Do you mean that retiring isn’t recommended, or dying?
If the latter, I’d love to hear how you plan to avoid it.
Do you mean that retiring isn’t recommended, or dying?
Jesus give me patience. Bunch of goody two shoes. Work till I drop nonsense. Presumably you are all pediatric brain/heart surgeons.
They’re usually the “live to work” types, the work to live people enjoy retirement, assuming their health is up to it and they aren’t stony broke!
nah, it’s men in general. Men retiring at 55 die earlier than men retiring at 60, so the work to live types better be careful what they wish for. not true for women though.
If you’re married and you retire, you’ll probably find you won’t be welcome in the house anyway.
better off keeping something up
my preference is mini retirements in between careers, but can’t imagine not being on the hustle in some shape or form
Got a source for this? Always thought it was the other way around?
I have seen statistics that state that something like 50% of civil servants (UK) die within 9 months of retirement, I suspect a lot of it is attitude to being “put out to grass!”.
If you have an all consuming hobby that could easily replace the hole work leaves in your life, then your chances of living longer are much better than someone who just “waits for god”.
I heard from a reliable enough source that senior Dept of Agriculture workers here live on average 17 months after retiring
I would imagine if you correct for income, this is true - rich people will live longer whenever they retire. Not just down to medical treatment, as much down to not having any income worries/being able to afford hobbies - their standard of living in retirement goes up…
edit: PS it doesn’t appear to hold true for doctors - again anecdotally, I’ve heard that the median lifespan for GPs following retirement is two years.
YM, good points. I’d be interested to see some proper research in this area controlling for various factors.
Hmmmm. When do GPs tend to retire though? Self-employed people tend to work until they’re older. I imagine you’re going to see the likes of GPs and solicitors working well past standard retirement age as many are up to their necks in arrears on whole mini property empires.
This was talking to someone about four years ago, while many were still saying ‘blip’ and before the bank collapse. I take your point about longer working lives, though.
Living without things like what?
All jobs have their down sides. All jobs have variable work life balances. The advantage of Medicine, Law & accountancy is that they are all basic degrees. When you graduate in any of these you are essentially qualified to do nothing. Each require an apprenticeship of about a further 5-7 years which allows the individual to mature and select with more confidence their specialist area (better than they could have at 18 or 23). While each profession can take “a hammering” its generally only in specific areas eg Cardiac Surgery in medicine is severally downsized due to stents, Conveyancing virtually wiped out in law and accountants burnt by bad investing partnerships lost etc.
But if you took 100 individuals graduating in each of these professions and checked in with them 10, 20, 30 years later. The vast majority >90% will be in well paid positions generally enjoying about 70% of their job. Pick any time period over the last 200 years, run this thought experiment again and again and you always get roughly the same outcome.
The same can not be said for any other professions quite so reliably.
+1. Doing the same at 47. Always wanted to study science. Now I am.
Out of curiosity do you base this on anything in particular or is this your opinion? To be fair I think most people are happy at what they’re at, so many years after finishing their studies. Not trying to be smart here by the way, just it’s my opinion that a great many workers would have a better quality of life than for example an oncologist, a geriatrician, a nurse doing night work, a paramedic, even a GP who has a lot happening in their personal lives and hasn’t got 20 hrs a day to devote to work. Even veterinary surgeons, physios dealing with stroke victims, CF patients etc etc need quite an empty day apart from work IMO and is that truly a good quality of life? Vocation like jobs have their limitations maybe in the real world?
I was in a public service job once and I was been offered a permanent position (job for life) that I wasn’t too keen on. I asked my my boss at that time what he thought I should do as I was having serious doubts about committing, he was near retirement and he said that half the men who retired from there had serious health problems within six months and as many were dead within a year and a half.
I had an uncle who worked for the railroads all his life and on retirement he went from one of the healthiest active people I knew to severe strokes within six months. It spooked my father and inspired him to get into golf before he retired, he got twenty good years of green time.
Ultimately it’s all about balance, it you love your work but are forced to retire the adjustment can be severe.
Its personal opinion and paraphrasing Nassim Nicholas Taleb’s Black Swan theory in which he used this thought experiment but comparing a doctor with a stock broker. He talked about lifetime average income (not work life balance)
For example if you took 100 people qualifying as doctors and averaged their income over their lifetime you should observe that a. None or very few are very rich b. almost all are “well off” and c. none or almost none are poor. As for the lifetime average earnings of a stock broker / banker you will observe a. A good few are extremely rich b. the vast majority struggled to make an income and c. a good portion are extremely poor and lost their shirts. Its much more likely that an individual Doctors average income will be higher than any individual stock broker / banker on average.
He was arguing that people tend to look at say a trader or banker who made millions and wish that they or their children can emulate that and may direct their carear accordingly. He was high-lighting the fallacy of high-lighting exceptions to rules and thinking that they are the likely outcomes.
Most people should be able to adjust their work life balance, even medicine has job sharing. but I agree some of the vocational aspects to a lot of medicine are not attractive.
This is why, IMO, the ideal time to start a business is when you’re about 50.
At that point, unlike people in their 20s, you have the experience, some capital and, very importantly, contacts in your field.
It’s going to take around ten years to build something from scratch, maybe less if you have less fundamental R&D to do. If you’re going to fail, you’ll probably do so in the first five, which still leaves you time to start again. By the time you reach your early 60s, you are master of your own destiny (as far as anyone can be) and can wind down over the next twenty years at your own speed.
Obviously, this is easier in some professions than others, but once you reach your 50s, you really should be looking at how you can go freelance over the next decade, so that you can work part time, even if you’re retired from your main job.
These sounds like variants of the police-die-five-years-after-retirement myth. These claims always come from the group themselves - never an independent source.
At some level the people claiming this know it’s not true – otherwise they’d probably hold off on retiring, but it’s an emotive argument to use against people who tell them they’ve an enviable retirement package. It may be some naive logic, i.e. all retired people die and only a minority of non-retired, therefore retirement causes death.
In reality if the life expectancy was say 62 for British civil servants of maybe 55 for police there would be medical investigations to find out why. It’s not like they’re ex-miners or ex-professional cyclists.
GPs may be somewhat different as in the past at least they’ve tended to have retired much older – but it sounds so much like the other statisticless anecdotes I’d say it’s not true.
Based on what you’ve heard, what proportion of statisticless anecdotes are actually true?
I think he referred to it as scaleable vs non-scaleable earnings. So doctors might experience some sort of theoretical cap on salary and some minimum amount (a scale) while stock broker has none. He was of the opinion it’s better to operate in a scaleable industry.