lagrangian
7d ago
chubbyFIRE then I suppose, maybe flirting with FAT. HCOL. I think 3M would maintain my current life, 5M with kids, 7M with kids + buffer to pay for a divorce.
This still doesn't answer how to navigate the "how chubby" question with a partner. It's not like we haven't talked about it, it's just hard to really get more than vibes, hypotheticals, rough spreadsheet budgets.
lagrangian
7d ago
all our money
my husband could have covered the art and I could have covered the music
These seem in contradiction to me. How can you consider separately whether to cover things if it's all "your" [combined] money?
Why are you thinking about income asymmetry?
It's hard not to at a FAANG vs good-for-not-being-FAANG ratio. Less glibly, because when I consider the tradeoff of being single, or at least not married, vs a marriage in which I have less control over spending, and much more to spend it on (square footage, children, travel), it is a hard sell. I feel a strong need to be in as much control as possible of how much/why the FIRE timeline slips. More control, easier sell. Five years easily, more likely ten, especially if the goal is to be so FI as to remain that way in the event of divorce.
Do you keep separate finances?
Largely a hypothetical consideration. There's a candidate in mind, but it's early. I'd certainly want to, and a strong prenup to boot.
lagrangian
7d ago
wdym aim for 85%? Live on 85% of your income? and for that matter "leave it to my partner"?
lagrangian
8d ago
How do you balance FIRE with not wanting to be a miserable tightwad? Most specifically interested in if anyone has thoughts on that in context of marriage + children + income gap (let's say 4 me:1 her). A particular potential (pun intended) Mrs. Lagrangian likes travel and activities more than I do and I have trouble thinking about that, especially in context of the income asymmetry.
lagrangian
10d ago
Right, that's the point of a basic sanity check. It's an easy check to rule out things that are insane, in this case "if this has a small TAM, it is not worth a large investment." AI does not have a small TAM, so this does not show that it is not worth a large investment.
But, as you said, it also doesn't show it is worth a large investment. It's a "fast rule-out" heuristic, not any kind of a "rule-in" one.
lagrangian
11d ago
The value of increasing white collar productivity by 10% permanently would be worth every penny spent on AI. It doesn't have to singularity to be worth it. There are nonobvious questions of how to capture the wealth as a company, but the basic "total addressable market" sanity check passes. TAM = 10% total white collar labor expense (well, value of marginal 10% of labor, but similar).
Interesting, but not super useful for me specifically. HCOL + want excellent schools + FAANG puts me well outside those buckets.
More options
Context Copy link