Any other attorneys considering FIRE / early retirement / part time? Forum

[dabigchina]

I don't know why everyone is jumping on this guy for not wanting to go to weddings. He's an adult. He can do whatever he wants for whatever reason he wants.

People are also making a big deal out of his "wearing a tux" comment. I don't think he means it literally. It's rarely ever just "wearing a tux". All the wedding I've been invited to involve at least 2 days stay and a plane ride.

[QContinuum]

I don't know why everyone is jumping on this guy for not wanting to go to weddings. He's an adult. He can do whatever he wants for whatever reason he wants.

For the same reason that we advise 0Ls against paying sticker at unranked or even unaccredited law schools. They're adults too and can (and do) do whatever they want for whatever reason they want. Doesn't make it a good idea, and when they come to TLS seeking advice we point it out to them.

Here we are rightly, IMO, cautioning this poster against keeping all of their friends at arm's length. Having no (close) friends may be helpful financially, but that doesn't mean it's a good idea to have no (close) friends.

[dabigchina]

I don't know why everyone is jumping on this guy for not wanting to go to weddings. He's an adult. He can do whatever he wants for whatever reason he wants.

For the same reason that we advise 0Ls against paying sticker at unranked or even unaccredited law schools. They're adults too and can (and do) do whatever they want for whatever reason they want. Doesn't make it a good idea, and when they come to TLS seeking advice we point it out to them.

Right, except we have metrics to point to in order to back up our claim abouy that. Here, we r making weird normative arguments about how Anon is a shitty person who will die alone because he doesn't go to weddings.

[QContinuum]

I don't know why everyone is jumping on this guy for not wanting to go to weddings. He's an adult. He can do whatever he wants for whatever reason he wants.

For the same reason that we advise 0Ls against paying sticker at unranked or even unaccredited law schools. They're adults too and can (and do) do whatever they want for whatever reason they want. Doesn't make it a good idea, and when they come to TLS seeking advice we point it out to them.

Right, except we have metrics to point to in order to back up our claim abouy that. Here, we r making weird normative arguments about how Anon is a shitty person because he doesn't go to weddings.

We aren't saying the poster's a "shitty person." We're expressing concern over their mindset. From some of that poster's other comments, they themselves recognize that they have issues they want to fix. I think professional counseling is warranted here - looks like many of the issues stem from childhood trauma due to housing/food insecurity.

[dabigchina]

I don't know why everyone is jumping on this guy for not wanting to go to weddings. He's an adult. He can do whatever he wants for whatever reason he wants.

For the same reason that we advise 0Ls against paying sticker at unranked or even unaccredited law schools. They're adults too and can (and do) do whatever they want for whatever reason they want. Doesn't make it a good idea, and when they come to TLS seeking advice we point it out to them.

Right, except we have metrics to point to in order to back up our claim abouy that. Here, we r making weird normative arguments about how Anon is a shitty person because he doesn't go to weddings.

We aren't saying the poster's a "shitty person." We're expressing concern over their mindset. From some of that poster's other comments, they themselves recognize that they have issues they want to fix. I think professional counseling is warranted here - looks like many of the issues stem from childhood trauma due to housing/food insecurity.

Annnddd now we are making unwarranted claims of mental illness...

People have different priorities. I personally don't make a big deal out of my birthday. Does that mean I need professional counselling?

[QContinuum]

I don't know why everyone is jumping on this guy for not wanting to go to weddings. He's an adult. He can do whatever he wants for whatever reason he wants.

For the same reason that we advise 0Ls against paying sticker at unranked or even unaccredited law schools. They're adults too and can (and do) do whatever they want for whatever reason they want. Doesn't make it a good idea, and when they come to TLS seeking advice we point it out to them.

Right, except we have metrics to point to in order to back up our claim abouy that. Here, we r making weird normative arguments about how Anon is a shitty person because he doesn't go to weddings.

We aren't saying the poster's a "shitty person." We're expressing concern over their mindset. From some of that poster's other comments, they themselves recognize that they have issues they want to fix. I think professional counseling is warranted here - looks like many of the issues stem from childhood trauma due to housing/food insecurity.

Annnddd now we are making unwarranted claims of mental illness...

Thank you for retracting the incorrect claim that folks were saying the poster was a "shitty person."

My advice is that professional counseling may be helpful. That does not imply a diagnosis of (current or past) mental illness.

[dabigchina]

I don't know why everyone is jumping on this guy for not wanting to go to weddings. He's an adult. He can do whatever he wants for whatever reason he wants.

For the same reason that we advise 0Ls against paying sticker at unranked or even unaccredited law schools. They're adults too and can (and do) do whatever they want for whatever reason they want. Doesn't make it a good idea, and when they come to TLS seeking advice we point it out to them.

Right, except we have metrics to point to in order to back up our claim abouy that. Here, we r making weird normative arguments about how Anon is a shitty person because he doesn't go to weddings.

We aren't saying the poster's a "shitty person." We're expressing concern over their mindset. From some of that poster's other comments, they themselves recognize that they have issues they want to fix. I think professional counseling is warranted here - looks like many of the issues stem from childhood trauma due to housing/food insecurity.

Annnddd now we are making unwarranted claims of mental illness...

Thank you for retracting the incorrect claim that folks were saying the poster was a "shitty person.

Wat?

[QContinuum]

I don't know why everyone is jumping on this guy for not wanting to go to weddings. He's an adult. He can do whatever he wants for whatever reason he wants.

For the same reason that we advise 0Ls against paying sticker at unranked or even unaccredited law schools. They're adults too and can (and do) do whatever they want for whatever reason they want. Doesn't make it a good idea, and when they come to TLS seeking advice we point it out to them.

Right, except we have metrics to point to in order to back up our claim abouy that. Here, we r making weird normative arguments about how Anon is a shitty person because he doesn't go to weddings.

We aren't saying the poster's a "shitty person." We're expressing concern over their mindset. From some of that poster's other comments, they themselves recognize that they have issues they want to fix. I think professional counseling is warranted here - looks like many of the issues stem from childhood trauma due to housing/food insecurity.

Annnddd now we are making unwarranted claims of mental illness...

Thank you for retracting the incorrect claim that folks were saying the poster was a "shitty person.

My advice is that professional counseling may be helpful. That does not imply a diagnosis of (current or past) mental illness.

Wat?

Thank you for further retracting the incorrect claim that I diagnosed the poster as having a mental illness.

All down this thread you've been making incorrect assertions and then immediately moving on to a new assertion whenever challenged. First you asserted that we shouldn't be offering any advice because the poster's "an adult [and] can do whatever he wants for whatever reason." When I rebutted that argument, you immediately moved on to a claim that we were defaming that anon as a "shitty person because he doesn't go to weddings." When I pointed out that no one was calling that anon a "shitty person," you declined to engage and immediately moved on to a third new claim, that I was making "unwarranted claims of mental illness."

It's clear that you aren't willing to defend any of your assertions when challenged. For all intents and purposes your actions indicate that you've retracted those claims.

[dabigchina]

[]
Thank you for further retracting the incorrect claim that I diagnosed the poster as having a mental illness.

All down this thread you've been making incorrect assertions and then immediately moving on to a new assertion whenever challenged. First you asserted that we shouldn't be offering any advice because the poster's "an adult [and] can do whatever he wants for whatever reason." When I rebutted that argument, you immediately moved on to a claim that we were defaming that anon as a "shitty person because he doesn't go to weddings." When I pointed out that no one was calling that anon a "shitty person," you declined to engage and immediately moved on to a third new claim, that I was making "unwarranted claims of mental illness."

It's clear that you aren't willing to defend any of your assertions when challenged. For all intents and purposes your actions indicate that you've retracted those claims.

This is an internet forum. I'm not answering a complaint. The fact that you are even trying to argue that you are right by the technicalities of civ pro rules speaks volumes about your conviction in your points. I'm not interested in lawyering an internet argument.

Anyway Anon, do whatever makes you happy and your life easy. There isn't a right or wrong way to live your life

[Anonymous User]

Extreme Cheapskate OP here.

When money starts to permeate every god damn thing you're doing, it's gone too far, and you need to take a step back and re-evaluate.

Even putting aside any normative views about what's "typical" or "healthy" or "socially expected" or whatnot, your reasoning doesn't make the remotest sense.

You claim that you are happy for your friends when they get married. But you don't want to be there to support them in person... because you'd have to wear a tux? How is wearing a tux that painful? And does that mean that you'd be happy to attend any weddings that aren't black tie? I presume that you'd be perfectly happy attending, say, a beach wedding with a casual dress code?

You then bemoan that you'd have to "sit ... for hours while people go through the rituals." This puzzles me. If you're truly happy for your friends, as you assert, then why are you so unwilling to sit in a chair to watch them tie the knot? They aren't asking you to wrestle a hydra or make a fool of yourself or whatnot.

You allege that your reluctance to attend isn't about saving money, because you'd happily cut a check for the expenses you'd otherwise incur. You'd even be happy to include a premium! So if it isn't about saving money, does it really just boil down to an inability to tolerate long events (but then how do you make it through long meetings at work?) and a deeply-seated aversion to tuxedos?

I guess I'm just really confused. Believe me, I also dislike dressing up and I'm not a big partier either so the typical wedding reception open bar isn't much of a draw to me. But I wouldn't miss my BFFs' weddings for anything.

Thank you for your takes. I think you both make perfectly valid points. I really didn't mean to start a conflict between other posters so I'll bow out of the conversation after this. I also get the perspective that I as an adult can what I want. If I knew how to balance the tension between these two stances well, I guess I wouldn't be posting about this.

I just live my life. I'm not trying to defend it because frankly, I don't think it's a fantastic set of habits I've developed nor do I recommend it for other people. My values and what brings me joy are just very different at such a fundamental level and I guess that causes me to analyze things different to apparently objectively nuts results.

I'll take the advice under consideration and see what, if anything, I'll do about it. Sorry for derailing a thread that's supposed to be about FIRE with my personal issues. I'm still open to hear what other hidden costs there are to life as an associate.

For me personally, I underestimated how willing I would be to pay for convenience because (1) I was tired and didn’t want to do something or (2) I needed to spend that time working instead of doing it myself. $100 for an apartment cleaning service because I haven’t been home before 9 pm in three weeks. $15 for take-out because it’s late and I don’t want to cook. A plane ticket because I can’t drive and work at the same time. $1500 for a last-minute long weekend somewhere tropical because my case just settled unexpectedly and I have no idea when I will be slow again.

This is definitely something I've yet to account for. Thank you for this.

Anyway Anon, do whatever makes you happy and your life easy. There isn't a right or wrong way to live your life

Thank you for the support--though I guess I'm somewhat off-kilter about how to live now.

[Anonymous User]

I also care much more about the Financial Independence side of FIRE rather than Retire Early. Like many, I think I'd get bored pretty quickly if I fully retire in my 30s... a part time gig with flexible hours would be fantastic... unfortunately not many of those in M&A.

This is my take too; the dream is to get to a point where I have enough passive income to just work a low-hours gig as a solo taking on a few small interesting-sounding appeals (at a discount!) with about 3-4 months of no work whatsoever at a time each year. Unfortunately this may be as rare for a non-SCOTUS clerk as a flexible hours M&A gig.

But I have 140k of student loan debt left to pay and I am aggressively going at that for now; we'll see if my future plans are affected by personal devleopments etc. as I'm single and not tied to my (major) market right now.

[Anonymous User]

I'm working aggressively toward it as well. I'm 30 and up to about ~$600k, spread across a variety of accounts. Having this much in the bank let me get out of biglaw and take a lower paying in house gig. That decision is going to significantly slow my ability to truly "retire early", but it's a non-stressful 9-5 and totally worth it after almost a decade of grinding.

In the future, I'm not really sure what I'll do when I reach my magic number in my mid-40s. Perhaps work for a nonprofit or do something non-legal.. Or just take a year or two off. Or go to a community college for some kind of trade skill, maybe.

The big wildcard in my mind is what my SO will be doing and whether we will have children. Those could push back the magic number a bit. Also, my SO has some student loans that will need to be paid off at some point.

But at the end of the day, I feel like I've already been able to get some benefit from my aggressive saving. And according to the calculators, I don't need to save that much more money in order to retire by 65 or so. In other words, even if I just made enough money to cover my expenses for the next 35 years and let everything else just grow, I could still probably have enough to retire.

[Anonymous User]

I found out about FI/RE right around the end of law school. I've got my savings rate at about 55% right now but feel like I should be doing more... Plan is to grind in BigLaw for 2-4 years (longer if I can handle it) to build a nice cushion (hoping for 350k NW at around age 30; sitting at -60k right now) then transition in-house and FIRE whenever i'm ready.

Taking advantage of firm perks has helped me save a ton of money. Whenever I get seamless I try and get something that I can split into two meals and i'll have it for dinner than night and lunch the next day. Also try and take advantage of the free lunches that come around every so often.

[clshopeful]

Are you serious? If so, loosen up a bit. If you are a biglaw senior associate who refuses to attend friends weddings because of the cost, there is something seriously wrong with your outlook on life. What is the endgame? Do you really want to be retired at 45 if you are single and living in a studio?

It's not really a cost issue. It's just that nothing about a wedding sounds interesting. I get that I'm supposed to be happy for my friends' big day, and I am. I just wish that I could be happy without having to sit in a tux for hours while people go through the rituals. Heck, I'd be happy to cut the bride/groom a check for the entire amount I would've spent attending the affair plus a "I'm happy for you" premium if it meant that I didn't have to attend. For 90% of people who aren't making six figures, I'm sure the money would be objectively more helpful--even if it is less meaningful-- though I wouldn't even know how to begin broaching that conversation. Yes, I know that sounds weird. I do.

Even putting aside any normative views about what's "typical" or "healthy" or "socially expected" or whatnot, your reasoning doesn't make the remotest sense.

You claim that you are happy for your friends when they get married. But you don't want to be there to support them in person... because you'd have to wear a tux? How is wearing a tux that painful? And does that mean that you'd be happy to attend any weddings that aren't black tie? I presume that you'd be perfectly happy attending, say, a beach wedding with a casual dress code?

You then bemoan that you'd have to "sit ... for hours while people go through the rituals." This puzzles me. If you're truly happy for your friends, as you assert, then why are you so unwilling to sit in a chair to watch them tie the knot? They aren't asking you to wrestle a hydra or make a fool of yourself or whatnot.

You allege that your reluctance to attend isn't about saving money, because you'd happily cut a check for the expenses you'd otherwise incur. You'd even be happy to include a premium! So if it isn't about saving money, does it really just boil down to an inability to tolerate long events (but then how do you make it through long meetings at work?) and a deeply-seated aversion to tuxedos?

I guess I'm just really confused. Believe me, I also dislike dressing up and I'm not a big partier either so the typical wedding reception open bar isn't much of a draw to me. But I wouldn't miss my BFFs' weddings for anything.

Not OP, but definitely backing OP here. I have no desire to go to a wedding and honestly hope I don't get invited to one. We may sound miserable, but that's just how we are.

(anon since my friends are on this forum)

[lavarman84]

Not OP, but definitely backing OP here. I have no desire to go to a wedding and honestly hope I don't get invited to one. We may sound miserable, but that's just how we are.

(anon since my friends are on this forum)

Agreed. Weddings suck. I'd rather be able to spend my free time doing what I please.

[nixy]

Personally, I find a lot of weddings boring (I like the small ones where you know most of the people, not the ones where you’re stuck eating mediocre food with strangers), so I get the sentiment. What makes less sense to me is the idea that you won’t have to consider the costs because your friends wouldn’t even invite you because they know you wouldn’t go. There are things you do that aren’t about personal entertainment.

[spyke123]

I’m on the FIRE boat as well. I think the movement should ditch “RE” part of the name since I don't think anyone (at least ones I’ve talked to) in the movement really want to “retire” in the traditional sense of the word and do nothing. I think it is more about being free from working for the sake of money so you can pursue whatever you want to do in life. If that is making partner at a law firm that’s great. If it’s flipping burgers at mcdonalds, that’s great too. I think people are missing the point if their main argument against FIRE is that they’d get bored if they “reitre early”.

I just paid off my student loans and hopes to build up savings aggressively in the next few years before I leave biglaw.

[MillllerTime]

I’m on the FIRE boat as well. I think the movement should ditch “RE” part of the name since I don't think anyone (at least ones I’ve talked to) in the movement really want to “retire” in the traditional sense of the word and do nothing. I think it is more about being free from working for the sake of money so you can pursue whatever you want to do in life. If that is making partner at a law firm that’s great. If it’s flipping burgers at mcdonalds, that’s great too. I think people are missing the point if their main argument against FIRE is that they’d get bored if they “reitre early”.

I just paid off my student loans and hopes to build up savings aggressively in the next few years before I leave biglaw.

Totally agree with this for the type of person who is going to get a job in biglaw or other professionals making 6 figures, but I think the FIRE movement also has a lot of traction for people working more standard 9-5s for like $70k. Those are the super frugal types who have to go the "lean" fire route to really become financially independent (and more power to them) and I think they're also more likely to "retire." I have a few friends who are closer to this and their plans are something along the lines of playing in a band and not continuing to make money.

I know when I first read about FIRE I was initially really excited about the part where I thought I was just going to spend 45 years on a beach.

[NotASpecialSnowflake]

What would be an ideal savings rate for a junior who’s looking to become financially independent? I’ve really struggled to save more than a third of my salary.

[Ken Kesey]

OP, don't see having no mortgage as a good thing. Having a house means having a lot of capital tied up in an asset with an historical 3.5% appreciation rate. You should rather have lots of capital tied up in the market. With mortgage rates lower than historical market return rates having a mortgage is better than having a fully paid off house.

I get your point, but if the goal is to retire as soon as possible, having paid-off housing makes that easier than having to still pay for a mortgage.

I don’t think you get his/her point unless you mean there is a psychological benefit

It's probably mostly psychological. It's just my impression is that there is a strain of thought among FIRE people that emphasizes lowering your living costs as much as possible. If your housing is paid off, it costs less to live than if you have a big mortgage payment. I get that you can make more money investing in other things, but if your goal is to reach a point where you can live on less, minimizing costs is one way to get there. (And I'm sure there are situations where investing in the market would get you there sooner, which is where it ends up a psychological thing.)

You're thinking of accounting costs, not opportunity costs, which are the proper things to measure. If you have a paid off house, let say 300k, that's 300k times the spread of the market rate of return (~7% on avg.) minus real estate appreciation return (~3.5% on avg) that your house is costing you every year despite you not having a mortgage/cash payment. This needs to be part of any analysis whether to pay off a house or not. The calculus will not always lead to the same answer depending on rates of return and risk aversion.

[nixy]

You're thinking of accounting costs, not opportunity costs, which are the proper things to measure. If you have a paid off house, let say 300k, that's 300k times the spread of the market rate of return (~7% on avg.) minus real estate appreciation return (~3.5% on avg) that your house is costing you every year despite you not having a mortgage/cash payment. This needs to be part of any analysis whether to pay off a house or not. The calculus will not always lead to the same answer depending on rates of return and risk aversion.

I get that. I think I was mostly getting at the risk aversion part.

[dabigchina]

I'm working aggressively toward it as well. I'm 30 and up to about ~$600k, spread across a variety of accounts. Having this much in the bank let me get out of biglaw and take a lower paying in house gig. That decision is going to significantly slow my ability to truly "retire early", but it's a non-stressful 9-5 and totally worth it after almost a decade of grinding.

In the future, I'm not really sure what I'll do when I reach my magic number in my mid-40s. Perhaps work for a nonprofit or do something non-legal.. Or just take a year or two off. Or go to a community college for some kind of trade skill, maybe.

The big wildcard in my mind is what my SO will be doing and whether we will have children. Those could push back the magic number a bit. Also, my SO has some student loans that will need to be paid off at some point.

But at the end of the day, I feel like I've already been able to get some benefit from my aggressive saving. And according to the calculators, I don't need to save that much more money in order to retire by 65 or so. In other words, even if I just made enough money to cover my expenses for the next 35 years and let everything else just grow, I could still probably have enough to retire.

Serious question - how did you accumulate that much wealth at 30? Did you go to law school exceptionally early?

[Anonymous User]

Serious question - how did you accumulate that much wealth at 30? Did you go to law school exceptionally early?

Anon here. I went straight through, but I caught a number of lucky breaks as well. Biggest is no debt from law school, thanks to a wealthy grandparent. I live in a low COL city with low taxes and have been making a NY big firm salary with bonus every year. I bought a house early on and it has made huge gains - about 10% each year (I counted that in the $600k even though it's obviously not "cash"). Oh, I also switched firms once and got a nice signing bonus. And thankfully, no major unplanned expenses have come up yet.

In terms of budgeting, I'm most certainly frugal but it's natural for me and I never feel like I'm missing out. I don't really travel much. I haven't been out of the country in years. I took very liberal use of the firm transportation/dinner perks before I left the big firm. Sometimes for weeks on end I wouldn't need to buy groceries.

All of my investments are in index funds with low expense ratios. Obviously the market gains from the last few years in particular have been helpful.
I just checked and I've up~$35k at the moment from that.

[hagoomata]

OP, don't see having no mortgage as a good thing. Having a house means having a lot of capital tied up in an asset with an historical 3.5% appreciation rate. You should rather have lots of capital tied up in the market. With mortgage rates lower than historical market return rates having a mortgage is better than having a fully paid off house.

I get your point, but if the goal is to retire as soon as possible, having paid-off housing makes that easier than having to still pay for a mortgage.

I don’t think you get his/her point unless you mean there is a psychological benefit

It's probably mostly psychological. It's just my impression is that there is a strain of thought among FIRE people that emphasizes lowering your living costs as much as possible. If your housing is paid off, it costs less to live than if you have a big mortgage payment. I get that you can make more money investing in other things, but if your goal is to reach a point where you can live on less, minimizing costs is one way to get there. (And I'm sure there are situations where investing in the market would get you there sooner, which is where it ends up a psychological thing.)

You're thinking of accounting costs, not opportunity costs, which are the proper things to measure. If you have a paid off house, let say 300k, that's 300k times the spread of the market rate of return (~7% on avg.) minus real estate appreciation return (~3.5% on avg) that your house is costing you every year despite you not having a mortgage/cash payment. This needs to be part of any analysis whether to pay off a house or not. The calculus will not always lead to the same answer depending on rates of return and risk aversion.

But there is also the opportunity cost of renting, which is paying off a house and thus reducing housing costs and investing those savings into the market. I know the whole "purchasing a home is actually irrational" idea is popular in the FIRE community but in many markets it is not clear-cut whether renting is the optimal choice, especially comparing apples to apples (e.g. 3 bd apartments to 3 bd homes). I think often it will come down to tax treatment and maintenance costs.

[SFSpartan]

To get this thread back on track - would be really interested in seeing how folks are pulling this off in ultra high COL areas. I'd love to do FIRE, but it just doesn't seem possible in my market (Silicon Valley) without 2 biglaw incomes (primarily due to the absurdly high COL - paying $4500ish/month on a mortgage really cuts into my ability to save and pay down debt).