# Retirement at 50: Smart Move or Asking for Trouble?



## JohnZ7 (Apr 1, 2018)

Hi,

I've been reading CMF for years and really enjoy the variety of postings here. Lately, I've been thinking a lot about retiring in about two years but I have doubts if it is the right thing to do. I would really appreciate hearing from CMFers what their thoughts are. Here is my situation:



48 years old, divorced, no kids
Own residence, 90K left on mortgage
Current job salary - $120K. Private sector job with no pension.
RRSP - $360K
TFSA - $ 70K
Non-registered accounts: $550K.
Investment breakdown: Equities: 57%; Bonds and cash: 43%
Annual expenses - $ 35-45K/year
Other than mortgage and car loan (2 years left, paying $270/month), no other debt.

I've run a bunch of retirement calculations and all seem to say that i could retire but I still am paranoid that I'll run out of money. While I enjoy my job, it is not very relaxing and I long to do something that is low stress. What I really want is to quit my current job and do something part-time that is low stress. I'm thinking of a job in the $10K-$15K range annually. I also intend to withdraw from my RRSP gradually ($5K to 10K a year to pay minimal tax). Current annual investment income from my non-registered account, a combination of interest and dividends, is around $11K. My goal is to not draw down on my principal, or do so very minimally. 

Another thing to take into consideration: I manage my mother's finances. She is 80 and healthy as a horse. She has around $1.2 million in financial assets (40% equities and 60% cash/cash equivalents) and fully paid house of around $ 1 million. Her will has both me and my brother as the individuals who will get all her assets, split 50-50. She is not a big spender and actually she does not spend all that she gets annually from RIFFs, pensions, interest, dividends, etc. Her income is around $85-90K. My assumption is that she'll live to around 100. Her current total assets are around $2.2 million; however, I cannot count on just getting half of that. My conservative assumption is that I may get $500K in today's dollars when I'm around 75. 

Based on the above, would it be wise for me to retire in a couple of years, or should I work more years to have a better cushion?

Thank you.


----------



## martik777 (Jun 25, 2014)

Given your relatively low annual expenses I see no problem unless high double digit inflation returns.

I retired at 47 with much less than you have. Key factors for me were having a paid off house and no debt and reliance on CPP/OAS in 13+ years. Be warned though, retiring so early is a big adjustment. 
You must find something meaningful and fulfilling to do with your free time as well as dealing with others' perception of your early retirement.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

I agree the OP must have something meaningful AND challenging to do to be fulfilled at that age. Last but not least, keep working until the mortgage is paid off. Retire with ZERO debt. Whether it is 50, or 52, when you retire, that is still well before a target age of 55.

I agree it is best to be conservative about an inheritance from your mother's investments. There will be a hefty tax bill on the RRIF assets and she could need 10 years in assisted living.


----------



## JohnZ7 (Apr 1, 2018)

martik777 said:


> Given your relatively low annual expenses I see no problem unless high double digit inflation returns.
> 
> I retired at 47 with much less than you have. Key factors for me were having a paid off house and no debt and reliance on CPP/OAS in 13+ years. Be warned though, retiring so early is a big adjustment.
> You must find something meaningful and fulfilling to do with your free time as well as dealing with others' perception of your early retirement.


Thanks for your response. I agree that the biggest risk is high inflation and that is one reason why I may continue working. It's just that the thought of continuing in my job for many more years doesn't appeal to me. It's actually a very interesting job and I never get bored; however, it is not low-stress, often requires 40+ hours per week, business travel, and there's the annoying office politics. Changing companies to do the same type of work wouldn't likely solve these issues (I don't believe the grass is greener on the other side! , and I'd lose my current seniority and other perks that I currently have. Also, the nature of the job is such that working part-time would not work. If I could work part-time in the same field, I would definitely do so.

One big reason why I'm thinking retirement is because I've known a number of people in their 50s who recently have either died or suffered serious health issues. Why continue working at a stressful job and risk your health if you have other options? I agree that retirement would be a big adjustment but I do have a lot of interests and hobbies that should keep me busy.

Out of curiosity, do you have any regrets retiring at such a young age or would you do the same thing all over again if you had the chance? 

John


----------



## JohnZ7 (Apr 1, 2018)

AltaRed said:


> I agree the OP must have something meaningful AND challenging to do to be fulfilled at that age. Last but not least, keep working until the mortgage is paid off. Retire with ZERO debt. Whether it is 50, or 52, when you retire, that is still well before a target age of 55.
> 
> I agree it is best to be conservative about an inheritance from your mother's investments. There will be a hefty tax bill on the RRIF assets and she could need 10 years in assisted living.


Thanks, AltaRed. Prudent advice about retiring with no debt; however, my mortgage is extremely manageable and if I really wanted to (but I don't), I could pay it off tomorrow. In your view, is it a bad idea to retire even with "extremely manageable" debt?

Indeed, the taxman will want their cut of the RRIF assets. I'd be very happy if she could draw the RRIF down to $0.

John


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Psychologically it is much better to have no debt, especially when you may be walking a pretty thin line on cash flow. I'd use the next 2-3 years to get rid of it entirely and then retire and enjoy working part time because you want too, rather than because you have too. Also remember there may be a major recession heading our way with Trump a wildcard. What would you do if your equities fell 30-40% like they did in 2008-2009?

Further, if you have no pension, you can't count on more than a 3% draw from your portfolio retiring at such a young age. The old rule of thumb of 4% SWR (which is inherently weak) apply to a 30 year retirement starting about 65. In other words, you cannot afford to tap into existing capital until about 65, though you might cash in a bit here and there as a result of unrealized capital appreciation.

Take a look at VPW (Variable Percentage Withdrawal) methodology at http://www.finiki.org/wiki/Variable_percentage_withdrawal to get a handle on what your portfolio can most likely sustain.


----------



## fireseeker (Jul 24, 2017)

I'm in a similar position, contemplating similar issues.
The advice about having something meaningful and challenging in your life is important.
As for finances, it sounds like your backup plan (in the event your savings take a hit or your expenses suddenly jump) is part-time work and, eventually, inheritance. Given the the unknowns of the inheritance (amount and timing), a key question for you (and me) is how comfortable you are with the idea of having to work, or increase work, to pay your bills. Working part-time for fun and sociability is one thing; working a dead-end job because you need the money is another.
One other thought: You live in an expensive part of Canada. You don't mention how much home equity you have, but in theory downsizing out of the Lower Mainland could also be a backup plan -- if you're comfortable with that.
Good luck.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Is the part time work assured or is that just something that you contemplated if you need more money and something to fill the time, not necessarily due to it's availability and/or enjoyment?

When it comes to retirement dates I use a simple question. If your employer stopped paying you today but allowed you to keep working there, would you?

If the answer is NO, which I assume would be the case for 99.99999% of employed individuals, then you are effectively working for the money. That is one of the reasons you are working. If you don't need the money and/or it is unlikely that you will ever spend all your money in your lifetime, then the money you earn this week is not necessary and will not be spent. So effectively you are working for NO paycheque.

The next question is, why are you working when you will not benefit from the money? For some people, they love their job, but for most of those people, the truer reality is that they believe they need to work to earn income and of all the jobs available, they believe theirs is the best or at least pretty good. That is not loving ones job, that is making the best of a bad situation.

For the last group of people working when they don't need to or perhaps even want to, is because they have nothing better to do with their time. In my opinion, life is pretty sad when you cannot find something better to do in a day, then something not overly meaningful, for someone else who probably doesn't even appreciate it. If you have trouble finding a way to fill your day when you are 50, do you think it will be easier when you are 65? It will be much harder. When I find I have a slow day and think that work might be a solution for the current day, I just go take a nap. In my opinion, anything is better then doing something I don't really want to do, starting at some hour of the day that is too early, for someone else who probably does not appreciate it...for money I do not need or will ever spend.

Now there is one last group of workers out there who do not need to be working, and they are a very large part of that population of people working for no personal monetary benefit. It's the people with kids. You might be able to figure out that a given sum of money will be enough to last you your lifetime but you will probably never come up with a number that will last you your lifetime and still allow you to support kids at home, or help/backstop some of the needs or problems that may come about with respect to your children and future grandchildren not living at home. With many of these people, they will never have enough to be sure and since the job is not all that bad, they get up each morning and go to work.

I don't think that last group is where you are so you need to figure where you are and make your decision. It's always easier to put this decision off, but while you are doing that remember one thing. When tomorrow comes and eventually goes, you will have one less day left of life on this planet. Was that day really the best way to enjoy one of your last days of this very short life.


----------



## JohnZ7 (Apr 1, 2018)

AltaRed said:


> Psychologically it is much better to have no debt, especially when you may be walking a pretty thin line on cash flow. I'd use the next 2-3 years to get rid of it entirely and then retire and enjoy working part time because you want too, rather than because you have too. Also remember there may be a major recession heading our way with Trump a wildcard. What would you do if your equities fell 30-40% like they did in 2008-2009?
> 
> Further, if you have no pension, you can't count on more than a 3% draw from your portfolio retiring at such a young age. The old rule of thumb of 4% SWR (which is inherently weak) apply to a 30 year retirement starting about 65. In other words, you cannot afford to tap into existing capital until about 65, though you might cash in a bit here and there as a result of unrealized capital appreciation.
> 
> Take a look at VPW (Variable Percentage Withdrawal) methodology to get a handle on what your portfolio can most likely sustain.


I cannot disagree with anything you've said. While I love the idea of early retirement, deep down, I'm a very prudent person who does not make rash decisions. One reason I posted is because I wanted to hear from financially-educated people as to whether my idea of early retirement is feasible.

Thanks for the VPW link. I will be reviewing.

John


----------



## JohnZ7 (Apr 1, 2018)

fireseeker said:


> I'm in a similar position, contemplating similar issues.
> The advice about having something meaningful and challenging in your life is important.
> As for finances, it sounds like your backup plan (in the event your savings take a hit or your expenses suddenly jump) is part-time work and, eventually, inheritance. Given the the unknowns of the inheritance (amount and timing), a key question for you (and me) is how comfortable you are with the idea of having to work, or increase work, to pay your bills. Working part-time for fun and sociability is one thing; working a dead-end job because you need the money is another.
> One other thought: You live in an expensive part of Canada. You don't mention how much home equity you have, but in theory downsizing out of the Lower Mainland could also be a backup plan -- if you're comfortable with that.
> Good luck.


I am OK with doing part-time work, and in a job that would be far less challenging than what I do now. I'd like a low stress job that, when added to my other income sources, would allow me to be in a position to not touch my principal. 

Although I was born and bred here, I'm not enamoured of the Lower Mainland and would definitely be open to moving to another area. I've travelled a lot and there are certainly other places where I could see myself living. It's not feasible currently, but it's certainly an option.

John


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

JohnZ7 said:


> I am OK with doing part-time work, and in a job that would be far less challenging than what I do now. I'd like a low stress job that, when added to my other income sources, would allow me to be in a position to not touch my principal.


You need to think through what 'far less challenging' means and what 'low stress' means. Many of us who were in pressure cooker jobs earning good money sometimes see the other side as 'greener' but a much lower paying job with less hours can bring with it other issues... such as predatory working conditions, the most crappy bosses in the world, treated like dirt, and mundane monotony, or a hospitality/service environment catering to crappy, abusive, disrespectful customers. Gotta be careful how you define the niche you are really looking for. Don't just trade one bucket of poop for a different bucket of poop.


----------



## dadaswell (Jan 6, 2016)

AltaRed said:


> You need to think through what 'far less challenging' means and what 'low stress' means. Many of us who were in pressure cooker jobs earning good money sometimes see the other side as 'greener' but a much lower paying job with less hours can bring with it other issues... such as predatory working conditions, the most crappy bosses in the world, treated like dirt, and mundane monotony, or a hospitality/service environment catering to crappy, abusive, disrespectful customers. Gotta be careful how you define the niche you are really looking for. Don't just trade one bucket of poop for a different bucket of poop.


Good point!!!


----------



## Markian (Apr 11, 2018)

JohnZ7 said:


> Hi,
> 
> I've been reading CMF for years and really enjoy the variety of postings here. Lately, I've been thinking a lot about retiring in about two years but I have doubts if it is the right thing to do. I would really appreciate hearing from CMFers what their thoughts are. Here is my situation:
> 
> ...



Based on above, you may look for other options. Part time job is a good idea but you still have your personal time committed to do something to earn. What you want is a peace of mind that you will not run out of money. You are still young. You may want to look and learn something like real estate business it is possible that the positive cash flow from it can take care of you forever. 

Good luck.!!


----------



## jacofan (Apr 17, 2013)

AltaRed said:


> You need to think through what 'far less challenging' means and what 'low stress' means. Many of us who were in pressure cooker jobs earning good money sometimes see the other side as 'greener' but a much lower paying job with less hours can bring with it other issues... such as predatory working conditions, the most crappy bosses in the world, treated like dirt, and mundane monotony, or a hospitality/service environment catering to crappy, abusive, disrespectful customers. Gotta be careful how you define the niche you are really looking for. Don't just trade one bucket of poop for a different bucket of poop.


and sometimes it's better earning the big income with a "don't give a F attitude" because you could FIRE at any time (a year at the high-income job could equal multi-years income at the hopefully better PT job) then maybe you'll get given a golden handshake...win-win


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

jacofan said:


> and sometimes it's better earning the big income with a "don't give a F attitude" because you could FIRE at any time (a year at the high-income job could equal multi-years income at the hopefully better PT job) then maybe you'll get given a golden handshake...win-win


Indeed. I know corporate employees who reached the bulletproof (pensionable) age, or where they have reached FIRE status, and enjoyed a few years of F attitude. Indeed, one engineer I knew quite well had a fairly large, maybe 11x17, sign in his office that simply said "Don't Piss Me Off". He never explained to many, maybe just a few, what it really meant, but I think it was pretty obvious.


----------



## JohnZ7 (Apr 1, 2018)

AltaRed said:


> You need to think through what 'far less challenging' means and what 'low stress' means. Many of us who were in pressure cooker jobs earning good money sometimes see the other side as 'greener' but a much lower paying job with less hours can bring with it other issues... such as predatory working conditions, the most crappy bosses in the world, treated like dirt, and mundane monotony, or a hospitality/service environment catering to crappy, abusive, disrespectful customers. Gotta be careful how you define the niche you are really looking for. Don't just trade one bucket of poop for a different bucket of poop.


You have a valid point. My hope (hopefully, I'm not being too naive here) is that I would only go to the "less challenging" job if I had the option to leave if I weren't happy. As I mentioned above, I'm just tired of my current career, which, while interesting and intellectually stimulating, puts excessive demands on my stress levels and time. If I could do the job part time (3 days a week) and never have to work from home or travel, I'd be OK with staying; however, this is NOT feasible. 

I know a couple of people in my company who tried the part-time thing and neither could make it work. The nature of the job is that you need to be constantly available and the part-timers had to continually work on their "days off", which defeated the purpose. This is why I think the most feasible option is going into a less challenging job as you just put in your hours for your scheduled shifts and the rest of the time is yours. I have a lot of interests outside of work so I think I'd be OK in giving up the intellectual stimulation from work in exchange for less stress and more free time. Yes, there is a risk that things won't go well, as you say, but the thought of continuing in my current career for another 10 years does not appeal to me at all. 

John


----------



## JohnZ7 (Apr 1, 2018)

Markian said:


> Based on above, you may look for other options. Part time job is a good idea but you still have your personal time committed to do something to earn. What you want is a peace of mind that you will not run out of money. You are still young. You may want to look and learn something like real estate business it is possible that the positive cash flow from it can take care of you forever.
> 
> Good luck.!!


Thanks for your response. Yes, I do want peace of mind that I won't run out of mullah!  With respect to real estate, I just don't have the attitude to be a landlord. The thought of having to deal with tenants and maintenance doesn't appeal to me. I actually know quite a few people who retired early as a result of being a landlord so it's a valid option for those so inclined. However, I prefer to limit my real estate investments to REITs - no tenants or having to fix a leaky toilet! However, even if I were inclined to be a landlord, I live in Vancouver, which has the most outrageous real estate prices in Canada so not many cash flow properties to be had! 

John


----------



## JohnZ7 (Apr 1, 2018)

AltaRed said:


> Indeed. I know corporate employees who reached the bulletproof (pensionable) age, or where they have reached FIRE status, and enjoyed a few years of F attitude. Indeed, one engineer I knew quite well had a fairly large, maybe 11x17, sign in his office that simply said "Don't Piss Me Off". He never explained to many, maybe just a few, what it really meant, but I think it was pretty obvious.


Yes, that would be the ideal situation! I would love to have the "not give a F attitude" and turn down all overtime, travel, and tell certain individuals to take a hike. However, that's not currently an option...sigh...

One reason I'm thinking early retirement is because my company is going through a major consolidation, with certain business areas moving to different locations. Certain longstanding staff have been let go and, from what I heard, they got reasonable deals. The choice is to wait it out to see what happens or look elsewhere for different opportunities Given my seniority in the company, it'd be stupid for me to look elsewhere and relinquish a potential golden handshake - if they want to move my job to a different location (the potential locations are not places I would want to relocate to), that would be fine with me as long as they give me a good deal! I'm happy to wait a couple of years in the hopes of getting a deal, but I don't want to wait longer than that as the continued uncertainty would suck.

John


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Right, if they lay you off, then you will basically get paid to leave (versus leaving on your own accord). On top of that, you might then be eligible to start collecting EI if you decide to search for a next job. Remember that you have paid into the EI system for many decades.

If I was in your position and there were actually layoffs happening, I would stay there and wait it out. But I agree that you should figure out a deadline or net worth amount at which you'll just retire anyway, in case you have the misfortune of remaining employed there.


----------



## My Own Advisor (Sep 24, 2012)

It sounds like you're ready John...and good on you. You're young.

"This is why I think the most feasible option is going into a less challenging job as you just put in your hours for your scheduled shifts and the rest of the time is yours. I have a lot of interests outside of work so I think I'd be OK in giving up the intellectual stimulation from work in exchange for less stress and more free time. Yes, there is a risk that things won't go well, as you say, but the thought of continuing in my current career for another 10 years does not appeal to me at all. "

For someone at 48, you've done extremely well...

Asset list:
"Own residence, 90K left on mortgage
RRSP - $360K
TFSA - $ 70K
Non-registered accounts: $550K."

That's almost $1 M in the bank in invested assets. Part-time work could kill the mortgage over the next few years. You probably only need something in the range of your desired $10-$15k per year to basically kill debt and you could "live off dividends" to ensure your capital stays intact for the next 30+ years.


The inheritance is coming at some point and that's another ~$500k+ conservatively. 

My wife and I hope the $1 M in the bank + paid off home is "enough" for us given our $40k per year expenses planned at age 50. Another 6 years for me. I've got some work to do to reach that but for you, well, it seems like you're pretty much there. Awesome. Pretty much F-You money


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

We have been in the "f**K you" position since we retired early years ago.

After being retired for awhile I came to the realization that the world also tells retirees......"f**k you", we don't need you anymore either.


----------



## My Own Advisor (Sep 24, 2012)

I certainly don't feel that way sags, re: the world doesn't need retirees...but good to have the f-you funds all the same. You've earned it.


----------



## RBull (Jan 20, 2013)

sags said:


> We have been in the "f**K you" position since we retired early years ago.
> 
> After being retired for awhile I came to the realization that the world also tells retirees......"f**k you", we don't need you anymore either.


I guess its all a matter of perspective. I retired on my 55th birthday after 2.5 years semi retired now almost 4 years later from full stop. 

I'm happy and feel as valued as ever in my community, as a tax paying Canadian citizen, as a world traveller, and as a customer wherever I go.


----------



## marina628 (Dec 14, 2010)

My husband went to 3 days a week at age 42 and by age 46 has been working 1 day a week in the family business .We have really enjoyed the freedom to do what we want together and at age 51 have enjoyed more retirement time than most .My sister is 63 and still working full time in a high stress job as does her husband , they have no kids and think they will be bored if they retire.I have my hobby sites and I work as much or as little as I want ,my husband worked a total of 200 hours in 2017 and probably this will be the last year he works any hours .


----------



## JohnZ7 (Apr 1, 2018)

james4beach said:


> Right, if they lay you off, then you will basically get paid to leave (versus leaving on your own accord). On top of that, you might then be eligible to start collecting EI if you decide to search for a next job. Remember that you have paid into the EI system for many decades.
> 
> If I was in your position and there were actually layoffs happening, I would stay there and wait it out. But I agree that you should figure out a deadline or net worth amount at which you'll just retire anyway, in case you have the misfortune of remaining employed there.


Thanks, James. It's like you can read my mind as that is exactly what I'm thinking! With a golden handshake and EI combo, I'm thinking that I could get several years' worth of "easy money" (not really easy as I put in years of hard work to be in this situation). However, I have my doubts that I'd be eligible for EI. Do they look at your financial situation before determining eligibility for EI (a means test)? It's something I'll need to look into if the situation presents itself.

John


----------



## JohnZ7 (Apr 1, 2018)

My Own Advisor said:


> It sounds like you're ready John...and good on you. You're young.
> 
> "This is why I think the most feasible option is going into a less challenging job as you just put in your hours for your scheduled shifts and the rest of the time is yours. I have a lot of interests outside of work so I think I'd be OK in giving up the intellectual stimulation from work in exchange for less stress and more free time. Yes, there is a risk that things won't go well, as you say, but the thought of continuing in my current career for another 10 years does not appeal to me at all. "
> 
> ...


Thanks for your feedback. However, I do NOT consider that I have nearly enough to have F-You money! If I did, I wouldn't be on this forum asking for feedback! To me, F-You money would be having at least $ 5 million or so in assets and short of winning the lottery, I won't ever reach that. In my situation, I'll have to remain prudent (not go overboard on spending) and hope something bad doesn't happen like major inflation or unexpected major expenses. As I said in my original post, I have no fat government pension that will pay me out irrespective of the economic situation. 

Kudos to you for your financial situation! You have a goal, and with a combination of discipline and some good luck, you'll make it.


----------



## JohnZ7 (Apr 1, 2018)

marina628 said:


> My husband went to 3 days a week at age 42 and by age 46 has been working 1 day a week in the family business .We have really enjoyed the freedom to do what we want together and at age 51 have enjoyed more retirement time than most .My sister is 63 and still working full time in a high stress job as does her husband , they have no kids and think they will be bored if they retire.I have my hobby sites and I work as much or as little as I want ,my husband worked a total of 200 hours in 2017 and probably this will be the last year he works any hours .


You and your husband are my inspiration! You both seem very happy with your situation and have no apparent regrets. 

I would hate to be in the situation your sister is in by staying in a full-time high stress job in my 60s. What's the point, unless your work is your life? I could understand if the job were low stress, but working a high stress job in my 60s if I had options? No thanks - life is too short.

John


----------



## JohnZ7 (Apr 1, 2018)

My Own Advisor said:


> I
> 
> My wife and I hope the $1 M in the bank + paid off home is "enough" for us given our $40k per year expenses planned at age 50. Another 6 years for me. I've got some work to do to reach that but for you, well, it seems like you're pretty much there. Awesome. Pretty much F-You money


I have to ask: how do you and your wife only have $40K per year expenses? I'm assuming that is based on having the mortgage paid off and no other debts. I was running my own numbers and if I remove the mortgage and car loan, I'd still have a minimum of $25K expenses a year as one person. There's stuff I could cut to make it lower (travel) but I enjoy that too much to cut it out. What's your secret? 

John


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

MOA may not be including income taxes in that number but it is still a number I wouldn't want to live with today, never mind years in the future. I would consider it too frugal an experience.

FWIW, I started retirement on my own 12 years ago at about $45-50k expenses including income taxes... but have gone well beyond that since then in a new relationship. Mind you, our travel expenses alone range $35-50k per year.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

sags said:


> After being retired for awhile I came to the realization that the world also tells retirees......"f**k you", we don't need you anymore either.


On the flip side, as a younger worker, I'm basically a slave. I work for whichever boss is generous enough to feed me. There's a constant fear of job loss at any time, which would make me scramble to find the next boss and beg for employment. The boss holds this implied & understood fear over all of us, and we all put on a fake smile [1] and pretend to enjoy and be thankful for our jobs. Week after week, the jobs sap all our energy and deplete our youthful years.

Frankly it would be a blessing to get to the point in my life where the employers don't need me, and I don't need them.

_[1] The fake smile really is a thing in America. My British friends mentioned this to me before, how their American coworkers walk around with stupid grins on their faces. I've discovered that in my US office, it's expected that you look happy and jovial, so they all walk around with fake smiles._


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Speaking of which, it's Saturday afternoon, it's 15 C outside right now, and I'm about to go and do a couple hours of office work out of necessity. Really, guys? Do you _really_ miss doing this?

Becoming slightly irrelevant seems like a small price to pay for freedom. Life is short. I read your stories of retirement as inspiration... enjoy the retirement! I'm jealous.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

james4beach said:


> _[1] The fake smile really is a thing in America. My British friends mentioned this to me before, how their American coworkers walk around with stupid grins on their faces. I've discovered that in my US office, it's expected that you look happy and jovial, so they all walk around with fake smiles._


Indeed it is. We ex-pats, i.e. Canucks, Brits, Aussies saw that in the US offices too. The Americans had to look happy, work long hours, not take more than 2 weeks of vacation, and use all that plane and airport time to catch up. They shook their heads at the Canucks, Brita and Aussies, many of which had progressed to 6 weeks vacation time (me included). I literally took a month off a few times in those later years.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

AltaRed, good to see it's not just my imagination.

Like I said, this forum has been an inspiration. I'm 35 but with aggressive savings and no debt, I'm only a couple years away from becoming much less dependent on a boss. Using a conservative 3% var withdrawal approach [60+ year horizon] soon I will only need to bring in around 30K - 40K employment income, much less than I earn now. It will be a long time before I "retire" but I'm hoping this will give me the freedom to do more of what I want, including high risk experimental pursuits since I will no longer be dependent on a full time income.


----------



## peterk (May 16, 2010)

james4beach said:


> soon I will only need to bring in around 30K - 40K employment income, much less than I earn now.


Do you have any prospect of this becoming a reality James? Casual consulting? Call it high-end part-time employment?

If I could make 50k for working 15hrs/week instead of 150k for 45hrs/week like now I'd be all over that! I have admittedly not pursued or put any actual effort into seeking such an arrangement, but it appears bleak in my field that I could pull such a thing off. You tech guys seem to have a lot more work environment and job-type diversity, can be an independent consultants with a few years experience, can walk away from employment willy nilly while still retaining your "career skills".
Traditional engineering fields are a lot more rigid and career track "profession" oriented. And becoming an hireable independent consultant pretty much requires that you are in your 40s+ with 15+ years experience of focused expertise in one single field.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Hi peterk... so far I haven't found a way to do this, but there a few "work from home" possibilities I'm looking at. I was networking at an event a few months ago, and got an open-ended offer to do some writing and light project management work (remotely). I have no idea how much income this could bring in, though.

I haven't figured it out yet.

Maybe one way to accomplish the lower average salary is to work normal jobs and then take large amounts of time off between them. For example if I earn 100K now, then quit and take 2 years off, then find another job at 100K, over those 4 years my average salary would be 50K... with plenty of leisure time.

But that's just one idea and I'm not sure it's the best way to do this.


----------



## off.by.10 (Mar 16, 2014)

james4beach said:


> Maybe one way to accomplish the lower average salary is to work normal jobs and then take large amounts of time off between them.


That's more likely to fit the needs of employers than working 1-2 days/week. I know an engineer who's been doing this for several years now. He works 3-9 months then spends 3-9 months home doing whatever he likes. I don't think there's any guarantee of there being work exactly when wanted but something always eventually comes up. That's likely how I would want work to be in my 50s.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

The other factor I have seen is that because the work available as well as as how interesting it is varies over time, the person looking for work can be watching what is offered instead of unplugging. Sort of like "make hay while the sun shines" attitude.

Some are able to ignore the uncertainly while others can't.


Cheers


----------



## My Own Advisor (Sep 24, 2012)

That's a far point Eclectic - may "hay while you can" type of attitude.

I know when it comes to us, once our debt is gone - life will begin.

This is because we have some assets in the bank and we should only have to work in a job to earn as much as to cover basic necessities. Say work at something for $20k each year.  The money already invested, and making money each month and quarter can be used for fun. 

@off.by - "I know an engineer who's been doing this for several years now. He works 3-9 months then spends 3-9 months home doing whatever he likes. I don't think there's any guarantee of there being work exactly when wanted but something always eventually comes up. That's likely how I would want work to be in my 50s."

Geez, that would be nice. You could actually, almost stomach full-time work this way


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

off.by.10 said:


> That's more likely to fit the needs of employers than working 1-2 days/week. I know an engineer who's been doing this for several years now. He works 3-9 months then spends 3-9 months home doing whatever he likes. I don't think there's any guarantee of there being work exactly when wanted but something always eventually comes up. That's likely how I would want work to be in my 50s.


Very interesting. How did he arrange something like that, those short bursts? I really like the sound of that. Are these with different employers? Is he doing consulting as an independent contractor?

So far I've done this (counting at the start of serious adult work): 1 year work, 2 years off, 3 years work, 1 year off, 5 years work. The average over this 12 years is that I worked 75% of the time, and free 25% of the time, and still significantly added to my savings, nearly +300K net worth increase. I like the pattern but I need to work less. While I am working, I notice that I seem to be ageing more rapidly. As soon as I stop working, my strength and energy bounces back to full strength. Even my hair gets thicker, no joke. Colours become more vibrant. Women find me more attractive. It's ridiculous.

I'm currently debating proposing to my employer: that I'd like to stay with them, but work X months on and take Y months off (continuously), maybe 6 months on/off for 50% duty cycle, with no guarantees of the next employment phase. They might fire me when I bring up the idea.


----------



## off.by.10 (Mar 16, 2014)

james4beach said:


> Very interesting. How did he arrange something like that, those short bursts? I really like the sound of that. Are these with different employers? Is he doing consulting as an independent contractor?


I think it's the same employer but a different "job" at a different location each time, in the mining sector. As far as I know, his work has always been like that so it's well suited for taking a break between jobs. That's about all I know.



james4beach said:


> Women find me more attractive. It's ridiculous.


Call it the retired rich guy effect  I imagine being well rested will do that too.



james4beach said:


> I'm currently debating proposing to my employer: that I'd like to stay with them, but work X months on and take Y months off (continuously), maybe 6 months on/off for 50% duty cycle, with no guarantees of the next employment phase. They might fire me when I bring up the idea.


I imagine that depends on the kind of work you do, how it is structured, how valuable your experience is to them, etc. Having a flexible workforce can be a great advantage to some businesses and a problem for others.


----------



## dogleg1 (Jul 4, 2016)

I have only read the last two dozen posts but the dislike for steady employment resonates with me. After high school I apprenticed and worked as a construction electrician all over hell's creation....made good money but was off work in between jobs now and then. I decided it wasn't for me and went to college and university. Worked in engineering for 7 years in Montreal and Toronto... what a boring job. Quit, and taught high school math and physics for a few years ( over 20)... hardest job I ever did. Started my own business and loved it.. made some good money and raised a family. Retired at 55 and played golf all year ... that is living. Moral to story; get a good education and never work for anyone else!


----------



## dBII (Mar 12, 2013)

I just want to contribute, because, well...I probably haven't been around much. 

I have found owning rental properties is a great way to fill in some of that early-retirement-should-be-working blues. I was forced into retirement at 56 due to a layoff. I had been building up my rental portfolio and I have to say, owning rental properties in this market has been great. I work whenever I feel like it, I have the time to spend monitoring the places to make sure there isn't nastiness going on and the work is quite rewarding. That plus I can look forward to a windfall in 8 to 10 years when I sell off the properties.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

Asking if retiring at 50 is a smart move or asking for trouble, is like the guy who jumped off the top of a 50 story building and all the way down could be heard repeating, 'so far, so good, so far, so good.' It is only when you come to the end in other words that you will know if it was a smart move or asking for trouble. 

The difference is that making an educated decision (guess) as to whether it should work or not, is not the same as doing something that anyone could tell you was a bad idea to start with, like jumping off a building.

When people ask is this a good idea or not, what they are really saying is they think they might be jumping off a building. The fear of that has them suspending their common sense which should tell them if they are in a position to retire or not. What do you think all the people who have no choice but to retire do? End up homeless and starving? We have plenty of people who are living happily on $15k a year. Then we have those here who worry about, 'but can I survive on just $100k a year in retirement.'

The difference in the two is not about needs, food and shelter, the difference is in wants, golf and vacations. The question of 'how much is enough' is a question for which the real answer is, no one knows until the day they die.


----------

