USA Today: Retiring "early" at 59 lol

[Kansaslover5]

http://www.usatoday.com/experience/weekend/lifestyle/how-to-retire-early-while-everyone-else-toils-at-work/13678931/?sf29564982=1

Not completely horrible though. There were a few good guidelines mentioned but overall, I'd rather retire at 40 than 59! And, I don't need another $400,000 to do so as the article suggests.

[iris lily]

http://www.usatoday.com/experience/weekend/lifestyle/how-to-retire-early-while-everyone-else-toils-at-work/13678931/?sf29564982=1

Not completely horrible though. There were a few good guidelines mentioned but overall, I'd rather retire at 40 than 59! And, I don't need another $400,000 to do so as the article suggests.

I think that you guys who are retiring way earlier than late 50's are cool, good for you. But the rest of us a just a little more cautious. And that's ok, too.

[Travis]

Don't think this belongs in this section.  The advice given was broad, but correct.  Most of the retirement articles lampooned in this section say "You must have $X million to retire, and if you save 10% of your income you might get there!"

[pachnik]

In my own life rather than on-line here at MMM, I don't know too many people who retired early and by that I mean before 60 years of age.  My parents both retired at 62, both grandfathers retired at 70.  I only know one person who retired before 60 and she retired in her mid-50's because she inherited big.  I know a few people who had to stop working before they were 60 because of health problems and I wouldn't call that retiring early. 

This is a pretty good mainstream article but not an MMM blog article.  Anyway, more power to the people here who will retire early by not being consumerist suckers!

[Wiggle]

The problem I see with the article is that is just a collection of tips.  Not anything about lifestyle changes that make early retirement more attainable.

[slugline]

Don't think this belongs in this section.  The advice given was broad, but correct.  Most of the retirement articles lampooned in this section say "You must have $X million to retire, and if you save 10% of your income you might get there!"

I'll +1 this. It's not MMM-level of bad-assity, but just because an article doesn't start with "Ride a bike" doesn't make it "antiMustachian" in my eyes either.

[MgoSam]

I don't think this article is horrible. The vast majority of people aren't going to live a MMM lifestyle. I still don't bike to work most days, I rarely do in fact. Shock therapy might work for some people, but for others just hearing that it is possible to retire before 65 might be enough for them to open their eyes. Instead of being told that in order to retire they need to live a frugal lifestyle (which for some is equated as meaning a 'miserly lifestyle'), simple things like saving and investing 10% of their paycheck is far better than having no savings at all.