Does FIRE subvert conventional ideas of work and finances ? WTF !

 

I don't know whether to laugh or to cry, his guy called Keith Yap, who seems to work in the Government, referenced my CNA article, and then proceeded to make some inaccurate statements about the FIRE movement and millennials ( and I'm not even a millennial ! ). 

You can read the article yourself by following this link. 

I'm generally quite sympathetic to folks who try to FIRE, because inevitably they will accumulate $100,000 before their 30s then get slammed in social media for sharing it. There is no evidence that Keith Yap is on the road to FIRE, but his main thesis is that FIRE will subvert conventional ideas of work and finances and I fail to see how its possible to agree with this. Furthermore, I think a much higher standard of proof is required to link millennial's dissatisfaction with the workplace status quo with the rise of FIRE.

My first point is that anyone who is attempting FIRE will know how much more engaged you will need to be at work to stand a chance of accumulating (25 x annual expenses) before age 40. This is generally not a game for the average millennial who hates his boss, but someone who enjoys his current work, figured out it may not be sustainable, so wants to volunteer for as much overtime as possible. 

My second point is Keith Yap seems a tad defensive when he finds some FIRE zealots seems to baulk when it comes to discretionary expenses, so he constructs these false dichotomies in his article. You either can save money on pumpkin spiced lattes, or catch up with old friends, Keith conveniently forgets that I can catch up with old friends over a cup of kopi-o kosong. Keith asserts that if you save and skip out on an extravagant wedding, you will lose a chance to gather everyone together, forgetting that I can get everyone together with a buffet instead of a banquet. 

Worse, after setting up a series of false dichotomies, Keith had the temerity to invoke Aristotle's golden mean - which leads me to question whether he is trolling the discerning reader ?

My third point is that folks with an affinity to FIRE are my INTJ pals who probably just belong to 1-3% of the human population but over-represented in FIRE forums and my ERM class. If you actually bother to have friends who are INTJ, you will find that their lives are actually quite interesting. INTJs have very diverse hobbies and often no relation to their jobs. INTJs do not really march to conventional lives and work, so cannot be actively trying to subvert work but to seek a wholly independent approach on lifestyle design. If anything I find INTJs quite fun and hedonistic - they don't eat expensive food, but they are really obsessed with the best hawker fare and can be counted on to find out the best eats. 

Finally, as it is pointed by a lot of successful entrepreneurs and CEO-types, mostly ENTJs who attain FATFire, the skills and talent which made FIRE possible often leads to financial independence but not early retirement or retreat from the workforce. Folks like me still want to find ways to contribute to society and will continue to seek employment, but on our own terms. This is why a paradox will occur if Early Retirement Masterclass is taught by a sometime who is fully retired.

Finally, I think Keith Yap really needs to look at himself and his biases before talking about FIRE folks. 

I visited his profile and find that his work may be government related, in some blog articles, he talks about his scholarship application process. I had a short, miserable stint in a statutory board and I know this - If your income has very bond-like characteristics like government work, and you're on the right side of the scholar-farmer divide, there will ultimately be a disconnect of your salary scale from actual market forces. This is the magic of high current estimated potential and having KPIs widely disconnected from commercial reality.

This inoculation from market forces accords you a more carefree expenses profile which most Singaporeans cannot afford. So maybe you can have that pumpkin spiced latte, that extravagant wedding, that monthly trip to backpack in Europe. You willingness to spend matches your ability to earn. Regardless of market cycles. 

Your equivalent in the private sector or private enterprise may not have that privilege even if he gets the same pay because he knows that in the business world - it's feast or famine. As such, my willingness to spend is only a fraction of my ability to earn. In such a case, having a high investment income is just a desire to have the same privileges of a government scholar.

So some commentators might be scholars and can get high falutin about FIRE. 

I am a statistic, even if I FIRE.

We are not the same.