quote author=JayJuanGee link=topic=5522931.msg64919177#msg64919177 date=1736044629]
It seems a bit strange that I read through this whole thread, and there were not too many responding members who were really attempting to grapple how bitcoin fits into this FIRE concept, except perhaps Franky1 had the post that discussed the FIRE idea in light of his bitcoin holdings.

Surely, the main underlying ideas of how FIRE plays out within traditional assets are sufficiently outlined in OP, which largely is that when any of us might decide upon living off of our investments in a passive income kind of a way, our annual withdrawal rate should on average be less than the amount that the various investments are earning, so in that sense on average the investment portfolio is not getting smaller in terms of its dollar value, and if we have 25x our annual income/expenses, then withdrawing 4% per year remains enough to sustain ourselves at that same rate for an indefinite period of time, and presumptively in a perpetual basis.

[/quote]

I don't think this strategy makes sense. It is too conservative. And will force you to work more

We don't need to sustain ourselves in perpetual basis, because our life isn't perpetual.

You just need money to live at most 110 years.

Making correct assumptions about your long you will live will allow you to make higher withdrawals, allowing you to withdrawal more than your investment earnings annually.  Because you don't need to die with your portfolio intact.