Retirement

My wife and I have been pondering recently the feasibility of the American cultural value of retirement.  Specifically the idea that one is supposed to work hard and pay their dues so that when they reach 65 they can retire and not work for the rest of their lives.  We have been meeting with financial planners in the last month who have been trying to sell us this dream and give us their best advice on how to get there.  We have come to think, however, that there may be some flaws in their assumptions.  First of all the amount of money that would be required to cease working after 65 would be unrealistically large if one were planning to live off of the interest alone.  In order to keep up our standard of living with 1 car in a 2 bedroom (really 1) apartment with all the trappings of daily life we would need around $500,000-$750,000, assuming that we would earn a 6% return each year.(My parents suggest I would need 1-2 million)  And that would not be the kind of retirement that many Americans dream of which includes living in florida, eating out, traveling when they feel like it or buying big toys.  Many people I would assume have discovered that this is not realistic and have saved up equity in their home enough to sell it off and, with the interest on that plus supplements from social security, eek out a living.  Another method of retiring is by doing what my father is doing and working at the same job for 30 years and getting a pension for the rest of his life.  Neither of these last options sounds appealing for us since Social Security may not exist by the time we retire and neither of us is planning on working at the same job for 30 years.

Yet despite the lack of feasibility for us to save enough, this dream is based on recent cultural assumptions that have been lacking for the majority of human history and for the majority of current cultures around the world.  A major factor behind this manner of retirement is due to the cultural value of not burdening our children with caring for their elders and conversely valuing not having to care for your elders.  I can see the appeal of this sentiment since I would neither enjoy changing my parent's diapers or having my children change mine.  Yet, I wonder if something is culturally lost if we follow this idea.  Does this create more distance in our families? Does it teach us to not take responsibility for others?  The rest of the world seems to take caring for your elderly as a matter of course.  

It is also interesting that it is a recent idea that people would stop working before they were no longer able to.  I grant that the increase in the life span has complicated things where people live a lot longer after they are no longer able to work, which gets expensive.  Yet the model that most Americans seem to be shooting for is based off of rich CEOs who can afford to not work after 65.  This model would not be applicable to most Americans nor I would argue sustainable for our society.  

So here is our plan.  Firstly, if we have children, we need to teach them that it is our value as a family to care for our elderly and model this with our own parents. (They won't care for us if we ship our parents to the nursing home :) )  Secondly, We plan on working until we can no longer work.  Thirdly, we see the need for rest from work as important in order to maintain sanity and quality of life so we propose the idea of a "Sabbatical" every 7 years.  After saving enough money over seven years of hard work we would have a year long break to reflect, rejuvenate, and plan the next part of our lives. (And get excited about working again.)  If we start this plan when we are 30 we will have 7 sabbaticals before we are eighty.  Over this 50 yr span we would need to save roughly $280,000 (assuming $40,000 saved for each sabbatical yr,~$6,000 saved each yr), about the equivalent of a nice suburban home.  

One potential difficulty I forsee would be getting hired again after our sabbatical year.  We both have fairly marketable qualifications and are in careers where I think it would be possible, yet the older we would get the more difficult it may be to be hired by companies.  It would also be difficult to save $6000 per year especially if we had children and limited our income to one provider.  Also I have yet to do the math on what would get us more bang for our buck in terms of if we were to invest $6,000 in the stock market every year.   We will keep thinking about this one.  :)

Beyond Critique

A terrifying thought has recently occurred to me. The kind of thought that makes one wonder if the ground they are standing upon is really there or if they are who they believe themselves to be. Recently, Marta and I have been pondering examples in our life of individuals or groups claiming that they are following the will of God. The scary thing is that once someone or a group of people claim that what they are doing is the will of God, they are guaranteed an air tight, waterproof theological barrier around their actions.

For example. Let us say that there is a plot of swamp land down the street selling for really cheap and I am looking to build a house. I spend some time in prayer and ask God if I should buy the land or not (I really want to, it is such a good deal). And then, I discern that God says yes. First of all, no one has any real good reason to deny my claims because there is nothing in his "general will" or revelation against buying swampland. One could maybe bring up that it is not very wise to buy swampland and will be very difficult to build a house but then I would counter that I am the wise one here for getting such a great deal. (I would also say that it worked for Walt Disney :) )

Now let's say that I go to build my house and it turns out that I need to haul in extra rock and soil to lay a solid foundation in the swamp or the house will sink. This puts me back an extra $40,000 but in the grand scheme of things, I am still coming out on top. This is what we would call a "test of faith" or a "trial/tribulation" which could come from God or from Satan trying to throw me off of this amazing blessing God has for us. Then another snag. I find I need to buy a special sewer system for the house that will put me over the amount I would have spent on a house on a normal piece of land. I start to have doubts at this point whether this was a good idea, but they are fleeting and I am at this point, too commited to turn back, besides I have already told my church and all my friends that this is the will of God and my entire reputation would be ruined if I said that I was wrong.

So I keep going. I start to build my house, but it turns out that the foundation I laid wasn't good enough and part of it sinks leaving me with a pretty crooked frame. So I have to pay more money to place more rocks into the foundation and fix the frame again. Clearly, a test of my faith. I have to take out a second mortgage on the house and get another job to pay for it. A friend of mine asks me if I still think it was God's will for me to build this house. First I tell him that I will pray for his lack of faith and secondly, that following God's will is worth more than any amount of money. God judges success not by human standards but by his own standards right?

Now, this story could end in a couple of different ways. 1.) I end up completing the house and have a pretty nice house that cost me twice as much as any other comparable house on the market. I also have the satisfaction of following God's will to completion.
2.) I go into bankruptcy and lose the home. I either blame those brief moments of doubting I had earlier or say that this was merely a test that God had put me through to make sure that I would follow him 100%.

What concerns me here is that there is often not a possibility for someone to admit they are wrong about discerning God's will. Once it has been announced or decided that this is God's will, it seems like it pretty much has to be carried out to completion regardless of the outcome. There is not a lot of grace in our culture for someone who admits that they were wrong, both from others and towards themselves. This individual would face the ruin of their reputation, and mockery from others as well as lose confidence in their own level of faith and ability to discern god's will. But, who am I to say? Maybe there are some times when God does want me to build on a swamp. Yet I suspect there are a lot of people out there building on swamps that don't have to be.

Counterscript (I)

Last Saturday, the Storks' Nest once again became a bustling seat of activity as our home filled up with some of our favorite people in the world, gathered once again to remember the story we have all chosen to live by, and to nurture one another as we all seek to follow the alternative scenario of the kingdom of God.

Those gathered in our living room come from various religious traditions - some have been raised in Evangelical megachurches, some graduated from a Pentecostal Bible college, others grew up Catholic, were part of a house church, watched preachers on TV or attended liberal churches with a strong emphasis on social justice. We've gravitated towards each other not just in reaction to our respective traditions - although we do vary in our level of criticism towards where we came from and openly bring those to the table, open to the realization that we've each been equipped with a set of key questions, commitments and preconceptions.

What pulls us together is a common sense that the dominant scripts of our culture, including the religious ones, fail to deliver the safety and happiness they promise. At the same time, we've all stolen glimpses of a very different story, one which makes my heart sing. It seems implausible, impractical, counterintuitive - and yet it is here that the blind see, the poor inherit a kingdom, those in mourning find their tears carefully counted; it is here that being takes precedence over having or doing, happiness is not an impossible goal but a pleasant side effect, and we find the heavens friendly and near.

The trouble is that those glimpses are fleeting, and we live in proximity to many powerful idols: Consumerism, Progress, Technology, Militarism, Romantic Love, Therapism, Liberal Guilt, Prosperity Gospel - to list just a few of the ones we mentioned the other night. They are compelling and popular stories that we repeatedly give in to, only to come full circle with Qoheleth - "all is vanity and striving after wind." That's when we remember the strange distant music of the Gospel. We gather again in someone's living room to hear the Counterscript, perhaps in the Beatitudes. We hear the truth about the shape we're in, and that truth telling makes us free.