A Paupers Pension Tale (Not many nuts to dig up)

Expotter

I'm really sorry if I offended anyone by touching on a sore point there and I really couldn't care less what people call themselves. What I was trying to get at was that, in my opinion, retirement means financial independence, and as happy and content as the OP may be, he's dependent on his wife (and son) really, were any of them to change their minds about the current arrangements he would probably have to reassess the whole situation.
And I don't think this thread is unrealistic at all, the opposite really, it's actually proof it can be done when everyone involved is willing. My point was a reference to the FIRE movement, with emphasis on the Financial Independence, which I don't believe the OP has realistically achieved for the time frame involved.

DairyQueen

Expotter said:

I'm really sorry if I offended anyone by touching on a sore point there and I really couldn't care less what people call themselves. What I was trying to get at was that, in my opinion, retirement means financial independence, and as happy and content as the OP may be, he's dependent on his wife (and son) really, were any of them to change their minds about the current arrangements he would probably have to reassess the whole situation.
And I don't think this thread is unrealistic at all, the opposite really, it's actually proof it can be done when everyone involved is willing. My point was a reference to the FIRE movement, with emphasis on the Financial Independence, which I don't believe the OP has realistically achieved for the time frame involved.

Agree.

Someone reliant on a partner's income isn't retired, they are a house husband/wife.

Back in the day, plenty of women didn't work again after the birth of first child. I see no difference between their status and that of OP. Both are dependent on spouse's income.

Retirement assumes that pension funds will be used for income.

trevjl

Don't agree with that at all. So if I "give up work" and just go for a year or three not drawing my pensions as I don't need to I am not retired ??
As I have said my wife loves looking after the elderly so will carry on. Her income in that job is pretty pathetic for what she does, but that is her income, I wont see any of it and it's not included in my spreadsheets. I will, I can assure you be retired

Albermarle

DairyQueen said:

Expotter said:

I'm really sorry if I offended anyone by touching on a sore point there and I really couldn't care less what people call themselves. What I was trying to get at was that, in my opinion, retirement means financial independence, and as happy and content as the OP may be, he's dependent on his wife (and son) really, were any of them to change their minds about the current arrangements he would probably have to reassess the whole situation.
And I don't think this thread is unrealistic at all, the opposite really, it's actually proof it can be done when everyone involved is willing. My point was a reference to the FIRE movement, with emphasis on the Financial Independence, which I don't believe the OP has realistically achieved for the time frame involved.

Agree.

Someone reliant on a partner's income isn't retired, they are a house husband/wife.

Back in the day, plenty of women didn't work again after the birth of first child. I see no difference between their status and that of OP. Both are dependent on spouse's income.

Retirement assumes that pension funds will be used for income.

I think if someone has worked for 30 years, and then decides they want to retire from paid employment for good (and they maybe have a retirement party/gold clock) then they are retired, even if their partner is still working.
Of course they are not fully reliant on their income from the usual retirement sources, but they personally have still retired from their job/career, which they had for many years. 

Kim1965

I guess the Op is lucky that his wife is happy with the arrangements. I think i am correct that the Op does the lions share of domestic chores to compensate. 
I think my marriage must be very traditional in that it has always been expected that I would be the main earner. My wife would be most un comfortable with her working and mě not. 
 The debatě whether the op is retired or not is not important. He is not doing a job he hates,  so he is a winner. 
 

bluenose1

Kim1965 said:

I guess the Op is lucky that his wife is happy with the arrangements. I think i am correct that the Op does the lions share of domestic chores to compensate. 
I think my marriage must be very traditional in that it has always been expected that I would be the main earner. My wife would be most un comfortable with her working and mě not. 
 The debatě whether the op is retired or not is not important. He is not doing a job he hates,  so he is a winner. 
 

Agreed. Though my husband retired 6 years ago and I am still working full time. 
He would say he is very much retired (and loving it.) 
Whether you would call him retired or a house husband as I am still working doesn't really matter. The main thing from his perspective that he is answerable to no-one workwise and not on the clock.  
The agreement was that my husband would do the housework /shopping/ cooking etc. Though not exactly worked to plan and we have now got a cleaner....... 

harlequinnyc

For what it's worth; imo, if you have left a job for an indeterminate period you are 'retired'; regardless of age, receipt of pension, partners income, intention to never work again or indeed, work again in the future. 
Isn't that the term sportspeople use all the time when ceasing their sport, often at an early age? 

german_keeper

Interesting if rather pedantic discussion, but in my opinion a little bit of pedantry goes a long way.

A very long story but we are now in a position where I don't work so presumably I am "retired" because I am in receipt of one of my pensions. My wife is still working part time 25 hours per week. So if I wasn't receiving a pension and my income was from savings would that mean I was retired? Reminds me of some of the incredibly important Stella fired late night discussions Martin Clunes and Neil Morrissey used to have on Men Behaving Badly. The real important issues of the time!!

I think we can afford for her to retire; we have actually talked about it again today because by taking her DB pension early and commuting some of it to a lump sum I think we would be fine. She is still undecided because truth be told I don't think she is ready to retire just yet. I certainly was ready!!         

anonmoose

I think the point that expotter (quite rightly) was trying to make is that he isn't financially independent. The reality is that he wouldn't be able to do it without his wife still working.

He is no doubt saving the family money though having time to shop around and get the best deals. In much the same way many stay at home parents/housepeople do.

It is still a very inspiring thread even if it is not about living from ones pot now.  I hope to be doing similar in a few years if my OH still enjoys his job and wants to continue for a couple more years.

I have decided to bring forward my retirement and settle for a slightly smaller pot as life is too short and I have seen too many examples of that recently.

Keep enjoying life GamblerUK and I hope you keep posting updates.

MoneyWorry

It was GamblerUK's original thread which inspired me to take the plunge and I will hand in my notice later this month at the age of nearly 62.  Before then, I would have kept making excuses that I did not have enough savings and would have stayed making myself more and more unhappy.

Will I be retired?  I think it's a combination of yes and no.  I will be living on the first of my pensions and savings while I look for something a couple of days a week.  So it's a yes to retiring from working full time permanently ever again, but a no to not working in some capacity ever again.

As long as you're happy and if you have a partner, they are happy, labels don't really matter in my opinion.

Definitely keep posting, GamblerUK