From the first moment I heard of FIRE, I totally agreed with FI, and totally rejected RE. My goal is to reach the point where my money earns enough for us to have a fabulous retirement, without having to forgo the fun stuff we can have now. It's a tricky balancing act, but having a really high income gives us a really wide balancing pole.

I reject Rocco's whole "never retire" notion because I see how it can work great, possibly for many years, but will inevitably fail spectacularly at a point when it's too late to be able to recover.

Sort of like the cartoon character running full tilt off the cliff, continuing to run on air until suddenly realizing they're in mid-air, gulping miserably, and falling. Unfortunately, in real life you don't get to pick yourself off the rocks below, dust yourself off, and blithely get back to what you were doing before.

Sure, keeping your fixed expenses low is a key component, and a worthy one (at least if it still allows you to enjoy your life in the present). However, at some point in the future, whether due to aging, illness, or bad fortune, you will no longer be able to continue bringing in enough to maintain even that modest lifestyle. And if you haven't set aside and invested prudently enough to take over the task of maintaining it for you, you'll be in abject poverty when you're old and sick.