If you had the money to retire at 30, your savings would be invested and on an average year your earnings would cover your expenses. You would have health insurance, so no worries there. The only catch is that you would have to keep your expenses at 65% of what you spend right now. Would you take it, or would you rather work a few more years for a better lifestyle and financial security?

  • Flax@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    1 day ago

    I don’t know if that’s morally right. I may pick a job though (or even volunteer!) that I enjoy more than one that pays, but I still think someone who is healthy and able to should still contribute to society.

    • BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Working thanklessly for slave wages to make Sociopathic Oligarchs or Corporations rich is not “morally right,” or “contributing to society,” it’s playing your non-disruptive role in THEIR society.

      Traveling the world, exchanging cultures, etc. contributes far more to the world than being a tiny cog getting worn down and used up over a lifetime in some oligarch’s machine.

      “Morally right?” JFC, get a fucking clue. How is it morally right to contribute to a MAGA Nazi society? Burn it the fuck down.

      • Flax@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 day ago

        I didn’t mention sociopathic oligarchs or sociopathic corporations. Not every business is a sociopathic corporation.

        “Morally right?” JFC, get a fucking clue. How is it morally right to contribute to a MAGA Nazi society? Burn it the fuck down.

        Ah yes, because the USA is the only country with internet access. No wonder you elected trump if you yanks are this reactionary.

        • BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 day ago

          No, you didn’t mention Oligarchs or Corporations because that would undercut your “moral” argument, so I did.

          The entire world has been sold the concept that the only “moral” lifestyle is to sacrifice your life to earn barely subsistence wages in the pursuit of obscene wealth for a few wealthy families. That is the 21st century human paradigm across the entire planet, regardless of political ideology. EVERY society is Capitalist in practice, and those that deny it it, are lying. There is not a single nation on this planet who is not dedicated to funnelling vast amounts of money to a few wealthy people in their country.

          In addition, if we continue on this path, the number of wealthy families benefiting by this system will shrink, until there is only a single family, or perhaps person, who controls the entire planet’s wealth. It may take a few generations, but it is inevitable.

          And yes, ALL corporations are sociopathic, by definition. There are NO exceptions.

          • Flax@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            1 day ago

            The entire world has been sold the concept that the only “moral” lifestyle is to sacrifice your life to earn

            EVERY society is Capitalist in practice, and those that deny it it, are lying.

            I wonder why…

            And yes, ALL corporations are sociopathic, by definition. There are NO exceptions.

            This you?

              • Flax@feddit.uk
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                21 hours ago

                Corporations aren’t inherently bad. It’s the money that corrupts. The love of money is a root of all kinds of evils.

                You can run a corporation that provides a good service to society, pay a fair wage and provide good employment locally. However, to make a large corporation, a lot of the time requires the said corruption, you need to fight and cheat your way to the top, cutting corners as well as employee benefits.

                • Doomsider@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  19 hours ago

                  Let me tell you a story about how corporations used to be time limited, for the public good, and held their members directly financially responsible.

                  The reasons? At the time people recognized corporations as a concentration of capital and it needed severe limitations to prevent corruption.

                  After a century of lobbying and a whole new legal field around corporate law sprouted up we ended up with corporations that are no longer time limited, that do not have to be for the public good, and their members are no longer held accountable.

                  Objectively corporations are horrible and have caused irreparable harm to the environment and society. They have become the dominant form of our culture bending governments to their will and killing off hundreds of millions of people for profit.

                  As I said, you are trying real hard to be a bootlicker.

                  • Flax@feddit.uk
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    4
                    ·
                    20 hours ago

                    Okay. This is irrelevant to what I was saying but go off.

    • Birdie@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      You’d still be paying sales tax, income tax, property tax and presumably participating in voting. Plus you’d be opening up a job for another person. All of that is contributing to society, imo.

      I’d probably still volunteer for something. As a retired person, there are a lot of hours to fill!

      • Flax@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Valid reasoning. The volunteering option if you’re financially self sufficient is probably the best option, in light of this.

    • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      I’m not sure how I feel about this answer, but on a personal level I share your feeling—that I should be contributing something to my community.

      Although when I think of most of my interactions with the people who actually live around me, almost none of them are done for money.

      So maybe retiring isn’t so much of an end to contributing to society as it is an end to contributing to private equity, et al.

      • Flax@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        I was morseo talking about retiring at 30. I still think we have a moral obligation to each other to work, if you’re well and able.

        • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          I’m talking about the same thing, but separating paid work from voluntary work.

          Just because you aren’t working for a company, doesn’t mean you aren’t working for your community.

          You’re also probably contributing a lot less carbon to the atmosphere, though.

          • Flax@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            Yeah, as long as it’s beneficial. I don’t think I’d count work where someone may be, for example, building tools to help the rich get richer.