this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2026
28 points (96.7% liked)

Slop.

873 readers
455 users here now

For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target federated instances' admins or moderators.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

article textEvery winter, Alan and Katie Donegan would avoid turning on the heating at their home in the south of England.

"Instead, we wore extra layers and used hot water bottles - we turned it into a game," says Alan. "It wasn't suffering, it was strategy."

While the couple admit that others thought they were "extreme" or "mad" to put so much emphasis on not spending money, Alan explains that they were "laser-focused on buying freedom".

By "freedom" he means early retirement, which the Donegans managed to achieve seven years ago when Alan was only 40, and Katie just 35.

The two rarely had takeaways and always took packed lunches to work. "We were £40,000 better off over 10 years from just that one lunch habit," says Alan.

"We even charged our phones while out and hunted for discarded Nectar [supermarket] vouchers. You can decide if that's crazy or genius, but it worked."

Alan had worked as a landscape gardener before launching a training and life-coaching business, while Katie was an actuary, or risk assessor, for a financial firm.

Aside from their good incomes, their extreme saving habits meant they were able to retire early - and they put as much money as they could possibly afford into investments.

"Every pound we invested was a step closer to the life we wanted," says Katie. They quit work after their savings hit £1m.

Alan and Katie are part of a small but growing global movement called Fire, which stands for "Financially Independent, Retire Early".

From a little-known concept 15 years ago, there are now almost a million members of the main Fire discussion board on social media site Reddit, and mainstream financial institutions now publish numerous guides on the topic.

The central tenet is that you live extremely frugally during your working life, so that you can retire as soon as possible.

For most of us, being able to quit working life early is just a dream. From the current high cost of living, to elevated property prices and student debt, we will be working longer not less. The statistics back this up.

Last year, average retirement ages in the UK hit record highs of 65.8 years for men and 64.7 for women, official data showed.

It is a similar situation in the US, where the average retirement age for men and women has increased steadily since the 1990s, to 64.8 and 63.3 respectively in 2025, according to one long-term study.

Yet Fire devotees such as 49-year-old Amy Minkley are committed to their goal. The American middle-school teacher was able to retire when she was just 44.

To help achieve this she worked abroad at international, private schools in Japan, Singapore, India and Thailand, where Minkley says she was able to earn more money and enjoy much lower living expenses than back home in Texas.

She also spent as little as possible. "I wasn't interested in keeping up with a certain expat lifestyle," says Minkley.

"I rarely bought expensive clothing, kept electronics until they gave out, cooked most of my meals at home, and paused before any significant purchase.

"Having a housemate while living in Singapore and India allowed me to save even more, and in several countries I didn't need a car, which kept my expenses low," she says.

Minkley now lives in Bali where her retirement income goes further than if she had moved back to the US.

Carol Schleif is chief market strategist at BMO Private Wealth, a Toronto-based financial advisory business.

She says that while Fire is "still doable" for many people, most of her clients are focused more on having balance in their working lives. So instead of rushing to retire as early as possible, they are focusing on combining a meaningful career with living within their means.

"If you retire early but don't have friendships, health or a sense of purpose, you've achieved one goal but sacrificed other things… you have to wonder if it's worth it," says Schleif.

"People are [instead] having a more flexible approach these days. They are trying to find ways to reach their retirement goals but also enjoy life."

Sarah Coles, head of personal finance at UK investment platform AJ Bell, warns that making the Fire philosophy work is increasingly challenging as most people simply cannot afford it.

Still, she says that several Fire principles are worthwhile, and can help people retire a little sooner, such as starting to save money as a young adult, and increasing your pension payments after every pay rise.

"A balanced path can get you the retirement you want, when you want it, without breaking your spirit. It just needs to be more nuanced and realistic," says Coles.

Within the Fire community, some are now following this less intense route, leading to the creation of sub-genres such as "Barista Fire". This focuses on saving enough money so that your investment income can cover most life expenses. You then top this up with part-time work.

For some Fire followers though, extreme frugality is still the main way to achieve retirement early, and a sacrifice they see as worth it in the long term.

As Minkley puts it: "The principles of Fire are simple, and they haven't changed - spend less than you earn, invest the difference, and give your money time to grow."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] barrbaric@hexbear.net 9 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Obviously being frugal is good, don't buy shit you don't have to for no reason. But were you really saving £4000/yr by having packed lunches? Or is that over some hypothetical version where they ate out every single lunch of the year?

Just looked up heating costs in the UK wondering how much that could be and holy shit, £150/mo during winter? That's like 4x what I pay for heating, and we're getting scammed by the utility. No wonder so many people freeze to death.

[–] Robert_Kennedy_Jr@hexbear.net 12 points 2 days ago

Dated someone who was going to school on their grandparents dime and told me once they spent around $600 a month on food when I was averaging $200 and this was over a decade ago

[–] came_apart_at_Kmart@hexbear.net 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

when i got my first OK paying job, despite making 10K USD more than what i made prior, i had nothing to show for it after the first year. no additional savings, and my whole mental deal with the job was that i could start actually saving.

i couldn't really unpack where the extra had gone, but i did start doing those YNAB tools. this was like 2014, when that crap wasn't fully monetized and people shared spreadsheets.

after programming in all the things i couldn't change (income, rent, utilities, insurance) and making some reasonable allowances based in the past (fuel, auto repairs/maintenance) all that was left that i could control daily was food and entertainment.

while that did lead to a shift in my thinking about daily spending vs monthly savings, as you say, it is only applicable to people who legitimately make more than they need to socially reproduce their labor. which is a narrowing demographic.

being on the bad side of that break-even line is not about treat selection but about risk assessment: car repair or dentist. medication or fresh food. treatment or soothing.

but the kind of people being advertised to in these periodicals do not want to be confronted with the knowledge of what poverty does to people in it, because it reveals the flaws in a system that has rewarded them with a life of generally lower stakes decision making.

learning to be economical with food can be a bit of a game changer within certain guardrails and if someone can save for the home-scale infrastructure/equipment to take full advantage, but this genre of stories is always the same thing: don't buy meals or prepared drinks during the work day. and they act like it's some secret that dropping $30/day on starbucks milkshakes and an artisan burrito will add up to $900/month.

probably because, for very comfortable bozos, this is a shock.

[–] miz@hexbear.net 2 points 2 days ago

being on the bad side of that break-even line

makes me think of the "Kill Line" meme from Chinese social media

[–] chgxvjh@hexbear.net 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That's <10£ of savings per workday per person. Maybe a bit high but doesn't seem impossible. Not really sure how much food is in the UK.

[–] barrbaric@hexbear.net 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

My point was more that most people (at least in my neck of the woods) only eat out for lunch like twice a week tops. Though this could be a bubble thing, where everyone I work with just can't afford more lol. Also a packed lunch isn't free, so if it's 10£/day savings they'd really be spending closer to 15£ average per day over 10 years?

[–] chgxvjh@hexbear.net 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yeah it's pretty arbitrary how you count your non spendings.

I'm saving billions with all the super yachts I'm not buying.