If you read a lot of FIRE blogs, it might seem bizarre to you that anyone would work once they were financially independent. Although the bloggers themselves will often discuss how FI can be totally separate from RE, when you get into the comments or the forums it becomes quite clear that many Americans are just waiting to hit their number before punching entirely out of their jobs for good.
Why Work Beyond FI?
There are several reasons why someone might work beyond financial independence. The most commonly trotted out ones are
- They really love what they do or
- They would be bored without their job.
These two reasons are all fine and good. It's your life, do what you want.
Are There “Bad Reasons” to Work Beyond FI?
A third reason that nobody ever seems to want to discuss is that they simply want to spend more money. Sure, you could live just fine for the rest of your life on $50K/year (or $100K, or $400K, whatever), but if you kept earning, you could live in an even nicer house, churn even nicer cars, have a nicer boat, and go on nicer vacations. Maybe they just want to be able to spend without thinking or budgeting; i.e. it's easier to just keep working than do the work to manage the money better. Or perhaps they treat money like a security blanket. They figure if they feel secure with $4 Million they will feel even more secure with $6 Million. Maybe people don't want to talk about that because it makes them feel guilty or they are worried they would look bad to reveal that is their reason to still be working.
Moral Reasons to Work
However, what I want to talk about today is a fourth and a fifth reason, both of which have one thing in common–morality. Is it morally, ethically, and/or religiously correct to work less than you can when additional work will produce so many benefits to the world, both from the work itself (reason number four) and by using the money earned from work to do good (reason number five).
Now, if you are a moral relativist (whatever you feel is right is right) without any belief in any kind of a supreme being, these issues may not bother you in the least. After all, you only get your 6-10 decades on this sphere and you might as well use them as best you can to eat, drink, and be merry. As we often say in the ED at about 5:30 in the morning, “That's a day shift problem” (i.e. something for someone else to worry about.) For the rest of us, these two issues may matter more than the top three combined when it comes to working after FI.
Helping Others Through Your Work
Let's look at reason # 4 first:
It is morally wrong to not use the talent, ability, opportunity, and knowledge you have to help your fellow man.
Where does this sort of idea come from? Who knows, but at a minimum it was taught by Jesus Christ in the Parable of the Talents:
For the kingdom of heaven is as a man travelling into a far country, who called his own servants, and delivered unto them his goods. And unto one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one; to every man according to his several ability; and straightway took his journey.
Then he that had received the five talents went and traded with the same, and made them other five talents. And likewise he that had received two, he also gained other two. But he that had received one went and digged in the earth, and hid his lord’s money.
After a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them. And so he that had received five talents came and brought other five talents, saying, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me five talents: behold, I have gained beside them five talents more. His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord. He also that had received two talents came and said, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me two talents: behold, I have gained two other talents beside them. His lord said unto him, Well done, good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.
Then he which had received the one talent came and said, Lord, I knew thee that thou art an hard man, reaping where thou hast not sown, and gathering where thou hast not strawed: And I was afraid, and went and hid thy talent in the earth: lo, there thou hast that is thine. His lord answered and said unto him, Thou wicked and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have not strawed: Thou oughtest therefore to have put my money to the exchangers, and then at my coming I should have received mine own with usury.
Take therefore the talent from him, and give it unto him which hath ten talents. For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath. And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Most high-income professionals who read this site are doctors, lawyers, business owners, and others who are highly talented and knowledgeable. That's why they get paid the big bucks. Of course, they also get paid the big bucks because their jobs are stressful, hard, and involve significant liability — all factors which may lead them to wish to cut back and/or retire early. But their work has significant benefits for society at large. How many arteries that should be stented are not because a cardiologist went part-time or retired early? How many cancers are missed because a talented body CT specialist hung up her monitor? How many life-improving products or services never spread around the world because the business owner decided he had “enough” at 51?
Now, obviously, if you carry out this sort of thinking to its logical extreme, it becomes nuts. While it might be morally wrong not to operate on an emergent patient to go to your kid's birthday party, it is also probably morally wrong to miss all of those parties. It's probably morally wrong to compel someone to work in a career they hate or to shame them for cutting back or leaving a career that is a bad fit for them. It's often a balancing game–it's wrong to neglect your patients but also wrong to neglect your partner. But to retire at 50 to “spend more time with my kids” who are in school 35 hours a week and will be out of the home in a couple of years anyway? Maybe you ought to think twice about that.
I don't pretend to have all the answers here, but I think the questions are worth spending some time on if you are in the fortunate position of being able to cut back or even retire completely while still physically and emotionally able to serve others.
Helping Others With Your Earnings
Now let's talk about reason # 5, the real purpose of this post:
It is morally wrong to not earn the money that could really help your fellow man.
Once you have enough money for yourself, including any additional spending you do just because you can, you are left with a dilemma of what to do with that money. One of two things is going to happen with it eventually–it will either be given away while you live or after you die. But your hearse will not have a trailer hitch.
Stewardship Responsibility
Most of the people reading this blog post already or soon will earn a lot of money. Probably at least $100,000 per year and often $1 Million or more. There is a lot of good that can be done with that money. The pressure to be a good steward of it can be astounding. We gave some money away to a family member in need a while ago. That person wondered how best to use it. It was wonderful to be able to say, “That's your problem now. I have passed on the stewardship responsibility for that money to you.”
Giving Earnings to Charity
Consider a doctor making $600K a year who is truly already financially independent. Maybe 1/3 of that goes to taxes, leaving $400,000 per year. She can do one of two things — earn less or use that $400,000 to do good. In Niger, malaria is responsible for 30% of all illnesses and 50% of all deaths. Its incidence can be dramatically reduced by the use of mosquito nets, which cost $4-5 apiece delivered and installed. That $400,000 could buy 100,000 mosquito nets. How many cases of malaria could be prevented with that $400,000? Certainly thousands and maybe tens of thousands. What kind of a jerk are you that you would rather sit around and play Super Mario Brothers with your kid than save thousands of Nigerien children from certain death?
The Benefits of Taxes

A lot of good to be done out there.
And why ignore the taxes? Your willingness to work and pay taxes allows the government to provide more services than it would otherwise be able to. A stronger military, better roads, expanded Medicaid and food stamps, and more environmental protection. Thank you, early retiree, for making our nation just a little bit weaker, our children just a little bit hungrier, and our water just a little bit dirtier.
Helping Family
Even avoiding these sorts of extreme ideas, think about your own extended family. You can work for just a month and give what you earned to a family member and essentially double their standard of living. You could buy them a car or pay off their medical bills. And how about your own children. Instead of having $80K for their college so they could get their undergraduate degree without debt, maybe if you would work a little longer they can now have $400K, and graduate debt-free from dental school. If you work 5 more years, maybe your kids never have to work at all and can then spend their lives creating incredible art or installing mosquito nets in Niger.
The possibilities are endless, and they're all paid for by you continuing to work after financial independence. Obviously there is risk here of giving someone too much. The Millionaire Next Door was careful to warn about the effects of “Economic Outpatient Care.” Sometimes giving money can do more harm than good (although I wonder how often that fear is used to justify miserly behavior.)
Things become even “worse” if you become financially successful doing something in addition to medicine. Imagine you're a real estate gal with 200 paid-for “doors.” 20 doors probably cover your living expenses for the rest of your life. 40 gives you a luxurious life. What are you going to do with the rest? And that doesn't include the people your business is serving. Think of how much discounted rent you can give to people in need. Think of how many people that would be homeless in your community no longer are because you developed that property, increasing the supply and lowering the cost of housing in your community? Or what if you developed a successful business helping doctors stop doing dumb stuff with their money? If you quit, maybe thousands of doctor families will never become financially literate, in turn preventing them from being able to use their excess money to improve the lives of dozens of others.
A few months ago I was really feeling some WCI Burnout and wanting to just walk away and spend my days between shifts skiing, climbing, and playing video games. Then I sat down and thought about what that would mean. Over 2.7 Million people came by this website in 2019. If I made just a $10,000 difference in the lives of just 1% of them, I may have just paid for 68 million headnets. Put in those terms, it seems morally wrong to quit. If you really did go into medicine (or business or whatever) to help people, why would you stop doing so right when you get to the point of being able to help the most people?
Again, I don't claim to have all the answers or know all the secrets of life, but I think each of us should carefully consider the value of our time and money. Neither is endless, but maybe we have a responsibility to put both of them to their highest and best use instead of simply maximizing our own happiness.
Now it's your turn. If you're financially independent and still working, which of these 5 reasons apply?

What do you think? Is it morally wrong not to work more and earn more if you are able to? How do you balance that with your other moral obligations and desires? Comment below!
To me, FI without a purpose is empty. Reasons 4/5 are amazing purposes. Working on our terms knowing the we are helping above and beyond is amazingly rewarding. Burnout comes in different forms and for different reasons but a big one is feeling like you’re not making a difference…which is why most of us got into medicine for in the first place. Financial well being should enhance our personal well being and those around us – near and far. Love it!
The Prudent Plastic Surgeon
I was a bit surprised to read this as this is almost never discussed, but I am glad to read it and thanks for writing it. I am working on (although reduced days each month) after FI because I enjoy it and to help others with the money. We have given away six figures to charity every year for many years, and are also helping our four kids pay off their debts, which is only their homes. (We would not do this if they were not living financially responsible Christian lives.} I am also able to volunteer regularly for dental mission trips now.
I believe God has purposely blessed me with the resources to benefit others. And blessings like that are not just to benefit me. Your scripture quotation is highly relevant.
I was a bit surprised to read this as this is almost never discussed, but I am glad to read it and thanks for writing it. I am working on (although reduced days each month) after FI because I enjoy it and to help others with the money. We have given away six figures to charity every year for many years, and are also helping our four kids pay off their debts, which is only their homes. (We would not do this if they were not living financially responsible Christian lives.} I am also able to volunteer regularly for dental mission trips now.
I believe God has purposely blessed me with the resources to benefit others. And blessings like that are not just to benefit me. Your scripture quotation is highly relevant.
Thanks Jim for posting this. Very well put. When we realized we could fund water wells in Nigeria for $1500 it put a lot of our spending in perspective. The moral relativism that is prevalent today will not address these questions but they are some of the most important to ask.
Love my job. Work less? Sure. Stop working? Not until I’m dead or my hands shake.
Four and five certainly are part of it.
I would add:
6. “Margin of error” in predicting financial independence. Many of the FIRE planners base their “number” on everything going right. No cut in SS, just see the attacks when someone even brings up the possibility. No tax increases, not even those in current law. No serious health expenses not covered by insurance. No time in long term care. No massive stagflation. No repeat of the Depression. No possibility of something worse than the Depression.
I model bad outcomes that include combinations of several of the above simultaneously. Once you do that, FI does not look so “I” any more. If you quit your high income job while you can still work and bad outcomes put you in financial difficulty it will be too late to fix your situation. Even in a terrible economic meltdown, the ability to do useful work can be valuable. Why give that up if you don’t have to?
Even if you have so much that nothing short of a complete collapse of the US could threaten you, say a networth, prudently invested, greater than $100,000,000, there is reason #7, below.
7. Working, in and of itself, is good. It is productive. The alternative, a life of endless indulgence with no productive goals or purpose, is immoral.
To those who say “All I want to do for the rest of my life is eat, play golf and travel all over the world”
I would say
“Get off the couch and go do something worthwhile! Maybe it will require more effort than lying in bed while someone intubates you to spare you the work of breathing. Maybe it will be tiring and sometimes frustrating. Maybe you go to bed exhausted from the effort you put in today. GOOD. That is what accomplishing things involves.
You have a limited time on this earth. Work while you can. Make something of yourself and your life. Don’t waste it by doing nothing.”
I included your #6:
Sure, there’s a little room for disagreement of how much is enough, but the range of that is pretty small for reasonable people.
Your # 7 is my # 4.
That’s why you retire to something, not just from something. It’s ok to choose to earn less, but you still need to contribute to society as long as you are able to do so.
Thank you for being courageous enough to write this post, knowing that it will generate some hate mail.
I don’t have answers either, but these are the questions I ask myself. We strive to hit FI by around 40, but I have been asking myself – what then? I will not be done contributing to this world.
Jim great post and don’t get burnt out! If it makes you feel better you can definitely cut down or even stop WCI work as your mission is very self sustaining. The books, website, and podcast have started a movement where other docs are spreading the message of financial literacy. Heck, even Jordan above has great content and you inspired that! As well as the other hundreds of physician finance blogs. I myself talk about personal finance to all my doc colleagues and every med student and resident that I teach.
IMHO, in terms of your mission of for physician financial literacy, there is always more to do but you have reached “enough”.
It sounds like WCI has been hanging around The Physician Philosopher. I love the deep thoughts.
I continue to work past FI for many reasons. I guess I would have only quit in the event I worked solely for money.
Otherwise quitting makes no sense, right?
But I have always worked for more than just money. Most should have other reasons. If your work sucks so bad that you do it ONLY for a paycheck then change something. Make your job better. Retrain. Cut back. But don’t spend 2,000 hours a year being miserable.
I chose a field I love. I grow, earn, serve, teach, connect, etc. None of that relates to the money.
My top three reasons to continue are 1. To serve my patients. 2. To earn a paycheck/benefits. 3. To serve my employer. But the other benefits like social support, respect, structure, gratitude, mental stimulation, etc. are big parts of it.
Lifestyle inflation, unanticipated needs, financial instability, and an unknown lifespan all add uncertainty to financial projections. So, it is better to err on the side of having “too much” money rather than going broke or having to scrimp on costs.
For decades I have been an advocate for FI, but I’m not a fan of the RE part at all. RE wouldn’t be good for me or most of the people I know.
This is a cool discussion! Love the point that taxes are a huge part of making America great, and the part about mosquito nets in Niger. I think that stuff is at the top of the effective altruism list. Just want to acknowledge that there are many of us atheists out there who aren’t moral relativists! Thanks for the discussion everyone.
Excellent point.
I’m a pastor (married to a doc), so this post caught my eye. I know you’re not a philosophy blog, but moral relativism is a bit more complicated than “whatever you feel is right is right.” There are actually quite a few arguments for some kind of moral system without belief in a higher power–John Stuart Mill might be a good place to start (not saying I agree with such approaches, but they are worth understanding and considering). Many people of faith actually fall prey to moral relativism (perhaps unconsciously), simply assuming that “whatever I personally do, God will approve/bless.” I digress…
For those interested in balancing their gifts with worldly needs and emotional health, I would highly recommend reading Boundaries by Henry Cloud and John Townsend. In many cases, it is morally harmful to overextend oneself. For “vocation” issues such as fulfillment and addressing the pain of the world, I’d also recommend Let You Life Speak by Parker Palmer. I think these two books absolutely apply to the philosophy of work/retirement! I wish more docs knew about these kinds of texts.
I agree there can be a moral system without a belief in a higher power. But moral relativism is moral relativism. If every individual gets to define what is moral themselves, there is obviously going to be some pretty significant differences.
At any rate, I only took one philosophy class in college so I don’t claim to be an expert on the topic. I have seen Boundaries recommended many times, but usually to someone whose family member is taking advantage of them to their detriment.
Fantastic post!
But I fail to see the need to connect it to a religion. I have no belief in a higher power but that has zero impact on my actions toward helping others.
Agree totally with Anne and with BSM above. I love that you had the courage to write the post, but I disagree with your definition of moral relativism. In fact, you point an issue of moral relativism to some extent when we don’t choose to spend every single waking minute of our lives working for others. I would also gently point out that many “non-believers” are moved profoundly to do good, and many who profess religion(s) fail to follow their faith. Religion has been used to support many immoral practices throughout history.
I agree with you that this desire to do good is an important consideration with cutting back or RE, but in my life I often see a disconnect between believing in “Good” and believing in “God” in terms of actions taken.
ArmyDoc do we know each other? Ft Gordon Rucker Bragg Hood Germany… In my secular circle we joke (re those who wonder how nonbelievers could possibly behave legally/ morally) “so the only reason you DON’T kill or rape or steal is your fear of God?!? Yikes!!!”
There is a “straw man” logical fallacy about believers in God (in particular Christians) in the last comment (even though it has already been noted as being in jest). The approach taught by Christ is to love God and to love our neighbor, which ought the be the ‘only reason’ we flawed Christians behave as we do.
People should do what they want to do and if someone judges me for retiring too early they can go swallow a fork.
I haven’t had a patient with a fork yet, but I bet it won’t go past the pylorus, making retrieval relatively easy.
Whenever I hear this I quickly calculate how many years of full time (40 hrs/wk) work we docs have already done in our life by the time we reach our 50s. Perhaps 49 is the correct retirement age for us if 65 is the time for other Americans? And also that I paid my official debt by paying off my loans and military obligation. (Sadly the state which funded my medical school never got me practicing there. So they did it for my parents as taxpayers rather than for the payoff of me doctoring there.)
Jim, I have to say that your article was one that REALLY got me thinking (and caught me a bit off guard). Several of your points have resonated with me recently, especially with regards to feeling a bit guilty of not continuing to work so even if we don’t have to in order to continue helping society.
Maybe it’s because I’ve been reading the book of Ecclesiastes, specifically when King Solomon discusses how he feels about work.
Ecclesiastes 5:18-20, ” I have seen what is best for people here on earth. They should eat and drink and enjoy their work, because the life God has given them on earth is short. God gives some people the ability to enjoy the wealth and property he gives them, as well as the ability to accept their state in life and enjoy their work. They do not worry about how short life is, because God keeps them busy with what they love to do.”
It’s the reason why I’ve always felt that if someone isn’t happy working in the field that they’re in, then they should make it a point to retire TO SOMETHING that they wouldn’t mind spending the rest of their life doing.
It’s interesting that you choose to intentionally link “work” with “earning money”. One of the endless arguments in the FIRE crowd is about proponents continuing to work for money after reaching FIRE. In some corners of the FIRE universe, earning money is forbidden, but they seem to have no issue with unpaid work – volunteering, teaching, raising children, adult literacy programs, etc.
Personally, I don’t see much difference between the two other than it’s often *much* easier to write a check than to offer personal time. Few people would view a year at Americorps or doing missionary work as stepping away from a moral responsibility. The unpaid work WCI did in Africa (???) providing medical care is an excellent example. Donations are necessary for practical purposes, but rarely provide the kind of mutual benefits that come from being deeply engaged in a issue.
Honduras? Guatemala? But I haven’t yet been on the continent of Africa. I have a strange desire to climb Mt. Kenya however.
Go for Kilimanjaro.
Kilimanjaro is a tourist walk-up. You can eat on white tablecloths the whole way up. Heck, my two brother in laws did it recently and they don’t know a belay from a crampon. It would feel like doing Fuji. Kenya is a mountain for real climbers.
https://www.mountainproject.com/route/107995173/southeast-face-of-nelion
But I suppose we could use Kili for acclimatizing.
I definitely struggled with guilt when I was contemplating retiring early (from medicine). I addressed this in two ways.
First, I worked another 4+ years after realizing we were FI in order to a) have more than what I figured was enough and b) build up a donor advised fund equal to 10% of our “enough” number so that we could continue to give generously for decades to come.
Second, when I started blogging about all things FIRE, I pledged to donate half of my profits from the venture. That has led to several hundred thousand dollars of donated money — some to our DAF and some directly to local, national, and international charities.
Like you, Jim, I sometimes want to take a break from the schedule I’ve created in this semi-retirement (I definitely still work, just in a much freer and different capacity now), but I also know that doing so would hurt this charitable mission that is funded by my online efforts.
So I guess I’m right back to where I started. Feeling guilty about maybe wanting to retire some day. Life can be funny like that.
Cheers!
PoF
Ok, since everyone has been so wonderfully complementary about this post, I’ll throw some ice on just for a change of pace..! Just know, I don’t necessarily disagree with some of the thoughts or conclusions, but I think it’s very easy, for someone highly intelligent like the WCI or many other docs, to espouse their own particular brand of morality or “right,” when (of course, of course) it’s no more right than anyone else’s.
First, you’re speaking to an audience of high income folks; does the “moral to keep working to help the world” argument still apply when it’s a blue collar worker making the parts to Vaping devices? Or working on a highway? Or does it just apply to high income doctors? If so, what’s your cut-off income where it shouldn’t apply? Does it apply to all doctors, including those, say, cosmetic plastic surgeons in Beverly Hills or the Upper East Side, or just to those in more “noble” fields like oncology or ER medicine?
Second, why is one charity – say the nets in Niger, the right one? What about a charity that promotes abortion rights or the rights of atheists (I think Ron Reagan, the former president’s son, works for that one) not the more valid one than a religious one or another? Many folks would argue you (and any of us) contribute to the exactly wrong charities, and therefore could be doing so much more.
Lastly, recognize there are vast levels giving, and no one is more proper than another. Is the doc making 400k a year, $6million in the bank better to give away $1000 a year or $100,000 a year? If the latter, why not $200,000 a year? Is the wildly successful doctor financial guru, who’s clearly helped a huge number of previously financially-illiterate doctors more moral if he or she gives away all wealth but a modest amount needed to live on? Or is a smaller level of giving also valid and moral?
I just think it’s a great argument to have, and keep in mind that none of us know the right answer here, including those that think they do. Including me.
First, I guess it would have to apply to all jobs.
Second and lastly, all great questions. That’s the fun part about charity, you get to choose yourself how much to give and to whom.
Touché; yes to each his/her own charity. But as to applying to all incomes, obviously easier to espouse charity when looking at all this from our relatively wealthy and privileged viewpoint. The masses don’t often have the luxury to give.
To give is not a luxury. To give a lot is a luxury. Those who don’t give when they have little income/wealth are unlikely to do so when they have more in my experience.
“I think it’s very easy, for someone highly intelligent like the WCI or many other docs, to espouse their own particular brand of morality or “right,” when (of course, of course) it’s no more right than anyone else’s.”
ScopeMonkey, that statement itself is a moral assumption that assumes moral correctness. If you think all religious moralities are equivalent, that itself is a moral statement assuming superiority (in that the religious moralities miss the big picture which your morality captures). So ironically, your statement can’t be true. Your statement, while outwardly simplistic and equitable, is intellectually porous. You can’t know all moralities are equally relevant unless you’re claiming that *you know* all the ins and outs of all moralities and comprehend all of them perfectly. I am not trying to stir the pot any more than I suppose you were, but it’s a common fallacy of the selfsame moral relativism Jim was discussing.
Wow you totally missed the point… I never said my brand of morality was not a religious one. If so, it just isn’t better than your or anyone else’s brand. One doesn’t have to know all brands for that to be so. One just has to know his or her tiny place in the world and their limitations.
And I’m saying, respectfully, that to assert that all moralities is the same is indeed a moral statement of superiority. How do you know they’re all the same? If you can’t know, then yours is a statement of faith and thus a moral of religious one. I believe, ScopeMonkey, you missed *my* point and are still missing it.
Incorrect; you’re overthinking it Dan. I’m saying I don’t know which is more correct, or moral, not that they’re equal. But then, you don’t know either. Let’s stop now; I have a headache. 😉
Enjoyed this thought-provoking, hornets’-nest-kicking post. I’d like to let a couple of poets have their say in the matter. From Emerson:
“To laugh often and much; to win the respect of the intelligent people and the affection of children; to earn the appreciation of honest critics and endure the betrayal of false friends; to appreciate beauty; to find the beauty in others; to leave the world a bit better whether by a healthy child, a garden patch, or a redeemed social condition; to know that one life has breathed easier because you lived here. This is to have succeeded.”
Notably absent in the sentiment is any implicit obligation connecting a continued need to earn in a stressful job despite the expected positive impact on self, family and society.
“Is it wrong to earn less?” was never the right question for many (if not most) of us. Instead, we looked to Mary Oliver: “What is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?”
I’m grateful to medicine for all it has offered me, from meaningful work to financial well-being. But is it exclusively what I plan to with my one wild and precious life? Not if I am fortunate enough to enjoy the health and security to explore other avenues within my allotment of time.
That first quote reminds me of this one from Robert Heinlein:
Very thought-provoking article and one that I enjoyed even if my own answers are different. For me, the reason I continue working past FI is the emotional satisfaction of a job well done. The ability to look someone in the eye and honestly say “You’ve been struggling for years, I believe you, I know what’s wrong and I can fix your problem” is not something found readily elsewhere.
Thank you for the insightful post. Doctors have indeed received many God-given gifts and talents. “Much is required of those to whom much is given,”
Interesting post as this is is something I’ve thought about a lot as I get closer to some level of financial independence. The “thing” that will be most likely to keep me getting out of bed in the morning is not a fancier lifestyle but rather the additional good that I can do through both my day job and philanthropy.
I’ve studied the topic of morality quite a bit and while there may be disagreement as to why we are wired to behave in certain ways, I think deep down no one can consistently live as though moral relativism is true. That is one of a number of reasons I choose the God option when it comes to Pascal’s Wager
The poll says “check all that apply” but I can only check 1.
I have been working more or less for reason 3 (bigger security blanket) but as I consider the reality of possibly retiring early, I have definitely been thinking about #5. I am not a doctor (on TV or otherwise) so the numbers at stake are a lot smaller, but not nothing.
There are definitely some questions in my head that bounce around about whether I have an obligation to continue to work beyond FI which we reached in 2018.
I still do some paid work, and I anticipate most of that money eventually going to charitable causes.
With that in mind, it would seem that more work = more funding for charitable purposes, which should motivate me to keep working.
On the other hand, someone else could be doing the work I’m doing and contributing that money to their family/their own goals.
I’m not sure there’s a clear “right” way.
Reasons 4 and 5 are valid, but the argument is incomplete and therefore flawed. YOU CAN BE REPLACED.
Re: Reason 4
If you/your profession trains the next generation prior to your RE or reduce working hours, that new person will pick up where you left off. You mentioned a doctor who tries at 51 and worry about who would perform those surgeries…the 41 year old doctor who was waiting for a position in that town.
Re: Reason 5
Same as above, but applied to compensation. The next person in line will earn and spend that money likely with similar motives as you (for family, charity, society).
I retired at 59 1/2 for many reasons primarily related to burn out. I live in a rural area so I didn’t have many other options if I want to stay in an area where my family resides. There was fear of malpractice with the feeling that why continue playing when you have already won the game. As a super saver I had enough income for myself and my family to be able to retire. I don’t need much. I was distressed when so many more patients were demanding everything from antibiotics to narcotics and in general felt entitled, yet didn’t want to get examined and felt that they knew what was best for them. Many stated that their physicians didn’t need to examine them. I didn’t have good administrative support or colleague support as most were concerned with self interest, as I watched others being thrown under the bus with little recourse. I tried to work administratively to change the culture to no avail. It was mandated that I sign off on midlevels who I couldn’t hire or fire and who didn’t change their behavior based upon recommendations and I didn’t get administrative help to do so. Hours were long with threats to shut down the department if I didn’t work. When I retired they did shut down but now have 4 people doing my job. I had already put in 30 years in the same city with four different group mixes as we were absorbed by various health systems. In a rural area you have to go where they hold the insurance contracts as you can’t make up losses on Medicare and Medicaid. Since retirement I have gotten regular exercise, sleep and appropriate diet, volunteered in many different area including mission related medicine, helped with a plasma center, and spent time with children and grandchildren. I also found time for some fun. I don’t regret my decision much, but those in rural areas don’t have as many choices as our urban counterparts.
Then who does the surgeries in the town where the 41 year old would have worked if the 51 year old was still working?
The next person still has to save up their own nest egg.
I see no flaws in either one.