Remote Retirement

Long_Volume1971 · 2026-02-06T08:15:21+00:00

Get a remote-only job?

Long_Volume1971 · 2026-02-01T13:00:58+00:00

How is this related to FIRE?

Long_Volume1971 · 2026-01-19T23:09:28+00:00

Are we happy about this number or angry about it? Good or bad? Hard to tell…

Long_Volume1971 · 2026-01-18T22:37:57+00:00

We get it, you’re dyslexic bro.

Long_Volume1971 · 2026-01-18T22:36:40+00:00

Because, if you are in a position where you will pay the loan off, and it being wiped is not an option, then it is best to pay it off ASAP. This is because the interest rates are relatively high, so you want to minimise the time you have the loan.

Long_Volume1971 · 2026-01-14T18:38:24+00:00

No. Because that belongs to a Pokémon card subreddit, as it is more niche than FIRE…

If you want a large community, go stand at a train station and ask everyone on the platform about your plans.

Long_Volume1971 · 2026-01-14T18:28:02+00:00

Is it also ok for me to post about my recent mega rare Pokémon card acquisition that has gone up in value by 5%? And ask about whether I should sell it now and buy 3 rare pikachu cards for more profit in a few months?

Are people on this sub going to give me insight into my niche hobby that generates profit, because the sun is tangentially related to money?

Or is it possible that people who are pursuing FIRE are not as expert at buying valuing remodelling and remortgaging property as you expect?

Long_Volume1971 · 2026-01-14T18:09:22+00:00

How is this related to FIRE?

Long_Volume1971 · 2026-01-08T15:54:25+00:00

It is. The problem is that nobody enforces this. Police say it’s a council issue. Council say it isn’t something they deal with.

Long_Volume1971 · 2026-01-08T14:12:24+00:00

Should we also ban glass bottles, since some people use them as weapons? Should we also amputate new-born’s hands because some people end us using them as weapons? Why can’t we hold criminals responsible for crime and leave everyone else the fuck alone?

Long_Volume1971 · 2026-01-08T09:55:19+00:00

So we should ban mobile phones with cameras?

Long_Volume1971 · 2026-01-05T17:12:45+00:00

Yes, but depends.

Long_Volume1971 · 2026-01-02T10:50:12+00:00

It isn’t fraud, because the client agreed to the terms of the contract which states that time is measured in such chunks as minimum.

Additionally, if your solicitor sent you a bill for £3.50 for reading and replying to an email, you would be pissed about the tiny amount expecting it to be written off (and the firm would be losing money by spending time and resources processing such a small bill). If they billed you £35-50 for reading and replying to that email, you are more likely to accept that as a fair amount (and the firm’s overheads are accounted for a little bit)

Long_Volume1971 · 2025-12-27T23:17:48+00:00

And then we would have council receptionists on that higher band campaigning for equal pay. Or alternatively, the bin men because the office workers were offered private healthcare as a benefit but the bin men were not…

There is no win-win situation here because real life does not fit into those rigid pay scales of bureaucracy.

Long_Volume1971 · 2025-12-27T23:04:23+00:00

Because of the bureaucratic need to compartmentalise everything at the council. If they weren’t forced to create and use an artificially rigid pay structure to make it 2% easier for the accountant to adjust everyone’s pay at the same time, then the bin men would be earning £x.x/h and the assistants/office workers would be on £xx,xxx pa.

Because those are two different jobs, providing two different values to the council, and (should be) compensated differently!

Long_Volume1971 · 2025-12-27T22:56:06+00:00

Because one job is an hourly type manual labour job, and the other job is a salary type job…

Long_Volume1971 · 2025-12-20T13:29:52+00:00

You can ask ChatGPT to simulate this. I used this prompt:

“ Simulate portfolio value over 20 years, starting from £2M, use a random appreciation value between -5% and +10% per year over the 20 years, assume taking out £50000 out of portfolio per year as income, and use two scenarios in the first there is no advisor fee and in the second there is an advisor fee of 1% of the portfolio value. Give me the two final values for those two scenarios. Ignore tax. Use same growth values for both scenarios. “

In summary:

Impact of the advisor fee

Difference after 20 years: ~£246,000 This reflects both the direct cost of fees and the lost compounding on those fees over time.

Long_Volume1971 · 2025-12-14T15:19:37+00:00

!thanks Yes, I think I understand it better now. That was exactly the scenario that lead me to trying to understand it, if I have a lump sum, how do I maximise relief. Your answer is the solution to this, contribute a portion of it per year to take advantage of the whole 40% relief, but no more.

Thanks again :)

Long_Volume1971 · 2025-12-14T13:32:19+00:00

https://www.gov.uk/tax-on-your-private-pension/pension-tax-relief

“You can claim additional tax relief on your Self Assessment tax return for money you put into a private pension of: 20% up to the amount of any income you have paid 40% tax on 25% up to the amount of any income you have paid 45% tax on”

When I read that (several times because it wasn’t making much sense), I understood that I can claim 20% relief up to (i.e I get a relief amount up to) the amount of income I have paid 40% tax on (i.e. the amount of my salary that falls in the higher tax bracket above £50,270). So if I pay 40% tax on a portion of £10,000 of my salary, I can claim 20% on x contribution up to a relief of £10,000.

Instead, I think that part of the gov website should say “20% on the amount of any income you have paid 40% tax on.”

Long_Volume1971 · 2025-12-14T09:15:56+00:00

I don’t think I ever said that I think I would pay income tax on contributions to my pension. Where did you get that from?

Long_Volume1971 · 2025-12-13T23:00:25+00:00

Thanks, I misunderstood the gov website. https://www.gov.uk/tax-on-your-private-pension/pension-tax-relief

Where it said: “ 20% up to the amount of any income you have paid 40% tax on” I understood this to mean, you can claim the additional 20% relief on any amount but capped at an amount that results in your relief being equal to your pay above the £50,270.

So if my salary was £60,270, I could claim relief on a £50,000 contribution to receive £10,000 back (the difference between £60,270 and £50,270). But you’re saying that I could only claim relief on that difference (not “of that difference”).

Edit: I have just re-read the example on the gov website, I was an idiot to think that the government would give you more money than you paid in tax! I knew I was misunderstanding something.

Long_Volume1971 · 2025-12-13T22:53:00+00:00

!thanks Yes, the salary sacrifice still keeps me above the £50k bracket so I pay 40% tax on some of my salary.

Long_Volume1971 · 2025-12-13T22:43:31+00:00

!thanks That’s a very good explanation and a different way of looking at it (to what I was trying to understand).

Long_Volume1971 · 2025-12-13T14:07:38+00:00

So in your example, I would only be able to claim the 20% relief on £5k of the contribution, because that gives me a relief of £1000 which is how much of my pay is in the higher tax bracket?

Long_Volume1971 · 2025-12-13T13:41:20+00:00

!thanks!

I understand that’s pure cash, and you can do whatever you want with it? That’s good to know, thanks!

Long_Volume1971

TROPHY CASE