When would you turn down $1 million?

[robnplunder]

If it were me ... I would work to have $7M around at retirement at that age in case I want to try something different and need "seed" money, say, $3M of it. I wouldn't touch $4M. That'd sustain me in case the venture goes south.

 

[MichaelB]

How much is not an amount, it is part attitude and part discipline. It is not easy to land a job that pays very well and not be a big spender because companies are not interested in employing someone who doesn't depend on a monthly paycheck, even when it hits 5 or 6 figures. The neverending need for the next paycheck is the leverage management needs to get people to do the stuff they otherwise wouldn't do.

If one has the attitude and discipline to earn and save, the question is not how much you need, it is how much BS you can put up with before your bucket overflows. See this post http://www.early-retirement.org/for...retired-want-to-retire-64729.html#post1274300

 

[ls99]

Rb35, so what are you selling?

 

[Shawn]

Now that I am in my 5th year of retirement, I would not return to work even for a day for $1,000,000. ... YMMV and probably does.

Only you can speak for yourself, but I believe almost everyone would work an additional day for $1M. If nothing else, it could be a "volunteer day" with the money given to charity. But I accept your point.

And it is a fascinating question.

When I joined this forum in January 2007 (same day as W2R, BTW), my targeted retirement date was November of 2009, with an absolute upper limit retirement date set for November of 2012. Not a second longer. Done deal. Guaranteed. No question. Positively. Beyond a shadow of a doubt. But here it is 2014 and I'm still working at age 54.

I do not make a million dollars a year but I make close to $500K/yr when my salary and the increase in the capitalized value of my pension are combined. This is a lot to give up. It does not matter that I do not need the money. It is still a lot to give up. I did not think this way five years ago. But it is different now that the ramifications are real. Once I leave, there is no turning back.

And my job comes at a price. I work 60-70 hours/week. The work itself isn't particularly difficult (e.g., limited travel, jeans and t-shirts in the office), but it is extremely stressful. Fortunately, it is not as bad as it was 7-8 years ago. This is probably because I and everyone else knows that I can walk out the door at any time. But it is still stressful. And there is the loss of freedom. Work makes it more difficult to pursue some activities. No six month backpacking trips.

But freedom goes both ways. There is significant financial freedom knowing that my needs and the needs of those around me can be met. For example, people talk a lot about LTC insurance and nursing home costs of $100K/yr. I do not think much about this. If my mother and/or my step-mother needs to spend three years in a nursing home, I can take care of this. I do not need to worry. But maybe there will be other costs that I cannot as easily afford. So maybe I should keep working.

I may retire tomorrow (literally), but I have yet to retire today. So for me, the compensation is still too good to pass up. It isn't the money. It's the financial freedom to do anything I need (or want). It's freedom from worry.

 

[haha]

Rb35, so what are you selling?

He's just dreaming. A surprising number of the posts here are just dreaming.


Ha

 

[W2R]

Now that I am in my 5th year of retirement, I would not return to work even for a day for $1,000,000. I don't need the money or the aggravation, no matter how small. I know this is an extreme point of view, but I am trying to be honest instead of just saying what is expected. I really, truly love and value each day of retirement and each day is literally priceless to me. YMMV and probably does.

Only you can speak for yourself, but I believe almost everyone would work an additional day for $1M.

You're absolutely right. I can and did speak for myself and reiterated my entire original post here, with a relevant part of it in bold blue font this time since it implies exactly what you are saying.

I agree that almost everyone else would work an additional day for a million dollars. It's pretty sad, IMO, although apparently not so sad from their points of view.

 

[steelyman]

http://youtu.be/WCzaYMSnges

Some nice dreaming going on up there.

 

[LOL!]

Guess that's why the rich CEO's make the big bucks.

This is definitely part of it, but it is also something that folks who complain about CEO compensation do not see. If my portfolio is increasing by one million dollars or more per year, why should I even want a $1 million a year job?

And before folks poo-poo the portfolio going up by a million, just think about 2013 when many folks on the forum reported performance of above 20%. A $5million portfolio would've increased by a million.

 

[Travelwanted]

rb35...

I can relate. I have a similar situation. I now think it becomes an issue of diminishing returns. Depending on your lifestyle, how much do you need to do what you want? After that, well, what is the point?

Life is short, often too short. Personally, I have hit the mark and am ready to give up THAT job. Time and family become even more important once you have reached FI.

The way I look at it: I am blessed to be in the situation. How do I enjoy this gift and show appreciation for it? Working more to accumulate even more? No, I will say "thank you" and "goodbye" so I may really enjoy the freedom. I wish you well.

 

[pb4uski]

I walked away from a very lucrative, reasonably easy job that I enjoyed. In the end, I decided that we had plenty to live in the lifestyle we liked (or better) for the rest of our lives and that to continue working was just enriching our kids, and while I love our kids that I preferred to relax, enjoy life and do what I wanted to do (or nothing at all).

It was a very selfish decision.

 

[MRG]

Not saying it's the same, just reminds me of this supposed conversation.

Churchill: "Madam, would you sleep with me for five million pounds?" Socialite: "My goodness, Mr. Churchill... Well, I suppose... we would have to discuss terms, of course... "
Churchill: "Would you sleep with me for five pounds?"
Socialite: "Mr. Churchill, what kind of woman do you think I am?!" Churchill: "Madam, we've already established that. Now we are haggling about the price
Winston Churchill

Best wishes,
MRG

 

[Helen]

No six month backpacking trips.

Deal breaker for me. I love hiking and backpacking and those are things that are tough on an older body. I wanted to get out while I still had a few years left to motor myself up mountains with a backpack strapped to my back.

Next month I will celebrate my 1 year retirement anniversary and my 57th birthday. I have probably hiked and backpacked more miles in the last year than I have in all the other years combined. It has been wonderful and I plan to hike/backpack even more miles this coming year!

I would not go back to work for a year for $1 million dollars.

 

[mchas]

A friend's Dad retired at 47 and a year or two later he got a call from a former coworker who was at a new company and offered him $1M/year if he wanted to come back to work (upper management at a huge company). He turned it down, but said he would consult for $3k/day if they wanted him to, as long as he got to choose when he wanted to work. I think in the end even that didn't sound worth it and he didn't do that either. He ended up passing away at 55 and luckily got to enjoy his years in between, so in his case looking back that extra $1M a year would not have been worth it. As others have said, life is very short.

 

[W2R]

A friend's Dad retired at 47 and a year or two later he got a call from a former coworker who was at a new company and offered him $1M/year if he wanted to come back to work (upper management at a huge company). He turned it down, but said he would consult for $3k/day if they wanted him to, as long as he got to choose when he wanted to work. I think in the end even that didn't sound worth it and he didn't do that either. He ended up passing away at 55 and luckily got to enjoy his years in between, so in his case looking back that extra $1M a year would not have been worth it. As others have said, life is very short.

So sad. I am sorry to read about this.

I am reminded of the sad cartoon below, that is occasionally posted here.

 

[Shawn]

You're absolutely right. I can and did speak for myself and reiterated my entire original post here, with a relevant part of it in bold blue font this time since it implies exactly what you are saying.

I agree that almost everyone else would work an additional day for a million dollars. It's pretty sad, IMO, although apparently not so sad from their points of view.

Hmmm ... my apologies if I did not properly acknowledge or reflect the sentiments in your original post. That was not my intent. While surprised by your remarks, I accepted them at face value - your honest feelings. I tried to quote what I believed were your two main points (i.e., you would not work an additional day for $1M; you believe most people have a different point of view).

The reason I focused on your post is because I made identical comments in other threads when discussing OMY syndrome. Specifically, I previously wrote that few people would give up $1M for 1 day of work. I found it interesting that you wrote the same thing, but from the opposite direction. I believe there is some level of compensation, different for each person, that will motivate most people to remain in the workforce or go back to work. It sounds like you agree, although you find this sad.

Personally, I'm more likely to be sad for someone who needs to work to put food on the table - especially when the employment situation is stressful and tenuous - or sad for someone who wants to work but cannot find a job. It's difficult and even overwhelming when there is little choice and no hope. But the concept of someone earning $1M for one day of work does not make me sad. Envious, yes. Sad, no. Especially when it's by choice.

I'm in OMY syndrome by choice. It's a puzzling choice, yes, which is why I'm interested in the perspectives here. But at the same time I want to be prepared for unexpected events that may impact me, my family, friends, pets, and others. If these events do not materialize and the additional money goes to charity, so be it. I do not consider this sad. I consider it independence and financial freedom. At least today, this clearly means more to me than ER. And I'm fortunate to have this choice.

 

[brett]

I would happily counter, and accept, $800K with three months of vacation each year. For a year or two.

 

[W2R]

Hmmm ... my apologies if I did not properly acknowledge or reflect the sentiments in your original post. That was not my intent. While surprised by your remarks, I accepted them at face value - your honest feelings. I tried to quote what I believed were your two main points (i.e., you would not work an additional day for $1M; you believe most people have a different point of view).

The reason I focused on your post is because I made identical comments in other threads when discussing OMY syndrome. Specifically, I previously wrote that few people would give up $1M for 1 day of work. I found it interesting that you wrote the same thing, but from the opposite direction. I believe there is some level of compensation, different for each person, that will motivate most people to remain in the workforce or go back to work. It sounds like you agree, although you find this sad.

I don't think that most people really know what they want; by "most people" I don't mean you, but just people in general. Instead of looking within to try to figure this out, they pursue illusory goals that never seem to lead to the genuine satisfaction that they hope to achieve. To me, that is sad because they are wasting their brief time on this earth.

The fact that most people (again, not meaning you) never know how much is enough, and would constantly be willing to work for more, seems awful to me if this is a goal that has not come from within. So many work all their lives seeking approval first from their parents, then their peers, or others and never get around to trying to figure out how they themselves want to spend their moment on earth.But then if it doesn't bother them, who am I to say that it is wrong? Perhaps their satisfaction is in the journey. I just wish I felt assured that such people had spent the time to introspect and know themselves before setting off on an endless quest for enough money. Also I am just so glad that I am not in that endless ratrace right now. I so enjoy being the one to determine how I will spend my time each day, and I enjoy knowing that I have enough.

 

[Shawn]

Life is short, often too short. Personally, I have hit the mark and am ready to give up THAT job. Time and family become even more important once you have reached FI.

Yes, time with family can be important. But what happens when a family member needs $300K for medical or other health care expenses (e.g., quality nursing home care for one or more parents with little money). What happens when an elderly parent living on $1K/month SS is evicted from her low-cost apartment? What happens when a sibling is destitute? What happens when someone needs money for college. What happens when ...

Obviously, one cannot plan for everything, but all of these (and more) are realistic scenarios that many people face. Time isn't always greater than money.

 

[Shawn]

Deal breaker for me. I love hiking and backpacking and those are things that are tough on an older body. I wanted to get out while I still had a few years left to motor myself up mountains with a backpack strapped to my back.

Next month I will celebrate my 1 year retirement anniversary and my 57th birthday. I have probably hiked and backpacked more miles in the last year than I have in all the other years combined. It has been wonderful and I plan to hike/backpack even more miles this coming year!

I would not go back to work for a year for $1 million dollars.

Good comments and insight. And applicable. A goal of mine is to hike the Pacific Crest Trail (Mexico to Canada). I would like to do it with a 65 year-old friend, and I know people who have done it in their 70's. While anything can happen - and a new ache seems to develop every day of my life - I am not as concerned about the physical inability. However, every year of work is one less year out on the trail.

 

[Shawn]

I don't think that most people really know what they want; by "most people" I don't mean you, but just people in general. Instead of looking within to try to figure this out, they pursue illusory goals that never seem to lead to the genuine satisfaction that they hope to achieve. To me, that is sad because they are wasting their brief time on this earth.

Yes, this is true. A lot of people - probably everyone to some degree - pursue goals that they believe will make them happy but do not. Money goals are among them. This applies to young people and to not so young people.

But is working one more day or one more year necessarily a bad thing - an indication that someone is chasing an illusory money goal that will never provide satisfaction (rhetorical question)? Is it better to have enough or more than enough? I suppose it depends on the definition of enough, but for me, I am quite pleased about having much more than FireCalc says I should have. Money may not buy happiness, but it creates feelings of financial freedom, independence, and security. It eliminates financial worry. This is a step towards happiness. If nothing else, it's contentment.

None of this means I should work another year or even another day. But I ask myself - do I regret not retiring 4 years ago when I turned 50? No. While it's been a tough 4 years, I have a lot more financial security to show for it. And life has gone on. Good days, bad day, laughter, sadness. Of course, the real question is if I will regret not retiring at age 54 if I am still working at 55 or 60. Don't know.

 

[unclemick]

Hmmm - The 'job' would have to 'grab my passion.' I did thirty years in the space program give or take and I'd like to think it just wasn't for the money.

Although at times there were periods of suckiness and times I was glad for what they paid me, I am not sure I would have switched jobs for mere money.

heh heh heh - hindsight and twenty years of ER makes me more idealistic. NOW - talk to me about something with the B word as in billion/s.

 

[clifp]

One more data point, which I have mostly posted before.

Back in early 2000,I was at the end of 1 year leave of absence. I could have gone back to work and earn 1.2 million over 3 year and possible more if the stock price went up. After taxes that would have increase my net worth by about 20%.

As it turned out the the stock crater along with almost all other tech stock, so my actually compensation would have less than 1/2 that.

I think if I could have increased my net worth by 50% for working 3 years I would have gone back to worth.

When making these decision I think it is really important factor in all financial info especially taxes.
So if you are making $1 million a year and your portfolio is $5 million. After tax you probably are only making an additional $500K $600K if you live in very low tax state.

Assume your portfolio earns 5% and spending is $150K. If you were retired your net worth would $5.1 million, if you continue working it is a $5.6 or roughly a 10% growth. Is 10% worth an extra year of your life perhaps.

 

[scrabbler1]

I remember when I was negotiating my first part-time work deal back in 2001 how my goal was to work less and earn less money. I was becoming depressed from the commute which had grown worse after my company initially relocated from lower Manhattan to Jersey City, New Jersey (before the 9/11 attacks). If my company had offered me a raise to keep working full-time, I would have easily declined. How much of a raise would it have taken to get me to keep working full-time? It would have taken a really big one, and I would not have worked FT for very long, just enough until I could fully ER.

And just to show that my desire to work less and earn less was no fluke, in 2007 I did it again, asking to have my weekly hours worked reduced. It would have taken a really big raise to keep me working even at my old PT schedule. And finally, when I made the ultimate work reduction (ER) in 2008, I told the HR flunkie in my exit interview that to get me to stay (not that anyone was making any offers) I would have needed to come to the office less often than even my once-a-week telecommute deal had in 2001-2003 (and regained group health eligibility). I did not desire a raise.

 

[heeyy_joe]

The Monty Hall Problem - Explained - YouTube

 

[calmloki]

Someone posted this blog link a few days ago: The Retirement Cafe: The Chicken and the Pig

Well spoken, and to quote him, "There's a fable about a chicken, a pig and a plate of ham and eggs. The chicken is involved but the pig is committed". It's much easier to commit as one's life grows shorter. If a year is likely to be 5% of your life it's easier to decide if one has enough than if a year is 2% of your expected life.

I think I'd pass on working for someone else for a million, but seem to enjoy "deals" too much to give them up - not driven to hunt for deals, but as they present themselves I sure enjoy letting our money work a bit harder.