Proposition: Early Retirement is Selfish

[kombat]

There are certainly other reasons why people don’t like the idea of early retirement. The way the ER’s success makes someone else’s spendthrift choices look foolish, or destroys the ways they have rationalized their own behavior is yet another.

That's an utterly terrible reason to discourage ER, in my opinion. If my good choices remind people of their own poor choices, then that's too bad for them. It's absurd to suggest that we should live our lives in such a way that others can maintain an illusion that wasteful living is OK, and we should hide the positive results of our own sensible choices so we don't hurt their feelings.

Poppycock.

 

[bongo2]

It's absurd to suggest that we should live our lives in such a way that others can maintain an illusion that wasteful living is OK

You misunderstand. I was contrasting the work ethic with those other, definitely bad, reasons.

Some good points: why does there have to be a relationship between money earned and the merit of the way you spend your time? Isn’t some unpaid work more “virtuous” than some paid work? Yes! I totally agree and said so in my original post. When someone stops work to raise a family or join the peace corps do we say they “retired?” Not typically. When you say you’re retiring you are implying that you are not leaving your job to work in a more altruistic fashion, but rather to do work on something like your golf game. If someone is retiring early because they have found something more important to do, rather than something more frivolous to do, then they should say so and avoid the stigma. In addition, money is a guide, albeit an imperfect one, for value. Without the measuring stick of money it is more difficult to judge the value of the way you are spending your time. I think, unless you have a specific calling, people are going to be suspicious of your ability to judge the worth of what you do, or your discipline to stick with it. Of course, most don’t have this problem because they are explicitly retiring for their own enjoyment.

By the way, I use examples like the peace corps not to suggest that anything less is selfish, but just for contrast. There is always a middle ground, and that’s probably the best one. And communist? Please. Talk about a false dichotomy – you’re either an Objectivist or a Commie!

 

[bongo2]

Other posters have already given examples of what ER has allowed them to do to help other family members, friends, neighbors, or volunteer organizations with their time and effort. Those aren't measured by economics.

I had to go back and read this whole thread again. In the pages of posts there are maybe 20 words on this. Also in the thread "what are we all retireing to" there is barely a mention of this sort of thing. I think the evidence is heavily against you here.

 

[Khan]

I had to go back and read this whole thread again. In the pages of posts there are maybe 20 words on this. Also in the thread "what are we all retireing to" there is barely a mention of this sort of thing. I think the evidence is heavily against you here.

Why should people have to justify themselves to you?

Is there some reason you are gracing us with your presence?

Are there other fields where you can push your plow?

 

[ERD50]

Rather than judging, why not just compare two people - a typical ER and their non-ER work-mate:

Say the ER works for 25 years, saves and invests, then retires. The ER will get a smaller pension and smaller SS for fewer years worked. The investments helped drive the economy.

The non-ER works for 45 years, didn't save or invest much. Will get a larger pension and SS. Their spending helped drive the economy.

I don't see the fallacy in saying that when the ER retires, a job is opened up? If the company didn't need that person, they probably would have laid them off - they would normally replace the person that is retiring (on average, not always). So the same amount of 'producing' is going on, unless so many people retired early that unemployment dropped close to zero. It really does seem like an ER is opening up an opportunity for a younger worker (likely lower-paid, so in theory, efficiency could be going up?).

So I don't see any big 'judgmental' position to take. It is a choice. Now, if I ER and expected somebody *else* to pick up the tab, and not do it with my own funds, *that* would be different.


-ERD50

 

[aenlighten]

Generosity

We all depend on the work of others, and by dropping out of society you are not holding up your end of the bargain.

It is not through labor alone we are productive. Saving is itself not selfish. It is a choice that most of us through our hard work and accumulation have arrived at this point. We are productive in many other ways. We are productive through our saving, our capital, our investing. We may not have jobs, but our capital provides them. We may not produce ourselves, but our capital can and does. I realize you don't value this, but it is every bit as necessary as more hands at the till. Now you may say, that is your capital, not you, but it is only through my efforts that it exists. You may say, you can do more, and I would say I would love to do more, but as someone involuntarily retired, no one has expressed any interest in my doing so. No doubt if I cut my salary in half, I could find something, but that really would be taking a job from someone that needs it more. There is nothing selfish in providing the funds the world needs. It is generosity.

 

[ERD50]

but as someone involuntarily retired, ....

Now *that* brings up an interesting point. All those people who *don't* at least *plan* to ER, could be laid off at any time and unable to find a job. Since they did not prepare for ER, they are now in a position where they may need to rely on others for support.

So, isn't it more noble to be prepared to be independent? Seems those non-ER, consume, consume, consume types are putting the rest of society at risk.

So who is being 'selfish'?

-ERD50

 

[Lsbcal]

I am not retired, but do plan on leaving my current job well before age 50, despite the fact that I have more obligations than most others here.

Bongo2, could you tell us a little more about yourself? What obligations have you incurred? Did you take them on willingly or were you just having a good time between the sheets when they came along ? You seem to be a saintly type. What have you done to make the world a better place? You have told us you are under 50, could it be you are just beyond your teen years?

 

[nun]

I'm depressed by this thread and the contention of the OP that we are some cog in a machine and that we must mesh with the other cogs.

"We all depend on the work of others, and by dropping out of society you are not holding up your end of the bargain"

What's a misanthrope to do? There are a lot of bent cogs with teeth missing on this forum, who'll just **uk up the machinery if they stay in it, so its best for everyone that we get out.

The OP has an extreme version of the protestant work ethic, whatever happened to "La Dolce Vita". I pay taxes when I work as anarchy is not the prevailing norm, but I never signed a contract that I have to work all my life. My labor is my own and if I choose to use it to drink Gin and ITs on a beach that's my choice, anyway I'm contributing to society by incresing the amount of pleasure and happiness in the world. Now I'm going to watch Anita Ekberg dance in a fountain, that's my kind of cog.

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Seems more of a communist ethic than a religious one, although I initially bent that way due to the reference materials posted.

Seems to me that the OP has confused the literary non worker who lays about dependent on the kindness of others, in combination with a ruling class/upper class that bends the working class to its detriment...with people who have worked their work, made their money, and wish to stop earning money "the old fashioned way".

I find it ironic that a glove is thrown regarding ethics and morals, yet the protester feels inclined to mill about with the morally and ethically challenged to gain some sort of benefit from their knowledge. And his intent to some day do the same.

All the while stating that his obligations are superior to most of the chaff he choses to mingle with.

Well, faced with a morally and ethically superior being whose efforts exceed mine, I'm afraid I have little option other than to fold up my tent.

What I felt like actually saying is "Had I not gone shopping half the day and dealt with a gigantic horde of dou---bags, I'd feel more offended right now..."

 

[travelover]

While I give low marks to the OP for logic, I'd say his ability to get a reaction, aka troll, are excellent.

 

[Rich_by_the_Bay]

Yeah, I'm not buying this whole shtick. It's that holier than thou thing that makes me wonder. My guess is still that he is frustrated with being unable to FIRE so he's re-casting it as something vaguely immoral or self-serving. B+ for troll value, though.

I'm moving on to more existential and philosophical threads, like the booze thread.

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

 

[TickTock]

bongo2,

As I read your comments on this thread, it strikes me that your defense of your original proposition that 'ER is selfish' is much too broad. Your proposition is more 'a certain type of ER is selfish', and you define that selfishness as 'not producing', or 'not producing social benefits'.

Or maybe, not producing enough social benefits; if (using your example) military, police, and firefighting are seen as jobs that produce enough benefits that they don't have to be followed until normal retirement, then under what other circumstances can 'enough' benefits have been gained to justify ER?

I submit that saving enough to invest (earning the money for said investments and investing both producing social benefits) and living off the proceeds of said investments demonstrates sufficient benefits to society that one can ER without the selfish label. What say you?

 

[Goonie]

I'm selfish and lazy. But I was that way when I was working too. ER has nothing to do with it.

I'm sure there are many people who are unselfish and dedicate their lives to helping the poor and sick without any need for either an income or respect.......I'm glad those people exist, but we're not all motivated by a love for humanity.

Nice try, Bongo, but "self interest" shouldn't be confused with the pejorative context of "selfish"-- and certainly not with society's envy or even jealousy.

Most people's reactions come from their own lack of opportunity or planning or discipline. A true friend would be happy for the ER-to-be instead of complaining about selfish witholding of services.

I feel that I provided enough benefit to the country during my 24 years of service to be able to enjoy at least the next 24 at my own pace. Ah, and I'm still paying my fair share of taxes to support all those social services that I used to be providing.

But feel free to live your life according to whoever's standards you wish to substitute for your own.

I've always been more interested in my well-being (and that of my immediate family) than in other's.....'lookin' out for #1'. Whether that is considered "selfish" or looking out for my own "self interest", is dependent on one's view point. The definition really doesn't matter to me. I w*rked for 30+ years in public service for pay & benefits.

I've also volunteered in non-profits ever since I was in school, including being on the boards and serving as director or chairman of several, never accepting any remuneration. I didn't do it for the "atta boys" or any glory....I only did it 'cause I felt like it. And I tried to stay out of the lime light as much as humanly possible.

So I've got 30+ years of w*rk, and about 40 years of volunteering under my belt. Now, I'm going to pursue my dream of being a slug, a sloth, a self-centered, egocentric, FIRE'd bum! I've heard NO negative remarks, from those who matter, about my choosing to ER! They're all very happy for me and my situation....and have said and shown it. If there's anyone who doesn't like it.....so what! I don't care! It's their problem, not mine!

And like Nords, I'm stilling "paying my fair share of taxes to support all those social services". And I don't have a great admiration for much of humanity either!

"But feel free to live your life according to whoever's standards you wish to substitute for your own." (that's a wonderful line Nords!!! Thanks!)

 

[TickTock]

Now why is there a general work ethic? Let me put it this way: do you enjoy parks, the protection of the military, your car, the roads on which you drive, the food you eat, movies or television, not having to fix your own sink? You would have none of those things but for the labor of others. Sure, you pay for them, but the value you get is much greater than the amount you pay. In economics these types of effects are called externalities or consumer surplus (depending on the beneficiary). Your friends and family probably aren’t thinking in these precise terms, but their instinct that society benefits when you work, and loses when you don’t, is a sound one.

Do I enjoy (1) parks? yes; (2) the protection of the military? yes; (3) my car? yes (4) the roads on which I drive? yes (5) the food I eat? yes (6) movies or television? yes (7) not having to fix my own sink? no, I'd rather learn the skill and do it myself, but given the demands on my time from my job, I hire it out.

So what? Numbers 1, 2 and 4 I pay for with taxes, whether or not I'm ERd or not. Numbers 3, 5 and 6 I pay for whether or not I'm ERd. And number 7 I'd rather do myself, and could do more readily if I was ERd.

Certainly I hope the value I get from any of these things is greater than what I pay for them! Otherwise, why would I pay for them, ERd or not?

Conversely, if I retire soley to play golf, then I buy golf clubs, pay greens fees, and so on - so doesn't that benefit the golf club makers and course owners greater than what I pay by definition?

I dispute your claim that only by producing are we unselfish; instead, by consuming something that others produce we demonstrate that said production is more valuable to us and therefore is beneficial.

 

[heyyou]

In a country full of debt-ridden people driving un-paid for SUVs commuting hours per day from distant un-paid for McMansions, this seems like a small group to call selfish. There are obviously bigger and better targets for those words. Speaking of cogs, something here just doesn't fit right.

 

[LRS]

Bongo's a missionary. We're the happy savages on ER island, blissfully unaware that we are naked, lazy and uncouth. Bongo is here to bring us light, show us the path, reveal our sinful, slothful natures. Soon he'll have us dressing in hot, uncomfortable clothes and (gulp) working.

What do missionaries do? They put their hangups into other peoples' heads. I'm OK with my own indolence. I don't care what others think about it. Why do you care so much?

 

[Retire Soon]

Most people who continue to w*rk fall into one of these four categories: 1) Those that are early in their careers and need to buy a house and accumulate savings for retirement. 2) Those who would like to retire, but lack funds to support themselves and pay for health insurance. 3) Those who could retire, but truly love to w*rk. 4) Those who could retire, but are too materialistic to relinquish future wages.

I can forgive the people who fall into the first three categories, but feel sorry and pity those in the fourth category, because their perceived happiness is contingent upon a bigger McMansion, a more impressive RV or fancier clothing and jewelry. These are the people who are selfish, not the fortunate group who were able to retire early. It makes me sad to see people who sacrifice their lives to accumulate more material goods, and in the process miss out on life.

We're only given one mind and one body. It is our duty to take care of both and live life to the fullest and the only way we can do this is to be truly free of w*rk. People who continue to w*rk in order to acquire more riches will never be satisified. This is only selfish and ugly greed. These people will never experience happiness.

In Walden, Henry David Thoreau stated, "I went to the Woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life, and to see if I could not learn what it had to teach, and not, when I came to die, discover that I had not lived." I am afraid that those unhappy, selfish and greedy people in category four will someday die, only to find that they never truly lived.

 

[Rambler]

Whenever I hear someone like Bongo2 talk it makes me think that they believe I should continue working to support the rest of society that can't seem to organize and control how they spend their money. How much is enough, by the way? Once I have earned enough to support myself, am I supposed to go on working so I can support a few dozen others? I am not ER'd yet, but my approach is deliberate and planned. When I pull the plug, it will be because I can do it and still support myself, society (thru taxes and material purchases that I make with money I earned and saved), and still make contributions to causes that I feel deserve my contributions, whether monetarily or by donating my time. I certainly do not feel like I should continue working and accumulating just for the heck of it, nor do I believe I should work and have my excess taxed so that others who have not been careful with their funds can be funded by MY work.

I don't see myself as selfish. I donate a lot of time and money, to both civic and religious issues, and I do not see that giving up my j*b so that I can have a little more time for myself as well as to do some of these volunteer activities, is selfish.

R

 

[Nords]

I might be wrong, but I don't think Bongo2 intended his posts to be taken at face value. More likely to be used as a stimulus for discussion. Isn't this a hint?
"Proposition: ........."
Ha

That philosophy reminds me of SG, who felt he could say anything no matter how condescending or insulting as long as he included enough smiley emoticons.

This may be a [-]reciprocated diatribe[/-] debating society but it would've been just as easy (and more sympathetic) for Bongo to start off with "Guys, I'm struggling with this issue". IMO the sentiments I'm reading in his quoted excerpt below don't match your impression.

There are some very concrete minded people around here.

Heeyyyyy... who you callin' a blockhead?

There have been a couple comments that, while ER is self interested, it is not detrimental to others, and therefore not selfish. I tried to address this before, and it is not clear if you are disagreeing with me, or I simply didn’t make myself clear. ER is detrimental to others both directly and obliquely. It is not hugely detrimental, it is not evil, but it is detrimental. We all depend on the work of others, and by dropping out of society you are not holding up your end of the bargain. In our society, allowances are made for people like police, firefighters, and the military. There is a reason why; those jobs have always been assumed to be too demanding for a lifetime of service. Whether that is true today, or applies to the desk-bound versions, is another story, but we have that tradition.
No one should be forced to work, and no one is expected to work beyond their ability. But when someone is perfectly able to work, and they simply chose not to do so, then people disapprove, and for good reason.

It appears that you equate a positive contribution to society with the activity of working for a paycheck.

I've made such efficient use of my paychecks (and qualifying for a govt-funded annuity!) that I don't need any more of them, yet somehow my decision to stop chasing them is interpreted as detrimental to society. I'd think it was more detrimental to keep chasing paychecks when I no longer needed to, or wasting the ones I already had.

You also appear to equate "not working" as "not participating in society". Yet "not working" allows me to actually engage in pleasurable activities that otherwise wouldn't be available to me, as well as mentoring and helping others. I'm also in the best physical, mental, and emotional condition of my entire life.

Your philosophy is not matching my experience. Since I'm the one who's ER'd and thus a bit differently experienced than you, I find it difficult to see your sentiments as credible. Perhaps you need to take a sabbatical or even ER and then get back to us in a year or two. Or start donating your paychecks to charity, with extra karma bonus points if you skip the tax deductions.

I find it ironic that a glove is thrown regarding ethics and morals, yet the protester feels inclined to mill about with the morally and ethically challenged to gain some sort of benefit from their knowledge. And his intent to some day do the same.
All the while stating that his obligations are superior to most of the chaff he choses to mingle with.
Well, faced with a morally and ethically superior being whose efforts exceed mine, I'm afraid I have little option other than to fold up my tent.

Hey, at least he's exclusive in his mingling.

Perhaps CFB is right, Bongo. You could find the same helpful info on FatWallet.com, SimpleLiving.net, and TMF that you're getting here, only without that icky ER stuff. But you wouldn't be able to cast aspersions on their membership for living up to the names of their boards, would you?

In Walden, Henry David Thoreau stated, "I went to the Woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life, and to see if I could not learn what it had to teach, and not, when I came to die, discover that I had not lived." I am afraid that those unhappy, selfish and greedy people in category four will someday die, only to find that they never truly lived.

"What's money? A man is a success if he gets up in the morning and goes to bed at night and in between does what he wants to do."
Bob Dylan
Another coupla dropouts. Or blockheads...

 

[ziggy29]

After watching this thread for a while, I decided to formulate my own thoughts.

The bottom line is that there are a lot of different ways to define "selfish." For some people, not w*rking and thus paying less in taxes is "selfish" from the standpoint of not maximizing their contributions to the community. I think this is the sort of selfishness the OP floated in this thread.

However, I could respond that the need to work in order to maintain a high level of consumerism -- resulting in more materials consumed, more junk in the landfills, more pollution generated and more energy guzzled -- could also be seen as selfish.

You also don't know the motivations for retiring early. Maybe it's not complete retirement but a "downsizing" of career into a public service role -- i.e. dropping out of Big Business to become a teacher, just to name one. Maybe it's the desire to do a lot of good volunteer work for the community that can't be done much when w*rking full time. And yes, maybe it's just sitting on one's butt and doing as little as possible.

I believe it's valuable to just accept each other's own definition of self-interest as long as it relies upon someone using the wealth they earned, created and built to fund it, and as long as no one else has their rights trampled along the way.

The world would do well to practice a little more live and let live.

 

[Retire Soon]

After watching this thread for a while, I decided to formulate my own thoughts.

The bottom line is that there are a lot of different ways to define "selfish." For some people, not w*rking and thus paying less in taxes is "selfish" from the standpoint of not maximizing their contributions to the community. I think this is the sort of selfishness the OP floated in this thread.

However, I could respond that the need to work in order to maintain a high level of consumerism -- resulting in more materials consumed, more junk in the landfills, more pollution generated and more energy guzzled -- could also be seen as selfish.

You also don't know the motivations for retiring early. Maybe it's not complete retirement but a "downsizing" of career into a public service role -- i.e. dropping out of Big Business to become a teacher, just to name one. Maybe it's the desire to do a lot of good volunteer work for the community that can't be done much when w*rking full time. And yes, maybe it's just sitting on one's butt and doing as little as possible.

I believe it's valuable to just accept each other's own definition of self-interest as long as it relies upon someone using the wealth they earned, created and built to fund it, and as long as no one else has their rights trampled along the way.

The world would do well to practice a little more live and let live.

If someone "downsized" a career from "big business" to become a public school teacher, they'd soon learn that there is far more stress in teaching than business.

 

[ziggy29]

If someone "downsized" a career from "big business" to become a public school teacher, they'd soon learn that there is far more stress in teaching than business.

Maybe, maybe not. If they were an executive dealing with a lot of management hassles, and they went to a private school that doesn't have the disciplinary and other problems in the public schools, that might not follow.

Plus, there's the matter of doing what you enjoy and what you feel passionate about. I don't think there's a one-size-fits-all in this regard, as we all have our own tolerances for different types of BS.

 

[Sandy]

I had to go back and read this whole thread again. In the pages of posts there are maybe 20 words on this. Also in the thread "what are we all retireing to" there is barely a mention of this sort of thing. I think the evidence is heavily against you here.

In that thread I simply said " to call my time my own". That will allow me to

spend more time with family (help provide a direction and foundation for my kids,

spend more time at the gym (keep me healthy, out of our costly health care system and avoid becoming a premature burden to my family),

take more time with my yard and garden (hoping to reduce use of fertilizers and pesticides),

explore new interests (help me meet others, benefitting me and them since relationships are proven to benefit oneself and "others"),

travel with self and family, (activity known to increase tolerance and committment to community and environment)

On the face, these might seem to be primarily self centered activities, but I see the benefits to both myself and society for these "selfish" acts, still contributing albeit in a different (non-monetary productive) way.

Is this a bit convoluted logic, maybe. Certainly, I am not looking to FIRE to be selfless. But to call it selfish, in a pejoritive sense, is too harsh as well. It is merely another path, an option that I am fortunate enough to be able to consider.