People Who Should Retire But Don't

[BunsGettingFirm]

Doctors, teachers, etc. are positions that are vocations not jobs and the people who hold those jobs generally love them. However, the initital topic of this thread states that workers are taking unnecessary abuse. There is no way a FI person would put up with that unless they want to hurt themselves (form of masochism) and I know someone like that.

LOL. I'm 80% to my FI target, and I'm finding that I put up with less and less. It doesn't help that I look 8 years younger than I am, so everyone always wonders why I have the balls. I don't think I'm turning into a nasty person, but I can see the turf battles and the ego trips coming, and I just don't want or need any part of them.

 

[rs0460a]

My DW was to retire last year, on her birthday. In fact, I delayed my retirement from January to May, upon her request.

Well May came - went and she decided to remain in the "j*bforce" (even though I retired May 1).

She told me "she wasn't (emotionally?) ready" and decided to wait till the end of the year.

End of the year came. You know the story; she said she would retire on her birthday this year (actually, next week).

Again, she decided not to. However, rather than tell me she would wait till the end of this year, she said she would wait for her next birthday (May '09).

Does she have interests other than her j*b? Yes.
Is she/we FI? Yes.

So what's the problem? Doing bit of "dream intrepertation" I believe that she looks at retirement as the "step before the grave".

You grow up, go to school, get married/partnered, have kids, they go through school, have their own families, and then your parents are gone (3 of 4 of ours are).

Sometimes, w*rk is viewed (in an emotional sense) as delaying the future.

She realizes this, but still has not accepted that part of life.

Oh well...

- Ron

 

[JustCurious]

... and she returned to work? Let's supposed that she does not want to spend that much time her husband (for whatever reason), can she take on a hobby and do something of meaning?

I can think of several reasons why she would return to work, as opposed to spending most of her time with a hobby.

First, maybe she actually enjoys her work more than a hobby. Maybe she enjoys the intellectual stimulation, and the sense of accomplishment and contribution to society, more than a hobby would provide.

Second, she can earn money while working, whereas a hobby may cost her money. For example, the hobby of travelling can be very, very expensive.

Third, maybe she didn't want to hurt her husband's feelings. It's one thing so say "Honey, I want to go back to work." It's another to say "Honey, I want to get away from you and do things on my own."

 

[Nords]

I know a fairly senior O-6, a competitive flag candidate, who's gone through an amazing transformation. Before he took over his squadron his attitude toward ER was "How can I afford to do that?!? I love my job!" If you asked him the tactical range that he'd employ a Navy missile you'd get an answer to three significant figures. When I asked if he could estimate his annual expenses I got a Rainman answer: "About $100K."

18 months later, thanks to "Work Less, Live More", he's seen the light. After [-]being nitpicked to death by higher authority[/-] enjoying the privileges of his third command, he's more than ready to ER. He and his spouse have determined the minute he's retiring, how much pension he'll get ($67K/year plus a CPI COLA), exactly how much they'll spend (a lot less than $100K/year), and how much time he'll be spending with family. His spouse will retire as a Reservist in a few years and she'll also collect a pension in about 20 years. He has no plans to seek further paid employment, so they'll all have a lot of quality family time.

However another shipmate not only does not see the light, I'm not even sure that he has ER optic nerves. They're a retired O-5 (24 years of active duty, pension of $55K/year with a CPI COLA) and a retired Reservist (who will receive the ECI-adjusted equivalent of at least $25K/year in today's dollars starting in 2025, also with a CPI COLA). We don't know their exact savings but after a number of chats I'd call it a combined $1M of home equity & cash. They're both eligible for lifetime TRICARE ($230/year each plus a $12 copay). No kids. Their most expensive habit is the recreational fishing boat.

She "gets" ER and has effectively been so for a couple years. She could work if she wants to, and she has in the past, but she chooses not to.

OTOH the idea of military ER has never even occurred to him. He's probably retiring before he's really ready but the assignment officer is not willing to negotiate about the [-]Pentagon or Iraq[/-] next tour. He's fantasized about spreading out on his 1-acre homestead and working on the boat without the neighbors complaining, but he's already towing it cross-country (further away from their avowed ER homestead) to start the new job before his terminal leave ends. (Since his background is similar to mine, I suspect that he's driving 12-14 hour days.) He might even overlap his last military paycheck and his first civilian one, but he'll spend all of that on tow fuel.

He worked with a headhunter who specializes in translating military subspecialty codes to civilian résumés. I'm not sure how much he learned about the transition or the job search because he took the first offer and didn't even negotiate the salary, let alone the benefits or the moving expenses. It was almost as if he was afraid they'd realize who they hired and might change their minds.

He and his spouse are not spendthrift by any stretch of the imagination. They could probably live off the first pension, let alone their savings, until the second pension kicks in. To do so, however, he would probably have to figure out their expenses and their desired asset allocation. (Due to the "volatile market conditions" they've been 100% cash for over two years.) To date he's been [-]on nearly five years of continuous sea duty[/-] too busy working to show much interest in either topic, and she's asking the right questions but unwilling to act unilaterally.

Despite his blissful ignorance of all things financial, he says that he plans to "work for a few years" before retiring, and this time he really means it.

This isn't "just one more year" syndrome. This is a "why would I stop?" obsession.

[-]Filling the BS bucket[/-] ER education would seem to be the key, and I know how to do that with someone who's showing interest. But how do you get the attention of someone who never even realizes that they need to see?

 

[retire@40]

When you are rich and can lead a stress-free life with almost anything you want, why would you risk it all for more?

"Rezko's fall came as dramatically as his rise. The Syrian immigrant came to Chicago in the 1970s and amassed a fortune from real estate dealings and Papa John's and Panda Express fast-food franchises. That world came crashing down as Rezko found himself deep in debt, facing lawsuits, foreclosure and three criminal cases."

The Rezko verdict: Guilty :: CHICAGO SUN-TIMES :: Tony Rezko

 

[retire@40]

By TRAVIS REED, Associated Press Writer Wed Jul 16, 2008

ORLANDO, Fla. - Lou Pearlman and federal authorities have finally agreed on how much the former boy band promoter swindled from banks and investors in a decades-long scam: a staggering $300 million.


That's how much creator of the Backstreet Boys and 'N Sync will have to repay, at a minimum, for restitution on the fraud conviction for which he's serving a 25-year prison sentence.

Boy band promoter ordered to repay victims $300M - Yahoo! News

 

[HFWR]

That's almost as bad as creating Backstreet Boys and 'N Sync...

 

[Marquette]

That's almost as bad as creating Backstreet Boys and 'N Sync...

Hopefully he'll go on trial for that next.

Or maybe this is like the IRS finally getting Capone since the feds couldn't.

 

[Nords]

Hopefully he'll go on trial for that next.
Or maybe this is like the IRS finally getting Capone since the feds couldn't.

If we're really lucky they'll go after Simon Cowell & Paula Abdul next...

Oh, wait, we got what we paid for there.

 

[retire@40]

At age 84, I don't think he needs this headache. He could have retired at 65 or sooner and enjoyed his life and lived off his fat government pension.

Instead, he'll live the last few years of his life in torment.

Alaska senator indicted on criminal charges - MarketWatch

Sen. Ted Stevens indicted on criminal charges

Justice Department alleges he didn't report more than $250,000 worth of gifts

By Robert Schroeder, MarketWatch
Last update: 2:18 p.m. EDT July 29, 2008

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- The Justice Department indicted Alaska Republican Sen. Ted Stevens on Tuesday on criminal charges related to inproper disclosure of gifts and services valued at more than $250,000 in his home state.

Matthew Friedrich, acting assistant U.S. attorney general, said Tuesday that the U.S. is charging the senator with seven felony counts of making false statements between 1999 and 2006.
The Justice Department is alleging that Stevens, 84 years old, accepted gifts from oil services company VECO in the form of material and labor to renovate his private residence in Alaska. The value of the gifts is more than $250,000, the government said.
"These items were not disclosed" said Friedrich.
Stevens, the longest serving Republican in the Senate in the party's history, is up for reelection this year and has served in the Senate for 40 years. He has been one of the Senate's most influential lawmakers, and served as chairman of the powerful Senate Appropriations Committee from 1997 to 2005, except for the 18 months when Democrats controlled the chamber.
Stevens chaired the United States Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation during the 109th Congress. He is currently the ranking member on the committee.
The senator's lawyer has denied any wrongdoing by Stevens.

Robert Schroeder is a reporter for MarketWatch in Washington.

 

[friar1610]

It wasn't that long ago that company policies included a mandatory retirement at 65. Many successfully fought to eliminate this prejudice, in part, with the sound argument that older workers can be valuable producers. For those who love what they do, it is a win win for everyone.

One organization that still has mandatory retirement is the military. Depending on your rank, you are required to retire at a certain point. For example an E-6 or O-4 must retire after 20 years. An E-9 or O-06 can stay for 30 years then must retire. There are other cut-off points (known as "high year tenure") as well. The only way you can stay longer than 30 years is to be a flag or general officer and even then the service tells you when it's time for you to "go home".

Of course, the majority of retired military people have a "second career" of some sort, so it's not like they permanently retire after reaching high year tenure.

I could have stayed in the Navy for two more years before reaching high year tenure, but knew in my heart it was time to go. I then worked 6 years as a civilian before retiring for good at 58.

 

[haha]

One organization that still has mandatory retirement is the military. Depending on your rank, you are required to retire at a certain point. For example an E-6 or O-4 must retire after 20 years. An E-9 or O-06 can stay for 30 years then must retire.

If an O6 gets passed for flag once or twice, can s/he still hang around for the full 30, or is it "up or out"?

 

[friar1610]

If an O6 gets passed for flag once or twice, can s/he still hang around for the full 30, or is it "up or out"?

Things may have changed since I retired, but an O-6 was able to remain for the full 30. Not being selected for flag is not considered a "passover" in the sense that failing to be selected at lower grades is.

At one time, during the post-Cold War drawdowns, there were "Selective Early Retirement Boards" (SERBs). These were essentially reverse promotion boards where you were selected for to be mandatorily retired short of your high year tenure. I was a board member for one of them (looking at O-5's who had not yet hit the 26 year point). All who were selected were those who had not been selected for O-6.

 

[huusom]

McCain is the one who should retire and spend more of his remaining time to learning how to use computer. Maybe then he'll join this forum and exchange ideas with us.

 

[Nords]

Things may have changed since I retired, but an O-6 was able to remain for the full 30. Not being selected for flag is not considered a "passover" in the sense that failing to be selected at lower grades is.
At one time, during the post-Cold War drawdowns, there were "Selective Early Retirement Boards" (SERBs). These were essentially reverse promotion boards where you were selected for to be mandatorily retired short of your high year tenure. I was a board member for one of them (looking at O-5's who had not yet hit the 26 year point). All who were selected were those who had not been selected for O-6.

Still the same this year. I've been waiting to see if the 40-year pay tables mean that O-6s can stay past 30, but it only seems to happen on an individual basis for the really tough-to-fill jobs.

After that last O-6 command tour, though, the choices start to dwindle and the follow-on tours get progressively uglier.

This O-6 is going to have to hire security guards and enter a witness protection program:
U.S. Naval Institute

 

[friar1610]

This O-6 is going to have to hire security guards and enter a witness protection program:
U.S. Naval Institute

Yeah; one of my buddies sent me that story a while back. But the author makes a point.

When I was in the 5-sided building quite a while ago (I was a mid-grade, restricted line O-5), I used to feel sorry for the URL guys. They'd just come off a successful CO tour as the CO of a DD, SSN or squadron and were either looking to get picked up on the next board or had just been selected for CAPT. Although I didn't like my assignment there, I thought it must have been a lot harder for them squirreled away in little offices, not having nearly the clout they did when they were in command and having (if their jobs were anything like mine) much less satisfying things to do every day.

Must be even harder for the post-major command guys who don't make flag. (And even for those who do - there are some really crappy O-7 jobs in OPNAV and OSD)

 

[haha]

Things may have changed since I retired, but an O-6 was able to remain for the full 30. Not being selected for flag is not considered a "passover" in the sense that failing to be selected at lower grades is.

Thanks, Friar.

Ha

 

[Nords]

Well, Lance Armstrong has finally admitted that he can't turn it off. Apparently none of the women he's dated over the last few years are able to keep him physically or mentally stimulated, either:

http://msn.foxsports.com/other/stor...etire:-`09-Tour-`is-the-intention`?print=true

Somewhere Michael Jordan is thinking "Looooser!"

 

[unclemick]

Micheal Jordan
Brett Farve
Lance Armstrong



heh heh heh - Soooooo - after wrapping up a 15 yr career of ER - back to er ah I can't say the word. . Nope wouldn't be prudent - good luck Lance.

 

[DangerMouse]

How lame is his excuse for coming back? I think the reality is he can't stand being out of the limelight. Get a life Lance and move on.

 

[Nords]

How lame is his excuse for coming back? I think the reality is he can't stand being out of the limelight. Get a life Lance and move on.

I've heard the guy speak on a number of occasions. One-trick pony who really has no ability to entertain himself in any other way. I don't think he's seeking publicity or even money, I think that the only thing he's interested in is pounding hills. I mean, c'mon, Sheryl Crow even gave up on him.

He preaches a good anti-cancer sermon but the fact is that he totally ignored his own symptoms until his swollen malignant cancerous organ would no longer fit on the bicycle seat without affecting his pedaling. (I can only imagine the coach reviewing the training videos: "Hey, Lance, what happened to your leg position there? Why are you grimacing so much? And what's that flapping under your seat, brah?" We're not talking a few days of denial or obliviousness, either-- we're talking months. So maybe this is his own way of doing penance.

 

[Rich_by_the_Bay]

He preaches a good anti-cancer sermon but the fact is that he totally ignored his own symptoms until his swollen malignant cancerous organ would no longer fit on the bicycle seat without affecting his pedaling. (I can only imagine the coach reviewing the training videos: "Hey, Lance, what happened to your leg position there? Why are you grimacing so much? And what's that flapping under your seat, brah?" We're not talking a few days of denial or obliviousness, either-- we're talking months. So maybe this is his own way of doing penance.

Could be.

Denial (acting as though an obvious golfball size testicular tumor doesn't exist, in this case) is amazingly powerful and usually hazardous. In young people it is much more spectacular.

I have cared for women who present with 5-inch breast tumors after waiting 1-2 years, which have basically ... well, too gross to describe. And others who have had obvious exercise-induced classic angina worsening for weeks before they come in with a fatal or debilitating result from a heart attack.

The dynamics behind this are not always clear. The obvious one is the magical thinking that if you pretend it isn't there, maybe it really isn't - a common child's approach when hiding under the covers when the bogey man is around. Another is that the fear of what will happen upon disclosure trumps the fear of what will happen if they do nothing, a counterproductive piece of pseudo-logic. And in some cases it's a depressive symptom manifest as a desire to give up, or die, or whatever.

Anyhow, don't be too hard on Lance for his procrastination. He has plenty of company and was just a kid, relatively speaking. We all do this a bit, but for most of us we ultimately buck up and take care of business.

 

[Nords]

The dynamics behind this are not always clear. The obvious one is the magical thinking that if you pretend it isn't there, maybe it really isn't - a common child's approach when hiding under the covers when the bogey man is around. Another is that the fear of what will happen upon disclosure trumps the fear of what will happen if they do nothing, a counterproductive piece of pseudo-logic. And in some cases it's a depressive symptom manifest as a desire to give up, or die, or whatever.

Anyhow, don't be too hard on Lance for his procrastination. He has plenty of company and was just a kid, relatively speaking. We all do this a bit, but for most of us we ultimately buck up and take care of business.

OK, I'm being pretty harsh on a public figure who should know better. But I guess it's human nature-- I've read that up to 90% of heart-bypass patients don't follow through on their post-op regimen (as in, step 1, stop smoking) and I can believe that he'd be in denial about anything that threatened to interrupt his training.

He has a golden opportunity to educate the public on his personal denial experience, to say nothing of the benefits of periodic exams. (By oneself or with the help of others.) Hopefully we'll hear him do that.

I just hope he's willing to pay the price of training for another Tour, let alone trying to win. I think he has no idea what it'll cost.

 

[Rich_by_the_Bay]

But I guess it's human nature-- I've read that up to 90% of heart-bypass patients don't follow through on their post-op regimen (as in, step 1, stop smoking) and I can believe that he'd be in denial about anything that threatened to interrupt his training.

He has a golden opportunity to educate the public on his personal denial experience, to say nothing of the benefits of periodic exams. (By oneself or with the help of others.) Hopefully we'll hear him do that.

Yep, nicely stated.

 

[DangerMouse]

I used to work at a heart-lung transplant centre and it was amazing the amount of patients who were waiting for double lung transplants who could be caught having a fag out the front of the hospital.