3 ms·
Hmm, no. Why are you putting this "forced charity work" condition on it? Someone who retires early has saved enough to live on their investments. That's no di
by smokes 9y ago
Hmm, no.
Why are you putting this "forced charity work" condition on it?
Someone who retires early has saved enough to live on their investments. That's no different from someone with a trust fund, but the difference is that they earned it.
Think of it this way; if you won the lottery tomorrow, would it be a better contribution to your community to keep working in order to pay taxes, or retire so that someone who needs your job to live and support their family can do it instead?
- rb808 9y agoIf someone wins the lottery tomorrow they should keep working. There is no shortage of jobs. If this is in an area where there is unemployment, ideally the lottery winner/trust fund baby/early retiree would start a company and employ people. If the lottery winner/early retiree doesn't work & pay tax, or do charity work, or contribute to society in any way they're leeches, just as bad as a trust fund baby. They live off investments based on other people working for them, and expect people to grow their food, teach their children, tend to their illness and build their roads for them. If you've worked 45 years you've done your time, but ideally then you'd continue to teach or manage so that others can learn from your experience. Retiring at 40 is offensive.