Retire early: It's your Duty to Society!

[Nords]

I take it he stayed at work because there were no titty bars nearby?

He had a job at Clever Beaver...

 

[DayDreaming]

The article's idea about reducing the work week to something like 30 hours makes a lot of sense to me. There have been so many labor saving advances in technology, people should not need to work the 40 hour week any more. Yet in many professions, employees are expected to work much more than that. Making the same income, but working less time to get it, should be a goal of civilized society - but of course that ain't ever gonna happen!

 

[Chuckanut]

One thing that would help would be if those of us nearing retirement could work part-time for a few years before we retire. I would gladly work 1/2 time and so would others like me. For every two of us who do so a full-time job opens for another worker. But, getting the employers to agree to that is like pulling teeth from a grizzly bear. They don't like it for several reasons:

1. They don't want to restructure work to allow for this change.

2. They won't be able to get a nearly full-time worker for a part-time salary (which is often what happens in my field).

3. They feel a loss of control if the employee is not on-site doing something, anything!

I have suggested that I work only one semester a year rather than two. I would be willing to accept my benefits being pro-rated at 50%, including my employer's contribution to medical insurance. They could even stretch my pay checks out over 12 months, giving them a very nice interest free loan. No deal.

The few people who do work part-time often have to work split-shifts and/or travel from one site to another (on their own time and at their own expense) for their job. In other words, they end up putting in nearly a full day for part-time wages.

 

[WestLake]

I don't think you can feel too guilty when millions of illegal aliens take jobs away from legal residents and citizens.

 

[M Paquette]

I don't think you can feel too guilty when millions of illegal aliens take jobs away from legal residents and citizens.

I knew there was a reason I couldn't find work washing dishes, picking lettuce, or trimming vines.

Alas, there's no catfish packing plant near me, or I could go for that ten hour day of gutting fish at piecework rates. I bet they'd even let me sleep under the sluice box, so's I could save on rent.

 

[Spanky]

The article's idea about reducing the work week to something like 30 hours makes a lot of sense to me. There have been so many labor saving advances in technology, people should not need to work the 40 hour week any more. Yet in many professions, employees are expected to work much more than that. Making the same income, but working less time to get it, should be a goal of civilized society - but of course that ain't ever gonna happen!

Unfortunately, working less may delay completion of a project or introduction of a new product.

 

[grasshopper]

I am to ready give everything I have for the common good as long as everyone does too.
Kinda like, put down your gun, and I will put down mine. Not a chance. No takers.

 

[travelover]

Unfortunately, working less may delay completion of a project or introduction of a new product.

Thanks for reminding me why I couldn't wait to get outta Dodge.

 

[ER Fireball]

+1 , I had a friend that hung on to 68, didn't need the money, but claimed his wife didn't want him hanging around the house

I know of a guy who had a divorce decree that entitled his wife to a percentage of his retirement pay (but nothing while he was working.) He continued to work just out of shear stubborness. When he was around 70, she finally died, and everybody figured he would finally retire. But by then, he had so defined himself by being a complete pain in the butt at work, that he hung on until he finally stroked out one day. The guy was worth a couple million, due to amassed stocks and farm land. He died within a year from his 'retirement'.

I guess he showed her!

 

[traineeinvestor]

This is why I retired on the very first day that I qualified to do so and consequently didn't need the job. (Well, actually the third day since the first day was a Saturday - - I wanted to be sure there was no question about it). I wanted to retire, others want to work, or so I thought at the time, so it was a no-brainer.

I expect that medal, along with appropriate fanfare and ceremony, to materialize any day now.

Sorry, no medal in these difficult times. They cost too much. However, we can offer you some higher taxes and lower benefits.

As to the original article, its either a piece of poorly written satire or an arguement for policies designed to export capital, reduce investment and impair economic growth to the detriment of job creation. Like it or not, we all live in the real world and have to compete in that world - making a country less competitive is the opposite of helpful.

There are many easier and less damaging ways to stimulate the economy than simply lashing out at the businesses which actually create the jobs and generate the tax revenues everyone is demanding.

 

[MichaelB]

Sorry, no medal in these difficult times. They cost too much. However, we can offer you some higher taxes and lower benefits.

As to the original article, its either a piece of poorly written satire or an arguement for policies designed to export capital, reduce investment and impair economic growth to the detriment of job creation. Like it or not, we all live in the real world and have to compete in that world - making a country less competitive is the opposite of helpful.

There are many easier and less damaging ways to stimulate the economy than simply lashing out at the businesses which actually create the jobs and generate the tax revenues everyone is demanding.

Referring to the article linked in the OP, there have been multiple references to satire. I read it and there is no satire at all. Where do you see satire? Likewise, in what way does the author "lash out at business"?

 

[traineeinvestor]

Referring to the article linked in the OP, there have been multiple references to satire. I read it and there is no satire at all. Where do you see satire? Likewise, in what way does the author "lash out at business"?

I took this as satire:

Over the past quarter-century, one very costly way of decreasing the surplus has been the imprisonment of people, mostly dark-skinned men, for actual and invented offenses.

At least, I hope it is.

As to lashing out at businesses, this is a pretty clear example:

special taxes on the capital-intensive part of the economy

At the risk of going completely off topic, there are some much easier ways to stimulate the economy that cost relatively little.

 

[MichaelB]

There was no satire in the article. It was not "anti-business" either, although if someone tries hard enough just about any view can be found and supported or challenged.

 

[ratto]

Maybe, unfortunately a third of these folks are uninsured

Maybe, more unfortunately a third of these folks are insured.

This is why I retired on the very first day that I qualified to do so and consequently didn't need the job. (Well, actually the third day since the first day was a Saturday - - I wanted to be sure there was no question about it). I wanted to retire, others want to work, or so I thought at the time, so it was a no-brainer.

I expect that medal, along with appropriate fanfare and ceremony, to materialize any day now.

You should be nominated for both Nobel peace and economics prizes next time. Please be ready for the call from the Nobel committee.

Regardless if there is any satire in the article linked in the OP or not, taxing more on rich or not, redistributing work or not, capitalism productivity push or not, etc, the supply and demand curve still can not escape from the ultimate natural resource constrain. There is no easy and clean solution out there. Nevertheless, I still agree ER should be everyone's duty to society.

 

[Spanky]

Nevertheless, I still agree ER should be everyone's duty to society.

ER can only happen when you are financially independent by LBYM and savings and/or working for an institution that provides generous (or outrageous) pension and health benefits.

 

[ratto]

Well, if everyone is doing ER, personal income and consumption will be down, government tax revenue will be down, economy growth will slow down or even shrink, so is personal investment/pension. More people will have a mediocre or lower (relatively speaking) living standard. However, people probably will be less stressful and happier (also relatively speaking) due to less personal material needs. ER is a lofty but difficult goal; not everyone is mentally, physically and financially ready or willing to for for it due to various reasons.

 

[Finance Dave]

Wow, really surprised at some of the opinions I see here. People staying in jobs is selfish because of unemployed people who could have it? Really?

 

[ziggy29]

Well, if everyone is doing ER, personal income and consumption will be down, government tax revenue will be down, economy growth will slow down or even shrink, so is personal investment/pension.

Is that a given? Keep in mind that retirements can often create job openings that get people off the rolls of unemployment -- so they will have a job, pay taxes, start spending more, not need unemployment benefits, food stamps or Medicaid, et cetera...

Wow, really surprised at some of the opinions I see here. People staying in jobs is selfish because of unemployed people who could have it? Really

?

No, I don't believe it is. But when you hear people say "early retirement is selfish," it's something to throw back in their faces.

 

[Finance Dave]

No, I don't believe it is. But when you hear people say "early retirement is selfish," it's something to throw back in their faces.

Thanks.

I don't think either is selfish. Those people have put themselves in the position where they have choices...and should do whatever they like without being called selfish in any/either case.

 

[Midpack]

Thanks.

I don't think either is selfish. Those people have put themselves in the position where they have choices...and should do whatever they like without being called selfish in any/either case.

+1.

You do hear/read people who seem to think one is "right" and one is "wrong." If you find yourself in a position to ER and choose to do so, nothing wrong with that. And if you enjoy/want to work even after you reach FI, nothing wrong with that either.

 

[REWahoo]

You do hear/read people who seem to think one is "right" and one is "wrong." If you find yourself in a position to ER and choose to do so, nothing wrong with that. And if you enjoy/want to work even after you reach FI, nothing wrong with that either.

+1

But I wouldn't spend a lot of time on this forum agonizing over whether or not you should work "just one more year" unless you're willing to take some lumps....

 

[Finance Dave]

+1

But I wouldn't spend a lot of time on this forum agonizing over whether or not you should work "just one more year" unless you're willing to take some lumps....

I'm sad to say I made that comment about 6 months ago, and took my lumps.

 

[HFWR]

I'm sad to say I made that comment about 6 months ago, and took my lumps.

And we have long memories....

Short-term memory, however...

Look, a shiny thing...

 

[ItDontMeanAThing]

Listing events and conditions of an industrialized nation as if their reason for existence was reducing surplus labor is probably a satire. Given the author's occupation and employer it's possible he believes the events and conditions exist mainly to reduce surplus labor.