Golden Handcuffs - a tougher form of the "one more year" syndrome.

[Shawn]

Our circumstances are quite similar. In fact, you came to the same conclusion when you responded to my introduction post 1 1/2 years ago. Although I'm not a professor, I've been in a research-oriented field since finishing my Ph.D. in the early 90's. I write proposals, papers, and have my own research projects. I work with students and post-docs at my organization and elsewhere. Effectively, I have tenure. My current position is stable, as it comes with "base funding."

On the other hand, while the technical work is interesting, I really do not like my job. I may not have the politics of academia, but I do have the immense bureaucracy of government. What ridiculous policy are they going to implement next that will make my work environment even more miserable? How many more times will they reorganize in the next two years? Every day, from 8:00 to 5:00, it's hassle after hassle. The only time real work gets done is during the evenings, weekends, and holidays (and when I'm not posting here ).

On the financial side, I'm fine. I'll be eligible for early retirement next year when I turn 50. I'll have a pension (with a ~65% COLA) and lifetime medical benefits (its possible we are part of the same retirement system). My savings and other assets are about $2M. If I retire at 50, my pension will be about $40K. If I retire at 53, my pension will be $70K. If I wait until 60, it will be $150K. As you point out, that's a huge difference. It's the steep part of the curve (although admittedly smaller when taxes are factored into the equation). Together with my savings, my before tax income will be approximately $100K/yr if I retire next year and perhaps $250K/yr if I wait until 60 (todays dollars). And I'm a frugal person. Not including income taxes or my mortgage (which I may pay off when I retire), my annual expenses are only about $20K.

So should I retire next year at 50? While I'd be quite comfortable, I'd be even more comfortable if I wait until 53, or 55, or 60. How much is enough? Although it's alien to my current lifestyle, maybe I'll want that $2M house. Maybe I'll want the freedom to go back to school just for fun. Maybe I'll need to financially support my parents. I don't know what the future will bring.

And when I retire, there will be no turning back. My career has been a series of interrelated accomplishments, one built upon another. I have a big corner office and a modicum of clout. All this will evaporate the day I leave. I will not be able to return, or at least return to my present position and status. They will be gone. It will be an absolute decision.

There are many things I'd like to do in my life. Get back into peak athletic and competitive shape. Running. Bicycling. Trail running. Orienteering. Adventure Racing. Backpack the Pacific Crest Trail (Mexico to Canada). Summit Everest. While people can do these things well into their 70's and even 80's, younger is better. 50 is far from old. 60 is far from old, too, but it's closer than 50.

My job gives me money and a certain amount of esteem. It's the reward for decades of toil. And that reward gets substantially larger with every passing year. Should I give it all up and retire at 50? 51? 53? Wait until 60? It's not a straightforward decision.

Right now, though, my heart starts pounding when I see the Sierra's on a clear day. That's the type of place I want to be. So should I go for the instant gratification when I turn 50 next year, or should I continue to invest my career skills so I'll have more down the road?

 

[MasterBlaster]

Ha:

You mentioned Beverly Hills, I just happen to know someone who was able to buy a small place in Beverly Hills. Just how happy do you suppose they were having all those upper income types rubbing their affluent lifestyle in their face.

When you get to Beverly Hills to be really happy you need one of those monstrous mansions with a few acres of landscaped lawn out front. You also need (at least) a 10 car garage filled with exotic and luxurious cars, domestic servants, and a membership at "the club". Then you would be happy .... But what if at the club, you didn't have your own private jet, like some of the others, waiting to wisk you to your French Rivierra Chateau. Only if you had that you would be happy...

Again, you just can't win this game. You will never have enough.

Yet compare what you have to most of the world. They think that you live "La Dolche Vita"

 

[FreeAtLast]

Have you considered Part Time? This might give you the extra time that you need and still allow you to continue on as a professor a bit longer possibly increasing your retirement benefits. I have been working Part Time for about the past 3 years and I am now down to just about 4 mornings a week. I remain for the health benefits and to contribute to my 401k. I rather sit in the office 4 mornings a week and be able to spend a bit extra at this point in my life. I don't really look forward to going to work, however, once I get there I do not mind it.

 

[haha]

Ha:

You mentioned Beverly Hills, I just happen to know someone who was able to buy a small place in Beverly Hills. Just how happy do you suppose they were having all those upper income types rubbing their affluent lifestyle in their face.

When you get to Beverly Hills to be really happy you need one of those monstrous mansions with a few acres of landscaped lawn out front. You also need (at least) a 10 car garage filled with exotic and luxurious cars, domestic servants, and a membership at "the club". Then you would be happy .... But what if at the club, you didn't have your own private jet, like some of the others, waiting to wisk you to your French Rivierra Chateau. Only if you had that you would be happy...

Again, you just can't win this game. You will never have enough.

Yet compare what you have to most of the world. They think that you live "La Dolche Vita"

This may be how it would affect you, and how it affected your friends. But people are all different. I live in a small apartment on a street where the houses range from $1 million to $9 million. It has only good effects on me. Those people make everything look like a park, and they are mostly attractive polite people. They have nice lawn parties with string quartets which I can enjoy as I walk up the street. Maybe it is because I am no longer young, but I can fully enjoy collateral benefits.

I only mentioned Beverly Hills and the Palisades because many people like them. I would much prefer Redondo or Hermosa or Manhattan Beach. If one can't be happy on the LA coastal strip his happiness switch has different settings from mine.

I am aware that I have it fine; I am just saying that arbitrary money cutoffs will be different for different people. Some take $500,000 and head for Indonesia or the Philippines. Some want only a bungalow near a WalMart. These are all good; just not necessarily optimal for someone who is not exactly unhappy in a good job. 4% of $2mm is not trash, but it is not exactly a high life in a world where a couple consisting of two teachers or two cops may be pulling down from 150% to 200% of that

Some jobs are either exhaustingly demanding as to time and effort, or ridden with abusive and demeaning daily humiliations. But some are not. I clearly don't care what people choose to do. But I do know what I would do if I could go back, or what I would counsel a loved son or daughter to do. Also there is some value in a different idea, just because it is different. We know the usual ER board recommendation, from back in the JG days to now- "Just do it, you ninny!" "Come on in, the water's fine!" Read these things, then come back and read a while when the stock market has had a little slip- not a major smash, just a little slip. You'll see plenty different ideas then.

The other thing, which I believe applies to many single men is that unless you go around trumpeting your high net worth, once you quit your prestigious job you are just another schmuck in the eyes of a random woman who does not yet know how terribly special you are. What you used to do, however impressive you feel that it was, is definitely ancient history 3 months after your retirement. If you don't believe me, just go to a cocktail party and tell people how important you used to be. Essentially pathetic.

And if you have eyes for young pretty women, you had better have more than 4% of $2 million to spend, since your cash flow and net worth are not very impressive nor very cool to talk about. What registers with women is what you spend on them. I know that this doesn't apply to many wonderful and sincere women, but some single men just like feminine companionship and entertainment without a lot of folderol.


Anyway, feel entirely free to ignore my ideas, most people do and I don't consider myself an expert about anything. Part of the joy of this board is that if one can shun vulgar, profane or openly hostile statements he is fairly free to express whatever he believes or even what he doesn't believe.

Ha

 

[Texarkandy]

I'm not an academic - but come April 9, 2009 I will have by virtue of 25 years of toil in my very secure job earned the right to show up every day with "my walking papers in my back pocket." ER ready if/when I choose.

(Every year I stick around after 25 only increases the DB pension portion of my retirement package by $1k a year anyway)

But I'm going to stick around a little while after April 9 & have some fun with it all for a change - I think it might feel different going to work in that situation & I'm looking forward to the experience - I'd especially like to hear the opinions of any here on the forum that have been in that situation

Like an ER eligible colleague of mine tells me "I'm just 3 bad days in a row away from retiring" (He's been eligible for about 2 years now)

 

[chris2008]

Your current burn out feeling seems to be the kind that comes from having achieved an important goal. Been there....

Have you already done something to reward you for having achieved your goal?
When I forget this, it seems that I do not believe myself that the goal was worthwile or that I have really achieved it.

Your work life balance seems to have got lost in the Death March. Do something to find new balance now.
Before making drastic and irreversible decisions I would invest some time in exploring a variety of options. Like mentioned above, taking summers off to travel, lecture in fun environment or with interesting people, find out which parts of your job you really enjoy and how to do more of this - while letting the nasty stuff drop off.
Maybe even with professional help like coaching.
You can do that and you have every right in the world to tailor your job exactly as you like it to be. If then after reasonable time the fun does not come back, you may still retire. But take care, you may then still have the same burn out feeling, but now about ER....

Recently I have read "Last lecture" by Randy Pausch on how to make your childhood dreams come true. Which childhood dreams did you have? Now its time...

 

[militaryman]

Prof. This is a simple lesson ---

Time is Money

Which do you want more?

Up until now you have chosen Money. As long as you have Time you can trade it for Money. Once you feel you have "enough" Money, Time may or may not be available for procurement.

I cannot afford to waste my time making money. ~Louis Agassiz

Too much money is as demoralizing as too little, and there's no such thing as exactly enough. ~Mignon McLaughlin, The Second Neurotic's Notebook, 1966

 

[haha]

I cannot afford to waste my time making money. ~Louis Agassiz

Odd choice of quotes! Like the OP prof, Agassiz had important work to do, and in spite of poor health he continued making expeditions and teaching almost until his death in his late 60s in the year 1873. Joe Dominguez he was not.

He was an astoundingly productive scientist and naturalist. His career shows that what he meant by the quote you gave, if he in fact ever said it, is that his work was very important per se, and not only as a means of getting money. Of course, it helped that like many scientists of the day he was born into a well to do family.

Ha

 

[militaryman]

Odd choice of quotes! Like the OP prof, Agassiz had important work to do, and in spite of poor health he continued making expeditions and teaching almost until his death in his late 60s in the year 1873. Joe Dominguez he was not.

He was an astoundingly productive scientist and naturalist. His career shows that what he meant by the quote you gave, if he in fact ever said it, is that his work was very important per se, and not only as a means of getting money. Of course, it helped that like many scientists of the day he was born into a well to do family.

Ha

I cannot afford to waste my time making money. ~Louis Agassiz

I think Agassiz had exactly the idea I wished to convey in that quote..... The OP's post is asking about staying or going as reference to how much $$ he will have to sustain himself. He has already demonstrated that in all probabilty he has "enough" to sustain himself now and could take the earliest retirement date.

If the OP is passionate about what he is currently doing, excited about his own "expeditions, teaching and production" and/or that is where his heart is then I would think his initial post would have asked very different questions. As is he said "I’ve finally reached a point where I am substantially free of the need to fight. There are rather few hurdles left in my career that I care to pursue."

The OP has said he has enough $$, therefore why keep trading his remaining time for more of which he has enough of versus following what he IS passionate about, whatever that may be?

 

[haha]

I cannot afford to waste my time making money. ~Louis Agassiz

I think Agassiz had exactly the idea I wished to convey in that quote..... The OP's post is asking about staying or going as reference to how much $$ he will have to sustain himself. He has already demonstrated that in all probabilty he has "enough" to sustain himself now and could take the earliest retirement date.

If the OP is passionate about what he is currently doing, excited about his own "expeditions, teaching and production" and/or that is where his heart is then I would think his initial post would have asked very different questions. As is he said "I’ve finally reached a point where I am substantially free of the need to fight. There are rather few hurdles left in my career that I care to pursue."

The OP has said he has enough $$, therefore why keep trading his remaining time for more of which he has enough of versus following what he IS passionate about, whatever that may be?

I believe that the quote was confusing when applied to Agassiz in the context of this discussion, without giving more historical background. But you have just done that, and I understand what you are getting at.

True also that not many peoplle retired or working are exactly passionate about much of anything. Read the "What Did You Do Today? thread for examples.

Oh wait, there is a man named Rob Bennet...

Ha

 

[Shawn]

Time is Money

Which do you want more?

I think it's much more complicated than this. Would the average early retiree spend a month working at McDonalds for minimum wage? Probably not. Unless they really needed the money or enjoyed the social interactions, the small financial benefit wouldn't be worth one month of a persons life. But what if the pay was a million dollars? In that case, few people would say no. Even if they had "enough," it would be difficult to pass up such an opportunity for an easy million. A month of time wouldn't seem like very much.

Money can provide additional freedom and independence. Even if one has enough for a modest but comfortable lifestyle, additional income can mean greater opportunity and control. It can mean less worry. I spend only 20-25% of my after-tax income (the rest going to savings), but I have a sense of contentment knowing that the flexibility is there to spend more should the need arise.

It's not the glamorous lifestyle that I seek, but rather the peace of mind. In that sense, there is never enough. So while I could retire today with a lifestyle substantially greater than my current standard of living, I'm in the steep earning stage of my career. I can earn a lot by working only a little, at least in relative terms. Do I want to give up this opportunity to spend a little more time to get a lot more money. It's a once in a lifetime opportunity, but granted, the cost will be years lost.

 

[militaryman]

I think it's much more complicated than this. Would the average early retiree spend a month working at McDonalds for minimum wage? Probably not. Unless they really needed the money or enjoyed the social interactions, the small financial benefit wouldn't be worth one month of a persons life. But what if the pay was a million dollars? In that case, few people would say no. Even if they had "enough," it would be difficult to pass up such an opportunity for an easy million. A month of time wouldn't seem like very much.

Money can provide additional freedom and independence. Even if one has enough for a modest but comfortable lifestyle, additional income can mean greater opportunity and control. It can mean less worry. I spend only 20-25% of my after-tax income (the rest going to savings), but I have a sense of contentment knowing that the flexibility is there to spend more should the need arise.

It's not the glamorous lifestyle that I seek, but rather the peace of mind. In that sense, there is never enough. So while I could retire today with a lifestyle substantially greater than my current standard of living, I'm in the steep earning stage of my career. I can earn a lot by working only a little, at least in relative terms. Do I want to give up this opportunity to spend a little more time to get a lot more money. It's a once in a lifetime opportunity, but granted, the cost will be years lost.

It is an interesting equation.... Time is Money .....

Of course if an opportunity arose where you could give up a bit of time for ALOT of money than it would make sense to give into that choice, if nothing else, to pass on a bigger inheritance or provide for some luxuries that otherwise were never dreamed of.

However, the OP was not asking about this. He clearly explained his situation at hand estimating that he currently had "enough" but ponders whether staying to get "more" (not a goldmine) was worth it.

I think the "steep earning stage" is at least proportional to the decline in "going power" that one has as they get older. (leaving out health declines all together) I've heard it questioned before rhetorically "why can't a person get some retirement years at the front end when they are young enough to enjoy the time?"

To be able to have sufficient resources AND good energy and health is what ER is all about to me. I feel like at 65-70 I am really going to be gearing down and heading for the rocking chair (my personal case) so if I could get out at 50 instead of 60 and triple my "active" years I'd be gone.

 

[haha]

It is an interesting equation.... Time is Money .....

Of course if an opportunity arose where you could give up a bit of time for ALOT of money than it would make sense to give into that choice, if nothing else, to pass on a bigger inheritance or provide for some luxuries that otherwise were never dreamed of.

However, the OP was not asking about this. He clearly explained his situation at hand estimating that he currently had "enough" but ponders whether staying to get "more" (not a goldmine) was worth it.

I think the "steep earning stage" is at least proportional to the decline in "going power" that one has as they get older. (leaving out health declines all together) I've heard it questioned before rhetorically "why can't a person get some retirement years at the front end when they are young enough to enjoy the time?"

To be able to have sufficient resources AND good energy and health is what ER is all about to me. I feel like at 65-70 I am really going to be gearing down and heading for the rocking chair (my personal case) so if I could get out at 50 instead of 60 and triple my "active" years I'd be gone.

So, do you by any chance have a pension?

 

[militaryman]

So, do you by any chance have a pension?

I got a couple coming.... Retired from the Air National Guard in 2006 (20+ years) so that will start at 60 and currently have 22 years in as a Federal Employee (age 40) so I gotta go 16 more years before I am eligible for my FERS pension. I will be hard pressed to stay if they offer me an early out after 50 though. (wishful thinking )

 

[rs0460a]

It is an interesting equation.... Time is Money .....

One of my favorite ER "subjects" (and why I ER'ed!)

 

[Shawn]

It is an interesting equation.... Time is Money
[...]
However, the OP was not asking about this. He clearly explained his situation at hand estimating that he currently had "enough" but ponders whether staying to get "more" (not a goldmine) was worth it.

The OP said that his pension would quadruple if he retired at 60 instead of 50. That may not be a goldmine, but it's still a big difference.

As for me, my pension plus savings will give me about $100K/yr if I retire in a year at 50 (when I'm eligible for lifetime medical), $140K/yr if I retire at 53, and $250K/yr if I retire at 60. These estimates are inflation adjusted but do not factor in taxes. My current annual expenses, not counting mortgage and taxes, are about $20K. I'm well into my comfort zone, but the prospect of additional money is tempting. If I work 3 years past 50 I'll increase my before tax income by 40%. Is it worth it? Tough call. My current plan is to retire at 50, but it still has me thinking.

 

[chinaco]

One of my favorite ER "subjects" (and why I ER'ed!)

Good one! I agree... in the end Time > $.

For many of us, we hope to figure out how to maximize the equation (without ending our lives early)... (Time - $ = 0) Die broke. OR better yet (Time -$ = - mucho $) Die owing... the last fling on the credit card .


Ohhh.. come on... its a joke!

 

[Grep]

Shawn,

It's interesting to hear back from you. I see you survived those few years to ~50 (there were doubts back when I posted to your old thread), as I have.

So now we both have to decide where to go from here, and I sense that you are still in a similar boat as I. You don't sound quite as burned out at the moment as you did back then. Perhaps that's because you are now at that point where you could retire vs. quit?

I'm hoping that will make a psychological difference. I may not be "three bad days from retiring" but I certainly could be three bad quarters from retirement.

I've done many calculations, wondering how that quadrupling of my pension would impact my security and lifestyle. On a year by year incremental basis (work one extra year for $X extra for life after taxes), it's not very significant. If I had to make that single trade-off, I would not work that extra year. However, in total it is a fair amount that is hard to give up. Even so, I'm not sure I would continue unless I felt the social and other gratifications of my job were worth-while in their own right. In my case, it can be if the political system spares me and I can manage the right adjustments in attitudes and habits.

 

[Meadbh]

Grep, as an academic myself (medicine, nontenured, no pension) I can relate to your dilemma. Despite your current feeling of burnout there are many perks in academia, notably, a lot of control over your time, "academic freedom", intellectual stimulation, the satisfaction of discovering new knowledge, mentoring young minds, and the opportunity to speak at conferences, often at other people's expense. Sure, there's politics, but there's politics in every workplace.

How about a sabbatical? Take six months off to study turtles in the Galapagos, chaos theory in Hawaii, or something else that interests you and can support an application. It'll do you the world of good.

When you come back, get into some collaborative research. It's a lot more fun that way!

Personally I think you have it made.

 

[Shawn]

[...]

So now we both have to decide where to go from here, and I sense that you are still in a similar boat as I. You don't sound quite as burned out at the moment as you did back then. Perhaps that's because you are now at that point where you could retire vs. quit?

[...]

I've done many calculations, wondering how that quadrupling of my pension would impact my security and lifestyle. On a year by year incremental basis (work one extra year for $X extra for life after taxes), it's not very significant. If I had to make that single trade-off, I would not work that extra year. However, in total it is a fair amount that is hard to give up. Even so, I'm not sure I would continue unless I felt the social and other gratifications of my job were worth-while in their own right. In my case, it can be if the political system spares me and I can manage the right adjustments in attitudes and habits.

Over the last several months, I've started to see the light at the end of the tunnel. I could be wrong, but I think this has reduced my level of stress. While I won't be 50 until November of 2009 (when I can officially retire), I can quit 4 months prior to this date (August 2009) and still be eligible for lifetime medical benefits. The main drawback is that I'd have to purchase COBRA coverage for those 4 months. More so, I could stop working ~3 months earlier (May 2009) and take accumulated vacation. Also, I have enough available sick leave that I probably could take an extended medical leave of absence, if needed, and stop working today. I think these "milestones" have had a positive effect, relatively speaking. I still hate most aspects of my job, but at least I don't feel as trapped. I'm guessing that in a year or so from now, when I can retire without question, it may feel even better. It may be that I will decide to take it one year at a time. So yes, being (almost) able to retire vs quit is a positive feeling.

I've done the same calculations with respect to the incremental return for each additional year of work. There are multiple ways to look at it but for me it turns out to be about $7K/yr of additional after-tax income for each additional year at my job (at least in my early 50's). This is about 10% a year. So while a single year of additional work isn't immensely beneficial, it certainly starts to add up if I work 3 or more years.

Another issue is that I'd like to be able to save beyond my pension. That is, I'd like my pension to pay my living expenses, with some left over funds for savings/investing. My pension will be $40K/yr if I retire at 50 and $70K/yr if I retire at 53. Since my living expenses are $20K/yr without mortgage and $30K/yr with mortgage, even one additional year of work can add a good deal of "extra" money. This is especially true considering taxes and the partial COLA aspects of my pension.

So it's a lot to think about. And once the decision is made, there is no turning back. I'm not certain if I'll feel a loss because "I'm giving it all up." Regardless, my intention today is to retire in a year at 50. I'll have to wait until next year to see if my feelings change.

 

[Darryl]

Ditto on Ha's comments I think aaron and Milton were there to. Just take a breath and get your mind right.
I was b#t$hing about my job a few weeks ago to a friend I hadn't seen in a year and as I layed it all out he said "it sounds like a dream job to me".
He is talking career change and going back to school. Everybody goes through this stuff.
I have been increasing my charitable giving the last few years and plan a big increase again for 2009 deducted right from my paycheck if I leave I wouldn't be able to afford to continue and it would stop on it's own but while I work it feels good knowing I'm kicking something in. I'm not FI yet and have other tartgets I need to work on too but I can hit them all on a lot lower income and probably lower BS quotient but find that something for you is it the weekly massage, the summers off?? You don't need to quit for god's sake your tenured.

 

[Max Power]

I haven't read all the previous posts, so I'm not sure if I'm echoing other sentiments or not. However I did see that someone mentioned the fact that you don't want to die at your post. I'll agree with that 100 percent. I'm currently 60 years old and plan to retire at age 62. My wife is battling Multiple Sclerosis. Right now I'm at work 10 hours per day, 5 days per week, and I'm looking forward to spending much of that time with her instead of my work colleagues. Yes, it will mean cutting a few corners and making do with a bit less than if I waited until age 66 to retire. But I'll be forever kicking myself if something were to happen to her while I was working "just a few more years" instead of spending that time with her. There is nothing like a big reality check like this to open your eyes. One thing you have to do is be honest with yourself. Are you a work-a-holic? Does that extra money mean more to you than the time spent at a reduced income? The cemetary is full of people who might have said, "I wished I had done it all differently."

Only you can answer questions like this, but to use a worn out phrase, "money isn't everything."

 

[DangerMouse]

Interesting position to be in.

One question I do ask, is whilst you seem to have your ducks in a row on the financial side, what would you intend to do if you do retire at 50? Do you have a plan for that, as for many that can be the downfall.

 

[Milton]

For example, they do need to hear the facts about academia vs. other options from me. Very few of my colleagues can offer a balanced view since they have never lived the alternatives, and most of them are too busy defending their own choices.

Fair enough.

Finally, the over-all impression I have from your commentary is that few things really matter greatly in working life, that nothing in working life matters in comparison to personal freedom, and that more personal freedom is always better.

Exactly! Well put.

 

[shotgunner]

think about this

A very distinguished professor at the Univ. of NH, where I now work P/T, passed this month at age 53 after being diagnosised with liver cancer in April of this year. It is not likely that this will happen to you, but what if it did. Which side of the equation do you want to gamble with the most, your money or your time?