If I had it to do all over

And to think I feel guilty about considering ER after 35 years of working, saving and investing.
 
And to think I was feeling guilty at age 40 for thinking about quitting my job and moving back in with my momma and paying $700 to rent a room.
 
+1M, except I sometimes doubt if society will cut down on those freebies.

He's what we used to call a "bum". Refuses to invest the $500 to get his cert as tennis pro...even when he had the $$ from selling those iPhones.
If too many in society take that path the society starts to crumble. Its like the old joke about Greece's most valuable export.......working Greeks;)


In my neck of the woods he would still be called a bum.
 
My thoughts exactly.
Definitely NOT a role model we want our youth to emulate.

While it is one thing to live to work, at the same time people need to support themselves. This guy seems like he is just dependent on society to provide for him.
 
What I found equally if not more disturbing were the number of comments at the bottom of the article supporting and praising this lifestyle.

It seems to me that one sees more and more articles like these, which either celebrate what I call the "fully subsidized life" as the perfect life, or that things are so bad one can no longer make it on their own at all. Planning, discipline, and hard work that achieves a goal is dismissed as "dumb luck".
 
It seems to me that one sees more and more articles like these, which either celebrate what I call the "fully subsidized life" as the perfect life, or that things are so bad one can no longer make it on their own at all. Planning, discipline, and hard work that achieves a goal is dismissed as "dumb luck".

Lately, "planning, discipline and hard work that achieves a goal" is dismissed as "getting ahead at the expense of others".

Success has been redefined as a zero sum game.
 
By some...

Yes, but those "some" are the ones now making the rules and deciding how much we should pay for our [-]frugality[/-] selfishness...in the name of fairness of course.
 
The posting of this article seems more like an attempt to provoke and incite, than elicit any kind of thoughtful response or meaningful dialogue.
 
The posting of this article seems more like an attempt to provoke and incite, than elicit any kind of thoughtful response or meaningful dialogue.

Well, the original post is about one man's view of early retirement. It's just another way to get there and how he's willing to live in order to not have to work.

Some save and invest, others play the system...I personally resent those who game the system but that's just me.
 
Well, the original post is about one man's view of early retirement. It's just another way to get there and how he's willing to live in order to not have to work.
True, but given the make-up of nearly everyone in this forum, it would be surprising if his way of living found much support here. I don't think there's anything for us to learn from this article.
 
True, but given the make-up of nearly everyone in this forum, it would be surprising if his way of living found much support here. I don't think there's anything for us to learn from this article.

Perhaps we already "know" what we need to learn, but the story reminds us of the dangers of providing such a system as an alternative. I've often said that there needs to be an incentive to get out of poverty. Hunger, lack of comforts, less medical care, heat in the summer, cold in the winter, etc. etc. These "specters" all drove me to find a decent j*b, save, prepare, plan, etc. etc.

Now, while I wouldn't want to live as the "hero" of the story live, he does live better than most people in the world. I don't like the uncertainty he faces, I don't like the limited options he has, but he clearly can exist in relative comfort for the future.

We have provided a system that is too good to get out of. As we are finding out (by 3rd and even 4th generation participates) the system is its own prison. I know this could get political, but I think its been "equal opportunity" when it comes to giving away someone else's money to buy votes. I'm sure many disagree, so, as always, YMMV.
 
If I were emporer, none of this would exist. Given our actual political system, this exists and will increase until everything finally breaks.

When social democracies really got going in Europe after WW2, there was considerable attitudinal homogeneity in the populations, and most of them shared similar moral and ethical foundations. I remember reading that Scandinavian socialism has gone along relatively well for so long because it runs on the leftover vapors of Lutheranism. The people being helped made mightly efforts, and were generally able to pull themslves up fairly quickly. Their pride/embarrassment required that.

None of this is true anymore. The paying class is entirely divorced from the payee class. In many cases, they don't even share a language, let alone cultural assumptions. To make mattters worse, there is a large professional class of mostly government workers whose job it is to be sure that there will always be a growing supply of "clients".

Regard it and weep.

Ha
 
Last edited:
Well said, Ha.
 
If I were emporer, none of this would exist. Given our actual political system, this exists and will increase until everything finally breaks.

When social democracies really got going in Europe after WW2, there was considerable attitudinal homogeneity in the populations, and most of them shared similar moral and ethical foundations. I remember reading that Scandinavian socialism has gone along relatively well for so long because it runs on the leftover vapors of Lutheranism. The people being helped made mightly efforts, and were generally able to pull themslves up fairly quickly. Their pride/embarrassment required that.

None of this is true anymore. The paying class is entirely divorced from the payee class. In many cases, they don't even share a language, let alone cultural assumptions. To make mattters worse, there is a large professional class of mostly government workers whose job it is to be sure that there will always be a growing supply of "clients".

Ah! At last, a "kind of thoughtful response or meaningful dialogue."
 
If I were emporer, none of this would exist. Given our actual political system, this exists and will increase until everything finally breaks.

When social democracies really got going in Europe after WW2, there was considerable attitudinal homogeneity in the populations, and most of them shared similar moral and ethical foundations. I remember reading that Scandinavian socialism has gone along relatively well for so long because it runs on the leftover vapors of Lutheranism. The people being helped made mightly efforts, and were generally able to pull themslves up fairly quickly. Their pride/embarrassment required that.

None of this is true anymore. The paying class is entirely divorced from the payee class. In many cases, they don't even share a language, let alone cultural assumptions. To make mattters worse, there is a large professional class of mostly government workers whose job it is to be sure that there will always be a growing supply of "clients".

Regard it an weep.

Ha

Ha,
What do you think will be the mechanism by which everything breaks? Inability of government to print more money, run away inflation, the inability of the few to produce enough goods and services for the many, or something else? I would personally suspect the inability of the few to provide enough goods and services for the many. I am only 45 so the country has been being destroyed by debt my entire life. I have become numb to it. It has never affected me personally that I can tell. I used to think there was a limit to the amount of money the government can print but I am starting to doubt it. It seems like no one cares as long as the products keep flowing and the people that are producing get to live better that the ones that aren't. Not saying it won't all come crashing down one day. Just wondering what people think the acute cause will be.
 
Ha,
What do you think will be the mechanism by which everything breaks? Inability of government to print more money, run away inflation, the inability of the few to produce enough goods and services for the many, or something else? I would personally suspect the inability of the few to provide enough goods and services for the many. I am only 45 so the country has been being destroyed by debt my entire life. I have become numb to it. It has never affected me personally that I can tell. I used to think there was a limit to the amount of money the government can print but I am starting to doubt it. It seems like no one cares as long as the products keep flowing and the people that are producing get to live better that the ones that aren't. Not saying it won't all come crashing down one day. Just wondering what people think the acute cause will be.
I don't really know. It is likely just based on a distrust of taking the easy way. Generations of nursery rhymes and fables seem to teach this, and I think there is a reason that they do.

But it is somehat like a bridge collapse. Very hard to tell what will cause that bridge to collapse, or when it will collapse, but often much easier to see that it is vulnerable. The whole science of criticality bears. You can make a sand pile higher and higher, but every pile has its limits, and then down it comes.

Ha
 
I read an article that listed the happiest people in the world.Scandinavian countries on top.New Zealand etc.What I noticed is the lack of diversity in these happy countries.God forbid,can someone might come to the conclusion that to much diversity is not good for you.Like taking to many vitamins or drinking to much milk can be counter productive.U.S. wealthiest country on earth came in something like 11th place in the poll.Just an observation.:confused:
 
U.S. wealthiest country on earth came in something like 11th place in the poll.Just an observation.:confused:
If you think of how many countries there are in the world, coming in at #11 still ain't shabby :)
 
Last edited:
I read an article that listed the happiest people in the world.Scandinavian countries on top.New Zealand etc.What I noticed is the lack of diversity in these happy countries.God forbid,can someone might come to the conclusion that to much diversity is not good for you.Like taking to many vitamins or drinking to much milk can be counter productive.U.S. wealthiest country on earth came in something like 11th place in the poll.Just an observation.:confused:

Actually New Zealand & Australia which were in the top 5 are quite diverse.
Talk about drawing a long bow.
Perhaps closeness to the North or South pole is a key determinant of happiness:facepalm:
 
That explains it.That"s why Santa and his elves are the happiest folks on the planet.:)
 
Back
Top Bottom