It is odd that I mention "early retirement" in the subtitle of this blog, but seldom talk about what some readers would care about: "how the hell can you possibly do it?" One reason I shun the topic is that I get accused of being anti-woman.
How generous of Fred Reed to offer up an essay "Against Marriage," which provides me with easy "cover." Although he doesn't mention early retirement per se in his essay, his arguments against marriage apply triply to somebody who wants to retire early.
But let's be clear: his essay is against getting sucked into a destructive legal/financial relationship (aka, marriage) with a woman. It is not anti-woman. People who reflexively trot out that old canard do so as a crutch: they don't want to look at the arguments against marriage honestly and intelligently; they would rather perform character assassination on the man making the argument.
If you read the essay, you will probably find it provocative and witty, in Fred's usual style. But it may leave some readers with a bitter after-taste in their mouth. We are only cut out for a certain amount of brutal truth. Beyond that, we come away discouraged and depressed. It helps, when reading his essay, to remember that his "contra" theme could be balanced by a second essay on the cheerful and positive agenda of being single and retired early.
Some would argue that marriage itself is not injurious to early retirement, but rather, the blame should go to children, divorce, and the ballooning cost of college. Strictly speaking, this might be true. But an individual only has 100% control over whether they get married.
But once you do get married, how much control do you have over the issue of children and divorce? As a rough guide, you only have 33% control; with another 33% belonging to the spouse; and 33% belonging to the mores of your society.
Can you be satisfied with a mere 33% control over your destiny?; over financial ruin?; over working at a (probably disagreeable) job until you are a matter of months from medical problems taking over your life?
How generous of Fred Reed to offer up an essay "Against Marriage," which provides me with easy "cover." Although he doesn't mention early retirement per se in his essay, his arguments against marriage apply triply to somebody who wants to retire early.
But let's be clear: his essay is against getting sucked into a destructive legal/financial relationship (aka, marriage) with a woman. It is not anti-woman. People who reflexively trot out that old canard do so as a crutch: they don't want to look at the arguments against marriage honestly and intelligently; they would rather perform character assassination on the man making the argument.
If you read the essay, you will probably find it provocative and witty, in Fred's usual style. But it may leave some readers with a bitter after-taste in their mouth. We are only cut out for a certain amount of brutal truth. Beyond that, we come away discouraged and depressed. It helps, when reading his essay, to remember that his "contra" theme could be balanced by a second essay on the cheerful and positive agenda of being single and retired early.
Some would argue that marriage itself is not injurious to early retirement, but rather, the blame should go to children, divorce, and the ballooning cost of college. Strictly speaking, this might be true. But an individual only has 100% control over whether they get married.
But once you do get married, how much control do you have over the issue of children and divorce? As a rough guide, you only have 33% control; with another 33% belonging to the spouse; and 33% belonging to the mores of your society.
Can you be satisfied with a mere 33% control over your destiny?; over financial ruin?; over working at a (probably disagreeable) job until you are a matter of months from medical problems taking over your life?
Comments
With the majority of married households having two wage earners and women fast reaching the 50 percent mark in being the main wage earner, they have as much or more to lose
So I don't know why women would be offended by this essay if taken as a reason not to marry.
I tell everyone when you get married it is between two people and the state. The state now predicts and controls the outcome.
In contrast, if an essay is about one experience (or even two or three, or five or ten) and describes that experience, and perhaps even wonders if any conclusions could be drawn, I find my self much more open to the topic, and more willing to consider whether it might be "true."
First off to Fred. His premise, based on my own experience is about 50 years out of date. At least as it relates to the security angle for women. I can only say that all of my contemporaries were dual income families.
Again, for me the reality of an earlier retirement was enhanced by marriage as a result of dual income and children were never a factor. If a person is so weak as to allow external social pressures to induce them into having children when they don't want them, then they get what they deserve.
I can offer one economic example of the drawbacks to living together and not marrying. Two of our closest friends lived together for longer than Gayle and I have been married. A couple of years ago she died in an accident. As a result of not thinking through possible end of life consequences her significant other was unable to see to it that her funeral arrangement requests were honored. And because she assumed she would live to her 90's she failed to opt for a pension selection that extended to her SO upon her death resulting in the loss of a $4,000 a month income for him and that money reverting back to the pension plan.
For me, a companion has made all the difference and clearly I got lucky. Many people don't choose as well and end up with a lot of stress and regret. Life is an experiment and a crapshoot.
Jim
The theme of his essay is not unisex PC orthodoxy. It is the disadvantageous of marriage to a young man, in general.
My theme is the importance of staying single to achieving early retirement. We are discussing a general idea. Obviously there are exceptions in a human population of 7 billion.
Granted, I'm female, and I get tired of the "all women" type of discussions. But then too, I can't imagine writing an essay about "men" in general. Why would I? Or all of any sub-group, really. To me it makes real discussion much less likely. But then, I only speak for one person ;)
Anyway, I realize that each person will react differently, but you seemed interested in people's reactions, so I posted mine.
I somehow managed to dodge the marriage bullet, though not by my own design. It just worked out that way. I guess I didn't want it enough to make it happen. I am not unhappy that it turned out this way. Not at all.
Young men considering this advice should be made aware that if they go unmarried they'll be suspected (accused) by family, friends, and coworkers of being gay. Every friend you make you'll lose when they marry, though sometimes you'll regain them for a time before remarriage. And people will instruct their children to keep away from you, the potential pedophile. You learn to live with the disappointing downsides and move on with your wonderfully untethered life.
Indeed, that is the greatest hardship for single men. .
That's too bad about family/friends/co-workers accusations of being gay (and the way you write it I presume they mean it as a negative). Potential pedophile is obviously much worse, since it can't possibly be a positive. I guess it's just another case of assuming or generalizing (all older single men are gay; all gays are pedophiles, etc. etc.). I'm lucky never to have experienced anything like that. OTOH I often get "You're traveling ALONE?!" comments (as if that is irresponsible or outrageously dangerous), which I assume stem from my being female (presuming the gay/pedophile comments are directed at you because you are male).
Presumptions/generalizations (about all of a given group) are a pain oftentimes. Which was just my beef with the discussion on women/marrying above. Not that no-one can ever generalize ("sunsets in Arizona are fantastic"), but when the generalization is a negative about a specific group of people....
But to your point. Your post is based purely on speculation and anecdotal information. So, I supposed it has as much value as my response.
In my case, I “early” retired at age 57 (female, no kids, and the trek was solo for the most part.) As far as marriage possibly impeding early retirement, I see your point, but it wouldn’t be the first place I’d look to for not achieving the goal. Although, if both parties are on board, it could even make it easier.
To answer the question “how the hell can you possibly do it?” My response is it really didn’t seem that hard. I never made more than $43,000 gross per year, but for the most part lived on about half that amount (which included taxes) comfortably. Being more introverted and able to self-entertain I never really experienced a lot of social or peer pressure to scale up the life style. In fact I’m still driving my 22-year old beater car which works just fine! When I finally did quit the job my biggest concern cost wise was health insurance, but about six months after employment ended, the new health care law went into effect which helped considerably. I really take to heart your last point about medical problems taking over life as a result of being in a disagreeable job. It makes the message more and more clear that it’s time to go. Unfortunately, many don’t get that either.
So, “how to retire early” or “how to do just about anything” probably starts with what we buy into and whether or not we are willing to change.
Hats off to Jim's first and last paragraphs.
Suspicion of being gay is as negative as any falsehood about me, plus it can spoil potential romantic relationships if I'm labeled that way. Not that it matters much now, at my current age, but a couple of decades ago it sure did!
You are proud of retiring early but you must remember that your Spartan lifestyle would not appeal to many, men or women. Many people are willing to work longer for more benefits.
Many young people now don't buy into this value at all. They don't expect the benefits to be there for them when they get old so they opt out early. I have a nephew who makes what money he needs with online gambling and management of investments. He lives hand to mouth and has no desire to own much of a material nature. Even your lifestyle would be too much of a commitment to him, I would bet.
Many of the old reasons for marriage don't exist in this society. Women often out-earn men nowadays and child support will be determined not by marriage but by DNA, so not being married won't save anyone there.
I believe I have read that women initiate more divorces now than men. For a long time, women couldn't own property, couldn't get a loan without a man, were excluded from most good paying jobs, and had no political power. They have only had the right to vote for 100 years.
So a little wider viewpoint on this issue is in order here.
I believe Jim has said it well. A good marriage trumps it all. But it is not an easy accomplishment. I do think he is right on to say it includes a bit of luck as well as choosing well. All of our dark sides come out in marriage and it is where we are blind that we unwittingly spread the seeds of destruction. Your position is one example of such blindness.
However, can you deny that going through life with a trusted companion and true partner wouldn't be better than going through life alone?
I am simply trying to bring some balance into the perspective you offered above. That's all. I don't have all the answers and I don't think you do either.
My argument about staying single in order to retire early is fundamentally an application of being a Stoic. I believe it is better to focus on what you control, to work on mitigating its disadvantages, and to wallow in its advantages, than to pine for an Ideal (your "trusted companion and true partner") that you only have a small amount of control over.
When you turn control over to other people, they will act in their perceived best interests, not yours. I don't hate them for that. I merely want to protect myself from it.
NO KIDS
NO DEBT
NO DIVORCE
You can also add living beneath your means for your entire working life and genuinely enjoying saving more than spending to the list. It's all really quite simple. Marriage isn't the problem or the solution. Having the wrong partner will slow down your retirement plans and having the right partner will accelerate them. Like most things in life, making smart choices will change your trajectory.
By the way, I never read anything by that guy Fred before. Thanks for the ling. He seems pretty entertaining!
Your last sentence suggests that in marriage you turn control over to the other party. Who is that true for the man, the woman? And, of course, in same sex marriage which one is it?
Moreover, if you actually care about the other person you would act in the perceived best interests of both. At least that is what I have done and I believe that is what Gayle does. People don't always agree and never will but it you actually (L word) someone you do act in their best interests.
I am not making a case for marriage and clearly not everyone should get married. Moreover, if there were no legal benefits I don't see much point, but all that said, I think you have chosen a position that just isn't supported by anything other than your opinion and narrow perspective.
The only case that you have made here is that some people shouldn't marry which is probably true. You haven't begun to prove your case regarding marriages impact on early retirement and due to the variables involved I don't see how you can.
Makes him look like a hypocrite and probably recycling old stuff...
Fred is married to a Mexican woman. His diatribe is aimed at American women, not at third world women. I suspect he is right.
Yes, there's always risk and uncertainty in making decisions. But nobody should live their life being gun shy about risk and uncertainty. Otherwise there would be no meaningful gain.
And as for your "broad brush," I would say that the key that unlocks the trashcan to where your generalizations belong is that people don't take enough care in choosing a life partner. It's difficult to look down the road... beyond the sex and physical beauty... when in the infatuation phase. Some relationship success is dumb luck, some is homework done right. Personally, staying single would have me, and probably Bobbie, on treadmills. It was obvious early on that she was more frugal than I was so she managed the money. I, on the other hand, had a plan to get us retired before I turned 50 and worked to make that happen. It was a team approach that made that plan work. Bobbie was the voice of reason when my ideas got too grandiose and jeopardized the goal. She was also the tireless worker on the other end of the 2 by 4's of our spec homes… from design to finish work and painting, working on scaffolding with nail guns 30 feet off the ground on projects that sometimes took over a year to complete… this in addition to our regular day jobs. How bad do you want something? Are you willing to work 80 hour weeks year in and year out to get it? It's about choosing the right partner and working hard, not about gender.
box canyon mark and bobbie
I don't know why people obtrude anecdotes into general philosophical discussions, especially where sex is involved. Why, you couldn't get away with saying something like "females have most of the babies for most species" without some PC prig acting morally indignant and getting up on their soapbox and finding some exception.
Maybe PCness is just one example of a more general principle: most people are just sheep that walk on two legs, and being PC is just one example of that. Working until you are a few months from your first operation (in a long series) is another example of being a stupid sheep.
The good news is that the anger caused me to connect many types of behavior with the sheep-like propensities of the vast majority of people. It is always enjoyable to have a "new" thought from forming that connection.
My real, long-term concern is that your RV and life philosophy is painting you into a "celibate" corner… that pretty soon there will be something wrong with everything and that we should forsake all interaction with "evil" and doers there of. In the immortal words of Rodney King… well, you know.
There are many things that will derail an early retirement. A bad marriage is certainly one of them. For most people, this is probably the main retirement-killing culprit simply because of all of the cascading problems that come of a bad marriage and divorce. This is true for both the boys and the girls. Any smart single will be able to avoid having kids and divorce...two big early retirement killers. So there is some logic there.
It's a discussion like this that makes KB interesting. My wife and I like camping with him. I'm sure we give him more crap than he ever gives us. :-)