Do you consider retirement the same as quitting?

Do you consider retirement the same as quitting?


  • Total voters
    15
I'm looking forward to the day I get to retire. Folks can call me anything they want as I flip them off walking out the door to freedom. :lol:
 
No. These guys were both way old and they have both been in Congress too long by any measure.


Even if they were Republicans, I would think they have been there too long. Retirement is good.

Anyone know their ages? I think they are both mid 70's..?
 
I'm retired. I highly recommend it. Things worked out for me the way I had always planned them - that is to retire at age 55. However, after I retired I started to fall apart physically. Retirement isn't the same thing as quitting to me, or in my case. I planned on the age I could retire and met that goal. However, when I reached that age and obtained that goal, I quit.
 
Not that I am not glad to see both of these guys gone, mind you. But to call them quitters is bad manners.
 
Quitting means you're still in the game.

Retirement means you're done.
 
Hmmm...

Isn't it fascinating that PatekPhillipe has not chimed in yet?

I wonder if he refers to RGS as QGS?
 
Retirement is not the same as quitting.

In quitting, you stop somewhere before the job is done.

In retirement, you stop WHEN the job is done, and they give you a reward in the form of a pension.

I retired at 38. Didn't plan it that way at first, but, when I saw that I was somewhere around halfway through, I thought back to the previous 10 years, and said......shit.......ain't a bad life, takes me cool places, and they promise to give me a check for the rest of my life if I can stay alive for the next 10.

At that point, I said "I'm in".

And, there is something nice about being able to go sit in the middle of the park, drinking a beer at 1:00 in the afternoon on a Wednesday or Monday afternoon, thinking about all the things I did to get there, while the other poor saps are just now getting back to work, and looking forward to several more days of the same.

Nope. Retirement is much different.

But........because congress critters have no set amount of time? When they leave, it's quitting.
 
Last edited:
But........because congress critters have no set amount of time? When they leave, it's quitting.

So that means that they must continue to run for office until they are defeated or they die, otherwise they are quitters?

I guess that is an interesting way of looking at it.

But, then again, what job has a "set amount of time"?
 
Please vote and discuss.

There is a sub-category of "retirement" called "semi-retired" and that's my category. I was a home-builder and land developer for 36 years (1970-2006) and wasn't able to earn enough along the way to set aside any sizeable retirement; just enough to divide up over my remaining time to supplement a nominal monthly SS check.

But this situation has enabled me to approach work and the marketplace differently than before: Now I can take new jobs or turn them down with much less angst and anxiety about not having bid low enough to get every one. Also, I only take jobs I can do alone or that I can get help from casual laborers; those who can free up time for some extra money or as a favor to be returned later. In this way I don't have regular employees, something which has greatly reduced my business insurance costs. (Still, when my wife saw my most recent annual insurance premium she commented that in her opinion I didn't earn enough money to pay it)

I still bid against myself to a degree by being concerned too high a price will drive a past customer to find someone else for future potential projects.
 
As for the politicians "quitting" they will not really retire. They'll become lobbyists, and sell influence, making as much money as they ever have. But they are getting out of the elective office arena, and the more the better; it shows the vulnerability of their ideas and what they have stood for.
 
Last edited:
As for the politicians "quitting" they will not really retire. They'll become lobbyists, and sell influence, making as much money as they ever have. But they are getting out of the elective office arena, and the more the better; it shows the vulnerability of their ideas and what they have stood for.

Not necessarily
 
But........because congress critters have no set amount of time? When they leave, it's quitting.

So that means that they must continue to run for office until they are defeated or they die, otherwise they are quitters?

I guess that is an interesting way of looking at it.

But, then again, what job has a "set amount of time"?

Hey..........they're the ones that started the whole mess. Think about it.......what are campaign funds best known as?

War chests.

How do you win a war? Keep ruling until you die, and then, have a successor who will carry on your system of rule. See Castro for that one.

Anything else is a coup or a defeat. No. Politicians do not "retire", they quit.

Is there a job that has a "set amount of time"? Yep. It's called the U.S. Military. Conditions are that you serve honorably, make rank at the appropriate time points, and live long enough.

Do it for 20 years? You retire with a pension and a whole butt ton of marketable skills, so that if you decide to go for another retirement, you can.

Me? After 20 years of being a recruiting poster/water walker, decided I wanted to see what the other side was like and became a tie dye, sandal wearing hippie with long hair.

I like to maintain balance in my life. And.......best part is, I have to be a hippie until 2022.
 
This thread needs shades of gray. Retirement is not quitting, but with some politicians they see the writing on the wall and want to go out on top. It's better than defeat.
With my retirement, I just wanted to get out alive. :lol:
 

Forum List

Back
Top