3 ms·

> If the goal is to only subsist, there is an option to reduce hours worked in exchange for reduced pay. No. You need to factor in the future. The whole passi

> If the goal is to only subsist, there is an option to reduce hours worked in exchange for reduced pay. No. You need to factor in the future. The whole passive income/early retirement crowd is a great example of it. They want to create regular income (from projects/businesses or investments) to allow them a simple life for all of their future years, while they go do whatever they please. Few people do that, because it typically entails working much harder today so you don't have to work as much or at all tomorrow. If you removed the hurdle or working harder today, many people would choose that route. > There are also numerous financial options available to you such as annuities or insurance if you are worried about protecting yourself from unforeseen financial hardships. Absolutely. And you need to pay for those. To do that, you need to earn more than you currently need to subsist.

slg 6y ago
Maybe I didn't explain my point well enough since you are just talking past it. People generally don't stop once they get to a level that would guarantee them subsistence living for the rest of their life. Most of us could buy a combination of annuities and long term care insurance that could provide for ourselves for the rest of our lives well before we actually retire. Very few people actually pursue this path and most of us continue to work until a point that would provide a higher standard of living in retirement.
- luckylion 6y ago
  I know quite a few people who have achieved that level of wealth, all but one have dropped their work load massively, down from 40+ hours/week to 2-4 hours. They still love making money, but they value their leisure time much more and enjoy their largely work-free life, so I have some doubts that people generally continue working as usual when they have enough money to guarantee work-free subsistence for the rest of their life. Maybe I have a different understanding of subsistence than you? They don't live of the land and sleep in a tent, they live pretty average lives, living in an apartment in the city, buy food from the super market, wear normal clothes and ride bicycles. It does take quite a bit of money to guarantee enough secure long-term passive income (so "just invest it at 15% profit" is not an option) to pay for the basics, I'd put it at 300-500k Euros in my area, post tax.

slg 6y ago

Maybe I didn't explain my point well enough since you are just talking past it. People generally don't stop once they get to a level that would guarantee them subsistence living for the rest of their life. Most of us could buy a combination of annuities and long term care insurance that could provide for ourselves for the rest of our lives well before we actually retire. Very few people actually pursue this path and most of us continue to work until a point that would provide a higher standard of living in retirement.

luckylion 6y ago
I know quite a few people who have achieved that level of wealth, all but one have dropped their work load massively, down from 40+ hours/week to 2-4 hours. They still love making money, but they value their leisure time much more and enjoy their largely work-free life, so I have some doubts that people generally continue working as usual when they have enough money to guarantee work-free subsistence for the rest of their life. Maybe I have a different understanding of subsistence than you? They don't live of the land and sleep in a tent, they live pretty average lives, living in an apartment in the city, buy food from the super market, wear normal clothes and ride bicycles. It does take quite a bit of money to guarantee enough secure long-term passive income (so "just invest it at 15% profit" is not an option) to pay for the basics, I'd put it at 300-500k Euros in my area, post tax.