Proposition: Early Retirement is Selfish

[Gumby]

All human beings are by nature selfish. ER's are human beings and are therefore selfish, but no more and no less than anyone else.

 

[TickTock]

FAIR WARNING: Long post ahead, with many quotes. I’m trying to take what bongo2 posted, analyze it, and distill it down.

I want to get straight what I mean by retirement. Technically you can say things like “Bob retired from his job as a lawyer to teach starving children in

Africa,” or “Bob retired early from his job as a mover after his eighth heart attack left him unable to lift heavy objects.” The ER we are generally discussing around here is someone who is perfectly able to work deciding to leave their job in order to pursue “leisure” activities.

Okay, so not being able-bodied is an exception, and it’s not leaving paid employment as such that’s bad, but having too many ‘leisure’ activities. I’ll get back to that idea later.

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. I’ve wrestled with how to balance my obligations, my willingness to take on new obligations, and my own self-interest. I hang around here (and this is the only internet forum I frequent) because, despite my concerns about the ethics, there is a lot of stuff here I do find useful.

Side question: I’m curious, what are these ‘more obligations than most here’?

Side observation: As far as you being personally concerned about the ethics of your intended ER, just do volunteer work – take meals to home-bound people, become an adult literacy tutor, take care of family, etc. – enough so that your leisure time is small enough that you feel productive. Or, don’t ER – keep working.

The idea occasionally is put forth that giving up your job is good because someone else is then allowed to take it. The fallacy here is that we do not have a fixed number of jobs in our society or even a fixed number of good jobs.

True, but there is still unemployment, and ERing from a job that will be backfilled does free up the position for someone else, and so on, until an unemployed person becomes employed. I think your argument looks more convincing in a time with low unemployment (like now in the US) than high unemployment (like during the Depression in the US). Even if unemployment is not directly reduced, the person stepping into the vacated job is likely being promoted and thus contributing more. I don’t see a fallacy.

Also people confuse consuming with contributing. You contribute by producing.

And I disagree that consuming is not contributing, provided the consumer pays for the consumption himself. Without consumption, there is no reason to produce. Also, taxes are contributing. Also, invested capital is contributing. Aenlighten said it better than me:

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.

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.

How? How how how? Show me the direct and oblique detriment to others.

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

Dropping out of society? Where did that come from? Let’s say my nest egg is big enough tomorrow and I ER. I still consume and pay for my own consumption. I still pay taxes. I still interact with and help my family and neighbors, perhaps more since I have more time available. I simply don’t go to work anymore. I don’t agree that that’s dropping out of society.

I don’t know about this ‘bargain’. I certainly agree that an able-bodied person shouldn’t live off of others without returning anything, but that’s not the case here – others are depending on the capital I have, and that capital was produced by work. I claim that is holding up my 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.

And so, if you contribute enough (though demanding service), you can retire and it’s not detrimental. I also notice that you haven’t claimed that retirement at normal age is detrimental, it’s the early part you take issue with. I assume that’s because a person is credited with having produced ‘enough’. Again I claim that saving enough to retire on demonstrates having produced enough.

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.

What good reason? State it.

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.

It looks to me that your objection boils down to the idea that people should be doing something ‘important’ rather than something ‘frivolous’. Unless they’ve already done enough ‘important’ things (military job, being of a certain age).

What I distill from your posts is this: For an able-bodied person, unless of a certain age or having worked for some number of years in a demanding job such as policeman, to have more than a certain amount of leisure time is directly and indirectly detrimental, although not hugely detrimental, to others.

And that’s simply a refinement and restatement of your original position.

I disagree with your assertion that an ER living off of his investments is not contributing to society. Perhaps that’s the root of our disagreement.

But, where is this direct and indirect detriment to others? Please state it.

P.S. - sorry about the broken double quote at the beginning. I tried five times to fix it, but the quote /quote kept getting added in. Strange.

 

[Sandy]

Let's also look at this from the other side:

what is the value and contribution to society of spending 5-6 hours per week sitting in traffic commiting to the j*b?

what about the 20+ hrs per week (varies by employer) of spending time in non-productive meetings, water-cooler chit-chat, and other side bar efforts?

Why is doing these things generous and supportive of community, while spending time with family, friends, and self-acutualization is selfish?

 

[ziggy29]

And how about this: what's selfish about leaving a job you no longer need financially -- and create a job opening for someone who *does* need it? Sounds like a win-win to me.

 

[Meadbh]

When I consider how my light is spent
Ere half my days in this dark world and wide,
And that one Talent which is death to hide
Lodged with me useless, though my soul more bent
To serve therewith my Maker, and present
My true account, lest He returning chide,
"Doth God exact day-labour, light denied?"
I fondly ask. But Patience, to prevent
That murmur, soon replies, "God doth not need
Either man's work or his own gifts.
Who best Bear his mild yoke, they serve him best.
His state Is kingly: thousands at his bidding speed,
And post o'er land and ocean without rest;
They also serve who only stand and wait."

John Milton (1608-1674) On his Blindness

 

[maddythebeagle]

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.

http://www.early-retirement.org/forums/f26/another-young-dreamer-14040.html

Looks like Jarhead came out of the bushes to prove your point

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Wow. A rare Jarhead sighting!

 

[TickTock]

The more I read and think about bongo2s posts, the more I come to the conclusion that his issue is with a person having too much leisure time (with some exceptions previously noted). He seems to think that is inherently detrimental to other people in some way that I don't yet understand.

For example, why someone with $100 million invested and golfing 40 hours a week is detrimental to others while the same person working at a minimum-wage job in a fast-food restaurant 40 hours a week is a productive member of society is beyond me.

I do note that bongo2 has taken a lot of grief in this thread, and he went into it knowing that he would take grief, yet he's attempting to defend his proposition. That takes a certain amount of guts, and I admire him for that, even though I disagree with his proposition.

 

[TickTock]

So bongo2 is now 37, give or take a year. I'm guessing that the obligations he referred to earlier are his minor children.

At 40 myself, I guess I'm a young whipper-snapper on this forum as well. And just when I've gotten out of the habit of looking over my shoulder for my father when someone calls me 'sir' or 'Mr. TickTock'.

 

[Meadbh]

enough with the poetry.....what about the economy?

Women & The Economy - A Project of UNPAC - Equality, Development and Peace

All Academic Inc.(Abstract Management, Conference Management and Research Search Engine)

Not everything that contributes to the economy is paid work. Not by a long shot.

 

[Gumby]

When I consider how my light is spent
Ere half my days in this dark world and wide,
And that one Talent which is death to hide
Lodged with me useless, though my soul more bent
To serve therewith my Maker, and present
My true account, lest He returning chide,
"Doth God exact day-labour, light denied?"
I fondly ask. But Patience, to prevent
That murmur, soon replies, "God doth not need
Either man's work or his own gifts.
Who best Bear his mild yoke, they serve him best.
His state Is kingly: thousands at his bidding speed,
And post o'er land and ocean without rest;
They also serve who only stand and wait."

John Milton (1608-1674) On his Blindness

Nicely done Meadbh.

 

[TickTock]

Not everything that contributes to the economy is paid work. Not by a long shot.

While I agree with your statement, this irritates me, as bongo2 never made the claim that paid work is the only way to contribute to society (not quite the same thing as contributing to the economy, but still I don't think you're arguing against a position that he's taken).

I want to get straight what I mean by retirement. Technically you can say things like “Bob retired from his job as a lawyer to teach starving children in Africa,”

[snip]

If you are leaving your job to pursue a higher calling then I think it is misleading to say you are “retiring”

Now, I disagree with his stated position that ERing to a life of leisure is detrimental to society. But let's argue against what he actually claims.

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Is it about time to point out that a vacuum is frequently better than the things nature decides to fill it with?

Theres a couple of ways to take that. I mean it the good way.

 

[clifp]

All human beings are by nature selfish. ER's are human beings and are therefore selfish, but no more and no less than anyone else.

I echo what Gumby said in one sentence but of course I'll take a few paragraphs.

I threaten to make Bongo's point in an earlier post. Luckily, he beat me to it and once again proved the rule that you can spot pioneers by the arrows in their backs.

I agree with much of Bongo's observation, but I feel so much of what people to is selfish, that early retirement is about as selfish as habitually driving 5-10 miles an hour over the speed limit.

Most activity that people do is selfish, the exception are rare enough that you can pretty much list them. Taking care of your children, family, and strangers. Helping the poor and the defenseless . Arguably helping animals and the environment. Basically, anything will earn you sainthood, or sometimes a Noble Peace Prize is selfless most everything else is selfish at some levels.

It seems that as long as have sufficient resource when you retire to take care of your children and family you aren't adding to a society burden. Where I do agree somewhat with Bongo is that when you retire you are decreasing (taxes) the ability of society to take on care of poor or spend on things that will benefit everyone (e.g. roads, clean water). I think you can argue that maximizing the taxes paid or given to charity is a selfless act, but don't I think not doing it is particularly selfish.

I also think it matters to some extent what your profession was if ER is selfish. It seems to me that few would argue, that a smart ruthless [-]annuity salesman [/-]drug lord, retiring early would be detrimental to society. On the other hand a brilliant medical research who has already discovered the cures for 3 forms of cancer, deciding to retire at 45 to life of golf, and sailboat would be a blow to society.

Many public service jobs are beneficial to society firefighters, K-12 teachers, cops, garbage collector. Also many health care workers are similarly valuable. On the other hand there are lot of profession which are competitive in nature and the net contribution to society is marginal. For instance if 1/2 of the following profession disappeared tomorrow would we be really worse off overall? (Lawyer, money manager, sales/marketing/ad, TV producer, Casino personal, any body involved in liquor, gun, tobacco industry, fashion industry etc.) So it seems to me it isn't all selfish to ER from one of those jobs. Now that leaves a lot of jobs which actually produce something valuable and so you could make the argument that taking an Early Retirement is somewhat detrimental to society. On the other hand, if you retire from a you do give an opportunity for some else to take over your position and get promoted.

 

[NotSoonEnough]

"I think that there is far too much work done in the world, that immense harm is caused by the belief that work is virtuous, and that what needs to be preached in modern industrial countries is quite different from what always has been preached."

In Praise of Idleness By Bertrand Russell

 

[chinaco]

Not completely sure about the point Bongo is trying to make.

But I think Bongo is Wrongo!!!

Especially if he is equating ER with societies free loaders that have never worked... Most of us have deferred consumption (saved) early on to consume during a later phase in life. Once one has squirreled away enough nuts for 50 winters... no reason to keep gathering nuts. Time to start doing something different.

If his point is that people who do not produce are a drag on society, he could be correct if the ratio of non-workers to workers was too large. But economic forces (e.g., inflation) will adjust to bring about an equilibrium between supply and demand of most goods and services.

 

[gandalf42]

Most activity that people do is selfish, the exception are rare enough that you can pretty much list them.

Its the point I made early on. So are most of the choices that lead to your job..education, place of employment, whether you went all out in a job or pursued other interests, whether you stayed current in your knowledge, and on and on.

For Bongo to state that ER is selfish, my reply is "yeah, so what's your point?" (and why not just state that all retirement is selfish?)

It's like Bongo is pointing out a tomato while not noticing he's standing in a fresh produce market.

We need more philosophical ideas. Similar to: "I ER therefore I am."

 

[Gumby]

For only a slight twist on Descartes, I offer "J'ai pension, donc je suis."

 

[Dawg52]

.

For example, why someone with $100 million invested and golfing 40 hours a week is detrimental to others while the same person working at a minimum-wage job in a fast-food restaurant 40 hours a week is a productive member of society is beyond me.

Right on brother! Now, one more cup of coffee before I head to the golf course.

 

[Eagle43]

For example, why someone with $100 million invested and golfing 40 hours a week is detrimental to others while the same person working at a minimum-wage job in a fast-food restaurant 40 hours a week is a productive member of society is beyond me.

Jarhead, Is that you?

I worked for 43 years... from 17 to 60. This does not count the time in school when I delivered papers and bagged groceries... I feel no angst that I decided to take the money and run. I do not feel unproductive; I don't think I'm a freeloader, and I could care less if someone thinks ill of me as the checks pour in.

Let's ask Ed Abbey about this...quote

Wealth should come like manna from heaven, unearned and uncalled for. Money should be like grace--a gift. It is not worth sweating and scheming for.

I have found through trial and error that I work best under duress. In fact I work only under duress.

My cousin Elroy spent seven years as an IBM taper staring at THINK signs on the walls before he finally got a good idea: He quit.

 

[Goonie]

I feel no angst that I decided to take the money and run. I do not feel unproductive; I don't think I'm a freeloader, and I could care less if someone thinks ill of me as the checks pour in.

That's what I'm talkin' 'bout!

 

[REWahoo]

Evidently the golfing weather in Jarhead's neck of the woods is lousy since he (or someone claiming to be him) reappeared from the mists and posted this quote on another thread:

Hi all! I've piped up a few times before, and I thought I'd introduce myself. I think I'm quite a bit younger than most of you (33) and still working with three young children (all under 5). I have a typical desk job, and my wife stays at home. I dream of FI/RE, but, like the typical family, saving money was a lot easier when it was Double Income No Kids, rather than Single Income Three Kids. With the wife and kids sending our expenses up rapidly, the dream seems farther and farther away each year. This year was particularly bad, with a move to a higher-priced neighborhood, and an almost endless stream of large expenses that went with it. In the next two years I hope to get back to saving significantly (something that I used to do easily, but haven’t been able to manage for the last two years).

This certainly lends credence to RIT's sour grape theory as the motivation behind this thread.

 

[TickTock]

Jarhead, Is that you?

Nope, I don't know Jarhead*. Members List shows the last time he posted before today was on 5/19/07, before I signed up.

 

[Moemg]

This thread got me thinking .I have worked 39 years . I worked when my children were babies and all thru their childhood . I worked extra so they could go to college . I worked an extra year to pay for a wedding . I worked so I could help my Mom out for years . Do I feel selfish now that I finally stopped working ? Not at all !

 

[Rich_by_the_Bay]

Evidently the golfing weather in Jarhead's neck of the woods is lousy since he (or someone claiming to be him) reappeared from the mists and posted this quote:

Originally Posted by bongo2
Hi all! I've piped up a few times before, and I thought I'd introduce myself. I think I'm quite a bit younger than most of you (33) and still working with three young children (all under 5). I have a typical desk job, and my wife stays at home. I dream of FI/RE, but, like the typical family, saving money was a lot easier when it was Double Income No Kids, rather than Single Income Three Kids. With the wife and kids sending our expenses up rapidly, the dream seems farther and farther away each year. This year was particularly bad, with a move to a higher-priced neighborhood, and an almost endless stream of large expenses that went with it. In the next two years I hope to get back to saving significantly (something that I used to do easily, but haven’t been able to manage for the last two years).

This certainly lends credence to RIT's sour grape theory as the motivation behind this thread.

That's quite a turnaround in attitude.

Not to be harsh on the OP - it's tough to pull off especially with a few kids. But the first step is a hard self-assessment and reality check. If life and dreams are not aligned, change things - enlist the family to live beneath, move to less expensive housing, whatever. If that can't be done, accept the fact and identify some potential compromises.

But to realize you're falling short (no shame in that) and react by playing games with the validity of your original dream won't get you anywhere except frustrated. If there's any truth to this take on the original post, I hope it serves as a wake up call to get back on track to FIRE - it may still be reachable even it it takes a few compromises. Bongo is still young with lots of possibilities, once he accepts that the current strategy (whatever it might be) may need some adjustments.

Of course, this could all be a genuine moral crisis for the OP in which case FIRE is not the goal at all. Seems to me his proper response to that is to work forever.

Bongo, good luck to you.