The "Dark Side" Of ER

[Milton]

During certain kinds of activity - such as art, gardening, etc. I have found myself reaching what I would call a sort of "Zen" consciousness. Things seem to flow, and I feel like I am exactly where I need to be.

I presume that you are familiar with Csikszentmihalyi?

Throughout my working life I gradually built on my education, and now, at 64 am able to make money doing what I love. My work is in a helping field related to art; I planned it that way and my life is truly rich. I plan to stay engaged in life.

Most people interested in FIRE plan to stay engaged in life (few people on this board appear to harbour suicidal ideations). The point is that paid employment need not form any part of such engagement.

 

[scrabbler1]

Yes - especially for women. Our generation went through a period of rejection of "traditional" roles for women in favor of roles that allowed for financial independence from spouse or parents. So this pretty much meant career/work. And unfortunately tended to devalue the non-money-earning aspects of a woman's life. Just a pendulum swinging the other way, really.

I think of myself growing up, and how important it was for me to "earn my own money" and not seek financial support through marriage. To me growing up, financial independence meant being independent of spouse or parents for financial support. It wasn't until much later that I realized "financial independence" might mean independence from employment too! But of course until you achieve full FI, those distinctions matter little.

Audrey

Audrey, what your wote here reminds me of the book, "The Feminine Mistake," by Leslie Bennetts. In it, she tells stories about women whose lives took a big tumble when they became economically dependent on their husbands only to see them become disabled, die, or become divorced. She wondered why these women would go to the trouble of getting a college degree (other than a M-R-S degree) and begin a good career towards being self-supporting only to abandon that and make themselves vulnerable by becoming dependent on something which might not turn out the way they had hoped.

And to the others who recently posted, egads to getting up at 5 AM. Getting up at 7 AM, give or take 45 minutes, every day or just a few days a week, was too much for me in my working days. That and a lousy commute were the main reasons I wanted to retire early in late 2008 at age 45.

 

[audreyh1]

Audrey, what your wote here reminds me of the book, "The Feminine Mistake," by Leslie Bennetts. In it, she tells stories about women whose lives took a big tumble when they became economically dependent on their husbands only to see them become disabled, die, or become divorced. She wondered why these women would go to the trouble of getting a college degree (other than a M-R-S degree) and begin a good career towards being self-supporting only to abandon that and make themselves vulnerable by becoming dependent on something which might not turn out the way they had hoped.

Divorce and single parenting was already pretty prominent in the US before I graduated from college. Even though we had been raised by a generation whose world view was that women's careers ended at marriage and certainly children, and that family and motherhood was a woman's main role, it was pretty obvious to me that the real world had changed. But I can certainly understand how some women my age adopted the views of their parents and expected the more traditional situation and thus were not prepared.

And there is nothing wrong, IMO, with a woman choosing to put family and motherhood first. How could there be? But unless you make wise choices, that can make you very vulnerable financially. You had better take some steps to ensure your own economic future and not be passive and leave it all on your spouse's shoulders.

Audrey

 

[travelover]

................... I wonder whether this "find work you're passionate about" is a Gen Y thing?! did boomers have the same lofty goals?

Personally, when I began my career as an engineer I was having so much fun that I would have worked for free. For some reason, though, in most large corporations or organizations, it seems like there exists an overclass that relishes wringing every shred of enjoyment from w*rk with their petty politics and power struggles. I know that some here seem to have avoided this trap in certain careers, but in my experience, this is the trend.

So, I don't think it is so much a case of boomers not looking for a career that they could be passionate about, as opposed to being lured in with the roses and finding the thorns after they have come to depend on the income. Or as a cow*rker pointed out, management is like a septic tank and the really big chunks float to the top.

 

[kcowan]

During certain kinds of activity - such as art, gardening, etc. I have found myself reaching what I would call a sort of "Zen" consciousness. Things seem to flow, and I feel like I am exactly where I need to be. ...

I had a number of activites that enabled "flow state". During those periods, I solved many work-related issues. Painting, lawn-mowing were just two.

 

[audreyh1]

Sailing was a good flow state. Even though it was purely recreative, sailing well requires you to "bond with the wind" - suspend logical thought watch the water surface and just "feel" the tiny wind shifts so you can keep the sails perfectly trimmed. It's a wonderful feeling.

Sailing saved my sanity while I was working.

Audrey

 

[segfault]

I think the original blog presents an overly-idealized view of work. Most people work to earn money, not because they're doing something they love doing. The law of averages applies--very, very few people will cure cancer or be the next Warren Buffett. The tiny chance of having such an accomplishment is not a good reason to keep w*rking until you're 65 or dead.

 

[brewer12345]

On that note, here is an open letter I posted elsewhere. Open letters on things like this help me a lot by way of catharsis, and are hopefuylly suitably anonymous:

To the shaved apes passing for management at my employer:

Yes, we have heard countless times that you want us rank and file employees to be "empowered" and similar buzzword motivational nonsense. You even made a big show of soliciting feedback as to why morale is so abominably low and using the results to drive an employee task force (which was muzzled) to address the findings. All of us in the lumpen-worker ranks know full well this is going nowhere but into a dark closet where it will die a quiet death, whimpering in the gloom.

But did you have to rub our noses in it with an all-employee announcement that everyone must open their "to go" styrofoam containers for the cafeteria cashier to inspect? We all had to go through extensive background checks, are regularly entrusted with HIGHLY confidential information, and are held to a very high ethical standard. You really want to push this button?

OK. Enjoy the turnover.

 

[audreyh1]

Bravo Brewer! That was a great read LOL!

Audrey

 

[audreyh1]

I think the original blog presents an overly-idealized view of work. Most people work to earn money, not because they're doing something they love doing. The law of averages applies--very, very few people will cure cancer or be the next Warren Buffett. The tiny chance of having such an accomplishment is not a good reason to keep w*rking until you're 65 or dead.

I think you have identified the basic problem: some blogs/forums appear to over-idealize work, some appear to over-idealize retirement, so when someone from one world view is exposed to the other they feel compelled to preach about it.

BUT - there is a happy medium! And no preaching required!

Audrey

 

[brewer12345]

Bravo Brewer! That was a great read LOL!

Audrey

Thanks. When I think about it, I get really angry. Better to wrap it up in acid humor and let it go. OTOH, a co-worker nominated me for a "peer" award and other people in different departments seconded it, to my surprise. It went nowhere since neither of us are the pets of the powers that be, but I was really genuinely touched. It meant a lot more to me than a piece of paper and a trivial monetary award from the power structure.

 

[jacob]

Yes, we have heard countless times that you want us rank and file employees to be "empowered" and similar buzzword motivational nonsense. You even made a big show of soliciting feedback as to why morale is so abominably low and using the results to drive an employee task force (which was muzzled) to address the findings. All of us in the lumpen-worker ranks know full well this is going nowhere but into a dark closet where it will die a quiet death, whimpering in the gloom.

Hahaha! Do a search for the "Gervais Principle". It is an expanded form of the Peter Principle (promoted to the highest level of incompetence) and the Dilbert Principle (promoted to the level of least damage). It is highly enlightening.

 

[kumquat]

I know people who spent years in jobs they hated - myself included; the only motive was money.

The question is "why did they stay in jobs they hated?" There are other jobs.

 

[rescueme]

The question is "why did they stay in jobs they hated?" There are other jobs.

In my case, it was for the benefit of my wife/son. We have no safety net (e.g. family/friends). My wife had to stay home in the early years (first 10 years of marriage) to care for our disabled son (we could not place him outside the home).

Additionally, after the ten year mark, I got a j*b that paid much more than a college grad would normally get (I know, since I worked with some teachers who gave up their career to work on the line at my former company). I left home when I turned 19 (got drafted, and college was not an option in my family; yeah, I was one of those "poor white trash" folks that got caught up in the political tide of those days), served in a combat area at 20, got married at 21, had a child at 22. By age 23, I was unemployed, had a family to support and needed to do whatever to get by.

Sometimes "life" plans your life, and you do whatever to get by. But hey, I'm not complaining (but you did ask the question )...

 

[donheff]

The question is "why did they stay in jobs they hated?" There are other jobs.

I think this happens to lots of people who "burn out." They are in a field that pays well or have moved to a level that pays well. It can become the devil you know vs the devil you don't. If the angst is caused by job specific factors (e.g. an SOB boss) a move may be a good option. But if the generic aspects of the job are the problem it may be hard to impossible to find another job paying nearly as well. If the problem is personal factors like depression you may not be able to find any job you enjoy. After all, wherever you go, you are there. What a bummer - give up a well paying job you don't like only to find you don't like the low paying job any better. And your ER date is postponed to boot.

The bottom line is that job angst calls for some careful self evaluation and solutions may not be easy.

 

[Sea Kayaker]

I enjoy every single aspect of my life, EXCEPT for the working part... I can't possibly see a "dark side" to my FIRE at 45 plans.

I am incapable of being bored... too many things to do and see in this world.

 

[audreyh1]

The question is "why did they stay in jobs they hated?" There are other jobs.

A lot of things affect job mobility. Health insurance is a huge one if you have a pre-existing condition. It may be very difficult to change locations if there are few other local opportunities and other family members or housing may have you to tied to a location. And then, of course, changing jobs is risky, things could turn out worse, and a lot of people might feel safer just staying put.

Audrey

 

[flyfishnevada]

This smacks of agenda. I have to believe that the powers that be want to encourage you to work longer and put off retirement. It saves them money. No pension payouts, no retraining, etc. There is also that crowd that insists we each have a duty to offer our services to society and that retirement is selfish as you deny society your work, skills and knowledge. We all know the opposite is often true. Many of us ER and offer our knowledge and expertise up for free, but that does not allow the establishment a measure of control over our lives.

As for our lamenting the decision to ER, perception is reality. The blog would have you believe that we all are only crowing about our giddiness in an attempt to overcompensate for our desire to be rich and powerful in the working world. I believe nothing could be further from the truth. We have learned to accept a lower standard of living, less stuff and simpler pleasures to AVOID the evils of the work world.

Many of us are/were "stuck" in jobs we dislike because we chose a career when we were 16 - 18 yo. We stay because it is what we know. Few of us that are mechanics, for instance, are willing to quit that line of work and the income it brings to pursue our dream of being a florist, for example. We continue on and begin to look at ER. We dream of pursuing our dreams then, purely for ourselves. Even your dream career can be ruined by the realities of the real world. Idiotic bosses, corporate policies, government regulation, etc. It isn't about finding your dream career or sustaining a certain lifestyle or status, its about freedom.

 

[Milton]

The question is "why did they stay in jobs they hated?" There are other jobs.

Exactly. Brewer, please note.