Hacker News Reader

Comment by aprdm | Hacker News Reader

"Live frugally" , "FIRE" , "work in tech"

All incompatible with 99% of the upper class, neither do they want to eat ramen to retire early.

You're also one medical disaster away from being "very very wrong"

FIRE doesn't depend on having a tech job. Its all about income to expense ratio. Planning for medical events is something that gets talked to death in these communities.

How do you plan for a potential quarter million dollar medical bills over a couple of years?

Good insurance is one aspect including long term disability coverage if you haven’t retired.

That’s the thing medical expenses when young are unlikely enough insurance is a viable strategy. Long term it’s worthwhile to move to a country with a less expensive medical system. You can move basically anywhere in retirement and be better off.

Again like I have been saying, good insurance is predicated on the open market and ACA being around and not being killed by Republicans. Even if they don’t outright kill it, they are trying to put in a “death spiral” where only sick people use it and insurance companies don’t want to participate.

LTC not discriminating against pre-existing conditions is also post ACA.

In a hypothetical universe with different laws people would make different decisions, like abandoning the US. But you’re asking about medical conditions which rarely apply and laws that don’t exist. That’s not a failing of FIRE for the vast majority of people.

Further FIRE doesn’t mean crap if you get something serious and die at 23, that’s just the reality of human existence.

People didn’t abandoned the US before the ACA was the law in 2011-2012. And if there were an influx of US citizens to foreign countries, I can guarantee you other countries wouldn’t be as welcoming.

There are plenty of conditions where the difference between life and death is being able to get health care

Some did. The US expat community has been quite large for decades.

Most people didn’t do FIRE style early retirement while dealing with pre existing medical conditions. There however was plenty of expats pre ACA who very much left the country for early retirement.

US healthcare is ruinously expensive but on average it’s not particularly good if you’re in the income bracket where 1/4 million over a few years is a serious issue.

There is absolutely no significant number of Americans who left without ties to other countries. I find it rich that Americans who leave the US call themselves “ex-pats” instead of “immigrants”

There’s over 1/2 million former Americans living in Canada or the UK which doesn’t require learning a foreign language. You really can’t make those kinds of sweeping statements about populations that large. Many Americans without any prior connections fled to Canada to avoid the Vietnam war for example and then made a home there.

Brit’s will also call themselves expats. https://britishexpats.com/forum/ ditto Canadians https://www.expatden.com/global/canadians-living-abroad/ Also, the US imposes taxes on Americans who leave until they renounce their citizenship on the upside they still get to vote. It’s an unusual relationship to your former country.

There's a difference in intention between ex-pat and immigrant. Ex-pat's tend to think of themselves as being wherever they are temporarily, but intending to return to their home country. Immigrants desire is to make wherever they are their new home country.

If you're saying that people who have permanently left the US call themselves ex-pats, that is news to me, and I can understand the confusion.

They very much do. People retiring to other countries specifically

The same way that an employed person would plan for this. Catastrophic insurance plans put a cap on how much your medical bills can be.

An employed person since the ACA hasn’t had to worry about lifetime caps…

Oh and catastrophic insurance plans only have to cover pre-existing conditions since the ACA - which one party is actively trying to kill.

A lot of people are often surprised at how non-frugal their lifestyles are. I'm not suggesting that people living on $50k/year aren't already frugal, but yeah, there's definitely people who take out car loans, take out mortgages for the full amount they were approved for, and all sorts of random things like buying chicken parts instead of whole chickens, buying small grocery store containers instead of bulk pricing for shelf-stable items, keeping your speed down to save gas, etc.

You really just need to build an innate understanding that the hedonic treadmill doesn't make you happier long-term and develop a resolution to get your expenses down and stay disciplined about it.

But also you see people asking why can’t someone making the median wage - $75K a year - max out there 401K at $23500 and their HSA at $8300, etc

There are three things you can do with your money - save it (e.g. investments), give it away (e.g. charity), or spend it (e.g. housing, vacations). Whether or not somebody's investment strategy (i.e. saving) is optimal for their income level has nothing to do with the frugality of their lifestyle (i.e. spending).

So you are saying when I first graduated from college in 1996 I should have been able to max out my 401K - then it was $10K I believe. I was making $22K.

If the median income is $70k a year, after taxes they should be able to save $23500 a year and have an HSA compatible healthcare plan and max out their HSA?

I have no idea how you got that from my comment. How much you make, how much you save, how much you spend, and how much you give away are all independent, and neither is it a zero-sum pie (for example, sometimes investments go down in value, and sometimes the line between giving away and spending is blurry).

To answer your question directly, $70k income is independent of the cost of living in high cost of living cities (like NYC or SF) vs. low cost of living areas. If you make $70k/year in NYC, no you don't have the spare income to max out 401k/HSA. If you make $70k/year working for Walmart in Bentonville, Arkansas, then yeah, I expect that you ought to be able to max them out.

I know several people with normie jobs (not tech related or government) and normie lifestyles that saved up enough money to never need to work again by 50 while still maintaining their lifestyle. Most still work because they have no idea what to do with their time even though they don’t need to work anymore.

You can easily derive that this is possible from the median household finance statistics published by BLS, never mind the upper class. It isn’t that hard if you care to do it.

No one is doubting that it is possible to save enough to retire by the time you’re 50 - as long as the ACA and the open market is viable.

Just leave the US, problem solved.

I said in another reply, that’s actually a real Plan B. We are going to stay in Costa Rica for 5 weeks starting next week and my wife and I are both learning Spanish now. I’m at around an A2 CEFR level.

I’ve already researched the residency requirements for both there and Panama

There are definite costs to this in terms of continued US taxation as an expat, especially if there isn't a tax treaty in place.

Costa Rica doesn’t tax foreign income. But logically it only makes sense to establish residence there if I am not working. CAJA - their healthcare system would be about the same price as my employer provided healthcare.

I already don’t pay state tax living in Florida and I would pay federal tax either way.

90%+ chance the person you are replying to has health insurance that will cover them in case of medical disaster.

I absolutely have health insurance, the most expensive available on my state. That doesn't protect me 100%, but what health insurance (including the ones available at most companies) does?

People who have poor money management skills believe that FIRE=Ramen and no health insurance... In fact, it's about getting a 30K car (the one I bought new 3 years ago) instead a 70K car despite having the money.

And what happens when the Republican Party gut the ACA and you have a pre-existing condition. Do you know what life was like trying to get insurance with a pre-existing condition before 2012?

Then they can just skip insurance. Most people don't need it, especially if they already have a lot of money (which is what FIRE means)

Obviously said by someone who is young and never had or knew anyone that had an expensive medical procedure like a friend who is 45 who I have known since 2003 and is a cancer survivor and now has to have open heart surgery

I don't believe your friend is most people. I have quite a few who haven't been to a doctor in decades.

So, in your 30s? My parents both had cancer in their late 50s/early 60s (including surgery / chemo) - and paid like $15 for some pain meds in Canada.

Even on a pretty good Kaiser plan, we're paying $200+ per day in the hospital, etc. On a high-deductible, more. They say they have a $1M annual limit, but that they've never enforced it. I hope we never have to find out.

Yes, I would get insurance once I have kids and that would cover the 50s+ when people usually start needing it.

But do you want to take the chance that you will never have major medical expenses between the time you retire early and you are 65 and eligible for Medicare? How many of your friends are over 50?

Very few, I am just saying that you can sign up when you think the risk hits your threshold. I'm mid 30s and wish I hadn't had to pay the last 10yrs. Honestly, until you have ids it's unlikely you'll use it and even less likely that you can't sign up for it before a major operation.

Yes you should try to time a major medical issue or accident during the open enrollment window. You should also not have car insurance until you think you might have an accident

That plan works until it suddenly doesn't. When it doesn't it's catastrophic for your finances and your health.

If you have an extra couple million dollars above and beyond your regular retirement fund you could self-insure your medical costs. But then you could just buy the health insurance.

Medical expenses are less expensive when you don't have insurance. Insurance is just for catastrophic events, if you do some regular risk analysis you can come to a balance that works for you. If you know a major medical expense is imminent then get the insurance. Most procedures don't happen immediately anyway.

That’s not how insurance works even with the ACA. You have open enrollment is the only time you can get insurance on the open market. Good luck if you find you have a major medical issue right after open enrollment ends - which the Republican administration has shortened and you have to wait 9-10 months.

99% of people have poor money management skills? It's statements like this that makes FIRE a fringe scene.

you're saying 99% of people think FIRE = ramen? I doubt that many even have heard of it

i think you can get a pretty decent prius from 5k to 10k and a fantastic nearly brand new tesla model 3 for 17K. That's what i did. it was 8 years old, practically brand new, FSD prepaid included! it drives me to work and i only paid 17K for it!

you don't need to eat ramen. there are many cost effective options out there: oatmeal, beans, rice, you could grow your own fruits and vegetables, etc.

and as for the medical disaster: heart attack and stroke are actually preventable with a plant based diet (keep your LDL under 80 and you'll vastly decrease your chance of a heart attack). i know a lot of people will hate on that, but those are the facts and any evidence based nutritionist can tell you this.

How do you prevent random accidents, cancer, etc?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com