The Dangerous Allure of “Dying with Zero”
Bill Perkins gave us a rallying cry to spend now and live fully. But here is why I refuse to aim for a zero-balance life—and why you shouldn’t either.
If you are at all plugged into the personal finance community, you already know about the craze caused by Bill Perkins’ book, Die with Zero. It has become a modern rallying cry. The message is simple and seductive: spend your money now while you are young and healthy enough to enjoy it. Use wealth as a tool to maximize your life experiences rather than hoarding it until the very end.
I’ll admit, I love the core intention behind this message. It pushes back against the toxic, hyper-frugal mindset that plagues so many savers. But as someone who has spent years sitting at the bedsides of the dying as a hospice physician, I also look at this ethos and think: this is completely unrealistic. For a certainty, I will not be dying with zero. And I don’t think you should try to either. While the philosophy sounds beautiful on paper, when you look at how human psychology and actual life play out, shooting for exactly zero is a deeply flawed strategy.
I have four major problems with the Die with Zero ethos.
1. The Reality of Asymmetric Risk
When we talk about aiming for a zero balance at death, we act as if there are only two outcomes, and that they carry equal weight. Either you die with nothing—having perfectly calculated your lifespan, spent every last dollar, and lived an optimized life—or you die with too much money left over, meaning you failed to utilize your wealth.
This framework pretends these two outcomes are equivalent. They aren’t. Not even close.
The truth of the matter is that running out of money before you run out of breath is a horrendous, devastating outcome. No one wants to be eighty-five years old, facing severe health declines, and realizing they cannot afford basic comfort or care because they spent too much in their fifties.
On the other hand, the opposite outcome…dying with too much money, is really no big deal. So what if you took one less vacation? How many vacations do you actually need to feel fulfilled? So what if you didn’t buy that extra sports car? There is an asymmetric risk here. The downside of underspending is a minor loss of momentary pleasure; the downside of overspending is an end-of-life catastrophe. Shooting for zero requires falling on the wrong side of that risk profile. Who wants to make that bet?
2. The Law of Diminishing Utility
My second issue comes down to economic psychology, specifically the concept of expected utility. There is an incremental decrement in the happiness each additional dollar can buy you.
Think of it this way: if you save up and go on one luxury vacation a year, it feels fantastic. If you do it twice a year, it still feels great, but a little less magical. If you start going on luxury vacations every other week, those trips suddenly lose their meaning. They become the baseline.
Spending money is wonderful when it funds something atypical: a special moment that breaks the routine of daily life. But when you adopt an aggressive Die with Zero mindset, you often feel pressured to constantly go overboard, spending on outsized, extravagant things just to empty the account. Because of the law of diminishing utility, this forced escalation doesn’t actually lead to more happiness. Your return on investment plummets, and the luxury simply becomes the norm.
3. Trading One Financial Anxiety for Another
Over the years, I’ve watched a fascinating and troubling trend unfold. I know many people who spent a decade as part of the FIRE (Financial Independence, Retire Early) movement. They spent years stressing over every penny, driving themselves crazy trying to maximize their savings rate.
Then, they discovered Die with Zero. And instead of finding peace, they just flipped the switch on their anxiety.
Suddenly, they went from stressing about saving enough to stressing about spending enough. I have seen this ethos cause immense dismay and panic. People track their “net worth curve” downwards and feel immense guilt if they aren’t blowing through their cash fast enough.
But for some people, spending a lot of money just doesn’t feel good. It’s not aligned with who they are. Why should you feel guilty for living simply just because a book told you that you are doing retirement wrong? When an idea designed to liberate you ends up making you more anxious, it’s time to abandon the idea.
4. The Identity Trap
My biggest problem with this ethos is that it subtly shifts your identity onto what you spend money on. It places your focus entirely on things that come from the outside…the luxury trips, the big parties, the premium consumer goods.
But those things are not who you are. They are just momentary thrills bought with cash.
What is truly important at the end of life is not how much you spent, but who you became. What was your identity? What type of purpose did you pursue? What did you give back?
The best things in life truly are free, or at least very cheap. They are your relationships. They are the deep, internal work of becoming a better version of yourself. Do you want to be an author? A public speaker? A podcaster? The best pickleball player in your neighborhood? A present and loving grandparent?
None of those things require a massive net-worth drawdown. Yes, you can spend money on a coach or a few tools to help you along the way, but you don’t need to empty your bank account to achieve self-actualization. Real fulfillment comes from doing the harder, deeper work of deciding what matters to you, pursuing that life, and building a community of like-minded people around you.
A Better Way Forward
Don’t get me wrong: Die with Zero is a fantastic book because it serves as an excellent wake-up call. It reminds us that life is short, health is fleeting, and we shouldn’t hoard wealth out of irrational fear.
But taken literally, it creates an artificial, risky, and stressful game out of your finances.
You will be far better off if you stop worrying so much about optimizing your bank account to hit zero on your final day. Leave a cushion. Accept that you might die with money left over, and let that money flow to your children, your community, or charities you care about.
Worry less about how much you spend, and worry more about becoming the person you want to be. That is the only investment that never depreciates.
Did you catch this week’s episode of Earn & Invest (Click to listen)?





Hi Jordan, I came away with a different perspective after reading Bill Perkins ‘Die With Zero’. I thought he was pretty clear that die with zero wasn’t literal, and that the goal wasn’t to spend money just on yourself, but to help others while they could benefit from the financial offer. I do agree that having funds for end-of-life healthcare is very important, especially in the broken US system. That is something unpredictable for many unfortunately. Best approach is to take great care of your health! Thanks for the post.
I absolutely loved the book and recommend it widely. The biggest takeaway for me is discussion about the loss of physical capacity and interest as we age. More than spending, the takeaway for me is doing physical things now, in my 50s. Another great point is to give to those you love earlier instead of later. I never read it as Bill literally wants me to die with zero. Thanks for another great post!