Why do people wait so long to retire?

I was reading an article on this very subject. Why do wealthy and mega rich continue working.
They continue working not for money but the challenge of making more money and they enjoy their work.
So many reads I have done on this subject of retiring early don't always view it as a positive thing for people that retire.
Work keeps people young and engaged with others and is healthier than a person in retirement.
So, who really knows which way is better for the average person. I sometimes have questioned my decision but I have been very busy and engaged with life and activities. Not enough time most days to get all I want to get accomplished.
That's the point. Most people on this forum stay fairly busy in their own way during retirement and one also has the choice to do nothing, which one can't do while working.
I would add that some wealthy folks also continue to work, as the work satisfies their ego needs.
 
I retired (fully) at 60, my wife retired earlier at 58, but continued at about 12 hours a week from home until 62. She retired from full time work as soon as possible, considering our daughter's college tuition and need for us to keep in-state residence.

The best we could have done is my retiring one year earlier.
 
I was reading an article on this very subject. Why do wealthy and mega rich continue working.
They continue working not for money but the challenge of making more money and they enjoy their work.
So many reads I have done on this subject of retiring early don't always view it as a positive thing for people that retire.
Work keeps people young and engaged with others and is healthier than a person in retirement.
So, who really knows which way is better for the average person. I sometimes have questioned my decision but I have been very busy and engaged with life and activities. Not enough time most days to get all I want to get accomplished.
My career has brought me in contact with a great many wealthy and mega-rich individuals, what you might call the "working rich" (as opposed to the idle rich). What they typically have in common is a seamless integration of work and personal life. In other words, the two are so blended as to be almost indistinguishable. For example, they might combine a vacation with socializing with potential business partners and/or clients. Nearly every "acquaintance" serves a purpose as part of a network that drives commercial opportunities. I've even had my clients bring along their (very well-behaved) young kids to sit in on business dinners - convenient for them and sort of educational for the kid. These are the kinds of people that will never stop "working" until their last breath.
 
I was reading an article on this very subject. Why do wealthy and mega rich continue working.
They continue working not for money but the challenge of making more money and they enjoy their work.
So many reads I have done on this subject of retiring early don't always view it as a positive thing for people that retire.
Work keeps people young and engaged with others and is healthier than a person in retirement.
So, who really knows which way is better for the average person. I sometimes have questioned my decision but I have been very busy and engaged with life and activities. Not enough time most days to get all I want to get accomplished.
It might be axiomatic, but with apologies, I still struggle to internalize the concept: we're better-off, in that pursuit of living, that we believe to be right.

But how do I know, that that which I believe to be right, IS right? Perhaps, the things that I dearly want for myself, is illegitimate? Perhaps, I am wanting the wrong thing? How can we NOT be troubled by this? How we become genuinely comfortable, with our choices and their consequences?
 
Those that I know delayed retirement for one of four reasons.

Not ready, loved their work, married to their business.

Financial reddiness or the OMY desire to amass even more money that they probably could ever spend. Financial nervous nellies.

Frightened to retire or could see no life to retire to. Work was his life.

Medical coverage....most especially one whose spouse had been undergoing very expensive cancer treatments. He claimed the medical bills would otherwise bankrupt them. No real insight into this one, just his comments to me when I retired early.
 
Last edited:
"masochist" - a person who derives pleasure from experiencing pain or humiliation :2funny:
 
It might be axiomatic, but with apologies, I still struggle to internalize the concept: we're better-off, in that pursuit of living, that we believe to be right.

But how do I know, that that which I believe to be right, IS right? Perhaps, the things that I dearly want for myself, is illegitimate? Perhaps, I am wanting the wrong thing? How can we NOT be troubled by this? How we become genuinely comfortable, with our choices and their consequences?
In my experience, second guessing yourself is just a recipe for unhappiness. Life is full of uncertainty, and confidence is crucial to success. If I take action, I am confident it is the right thing for me to do. If I weren't confident, I wouldn't do it.

Throughout the course of my life, I have tried to gather sufficient information and knowledge to make good decisions. I accept the fact that I sometimes need to act with incomplete, vague or inconsistent information, but I do need to act. I don't think I have ever been overcome by "analysis paralysis." I do my best to properly identify the uncertainties and think through the upside and downside risks. But having decided to take action, I don't ever second guess my decision. I monitor closely, and if a course correction is required, I make it. Occasionally things just go awry. At that point, I pick up the pieces, think hard about what lessons I can glean from that failure, get back up and move ahead, with the intent of doing better next time.
 
Last edited:
It might be axiomatic, but with apologies, I still struggle to internalize the concept: we're better-off, in that pursuit of living, that we believe to be right.

But how do I know, that that which I believe to be right, IS right? Perhaps, the things that I dearly want for myself, is illegitimate? Perhaps, I am wanting the wrong thing? How can we NOT be troubled by this? How we become genuinely comfortable, with our choices and their consequences?
Too existential for me. Reminds me of Philosophy class in college.
 
I did retire soon after the retirement benefits from employer were 100%. 55 years old an 25 years employment required.
Waited until 56 and 26. Had enough money/assets earlier but you really never know for sure.
 
Throughout the course of my life, I have tried to gather sufficient information and knowledge to make good decisions. I accept the fact that I sometimes need to act with incomplete, vague or inconsistent information, but I do need to act. I don't think I have ever been overcome by "analysis paralysis." I do my best to properly identify the uncertainties and think through the upside and downside risks. But having decided to take action, I don't ever second guess my decision. I monitor closely, and if a course correction is required, I make it. Occasionally things just go awry. At that point, I pick up the pieces, think hard about what lessons I can glean from that failure, get back up and move ahead, with the intent of doing better next time.
While your approach is tactically wise, strategically it still leaves me befuddled.

For example, consider a young person trying to decide, whether to get married, or not; whether to have children, or not. How does one go about deciding? If a person gets married, but realizes that it's undesirable or otherwise problematic, I suppose that divorce is possible... but it's hardly a clean undoing, of what was done. And if one has a child, but then decides, that one doesn't want to be a parent?

More to our topic, and our generation... suppose that I want to build a lavish custom mansion. Suppose that for argument's sake, one has enough cash to amply cover the cost. Should one do it? Is it a worthy and decent enterprise? Or a louche and dissipated indulgence?

Quite commonly, a person might delay retirement by several years, to amass the cash for something like a mansion, or a boat, or whatever. Well, is this justified? How do we know? Suppose that one takes a leap of faith, and then regrets it. Then what?
 
While your approach is tactically wise, strategically it still leaves me befuddled.

More to our topic, and our generation... suppose that I want to build a lavish custom mansion. Suppose that for argument's sake, one has enough cash to amply cover the cost. Should one do it? Is it a worthy and decent enterprise? Or a louche and dissipated indulgence?

Quite commonly, a person might delay retirement by several years, to amass the cash for something like a mansion, or a boat, or whatever. Well, is this justified? How do we know? Suppose that one takes a leap of faith, and then regrets it. Then what?
Justified to whom?

Once again, I believe that you're waaay overthinking things, along with a heavy dose of "what other people think".

People tend to do what they want to do/can afford and give little thought to "justification". Build the mansion. Or don't. Regret it? Sell it and move on with life.

People leap or delay retirement for any number of good or bad reasons. Such is life.
 
While your approach is tactically wise, strategically it still leaves me befuddled.

For example, consider a young person trying to decide, whether to get married, or not; whether to have children, or not. How does one go about deciding? If a person gets married, but realizes that it's undesirable or otherwise problematic, I suppose that divorce is possible... but it's hardly a clean undoing, of what was done. And if one has a child, but then decides, that one doesn't want to be a parent?

More to our topic, and our generation... suppose that I want to build a lavish custom mansion. Suppose that for argument's sake, one has enough cash to amply cover the cost. Should one do it? Is it a worthy and decent enterprise? Or a louche and dissipated indulgence?

Quite commonly, a person might delay retirement by several years, to amass the cash for something like a mansion, or a boat, or whatever. Well, is this justified? How do we know? Suppose that one takes a leap of faith, and then regrets it. Then what?
Analysis paralysis.
 
... Suppose that one takes a leap of faith, and then regrets it. Then what?
That's the sunk cost fallacy. What's done is done and regrets are never helpful. You decided on a course of action and it didn't work out. So you learn what you can from that failure and move on, and the only consideration is what will be the best course of action for you moving forward.
 
While your approach is tactically wise, strategically it still leaves me befuddled.

For example, consider a young person trying to decide, whether to get married, or not; whether to have children, or not. How does one go about deciding? If a person gets married, but realizes that it's undesirable or otherwise problematic, I suppose that divorce is possible... but it's hardly a clean undoing, of what was done. And if one has a child, but then decides, that one doesn't want to be a parent?

More to our topic, and our generation... suppose that I want to build a lavish custom mansion. Suppose that for argument's sake, one has enough cash to amply cover the cost. Should one do it? Is it a worthy and decent enterprise? Or a louche and dissipated indulgence?

Quite commonly, a person might delay retirement by several years, to amass the cash for something like a mansion, or a boat, or whatever. Well, is this justified? How do we know? Suppose that one takes a leap of faith, and then regrets it. Then what?
How do you even decide to buy car A vs. car B? Every decision that we make have alternatives and we can only proceed with the data on hand and emotions that we have at that time. If that turns out to have undesirable consequence, just live with it. There is no use in crying over spilt milk.
 
How do you even decide to buy car A vs. car B? Every decision that we make have alternatives and we can only proceed with the data on hand and emotions that we have at that time. If that turns out to have undesirable consequence, just live with it. There is no use in crying over spilt milk.
Car A vs. car B isn't difficult, because there are readily quantifiable trade-offs, and because the penalty for buying the suboptimal car, is picayune. Worst case, one eats the depreciation and sells.

The retirement decision is much harder, because generally there's no going back. One can't restart the clock, or whatever is the metaphor, for undoing an exit. My earlier example of building a mansion, is also hard to undo... besides the high transaction costs of real estate, building anything custom is going to be far costlier than it's worth. The very act, is a destruction of value... hence, hard to justify. When I bought my former house - much closer to a hovel than a mansion - I immediately had buyer's remorse. Immediate effort at sale, went nowhere. I ended up, holding-on for 20 years... before finally selling at a loss. Yes, a loss, after 20 years.

Returning to our theme, people sense the finality and irreversibility of the decision to retire. They're terrified of potentially making a mistake, of "buyer's remorse". Thus they delay retirement, even if they hate working, have plenty of hobbies, and yearn for smashing their alarm-clock with a baseball bat.
 
How do you even decide to buy car A vs. car B? Every decision that we make have alternatives and we can only proceed with the data on hand and emotions that we have at that time. If that turns out to have undesirable consequence, just live with it. There is no use in crying over spilt milk.
I know some people who, if their house was on fire, would spend an inordinate amount of time weighing the pros and cons of calling the fire department.

Maybe the fire isn't so bad. It might go out by itself. Should I try to put it out myself? What are the consequences of doing nothing? Maybe I'll just call and see what they think?
 
Car A vs. car B isn't difficult, because there are readily quantifiable trade-offs, and because the penalty for buying the suboptimal car, is picayune. Worst case, one eats the depreciation and sells.

The retirement decision is much harder, because generally there's no going back. One can't restart the clock, or whatever is the metaphor, for undoing an exit. My earlier example of building a mansion, is also hard to undo... besides the high transaction costs of real estate, building anything custom is going to be far costlier than it's worth. The very act, is a destruction of value... hence, hard to justify. When I bought my former house - much closer to a hovel than a mansion - I immediately had buyer's remorse. Immediate effort at sale, went nowhere. I ended up, holding-on for 20 years... before finally selling at a loss. Yes, a loss, after 20 years.

Returning to our theme, people sense the finality and irreversibility of the decision to retire. They're terrified of potentially making a mistake, of "buyer's remorse". Thus they delay retirement, even if they hate working, have plenty of hobbies, and yearn for smashing their alarm-clock with a baseball bat.
Retirement is not "irreversible". You can always go back to work. I have done it twice so far...
 
Quite commonly, a person might delay retirement by several years, to amass the cash for something like a mansion, or a boat, or whatever. Well, is this justified? How do we know? Suppose that one takes a leap of faith, and then regrets it. Then what?
Every decision is based upon a belief of the future outcomes which are unknown. We know when we have experienced the outcome and are satisfied (or not). Then we go from there with a little more knowledge. Have you seen The Big Lebowski? The dude abides. Be the dude.
 
Car A vs. car B isn't difficult, because there are readily quantifiable trade-offs, and because the penalty for buying the suboptimal car, is picayune. Worst case, one eats the depreciation and sells.

The retirement decision is much harder, because generally there's no going back. One can't restart the clock, or whatever is the metaphor, for undoing an exit. My earlier example of building a mansion, is also hard to undo... besides the high transaction costs of real estate, building anything custom is going to be far costlier than it's worth. The very act, is a destruction of value... hence, hard to justify. When I bought my former house - much closer to a hovel than a mansion - I immediately had buyer's remorse. Immediate effort at sale, went nowhere. I ended up, holding-on for 20 years... before finally selling at a loss. Yes, a loss, after 20 years.

Returning to our theme, people sense the finality and irreversibility of the decision to retire. They're terrified of potentially making a mistake, of "buyer's remorse". Thus they delay retirement, even if they hate working, have plenty of hobbies, and yearn for smashing their alarm-clock with a baseball bat.
I think what you are referring to is the "cost" of a mistake. To someone who can easily afford to buy both car A and car B is likely not to worry about making a mistake in buy A vs. B. If the person can barely afford to buy A or B, then a mistake is significant, because selling and then buying the right car causes financial hardship.

Similarly with your example of buying a mansion. If the person is worth $200 M and decides to buy a $10M mansion and turned out to be a mistake, even to unload it for $5M is not going to cause the person any hardship. If I only have $15M and make the mistake of buying the $10M home, and then I sell it for $5M, I see my net worth drop 33%.

Retirement is reversible, although you are likely not to get the same job back. If you have more than enough money to retire, i.e. oversave, then retirement is not going to cause an angst. It's the people who may not be able to afford to retire and then decide to retire EARLY, it gets costly because of lost time in earning more wages, and they have to go back to work.

If you are over thinking because of a marginal situation, then I can understand the indecision piece. From your earlier postings, you have more than enough to retire but you have an emotional need to keep working. Just quit working and start enjoying retirement!
 
Last edited:
Hamlet, that dithering Dane, is certainly not a character to be emulated.
 
Emotional concerns about retirement is not something that money is able to solve alone.

My life became easier when I realized I can be satisfied with being content instead of the constant pursuit of absolute happiness. Not every decision I make will be correct or bear optimized results. I try not to don’t dwell on things I can’t control. Instead I want to give myself options when things don't go my way.
 
Hamlet, that dithering Dane, is certainly not a character to be emulated.
Hamlet had a mission. He just wasn't sure how to carry it out, what his options were, or how to avoid deeply regrettable consequences, such as stabbing Claudius while the latter was praying, lest he be sent straight to heaven. Hamlet dithered in his approach, and was unsure of his abilities, but didn't have substantial doubts as to his ultimate duty.

In the alternative, he'd have regarded his father's ghost as a deranged crackpot. He'd have been torn between mistrusting his father's ghost's judgment, and feeling filial obligation to do the ghost's bidding. So you see, Hamlet's dilemma was essentially tactical. In big-picture terms, he wasn't dithering at all... whereas some of us, are.
 
Back
Top Bottom