4 ms·

I would be curious to hear about other people who "retired" then went back to work. I feel like if I reached the FIRE point, I would continue to work, but enti

by jawns 6y ago

I would be curious to hear about other people who "retired" then went back to work. I feel like if I reached the FIRE point, I would continue to work, but entirely on my own terms, not as an employee of somebody else. Even at my favorite jobs, where I got to spend the majority of my time doing interesting things, having to deal with red tape, institutional slowness, upper management, etc. was not fun, and I can't imagine it getting any better when you know you are now working only because it's your hobby.

Denvercoder9 6y ago
At his level, there's very little red tape, institutional slowness and management to deal with.
- kortilla 6y ago
  As long as he doesn’t do anything that impacts the actual business. DEs working on Microsoft products absolutely have red tape and institutional slowness.
- NordSteve 6y ago
  I have exactly that deal at MS (and I know many others who do), and I'm a couple levels away from DE. I'm later in my career, don't need the job for $$ (they know it), lead a great team, work on a meaningful project that I pitched in an area where I'm an expert, great support from management. The only thing remotely close to "red tape and institutional slowness" is about making sure what we build meets the promises (privacy and compliance, for example) that we've made to customers.
- chillacy 6y ago
  Not only that but he probably has a small legion of full time developers working on his projects now that no normal FIRE savings would be able to afford.
ghaff 6y ago
I think it really depends. I could see continuing working for someone longer in an IC role if no one is breathing down my neck to do things I don't really want to do and, especially, if I could negotiate flexibility in terms of time off, etc. I'm actually pretty close on both those things today and, post-COVID, I could see making adjustments more in that general direction. ADDED: As Denvercoder9 writes, some companies/groups can be pretty good about being hands-off a senior person who they want and also know doesn't need the job. Others, of course, are not. Certainly many Sun folks did not sit well with Oracle.
npsimons 6y ago
> I feel like if I reached the FIRE point, I would continue to work, but entirely on my own terms, not as an employee of somebody else. I'm right there with you - this is my number one goal for FIRE, is basically to not have to put up with anyone else's idiosyncrasies but my own. The only way I could see that changing is if I see a group of people worth working with, or a project worthwhile enough to work with other people, or I would feel an obligation to be a mentor to others.
- SmellTheGlove 6y ago
  Careful with FIRE though. Don't fully sacrifice living with the goal of doing it later. I realize I'm not old by any stretch, but I'm at 40 next year. I've definitely made some sub-optimal decisions with money, but the experiences were mostly worth it. My retirement goal is to be able to do it by the time my kid is out of college - 14 years from now, unless she's smart and does the 5th year I never did. Anyhow, I digress, but I'm glad we traveled, ate, bought a house, sold a house, moved around a bit, etc. because even as income continues upward (along with some wealth if that's what you want to call our tech equity comp), life still gets harder in non-financial areas. I'm convinced the worst thing we do to our kids is shove them through school and stick them behind a desk the day they're done. I didn't break into tech until my mid 30s, but for the folks who came out of college doing this, you have a legitimate shot to be set before you turn 40. That said, if I could rewind, I'd happily push my own retirement goals back a few more years in exchange for a financially secure year off in my 20's or early 30's.
  - btkramer9 6y ago
    What would you do in your financially secure year off in your 20's or 30's?
    - ghaff 6y ago
      Not the parent, but I would have primarily traveled. Might have hiked the AT or something like that. That said, although I didn't take extended time off, I did always max out my vacation time and took month-long trips to places like Nepal.
SmellTheGlove 6y ago
We're in the same boat, but given that this is HN and I don't know if you're actually a billionaire or something, let's assume we both aren't. I'm not, for sure. This is a rational position for folks like us who a) work to live, and b) probably haven't built anything to the level of the second most popular language in the world. Now say you're Guido. I don't know him, but I feel like we're on a first name basis. Guido is clearly driven to invent, and has developed one of the major building blocks of modern tech. He's probably set for life financially, but Guido has the urge to innovate. Along comes Microsoft, who basically is paying him to do whatever he wants, however he wants. If you're Guido, you take that. Now if you're me (and it sounds like probably you too), we don't have those kinds of offers, and I personally don't have that specific drive either. Ideal retirement for me is more time in my yard and also probably spending the cold months starting app projects that I'll never finish. The way life should be!
marcinzm 6y ago
>I feel like if I reached the FIRE point, I would continue to work, but entirely on my own terms, not as an employee of somebody else. If you want do to something that impacts or depends on other people then it will never be solely on your own terms. Plenty of people burn out of OSS because they think otherwise and then the angry users eat away at them. Likewise being FIRE doesn't mean you have unlimited resources so if you want more resource you will need to get them on someone else's terms. I've known a number of senior people at these companies that basically get to do whatever they want, pitch projects and then have teams whose job is to work out the details. Their name provides so much political clout that the org bends around them rather than the other way around. Personally I work at startups as a hands on manager so generally haven't had much red tape, institutional slowness, upper management, etc. hassles to deal with. Would continue doing so if I reached FIRE although might cut down my hours.
kevinventullo 6y ago
I think he is motivated by more than money and retirement.

by jawns 6y ago

Denvercoder9 6y ago

At his level, there's very little red tape, institutional slowness and management to deal with.

kortilla 6y ago
As long as he doesn’t do anything that impacts the actual business. DEs working on Microsoft products absolutely have red tape and institutional slowness.
NordSteve 6y ago
I have exactly that deal at MS (and I know many others who do), and I'm a couple levels away from DE. I'm later in my career, don't need the job for $$ (they know it), lead a great team, work on a meaningful project that I pitched in an area where I'm an expert, great support from management. The only thing remotely close to "red tape and institutional slowness" is about making sure what we build meets the promises (privacy and compliance, for example) that we've made to customers.
chillacy 6y ago
Not only that but he probably has a small legion of full time developers working on his projects now that no normal FIRE savings would be able to afford.

ghaff 6y ago

I think it really depends. I could see continuing working for someone longer in an IC role if no one is breathing down my neck to do things I don't really want to do and, especially, if I could negotiate flexibility in terms of time off, etc. I'm actually pretty close on both those things today and, post-COVID, I could see making adjustments more in that general direction. ADDED: As Denvercoder9 writes, some companies/groups can be pretty good about being hands-off a senior person who they want and also know doesn't need the job. Others, of course, are not. Certainly many Sun folks did not sit well with Oracle.

npsimons 6y ago

> I feel like if I reached the FIRE point, I would continue to work, but entirely on my own terms, not as an employee of somebody else. I'm right there with you - this is my number one goal for FIRE, is basically to not have to put up with anyone else's idiosyncrasies but my own. The only way I could see that changing is if I see a group of people worth working with, or a project worthwhile enough to work with other people, or I would feel an obligation to be a mentor to others.

SmellTheGlove 6y ago
Careful with FIRE though. Don't fully sacrifice living with the goal of doing it later. I realize I'm not old by any stretch, but I'm at 40 next year. I've definitely made some sub-optimal decisions with money, but the experiences were mostly worth it. My retirement goal is to be able to do it by the time my kid is out of college - 14 years from now, unless she's smart and does the 5th year I never did. Anyhow, I digress, but I'm glad we traveled, ate, bought a house, sold a house, moved around a bit, etc. because even as income continues upward (along with some wealth if that's what you want to call our tech equity comp), life still gets harder in non-financial areas. I'm convinced the worst thing we do to our kids is shove them through school and stick them behind a desk the day they're done. I didn't break into tech until my mid 30s, but for the folks who came out of college doing this, you have a legitimate shot to be set before you turn 40. That said, if I could rewind, I'd happily push my own retirement goals back a few more years in exchange for a financially secure year off in my 20's or early 30's.
- btkramer9 6y ago
  What would you do in your financially secure year off in your 20's or 30's?
  - ghaff 6y ago
    Not the parent, but I would have primarily traveled. Might have hiked the AT or something like that. That said, although I didn't take extended time off, I did always max out my vacation time and took month-long trips to places like Nepal.

SmellTheGlove 6y ago

We're in the same boat, but given that this is HN and I don't know if you're actually a billionaire or something, let's assume we both aren't. I'm not, for sure. This is a rational position for folks like us who a) work to live, and b) probably haven't built anything to the level of the second most popular language in the world. Now say you're Guido. I don't know him, but I feel like we're on a first name basis. Guido is clearly driven to invent, and has developed one of the major building blocks of modern tech. He's probably set for life financially, but Guido has the urge to innovate. Along comes Microsoft, who basically is paying him to do whatever he wants, however he wants. If you're Guido, you take that. Now if you're me (and it sounds like probably you too), we don't have those kinds of offers, and I personally don't have that specific drive either. Ideal retirement for me is more time in my yard and also probably spending the cold months starting app projects that I'll never finish. The way life should be!

marcinzm 6y ago

>I feel like if I reached the FIRE point, I would continue to work, but entirely on my own terms, not as an employee of somebody else. If you want do to something that impacts or depends on other people then it will never be solely on your own terms. Plenty of people burn out of OSS because they think otherwise and then the angry users eat away at them. Likewise being FIRE doesn't mean you have unlimited resources so if you want more resource you will need to get them on someone else's terms. I've known a number of senior people at these companies that basically get to do whatever they want, pitch projects and then have teams whose job is to work out the details. Their name provides so much political clout that the org bends around them rather than the other way around. Personally I work at startups as a hands on manager so generally haven't had much red tape, institutional slowness, upper management, etc. hassles to deal with. Would continue doing so if I reached FIRE although might cut down my hours.

kevinventullo 6y ago

I think he is motivated by more than money and retirement.