I remarried two years ago (second marriage for both) and we are both in our 50s with college-age kids. I have two masters degrees but earn considerably less than my husband due to my chosen field. He makes upwards of $150,000 and has a hefty pension upon retirement plus a 401(k). Despite my paltry income, I have a considerable inheritance that is invested in a diversified portfolio. I also own a home with no mortgage...when we married, he sold his house and moved into mine. At my insistence and despite the income disparity, we split household expenses (which are minimal) down the middle. We are both frugal and share the goal of downsizing and simplifying our lives.
He is fixated on a particular retirement date which is two years away, and is adamant that he won't retire before that date. We could both retire now and live very comfortably but he is paranoid about finances and thinks two years is the magic date. At that point, he wants me to retire and has indicated that he wants to move to another state. I would be fine staying where we are, but, whatever. I agree with his plan up to a point. I have a great deal of money tied up in my house; if I could sell the house, liquidate the assets, and invest, I could afford to quit now! But he objects to that idea since, in his view, in two years we'll be moving anyway, and he always has a rationale for why it's a bad idea to sell. The issue is, I feel quite resentful and held hostage by his personal financial goals. It feels like I'm structuring my whole life around his "magic date" at the expense of my own financial well-being, and that he is dictating the rules. Not to mention, our combined incomes place us in an outrageously high tax bracket, which of course penalizes me as the lower wage earner. It actually makes more financial sense to quit my job and live off investments. Am I being unreasonable? Should I just sell the house and force him to deal with it?