Since 2009, I\u2019ve been writing about the importance of working to live\u2014accumulating wealth to achieve financial independence and freedom<\/a>. But despite years of advocating for this lifestyle, I\u2019ve come to realize that convincing people remains an uphill battle. Instead, I now have new proof that live-to-work is back and stronger than ever!<\/p>\n \u201cLive to work\u201d describes a mindset where a person’s life revolves primarily around their career or job. People who \u201clive to work\u201d often prioritize their work above personal interests, relationships, or leisure. Their identity and self-worth may be closely tied to their professional achievements and productivity.<\/p>\n I understand the importance of \u201cliving to work\u201d when you first graduate from school. Building a career and establishing financial security often require dedication and long hours. However, there comes a point when we need to decide what truly matters and when enough is enough. Otherwise, we risk looking back with regret<\/a>, wishing we had the courage to prioritize our happiness and live life on our own terms.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n A couple of years before retiring from finance in 2012, my wife and I were rushing through Venice, Italy when an older couple stopped us and said, \u201cTake it slow and look around. There\u2019s no hurry to get to where you\u2019re going.\u201d At first, I was surprised, but then I realized they were right. We were speed-walking through the city like New Yorkers in Midtown Manhattan.<\/p>\n When I finally built up the courage to negotiate a severance<\/a> and leave my job, I spent late mornings sitting in Golden Gate Park, reading a book or simply enjoying the moment. It was a wonderful feeling\u2014not having to endure rush-hour traffic just to sit in meetings all day. Even though I earned 85% less in my first year of retirement, I was happier because I was free.<\/p>\n At last, I could finally enjoy the public parks and services my six-figure tax bills had been paying for over the past decade. It felt good to break free from the live-to-work mentality\u2014the relentless pursuit of more money and greater status. In retrospect, it was weird to let go at 34, but I don’t regret it at 47 today. <\/p>\n I shouldn\u2019t be too surprised that the work-to-live philosophy is fading again. After all, I wrote the post\u00a0Why Early Retirement\/FIRE Is Becoming Obsolete<\/a><\/em>, which argued that increased workplace flexibility had reduced the urgency to retire early. If I only had to go into the office 2-3 days a week, I likely would have worked at least<\/em> five years longer.<\/p>\n Just last week, I played pickleball from 2 \u2013 3:45 PM with someone who works at Uber. He told me his company only requires employees to be in the office on Tuesdays and Thursdays, giving him a four-day weekend. This season, he\u2019s been skiing in Lake Tahoe<\/a> almost every week. On Fridays and Mondays, he takes video meetings until about 11 AM, gets in six runs on the slopes from 11:30 AM to 1 PM, and then logs back in for work.<\/p>\n Spending time on the pickleball and tennis courts led me to believe that more people were embracing flexible work. However, meeting a few individuals with relaxed schedules is one thing\u2014seeing how people spend their money is another<\/em>. And from what I\u2019ve observed, the most serious professionals\u2014the ones living to work\u2014are actually doubling down on work post pandemic. <\/p>\n The reality is that most of my midday pickleball partners fall into two groups: people in their 20s and those over 50. The younger crowd are all renters without kids, while the older group either runs their own businesses, has a working spouse<\/a>, or lives frugally on government assistance. <\/p>\n One of the best things to come out of the pandemic was widespread remote work. Beyond eliminating commutes and unnecessary face time, it also allowed people to save<\/em> on housing costs by moving farther from city centers. This trend is one of the reasons why I’ve been investing in heartland real estate<\/a> since 2016. <\/p>\n In San Francisco, you can save 40%\u201360% on rent or home prices just by moving 3\u20135 miles west. During the pandemic, thousands relocated to entirely different cities to cut costs. Personally, I advocate for less drastic measures\u2014relocating within your city<\/a> to reduce expenses while keeping the same salary, professional network, and school district for your kids. <\/p>\n But what shocked me recently was seeing two homes with no views sell for well above asking prices on San Francisco\u2019s growing west side<\/a>. They sold for more than the homes available with ocean views. I had toured both properties extensively and estimated their final selling prices. I do this for every property I visit to keep my pricing forecast skills sharp.<\/p>\n For context, I\u2019m bullish on San Francisco real estate, particularly due to the growth of artificial intelligence<\/a>. I\u2019m especially optimistic about the city\u2019s west side, driven by new schools, property developments, and the $4 billion UCSF Parnassus medical center remodel, which will add over 1,400 new jobs.<\/p>\n I think these two homes are great\u2014I\u2019m just surprised they sold for so much more than my estimates, when you can buy nicer homes with views just 0.5 \u2013 1 miles away, for less. <\/p>\n This fully remodeled 3-bedroom, 3.5-bathroom, 2,836-square-foot home in the West Portal neighborhood sold for $3,125,000 in April 2024. Given my positive stance on west-side San Francisco real estate, I projected a 4% appreciation in 2025, bringing its estimated value to $3,250,000.<\/p>\n It was re-listed in 2025 at $2,495,000 to generate interest\u2014similar to its 2024 strategy when it was listed at the same price and ultimately sold for $3,125,000. However, I doubted it would go $750,000 over asking again. That is a scary amount of money and percentage to overbid. <\/p>\n I was wrong. The home sold for $3,435,000\u201410% higher than its 2024 price, and $393,799 over Redfin’s estimate. <\/p>\n The home\u2019s biggest selling point, according to real estate agents, was its proximity to the MUNI station. A five-minute walk to the train, an eight-minute wait, a 15-minute ride, and you\u2019re in downtown San Francisco.<\/p>\n But I debated this logic with my real estate agent. \u201cWhy would someone pay a huge premium for a home just to have a short commute to work under fluorescent lights for 8-10 hours a day? That doesn\u2019t sound fun. By paying that housing premium, they\u2019re locking themselves into working even harder to afford it.\u201d<\/p>\n Her response? \u201cWhat if they have to go into the office?\u201d Good point. That ended the debate because it reminded me that I’m in this FIRE bubble<\/a> where I refuse to work longer than I have to. Only a minority of people are personal finance enthusiasts, whereas the vast majority of Financial Samurai readers are.<\/p>\n A single example isn\u2019t enough to declare a trend for the new year, but then I came across another. This 3-bedroom, 3-bathroom home, 2,230 sqft (600 square feet smaller than the first), was somewhat move-in ready, though its remodel was 25\u201330 years old. So it didn’t feel nearly as nice as the first home. In fact, I would want to spend $100,000 \u2013 $200,000 remodeling<\/a> it.<\/p>\n It was also listed at $2,495,000, and I estimated it would sell for about $2.8 million. Again, I was wrong. It sold for $3,039,159\u2014over $359,000 above Redfin\u2019s estimate, or $1,362\/sqft. Never would I have guessed the home would get over $3 million.<\/p>\n Why the premium? A slight skyline view from the main bedroom and a seven-minute walk to the MUNI station instead of five. In a previous post, I mentioned that owning a home within walking distance of everything isn\u2019t always ideal<\/a> due to noise and other disturbances. Being one block farther from the MUNI station, shops, and restaurants may have made this home slightly more desirable to buyers.<\/p>\n Once again, real estate agents confirmed that all the buyers were families prioritizing proximity to public transportation. Live-to-work strikes again! You could buy a 300 sqft larger, fully remodeled home with ocean views for 10% less<\/a>. Or you could buy a similar quality house 1 mile away also near a MUNI station for 33% less.<\/p>\n Clearly, my advice for people to find more affordable homes a bit farther from work seems to be failing. And don’t worry, I have plenty more examples<\/a> besides these two that show how working to live is back. <\/p>\n I\u2019m not saying these homebuyers are obsessed with work\u2014many simply need to be in the office daily. Their locations are convenient\u2014close to downtown, near transit hubs, and within walking distance of shops and restaurants. Again, these are great homes in a nice neighborhood. <\/p>\n But the reality is that the need to work fuels demand for homes near offices and public transportation, driving prices higher. And as home prices climb, more people find themselves working more<\/em> just to afford them. Remember, higher home prices means more maintenance, insurance, and property taxes to pay for. <\/p>\n This cycle won\u2019t break anytime soon, despite the personal finance community\u2019s best efforts to encourage more affordable living arrangements. There\u2019s simply too much pressure to earn more and grow social status<\/a>.<\/p>\n There are also people who willingly endure a\u00a045-minute commute each way\u00a0to drop off their kids at school\u2014for the next 8 to 12 years\u2014simply because they refuse to give up the status of their current neighborhood. Instead of moving closer and cutting the drive down to\u00a0under 10 minutes, they stay put because they don\u2019t think the new area is \u201cfancy\u201d enough.\u00a0<\/p>\n Financial independence is about creating options, yet we\u2019re seeing a shift back toward working harder just to sustain an expensive lifestyle. On top of paying a premium to live closer to work, many families in big cities want to send their kids to private school, which can easily cost between $20,000 and $70,000 per year per child. Add on a car or two, vacations, fine dining, and supplemental lessons for their kids, and even households making $500,000+ a year are just scraping by<\/a>.<\/p>\n Such households aren’t being irrational\u2014they’re choosing to pay because they believe the benefits are worth it. In other words, there’s no need to feel sorry for them because they can change their situation if they choose. With the help of ProjectionLab<\/a><\/strong>, we conducted a case study showing how a $500,000\/year household went from struggling to being able to retire early<\/a>.<\/p>\n If you have a million-dollar mindset<\/a>, saving $1 million on a home equates to ~$42,000 per year in risk-free income\u2014or potentially $100,000 per year if invested at a 10% return. Personally, I\u2019d much rather save $1 million and live a mile farther away on the MUNI line with a slightly longer commute than be forced to work many more years just to afford my home.<\/p>\n Let\u2019s run the numbers. Say you have a $600,000 household income\u2014the minimum I\u2019d recommend for comfortably affording a $3 million home (5X income, though ideally, it should be 3X<\/a>). But instead of opting for a $2 million home just one mile farther, you buy the more expensive one because it feels more prestigious and convenient.<\/p>\n Now, let\u2019s assume you\u2019re a disciplined saver, putting away 10% of your gross income, or $60,000 a year. That\u2019s about 14% of your after-tax income of $420,000 (assuming a 30% effective tax rate). With a 5% compound annual return, it will take you\u00a012 years\u00a0to save $1 million<\/strong>.\u00a0Holy moly!<\/p>\n Are you telling me you\u2019d rather work\u00a012 more years\u00a0just to live slightly closer to work, rather than buy a similar home a bit farther away for less and\u00a0not have to work for 12 extra years? That\u2019s a trade-off I wouldn\u2019t make. <\/p>\n OK, fine. Maybe a 10% gross savings rate is too low for a $600,000 household income earner. Let\u2019s say you\u2019re an exceptional saver, setting aside\u00a0$180,000 a year\u00a0(30% of gross, 43% of net income). You are reading Financial Samurai, after all. <\/p>\n Even then, choosing the $3 million home over the $2 million option means working\u00a0five extra years<\/strong>\u2014assuming a 5% annual return. And if you\u2019re middle-aged, those five years are way more costly than in your 20s. Again, my answer is a hard\u00a0no!<\/p>\n If you don\u2019t like these examples because you’re focused on the absolute dollar value of the homes, try shifting your perspective. Think in percentages instead. Paying 50% more for a slightly shorter commute may not be worth it.<\/p>\n I have written in the past about how a big expensive home can derail your path to financial freedom<\/a>. However, I don’t think many people really care until it’s too late. Do the math please. <\/p>\n While some maximize work flexibility, others are paying top dollar to ensure they can keep working. Ironically, this live-to-work cycle benefits those who participate in it, as continued demand drives home prices even higher. If you buy into this mindset, the best thing you can do is encourage others to do the same<\/em><\/strong>\u2014because that will increase the odds of selling your home for a greater profit down the road.<\/p>\n But if you\u2019re still in the wealth accumulation phase or are miserable at work, take a step back and ask yourself:\u00a0Are you working to live, or living to work?\u00a0Because if you\u2019re not careful, lifestyle inflation might trap you in the latter\u2014without you even realizing it.<\/p>\n Readers, why do we choose unenjoyable work over experiencing freedom sooner?\u00a0Do people not run the numbers and realize how the pursuit of a fancy home and status keeps them trapped in a work cycle for far longer than necessary? Do you think the\u00a0live-to-work\u00a0mentality is back? How can we encourage people to stop following the herd and consider alternative lifestyles?<\/em><\/p>\n For new readers:<\/strong>\u00a0I lived to work for 13 years in investment banking. I bought the nice house in a fancy neighborhood, which only pressured me to work harder to afford my bills. Eventually, I decided to\u00a0downsize to a smaller, more affordable home\u00a0because I wanted to live more. Although I lost prestige, status, and money, I gained something far more valuable\u2014freedom.<\/em><\/p>\n Invest in real estate without the burden of a mortgage, tenants, or maintenance with\u00a0Fundrise<\/a><\/strong>. With almost $3 billion in assets under management and 350,000+ investors, Fundrise specializes in residential and industrial real estate. During times of turmoil, real estate tends to outperform.\u00a0<\/p>\n If you don\u2019t want to live to work forever, you must save aggressively and invest wisely. Real estate is my favorite asset class for building wealth because of its utility, income potential, and relative stability. The powerful combination of rental income and property appreciation makes it one of the best ways for the average person to grow wealth over time. <\/p>\n I\u2019ve personally invested $300,000 with Fundrise to generate more passive income. The investment minimum is only $10,\u00a0so it’s easy for anybody to dollar-cost average in and build exposure.\u00a0Fundrise is a long-time sponsor of FS.<\/p>\n If you want to build more wealth than 93% of Americans, order a copy of my new book,\u00a0Millionaire Milestones: Simple Steps to Seven Figures<\/a><\/strong><\/em>. With over 30 years of finance experience, I’ll help you achieve financial freedom sooner, so you can break free and do more of what you truly want!<\/p>\n Listen and subscribe to The Financial Samurai podcast on\u00a0Apple<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0or\u00a0Spotify<\/strong><\/a>. I interview experts in their respective fields and discuss some of the most interesting topics on this site. Your shares, ratings, and reviews are appreciated.<\/p>\nMy Start Of Wanting To Work To Live<\/h2>\n
Work-to-Live (FIRE) Is Getting Pushed Aside Again<\/h2>\n
Proof That Live-to-Work Is Back And Stronger Than Ever<\/h2>\n
Example #1: West Portal House, San Francisco, CA<\/h3>\n
![\"Work](\"https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/financialsamurai.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/IMG_0790.jpg\")
Why I Had My Doubts It Would Sell For So Much<\/h3>\n
Example #2: Smaller West Portal Home, San Francisco, CA<\/h3>\n
![\"Second](\"https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/financialsamurai.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/IMG_0791.jpg\")
<\/figure>\nThe Live-to-Work Cycle Will Drive Home Prices Higher<\/strong><\/h2>\n
Maybe High Income Households Struggle On Purpose<\/h2>\n
How Many More Years Will You Have to Work To Pay For A More Expensive Home?<\/h2>\n
A More Aggressive Saver Can Sacrifice Less Time<\/h3>\n
The Live-to-Work Mindset Perpetuates Itself<\/h2>\n
Let Professionals Invest In Real Estate For You<\/h2>\n
Change Your Life For The Better<\/h2>\n
![\"Millionaire](\"https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/financialsamurai.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/IMG_7171.jpg\")
<\/a>