting it.

zagfles

westv said:

kimwp said:

michaels said:

Sea_Shell said:

Triumph13 said:

Hi Sea_Shell.  It's great to see that your FIRE is going so well.  I FIREd five years ago too, with not too dissimilar gaps until DB and state pensions came on line, so I'm intrigued by how different your strategy is to mine. 

Apologies if this has already been covered at length (400 pages is a bit daunting to catch up on) but do you mind if I ask the reasoning behind your approach?  It's pretty clear that you could probably double your current spending level if you were prepared to spend though more of your funds before the pensions come on line - eg by setting aside £10k a year until DH's pension comes on line, another £10k pa until the first state pension comes on line and then drawing down sustainably from the rest.   Are you particularly wanting to leave a large legacy? No, not really.  We only have S/Niblings, so not our "responsibility" to provide for them.  We will likely gift more as time goes on.  Or just hate the idea of spending capital?  We would happily spend capital on something we need, or want, but we'd still want value for money 😉. Or distrust the future of the state pension?  A little bit.  Maybe it will get pushed back further, meaning we have to wait longer for it.  Or planning to have a really big income in old age to cover care needs?  It's something we are aware of, along with the need for odd-jobs that we'll need doing, once we can't.  I plan to be waited on hand and foot.  Domestic staff aren't cheap 😉.   I'm hoping it's just that you are perfectly happy as you are and can't imagine any higher spending making you happier .  Quite.  Bigger spends don't necessarily mean bigger smiles , plus I really don't like shopping 😁

Answers in bold ^^^

Not forgetting your commitment to minimise your carbon/environmental footprint rather than just spending for spending sake....

This is what I ponder when people talk about needing £50k+ - sure, it's possible to spend any amount of money, but surely there's a point where it's just spending to purchase things that don't really add anything to your life and then there's really no justification for the environmental impact.

It's partly the quality of what you buy too.
You could buy 50 "toothpaste" sausages for £2 or 1 organic local sausage for £2.
When on holiday you could stay at the YHA or you could stay at the best 5 star Hotel.
It soon adds up. Not necessarily to £50k but still a lot.

I've found there's generally not a correlation between price and quality for both food and hotel accomodation. There are obviously some exceptions, like processed meats etc. I've stayed in hotels at £400 a night which were no better than ones costing £100 a night, I've stayed in ones costing £40 a night which were better than ones costing £200. Some of the best restaurants we've been to have also been among the cheapest. 

swindiff

zagfles said:

swindiff said:

No-one "needs" £50k.  But there is nothing wrong with wanting it.

And there's nothing wrong with not wanting it.

Of course not, and I did not say or imply that there was.

zagfles

swindiff said:

zagfles said:

swindiff said:

No-one "needs" £50k.  But there is nothing wrong with wanting it.

And there's nothing wrong with not wanting it.

Of course not, and I did not say or imply that there was.

I know, but some other posts have, so it's worth adding IMO. 

westv

zagfles said:

westv said:

kimwp said:

michaels said:

Sea_Shell said:

Triumph13 said:

Hi Sea_Shell.  It's great to see that your FIRE is going so well.  I FIREd five years ago too, with not too dissimilar gaps until DB and state pensions came on line, so I'm intrigued by how different your strategy is to mine. 

Apologies if this has already been covered at length (400 pages is a bit daunting to catch up on) but do you mind if I ask the reasoning behind your approach?  It's pretty clear that you could probably double your current spending level if you were prepared to spend though more of your funds before the pensions come on line - eg by setting aside £10k a year until DH's pension comes on line, another £10k pa until the first state pension comes on line and then drawing down sustainably from the rest.   Are you particularly wanting to leave a large legacy? No, not really.  We only have S/Niblings, so not our "responsibility" to provide for them.  We will likely gift more as time goes on.  Or just hate the idea of spending capital?  We would happily spend capital on something we need, or want, but we'd still want value for money 😉. Or distrust the future of the state pension?  A little bit.  Maybe it will get pushed back further, meaning we have to wait longer for it.  Or planning to have a really big income in old age to cover care needs?  It's something we are aware of, along with the need for odd-jobs that we'll need doing, once we can't.  I plan to be waited on hand and foot.  Domestic staff aren't cheap 😉.   I'm hoping it's just that you are perfectly happy as you are and can't imagine any higher spending making you happier .  Quite.  Bigger spends don't necessarily mean bigger smiles , plus I really don't like shopping 😁

Answers in bold ^^^

Not forgetting your commitment to minimise your carbon/environmental footprint rather than just spending for spending sake....

This is what I ponder when people talk about needing £50k+ - sure, it's possible to spend any amount of money, but surely there's a point where it's just spending to purchase things that don't really add anything to your life and then there's really no justification for the environmental impact.

It's partly the quality of what you buy too.
You could buy 50 "toothpaste" sausages for £2 or 1 organic local sausage for £2.
When on holiday you could stay at the YHA or you could stay at the best 5 star Hotel.
It soon adds up. Not necessarily to £50k but still a lot.

I've found there's generally not a correlation between price and quality for both food and hotel accomodation. There are obviously some exceptions, like processed meats etc. I've stayed in hotels at £400 a night which were no better than ones costing £100 a night, I've stayed in ones costing £40 a night which were better than ones costing £200. Some of the best restaurants we've been to have also been among the cheapest. 

What did we do before TripAdvisor or Booking.com reviews? I use those as a guide to any hotels we might be staying at.

swindiff

kimwp said:

swindiff said:

No-one "needs" £50k.  But there is nothing wrong with wanting it.

If it means accelerating climate change, isn't that a bit wrong?

I fail to see how having more disposable income equates to accelerating climate change. Most of the cheap, disposable, consumable items come from Asia.  It would cost a lot more to buy better quality products from domestic producers.  Which do you think is worse for the environment?

Sea_Shell

zagfles said:

westv said:

kimwp said:

michaels said:

Sea_Shell said:

Triumph13 said:

Hi Sea_Shell.  It's great to see that your FIRE is going so well.  I FIREd five years ago too, with not too dissimilar gaps until DB and state pensions came on line, so I'm intrigued by how different your strategy is to mine. 

Apologies if this has already been covered at length (400 pages is a bit daunting to catch up on) but do you mind if I ask the reasoning behind your approach?  It's pretty clear that you could probably double your current spending level if you were prepared to spend though more of your funds before the pensions come on line - eg by setting aside £10k a year until DH's pension comes on line, another £10k pa until the first state pension comes on line and then drawing down sustainably from the rest.   Are you particularly wanting to leave a large legacy? No, not really.  We only have S/Niblings, so not our "responsibility" to provide for them.  We will likely gift more as time goes on.  Or just hate the idea of spending capital?  We would happily spend capital on something we need, or want, but we'd still want value for money 😉. Or distrust the future of the state pension?  A little bit.  Maybe it will get pushed back further, meaning we have to wait longer for it.  Or planning to have a really big income in old age to cover care needs?  It's something we are aware of, along with the need for odd-jobs that we'll need doing, once we can't.  I plan to be waited on hand and foot.  Domestic staff aren't cheap 😉.   I'm hoping it's just that you are perfectly happy as you are and can't imagine any higher spending making you happier .  Quite.  Bigger spends don't necessarily mean bigger smiles , plus I really don't like shopping 😁

Answers in bold ^^^

Not forgetting your commitment to minimise your carbon/environmental footprint rather than just spending for spending sake....

This is what I ponder when people talk about needing £50k+ - sure, it's possible to spend any amount of money, but surely there's a point where it's just spending to purchase things that don't really add anything to your life and then there's really no justification for the environmental impact.

It's partly the quality of what you buy too.
You could buy 50 "toothpaste" sausages for £2 or 1 organic local sausage for £2.
When on holiday you could stay at the YHA or you could stay at the best 5 star Hotel.
It soon adds up. Not necessarily to £50k but still a lot.

I've found there's generally not a correlation between price and quality for both food and hotel accomodation. There are obviously some exceptions, like processed meats etc. I've stayed in hotels at £400 a night which were no better than ones costing £100 a night, I've stayed in ones costing £40 a night which were better than ones costing £200. Some of the best restaurants we've been to have also been among the cheapest. 

Most seem driven by brand or a "name" or gimmicks to justify the cost IMO.

Copper bath in the bedroom?!?   But no chair to sit on.    Room service tea/coffee, rather than facilities in the room...so it eventually turns up...tepid.    

Looks great in a brochure mind.

Sea_Shell

swindiff said:

kimwp said:

swindiff said:

No-one "needs" £50k.  But there is nothing wrong with wanting it.

If it means accelerating climate change, isn't that a bit wrong?

I fail to see how having more disposable income equates to accelerating climate change. Most of the cheap, disposable, consumable items come from Asia.  It would cost a lot more to buy better quality products from domestic producers.  Which do you think is worse for the environment?

It's things like buying that new handbag*, when you already have 12 in the wardrobe.

It might be made in the most sustainable way possible, but it will still have a footprint.

Obviously the flip side is it's supporting the economy 😉


* Insert product of your choice 😉