UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (174) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 63316  
Subject: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 4:04 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 4
The key to early retirement for most people is a program of saving a high percentage of one's income and investing it for a good return.

People who borrow and spend all they can pay significant amounts of their income in interest to borrow money. This reduces the total amount they can spend over a lifetime.

People who spend what they earn generally can spend no more than they earn over their whole lifetime.

But the person who saves a high percentage of their income and invests it for a good return can expect to have sharply more total wealth in a lifetime than they earned available to spend because investment returns add to their lifetime income.


Is saving and investing environmentally correct behavior, or does it add large amounts of additional spending and consumption to fuel an industrial machine that rapes Mother Earth?

Can you be an environmentally correct liberal and ethically aim to retire early? Don't people who borrow, pay interest and spend less over a lifetime live lighter on the earth, other things being equal?

Isn't early retirement something that should be enjoyed only by grasping Republicans?



Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
Author: LudditeAndroid Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 561 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 5:37 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
Can you be an environmentally correct liberal and ethically aim to retire early? Don't people who borrow, pay interest and spend less over a lifetime live lighter on the earth, other things being equal?

Isn't early retirement something that should be enjoyed only by grasping Republicans?




Does framing gross generalizations in question format make them any less immature and inflammatory? Am I going to have to de-fave yet another retire early board for containing more than my recommended daily dosage of headache-inducing, infantile flamewarring? What does the F12 button do? Why am I still awake? Why does anyone even bother arguing with asinine statements like this? Why am I even bothering to reply to something that deserves no humoring and warrants no argument because it's so patently ridiculous? Is there an echo up in here?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: GusSmed Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 562 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 7:02 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 6
Am I going to have to de-fave yet another retire early board for containing more than my recommended daily dosage of headache-inducing, infantile flamewarring?

Please don't. If you do that the terrorists win. Put him in your penalty box, and keep the board instead. Ignoring this kind of stuff wouldn't work on RECF, since pretty soon almost all of the posts would be gray. But now we have a board of our own, and regular posters who'd just as soon keep their flamewars on PA, where they belong.

If you a message here posted purely to irritate us, ignore it. If you can't ignore it - and I do understand that sentiment - post your angry response on a political board instead. If you end up reading someone else's angry response, hit "ignore thread." You don't have to penalty box someone just because they can't help responding to the trolls.

That's my public service announcement for today. Or maybe just for this hour.

- Gus

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Gingko100 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 564 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 8:31 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
Oh shoot. Now I'm feeling badly for defending you on the other board as not just being a provocateur. I thought you were really interested in dialogue here.

Oh well. Live and learn.

Sigh.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: GusSmed Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 569 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 8:43 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Oh shoot. Now I'm feeling badly for defending you on the other board as not just being a provocateur. I thought you were really interested in dialogue here.

What? Are you suggesting that "Isn't early retirement something that should be enjoyed only by grasping Republicans?" is an attempt at dialog?

I'm missing something here.

- Gus

Print the post Back To Top
Author: parger Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 577 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 9:04 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
No, no -- he DID defend him because he PREVIOUSLY thought that he was interested in dialog. After seeing these latests posts, he appears to have re-thought the matter.

The thing is SP often has very interesting things to say -- if you can ignore his comments about things that you may have a different opinion on -- women, children, marriage, politics, ad naeseum (sp?). I take what I can use and pretty much ignore the rest (I try to think of him as one of my raving bachelor great-uncles -- it works pretty well for me). After all, this is only a message board!

I really, really like a lot of people on this board AND on the other board. I hope it doesn't get down to where a poster is only welcome on one or the other.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: tenworlds Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 581 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 9:21 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Can you be an environmentally correct liberal and ethically aim to retire early? Don't people who borrow, pay interest and spend less over a lifetime live lighter on the earth, other things being equal?
Isn't early retirement something that should be enjoyed only by grasping Republicans?
Seattle Pioneer

-----

"There you go again."
--R. Reagan


What happened to all your pontificating about posting sans 'political jabs'?




Rich
-starting to agree with 6

Print the post Back To Top
Author: markr33 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 582 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 9:26 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 7
I've found that it is almost universal that the "saver" uses less energy and resources than the "spender" does. I am an ardent conservationist (I like the word "environmentalist", but it has been hijacked by the far left, otherwise I could easily be one) and when someone asks me what are the best things they can do to save our environment, one of my main recommendations is "save money". Think about it, buying a smaller, more fuel efficient car, generally saves money ... and saves resources. Same for buying a smaller home, and same for downsizing other consumer desires.

I don't think it has anything to do with liberal or conservative (two terms that have been so distorted in recent years, the conservatives losing their values of responsibility, and the liberals losing their values of freedom). When it comes to individuals, those who spend less, on average, generally use less energy.

And cut it out with the "grasping Republican" crap, there are grasping folks of all types, Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, Communist, Socialist, etc.


Print the post Back To Top
Author: GusSmed Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 586 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 9:41 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
No, no -- he DID defend him because he PREVIOUSLY thought that he was interested in dialog. After seeing these latests posts, he appears to have re-thought the matter.

Since Gingko's post was in reply to one of my posts, and used the pronoun "you," I thought Gingko was saying I was being a provocateur. I see now that I misunderstood, and Gingko had in fact defended SP's behavior on the other board, and was now having second thoughts.

My apologies.

The thing is SP often has very interesting things to say -- if you can ignore his comments about things that you may have a different opinion on -- women, children, marriage, politics, ad naeseum (Sp?).

Ad nauseum. It's a tough word. So tough, in fact, that ieSpell doesn't recognize the correct spelling.

That's true. It's just that there are so many topics (women, conservation, abortion, gay rights, etc.) are hot buttons for him, and often something completely unrelated will set him off. Given the tone of those posts, which can appear completely without warning on an unrelated topic, I've found it less stressful to ignore him.

(I try to think of him as one of my raving bachelor great-uncles -- it works pretty well for me).

I have a raving grandmother. Unfortunately, I find conversations with her to be a harrowing experience, so that example doesn't help.

After all, this is only a message board!

I tell my wife that about her bead-making message boards all the time. Yet I sometimes find it hard to do myself. I still get worked up about posts from months ago that I didn't respond to because I didn't want to continue a flamewar. I don't like that very much, I wish I found it easier to let some things go.

- Gus

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 589 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 9:45 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 4
<<I've found that it is almost universal that the "saver" uses less energy and resources than the "spender" does. I am an ardent conservationist (I like the word "environmentalist", but it has been hijacked by the far left, otherwise I could easily be one) and when someone asks me what are the best things they can do to save our environment, one of my main recommendations is "save money". Think about it, buying a smaller, more fuel efficient car, generally saves money ... and saves resources. Same for buying a smaller home, and same for downsizing other consumer desires.
>>


The problem is that if you invest that money, and especially of you invest that money well, you wind up with sharply more money to spend over a lifetime. When I add up my lifetime earned income and compare it with my net worth, I find my net worth today is something like five times my lifetime earned income.

Just guessing (since he's never reported his own numbers) but with much greater investment success than I have had, intercst might have twenty or thirty times the net worth to spend as he has had earned income.

By comparison, a good borrow & spend consumer who has charged up their credit cards all their life might have a negative number reflecting a negative net worth.


High rates of saving and investing can be expected to greatly increase the money people have to spend over a lifetime. Spending on almost anything tends to run the economy harder and use more resources. So the question I raise is a serious one that "green" early retirees should have an answer for, in my opinion.

It's also a question I've never seen addressed anywhere before.


I appreciate your giving a serious reply, and I'm surprised at the hostile non response of others to this question.




Seattle Pioneer

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: decath Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 590 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 9:45 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
markr33:
I've found that it is almost universal that the "saver" uses less energy and resources than the "spender" does. I am an ardent conservationist (I like the word "environmentalist", but it has been hijacked by the far left, otherwise I could easily be one) and when someone asks me what are the best things they can do to save our environment, one of my main recommendations is "save money". Think about it, buying a smaller, more fuel efficient car, generally saves money ... and saves resources. Same for buying a smaller home, and same for downsizing other consumer desires.

I don't think it has anything to do with liberal or conservative (two terms that have been so distorted in recent years, the conservatives losing their values of responsibility, and the liberals losing their values of freedom). When it comes to individuals, those who spend less, on average, generally use less energy.

And cut it out with the "grasping Republican" crap, there are grasping folks of all types, Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, Communist, Socialist, etc.


I would agree! I don't thing ER has much to do with being environmentally sound.

Living a LBYM's existence helps the environment quite directly.

One example from my family of 5.

When I put my garbage out once a week, I only have a couple of small garbage bags compared to 6-12 of most of my neighbors. I have an organic garden that produces food year around. So eating out of it produces no waste for the garbage man as it goes back into my compost pile. Because we buy no packaged processed foods, that also helps with waste prevention.

decath

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: telegraph Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 594 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 9:53 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Obviously, someone who retires has a lower 'carbon footprint' that someone working...

You don't need to commute, nor do you generate carbon footprint by having to have a place to work, all the heating/cooling/lighting for that place which you occupy only 8 hours a day, plus the carbon cost to actually build that building in the first place.

Going out for walks, going camping, low impact travel has a lower carbon footprint....

So environmentally, retiring early is better.

HOwever, from a liberal standpoint, it is not contributing to the 'better good' since you are paying less taxes to support all of the public programs. A command economy requires all to work and pay taxes. The accummulation of private wealth is frowned upon, and the use of private capital is frowned upon.

So there cant be a 'liberal environmentally' position on early retirement. That is an oxymoron type statement....

The accumulation of private wealth is not a 'liberal' acceptalbe idea.
That should have been 'redistributed' already. Without private wealth, you only have government pensions, and the gov't controls when you get it.


t.


Print the post Back To Top
Author: markr33 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 596 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 10:01 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 7
The problem is that if you invest that money, and especially of you invest that money well, you wind up with sharply more money to spend over a lifetime. When I add up my lifetime earned income and compare it with my net worth, I find my net worth today is something like five times my lifetime earned income.

But it isn't true. Most people who are "savers" are always savers, they don't suddenly change attitudes when they retire. And even for those who allow themselves more "treats" after retirement, those treats don't necessarily include the use of large amounts of energy/resources. For example, someone who wasn't into fast, powerful cars in youth, young adulthood, or middle age, is very unlikely to suddenly get interested in fast, powerful cars in retirement, early or not. Similarly, someone who lived in a 1500-2000 sq ft home for all his/her working life, isn't very likely to suddenly want to live in a 4000-5000 sq ft home in retirement.

Just guessing (since he's never reported his own numbers) but with much greater investment success than I have had, intercst might have twenty or thirty times the net worth to spend as he has had earned income.

But it isn't relevant at all, intercst has clearly described his life to us, and he doesn't do such things. He still lives in a $540/mo apartment rather than a 4000 sq ft house using far less energy than he could "afford" to use, and his major use of resources appears to be driving across the country a couple of times a year, but I'd still bet that, overall, he still drives less than the average working American. Perhaps another use of resources would be using golf courses that require large amounts of water. For the most part, his is a life of conservation, not waste, even with the millions of dollars at his disposal.

Just because someone has the money to spend, and to "waste" resources, doesn't mean that they do so.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: GusSmed Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 597 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 10:02 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 5
Think about it, buying a smaller, more fuel efficient car, generally saves money ... and saves resources.

That's a good point. I worry a lot about doing things about cutting my heating bill, not because I'm worried about natural gas supplies (though I probably should be), but because I want to save money.

We both know that SP had a hot-bottom about conservation. Mention it, and he'll talk about the stupidity of "green whackos." Yet it's really just about being frugal, and I know he approves of that. It's about saving resources rather than money.

I like the word "environmentalist", but it has been hijacked by the far left

I do know who you're talking about. There is, and always will be, a contingent that would like us to live in mud huts. I first ran into them in college. But not everyone who thinks about the subject is a Luddite, any more than everyone who saves money is Scrooge.

Have you ever read "The Space Merchants," by Frederick Pohl and C.M. Kornbluth? It was a SF novel about conservation and environmental problems before conservation was a popular movement. It deliberately drew parallels to the McCarthy era. Conservationism was an underground movement in the book, "Consies," and a politician in the book talks about having a "list of Consies in my hand" ala McCarthy.

It was written in 1958, and I don't think they had any idea that modern conservatives would actually be the people so opposed to conservation.

- Gus

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: markr33 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 600 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 10:11 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
When I put my garbage out once a week, I only have a couple of small garbage bags compared to 6-12 of most of my neighbors. I have an organic garden that produces food year around. So eating out of it produces no waste for the garbage man as it goes back into my compost pile. Because we buy no packaged processed foods, that also helps with waste prevention.

We are very similar. We are a family of 7 people and we put out a single partially full trash can (the small kind, I think 32 gallon) for each collection. In fact, we only own 2 trash cans for the collection after a Monday holiday when there is no collection (so we have twice as much trash waiting) and even then we don't always need two trash cans. We also have 2 recycling bins that are collected, one for paper and the other for glass/plastic, and bundles of cardboard boxes (very rare, because I save cardboard boxes in my garage and try to give them away to people who are moving or otherwise require them). And this is including 2 kids still in diapers! Meanwhile most of our neighbors put out 2, sometimes 3, very large (the 45 gallon kind on wheels) trash cans. We have one neighbor that often seems to have 2 trash cans, 3 recycling bins (1 paper and 2 plastic/glass ones) piled high, AND a bag or two and/or a small pile of other refuse (small furniture pieces, lamps, and other stuff that doesn't fit into a trash can easily) next to the trash cans - amazing! I have to wonder where all that stuff comes from???


Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 602 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 10:14 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
<<Obviously, someone who retires has a lower 'carbon footprint' that someone working...

You don't need to commute, nor do you generate carbon footprint by having to have a place to work, all the heating/cooling/lighting for that place which you occupy only 8 hours a day, plus the carbon cost to actually build that building in the first place.
>>


Yes, but someone else is going to take your place to do the work you no longer do. On the average, that person will leave an average carbon footprint to add to the reduced carbon footprint of the early retiree.

Furthermore, surveys on the board formerly known as REHP support the idea that many retirees plan to spend the assets theyt have accumulated, which suggests that living frugally to accumulate savings for investment may be replaced by higher spending levels once those net worth and early retirement goals are reached.

Even if you don't spend the additional money yourself but donate it to charity it will be spent and increase spending in the economy that otherwise would not exist.


<<HOwever, from a liberal standpoint, it is not contributing to the 'better good' since you are paying less taxes to support all of the public programs. A command economy requires all to work and pay taxes. The accummulation of private wealth is frowned upon, and the use of private capital is frowned upon.

So there cant be a 'liberal environmentally' position on early retirement. That is an oxymoron type statement....

The accumulation of private wealth is not a 'liberal' acceptalbe idea.
That should have been 'redistributed' already. Without private wealth, you only have government pensions, and the gov't controls when you get it.
>>


I was going to save this issue for another thread. I think it's another good one that our liberal friends should be able to answer for us, and another reason why we grasping Republicans may be better equipped ethically for early retirement, since we usually don't share such values.




Seattle Pioneer

'





Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: GusSmed Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 603 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 10:18 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
For example, someone who wasn't into fast, powerful cars in youth, young adulthood, or middle age, is very unlikely to suddenly get interested in fast, powerful cars in retirement, early or not.

OK. Confession time. I'm into fast, powerful cars. In fact, we own two '97 Toyota Supra Turbos, though I don't think Debbie gets as much out of driving hers as I do mine.

However, we don't drive them much anymore. I'm at home all day, and I only drive for groceries and the like. I put about 1500 miles on the car in the last year. Debbie takes the commuter rail to work because it's less stressful than driving in Boston traffic, so hers has even less. I had to buy a battery charger, because the batteries on both cars were self-discharging in the garage due to disuse.

These might be the last cars we own, because at this rate my car will hit 100,000 miles in 2027.

Similarly, someone who lived in a 1500-2000 sq ft home for all his/her working life, isn't very likely to suddenly want to live in a 4000-5000 sq ft home in retirement.

We lived in a 4-bedroom 2400 square foot house for a while. It was too big. We're doing pretty well in a 3 bedroom, 1800 square foot house now, though I constantly feel like I don't have enough counter space in the kitchen, and we could use a double sink. Even at 1800 square feet, we could lose the living room and I'd never miss it. Though we'd have to sell the couches we never use.

- Gus

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 605 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 10:23 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
<<Just guessing (since he's never reported his own numbers) but with much greater investment success than I have had, intercst might have twenty or thirty times the net worth to spend as he has had earned income.

But it isn't relevant at all, intercst has clearly described his life to us, and he doesn't do such things. He still lives in a $540/mo apartment rather than a 4000 sq ft house using far less energy than he could "afford" to use, and his major use of resources appears to be driving across the country a couple of times a year, but I'd still bet that, overall, he still drives less than the average working American. Perhaps another use of resources would be using golf courses that require large amounts of water. For the most part, his is a life of conservation, not waste, even with the millions of dollars at his disposal.

Just because someone has the money to spend, and to "waste" resources, doesn't mean that they do so.

>>


All good points. But because intercst is no longer working some other engineer with a presumably average carbon footprint/spending pattern has taken his place to do the work intercst no longer does.

And the wealth of frugal retirees can be expected to be spent by heirs, charities or whatever after we die, usuaally with a lot less emphasis on frugality than the people who accumulated those resources.



Seattle Pioneer

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: tedhimself Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 611 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 10:46 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Can you be an environmentally correct liberal and ethically aim to retire early? Don't people who borrow, pay interest and spend less over a lifetime live lighter on the earth, other things being equal?

Huhhh?
Environmentally correct liberals live in smaller more energy efficient houses, don't buy big honking cars, and save money rather than buying big boats and other manufactured items that waste earth's resources.


Print the post Back To Top
Author: telegraph Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 614 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 10:58 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
SP: "Yes, but someone else is going to take your place to do the work you no longer do. On the average, that person will leave an average carbon footprint to add to the reduced carbon footprint of the early retiree. "

Maybe. But the average retiree is not going to suddenly ramp up use, and he is using 'deferred' carbon footprint credits...he didn't spend them consuming earlier....so it is like his/her savings...deferred...

As to his/her position being filled, in many cases, companies are using fewer and fewer folks to do more and more work.....so that may or may not be true..... new workers don' t magically appear, if you want ever legal resident to have a job, your retiring makes room for younger folks to be employed gainfully.

SP: "Furthermore, surveys on the board formerly known as REHP support the idea that many retirees plan to spend the assets theyt have accumulated, which suggests that living frugally to accumulate savings for investment may be replaced by higher spending levels once those net worth and early retirement goals are reached."

But overall, is that any more than if they had spent their money and carbon allowance along the way, not saving? I'd suggest it is just deferred money and deferred carbon usage....

Of course, with that 'wealth accumulation' of both more money and more carbon footprint, the libs would want to confiscate it for their re-distribution to those with 'less'...... you obvioulsy don't need it, and can continue working, scrimping along....like you always have, while it is redistributed to those who haven't a clue of how to live below their means...

t.





Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 615 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 11:04 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
(I like the word "environmentalist", but it has been hijacked by the far left, otherwise I could easily be one)


This is just as silly as people who identify themselves as "liberals" no longer reading the poem "Invictus" because it was the favorite of some right-wing dude who blew up a government building in Oklahoma.

There is nothing wrong with the word "environmentalist" -- and only someone with a pretty small mind would toss it aside because someone with whom they disagree on other things also embraces it.

AM
....likes "Invictus" very much

Print the post Back To Top
Author: tedhimself Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 616 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 11:04 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
High rates of saving and investing can be expected to greatly increase the money people have to spend over a lifetime. Spending on almost anything tends to run the economy harder and use more resources. So the question I raise is a serious one that "green" early retirees should have an answer for, in my opinion.

It's also a question I've never seen addressed anywhere before.


We still live simply after 10 years of retirement. All the money we have left when we die goes to places like the Nature Conservancy and the Sierra Club. I don't know how those organizations are any less green than if we had spent the money on his and hers Hummers.
Ted


Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 617 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 11:05 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
The environment, by the way, affects and should be important to all of us.

AM

Print the post Back To Top
Author: telegraph Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 618 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 11:07 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 4
ted: "Environmentally correct liberals live in smaller more energy efficient houses, don't buy big honking cars, and save money rather than buying big boats and other manufactured items that waste earth's resources."

Why is this tied to any particular party?

I know a lot of very conservative folks who are VERY environmentally concerned, have low carbon footprints (well, some of them burn firewood so they aren't burning fossil fuels)....live in small passive solar houses with solar cells, off grid..... or in Earth ships or equivalent....

Why does it take a 'lib' to do that? I'd venture most libs,...and we can start with the Kennedies and the movie stars out west, live in horrendously big mansions, have 3 or 5 other properties around the country (like FL for the Kennedies and the 'summer place' off the coast in MA) plus jet set destintions...... Schwarnegger has a couple Hummers...so one runs on hydrogen...consumes MORE energy per mile than a gas powered one, but heck, he is environmntally blabbering about his 6 mpg Hummer..... and the rest of the libs drive to rallies to reduce carbon footprints in their gigantic SUVs along with a multi car entourage of other SUVs for their staff, assistants, hair colorists, etc.

More likely it is the libertarians, not the libs, who are more likely to be 'very low impact' and conservatives, who don't want gov't handouts and gov't subsidies - people like the Mormons - and the Amish who are very low impact, very low carbon using folks.

Most libs talk a good game, but still live in McMansions and drive SUVs - soccer moms - more concerned with family safety, living in neighborhoods with 'good schools' (meaning usually new construction of large houses that are popular).

Could you show us some data to confirm that is is libs that are 'environmentally concious' compared to other segments of the USA population???? Say, more so that conservatives, or folks in the middle?

Or is this a dream?

t.



Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 620 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 11:10 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 5
<<Can you be an environmentally correct liberal and ethically aim to retire early? Don't people who borrow, pay interest and spend less over a lifetime live lighter on the earth, other things being equal?

Huhhh?
Environmentally correct liberals live in smaller more energy efficient houses, don't buy big honking cars, and save money rather than buying big boats and other manufactured items that waste earth's resources.
>>


I see most ardent environmentalists spending their money jetting around the world on eco vacations, expensive home improvements, the new Prius, high end college educations for themselves and their children and other luxuries. Most are spending pretty much everything they have (or more), just like most people.


But what about those who are saving and investing for early retirement? Those folks will probably have much more in accumulated assets and income to spend over a lifetime because of the effects of compound interest on investments and if they retire early, another worker with a presumably average carbon footprint will have to be hired, perhaps from abroad, to take his place.

Even if they live frugally in retirement, presumably those hoarded assets will be spent by less frugal beneficiaries or charities upon their death.


The environmentalist who spends more than they earn each month and pays generous interest to credit card companies is reducing the income they will be able to spend over a lifetime, aqnd presumably has a much lower effect on the environment because of that.


How can environmentalists and liberals justify a life of frugality and investing which leads to much more wealth and spending long term than their borrow-and-spend green cousin?


I think it goes without saying that we grasping Republicans are evil for saving, investing and spending, just as you suggest. But why aren't my envronmentally correct liberal friends evil for doing pretty much the same thing?




Seattle Pioneer

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: tedhimself Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 621 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 11:15 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
SP: All good points. But because intercst is no longer working some other engineer with a presumably average carbon footprint/spending pattern has taken his place to do the work intercst no longer does.

But if intercsrt were still working, wouldn't there be two worders with average carbon footprints?

SP: And the wealth of frugal retirees can be expected to be spent by heirs, charities or whatever after we die, usuaally with a lot less emphasis on frugality than the people who accumulated those resources.

Are you arguing that it is better to spend the money now rather than later? Are you arguing that one should make less money? I'm not following this at all.
Ted


Print the post Back To Top
Author: tenworlds Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 622 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 11:21 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 27
Are you arguing that it is better to spend the money now rather than later? Are you arguing that one should make less money? I'm not following this at all.
Ted

-----

Maybe because you're trying to look at his posts from a 'Retire Early' perspective and he's just using this board to snipe at 'liberals'.




-just sayin'





Rich

Print the post Back To Top
Author: tedhimself Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 623 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 11:22 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
telegraph: Why is this tied to any particular party?

Because the question I was answering concerned only liberals. I did not mean to imply in any way that conservatives had to be wasteful.
Ted


Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 624 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 11:23 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
<<Of course, with that 'wealth accumulation' of both more money and more carbon footprint, the libs would want to confiscate it for their re-distribution to those with 'less'...... you obvioulsy don't need it, and can continue working, scrimping along....like you always have, while it is redistributed to those who haven't a clue of how to live below their means...

t.
>>


I'm sure our liberal friends here support the idea of heavily taxing the rich who have 401Ks and IRAs and such. But that just means that the government is going to spend that wealth generated through high rates of saving and skillful investing.

I doubt that anyone would suggest that government spending in general not to be hard on the environment like pretty much any other kind of spending and consumption. The frugal environmentalist who pays more in taxes because of his wealth merely enables the government to spend more.


Of course, socialism provides the obvious answer to this problem. Stalin solved the problem of the wealthy Kulaks by killing them off, and the problem of wealth through investment by prohibiting investments by individuals and wasting wealth through government, leaving most people living in a variety of poverty.


But that's not the objective of liberals interested in early retirement. However, I don't think a good answer to this conundrum has yet been made on this thread. I await more replies.



Seattle Pioneer

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: jgc123 Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 625 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 11:23 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"If you a message here posted purely to irritate us, ignore it"

Bingo.

I no longer desire to let trolls rob me of tha last vestiges of my sense of humor. If the entire board turns grey as a result, THEN I will give up. Until then I will respond to the people I find interesting.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: tedhimself Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 626 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 11:26 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
SP: I think it goes without saying that we grasping Republicans are evil for saving, investing and spending, just as you suggest.

Kindly show me where I suggested that.
Ted

Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 627 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 11:31 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0

We lived in a 4-bedroom 2400 square foot house for a while. It was too big. We're doing pretty well in a 3 bedroom, 1800 square foot house now, though I constantly feel like I don't have enough counter space in the kitchen, and we could use a double sink. Even at 1800 square feet, we could lose the living room and I'd never miss it. Though we'd have to sell the couches we never use.

- Gus




I've been looking at floorplans for manufactured homes on the internet -- and for the life of me I can see absolutely NO use at all for BOTH a "living room" AND a "family room". It just makes no sense at all -- especially since they are usually always close enough to each other that TVs in each would interfere with the other. So much space just wasted!

AM

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 628 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 11:31 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
<<SP: And the wealth of frugal retirees can be expected to be spent by heirs, charities or whatever after we die, usuaally with a lot less emphasis on frugality than the people who accumulated those resources.

Are you arguing that it is better to spend the money now rather than later? Are you arguing that one should make less money? I'm not following this at all.
Ted
>>


A person who lives frugally and saves and invests a high percentage of his income will very likely have far more money to spend over a lifetime than someone who spends what they earn each month because of the effect of compound interest.

Generally speaking, that increased wealth is going to be spent by someone, sooner or later, and increased spending on average will burden Mother Earth.



So yes, I am asking whether it's environmentally correct to save and invest for early retirement, because that creates more wealth and presumably a greater burden on Mother Earth long term.

Shouldn't the environmentally correct borrow and spend and thus reduce their ability to spend over their whole lifetime by paying interest charges?



Seattle Pioneer

Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 630 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 11:33 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0

And the wealth of frugal retirees can be expected to be spent by heirs, charities or whatever after we die, usuaally with a lot less emphasis on frugality than the people who accumulated those resources.



I plan to spend mine while I'm here.

AM
...unless I can find a way to take it with me....

Print the post Back To Top
Author: GusSmed Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 631 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 11:38 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I've been looking at floorplans for manufactured homes on the internet -- and for the life of me I can see absolutely NO use at all for BOTH a "living room" AND a "family room". It just makes no sense at all -- especially since they are usually always close enough to each other that TVs in each would interfere with the other.

I believe the theory is that you don't put TVs in both. You put couches in the living room, and socialize there. You put the TV in the family room, and watch TV (or movies, in my case) there.

This is in fact the way we're set up. We can't really socialize in the family room, because we only have a recliner / loveseat in there, and guests have no place to sit. We don't socialize much, so the couches and chairs in the living room gather dust.

- Gus

Print the post Back To Top
Author: telegraph Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 632 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 11:38 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
ted: "Because the question I was answering concerned only liberals. "

Funny how one party wants to claim the sole title to 'We are the party concerned with the environment..'...

It is only their personal benefit they want to protect...

Don't build windmills off the coast of MA, because the Kennedies, when sailing on their multi-million dollar yachts, will be able to 'see it' and that is bad (for their personal environment).....Oh, they are for 'windpower' but NOT IN THEIR BACKYARDS.

FOlks want 'more natural gas' since it is less polluting for power plants, but don't dare drill for it off the coast of Florida, because that is "BAD" by definition - done by those profit making corporations that generate 'record profits' by producing record amounts of fossil fuels each year. Duh? you expect the to produce record amounts of fossil fuels at a loss each year?

My neighbor is a California 'lib'....changed all the lightbulbs in her house to compact flourescents..they leaves 90% of them on all day, along with the 60 inch widescreen TV because it keeps their two dogs enertained all day.....so they have a multi-kilowatt 'baby sitter' for the dogs while they are off and about town...and they leave all the outside lights on all day and night..never turn off.... another couple hundred watts down the drain....but they are so 'environmentally concious'....ripped out half the interior of the house and re -did it with 'enviornmentally friendly materials'..... (after it had been done 4 years before by the last owner)...... oh, they are so green....it will take 50 years to re-coup all that energy....used to make, ship and install all that material, plus all the barely old old material that had to be hauled off to the dump - filling it up with 'construction material'.

I'm amazed...a 'green neighbor' who in the past six months has consumed more than I will for the next 10 years.

WRong priorites, but she feels good being 'so green. Her outside lights (8 of them) on all day belie her real agenda.....look green, but waste....the TV set is on 18 hours a day, and no one watches it more than 2 hours a day.....(except the dogs).....

t.



Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 633 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 11:39 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
SP: All good points. But because intercst is no longer working some other engineer with a presumably average carbon footprint/spending pattern has taken his place to do the work intercst no longer does.

But if intercsrt were still working, wouldn't there be two worders with average carbon footprints?

SP: And the wealth of frugal retirees can be expected to be spent by heirs, charities or whatever after we die, usuaally with a lot less emphasis on frugality than the people who accumulated those resources.

Are you arguing that it is better to spend the money now rather than later? Are you arguing that one should make less money? I'm not following this at all.
Ted





Don't look now, Ted, but you are responding to SeattlePioneer.

AM

Print the post Back To Top
Author: markr33 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 634 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 11:43 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
and only someone with a pretty small mind would toss it aside because someone with whom they disagree on other things also embraces it.

You must mean a small mind like someone who would seriously consider moving out of their neighborhood because some millionaire (or wannabe millionaire) conservatives live there.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 637 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 11:48 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
<<SP: I think it goes without saying that we grasping Republicans are evil for saving, investing and spending, just as you suggest.

Kindly show me where I suggested that.
Ted
>>


Well, your post included the following:



<<Huhhh?
Environmentally correct liberals live in smaller more energy efficient houses, don't buy big honking cars, and save money rather than buying big boats and other manufactured items that waste earth's resources.


>>


Weren't you saying that we grasping Republicans spent our money in evil ways compared to environmentally correct liberals?

Or if using the word evil doesn't appeal to you, how about saying that environmentally correct liberals spend their money in enlightened and virtuous ways compared to benighted and backward Republicans?


However, sometimes I wonder. Last week my brother and sister in law jetted off to Cancun for an eco vacation among the Mexican jungles and Mayan ruins. In my backward view, that utterly consumes a good deal of Mother Earth's resources, while I spent time with my nephews at their request. But perhaps jetting about the world in petroleum guzzling jet transports is exempt from scrutiny by politcally correct environmentalists. I never seem to see it criticized.


You have to educate we grasping Republicans you know.



Seattle Pioneer

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 638 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 11:52 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
and only someone with a pretty small mind would toss it aside because someone with whom they disagree on other things also embraces it.

You must mean a small mind like someone who would seriously consider moving out of their neighborhood because some millionaire (or wannabe millionaire) conservatives live there.




You certainly are stuck in that groove, aren't you?
I never realized I had so much power -- but it appears that I have made you tap-dance around like a little marionette. I'm so proud.

To answer your non-question: Neighbors are important. When you find yourself in a nest of hornets, it's best to remove yourself if you want to have a happy and peaceful life. People like those at MF who would happily step on their near-dead grandmother's faces rather than pay a penny in taxes do not appeal to me as neighbors. And I doubt they would find my company to their liking either. Therefore, I would move out of the neighborhood and leave them to their selfish, arrogant, snotty, tight-fisted, judgmental, and hateful lives.

Happy now?

Could we get back to talking about retirement for LIBERALS on this board now? Do you not have enough conservative boards on which to post? Or do you like having your little emotional strings pulled such that you continue to tap-tappety-tap to my tune?

Just wondering.

AM

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 639 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 11:54 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 5
<<My neighbor is a California 'lib'....changed all the lightbulbs in her house to compact flourescents..they leaves 90% of them on all day, along with the 60 inch widescreen TV because it keeps their two dogs enertained all day.....so they have a multi-kilowatt 'baby sitter' for the dogs while they are off and about town...>>


Telegraph,


any idea what programs the dogs like to watch? I wonder if Nielson captures that data?



Seattle Pioneer

Print the post Back To Top
Author: markr33 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 644 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 12:01 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I've been looking at floorplans for manufactured homes on the internet -- and for the life of me I can see absolutely NO use at all for BOTH a "living room" AND a "family room". It just makes no sense at all -- especially since they are usually always close enough to each other that TVs in each would interfere with the other. So much space just wasted!

This is so true. Our house has a living room and a family room (connected to the kitchen) and the family room is the most used room in the house, it has many of the kids toys and books, it has our television (we only have one), and it has a few sofas to sit on. But our living room is used for storage, mostly for some of the kids clothes and larger toys, and we also use it as a stroller parking lot since it is located just to the right of our front door, a convenient place to put all the strollers while they aren't in use. If we didn't have that living room, we could probably move all the clothes into other places and fold up the strollers and put them in the garage somewhere instead. What a waste!


Print the post Back To Top
Author: telegraph Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 645 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 12:04 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
AM: "
I've been looking at floorplans for manufactured homes on the internet -- and for the life of me I can see absolutely NO use at all for BOTH a "living room" AND a "family room". It just makes no sense at all -- especially since they are usually always close enough to each other that TVs in each would interfere with the other. So much space just wasted!"

Most homes are designed for families, and the modern family needs to have two TVs and have the kids or some of the kids separate from the rest of the family.......

Some of the McMansions have 'three living areas'....plus a dining room that gets used 3 times a year when company shows up for formal dinners...

t.



Print the post Back To Top
Author: 2gifts Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 646 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 12:04 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I've been looking at floorplans for manufactured homes on the internet -- and for the life of me I can see absolutely NO use at all for BOTH a "living room" AND a "family room". It just makes no sense at all -- especially since they are usually always close enough to each other that TVs in each would interfere with the other. So much space just wasted!


I'd suggest changing the use of the living room. In our last house which we lived in for 12 years, I used the living room as my sewing room. DH built some wonderful cabinets and bookcases, and put in a place for my sewing machine. He also built me a drop leaf table that opens to 4'x8' that I use as my sewing table.

In the current house which we designed and built, we do have a very small living room on the first floor, but it's original purpose was to be a 2nd guest room on the first floor. That was because my mother couldn't climb stairs, so it was not possible for her to stay over at my house without having a room on the first floor for that. To solve this, we added french doors and window shades to the living room and bought a really nice sleep sofa. For a few years when my son was playing the saxophone, we let him use the living room as his music room.

These days, it gets used at Christmas and during the school year as a quiet place for the kids to read.

So perhaps if you looked at it as another space in the house and decided what you want to use the space for, it might work. It might not work, but at least I thought I'd make the suggestion.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: 0x6a74 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 648 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 12:08 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0


OK. Confession time. I'm into fast, powerful cars. In fact, we own two '97 Toyota Supra Turbos, though I don't think Debbie gets as much out of driving hers as I do mine.


cool.

i had an 84 Supra that i loved.

when she died (at 15yrs, 180k miles), i really wanted a turbo ....

but decided to get 'serious' and bought a little German car.


=

Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 652 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 12:12 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0

So perhaps if you looked at it as another space in the house and decided what you want to use the space for, it might work. It might not work, but at least I thought I'd make the suggestion.



Yes, and good suggestions, too.
The problem with the plans that I saw was that the family room and living room were both big open spaces adjacent to the kitchen and to each other -- almost like one continuous room that sort of went around a corner. Almost no way to make something useful out of the extra one.

If the designs had been such that the living room was more isolated from the kitchen/family room, it would be lots easier to turn it into an office/library or something.

But I think you have a good idea -- it just doesn't work for most of the plans that I was seeing.

AM

Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 653 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 12:13 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0

cool.

i had an 84 Supra that i loved.

when she died (at 15yrs, 180k miles), i really wanted a turbo ....

but decided to get 'serious' and bought a little German car.





I want a Smart Car. :)

AM

Print the post Back To Top
Author: telegraph Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 654 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 12:14 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 4
AM: "Could we get back to talking about retirement for LIBERALS on this board now?"

So far, we haven't seen how an 'ecologically cognizant' liberal can possibly retire early without offending the very sense of the term liberal.

If you want to tax and spend and have a command economy with the gov't in charge of the re-distribution of wealth, and with the gov't in charge of when you can retire, it is hard to see how you can 'retire early' at any point other than that dictated by the 'majority' who want those tax revenues from people continuing to work to 'retirement age'.

Maybe you can show me how this isn't true?

It seems to be a philosphical deadlock.....you can't have liberal ideology and retire early (unless you are one of the libs who talks a good story, but actually acts conservatively in financial matters and spending).

t.


Print the post Back To Top
Author: 2gifts Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 657 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 12:16 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
But I think you have a good idea -- it just doesn't work for most of the plans that I was seeing.


I can see that. I've looked through a gazillion house plans trying to find something when we were building our house, and could never find something that met our requirements. We ended up having our house designed from a blank piece of paper, but it meets our requirements.

We used a designer instead of an architect, so it wasn't very much more expensive doing that that buying pre-existing plans. I don't know how hard it is to find a designer who is not a registered architect, but that might be something to consider. We found ours because a couple of the high-end builders in town use this guy which also meant that we could see real houses that he had designed, so we knew the quality of the work going in.

I agree that quite a lot of the plans I've seen in those house plans magazines never quite seemed livable to me, or at least not the way that we live.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 659 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 12:19 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0

I agree that quite a lot of the plans I've seen in those house plans magazines never quite seemed livable to me, or at least not the way that we live.



True -- and everyone has slightly different needs and different lifestyles. It's really important, I think, to find a plan that suits the way YOU live and not the way some designer thinks MOST people live. After all, your home is where you spend most of your time so it should be really comfortable for you.

AM

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 662 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 12:25 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 5
<<If you want to tax and spend and have a command economy with the gov't in charge of the re-distribution of wealth, and with the gov't in charge of when you can retire, it is hard to see how you can 'retire early' at any point other than that dictated by the 'majority' who want those tax revenues from people continuing to work to 'retirement age'.

>>


And we've already discussed that early retirement is a legal way to avoid paying huge amounts of taxes. I've estimated that quitting regular employment at age 49 (even though not retiring completely) probably will wind up costing the government $150,000 in tax revenue they now wont collect.

And one of my important motivations to retire completely is that I feel like the tax man is the primary beneficiary of my labors, since I've been financially independent since 1999 at least.


So again we get back to the question of whether early retirement is really ethical for liberals, or whether they should keep their shoulder to the wheel to support government by higher levels of tax revenues and providing their services to an economy which has nurtured them and might expect them not to quit just because they can and want to do so. Liberals may have an ethical and social obligation to keep working.


Perhaps early retirement should be left to we grasping Republicans, who can do so without ethical qualms because of our benighted values.



Seattle Pioneer



I imagine these issues will have to be sorted out in succeeding threads, since each issue deserves some careful thought I think.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: jgc123 Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 665 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 12:31 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"So perhaps if you looked at it as another space in the house and decided what you want to use the space for, it might work. It might not work, but at least I thought I'd make the suggestion."

I had a guy put two large doors on the entrance to our 'family room', put a CD player and a computer in it along with a comfortable chair, a desk and a couple of good reading lamps, and made it my 'study'.






Print the post Back To Top
Author: sykesix Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 667 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 12:33 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 24
HOwever, from a liberal standpoint, it is not contributing to the 'better good' since you are paying less taxes to support all of the public programs. A command economy requires all to work and pay taxes. The accummulation of private wealth is frowned upon, and the use of private capital is frowned upon.


Good to know. I forgot to look that part up in liberal handbook.

Don't take this the wrong way, tele. But your statement is dumb as box of hammers and it makes you personally look ridiculous. Making silly, disconnected comments like that will get you a lot recs on the other board, but it doesn't become you. Or anyone. It is just stupid.

Now you've proved you can make a caricature of yourself, why don't you add some real thoughtful, content? I know you can do it, I've seen you do it in the past.




Print the post Back To Top
Author: FoolYap Big funky green star, 20000 posts Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 670 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 12:40 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
I had a guy put two large doors on the entrance to our 'family room', put a CD player and a computer in it along with a comfortable chair, a desk and a couple of good reading lamps, and made it my 'study'.

Good idea!

One recommended approach for people who have the luxury of building a house from scratch, is to think of what you like / need to do in the house, and to create spaces for those functions.

E.g., don't say, "I want a three-bedroom house, and I'll use one of them as an office". Say, "I need space for two adults and a child to sleep. And I need enough space for a computer desk and chair."

In our case, my "office space" is a tiny nook off the livingroom (sorry, "the social place to gather" :-). It's only about 5x7 feet. But, it has a door if I need privacy. It has a window, which prevents it from feeling too claustrophobic. It will eventually have a builtin desk and shelves (when I get around to building them).

I've seen plans where the "office space" was a corner of the living room or the master bedroom, with changes in ceiling height, or bump-ins/outs of the walls, to define it as a separate space.

Planning it this way can prevent square-footage and mortgage bloat.

--FY

Print the post Back To Top
Author: sofaking6 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 675 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 12:53 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Can you be an environmentally correct liberal and ethically aim to retire early? Don't people who borrow, pay interest and spend less over a lifetime live lighter on the earth, other things being equal?

Isn't early retirement something that should be enjoyed only by grasping Republicans?


Are you suggesting that it be illegal for registered Democrats to retire early?

6

Print the post Back To Top
Author: GusSmed Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 677 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 12:56 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
A command economy requires all to work and pay taxes.

Good to know. I forgot to look that part up in liberal handbook.


I wouldn't bother commenting, except that there's a side note worth considering. I think there's a sizable contingent of conservatives who actually do equate "liberal" with "socialist." They can't quite get it straight in their heads that there are far more moderate liberals in the world than socialist extremists.

- Gus


Print the post Back To Top
Author: whafa Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 679 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 12:58 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I wouldn't bother commenting, except that there's a side note worth considering. I think there's a sizable contingent of conservatives who actually do equate "liberal" with "socialist." They can't quite get it straight in their heads that there are far more moderate liberals in the world than socialist extremists.


Do you feel like any of that is a reaction to the neocon label, which is also woefully mis-applied?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: telegraph Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 683 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 12:59 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
You want some good content?

Here is some

http://www.neolibertarian.net/articles/sanandaji_20060414.aspx

from a lib site, too....

THe horrors of the welfare state in Sweden...

"As the Swedish welfare state has expanded and economic incentives reduced, entrepreneurship has dropped. In a study of 37 developed countries that was conducted in 2002, Sweden was ranked in the 31:st place when it came to entrepreneurial activity and was one of the countries where entrepreneurship had fallen the most between 2000 and 2002. An important contributing factor is that the marginal tax on entrepreneurs is approximately 70 percent and that they are required to pay additional fees to the state, such as when their employees go on sick leave. "

"The expanding Swedish welfare state has monopolized many sectors of the economy and thus reduced the opportunities for private enterprise. The high taxes and the high regulatory burden are other obstacles for entrepreneurship. The disadvantageous climate for business in Sweden is demonstrated by the fact that the number of employees in the private sector is today some 100 000 less than for 30 years ago, although our population has grown by more than one million during this period. "

But they have 'free healthcare'....

t.



Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: cattleman22 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 685 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 1:00 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
{{Are you suggesting that it be illegal for registered Democrats to retire early? }}

Huh? How did you get the idea that SP advocated for increased government regulation from his post?


c

Print the post Back To Top
Author: GusSmed Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 687 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 1:02 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Do you feel like any of that is a reaction to the neocon label, which is also woefully mis-applied?

Not really, since they were saying the same stuff before I ever heard the term "neocon."

- Gus


Print the post Back To Top
Author: whafa Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 688 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 1:05 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Not really, since they were saying the same stuff before I ever heard the term "neocon."

- Gus


My impression is that things have gotten a lot more polarized in the last 6 years or so, and all sides are to blame.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: crassfool Big funky green star, 20000 posts Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 689 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 1:05 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
SeattlePioneer says

Is saving and investing environmentally correct behavior, or does it add large amounts of additional spending and consumption to fuel an industrial machine that rapes Mother Earth?

Not necessarily.


Can you be an environmentally correct liberal and ethically aim to retire early?

Yes.


Don't people who borrow, pay interest and spend less over a lifetime live lighter on the earth, other things being equal?

Not necessarily


Isn't early retirement something that should be enjoyed only by grasping Republicans?

Why don't you run along and play somewhere else?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: crassfool Big funky green star, 20000 posts Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 693 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 1:08 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
GusSmed says

Ad nauseum. It's a tough word. So tough, in fact, that ieSpell doesn't recognize the correct spelling.

I bet it will recognize ad nauseam, which is the correct spelling.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 0x6a74 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 694 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 1:08 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2

actually do equate "liberal" with "socialist." They can't quite get it straight in their heads that there are far more moderate liberals in the world than socialist extremists.


Do you feel like any of that is a reaction to the neocon label, which is also woefully mis-applied?



no. the 'conservative' blather about liberals pre-dates Reagan Admin.

pretty much no one ever heard of a neocon until a couple years ago.


=

Print the post Back To Top
Author: markr33 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 696 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 1:09 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Are you suggesting that it be illegal for registered Democrats to retire early?

I sure hope not! Or are you suggesting that all Democrats are liberal? (It isn't true and I have proof).


Print the post Back To Top
Author: tenworlds Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 697 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 1:11 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I wouldn't bother commenting, except that there's a side note worth considering. I think there's a sizable contingent of conservatives who actually do equate "liberal" with "socialist." They can't quite get it straight in their heads that there are far more moderate liberals in the world than socialist extremists.
- Gus

-----

Heh, thank Newt Gingrich; who started it, and Karl Rove; who finessed it.





Rich

Print the post Back To Top
Author: GusSmed Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 699 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 1:12 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Or are you suggesting that all Democrats are liberal? (It isn't true and I have proof).

Even though I've generally voted for Democrats, I can't bring myself to register as one. I want a replacement party. And no, I don't mean the Libertarians!

- Gus



Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 711 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 1:30 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
<<Can you be an environmentally correct liberal and ethically aim to retire early? Don't people who borrow, pay interest and spend less over a lifetime live lighter on the earth, other things being equal?

Isn't early retirement something that should be enjoyed only by grasping Republicans?

Are you suggesting that it be illegal for registered Democrats to retire early?

6
>>


Not at all.


I am raising the issue of whether it is ethical for the environmentally correct to use the power of compound interest to multiply their incomes in order to acquire more wealth, which is then usually spent on "stuff" of one kind or another which will usually burden Mother Earth.

And if you retire early, someone else is going to take your place, adding their carbon footprint to yours because you are no longer working but still consuming.

Grasping Republicans like myself often don't subscribe to such values and are therefore not burdened with the obligation to look at the ethics of such behavior.


But perhaps the politically correct environmentalist should consider being a borrow and spend consumer which would reduce his lifetime ability to spend rather than seek to multiply that spending power and burdensome impact on Mother Earth.



Seattle Pioneer




Print the post Back To Top
Author: Volucris Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 716 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 1:46 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Isn't early retirement something that should be enjoyed only by grasping Republicans?

Nope.

Being an environmentalist doesn't mean you are anti consumption, at least in my case. It means that the resources that are used should be extracted with a little more care and thought than a clear cut or a strip mine. Sure, it costs more to get them out this way, but the true cost of environmental damage is seldom included when resources are extracted without regard for the environment.

For example, a silted up stream from a clear cut (Which the forest service used the proceeds from, and then some, to build a road to the clearcut), throw in a few cows (which are not paying the market rate for grazing) and you wipe out a fishery. Who pays for restoration of the fishery, if it ever is restored? Usually you do, Mr. Seattle Taxpayer. Who paid for the summitville mine cleanup? We all did, and we still are.



Print the post Back To Top
Author: cliff666 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 719 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 1:49 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
But it isn't relevant at all, intercst has clearly described his life to us, and he doesn't do such things. He still lives in a $540/mo apartment rather than a 4000 sq ft house

I amuse myself imagining a "frugal lifestyle" contest between intercst and SP. I think it would be close. I wouldn't even be in the same ball park.

cliff

Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 721 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 1:51 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1

I amuse myself imagining a "frugal lifestyle" contest between intercst and SP. I think it would be close. I wouldn't even be in the same ball park.

cliff




Awww Cliff -- everybody knows you are cheaper than a twoferone sale at Woolworth's. ;o)

AM

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 723 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 1:54 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
<<SeattlePioneer says

Is saving and investing environmentally correct behavior, or does it add large amounts of additional spending and consumption to fuel an industrial machine that rapes Mother Earth?

Not necessarily.

>>


That's an equivical answer at best. I'll even agree that it's possible to do so --- the person who suggested that they intended to live frugally and leave their surplus welath to a group to buy and maintain land might be an example of that.


But I doubt that most people are going to do that, as Angel May was candid enough to acknowledge.


How about suggesting the conditions under which wealth multiplication is ethically justified for politically correct environmentalists, and when it is not?


<<Can you be an environmentally correct liberal and ethically aim to retire early?

Yes.
>>


Now you are giving a blanket answer to a question you answered in a nuanced way before.


<<Don't people who borrow, pay interest and spend less over a lifetime live lighter on the earth, other things being equal?

Not necessarily
>>


A two word answer doesn't really do much to answer a complex question does it?




<<Isn't early retirement something that should be enjoyed only by grasping Republicans?

Why don't you run along and play somewhere else?
>>


Grasping Republicans like myself aren't concerned with being politically correct environmentalists, so we are not bound by the questions I raise.

It is politically correct liberals who must ponder such questions, and where better to do so than on the Retire Early Liberal Edition discussion board?



Seattle Pioneer







Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: cliff666 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 727 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 2:01 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
markr33: In fact, we only own 2 trash cans for the collection after a Monday holiday when there is no collection (so we have twice as much trash waiting) and even then we don't always need two trash cans. We also have 2 recycling bins that are collected, one for paper and the other for glass/plastic, and bundles of cardboard boxes (very rare, because I save cardboard boxes in my garage and try to give them away to people who are moving or otherwise require them).

We have similar containers. Black for garbage, green for lawn clippings, leaves, etc, and blue for recycle stuff. Because of our business, we accumulate a lot of cardboard every week. I want to find an environmentally friendly way to dispose of it. Maybe someone could even use it. We also generate a lot of paper, so our "blue" can is full every week, plus we have an extra one. We have a compost can which stays full, but there is still stuff in the green can (I believe the city has a huge compost pile somewhere.) Our black can is rarely more than half full, but the business does generate a certain amount of non-recyclable stuff.

cliff

Print the post Back To Top
Author: LB0507 Two stars, 250 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 734 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 2:15 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
Seattle Pioneer said:

And if you retire early, someone else is going to take your place, adding their carbon footprint to yours because you are no longer working but still consuming.

Since it is unlikely that the "someone else" will have suddenly materialized out of thin air, it is safe to say that the "someone else" is already leaving some sort of carbon footprint. The environmental impact is the difference between the combined footprint made by me and "someone else" after "someone else" takes my place versus what is was before.

While it is possible that the new combined footprint could be larger than the old one ("someone else's" income is now so much greater that he or she runs out and buys a Hummer and a McMansion - not terribly likely from taking my place), it is also possible that the combined footprint could be smaller ("someone else's" new commute is shorter than mine had been), or simply neutral ("someone else's" new footprint increases by the same amount that mine decreases).


Print the post Back To Top
Author: decath Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 738 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 2:22 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
I amuse myself imagining a "frugal lifestyle" contest between intercst and SP. I think it would be close. I wouldn't even be in the same ball park.

cliff



Awww Cliff -- everybody knows you are cheaper than a twoferone sale at Woolworth's. ;o)

AM


Any of you read Art's posts over on REHP? Now that is a cheapskate king if you have ever heard of one.

The dude will pick up road kill (selectively I might add) and take it home for freezing!

Try as I might, I just can't outdo him. He is my LBYM hero! <g>

decath

Print the post Back To Top
Author: sofaking6 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 739 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 2:25 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 44
The thing is SP often has very interesting things to say -- if you can ignore his comments about things that you may have a different opinion on -- women, children, marriage, politics, ad naeseum (sp?). I

Why is the burden on everyone else to change?

If my mom slapped me every time she gave me $20, I would stop taking $20 from her. Why accept "gifts" from SP when they all come with a punishment?

6

Print the post Back To Top
Author: cliff666 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 740 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 2:25 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
changed all the lightbulbs in her house to compact flourescents..

I didn't know there were light bulbs made from flour, or do they have flour inside? Are they really, really efficient?

Oh. Did you mean fluorescent?

cliff

Print the post Back To Top
Author: MDGluon Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 742 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 2:32 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Bingo.

I no longer desire to let trolls rob me of tha last vestiges of my sense of humor. If the entire board turns grey as a result, THEN I will give up. Until then I will respond to the people I find interesting.


Yep...you really don't ever need respond to the boor at the party I have found...they are self starters and require no priming or igniting.

lol.

md



Print the post Back To Top
Author: 0x6a74 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 743 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 2:32 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1

I didn't know there were light bulbs made from flour, or do they have flour inside? Are they really, really efficient?


they're really REALLY efficient .... and cheap

..downside is they don't give off any light.



(>;

Print the post Back To Top
Author: sykesix Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 744 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 2:39 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 52
Do you feel like any of that is a reaction to the neocon label, which is also woefully mis-applied?

I think it is symptomatic of something else, the decline of the intellectual conservative. Back in the day I used to watch Firing Line on PBS. The host was William F. Buckley, and quite obviously he was a smart guy. I disagreed with him at times of course, but it was worth hearing what he had to say. Same thing with a few of the older guys like George Will, Thomas Sowell, or even Pat Buchanan at times They've usually thought about what they are going to say. Usually their arguements were of the type: Here's my position. Here's why I think that. You might agree or disagree, but they did think about what they siad.

But those guys aren't the faces of conservative thought anymore. It is the hugely popular Rush, Ann Coulter, and Sean Hannity. Those are the people who really appeal to conservatives, and all their arguments are of the type: Liberals are evil/greedy/lazy and/or traitors.

That's really it, that's all they have to say. We've seen it in this thread. And of course the left participates in the same type of bomb throwing and invective, but no where close to the same level. There is no one like that on the left who has any where near the same level of popularity as Rush or Ann Coulter. A good thing, that.

Which brings us back to the queestion of why there seems to be a large group of people who seem to think every one to the left of George Bush is a communist. The reason is these people just don't know how to think about politics in any other way than the way Rush or Hannity do it.


Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: MDGluon Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 745 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 2:43 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
pretty much no one ever heard of a neocon until a couple years ago.

And to me Neo-Conservatives have more in common with hard core left communists/anarchists/libertarians than anyone else...in fact many of them wer hard core left politically and moved to the other extreme with little change in thier beahviors.

:)

md


Print the post Back To Top
Author: MDGluon Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 747 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 2:46 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Or are you suggesting that all Democrats are liberal? (It isn't true and I have proof).

Even though I've generally voted for Democrats, I can't bring myself to register as one. I want a replacement party. And no, I don't mean the Libertarians!

- Gus


Progressive Liberal Party would be nice.

md


Print the post Back To Top
Author: FoolYap Big funky green star, 20000 posts Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 748 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 2:47 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
they're really REALLY efficient .... and cheap

..downside is they don't give off any light.


But the upside is, they bake into compact biscuits when you turn them on. :-)

--FY

Print the post Back To Top
Author: MDGluon Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 750 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 2:50 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
I am raising the issue of whether it is ethical for the environmentally correct to use the power of compound interest to multiply their incomes in order to acquire more wealth, which is then usually spent on "stuff" of one kind or another which will usually burden Mother Earth.

Assumption...no proof of this.
Compound interest is a fiscal tool which may lead one to have the monetary resources to buy say solar power which will reduce ones energy footprint and impact the earth less.

And if you retire early, someone else is going to take your place, adding their carbon footprint to yours because you are no longer working but still consuming.

Assumption. Why do you believe this.

Grasping Republicans like myself

Oh get the chip off your shoulder and stop whining.

But perhaps the politically correct environmentalist should consider being a borrow and spend consumer which would reduce his lifetime ability to spend rather than seek to multiply that spending power and burdensome impact on Mother Earth.

Nonsense statement designed to inflame board and smear/insult posters here....of no real use or of interest.

Why are you here?

md



Print the post Back To Top
Author: FoolYap Big funky green star, 20000 posts Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 756 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 3:05 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Why are you here?

http://boards.fool.com/Message.asp?mid=25136572

--FY

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 0x6a74 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 757 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 3:06 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0


Nonsense statement designed to inflame board and smear/insult posters here....of no real use or of interest.

Why are you here?


rhetorical question?



=

Print the post Back To Top
Author: cliff666 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 758 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 3:07 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
FY: In our case, my "office space" is a tiny nook off the livingroom (sorry, "the social place to gather" :-). It's only about 5x7 feet. But, it has a door if I need privacy. It has a window, which prevents it from feeling too claustrophobic. It will eventually have a builtin desk and shelves (when I get around to building them).

I have been smirking a bit at this thread. We, two people and two cats, live in a 3000 sf house. Kinda wasteful, at first blush. The business does take about 800 sf, though. We have a spare bedroom which mostly sits unused, and another we use as a media room. (no TV permitted in the formal living room.) I have my own office, with a "turret room" off of one end, which we use as a music/reading room. (I have a clarinet. The cats, and Mrs 666 like me to be as far away as possible.)

3000 sf, 9 rooms. We may want to downsize when we retire. (Actually, we did downsize when we moved here. We had a 1500 sf house, 1950's vintage, before. It had a 180° ocean view, which made it very expensive by the square foot. So we sold it and moved here, and came out $300,000 ahead on the deal.) I realized that I could never retire with the house payments we had on that house.

cliff

Print the post Back To Top
Author: sofaking6 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 760 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 3:08 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
My impression is that things have gotten a lot more polarized in the last 6 years or so, and all sides are to blame.

You're very young, and very naive.

6

Print the post Back To Top
Author: whafa Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 762 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 3:12 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
You're very young, and very naive.

6


Do you think things have become LESS polarized in the last 6 years?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: FordLove Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 763 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 3:12 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Why are you here?

http://boards.fool.com/Message.asp?mid=25136572

--FY


Awe FY
I thought it was for the geriatric porn
Ah that Bea Arthur
Saucy!

Ford
Going to let Adrienne Retire before myself

Print the post Back To Top
Author: sofaking6 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 766 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 3:17 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I sure hope not! Or are you suggesting that all Democrats are liberal? (It isn't true and I have proof).

I'm just trying to understand the point that's being made, or is it just a nasty little snipe?

6

Print the post Back To Top
Author: sofaking6 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 769 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 3:25 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I am raising the issue of whether it is ethical for the environmentally correct to use the power of compound interest to multiply their incomes in order to acquire more wealth, which is then usually spent on "stuff" of one kind or another which will usually burden Mother Earth.

And if you retire early, someone else is going to take your place, adding their carbon footprint to yours because you are no longer working but still consuming.

Grasping Republicans like myself often don't subscribe to such values and are therefore not burdened with the obligation to look at the ethics of such behavior.


But perhaps the politically correct environmentalist should consider being a borrow and spend consumer which would reduce his lifetime ability to spend rather than seek to multiply that spending power and burdensome impact on Mother Earth.


I don't understand why you're asking that question here? Are you suggesting that I am "environmentally correct"? What is a "grasping" Republican? Why do you assume that someone enters the workforce only when another person retires? That's a very silly assumption. Can you provide some calcuations to show that over a lifetime, a person who saves more also spends more? That also seems like an incorrect assumption to me and I'd like to see it proven. Otherwise...you're just sniping and I'll have to FA that post.

6

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 777 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 3:39 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
<<But it isn't relevant at all, intercst has clearly described his life to us, and he doesn't do such things. He still lives in a $540/mo apartment rather than a 4000 sq ft house

I amuse myself imagining a "frugal lifestyle" contest between intercst and SP. I think it would be close. I wouldn't even be in the same ball park.

cliff >>


intercst made some great frugal moves, such as graduating from his engineering program in three years so he could gain a year of employment on the front end, getting him out the back end a year or more early as well.

And intercst has had some excellent investing results as well, more and bigger than mine.

I bow to intercst as Yoda among the Early Retired Jedi Knights.



Seattle Pioneer









Print the post Back To Top
Author: sofaking6 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 778 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 3:41 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 4
Do you think things have become LESS polarized in the last 6 years?

I would never claim to be totally objective, since obviously I have major ethical and political issues with the American right wing. However, I think I'm *at least* observant enough to see that the right (see the recent good post re: Rush and Coulter) is polarized to the point of insane, blind, ignorant hatred. The left has issues, no doubt, but the difference is massive and very obvious.

Example; the left would like to see Bush impeached, whereas the right would like to see all Democrats locked up in internment camps. That's a freaking depraved viewpoint, period.

6

Print the post Back To Top
Author: vickifool Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 786 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 3:55 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Just read the first post in this thread.

Cut it out, Seattle Pioneer!

I'm not going to play this game with you.
Vickifool

Print the post Back To Top
Author: cliff666 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 787 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 3:55 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
You're very young, and very naive.

6


Do you think things have become LESS polarized in the last 6 years?


I have theories (ok, postulates) about almost everything. My thought on this is that the polarization hinges around the Nixon years. Old tricky Dick and his dirty tricks were the first, or at least the first I noticed, of the sort of smear campaigns the like of which we see today. But mud-slinging is as old as politics. Wasn't invented yesterday.

I think the conservatives were so enraged by the investigations into Nixon's illegal activities that they seethe with rage until yet. The Clinton impeachment was a totally transparent payback for Nixon, don't you think?

Rove &co cut their teeth on the Nixon years. They raised a generation of neo-cons who are conditioned to see things as conservative vs evil.

Recognizing, as usual, that I may be FOS.

cliff

Print the post Back To Top
Author: FoolYap Big funky green star, 20000 posts Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 789 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 3:59 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I have been smirking a bit at this thread. We, two people and two cats, live in a 3000 sf house. Kinda wasteful, at first blush.

Oh, I'm certainly not trying to make any points about big homes, just happens that my "office" is tiny. And by "office", I don't mean that it's used for a home business (though I have hopes to be transitioning to work-at-home this month, so it will be then).

I'd love a turret myself. :-) We have often said that if we could change anything about this house, we'd build slightly bigger than the ~1800 sf it is.

--FY

Print the post Back To Top
Author: FoolYap Big funky green star, 20000 posts Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 791 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 4:01 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Going to let Adrienne Retire before myself

Nice of you to volunteer.

Er, or was it a directive? :-]

--FY

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 0x6a74 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 794 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 4:09 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0


Example; the left would like to see Bush impeached, whereas the right would like to see all Democrats locked up in internment camps. That's a freaking depraved viewpoint, period.



dunno about depraved, but it IS a distinction



(>:

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 795 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 4:10 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
<<Seattle Pioneer said:

And if you retire early, someone else is going to take your place, adding their carbon footprint to yours because you are no longer working but still consuming.

Since it is unlikely that the "someone else" will have suddenly materialized out of thin air, it is safe to say that the "someone else" is already leaving some sort of carbon footprint. The environmental impact is the difference between the combined footprint made by me and "someone else" after "someone else" takes my place versus what is was before.

While it is possible that the new combined footprint could be larger than the old one ("someone else's" income is now so much greater that he or she runs out and buys a Hummer and a McMansion - not terribly likely from taking my place), it is also possible that the combined footprint could be smaller ("someone else's" new commute is shorter than mine had been), or simply neutral ("someone else's" new footprint increases by the same amount that mine decreases).>>


That may be what happens, or perhaps another immigrant will wind up entering the United States to fill another hole in the labor force.

The labor force is tight enough that there are not a lot of people corporations are anxious to hire waiting around with nothing else to do until the boss whistles.

In general, I think we've seen immigration expand whenever large numbers of employers wanted more people from which to pick and choose. Have a shortage of nurses and very likely new green cards will be available for Phillippino nurses. Need more Docs --- India has lots of docs interested in immigrating to the United States. Short a bunch of IT professionals ---I bet there are a number of people who can tell us about that.


I think it's fair to say that there are substantial costs to the economy when someone like intercst retires in his 30s. As a grasping Republican, that doesn't bother me. But perhaps it should trouble an environmentally correct liberal who is contemplating a decision to retire early.


Thank you for a good post, the best objection to the title of this thread so far.



Seattle Pioneer

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: tootru Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 797 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 4:13 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I knew there was a reason I married you.

Can we retire to Baja yet?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 0x6a74 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 798 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 4:15 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0

I have theories (ok, postulates) about almost everything. My thought on this is that the polarization hinges around the Nixon years. Old tricky Dick and his dirty tricks were the first, or at least the first I noticed, of the sort of smear campaigns the like of which we see today. But mud-slinging is as old as politics. Wasn't invented yesterday.

I think the conservatives were so enraged by the investigations into Nixon's illegal activities that they seethe with rage until yet. The Clinton impeachment was a totally transparent payback for Nixon, don't you think?


yes..... as to the payback.

but over all, i think there's more continuum....

Nixon tricks were payback for JFK tricks
Reagan was payback for FDR
Newt was payback for LBJ/dem Congresses....

...divisiveness is common to American history, a singing pendulum & we're about a decade from the extreme end of this swing.


IMO


=

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jgc123 Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 799 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 4:16 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"If my mom slapped me every time she gave me $20, I would stop taking $20 from her. Why accept "gifts" from SP when they all come with a punishment?

6"

I've missed you at AF, 6.


Print the post Back To Top
Author: sofaking6 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 801 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 4:16 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Can we retire to Baja yet?


I've heard very recently that some Asian banks will secure loans against lots in Mexico, as long as there is income property on it. I'm looking into it...

6

Print the post Back To Top
Author: sofaking6 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 802 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 4:17 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I've missed you at AF, 6.

Missed you too...you know how the trolls get to me though.

6

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jgc123 Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 803 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 4:18 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
"Oh. Did you mean fluorescent?

cliff"

I've probably been greeked, but now that you have teased somebody else about their spelling, did you look up ophthalmologist yet?



Print the post Back To Top
Author: feedmeNOWhuman Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 805 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 4:20 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
If my mom slapped me every time she gave me $20, I would stop taking $20 from her. Why accept "gifts" from SP when they all come with a punishment?


$20 a slap isn't bad. Ten slaps a day and I'm making $50k a year.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 807 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 4:23 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
<<But those guys aren't the faces of conservative thought anymore. It is the hugely popular Rush, Ann Coulter, and Sean Hannity. Those are the people who really appeal to conservatives, and all their arguments are of the type: Liberals are evil/greedy/lazy and/or traitors.>>


These are conservative commentators who are talking to the new conservative working class. William F Buckley and George Will are fine for addressing a more ducated audience, but they aren't going to reach that working class audience.


Jessie Jackson, Al Shapton and George Wallace are (were) Democrats who were able to address similar working class or lower class audiences effectively.




Seattle Pioneer

Print the post Back To Top
Author: cliff666 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 810 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 4:26 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"Oh. Did you mean fluorescent?

cliff"

I've probably been greeked, but now that you have teased somebody else about their spelling, did you look up ophthalmologist yet?


Hey! It ain't nice to make fun of old people what can't see! Or type. Or can't proof read. Or sometimes can't put in a h which doesn't even look like it belongs.

cliff

Print the post Back To Top
Author: sykesix Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 811 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 4:27 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I think the conservatives were so enraged by the investigations into Nixon's illegal activities that they seethe with rage until yet. The Clinton impeachment was a totally transparent payback for Nixon, don't you think?

I don't think so. The reason Nixon stepped down is because he didn't have support from his own party. I think it was inexperience mixed with hubris. I'm reminded of an old quote made by Maharbal, one of Hannibal's commanders: Vincere scis, Hannibal; victoria uti nescis You know how to gain a victory Hannibal, not how to use it.

Gingrich et. al. gained power but didn't know how to use it. Gingrich assumed the thing to do was to destroy everything in his path, including Clinton. Clinton survived the blow and when the smoke cleared Clinton had Reagan-esque approval ratings and Gingrich was out of a job.

Note the Pelosi and Reid are careful to stay away from impeachment talk and take pains to at least give lip service to bipartisanship. We haven't seen that in while. It is because they don't want to repeat the mistakes of Gingrich over reaching. Notice even Gingrich of today is not nearly the bomb thrower he once was.





Print the post Back To Top
Author: sofaking6 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 813 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 4:29 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
$20 a slap isn't bad. Ten slaps a day and I'm making $50k a year.

TMJ treatment will cost you a good portion of that.

6

Print the post Back To Top
Author: MDGluon Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 816 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 4:29 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Why are you here?


rhetorical question?


:)

No...not really....it is an important philosophical question we each should be able to answer and honestly answer.

I rarely really ask "rhetorical questions" even when asking "rhetorical questions".

md



Print the post Back To Top
Author: ResNullius Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 817 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 4:36 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Notice even Gingrich of today is not nearly the bomb thrower he once was.

Possibly because he no longer holds the job of chief bomb thrower, which is what the minority does in the House, regardless of Party affiliation.


Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 818 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 4:37 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
<<I am raising the issue of whether it is ethical for the environmentally correct to use the power of compound interest to multiply their incomes in order to acquire more wealth, which is then usually spent on "stuff" of one kind or another which will usually burden Mother Earth.

Assumption...no proof of this.
Compound interest is a fiscal tool which may lead one to have the monetary resources to buy say solar power which will reduce ones energy footprint and impact the earth less.
>>


Most of the solar power being touted to tie into the grid isn't economic and is only popular because other electric rate payers and taxpayers are heavily subsidizing installations.


No doubt there are environmentally friendly ways to spend money --- one poster suggested that he lived frugally now and intended to donate his estate to Nature Conservancy or similar groups when he died. That would seem to meet the objection I have posed in this thread.


But probably not many people are intending to do that, and I think it's very likely that much of the increased wealth people earn through investments will in fact wind up burdening Mother Earth one way or another.



Seattle Pioneer

Print the post Back To Top
Author: vickifool Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 819 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 4:38 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I've found that it is almost universal that the "saver" uses less energy and resources than the "spender" does. I am an ardent conservationist (I like the word "environmentalist", but it has been hijacked by the far left, otherwise I could easily be one) and when someone asks me what are the best things they can do to save our environment, one of my main recommendations is "save money". Think about it, buying a smaller, more fuel efficient car, generally saves money ... and saves resources. Same for buying a smaller home, and same for downsizing other consumer desires.

I don't think it has anything to do with liberal or conservative (two terms that have been so distorted in recent years, the conservatives losing their values of responsibility, and the liberals losing their values of freedom). When it comes to individuals, those who spend less, on average, generally use less energy.


Also, folks who spend less generally create less waste to dispose of in landfills.

Vickifool

Print the post Back To Top
Author: vickifool Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 821 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 4:43 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
High rates of saving and investing can be expected to greatly increase the money people have to spend over a lifetime. Spending on almost anything tends to run the economy harder and use more resources. So the question I raise is a serious one that "green" early retirees should have an answer for, in my opinion.

This is true ONLY if you assume that all spending uses resources. What's that organization that buys and sets aside land?

I'm surprised at the hostile non response of others to this question.

No you aren't. You put the inflammatory stuff in your posts on purpose.
I've seen you do it too many times.

Wise-to-SP-tricks-Vickifool

Print the post Back To Top
Author: vickifool Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 822 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 4:49 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
But because intercst is no longer working some other engineer with a presumably average carbon footprint/spending pattern has taken his place to do the work intercst no longer does.

Unless you created that other engineer yourself, that other engineer is taking up no more or less carbon footprint than s/he would have in whatever job s/he would have had if it wasn't intercst's job.


Vickifool

Print the post Back To Top
Author: vickifool Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 823 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 4:51 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
All the money we have left when we die goes to places like the Nature Conservancy and the Sierra Club.

Nature Conservancy! Thanks, Ted. That's the name I couldn't remember.

That's because all my charity money goes to women's organizations.

Vickifool

Print the post Back To Top
Author: vickifool Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 825 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 4:58 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
In the current house which we designed and built, we do have a very small living room on the first floor, but it's original purpose was to be a 2nd guest room on the first floor. That was because my mother couldn't climb stairs, so it was not possible for her to stay over at my house without having a room on the first floor for that. To solve this, we added french doors and window shades to the living room and bought a really nice sleep sofa. For a few years when my son was playing the saxophone, we let him use the living room as his music room.


Our living room is mostly the music room, too. We have a baby grand piano, a keyboard, guitars, autoharps and a dulcimer in there. We have the sheet music there. We have a sleeper sofa for guests, too.

In March, I will host a concert there.

Vickifool

Print the post Back To Top
Author: vickifool Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 827 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 5:00 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0

Yes, and good suggestions, too.
The problem with the plans that I saw was that the family room and living room were both big open spaces adjacent to the kitchen and to each other -- almost like one continuous room that sort of went around a corner. Almost no way to make something useful out of the extra one.

If the designs had been such that the living room was more isolated from the kitchen/family room, it would be lots easier to turn it into an office/library or something.

But I think you have a good idea -- it just doesn't work for most of the plans that I was seeing.

AM


Headphones might fix that.

My family likes to be near each other. I guess we're a pack.

Vickifool

Print the post Back To Top
Author: ResNullius Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 831 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 5:09 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Our living room is mostly the music room, too. We have a baby grand piano, a keyboard, guitars, autoharps and a dulcimer in there. We have the sheet music there. We have a sleeper sofa for guests, too.

That sounds like a most wonderful room. My music room is my home office, where I have a guitar, a dulcimer, and a banjo. Music is an important part of life. I love to play and to listen. We have a local jazz society that brings in traveling groups the second Sunday night of each month. The meeting place is a local bar/restaurant. We have several fine jam joints, where the best bluegrass music in the world can be heard. There's a BBQ joint nearby, which has great Blues every Friday and Saturday. The local university in a nearby town has all kinds of great stuff going on. Given that I live in a village of 1200 in the NC mountains, we have a quite a lot of alternatives for putting the fingers and ears to work.


Print the post Back To Top
Author: vickifool Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 833 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 5:13 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Ad nauseum. It's a tough word. So tough, in fact, that ieSpell doesn't recognize the correct spelling.

I bet it will recognize ad nauseam, which is the correct spelling.


That's a really hard word!

Vickifool -- doubt I'll remember it either.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: vickifool Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 834 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 5:15 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Even though I've generally voted for Democrats, I can't bring myself to register as one.

Me too.

Vickifool

Print the post Back To Top
Author: MDGluon Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 835 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 5:15 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Most of the solar power being touted to tie into the grid isn't economic and is only popular because other electric rate payers and taxpayers are heavily subsidizing installations.

Data?
We still heavily subsidize coal even to this day, especially by ignoring the overall environmental cost which should include the long term high cost of global warming.

Most solar AFAIK is not heavily subsidized and is actually with the newer technology competitive with both unsubsidized coal and unsubsidized nuclear energy (being around ~8-12 cents per kilowatt hour. Solar research was effectively killed by temporary low oil prices, bought politicians, and poorly thought out credits which were both not aimed at the correct level of production/use and rewarded fly by night outfits.

Even a subsidy today make sense.....after all we have subsidized every stage of our energy development over time with public dollars and the passing on of the environmental costs to future generations.

Oil is our most compact per unit energy resource yet is limited and we would be wise to ue the time to develop a more distributed and varied energy economy. Natural gas is better but also limited and has environmental costs of the extraction processes which we ignore or are willfully blind to (ask the ranchers of Wyoming about it).

Solar will address many initial needs, and costs will drop with volume use and be competative if the true costs of coal is factored in....coal even with the best of new technology is inneficient, a high CO2 contributor, and generates many toxic pollutants such as mercury and flyash.

Geothermal is a potential yet the time frame to develop is probably a realistic 10-15 years and nuclear is no better for both development timeframes and the problem of waste disposal and fuel limitations.

Hydro, big hydro is finished due to a lack of useful sites which can pay back even a 100 year return and because the projected drying of the U.S. will reduce the ability to generate anything.

Micro-hydro still can be developed although it is limited.

Bio-mass is limited and care must be taken to avoid leakage of natural gas (methane) which has a very large "forcing" factor as a greenhouse gas.

Wind is also a good development, and many of the bird issues have been addressed, although again some subsidization is needed for initial infrastructure build out.

A mix of many instead of a "silver bullet" is really what is needed and we as a civlization need to avoid being tied into and ruled by the three large players (oil, natural gas, coal). Our short, medium, and long term civilizations cannot afford the short sighted view that profits are the only goal and that we have time enough to waste.

After all would you advise someone to wait till they are 65 to begin saving for retirement?

Would you wait till you are at deaths door before doing what the doctor said could heal you?

But probably not many people are intending to do that, and I think it's very likely that much of the increased wealth people earn through investments will in fact wind up burdening Mother Earth one way or another.

An assumption which is only true if we continue to promote and extoll a consumeristic growth society which is likely to destroy our environment, our society, our civilization, and our world (at least in ways that can support all of us).

This is an education matter and a bad learned behavior not a forgone conclusion...people can be taught, be encouraged, and be convinced to change...especially when it will cost so little in the way of altering our lifestyles.

I think you give people too little credit for being both able and willing to alter lifestyles to both save themselves and create a better world for those that come after us.

To help reduce the problem and improve our world with respect to our "footprint" does not require living in a mud hut and being naked, it does require passing by the rhetoric and looking at the data and best actions available.

Consider...

..how hard is it to change your lights to CFL's
..how hard is it to buy, install, and save $$$ from a solar water heater.
..how hard is it to carpool 2-3 times a week.
..how hard to grow a environmentally kind garden.
..how hard is it to bike to work in an urban area.
..how hard is it to dry your clothes on a "solar powered rack".
..how hard is it to push for better public transit to lower the "road load" (and then use it).
..how hard is it to not buy so much of the crap being offered.
..how hard is it to recycle energy intensive materials such as aluminum.

..how hard is it to vote for those who say "we can fix it" (and they try) compared to those that whine that "we cannot change it" (and won't).

Not much cost in any of these yet over time with many willing and edumacated minds large changes will happen. And really all of the above are "conservative" ideas and viewpoints which are also "liberal" ideas.....what they are not is Consumerative ideas.

Just my view.

md




Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: sykesix Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 836 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 5:15 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
These are conservative commentators who are talking to the new conservative working class. William F Buckley and George Will are fine for addressing a more ducated audience, but they aren't going to reach that working class audience.

Jessie Jackson, Al Shapton and George Wallace are (were) Democrats who were able to address similar working class or lower class audiences effectively.


That is sort of my point. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have their followers among liberals but in no sense have anything near the widespread appeal that say, Ann Coulter or Rush Limbaugh have among conservatives. The Hannity/Coulter/Limbaugh types have come to dominate conservative viewpoints.





Print the post Back To Top
Author: vickifool Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 840 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 5:29 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Any of you read Art's posts over on REHP? Now that is a cheapskate king if you have ever heard of one.

The dude will pick up road kill (selectively I might add) and take it home for freezing!

Try as I might, I just can't outdo him. He is my LBYM hero! <g>

decath


Did you ever see a roadkilled vegetable?
I think you are definitely at a disadvantage there, as a Vegan.

Vickifool


Print the post Back To Top
Author: cliff666 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 841 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 5:29 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
MD: Solar will address many initial needs, and costs will drop with volume use and be competative if the true costs of coal is factored in....coal even with the best of new technology is inneficient, a high CO2 contributor, and generates many toxic pollutants such as mercury and flyash.

These folks seem to have a good product, but it's still under development.

http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/nanosolar-friends/

I would love to buy their stock, if it were available to the public.

cliff

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 0x6a74 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 844 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 5:33 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0

Did you ever see a roadkilled vegetable?
I think you are definitely at a disadvantage there, as a Vegan.


i've known people i thought just fell off the turnip truck.... would that be a roadkill vegetable?



=

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 853 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 6:02 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
<<High rates of saving and investing can be expected to greatly increase the money people have to spend over a lifetime. Spending on almost anything tends to run the economy harder and use more resources. So the question I raise is a serious one that "green" early retirees should have an answer for, in my opinion.

This is true ONLY if you assume that all spending uses resources. What's that organization that buys and sets aside land?>>


Nature Conservancy? Someone in this thread already reported that they lived frugally and intended to leave their estate to Nature Conservancy type groups when they died.


I agreed that that would be a good way to avoid having that wealth effect spill over into more consumption.


But how many people will do that? I suggest that most wealth is going to be spent in ways that will burden Mother Earth. Politically correct environmentalists who use compound interest to multiply their wealth are likely to be burdening the earth by creating and ultimately spending that extra wealth.

So Vickifool, may I ask what you intend to do with your well gotten capital gains?



Seattle Pioneer



Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 854 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 6:06 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
<<All the money we have left when we die goes to places like the Nature Conservancy and the Sierra Club.

Nature Conservancy! Thanks, Ted. That's the name I couldn't remember.

That's because all my charity money goes to women's organizations.

Vickifool
>>


But it's a pretty safe bet that most charrities, probably including the ones you give to are going to be spending your money buying goods and services that will consume resources and burden Mother Earth.


That's my point. If environmentally correct liberals multiply their wealth using compound interest, they will be multiplying the burden they place on the earth. How can they do that in good conscience?




Seattle Pioneer

Print the post Back To Top
Author: sykesix Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 855 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 6:22 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
That's my point. If environmentally correct liberals multiply their wealth using compound interest, they will be multiplying the burden they place on the earth. How can they do that in good conscience?

That much money can buy the blood of a lot of Christian babies.



Print the post Back To Top
Author: sofaking6 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 856 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 6:25 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
That much money can buy the blood of a lot of Christian babies.

Financing abortion on a large scale is fantastic for the environment.

6

Print the post Back To Top
Author: tootru Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 857 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 6:26 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I'm looking into it...

::swoon::

Print the post Back To Top
Author: FordLove Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 858 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 6:37 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Going to let Adrienne Retire before myself

Nice of you to volunteer.

Er, or was it a directive? :-]


Nah, I just have a lot better earning potential

When we get to a point where we can meet our saving goals on my salary alone, then she will be free to do as she likes.

She's rather LBYM anyway, where my money burns a hole through my pocket. I've got my Direct Deposits split so I can't "see" most of my money. I'm awful with the cash that I can see, but that isn't most of what I make.

Ford

Print the post Back To Top
Author: tedhimself Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 865 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 7:07 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
SP: Well, your post included the following:

<<Huhhh?
Environmentally correct liberals live in smaller more energy efficient houses, don't buy big honking cars, and save money rather than buying big boats and other manufactured items that waste earth's resources.

Weren't you saying that we grasping Republicans spent our money in evil ways compared to environmentally correct liberals?

SP< I did not mention either the words "conservatives" or "republicans" even one time in my post. If you think that a post concerning liberals must include a dismissal of conservatives then I simply don't know how to try to communicate with you.
Ted- giving up.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: vickifool Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 868 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 7:26 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
But how many people will do that? I suggest that most wealth is going to be spent in ways that will burden Mother Earth. Politically correct environmentalists who use compound interest to multiply their wealth are likely to be burdening the earth by creating and ultimately spending that extra wealth.

So you say. I say "not necessarily." I will do a less damage spending it than most others would. And since when have you honored "Mother Earth?"

Are you calling me "politically correct?" I'll be the judge of that.

Are you referring to my Retire Early stash as "extra wealth?" Again, that's my call.



So Vickifool, may I ask what you intend to do with your well gotten capital gains?


Buy a bicycle and come visit you! <grin>


If I didn't think you were just trying to cause trouble (mostly by your choice of terms), this could be an interesting discussion. But this probably isn't the board for it.
May I suggest "It's So Easy Living Green?"
http://boards.fool.com/Messages.asp?bid=117715

The right question isn't the one you are asking.
It's "How do we act as responsible stewards of the land?" and
"What does wealth enable us to do to conserve and heal the Earth?"

Vickifool



Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: vickifool Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 869 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 7:34 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
And we've already discussed that early retirement is a legal way to avoid paying huge amounts of taxes. I've estimated that quitting regular employment at age 49 (even though not retiring completely) probably will wind up costing the government $150,000 in tax revenue they now wont collect.

And one of my important motivations to retire completely is that I feel like the tax man is the primary beneficiary of my labors, since I've been financially independent since 1999 at least.


The government (Dept. of Defense, for example) isn't very good at taking care of the environment. That's why it's better for people concerned about the environment to Retire Early and become the stewards of more of their own money.

Vickifool



Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 870 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 7:41 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
<<If I didn't think you were just trying to cause trouble (mostly by your choice of terms), this could be an interesting discussion.>>


I spent a good deal of time thinking up a thread topic that would really involve early retirement and liberal political values. How many other can say as much with the posts on this board today?

And I have considered every serious post and replied in a thoughtful manner, and refused to be baited by the considerable number of people who merely wanted to vent their spleens.


I don't know why you would call that causing trouble. My aim has been to treat this board and the people interested in talking about the idea I suggested with respect, and I think I have done that today.


Seattle Pioneer

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 871 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 7:44 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
<<And one of my important motivations to retire completely is that I feel like the tax man is the primary beneficiary of my labors, since I've been financially independent since 1999 at least.

The government (Dept. of Defense, for example) isn't very good at taking care of the environment. That's why it's better for people concerned about the environment to Retire Early and become the stewards of more of their own money.

Vickifool

>>


Heh, heh! I guess we share an aversion to handing over our wealth to the tax man.




Seattle Pioneer

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Jim2B Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 879 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 8:04 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
The government (Dept. of Defense, for example) isn't very good at taking care of the environment.

Now I'd bet quite a bit on the fact that the environmental impact of money spent through the DoD is, by far, more carefully managed and controlled than the money spent through say Social Security.

Jim

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Jim2B Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 880 of 63316
Subject: Re: Is Early Retirement Environmentally Correct? Date: 2/6/2007 8:11 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later |