Early Retirement?

Good advice. Both of my parents didn't live to retirement age. My Dad died at 62 and my Mom at 64 so I totally get it. Plus, I work in hospice so I have an almost daily reminder that if you want to do something important, don't wait, do it now. You never know when your time will run out.

I think what I am learning as I get older is that time is worth more than all the "stuff" I've spent my life accumulating. You think you will be happier when you are in your dream home but then you realize, its just more to clean.:scratchin

I agree with this, too. You do have to plan for the future, but we live to enjoy our lives now. I wouldn't sacrifice now for some glorious retirement, that I will probably spend sick and may die young. And all the money we hoarded will go for medical expenses anyway. I had a major shift in my belief about this after my father died young from cancer. Previously we were living in the tiniest house we could stuff ourselves in to and skimping and investing. But then we decided to enjoy our lives now while our kids are young and we are still healthy. Even if we live to be in our 90's, we aren't going to have as much energy and feel as good as we do now.

But it is a balance. My husband will "retire" from his current job with a 50% pension and nearly free health insurance for the rest of our lives at age 45. But he plans on still working at his job because he loves it so much. He doesn't plan on ever retiring from it, although he will probably move to a smaller hospital and work fewer hours when he gets much older. We are investing and planning for our older years, but we're not making major sacrifices for it now, either.

What's that quote about how a life is not measured by how many breaths you take, but how many times you are left breathless?
 
If someone is getting a great deal with ACA then someone else is paying more - it is a subsidy! So a middle class younger person will have a higher premium for their insurance, so someone else can have it cheaper. We are inching very close to socialism with this type of mentality.

:thumbsup2:thumbsup2:thumbsup2
 
One of the things about the subsidy for insurance is that if some people can now afford to retire when before they couldn't because of insurance, that frees up jobs for others. We have a shortage of jobs. We can pay a subsidy for me to have insurance, and I can retire early and live off saved wealth (and the insurance subsidy) and free up a six figure job for someone else, which someone with some experience will move into, freeing up a lower level job, which will continue until a recent college grad can get hired into a job with a good career path. Or we can not pay the subsidy to me, I can stay in my job for the insurance, and then we have a younger person not able to find a decent job at a living wage and end up subsidizing them for health care - plus needing free or reduced lunch programs for their kids and an earned income tax credit.

If everyone deserves health care (and I think people shouldn't starve and they should get health care), you will be subsidizing some people. If you are opposed to the idea that health care should be a right, then we have a fundamental philosophical difference about ethics.
 
One of the things about the subsidy for insurance is that if some people can now afford to retire when before they couldn't because of insurance, that frees up jobs for others. We have a shortage of jobs. We can pay a subsidy for me to have insurance, and I can retire early and live off saved wealth (and the insurance subsidy) and free up a six figure job for someone else, which someone with some experience will move into, freeing up a lower level job, which will continue until a recent college grad can get hired into a job with a good career path. Or we can not pay the subsidy to me, I can stay in my job for the insurance, and then we have a younger person not able to find a decent job at a living wage and end up subsidizing them for health care - plus needing free or reduced lunch programs for their kids and an earned income tax credit.

If everyone deserves health care (and I think people shouldn't starve and they should get health care), you will be subsidizing some people. If you are opposed to the idea that health care should be a right, then we have a fundamental philosophical difference about ethics.

Not sure this is still the case, but that is exactly what they did with teachers in Canada. Of course, they have government provided healthcare there, so there is no impact related to that. My Aunt and Uncle were teachers, and said it was pretty much impossible to work past age 55 there as a teacher in the early 1980's. You went from the payroll to receiving unemployment benefits until you were old enough for your national pension.
Whole idea was to open up jobs for younger folks.
 

Not sure this is still the case, but that is exactly what they did with teachers in Canada. Of course, they have government provided healthcare there, so there is no impact related to that. My Aunt and Uncle were teachers, and said it was pretty much impossible to work past age 55 there as a teacher in the early 1980's. You went from the payroll to receiving unemployment benefits until you were old enough for your national pension.
Whole idea was to open up jobs for younger folks.
Unless this is happening in different parts of Canada I am not sure, but the part of Ontario I live in, some teachers retire at the age of 55, with a full pension then go on the supply list, taking jobs away from the younger generation. To get a teaching job you need to be on the supply list and what I have heard is it can take up to 5 years to get on to it. Hence we have high unemployment for young people making it almost impossible for them to retire early.
 
Unless this is happening in different parts of Canada I am not sure, but the part of Ontario I live in, some teachers retire at the age of 55, with a full pension then go on the supply list, taking jobs away from the younger generation. To get a teaching job you need to be on the supply list and what I have heard is it can take up to 5 years to get on to it. Hence we have high unemployment for young people making it almost impossible for them to retire early.

It is a huge issue here. It becomes very difficult for these people to get on the supply lists, and even harder for them to secure a full time position. Years and years.
My SIL was able to finally get her own classroom because she can teach French, but she was not the norm. And she is a fabulous teacher and a hard worker. There was just nothing . Most of her graduating class hasn't secured a full time position teaching and this is 6 years later! Let's not forget the advertising and lobbying the Ontario government did about the upcoming teacher shortage years ago. So many young people went into that career only to find out there was absolutely nothing available. It's awful. Universities should be forced to cut way back on the amount of people they are allowing to enroll for teaching until this mess is cleaned up.
 
One of the things about the subsidy for insurance is that if some people can now afford to retire when before they couldn't because of insurance, that frees up jobs for others. We have a shortage of jobs. We can pay a subsidy for me to have insurance, and I can retire early and live off saved wealth (and the insurance subsidy) and free up a six figure job for someone else, which someone with some experience will move into, freeing up a lower level job, which will continue until a recent college grad can get hired into a job with a good career path. Or we can not pay the subsidy to me, I can stay in my job for the insurance, and then we have a younger person not able to find a decent job at a living wage and end up subsidizing them for health care - plus needing free or reduced lunch programs for their kids and an earned income tax credit.

If everyone deserves health care (and I think people shouldn't starve and they should get health care), you will be subsidizing some people. If you are opposed to the idea that health care should be a right, then we have a fundamental philosophical difference about ethics.

Well I certainly have a fundamental philosophical difference about ethics. As a single mom (receiving no child support) who doesn't make six figures, I don't want to subsidize someone who just retired from a six figure job and is living off of their wealth. Sorry, but I'm trying to put food on my table, a little away for retirement, and something in my kids' 529 plans. I'm willing to work very hard to give my kids the opportunities they deserve, but I really don't want my income redistributed to others--especially people who are living off their wealth and retiring early.
 
Well I certainly have a fundamental philosophical difference about ethics. As a single mom (receiving no child support) who doesn't make six figures, I don't want to subsidize someone who just retired from a six figure job and is living off of their wealth. Sorry, but I'm trying to put food on my table, a little away for retirement, and something in my kids' 529 plans. I'm willing to work very hard to give my kids the opportunities they deserve, but I really don't want my income redistributed to others--especially people who are living off their wealth and retiring early.

But the thing is Havaneslover, is pretty much that's what we do in this country. Your income in the form of taxes goes to pay for services.

For some reason we have a very "individualistic" view of the economy in our country. We think "I don't want to pay for some one else" when in reality since we are not a country that lets people starve or die on the streets. we've always "paid" for others. Basically our taxes are "dividy up" to pay for other peoples needs. Always is, always has been, always will be.

The object is really to divvy up the money so it produces the best results.

So let's take Crisi's example. Our economy lives off of consumerism. Period. We need people to spend money. Crisi's right, in that if I stay in my job until I'm 75 that's less money in the economy. You want your wage earners out there getting mortgages, buying cars, getting car loans and shopping. whether we like it or not, that demographic is a youngster. ;)

We want our seniors to retire, live off their wealth and also spend but we want our 30, 40 and 50 some things getting good jobs.
they are the ones getting car loans, getting 3 and 4 mortgages.

Now I'm not getting into health care and the aca debate, it's been done to death.
only to say that healthcare is also another area that whether we like it or not, we cover the uninsured.
 
On the other hand, a lot of people who go for early retirement made a lot of money in their lives and have paid a lot in taxes, the ACA is one way for them to get some of their investment in the system back.

Sorry that seems selfish to me to expect my kids and grandkids to subsidize my healthcare. They are having enough trouble now as it is to pay their OWN healthcare and taxes. There are a lot of other things we can cut out instead of passing the burden onto our young people. Let's eliminate some of the entitlement programs - there are so many out there that I can't name them all but we can start with free cellphones and free internet for those who aren't working.
 
Well I certainly have a fundamental philosophical difference about ethics. As a single mom (receiving no child support) who doesn't make six figures, I don't want to subsidize someone who just retired from a six figure job and is living off of their wealth. Sorry, but I'm trying to put food on my table, a little away for retirement, and something in my kids' 529 plans. I'm willing to work very hard to give my kids the opportunities they deserve, but I really don't want my income redistributed to others--especially people who are living off their wealth and retiring early.

As a single mom not making six figures, how much do you pay in federal income taxes to subsidize anyone? Probably not much of which a fraction will go to health care.

And, do your kids go to public school?
 
Sorry that seems selfish to me to expect my kids and grandkids to subsidize my healthcare. They are having enough trouble now as it is to pay their OWN healthcare and taxes. There are a lot of other things we can cut out instead of passing the burden onto our young people. Let's eliminate some of the entitlement programs - there are so many out there that I can't name them all but we can start with free cellphones and free internet for those who aren't working.

Well to start with the federal govt doesn't give free cell phone and internet. the phone and cable company do that. They do get tax credit for offering that service but that is no different than the dairy farmers and oil company getting tax breaks for keeping milk and gas price artificially low.

Next, how do you think social security works. The workers today pay into the system. It covers the retirement of workers who are retired. Yes, you get the credit toward your retirement but the money you put in is paying for some one's retirement and medical.
Just like your kids will be paying for your social security and some one else will be paying for theirs.

This is not a new system and sorry unemployed people are not the reason why you pay social security tax and medicaid. And as Crisi said, I pay crazy property taxes. My property taxes pay for my school system even though my children have been out of the system for a while. Some other person who lived in my township when my kids were small and I was a stay at home mom paid property tax for my kids to get services at their public school

Hey, I'm totally with you on cutting waste but the social security and medicaid/medicare system has been working this way for a very long time.

I understand everyone's frustration. health care cost are astronomical but as others have mention, our system has always worked on that premise.
 
The phone and cable companies don't pay for the free services they give away- it is built into the rates they charge - so consumers are subsidizing the free service
 
danygirl said:
The phone and cable companies don't pay for the free services they give away- it is built into the rates they charge - so consumers are subsidizing the free service

And that is different how?
Either through tax breaks or direct pricing, the cost is passed on.
The cost for uninsured gets directly passed on to those with insurance.
The cost for social security cones out of our pockets

When did this all of a sudden become "surprising". Seniors in Philly get a reduction in their energy bills, most areas do this, Who do you think pays for that? What you think PECO and con ed, are doing it out of concern?

They get tax breaks and pass the cost amongst the general consumer.

Please believe me, Concast is not going to lower your rates if they stop giving free WiFi to poor school kids.

Our next generation will still be used to fund SS, Medicaid and Medicare. That is how the system is designed. You could get rid of ever Trac phone on the planet.
I'm paying the tab on some seniors drug plan and when I get 65 my son's salary will go to fund my benefits.

Listen, I'm not arguing the merits or wastefullness of free cell phones, as far as I know, no company is forced to participate. They do it for the same reasons any company does something, they get economic benefit from it.
What I am arguing is the notion that one generation does not support the older generation. They do, they always have. Thank FDR for that.
 
Good advice. Both of my parents didn't live to retirement age. My Dad died at 62 and my Mom at 64 so I totally get it. Plus, I work in hospice so I have an almost daily reminder that if you want to do something important, don't wait, do it now. You never know when your time will run out.

My dad died at 55 and never got to retire. I worked the past 28 years thinking I was retiring last June 2013 at 50 years old- until I ran some numbers with my company and found out if I stayed just 2 more years and had 30 years there my pension would be over $30,000 a year MORE than what I would get if I went with 28 years. It was a no brainer to me to suck it up and stay 2 more years. So now I have about 13 more months to go. So I will be retiring when I am 52 rather than 50-
 
One of the things about the subsidy for insurance is that if some people can now afford to retire when before they couldn't because of insurance, that frees up jobs for others. We have a shortage of jobs. We can pay a subsidy for me to have insurance, and I can retire early and live off saved wealth (and the insurance subsidy) and free up a six figure job for someone else, which someone with some experience will move into, freeing up a lower level job, which will continue until a recent college grad can get hired into a job with a good career path. Or we can not pay the subsidy to me, I can stay in my job for the insurance, and then we have a younger person not able to find a decent job at a living wage and end up subsidizing them for health care - plus needing free or reduced lunch programs for their kids and an earned income tax credit. If everyone deserves health care (and I think people shouldn't starve and they should get health care), you will be subsidizing some people. If you are opposed to the idea that health care should be a right, then we have a fundamental philosophical difference about ethics.

I don't buy this analysis. The subsidy has nothing to do about "jobs". It's to get people with low incomes, who would not ordinarily get ANY insurance, buy into the ACA. So the subsidy lures them in, all the while collecting some form of payment which will go into the overall fund. This is supposed to be what keeps the ACA viable. However, even the subsidies are not enough to get those in the lowest income bracket to buy it.

If Obama really wanted to free up jobs he would extend those subsidies to spouses that don't qualify for Medicare. Nope don't see that being talked about. How about lowering the Medicare age. You want to purge people from the job market? Let me count the ways.
 
If someone is getting a great deal with ACA then someone else is paying more - it is a subsidy! So a middle class younger person will have a higher premium for their insurance, so someone else can have it cheaper. We are inching very close to socialism with this type of mentality.

If that were true, it would be great. :goodvibes:goodvibes
 
I don't buy this analysis. The subsidy has nothing to do about "jobs". It's to get people with low incomes, who would not ordinarily get ANY insurance, buy into the ACA. So the subsidy lures them in, all the while collecting some form of payment which will go into the overall fund. This is supposed to be what keeps the ACA viable. However, even the subsidies are not enough to get those in the lowest income bracket to buy it.

If Obama really wanted to free up jobs he would extend those subsidies to spouses that don't qualify for Medicare. Nope don't see that being talked about. How about lowering the Medicare age. You want to purge people from the job market? Let me count the ways.

Jobs are a relatively minor part of it, but they are part of the OMB and CBO analysis.
 
Well to start with the federal govt doesn't give free cell phone and internet. the phone and cable company do that. They do get tax credit for offering that service but that is no different than the dairy farmers and oil company getting tax breaks for keeping milk and gas price artificially low.

Next, how do you think social security works. The workers today pay into the system. It covers the retirement of workers who are retired. Yes, you get the credit toward your retirement but the money you put in is paying for some one's retirement and medical.
Just like your kids will be paying for your social security and some one else will be paying for theirs.

This is not a new system and sorry unemployed people are not the reason why you pay social security tax and medicaid. And as Crisi said, I pay crazy property taxes. My property taxes pay for my school system even though my children have been out of the system for a while. Some other person who lived in my township when my kids were small and I was a stay at home mom paid property tax for my kids to get services at their public school

Hey, I'm totally with you on cutting waste but the social security and medicaid/medicare system has been working this way for a very long time.

I understand everyone's frustration. health care cost are astronomical but as others have mention, our system has always worked on that premise.

I think the difference is that with SSN, I know exactly how much I will be expected to contribute, and exactly how much I will (or won't) get back out.

ACA on the other hand is completely open-ended. And the more "socialized" it becomes, the less incentive for anyone remotely connected to the plan to attempt to contain costs. That's the scary part.
 
the federal govt doesn't give free cell phone and internet. the phone and cable company do that.

Wrong - If you have a wireless or landline phone, you’re paying for millions of people to get a free phone. The cost is deducted from your monthly bill. The average deduction is around $2.50 per month.

The workers today pay into the system.
That used to be try and how the system was meant to be however they are millions of people who never pay into the system but get thousands of dollars in entitlements every year. That's why the system no longer works when more is going out than is coming in. One example alone - illegal immigration cost North Carolina taxpayers more than $2 billion annually. That amounts to $578 annually for every North Carolina household headed by a native-born or naturalized U.S. citizen. These costs are for welfare, medicaid and education without any money being put into the system.
 
Wrong - If you have a wireless or landline phone, you’re paying for millions of people to get a free phone. The cost is deducted from your monthly bill. The average deduction is around $2.50 per month.

That used to be try and how the system was meant to be however they are millions of people who never pay into the system but get thousands of dollars in entitlements every year. That's why the system no longer works when more is going out than is coming in. One example alone - illegal immigration cost North Carolina taxpayers more than $2 billion annually. That amounts to $578 annually for every North Carolina household headed by a native-born or naturalized U.S. citizen. These costs are for welfare, medicaid and education without any money being put into the system.

ACA on the other hand is completely open-ended. And the more "socialized" it becomes, the less incentive for anyone remotely connected to the plan to attempt to contain costs. That's the scary part.

that's the phone company. The government is not forcing companies to take part (the last I researched it, it was not mandatory). The phone company is getting a kickback. they past the cost onto the consumer. ONCE again, how is this any different than farmers getting subsidies to artificially keep prices low.? For example the big cell phone program Lifeline. The feds tell the big cell phone guys, if you give low income folks who meet federal welfare standards, X amount of service (and that service can be text, talk or any combo the cell phone provider decides on), we will give X amount of tax breaks. Now yes, they indirectly pass the cost onto. MY QUESTION IS THIS. HOW IS THIS ANY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE DO NOW?? When some one goes to the hospital and cannot pay, how do you think it gets paid for? Do you think the hospital, doesn't bill them out of the kindness of their hearts? When some one gets food stamps, where do you think the money is coming from? When a senior gets a SS check, where is the money coming from.

Please stop pretending that all of a sudden we are now footing the bill for people. Our entire system is built on person X getting benefits paid for by person Y.

Of course there are millions of people who don't pay into the system. There were millions of people back in 1937 when the checks first went out that had not paid into the system.

And most people take more money out of the system than they put in. YOUR employee puts in a chunk of change. So EVERY BODY is getting a piece of some thing at the expense of some one else.

I don't know enough on illegal immigration to say what's going on, but I have read that the situation you mention has been a problem in many areas.

GUMBO, I think the entire retirement Health care is open ended. I will get most of my HC cost covered by my pension from a private company. Now granted my company is huge and not likely to go under but the reality of it is that at any time they can cut benefits. They have most definitely reduced them over the years. The thing is, in this country most of these plans are already very much "socialized". My company's profits of today are going to the cost of folks that are already retired. so very much I'm working for Retiree Joe and Jane to pay their health care cost.

A guy that has retired from my company 10 years ago, has definitely seen his out of pocket hc gone up. now this hypothetical guy has a couple of recourses. Hopefully he's saved and can absorbed this cost, but if he can't and he's on a fix income, some thing gives.

So I think for us the problem remains, how do we effectively plan for retirement especially if we want to go before Medicaid kicks in when at any time our health care cost can be so variable.

But I think one of the issues is that no one is addressing the real problem which is why are health care cost skyrocketing in the first place. As we've seen with many of the post above it's much easier to say I can't retire because some poor person is getting free cell phone usage worth 2.50 LOL.
I think it will always be a losing battle if health care cost keep rising 10-15% annually. I read a report about how happy every one in Washington was because hc cost only rose 9.5% !! Seriously? That's good news?

Edited: these are just my ramblings. I am not advocating nor speaking out against centralized medicine. I've heard too many convicting reports.
 












Receive up to $1,000 in Onboard Credit and a Gift Basket!
That’s right — when you book your Disney Cruise with Dreams Unlimited Travel, you’ll receive incredible shipboard credits to spend during your vacation!
CLICK HERE













DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest DIS Tiktok DIS Twitter DIS Bluesky

Back
Top