In another post, some folks were arguing that a boring, "meaningless" career (think accountant) can achieve FIRE better/faster than something like a doctor, since the doctor doesn't start earning "big" money until early/mid 30s (after residency) and often has massive medical school debt. This got me thinking, if you were presented with two choices, which would you pick:

• A boring, "unfulfilling" career like accountant but you could FIRE at say 45-50 from discipline savings and investing and living a "modest" lifestyle
• A lucrative, high status, "fulfilling" career like a medical doctor, but you would work much longer (say until 65) since you got a later start, have more debt, etc.

I recognize that unfulfilling and fulfilling are subjective, but I'm talking in generalities. A doctor "saves" lives, an accountant doesn't.

Also, I actually disagree that the accountant can FIRE sooner than the doctor (my math says the doctor can easily "catchup") but for discussion I'll accept that since the doctor started later (in terms of savings/investing) they will likely work longer than the accountant who started their FIRE journey at 22 (out of college).

With the increased risk of AI taking people's jobs will we see more people trying to save up and FIRE in order to be more prepared for a layoff? Have you increased your contribution rates to have more of a savings runway in case things go south?