Personal Finance (Not Investing) • If you hit $3M by your 40s, what did you do after that

This is a pretty neat example of a kind of fallacious reasoning I see behind these kinds of posts. It's true that there is no meaningful step change between 2.9 and 3 million. However . . . there are a lot of things that you can't just "gradually" change about your life, in some sort of continuous function. For example, to take the example, you can't "gradually" go from not hiring someone for snow removal to hiring someone for snow removal. It's a binary choice. So if you're going to make that choice, you have to decide, at some discrete point in time, to make that choice. Setting a particular financial goal, such as a "number," and then using that to inform your timing seems perfectly reasonable.

I agree. As an example. An extra $250k in my portfolio above what I need for retirement will buy us business class tickets to Europe once a year for the rest of our lives. Before that we may not have been able to afford it. Just as an example and not specific to our lives.

Will business class make or break our lives? No. But it sure is nicer than flying coach.

This is a very interesting perspective and gave me an Aha moment. If you work one more year and “save” 250k with funding that year expenses and also saving additional money that equates to $250k, you can do business class tickets for rest of the life for 2 adults !

That’s why one more year is so addicting.

Interesting. To me this example is a pretty dramatic reason not to work the extra year. No way I would want to spend an entire year working just to pay for a few hours of comfort on airplanes. I don't think I would be willing to work even one day for one business class plane ride. E.g., if the comparison is between flying coach to Europe or flying coach followed by an 8-hour day of work, I'd choose coach.

Statistics: Posted by EnjoyIt — Sat Sep 21, 2024 4:13 am — Replies 137 — Views 14999