You have enough to live on, although you better be clear on what you really want to do if not working for money.
You are correct that the 4% rule really only provides you with a conservative estimate how much you need.
Meaning it should be more than you need if its properly managed.
In terms of the mechanics of living off your money, there are essentially four levers you can pull: (1) portfolio construction; (2) employing variable withdrawal strategies; (3) intentionally underspending the portfolio and (4) side income.
Believe it or not, the most prevalent strategy of good savers and just about every financial guru you ever heard of is actually the most disappointing and least compelling — namely (3) — i.e., “don’t spend money and continue to accumulate”, with or without side income.
(Which implies that your ultimate goal in life is to die with the most money possible.
Yes, its true – that is in fact what people are doing.) Side income is likely at your age, however.
So the question is really, how do you want to approach this? You could resolve to simply “not spend money” and be done as many have done before you.
For guidance, the recent book by Daniel Crosby (Soul of Money), along with many other sources such as Bronnie Ware’s Five Regrets of the Dying, suggests that money spent on the following yields the highest degree of life satisfaction:
(1) Improving or expanding relationships; (2) Experiences (including but not limited to travel); (3) Work Avoidance — i.e., paying people to take care of stuff you don’t want to do; and (4) Gifting to charities or otherwise.
What does not make the list is “spending more time working for money in a job I don’t really care for” and “not spending money so as to have the most money at death.”
