How early is "early" on this forum?

[Rustic23]

If I have to carry the card, I would never retire!

 

[kyounge1956]

My Opinion......

I think it should be "Retirement after having worked for at least 30 years Forum".

While I understand the incredible crap in the corp world and other places, and the increases in federal, state, and local regulations that make working lifge sometimes just plain unbearable, its my opinion that, you can't retire until you've actually worked for a good while. Its a yin-yang thing.

IMO, rtiring in your thirties is just moving to a less stressful job, and it might put you on the outs with all your friends who are still working, so essentially you move away and get a new kind of job. But again, IMO, that's not retirement because you didn't work long enough. So according to my def. you could retire at age 48, but I would really prefer that most people worked until they were old enough to get the AARP blurb and carry the card.

That's retirement for me.

I'm planning to retire in a little under three years, with between 28 and 29 years of service as a City employee. If it turns out I can prevent one of my younger co-workers from getting laid off by retiring sooner (the City is facing huge budget shortfalls at least next year and 2012, perhaps after that too if the economy does not improve), I might just do that. I'm certainly not going to stick around an extra year and a half after my target date, just to make it an even thirty. Thirty is just a number.


An unbearable job isn't the only reason people want to retire early. I gripe sometimes, but when it comes down to brass tacks, my job isn't bad. The working conditions, including pay, are fine, the work itself is a good fit for my abilities and my coworkers are for the most part agreeable people. There are just other things in my life that I'd like to accomplish, and I don't think I'll ever get them done as long as I'm working full time.

 

[FIREd]

My Opinion......

I think it should be "Retirement after having worked for at least 30 years Forum".

While I understand the incredible crap in the corp world and other places, and the increases in federal, state, and local regulations that make working lifge sometimes just plain unbearable, its my opinion that, you can't retire until you've actually worked for a good while. Its a yin-yang thing.

IMO, rtiring in your thirties is just moving to a less stressful job, and it might put you on the outs with all your friends who are still working, so essentially you move away and get a new kind of job. But again, IMO, that's not retirement because you didn't work long enough. So according to my def. you could retire at age 48, but I would really prefer that most people worked until they were old enough to get the AARP blurb and carry the card.

That's retirement for me.

What utter nonsense...

 

[flyfishnevada]

My dad took me out to dinner to celebrate my retirement. He told me his dad retired at 63. My dad retired at 52. I retired at 43, though I'm not sure I'm done working yet. I might take some part time work as my kids are still in school and DW will work until I am 50. At this rate my grand children will retire after graduating college!

My Opinion......

I think it should be "Retirement after having worked for at least 30 years Forum".

While I understand the incredible crap in the corp world and other places, and the increases in federal, state, and local regulations that make working lifge sometimes just plain unbearable, its my opinion that, you can't retire until you've actually worked for a good while. Its a yin-yang thing.

IMO, rtiring in your thirties is just moving to a less stressful job, and it might put you on the outs with all your friends who are still working, so essentially you move away and get a new kind of job. But again, IMO, that's not retirement because you didn't work long enough. So according to my def. you could retire at age 48, but I would really prefer that most people worked until they were old enough to get the AARP blurb and carry the card.

That's retirement for me.

Retirement is defined by you. Don't let these rigid thinkers define it for you. Life is more than working for a living, doing what your told and fitting the mold. If you think you're ready, go for it. Call it what you want and 99% of the folks on this board will support you. Considering you could easily live to be 90 nowadays, 60 is early!

 

[NW-Bound]

My dad took me out to dinner to celebrate my retirement. He told me his dad retired at 63. My dad retired at 52. I retired at 43, though I'm not sure I'm done working yet. I might take some part time work as my kids are still in school and DW will work until I am 50. At this rate my grand children will retire after graduating college!

May I suggest that their college tuition fund be simply diverted to their retirement fund. That way, they can start ER right after high school.

 

[HsiaoChu]

What utter nonsense...

NO, dude, its not utter nonsense. ITS MY OPINION. I didn't call it a fact. Its IS RUDE to tell someone that their opinion is "utter nonsense", though.

However, what you could ahve said with more aplomb woud be, "For me, that opinion is utternonesense." To state with pseudo authority that someone elses opinion is utter none sense is something in not very genteel.

And this too, is my opinion.

 

[FIREd]

I think it should be "Retirement after having worked for at least 30 years Forum".
While I understand the incredible crap in the corp world and other places, and the increases in federal, state, and local regulations that make working lifge sometimes just plain unbearable, its my opinion that, you can't retire until you've actually worked for a good while. Its a yin-yang thing.

You could retire at age 48, but I would really prefer that most people worked until they were old enough to get the AARP blurb and carry the card.

Is 30 years a magic number? Where does that number come from? I retired in my 30's and you are telling me that, in your opinion, I didn't suffer long enough to deserve to retire? Talk about being rude.

IMO, rtiring in your thirties is just moving to a less stressful job, and it might put you on the outs with all your friends who are still working, so essentially you move away and get a new kind of job.

What kind of job is that? I moved away from what exactly by retiring in my 30's? It makes no sense whatsoever.

Just because you keep saying "it's my opinion" does not make it any less nonsensical. And that's MY opinion.

 

[haha]

Rarely is truth absolutely on one side of a scale. To feel the need to call someone's opinion 'nonsense" may give away a degree of insecurity.

I am retired, and have been for a long time, but I don't feel that it is nonsense to think that quitting almost before one gets started may not be in anyone's best interest. I don't know that at all, I am just agnostic about it, and feel that outcomes and satisfactions/regrets may depend heavily on how life progresses.

Ha

 

[bbbamI]

I have opinions (and give advice), but everyone should be sure to have a grain of salt and a lime on hand....

 

[Katsmeow]

Is 30 years a magic number? Where does that number come from? I retired in my 30's and you are telling me that, in your opinion, I didn't suffer long enough to deserve to retire? Talk about being rude.

This is actually an interesting philosophical issue. And I could see their being different views on it. I think the vast majority of people who are here think that early retirement is fine. But...what does that mean?

Retire at 60? Sure.

Retire at 55? Sure

Retire at 50? Probably

Retire at 40? Maybe.

Retire at 30? Hmm

Let me put it this way. Let's say my 19 year old son won the lottery and suddenly had no economic need to work. Would I advise him that he should immediately "retire" and never work again? I doubt it.

I do think that there is a natural human desire to do things and be productive. I'm not sure that is served by lifelong leisure even if one is wealthy. Think of some of the children of wealthy people who never have to earn a living. They don't always end up in a good place emotinally.

Retirement does imply that you retired from something. It has an implication of you did certain things...ideally in a career that was worthwhile and fulfilling...and now you are done with those and ready to do other things.

The person who has never really gone through those worthwhile and fulfilling things through work seems more...unfinished...than retired. (This is one reason that personally I've never really understand a woman being a stay at home wife/mother for the entirely of adulthood. I can understand being home with kids for a time or deferring one's career for awhile due to a spouse's career but never really understood the idea of not working outside the home ever. Just seems odd to me -- and I'm female).

Now obviously where you draw the line on this is a gray area. It was suggested 30 years as one person's opinion. You might say 15 years. Someone else might say 20 years. Another person might say X years of part time work and then retire. I suggest that very few people would advocate 0 however.

 

[SunsetSail]

HsiaoChu - I disagree with your opinion about working for a certain period of time. But, I am curious as to how you would define 'work' for the purposes of saying that someone should put in a certain amout of time. Specificially, would you consider work to be an activity that:
(1) produces earned income
(2) contributes to society
(3) is something along the lines occupying a person to build character or something like that

I could make compelling arguments that in many instances early retirement will produce some or all of these things more so than what society calls a 'job'.
I'm just curious as to the thought process behind this type of opinion.

 

[SunsetSail]

Let me put it this way. Let's say my 19 year old son won the lottery and suddenly had no economic need to work. Would I advise him that he should immediately "retire" and never work again? I doubt it.

I think there would be a fundamental difference between retiring (or never working) from a windfall at an early age vs retiring early by extreme savings. It seems like the windfall would tend to corupt values but I think that would be more a function of youth, lack of life experiences and an absence of moderation that tends to come with age as opposed to lack of work experiences.

 

[landonew]

This is a retirement forum? Lol, many of us aren't seeking retirement 'per se', but merely financial indepenence.

I find this forum to be an excellent place to get financial advice, even if I have to occassionally listen to one or two grumpy old men tell me about how they used to have to walk up hill both ways in the snow.


All kidding aside, congrats on your "early" retirement. Somebody told me that 64 is the new 44, so you should party like it is 1991!

 

[bbbamI]

I retired...became financially independent...whatever you want to call it at the age of 41 and left my job.

Now, if I had met that goal at the age of 30 or 35, would I keep working instead of doing other things I'd like to do?

Ummm, words escape me, I'll just use this little guy --->

 

[Nords]

Let me put it this way. Let's say my 19 year old son won the lottery and suddenly had no economic need to work. Would I advise him that he should immediately "retire" and never work again? I doubt it.
The person who has never really gone through those worthwhile and fulfilling things through work seems more...unfinished...than retired.

This conversation comes up a lot at Hale Nords. If I'd been able to keep having fulfilling & worthwhile work to satisfy my every desire then I never would have ER'd. Instead the dissatisfiers quickly outweighed the satisfiers-- especially when we started a family.

Put it in this context: "My child, I think you should go find a soul-deadening entry-level drudge job at Megacorps. Initially you'll want to kill yourself rather than get out of bed on your 40th consecutive Monday morning for that rush-hour commute, but soon you'll be promoted to middle-level frustration and then executive dreariness. Imagine how good you'll feel when you stop!"

Instead we tell our kid that we hope she achieves financial independence as soon as she's able so that she can look for something she enjoys doing. If it's a job, great. (Good luck with that.) If it's not a job then I hope it's fulfilling & worthwhile.

As for that hypothetical 19-year-old lottery winner, the first thing I'd do with him (and his new fortune) is take him surfing.

NO, dude, its not utter nonsense. ITS MY OPINION. I didn't call it a fact. Its IS RUDE to tell someone that their opinion is "utter nonsense", though.
However, what you could ahve said with more aplomb woud be, "For me, that opinion is utternonesense." To state with pseudo authority that someone elses opinion is utter none sense is something in not very genteel.
And this too, is my opinion.

In my opinion, every board has a culture which you would benefit from appreciating instead of admonishing and lecturing.

 

[cardude]

I quit at 43, a couple of years ago. I was financially ready at 43, but probably not emotionally ready in retrospect, so for me 43 was a little early I guess. None of my peers are retired, and being solo most of the day has been a big adjustment. I'm still glad I got out of the car business when I did, but I think I may need to get back into something eventually that gets me involved and more productive.

But I gotta tell you, I sure like the 3 months of the year hanging out with the entire family, and it will be hard to give up the free time the rest of the year, so I'm just not really sure what to do.

No rush, but I'm kind of interested starting something the kids can get involved in that will teach them the value of hard work-- I worry a little about what the kids think about seeing me retired and not doing much. I remind them that I was able to do this because I worked my butt off in the car business for almost 20 years and saved much of what I earned, but you know, monkey see--monkey do.

Rambling again..............

 

[NW-Bound]

I quit at 43, a couple of years ago...

No rush, but I'm kind of interested starting something the kids can get involved in that will teach them the value of hard work-- I worry a little about what the kids think about seeing me retired and not doing much. I remind them that I was able to do this because I worked my butt off in the car business for almost 20 years and saved much of what I earned, but you know, monkey see--monkey do...

Or they might think "Surely Dad worked hard, but there are plenty of others who also work hard. Dad must be lucky. Now, why won't he share with us some of his lucky loots?"

All kidding aside, you are correct that having children to raise makes a difference.

 

[HsiaoChu]

HsiaoChu - I disagree with your opinion about working for a certain period of time. But, I am curious as to how you would define 'work' for the purposes of saying that someone should put in a certain amout of time. Specificially, would you consider work to be an activity that:
(1) produces earned income
(2) contributes to society
(3) is something along the lines occupying a person to build character or something like that

I could make compelling arguments that in many instances early retirement will produce some or all of these things more so than what society calls a 'job'.
I'm just curious as to the thought process behind this type of opinion.

I have no definition of work that I would require everyone to have. Work is different for everyone. Some people only consider work something that you do that is hard labor, others its only if you do it 16 hours a day(like my Dad), or others only if you don't like it, or me, that you have to have done it for a long period of time OR you can't be called retired from it.

In my thinking, I'm only defining work as it coinsides with reitrement. Someone who never did something conistently for a long period of time cannot then be retired from it.

Let me give you a crazy example. I believe that it is possible for a contract killer to retire. Say this dude or dudette did this job/career methodically killing maybe 20 people a year, with all the set up and action and get away necessary to make all the arrangements, along with ample vacation time. S/he could be retired. But if they only did the job for 10 years, then they are not retired, not enough duration, they are just on vacation. If they became a school teacher after it then they did indeed retire from contract killing because they have a new job.

Its all about duration of the activity even several activities..... IN MY OPINION, maybe crazy but not nonsense for me, just my opinion. However a cogent discussion about the weak points in my argument could change my opinion. But...... insults will never do it.

HC

 

[SunsetSail]

I have no definition of work that I would require everyone to have. Work is different for everyone. Some people only consider work something that you do that is hard labor, others its only if you do it 16 hours a day(like my Dad), or others only if you don't like it, or me, that you have to have done it for a long period of time OR you can't be called retired from it.

In my thinking, I'm only defining work as it coinsides with reitrement. Someone who never did something conistently for a long period of time cannot then be retired from it.

Let me give you a crazy example. I believe that it is possible for a contract killer to retire. Say this dude or dudette did this job/career methodically killing maybe 20 people a year, with all the set up and action and get away necessary to make all the arrangements, along with ample vacation time. S/he could be retired. But if they only did the job for 10 years, then they are not retired, not enough duration, they are just on vacation. If they became a school teacher after it then they did indeed retire from contract killing because they have a new job.

Its all about duration of the activity even several activities..... IN MY OPINION, maybe crazy but not nonsense for me, just my opinion. However a cogent discussion about the weak points in my argument could change my opinion. But...... insults will never do it.

HC

Assuming I understand you correctly - I could leave my current position at age 40, take an even more active role in raising my children until their age of majority (13 more years at that time). Cumulatively I would have 30 years of 'work' under my belt. After that time, if I choose to be completely idle I would have met the 30-year duration through the two tasks. You could replace raising children with sailing around the world, volunteering with a local charity, perfecting your flyfishing technique, etc. This line of reasoning puts defining what is included in the duration on a slippery slope. For example, I doubt you would consider perfecting one's channel surfing skills as a worthy activity for the 30 year duration.

It is arbitary to choose any timeframe at all. I could empathize (but not necessarily agree with) a position that a retirement must be earned, but not a length of service position.

You could also make the argument that a person that has achieved financial independence is being selfish by not retiring and making room for the next generation of workers.

I'm not trying to change your mind. I just can't see any logical reason for your position and I question whether you take that position only because society pushes us to believe that everyone must be a productive worker bee.

 

[foxfirev5]

It's all relative. My Mom worked fifty years for the same investment firm and felt she retired early. I will be lucky if I surpass 35 years of good fruitfull work before I hang it up. The particular age it happens is not important. I know plenty of 60 year olds who have more going on than a lot of 40 year young people.

 

[kumquat]

It's a state of mind. I ESRd at age 61 and am 5-10 years ahead of most of my colleagues, many of whom will work til they can't.

I CAN'T HELP IT!!

You're rich and in Florida, how easy can it be??

 

[Rich_by_the_Bay]

I CAN'T HELP IT!!

You're rich and in Florida, how easy can it be??

Got a nice house you might wanna buy...

 

[HsiaoChu]

I'm not trying to change your mind. I just can't see any logical reason for your position and I question whether you take that position only because society pushes us to believe that everyone must be a productive worker bee.

As much as I don't like it personally myself, I must admit that, in my opinion, the worker bee anology has some merit. I believe that people in a society have a requirement to be some kind of productive worker bee(either constructive or destructive) for a duration of time to have something to be "retired from".

In fact it may simply be the use of the word "retirement". I think in my mind, you cannot use the word "retirement" unless you actually worked for a period of time to retire from. Early retirement in my mind is forced retirement.

Its NOT LOGICAL, its my opinion, based on my upbringing. If someone stops working before the required numer of years, in my opinion, that is their right to do so in our society. But in my opinion, its not thier right to call that stoppage retirement, if they only did it a short period of time.

Retirement is a reward for working long and hard at something. Its probably about semantics, and its all relative and built around rewards. Those people who made an obscene amount of money or who inherited an obscene amount of money may never understand the concept of work at all, in the duration aspect. My sister in law works for a bank. She is a senior VP and she makes double what I make after working for 40 years, and she's only been at it for 28 years.

Semantics: Children are God's reward for enjoying sex.

 

[Escort Rider]

I CAN'T HELP IT!!
You're rich and in Florida, how easy can it be??

I don't get it. What does being in Florida have to do with anything being easy, apart from not having to shovel snow? It is difficult to imagine a more horrible climate, at least for six or seven months of the year: bugs galore, stifling and oppresive heat and humidity, being trapped indoors, evacuating for hurricanes. If I lived in Florida, I would be planning my escape, as if from a prison, ASAP. Please explain.

 

[REWahoo]

I suspect it's simply the grass is greener syndrome - kumquat lives in the Great White North.