make $ and retire early, or take federal job with more security?
August 11, 2014 4:32 PM Subscribe
Imagine you have the choice of taking (1) a very lucrative but highly demanding and stressful job in your current city, and (2) a federal job that requires a move and that pays only 25% of the lucrative job. Job 1 comes with an initial 2-year contract. While there's a possibility of getting sacked after two years, I imagine they'd renew the contract for at least two years, and if I'm performing well, I could keep going after that. If I got sacked, I could probably find another similar but probably less lucrative job, but it would take time and be quite stressful. Federal job is presumably more stable. Which would you take?
Possibly relevant details: early 40's, married, no kids (and no plans of having any), very substantial savings to date, home-owner (with mortgage), currently living in big city.
Interested in hearing your life experiences vis-a-vis working life and retirement. Are there benefits to trying to maximize income early and getting out of the game, vs a more slow and steady approach that provides more security? I'm clueless about retirement and recognize that a financial planner could help, but for now I'm more interested in hearing other's experiences.
posted by anonymous to Work & Money (19 answers total) 2 users marked this as a favorite