[happysadpanda2]

Is your reasoning here that it is selfish, because not everyone can do that, and if everyone could/did, then society would collapse due to no food production, garbage collection, emergency services, law enforcement etc, as all those people would also be out painting/kayaking etc?

I ask because as I first read your comment I was unable to see the selfishness, since GP outlined that they lacked the financial means to support that lifestyle (also implying that taxes would still be paid and money would flow through the system all the same). It took me writing out a reply to you, asking how you thought it selfish, before my brain came up with the potential answer I outlined in the first paragraph.

[Zetice]

Right, my thinking here is that the dream of running away from the very society that granted you the freedom to run away seems like you're not "paying it forward" enough, to enable others to have the freedom you'd be taking advantage of.

Rather, I would imagine the "not-selfish" version of this would be to spend your life doing those things, and finding ways to help others get to where you're lucky to be.

I just find the "I'll get mine and fuck off" attitude to be less than ideal.

[jjav]

> Right, my thinking here is that the dream of running away from the very society that granted you the freedom to run away seems like you're not "paying it forward" enough, to enable others to have the freedom you'd be taking advantage of.

I see it completely the opposite. If someone has already made all the millions they'll ever need, it's better for society to free up that job for someone else who needs the income instead of keeping amassing more and more millions to one single person. Paying it forward here is opening up the opportunity for the next person.

[Zetice]

Job? I'm not sure why we're talking about a job here, I'm not suggesting you stay at your employer beyond the time it takes to become independent.

[0xbadcafebee]

Not that you asked, but that's not the attitude I have, and not the impact of retirement. Retirement is the freedom to do what you care about without the fear of going hungry or homeless. It's a luxury and a privilege, to be sure. But it in no way is telling anyone to fuck off. If that were the case, every retiree at 65 is telling the world to fuck off. Or is there some arbitrary number at which you're not telling the world to fuck off? Is it ok to retire at 65 but not 55? Or 45? Should we work until we're dead?

A life of "leisure" still contributes to society. I would of course still pay bills and buy things, supporting business. I'd still pay my taxes, supporting the government. I'd still volunteer, like I do now outside my job. I'd like to teach, write, and create more (I like to sing, make music, art, furniture, etc). And I'd really like to start an informal class for underprivileged youth to learn computer skills and get a job without going to college, like I did.

If I didn't have to work, I'd have a hell of a lot more time to make the world a better place. In addition to the selfish kayaking, cooking, traveling, etc, that I already do with a job.

[FooBarBizBazz]

That society took from you before you were born, and "getting yours" is merely getting back to zero. You have assets and liabilities. Liabilities include a requirement for basic poverty-level food, shelter, and (if necessary) medical care. Your assets balance those liabilities around $1M. So in my view that's actually zero. In fact you're not even really a full legal person until you own property; otherwise you're on the hook to rent an apartment just to maintain a driver's license or a voter's registration.

[yakubin]

So... noone should exercise this freedom, because doing it is selfish? Then what are you paying forward for? Freedom noone should ever exercise? It feels like a prison with transparent bars.