The “Physician on FIRE” on the 4% Rule & Delaying Early Retirement

[@tcwaz]

I can totally relate to this. I am 45 years old. I have been in my Gov job for 23 years, most of which were under 100k. I started at 39k in 2001. I kept plugging away, saving and avoiding debt. I started on the ramsey program and paid off our house, then accelerated my savings rate after that. Now, I have promoted a few times in the last few years and am over 250k per year, which I never thought was possible. I planned to leave at 20-21 years of work with a pension, now I find it hard to leave because I have never experienced a high income and I am on my 3rd "one more year". Hearing the Dr. talk about 1 extra year of work = 5 years of retirement living is true for me (when supplemented by my pension). I will never make this kind of money in another job if I decide to work again. blessing and a curse lol. I feel that leaving now will be waste EVEN though I have enough. ugh.

[@zoraster3749]

“Unfair advantage.” Being a doctor is a toll road, not a free pass. He paid in blood, sweat, and tears to get that high income.

[@Cyclepilot85]

Exactly. That was hard to listen to her say. He earned every dollar.

[@holdencawffle626]

​@@Cyclepilot85she always says dumb things. always.

[@jimv77]

A close friend spent 5 years trying to get into medical school and finally got in to pursue her dream. Worked for 10 years as an MD and took a leave of absence for family issues. Still on leave and feels her values no longer aligns with Western Medicine. Wants a simple life now and wishes she had $1.5 million to just retire. We are both office professionals same age and have a NW of $5 million from just paychecks and saving. I guess different route and different careers and different goals.

[@travelnurseadventures3225]

At the hospital I'm a travel nurse to, the hospital offers 2.5% match on their crappy 403B and NO contribution for HSA--sad. I'm taxed but I have to fund my own retirement--Doctors have better leverage and can negotiate matches etc, not nurses, better to travel and do your own math.

[@educatedwanderer9293]

25 x 200k = $5M, that is impressive... or $10M; it's just about as difficult for an MD who achieves it young enough to enjoy it. I'm a critical care nurse who makes $150k, has living expenses of $88k and I'm at $3M in investments. At 55 years old, I plan to work 5 more years to be able to get health insurance from work. If I get to 40x then it will be a pleasant surprise. I very rarely see anyone highlight a nurse or therapist who is doing FIRE.

[@Monkey-oy1us]

If your expenses are $88k, with the 4% rule, you would need $2.2M. Sounds like you’re at and beyond goal already. Even with buying health insurance on the exchange you can certainly titrate down on your work load already… icu nursing is stressful. I thank you for your service!

[@educatedwanderer9293]

@@Monkey-oy1us Yes I enjoy my work but due to the stress I do plan to taper down my hours as I get closer to age 60. At 60 I'll be at the 36 years of work as an RN for the sake of SS calculation also.

[@travelnurseadventures3225]

Awesome Job My Fellow Nurse🎉

[@educatedwanderer9293]

@@travelnurseadventures3225 ❤️

[@holdencawffle626]

Just get out now. No need to be as greedy as you're being.

[@Kornheiser10]

Leif had/has the significant benefit of being an anesthesiologist, which is the rare transactional type of doctor, meaning, anesthesiologists are used on a case-by-case operation, not a physician that has continuing care or follow-up with patients, because they are basically sub-contractors to hospitals or surgery centers. Anesthesiology also provides more "free time" than most physicians that are responsible for patients' (unlike actual surgeons.) Think of an orthopedic surgeon who is going to operate on your knee....and compare the time of that doctor, and the anesthesiologist whom you might talk to for a few minutes as you're counting backwards from 10.....10, 9, 8....zzzzzzzzzzz

[@Kornheiser10]

Here's the problem with BP and the FIRE movement talking about the 4% Rule, it's not applicable to them. The 4% Rule relates to a traditional retirement, where you have passed the years of high expenses, like home buying, college tuitions, multiple cars, etc. Try FIRE at 40 with 3 kids based on the 4% rule and see where that leaves you, unless it's just about YOU. As for BP, the 4% rule is based on assets held in equities and bonds, not real estate. How would 5 duplexes equate to VTI when contemplating the 4% rule....seems like mixing apples and oranges.....

[@ariefraiser140]

5 duplexes don't need to equat to VTI. You only need to calculated how much those duplexes bring in per year same as VTI. You just need to calculate how much that VTI portfolio brings in per year.

[@Kornheiser10]

@ariefraiser140 Never said they did, that's why it's comparing apples to oranges. The 4% rule is for equities and bonds, the amount you need from your net cash flow from properties is what you need to figure out, has nothing to do with 4% Rule.

[@ariefraiser140]

@@Kornheiser10 You asked how one would equate 5 duplexes to VTI when contemplating the 4% rule. Whether you're talking cash flow from duplexes or cash flow from a portfolio using the 4% rule at the end of the day you're trying to figure out cash flow to live on. So to say rentals have nothing to do with the 4% rule is false. It has a ton to do with the 4% rule. You need $80,000/yr to live on and get $30,000/yr from rentals then you need $50,000/yr from your portfolio or about $1.25 million per year. You get $40,000/yr from rentals then you need a $1 million portfolio to produce $40,000/yr. They are related.

[@Kornheiser10]

@ariefraiser140 what is your 4% calculation of? You're reverse engineering as to how much you need, not how much you can withdraw safely. The 4% rule provides the $$$ you deplete assets while having rental properties is static, as you don't reduce your equity in your properties every year by 4%. If you can maintain net rental cash flow to pay expenses in "retirement", it's better as you won't reduce the corpus of your assets every year, and can raise rents yearly with inflation or CPI. Rental income is more like a pension or Social security, while investment assets like stocks/bonds are subject to reduction, if you need $$ (unless dividends is all you need), but also ultimately subject to RMDs depending on the type of account the $$ is in

[@ariefraiser140]

@@Kornheiser10 Whether or not stocks and bonds deplete using the 4% rule is an entirely different discussion than the first question you asked regarding how you count a duplex using the 4% rule. Nothing you stated counters what I typed before. You can use rentals and figure out the association with the 4% rule based on what's needed to live on.

[@NiranjanBendre]

If the health insurance wasn’t this expensive then I would have retired today! 😢

[@Cyclepilot85]

2:30. Unfair advantage? Mindy do you think he was just given an M.D. because of his name or privilege? What a horrible thing to say. Hopefully you didn't mean it as such, but that was hard to listen to.

[@ryan3716]

It was sarcasm

[@holdencawffle626]

Mindy has always said the dumbest things. That was just another example of her There are COUNTLESS other examples in other videos. She's a dingaling

[@pamjohnson2168]

Badgers vs Gophers! Go Gophers!

[@Bobventk]

Go Hawks. It wasn’t a fair catch

[@HieouyaAgnèsDoyo]

!!I recently sold some of my long-term position and currently sitting on about 250k, do you think Nvidia is a good buy right now or I have I missed out on a crucial buy period, any good stock recommendation on great performing stocks will be appreciated

[@Kornheiser10]

You're on the wrong podcast for that type of question. Go listen to Motley Fool shows