It seems like the article is based around the very flawed premises that what people enjoy doing can support them monetarily, and that such activities even can be carried on until death. It all sort of falls apart when you consider the passionate artist who isn't actually very good, or the skilled woodworker that develops arthritis.

It's no surprise that the author is a software developer, as we are the rare cases that are often well paid, often enjoy what we do tremendously, and the job has few physical requirements that would exclude an elderly person (though age discrimination is very real). The author's points come from a very privileged position, and I'm not sure they realise it.

I'm all for not giving up on life at retirement age, but even though I like my job I sure as hell don't want to be doing a 9-5 when I'm 80. I don't even really want to be doing it now.

The OP is 30 years away from retirement yet is posting on how to do it right... That's bold.

For me, retirement is imminent (I'm 67), but I can't imagine how ugly those prospects would look now if I'd not prepared for decades. Leaving a career with no income stream other than $35k/year in Social Security means you must continue working in whatever diminished role is available to you at age 70+. If that sounds bad to you, well, you got it right.

In the US, that would probably be working on your feet in a minimum wage role ($25k/year), with inadequate health insurance (Medicare A with Medicaid, if your state offers the latter), living in a low end apartment or mobile home, with declining health. In short, without substantial preparation, life after retirement will _suck_. I wouldn't wish it on an enemy. But this is exactly where 30-40% of Americans will be after 65 since they were unable (or unwise) to prepare for the final 20 years of unemployment that inescapably come at the end of life (AKA retirement).

Until some sort of organized coordinated alternative to old-age-demotion comes along, old folks are on their own in America. I recommend that everyone take life post-career deadly seriously long before it happens and prepare for it, or your 'golden years' will eat you alive.

I've generally thought like this, that whatever I'm doing in my life, including my labor should be something I want to do and energizes me. But I can't help but think this is kind of an aristocratic privilege. Someone, A LOT of someone's, most someone's, need to operate the oil rigs, drive the trucks, crew the ships, clean the kitchens, operate the sewage system, work under an organized hierarchy of thousands of people doing a tiny part of a massive function, etc etc etc. Any philosophy that doesn't account for the essential labor of civilization has an unrecoverable problem.

It's nice to have the choice to continue working and I certainly hope to have that. But not everybody does. And the reality is that a lot of people are kind of worn out and past their prime when they hit retirement age. And if they aren't, a lot of people start having all sorts of health issues that make work a lot less fun and interesting. Strokes, heart issues, Alzheimer's, etc.

These are the things that used to cause people to die relatively quickly but that's no longer the case. My father had a stroke and he might live another 20 years. He's definitely still active but there's no way he'd be doing his former job at this point or at least not at nowhere near the same level.

That's not to say retired people are useless but it does mean you have to be realistic about their ability to earn incomes for very long after they retire. Or more prudently, your own ability. Hope for the best but plan for the worst. Pensions are a form of insurance that is worth having.

With chronic over employment, there is a solid argument for making retirement age more flexible though. Continue working and have more disposable income when you reduce how much you work or eventually retire. The current system is not very flexible and actively disincentivizes people to work beyond a certain age.

My father actually retired early because his employer was downsizing and it was cheaper for them to settle for early retirement than it was to outright fire him. That same arrangement made it completely unattractive for him to find other work. He was being paid to retire, not to take another job. Another job would have eroded his pension. That's a weird incentive. Good for my parents but not necessarily for anything else. But 60 is definitely young to retire like he did. He's 77 now.

Two things. At 65 I'm applying for a job for the first time in 12 years! As a man I have had the luxury of being married to someone with better career prospects than me so I put my career on hold (p.s. there is no such thing - it's dead in the water) to do family things. I've done a great job. I've contributed to society and done it in a selfless way. All those girly things like PTA, cake stalls, committee meetings ... and my peers have thought I really ought to get a job. Well, fuck off is the expression that comes to mind. I am now going to get a job because I am bored, not because I feel I should contribute - I've done that. And I don't think I am exceptional. People get bored and contribute independent of reward. So I'd suggest UBI is the answer to many of our woes. Everyone gets to do what they like doing; if you're indifferent, but like the things money can buy you'll do the crap jobs if they pay enough. What is more, with guaranteed income and proportional tax on other income, businesses would get a few more people willing to work for a "non living wage" - too few hours or too low income to live on, but enough to play the pokies or a good night out. And there would be no need to think about welfare or pensions. Sure a percentage will not lift a finger, but let them. They are a drop in the ocean compared to the "financially independent", the "house wives" and "pensioners" who can already do that if they wanted to.

I liked making gears. The pay and commute sucked, but it was rewarding knowing that things I helped make would long outlast me. For me, I knew that if I could just hold on until I got social security, all would be well. I'd have lots of time to relax, and not have to worry about money any more.

Then I got long Covid, and was ripped out of the work force in 2020, at 56 years old.

It's no fun having nothing to do, and no purpose. The resonant idea for me from the article is to find your joy outside of work now, while you still have the time to explore the possibilities.

All those things that are totally fun for a weekend off are not sustainable for long term happiness. It's like ice cream... great stuff when you're a kid, and it's a treat... and just ok when you're an adult and could eat it exclusively.

I wish I had engrossing hobbies that could fill my days. I've watched everything interesting on Netflix, Amazon Prime, and YouTube. I played Universal Paperclips through 100 times in a row. I've spent thousands of hours in Factorio. I swore off Reddit when they sold out... so now it's here, twitter, facebook and youtube to occupy my days.

Get out now, find your passions that have nothing to do with work! Don't expect to find them magically when you retire.

Author sounds young. As you get older your interests may change. I used to really enjoy writing software. 35 years into it, I no longer get any joy or sense of accomplishment. Even when I write new things that result in patents (so don't tell me I need more interesting challenges.)

Now what brings me joy is spending time with my nieces and nephews. This is not a thing that can or should be monetized. I need to build up a retirement so I can truly enjoy the things I care about most in life.

Reading this article and the discussion leave me conflicted.

I retired early (40) from a career that most wouldn’t expect that from. I have two pensions and some modest investments that allow me to live quite well a couple hours from SF, but would be scraping by there.

I can no longer do the career I was successful in due to health degradation from exactly that career, but software was always a part of it so I’m pivoting to that to keep myself engaged and enjoying life.

So the comments here on health precluding this idea are very real. I also took about a year to get through the mental ramifications of my entire career being gone, as well as the entire community I was part of (due to moving). I don’t think this is talked about enough, especially in FIRE circles online. Having talked to a few other early retirees you can quite easily find that you no longer fit with the friends you’ve had for years, either due to interests diverging, spending abilities diverging, or plain old jealousy from some of them.

At the end I elected to pursue more education and (somehow) managed to get into a solid graduate program.

So I do think staying active in retirement is something you should plan, and this is even more true for early retirement. The type of partial work that I see talked about here is possible, but not generally at the earnings potential of your primary career. Things like being a substitute teacher, poll worker, etc. all pay and in California you can make around $15k/year fairly trivially doing that. If you want to donate plasma that’s another $5k/year or so; I haven’t done it but know a few early retirees that do for health reasons (reduction of forever chemicals).

The key to those jobs is that they won’t elevate your stress level like trying to find a salaried job or gig work will.

That’s a quick set of thoughts from someone who actually did execute on this type of life path and is living it in close proximity to SF, and without any type of software career.

The most telling sentence in the whole piece:

My retirement day is practically at least thirty years ahead.

When you are young, old age seems a long way away.

One of my fears is quickly losing cognition after retiring. I'm a WFH developer so I'm hoping that lets me extend my working years a bit longer than others can, but I need something to occupy my mind 30 hours a week after that. The idea of just ending up in The Villages driving around golf carts for the rest of my days seems very ominous.

My hope is to find a problem space to research in, there's a lot of capacity in unsolved problems to improve a lot of lives around the world. People die every day from diseases that we've solved in the west 50+ years ago, and there's a lot of work that can be done to make sure humanity has access to existing solutions for example.

I must be developing paranoia in my middle-age, because the first thing my brain suggested to me on seeing that headline is that this is the first droplet in the deluge of trying to convince people that they must work until they die on the job.

I want to retire from my day job. I have work I'd like to do of my own that isn't lucrative enough (by a very long ways) that I can't spend sufficient time on now. That will be my "retirement job."

I don't want to work at my current job until I keel over.

People with physical jobs should definitively be able to retire, a construction worker is not getting up a scaffold at 70.

The article appears very strong, and true, and it is. Perhaps everyone with some flickering self-recognition will see themselves as the protagonist in the story.

I definitely went through this transition, no earlier than 30, but certainly before 40. I think most self-aware people do.

But the recognition usually comes at a stage of life when you literally have every responsibility: mortgage, spouse, kids, beholden to some Dilbert-boss, and carrying the world on your shoulders (not sarc - Atlas, please don't shrug).

You have no honorable options to escape. Every dimension of escape is betrayal. Don't believe me? Try it and see. Face it, own it, own everything. Wait, push harder, postpone deliverance.

The decline of the hope and expectation that work could provide fulfilment happens gradually, then suddenly (as Hemingway once said about bankruptcy). But as I retire, I still code, I always will. It gives me joy.

The temptation is then to tell all your younger successors about the valuable insight you've acquired. What you have learned is very very important. But it cannot be told, or taught, it has to be experienced - or not.

My advice to parents is to treat your children as ~20% older than they are. By the time they hit aggravated puberty, you are already talking to them as adults. They don't deserve it, but they will thank you later. And even if they don't, you have no regrets, you showed them the shining path, the parental star of piercing brightness.

Show, don't tell.

Just be the best you can be at every interaction point with the world. Whatever person or problem is in front of you right now - just be the best you can possibly be. Don't think about the future. If you inevitably fail, from time to time, as you will, learn from failure, train what you wish you could do, and be better next time.

Be the absolute best in the grave. What better accolade?

Show, don't tell. Forever.

Of course, I contradict my own advice. We are all unfathomably contradictory.

"I contain multitudes"

Walt Whitman presaging Hesse, Gödel, or perhaps Wittgenstein - how can I tell what cannot be told?

I tried my best.

The usual retort to this is of the form "this is a privileged position to take. People who drive cabs, work construction and clean drains can't even think of this".

I agree, but we should recognize that we are moving more and more towards a world where automation enters every facet of our life, every step of the supply chain. Hitting a pause once in a while and just reflecting on how life has changed will do a lot towards changing opinions on work and retirement. While FIRE is achievable (at least until now in software), what I think I want is a long career to work on hard problems with other people of the same wavelength.

Easier said than done, but tbh we have a lot of free time today that we waste in social media as the OP says. Consciously slowing down a bit so that one can run a longer, more focused, perhaps less financially lucrative race but also one that has a higher probability of being fulfilling and putting us in touch with good people is something all of us, the well-paid software guys, must aspire to and put into practice.

Do companies want older people? In my experience, not so much, so even if you want it's not one side choice.

Sure, let's start by flipping the situation: the state should stop requiring me to pay into the retirement system, and then I'll agree to handle everything on my own. Maybe I'll retire, maybe I won't—but right now, I have no choice. I have to pay a mandatory contribution to the state every month, so it's fine to expect a good retirement plan from the state.

> For me, the purpose of life is searching for that purpose. That’s the job. The chase, the utter determination in the effort of search, the relentless seeking. It forces you to adapt to the changing world, not build expectations for the future that one day all struggle will stop. It demands training like an athlete for that purpose, enjoying the time with an ever-changing priority list. It asks you not to lose time with seemingly innocent but utmost time-wasters like Facebook, Instagram, or the latest news. It invites you to make the journey more enjoyable by building things that matter—like real relationships with family and friends and community around rituals—and seeking timeless ideas. To be able to do all, it also tempts you to make the journey safer.

Sounds to me a bit like the grown-up version of "The real treasure is the friends we made along the way".

How do you do all the things the author wants you to do while also having a day job and trying to keep your boss happy?

> that they will suddenly stop what they are doing after a certain age and let younger generations pay for their salary

This is the worst take I have seen in a while. First of all, in both Germany and Türkiye, we put aside a part of our monthly remuneration towards our pension. So when we retire, there is already a sizable sum that we have accumulated via our own work, nobody else is 'paying for our retirement'. It's our own money.

There is no some mythical younger generation working to pay our pensions, we have earned this money, it belongs to us, and we have all the reason to expect to not have to work in our old age.

The problem is only that in the current pension model, your money are not kept tight by the government or the pension fund, but instead spent or speculated with on the stock market. In this model, when you retire, it's not your money you are actually getting, but the pension contributions of the younger generation, because your money has been long spent. But that's a problem of the model, not some unsurmountable obstacle that the author of the article tries to make you believe.

Heck, if the pension fund or the government can't get it right, they can f-off and we can start saving for retirement on our own. But they say they can, so they either have to stand behind their promises, or reorganize to the new reality of people living longer and less young people entering the workforce. If that means that the government needs to guarantee a certain % of our pensions as a collateral, so be it. The world can benefit from less stock market speculation and more monetary resilience.

The myth that the younger generation is somehow paying the pensions of the old and that it's somehow a problem applies only if you don't ask: where did all the money we contributed towards our pension go. It's just a fault in the system that our own pension money is spent recklessly by the governments' bad calculations. The solution to that is emphatically not, as the author mentioned, 'expecting to never retire', but by demanding that our pension money is responsibly handled and not spent in the expectation that future schmucks will also join in this pyramid scheme.

This reminds me of a meme where there are two people shown side by side in a debate about euthanasia, the young dude is enthusiastically for, and the old dude against. The person who wrote this is quite obviously young and he thinks he will be able maintain his motivation to work indefinitely. That is not the case for most people in my observation. Sooner or later you'll want to down-shift at least, if not exit the rat race entirely, if you have such an option.

For hire: PhD physicist, 25 years of general programming and systems engineering experience, MBA, creative and dreamy: seeking a benefactor to support a modest lifestyle, and total creative freedom. You will own all IP generated. No retirement needed, just an inexhaustible line of credit.

Any takers?

There are three fundamentally contradictory paradigms.

1. human lifespan has doubled in last 100 years. Lifespan is still increasing but healthspan isn’t at the same rate. This means in the later years, we are spending a fortune on healthcare costs to extend lifespan a few more months.

2. Retirement age is fixed-ish in most countries. With rising lifespans, this means more years are spent draining on retirement income.

3. Lower birth rates means fewer people working to pay for retirees.

Something has to give. If we have fewer longer living people, then we need them to work more years.

Ideally retirement age is (average lifespan - 20 years) and is adjusted every few years.

It is a tough pill to swallow. Keeping the status quo means current generation will pay for boomers but by the time they retire, the pot runs out.

In US they say, social security will be drained by 2035 if nothing changes.

my former therapist thinks you should work until you die. but he is a good example of why you shouldn't (grandaddy needs naptime while his patients are sharing their traumas)

"that they will suddenly stop what they are doing after a certain age and let younger generations pay for their salary. That’s something I struggle to accept."

I mean I pay ~40%-55% of my income toward various taxes witch fund pensions among other thing. I would expect to get something 'back' after the age of 65. But chances are very slim what that will be any meaningful sum.

When I first started reading this my first thought was “Ehh, maybe I don’t need to formalize my thoughts on ‘retirement’ into a blog post if this does a good enough job” but it’s focusing on something a little different than what I’d like to write about I think.

I wrote a brief comment on this a day ago which sparked the idea of writing something longer [0]. Bottom line being: make sure you are happy today, you might not get tomorrow.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41547360

Man, that font really bothers me..

Well, I’m much closer, at 66, to having to deal with the dreams and realities of retirement, than the (much?) younger author of TFA is. All that follows, BTW, is from a USA-centric perspective. (Immodest request: kindly refrain from saying how much better retirement and/or old-age is, in your country-such comparisons are largely unproductive; yet annoyingly tedious.)

I’m still working full time as a Software Developer and systems analyst, and largely by my own choice. Though I admit my lifestyle would be curtailed a bit (or maybe a LOT, if I live long enough!) if I had to live off my current savings plus whatever level of social security I’d be entitled to.

I’m still healthy enough to do the work, but I definitely feel like I don’t have the energy level and stamina that I used to. Nor as much motivation to focus on the job and my career.

Those last two challenges were most apparent during my previous two jobs, which were at software or hardware start-ups. I simply don’t want to deal with that level of stress and time pressure anymore, regardless of whether or not I can work at that pace. (Which is increasingly doubtful, admittedly.)

Currently I’m working at a sort of ‘biotech startup’ except we’re embedded inside a giant pharma company. And the work pace is wonderfully relaxed (and low-stress), compared to my previous employment (in high-tech startups). From my current viewpoint, and career needs, it’s a good match. I get a solid salary (+ bonus and stock), but (unlike software/internet/AI startups): a PHENOMENAL benefits plan. Though not FAANG money; but, then again, I never made that kind of money when I worked for Internet startup companies, so…

The good news, for my current career, is that I’m still mentally sharp enough to have, say, an in depth discussion of the differences between React, Vue, and other UI frameworks. And I’m teaching myself the finer points of TypeScript, as well as applying it on the job. The bad news, is that I’m having a serious of health issues. Nothing catastrophic so far; but gradually increasing in significance or frequency. At this point I feel like it’s a race between when my body gives out, or when I simply lose interest in writing code, and can convince myself that I’ve got enough savings to retire on.

Assuming that I can retire in reasonably OK health (if possible, in 3-4 years, around age 70, when I’d max-out social security benefits), I’m thinking that I have a low boredom threshold, and will want something to keep me engaged (and to help me maintain a healthy regular schedule). I’m not sure what that is yet. Maybe something just for fun (for example, I like to do woodworking)? Maybe something part-time, or freelance; but enough income to make my retirement less financially worrisome)? I’ve thought of: substitute teaching; being a teacher’s assistant (both at secondary education level; college adjunct faculty; sound or TV production; or maybe trying to sell some of my woodworking (which would make it a much less fun hobby, sadly)? Possibly an (off-season) estate caretaker gig?

I’d love to hear from others here, on HN, who are retired (or about to) and have: experience reports, cavests, or tips to convey. Or constructive feedback on my own retirement ideas…

Alternative title: How to cope with the stranglehold neoliberalism has on us.

Tl;dr “Find a job you like and you’ll never work a day in your life”.

[flagged]