[type_enthusiast]

An interesting thought, but I think it falls apart a bit when it meets reality.

Most people want to retire eventually, and can't really predict what the cost of living is going to be or for how long they'll be paying it. So it makes sense to want to accumulate more wealth than your known spending needs demand.

Also, the alternative the author suggests is to spend only as much time as you need to spend in order to earn exactly what you need. This is also not particularly realistic, as many forms of labor don't allow you to precisely invest only as much time as you feel like, or stop/start working immediately based on whether or not you currently need more money.

[j0hnyl]

There's another thing that no one really mentions within this context and it's that people who are saving usually want to retire into something better, not the same slog they've been living while saving. That's why it's ridiculous when you read these FIRE forums and people get feedback like "Why do you need more money if your spending is only X".... well my spending is only X, because I'm saving to build a war chest for financial independence where I can actually live a better quality of life than I do presently.

[naming_the_user]

It also seemingly completely ignores that the theoretical person is not an island that is born and dies.

If I pass $0 on to my children I'd consider that to be one of the biggest failings of my life.