Money isn't the same thing as a plan. If anything, it's the exact opposite: You have the freedom to do many things, so there's more uncertainty than someone with less money.

Such differences can be called "academic", useful if you don't have a plan, not really useful for people without money. If you have money, you don't really need a plan, so whole discussion is then moot.

That comes across to me as being thoughtlessly dismissive.

Money helps, but there are a huge number of other factors that are just as important. That is demonstrated by the number of answers here by people that quit without having money, and the variety of stories and outcomes.

I quit my job a few years back, and I believe I have the financial runway to do so, but I am still unsure if it was a good idea.

Not working is weird because most of my peer group works. I have found there are social costs to not working. I find that not working has other significant issues, even though I have had plenty of chance to learn mitigations (I have had multiple job sabbaticals in my life e.g. travelling when I had little money).

I would be happy to work again, if it were a job that invigorated me rather than slowly killing me. Our time is our most valuable asset, and every second our remaining balance diminishes.

There is a certain amount of mystical or wishful thinking while working, about quitting work and relaxing or refocusing for a while. I have found reality turns out to be more mundane.

It is still my ongoing choice not to work, but the consequences of that decision are not quite so clear cut.

Tell it to yahoo.

Money is obviously a great help, and saving money aside is a great hedge against future risks (so you can call it a plan).

I think that the OP had no “career” plan in mind. You can burn through all the money in the world if you are not careful.

But again, having money helps immensely whether you have a plan or not. If possible do put some aside for future emergencies or crises.

Also, only 10 years of salary means you'll eventually have to start working again... so no plan means that you don't know what you'll do after 10 years

The runway length is dependent on their expenses. If they earned 100k and spent 50k, it would last 20 years assuming no investment returns. If they spend around 4% of their 10 years salary annually, they're very likely to be fine for 30+ years as long as it's invested reasonably.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity_study

No necessarily. It depends on a person's yearly expenses. If, for example, she was able to save 10 years salery in 20 years, it would mean that she consumes only 5 % of the total savings per year. This sounds quite sustainable, because you need only to achieve a 5 % return on investment (after inflation) on the savings to live just from these returns not touching the savings at all.

Left out my wife is still working and its enough for 70% of living expenses.

Now you follow The Way of the House Husband

If the money is sensibly invested an adjustment in lifestyle might allow you to live on it a considerable time, or even indefinitely.

That much money means you don't need a plan.

Money is worse than a plan, because until you run out of money you do not need a plan.