[AFNobody]

His math is a little optimistic when we are talking about "almost all market conditions" and once you start factoring in things that might go wrong, like a couple years of unemployment stretched over a 20 year career.

MMM ignores a ton of statistically common problems (like 4 bouts of unemployment over 20 years).

[sokoloff]

All models are wrong, but some models are useful.

[AFNobody]

If it is obvious predictable stuff, like being unemployed that almost everyone experiences eventually it isn't useful.

[sokoloff]

"[A] couple years of unemployment stretched over a 20 year career" seems to be an extreme outlier for the tech field.

I worked through the 2000 and 2008 crashes and I can't think of anyone I worked with in tech who was involuntarily unemployed for more than a few weeks at a time and certainly not for 10% of the total time. (Voluntarily for personal reasons like they decided to stay home with a kid, sure.)

Yes, years or 10%+ of unemployment would derail retirement savings. A few weeks here and there doesn't.

[AFNobody]

So now we are going from the general case to the Bay area tech crowd?

I think you live in a bubble, honestly. Get out of it and realize how most people live.

[sokoloff]

I see it differently. I think we’re in a sub thread on a tech discussion site about tech workers trying to retire in their 40s and what savings rate is required to do that.

You’re the one trying to steer the discussion into a general case.