But.. his audience is MF users, who are over 90% male. The lack of female regulars here make it a reasonable (though not obvious) belief that no person who participated in this survey is female.

Where's the bias?

[QUOTE=VBCurtis;580202]The lack of female regulars here ...[/QUOTE]... that you have been led to believe.

Some people might claim to be, or imply they are, male when in fact they are not. How would you know for sure?

It also works in reverse; someone using a female name/persona to get more attention and/or help.

[QUOTE=retina;580204]Some people might claim to be, or imply they are, male when in fact they are not.[/QUOTE]Especially when the group appears to be ~90% male.

[QUOTE=retina;580204]... that you have been led to believe.[/quote]
So how else are we supposed to act, if not on the basis of our beliefs? If you have evidence to change our belief (mf.org population is > 10% female), present it.

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;580207]Especially when the group appears to be ~90% male.[/QUOTE]
I do not claim to understand the logic behind how a minority group would identify themselves in an online psuedonymous forum, but I dont see any advantage in hiding (or revealing, for that matter) your sex/gender in mf.org. Can you explain why female forumites would like to hide that fact here, just because there are lot more males than females?

I was skimming through a book titled [I]Die With Zero[/I] that had a pretty good approach to balancing YOLO and delayed gratification. An excellent summary is at: [url]https://www.debtfreedr.com/die-with-zero/[/url]

Long story short, your ability to extract value from your money typically declines past your late 20s, so it often pays to spend it now rather than later. For example, you might be able to summit Everest for $X at age 30, but you'll likely need to pay $X+$Y for additional porters and supplies at age 50 to accomplish that goal. At age 70, you might not be able to reach the top regardless of how much money you're willing to pay for it.

Now most people aren't interested in climbing Everest or even mountains in general, but that applies to many other fun activities in life. Learning to snowboard in your 20s is easier and cheaper than learning to snowboard in your 60s, even though both are doable. Some older relatives of mine in their 70s and 80s couldn't go on a recent backpacking trip with the younger folks, even though they could easily afford to.

I save around 50 percent of my income (I have a middle class income). That works great in a bigger city and me not having kids right now.

I buy a lot of stuff that helps me improve my skills (e-books, books, ...) to live the life-long learning paradigm. I did recognize that most expensive things don't make me happy. Still I am not a minimalist. It's not really delayed gratification because I still can buy stuff I want. I also recently bought a PS5 but I unfortunately probably won't play as much as I should.

It's a personal choice and the chance of dying soon is in a normal case very exaggerated. Those who propagate it will live the longest. ;-)

I hope to can go to retirement with 50 but we will see. Life cannot be planned fully.

[QUOTE=The Carnivore;581637]At age 70, you might not be able to reach the top regardless of how much money you're willing to pay for it.
[/QUOTE]


I don't think it's the reason that you are 70 but with 70 and more or less rich you did fulfill a lot of desires you originally had. So you keep on searching for the next, more expensive fix.

It's the reason some older (and younger) very rich guys buy iPhones with gold and diamonds for 40,000 USD or want to go with a rocket to space for 10 minutes for 28 million USD.

You'll constantly move your life style expectations up if you're not careful. It's also called 'lifestyle creep'. Avoid that at all cost. It's also some expectation management for yourself.

So it's more of a mental thing than a thing of the age.

[QUOTE=The Carnivore;581637]Learning to snowboard in your 20s is easier and cheaper than learning to snowboard in your 60s, even though both are doable.[/QUOTE]


Why should it easier (and cheaper) to learn it with 20s than with 60s? The course will cost the same only the serious injury risk will be a little bit higher.

The mental capacity (for learning) can still be very high in your 60s, 70s, 80s if you take care of your brain and your mind. There are countless examples.

[QUOTE=joblack;582069]I save around 50 percent of my income (I have a middle class income). That works great in a bigger city and me not having kids right now.
...
I hope to can go to retirement with 50 but we will see. Life cannot be planned fully.[/QUOTE]
Congrats, you're on track to retire in 16 years or less (the "less" will depend on how long you've already been living that lifestyle):
[url]https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/01/13/the-shockingly-simple-math-behind-early-retirement/[/url]
"If you save a reasonable percentage of your take-home pay, like 50%, and live on the remaining 50%, you’ll be Ready to Rock (aka “financially independent”) in a reasonable number of years – about 16 according to this chart."

My personal retirement goal is age ~55.

[QUOTE=The Carnivore;581637]Learning to snowboard in your 20s is easier and cheaper than learning to snowboard in your 60s, even though both are doable. Some older relatives of mine in their 70s and 80s couldn't go on a recent backpacking trip with the younger folks, even though they could easily afford to.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=joblack;582072]Why should it easier (and cheaper) to learn it with 20s than with 60s? The course will cost the same only the serious injury risk will be a little bit higher.

The mental capacity (for learning) can still be very high in your 60s, 70s, 80s if you take care of your brain and your mind. There are countless examples.[/QUOTE]
I don't know how hard it is to learn something new in your 60s vs your 20s, but I do know that the cost of lift tickets and gear rentals are outstripping median wages and inflation :sad:

[QUOTE=MooMoo2;582082]
My personal retirement goal is age ~55.
[/QUOTE]

My personal goal in retirement is to reach age 150. (I have been retired for more that ten years already.) Whether or not that happens depends on too many other people.

150, in which base?