Anyone Else Deciding NOT to retire? (pension plan, supplement, vacations, friend)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why "retire" or go into "retirement" when you can contribute and add value?
I suppose I should ask what YOUR definition of "retire" and "retirement" are -- to understand what your trying to say -- before I ask whether your question was asked out of ignorance, ...or arrogance? Because perhaps your true position is badly conveyed.
Do you think that YOU only add value when you're working for pay?
I have no doubt that the most discriminated group in the US today is the elderly/seniors/aged. Which politician has stood up for seniors? None that I know of.
I agree and I think that in the "US today" could be extended to in the "world today".
First governments collude to trash savings by keeping interest rates low, baling out banksters with our money, pandering to lobby groups and other flaky organizations. Then to cap it off they side with big business to continue their discrimination process.
I suppose I should ask what YOUR definition of "retire" and "retirement" are -- to understand what your trying to say -- before I ask whether your question was asked out of ignorance, ...or arrogance? Because perhaps your true position is badly conveyed.
Do you think that YOU only add value when you're working for pay?
The words "retire" and "retirement" are so loosely defined and used that unless they are contextualized they become pretty meaningless.
There are obviously many ways of adding value. Whether you earn more money or it results in someone else being better off (receiving value) it is irrelevant ... value is added.
My definition of financial retirement is having enough money to live your chosen lifestyle till the day you die without ever having to earn anything or rely on anyone.
Location: We_tside PNW (Columbia Gorge) / CO / SA TX / Thailand
34,707 posts, read 58,042,598 times
Reputation: 46177
Quote:
Originally Posted by PatMil
I agree and I think that in the "US today" could be extended to in the "world today".
First governments collude to trash savings by keeping interest rates low, baling out banksters with our money, pandering to lobby groups and other flaky organizations. Then to cap it off they side with big business to continue their discrimination process.
We need revolutions not elections!!
Sorry... not gonna happen in the (roll-over-and-play-dead) USA. This is a couch potato nation. If it comes from the TV screen it will get voted in. In the USA you don't need to read or think (which is far better if you vote) certainly DON'T remember any campaign pledges. And definitely don't check the voting record of incumbents before you vote! If you like the TV commercial, you have certainly found the best candidate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PatMil
The words "retire" and "retirement" are so loosely defined and used that unless they are contextualized they become pretty meaningless.
There are obviously many ways of adding value. Whether you earn more money or it results in someone else being better off (receiving value) it is irrelevant ... value is added.
My definition of financial retirement is having enough money to live your chosen lifestyle till the day you die without ever having to earn anything or rely on anyone.
yup... that includes allowing those who choose to work or return to work do as they please (not gonna be digested well by the readership here!... they like GROUP think... fall in line or you are an outcast (U r wrong. PERIOD... end of discussion!, yes mommy)) Perfect group for a revolution! (not).
Hate to say it... but at some point...MOST of us will rely on someone else if we are gonna get outta this mess (Earthship). You have to do a flame-out, or drop dead in your tracks to exit solo. (Often this method is not too pretty). Don't burn all your bridges or you will be plenty lonely at the worst time of your life! (Not the same in Cebu, plenty of friends and only a few bridges!)
Retirement is usualy defined as 'meeting critical mass'... not HAVING to work / add to your accumulated nest egg to survive. For some it came very early, for others it is the culmination of enduring a painful and bitter career to fetch that PENSION! (they often remain pretty bitter, bad (sad) habit...)
Last edited by StealthRabbit; 08-16-2015 at 02:53 AM..
Don't misunderstand or think my life has been perfect or turned out how I hoped because I planned anything. It hasn't. It's had many twists and turns, financial and emotional setbacks. But that is life. I tried to learn from the problems and be a better person, both for myself, and others. Without some kind of plan or long term goal, I think most are doomed to fail. I am not as successful as I thought I would be. Or even as others thought I would be. Many many of my college buddies are far far wealthier and successful than I . Net worths in the many millions. And they are happy, have great families, and health too. They had that "something" that I must be missing that got them where they are. And none are bankers or cut throat traders. Many started their own successful companies and sold them for small fortunes. Others are VPs, CEOs, etc, and talking with them, they are the same people I knew 35 years ago. But I'm still way more successful than most Americans, and I wont have to worry much at all in my old age. I look forward to everything and everyday, and know I have more to do, than time will ever allow.
Real retirement to me is when you start taking SS, and after that any new job becomes a "retirement job."
With that definition, I will never retire. Since I am in the old federal Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS), I don't get to collect Social Security. My CSRS pension (annuity) is fully taxed, unlike Social Security benefits.
With that definition, I will never retire. Since I am in the old federal Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS), I don't get to collect Social Security. My CSRS pension (annuity) is fully taxed, unlike Social Security benefits.
OUCH! that sux. I guess I am completely glad I am in the old FERS system. The jury is still out on the new hires. I don't know if it will be as good as we have it. I would hope that it is at least close when the numbers finally shake out (retired new FERS employees).
Still the process is very similar. I tell the new hires that they need to pay attention to their retirement plans. Take advantage of what is available and save as much as they can within reason. I do not advocate saving every penny at the expense of living life. I do say that enjoy life on a budget and stay within your means.
With that definition, I will never retire. Since I am in the old federal Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS), I don't get to collect Social Security. My CSRS pension (annuity) is fully taxed, unlike Social Security benefits.
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfingduo
OUCH! that sux. I guess I am completely glad I am in the old FERS system. The jury is still out on the new hires. I don't know if it will be as good as we have it. I would hope that it is at least close when the numbers finally shake out (retired new FERS employees).
Still the process is very similar. I tell the new hires that they need to pay attention to their retirement plans. Take advantage of what is available and save as much as they can within reason. I do not advocate saving every penny at the expense of living life. I do say that enjoy life on a budget and stay within your means.
I do not agree with the "ouch, that sucks" conclusion. There is nothing inherently wrong with not being under Social Security, provided that the pension is as good or better than Social Security plus the FERS pension. The non-taxation of Social Security is predicated on not having much other income; therefore, it is an "advantage" only if one is living on not very much money in retirement.
I would much rather have a pension that I can live on which is fully taxable than live on (mostly) Social Security while watching every nickel and "rejoicing" at the tax advantages.
Well, after reviewing my options and seeing my retired pay estimate. I decided to put in for a job in my home town, for the same agency I work for now. Never really expected an interview much less getting the job.
Short story: great interview, got the job, they are paying for a portion of my move from WA to TX.
I didn't think at my age, 59, I could be this excited about starting a new job, but I am.
And I get to add to my 401, SS etc. And I'll be in my home where I was going to retire.
And NO MORE 3 hour daily commutes. It will be maybe 20 minutes round trip.
Blessed!
Good for you! There seems to be a lot of "peer pressure" on people in their late 50s/early 60s to bolt out the door into early retirement as soon as they're eligible. That might work for some people but for many, perhaps most, it's actually not in their best financial interest, and that probably goes double for single women who may have gotten a late start earning decent money or interrupted their employment to raise children.
I was eligible to retire at 55 and never even considered it. I could have retired at 62 but felt that it wasn't a smart move financially since I would be foregoing about $1000 a month in retirement income (SS and pension) doing that.
Also, moving to the place where you want to retire before you actually do retire enables you to establish/re-establish a lot of social ties more easily as most Americans make a lot of connections through work. I moved back to my home area when I was 48. Originally, I thought I'd move about 35 miles NE to my old home town when I retired, but I've grown to like this city so much and have made so many friends and connections that I'll stay here permanently.
I do not agree with the "ouch, that sucks" conclusion. There is nothing inherently wrong with not being under Social Security, provided that the pension is as good or better than Social Security plus the FERS pension. The non-taxation of Social Security is predicated on not having much other income; therefore, it is an "advantage" only if one is living on not very much money in retirement.
I would much rather have a pension that I can live on which is fully taxable than live on (mostly) Social Security while watching every nickel and "rejoicing" at the tax advantages.
E R I dont think CSRSJim is complaining. It was me and I am under FERS and have SS to look forward to as well. I am sure that it is CSRS is a good system or if it wasn't why were so many folks reluctant to switch over. Since I didnt study CSRS because it didnt affect me I do not know how I would look at it as Jim is. I realize that Federally my pension is taxable income. Not much I can do about that but do what I can to avoid paying too much. As it is I am grateful for the income to come (not retired yet for those who don't know me).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And definitely don't check the voting record of incumbents before you vote! If you like the TV commercial, you have certainly found the best candidate.
(not gonna be digested well by the readership here!... they like GROUP think... fall in line or you are an outcast (U r wrong. PERIOD... end of discussion!, yes mommy
)) Perfect group for a revolution! (not). 
There seems to be a lot of "peer pressure" on people in their late 50s/early 60s to bolt out the door into early retirement as soon as they're eligible. That might work for some people but for many, perhaps most, it's actually not in their best financial interest, and that probably goes double for single women who may have gotten a late start earning decent money or interrupted their employment to raise children.
