Should I have Quit? Is it too late for a sanity check?

[MichaelB]

Don't let this post keep anyone from providing other insights. I am very open minded and appreciate everyones time and input. I'll send out resumes tomorrow if convinced that it is appropriate.

What would you gain by working a few more years? If you are comfortable with your finances, ready to use all your newly found free time in other ways, and your spouse is committed to the same objectives, what else matters?

 

[Fermion]

+1, my portfolio assets are quite a bit greater than OPs, fully paid for house (~$500K), mega corp subsidized healthcare, max ss for me, DW has small pension at 65. Right now I'm 63 and DW is 58 (both retiring in next several months) That said, as a point of reference, I'm still nervous about the future, as I don't want to end up penny pinching.

my god, what do you people do? bath in dom perignon?

paid house, paid healthcare, max ss, pension, more than 2 mil in assets....worried about pennies

you could put your whole portfolio in a TIPS ladder and take a cruise every month and never run out of money with those assets and income sources.

 

[eytonxav]

my god, what do you people do? bath in don perignon?

paid house, paid healthcare, max ss, pension, more than 2 mil in assets....worried about pennies

you could put your whole portfolio in a TIPS ladder and take a cruise every month and never run out of money with those assets and income sources.

Far from that, but living reasonably well for another 30+ years, and leaving a legacy for the kids, in world we have today vs what I see in the rear view mirror, is not a slam dunk certainty. Sure I'm conservative, and quite far from some of the risk takers on this site.

 

[gauss]

ICNTR,

Several posters have been concerned about unknown events in the future.

You say you don't want to plan on needing SS and it has been left out of the discussion, but have you analyzed the value you and your wife have accrued under current law?

I am in my upper 40s and DW and I have both been working MegaCorp jobs for between 20 and 25 years. At this point, our accrued SS is worth almost $1M each (this assumes that we delay taking payments until age 70 and live to 102).

Even if I discount this by a 1/3 to account for any "reforms", that is still over $1.2M combined.

If your are in a similar situation then mine, this could make a significant difference in the survivability of your portfolio due to uncertainty.

-gauss

 

[FUEGO]

How could they post about it if they are dead?

Survivorship bias is a bitch!

 

[Fermion]

Far from that, but living reasonably well for another 30+ years, and leaving a legacy for the kids, in world we have today vs what I see in the rear view mirror, is not a slam dunk certainty. Sure I'm conservative, and quite far from some of the risk takers on this site.

Ah, ok, you have kids. We don't, but if I did, my attitude would be "here is a paid education, now go make your own money, I am spending mine"

 

[FUEGO]

I understand the unknowns about Healthcare, Politics, US Deficit/Economy, and my 58 year retirement projection. All legitimate concerns. However, I came to realization that these were out of my control and they were likely to not become any more certain within the foreseeable future. There will simply always be some unknown or "what if" that will be hanging out there. I suspect none of us would ever retire if we waited for certainty. I guess I was just comfortable with the "worst case scenario" of the fact that maybe I will someday have to go back to w*rk! I am ok with that because the other side of the coin is that nobody is guaranteed tomorrow. We only have today and I feel like I've spent enough todays working for someone else. I am now ready to spend whatever time I have left learning what else this world has to offer.

You probably have a 5-10% chance that you will be dead or the world will have gone to $hit in the next 20 years regardless of how much money you have. Sure, you could keep working and have more money, but would that do anything to prevent you dying or the world going to $hit? No. There is always that 5-10% chance that life will not turn out optimally regardless of the amount of money you have.

I think you have summarized the risks and identified the worst case scenario in the paragraph I quoted. I have come to the same realization. Some things I just can't control. But I can always hustle for some cash at a job or in self employment in business for myself. You may never get your old job back or your old salary, maybe not even a job in your former field or a job you like. But you can always go back to working. In contrast, in 20 years you can't rewind and "unwork" to previous 20 years to get back time to spend with your wife, or pursue hobbies you have postponed, or travel, or sit back and contemplate things.

And if you find yourself worrying too much in a few years, or feeling constrained financially, pick up some work and make some more money! You obviously have enough valuable skills to make some serious cash the last ~20 years of your life, plus the valuable skills of not spending it all and instead investing it in a profitable manner, plus the added value of a wife who doesn't spend it all and can earn money as well.

You have identified the worst case scenario and it isn't that bad. Certainly having to go back to work in the future isn't any worse than continuing to work now and doing that year after year for "just one more year".

 

[FIREd]

Over the last couple of weeks, several very early retirees on this board have expressed regrets over their decision to quit the rat race in their 30s or 40s.

This is quite alarming for me (retired at 36) so it may be wise to question your decision.

 

[BigE]

I for one appreciate the healthy dialogue to include personal experience and anecdotes. My significant other has previously inquired as to the bias this site (which I reference frequently) might have toward "damn the torpedoes" early retirement is all good all the time for everyone, and this discussion has been very enlightening on the pros and cons of jumping ship in the early 40's, no kids category. I would have to agree with many other posters that the longevity risks really come into play here. While it is true that the original poster could be struck down by satellite debris or have a heart attack tomorrow, these risks are low. Most working persons in their 40s are in a job that is not easily replaceable. I'm not kidding myself, once I leave, there's a slim chance I could ever get anywhere near the income level I am at now. Thanks again for a good topic.

 

[FUEGO]

A 42 year old male has an 87% chance* of living till age 62 or older. Or in other words a 13% chance of dying before age 62 (ie within 20 years from now). Pretty steep failure rate.

13% chance of being dead within 20 years or 2-3% chance of having a portfolio shortfall if we see worse market conditions than we have ever seen in the last 100+ years? If you are dead, it means you are dead. Portfolio failure means you have to either spend less or get a job.


*for a male, the annual mortality rate is 0.30% at age 43, increasing to 1.33% annually at age 62. Cumulative probability of not dying for 20 years = 87%. Don't smoke and maintain a healthy weight, diet, and exercise and bump that % up a few points. Keep commuting to work by car and bump it right back down a percent or two.

 

[Fermion]

Most working persons in their 40s are in a job that is not easily replaceable. I'm not kidding myself, once I leave, there's a slim chance I could ever get anywhere near the income level I am at now. Thanks again for a good topic.

If someone could give me a bond that guaranteed I could have enjoyable, energetic, healthy years from age 60 to 80, I would have no problem working until 59.

 

[Fermion]

If you are dead, it means you are dead. Portfolio failure means you have to either spend less or get a job.

Best point of the thread!

If you are dead, you are going to have a really hard time enjoying life.

If you are alive and run out of money, there are options.

 

[truenorth418]

Can we get a few responses from people who had 2 mil at age 42, didn't retire, and died at age 50 of heart disease? Would like their input as to if one should always make hay while the sun shines...

+1

 

[haha]

What would you gain by working a few more years? If you are comfortable with your finances, ready to use all your newly found free time in other ways, and your spouse is committed to the same objectives, what else matters?

Subsequent reality, perhaps? Events turn on realities, not perceptions thereof.

Ha

 

[haha]

A 42 year old male has an 87% chance* of living till age 62 or older. Or in other words a 13% chance of dying before age 62 (ie within 20 years from now). Pretty steep failure rate.

But this really has nothing to do with it. Retiring will not extend life, or likely, cut it short. If you die, you die. Is your current way of going about living so bad that it is not considered life? Is emptying septic hoses while touring around the country a totally different realm of existence from going to the office, having colleagues, having lunch with work friends?

Judging from my own life, I was burned out. But I believe changes within the world of work might have worked as well or better than quitting- and I have had a pretty successful retirement of~25 years. It certainly would have been financially better and with greater scope for changing course.

My idea is do whatever you will, whoever you are, however much money you have and whatever your responsibilities are. That is what people will almost always do.

But the board is biased. How often has someone said, "this is an early retirement board after all". To me, this is a warning- don't go to a surgeon if you want advice to wait, and don't go to an early retirement board if you want advice regarding the desirability of retiring early. Most of us have crossed that bridge, and time has burned it behind us. Commonly, divorced people recommend divorce, people with kids recommend having kids, religious people recommend church-I think we all know about this. I just had the funny experience of googling "León, Nicaragua". A piece by Catherine or Kathleen Peddicord popped up. She definitely recommended retiring to León. Cheap, very safe, blah, blah. The very next article was from an Australian consular travel advisory "Exercise a High Degree of Caution".

Now let me see, who is likely to be more biased, a woman who works for a newsletter with many RE affiliates in lots of third world places, or an agency of the Australian government?

Ha

 

[cardude]

When I shut down my new car dealership in 2008 I was hopelessly burned out and mad at the world, and from a pure financial perspective I shouldn't have closed it. I should have hung on, laid off most of my employees, and waited out the storm. But like I said, I was burnt and I just couldn't make myself do it. I made more of an emotional decision to close it rather than a calm, rational financial decision. And that's probably why after two years of "ER" I got bored and I decided to start up ANOTHER dealership, albeit it one structured where I'm not chained to the desk for 10 hours a day six days a week. I got really lucky in that I've almost duplicated my previous income but with much less work, but that's just due to our strong local oil-based economy and not because I'm super smart.

So I guess my point is, be really careful and rational, not emotional, before you pull the plug on a super-early ER. Your previous income will be hard to duplicate, and the stress if you ER in a overvalued market* can be considerable, even with a sub 3% SWR.

*the current overall market level (high IMO) and uncertainties facing our country make me worry that this might not be the perfect time to ER, if you are trying to time such a thing...........

 

[David1961]

Retiring will not extend life, or likely, cut it short.
Ha

I think it's impossible to accurately relate retiring or not retiring to extending or shortening life. I've known people who have retired and died in a short period of time. I've also known retirees who look 10 years younger since they retired and are extremely happy. You could get killed in an auto accident the day after you retire. You could also get killed driving to work. It's a judgement call. I do know stress is a killer. Some are more stressed at work and others are more stressed in retirement.

 

[haha]

I think it's impossible to accurately relate retiring or not retiring to extending or shortening life. I've known people who have retired and died in a short period of time. I've also known retirees who look 10 years younger since they retired and are extremely happy. You could get killed in an auto accident the day after you retire. You could also get killed driving to work. It's a judgement call. I do know stress is a killer. Some are more stressed at work and others are more stressed in retirement.

I may have been unclear. I mean the same as you-that retirement on average will have no effect on living or dying. Some obvious exceptions might be if someone works on a crabber or similar in Alaska, or does street robbery or prostitution as a career. Then retirement might well extend life.

Ha

 

[JoeWras]

Most working persons in their 40s are in a job that is not easily replaceable. I'm not kidding myself, once I leave, there's a slim chance I could ever get anywhere near the income level I am at now. Thanks again for a good topic.

Rings true. File this away for me under the "What's holding you back" thread. Especially true in technology. In my field, the idea of "consulting" or "going back for a while" is impossible in the current environment. When I make that decision, it will be final.

 

[FUEGO]

But this really has nothing to do with it. Retiring will not extend life, or likely, cut it short. If you die, you die. Is your current way of going about living so bad that it is not considered life? Is emptying septic hoses while touring around the country a totally different realm of existence from going to the office, having colleagues, having lunch with work friends?

Hmm let's see. Get up while it is dark, get ready for work, drive or ride the bus to work, push paper all day, deal with imbeciles, drive home, decompress. Rinse repeat 5x a week. Take a week off here and there for vacation.

Sure, a limited number of colleagues are somewhat interesting to spend time with, one or two may actually be very interesting to the point of wanting to be real friends outside of work. So many others are boring or annoying. I prefer real friends outside of work that I choose to voluntarily spend time with.

RVing isn't for me (partly because of dealing with the septic hoses), but like most here, I have enough interests to keep me busy. And at age 32, I have enough friends that work odd shifts, stay at home and care for kids, are self employed or frequently play hooky from work that socializing during the day with friends wouldn't be a constraint on my social life. Since I'm still working and have a few kids, juggling work and kids eats up most of the free time, so there isn't a lot of time for socializing with friends right now.

Maybe it is a difference of circumstances. I have a wife and kids and like spending time with all of them (though never have enough time). Maybe some day when the wife wises up and leaves me and the kids are grown and out of the house, I'll miss having work to keep me busy. Then I'll go get a job I guess.

I see your point about having more money = more freedom, but I guess we all weigh time vs money differently. I guess I view ER as a sabbatical at first, and not until after a number of years is it really "retirement". Even then your aren't locked into never working again. Nothing wrong with going back to work to broaden your financial horizons.

 

[haha]

I guess I view ER as a sabbatical at first, and not until after a number of years is it really "retirement". Even then your aren't locked into never working again. Nothing wrong with going back to work to broaden your financial horizons.

Can be true, but as others have pointed out, few of us can ever hope to leave good well paid professional jobs, and go back to anything even in the same ballpark financially. The more demanding the job, the truer this is.

Of course, ymmv, and you have made clear for many years what your intentions are, and how you view it. My comments were intended more for fence sitters. I'm a little over 70, and I have seen a number of things play out. Few of them were made worse by having more resources. I can think of one situation that perhaps qualifies. If someone is trying to qualify for taxpayer funded benefits, it can help to have less.

Ha

 

[FIREd]

Can be true, but as others have pointed out, few of us can ever hope to leave good well paid professional jobs, and go back to anything even in the same ballpark financially. The more demanding the job, the truer this is.


Ha

True, it would be hard to find another well paid job. But would you have to? Most of us on this forum live on less than $100K per year (many on much less actually). Assuming your portfolio didn't get completely decimated, it should still cover a significant portion of your expenses. So, in the worst case scenario, you might be a few $10Ks per year short. Why would you have to find another job paying $100Ks a year?

 

[haha]

True, it would be hard to find another well paid job. But would you have to? Most of us on this forum live on less than $100K per year (many on much less actually). Assuming your portfolio didn't get completely decimated, it should still cover a significant portion of your expenses. So, in the worst case scenario, you might be a few $10Ks per year short. Why would you have to find another job paying $100Ks a year?

Really, it is just a matter of how you frame things. There is no answer that is absolutely true.

Ha

 

[NW-Bound]

Eh, one can decide to RV or not to RV, but the decision should not be based on the fear of the handling of the sewer hose.

Before I got started RV'ing, I did substantial research of this subject on the Web, and by reading RV'er blogs and books. Let's just say I suffer from coprophobia. It's been many many years since I had to change diapers, so I cringed when the thought crossed my mind.

But after several trips, many thousand miles, and quite a few ceremonious waste tank dumpings, I would have to say that the following words were very true, taken from this post: http://www.early-retirement.org/forums/f28/rv-expenses-51286-4.html#post962269.

The "dumping the poo" process really isn't a big deal. Truth is you are much less exposed to the sight and smell of human waste when you dump your tanks than when you use the toilet. Systems and equipment have been designed to make this task simple and uneventful.​

I'd rather be dumping my RV tanks than changing baby diapers, or even be near a baby diaper changing station.

We shall now return to the question of whether the OP should ER.

 

[MichaelB]

Subsequent reality, perhaps? Events turn on realities, not perceptions thereof.

Ha

How do you suggest we prepare for the subsequent realities?