NoFeeBoards.com!

No Fees! No Ads! No Spam!

Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search NoFeeBoards.com! Forum Index

Is Hocus FIREd?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    NoFeeBoards.com! Forum Index » FIRE Board
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
hocus2004
Moderator


Joined: 10 Jun 2004
Posts: 752

PostPosted: Tue Mar 08, 2005 3:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

that was in response to posts putting the 'Hocus plan' in the 'land of busted retirements' on the original board that I posted on.

This is the sort of thing that you need to point out in your posts to give them balance, BeachBumz.

Intercst obviously had no good intent in putting that post forward. His obvious goal was to inject more poison into the bloodstream of the community.

It's a good thing to point out the errors in his assumptions and calculations. Where you drop the ball is in suggesting that he is a serious poster putting forward serious arguments. He is not.

The very names that he assigns to the boards he creates give the game away. The guy is a clown. Not a happy clown. He is an angry clown. That's why under his leadership the Motley Fool board has become an Angry Clown Board.

Intercst's motives and history and tactics are part of the story, Beachbumz. If it were any other poster engaging in the ugliness he is engaging in, you would be calling him on it. I am saying that you should be calling intercst on it too. The only way out of this mess is to apply the same rules to intercst that we apply to all other community members.


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hocus2004
Moderator


Joined: 10 Jun 2004
Posts: 752

PostPosted: Tue Mar 08, 2005 3:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I do not understand why Hocus decides to talk negatively to poor beachbumz

I don't agree that I am doing that, Ben.

I have said a number of good things about the BeachBumz analysis. The most important good thing that I said about it is that I believe that it was put forward with good intent. I said that because I believed it and I still believe it.

The fact that someone puts forward a post with good intent does not mean that he cannot make mistakes. I believe that BeachBumz has made mistakes. The most basic way to state them is to note that he should not put my name in the title of a thread that does not examine my plan.

That's not the core issue, though. The core issue is the question of BeachBumz's motivation. Why is he twisting himself into a pretzel to try to avoid making note of the obvious bad faith being demonstrated by intercst? There are a number of possible motivations. That's another long post, so I'll just skip it for now.

The bottom line, though, is that I think BeachBumz is making a mistake in trying to phrase things in ways that step around the core issue--the animosity that intercst directs to anyone in this community who posts in an honest and informed way on SWRs. The issue cannot be sidestepped forecer. At some point, it needs to be confronted head-on or it will continue to do BeachBumz and lots of other fine posters harm.

We need to cut this guy loose. That's just the way it is. No one ever presents any reasoned oppostion to my proposal. The two reactions we get are the bury-the-head-in-the-sand response and the react-with-anger-to-the-bearer-of-bad-news response. Neither of these responses are good long-term responses.

We need to deal with the real issue. The rest of us can obviously come to reasonable and workable definitions of the phrase "Eary Retirement" if we put out minds to it. We are not going to do that so long as the voice of intercst is still present somewhere in the toom. He is not interested in seeing us move forward. He wants to see us remaining stuck in the past.

I want to take us forward and intercst wants to take us backward. There is no way to split the difference between the two visions of early retirement. Sooner or later, the community needs to make a decision to go forward or backward and stick with it and take action on the steps required to implement it.

You can't take that issue off the table because that issue is the issue that gives these discussions their juice. That's what we are really talking about when we appear to be talking about 1001 other things. Forward or backward? That's the question on the table.


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ben
*** Veteran


Joined: 17 Feb 2003
Posts: 231
Location: The world is not enough

PostPosted: Tue Mar 08, 2005 4:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
We need to cut this guy loose

How do you suggest we do that? You have before told Intercst that you will "take him out" (or was that call him out?).
Quote:
Sooner or later, the community needs to make a decision to go forward or backward and stick with it

Should we put a deadline or is "sooner or later" precise enough?

Cheers!



_________________
Normal; to put on clothes bought for work, go to work in car bought to get to work needed to pay for the clothes, the car and the home left empty all day in order to afford to live in it...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hocus2004
Moderator


Joined: 10 Jun 2004
Posts: 752

PostPosted: Tue Mar 08, 2005 4:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

How do you suggest we do that?

Use your imagination, Ben. For heaven's sake.

You have before told Intercst that you will "take him out" (or was that call him out?).

This is a reference to a post that I put last Saturday to the board associated with the RetireEarlyHomePage.com site. I believe that it is on the thread titled "Math Question."

I explained in that thread that I made my living for a long time reporting on tax legsilative developments. I got to watch masters of the game of practical politics up close--people like Dan Rostenkowski, Bob Dole, and Lloyd Bensten.

One of the lessons I took from the work I did then is that what it usually comes down to in the final anlaysis is "Who wants it more?" There are all sorts of speeches put forward in the process of bringing a controversy to resolution. But it is often not the words of the speeches that matter. What matters in the end is the subtext of the message being delivered, what the message is saying re the question "Who wants it more?" Analyze it from that perspective and you can often make good predictions re how a controversy is going to be resolved.

The majority of the community has always favored civil debate. The majority has never had its way. Why? Because the small group of community members who would rather see all the boards burn to the ground rather than permit reasoned discussion of the flaws of the REHP study do not want what they want as bad as the intercst supporters want what they want. We have the numbers. They have the intensity.

What we need to bring this to an end is to match the intercst supporters in intensity. I don't think we can do that by focusing on SWRs. Lots of people are interested in knowing what the historical data says. Not too many are intense about it. Most view SWR analysis as something useful, but they are not going to put their lives or the lives of their families at even a little bit of risk to open up the posibility of honest investing discussions at these boards.

So we need something else. I believe that the "something else" that we need to tap into to get more people involved in helping us put the intercst matter behind us once and for all is the intense excitement that people feel for the idea of winning financial freedom early in life. That's what those posts that I have been putting up in recent days at the SWR board are about. I am trying to demonstrate the point that there are lots of people in our community who love us for the good work we have done in the past. We can get those sorts of people participating again if we provide them with hope that we are making a serious effort to turn things around.

We are not really talking about SWRs. That's just the surface issue. It is an important one, but not nearly as important as the core issue. The core issue is the survival of our boards. Boards that do not permit honest and informed posting on key questions before the community eventually die. Honest on-topic posting is the lifeblood of any discussion board.

There is zero possibility that intercst is ever going to permit us to engage in honest posting. Lots and lots of people want us to permit honest posting. I think that that is the way we need to frame the question to get the sort of intensity against intercst that we need to get him removed from the various boards. The question is not "What do you think the SWR is?" The question is "Do you think that a board founder can be removed when he betrays the board community and seeks to destory the movement he started?" Frame the question that way, and I think you get a different answer from the community members who have postions on SWRs somewhere betwen the viewpoints expressed by hocus and intercst.

Should we put a deadline or is "sooner or later" precise enough?

That's for you and lots of others to decide, Ben. Me and 25 other commnity members voted to take action back on November 23, 2002, the day that I put forward the "Request for Revocation of Posting Priviledges" post back at the Motley Fool board.


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ben
*** Veteran


Joined: 17 Feb 2003
Posts: 231
Location: The world is not enough

PostPosted: Tue Mar 08, 2005 5:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Ben: Should we put a deadline or is "sooner or later" precise enough?

Hocus:That's for you and lots of others to decide, Ben


Based the above I suggest a deadline being end this week - if we have not gathered enough supporters for this we follow your suggestion of accepting status quo (or going backward as you call it).
Quote:
Use your imagination, Ben. For heaven's sake.

I honestly have no idea unless you mean "take him out" in that military way....

Cheers!



_________________
Normal; to put on clothes bought for work, go to work in car bought to get to work needed to pay for the clothes, the car and the home left empty all day in order to afford to live in it...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hocus2004
Moderator


Joined: 10 Jun 2004
Posts: 752

PostPosted: Tue Mar 08, 2005 5:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I suggest a deadline being end this week - if we have not gathered enough supporters for this we follow your suggestion of accepting status quo (or going backward as you call it).

So long as there is some good remaining in the community, there is some good for us all to build on. I see the same bad stuff you see, Ben. But that's not all I see. Where there is life, there is hope. I see both bad stuff and signs of life.

I am hopeful that we will be able to turn things around. Nothing would make me happier than to see that happen by the end of this week. But I wouldn't bet a thousand dollars that it is going to happen by then.

Please read the links that I am putting forward in the "Something to Look Forward To" thread at the SWR board. Read what a large number of community members have said about what they learned from participation at our boards (either posting or lurking) at earlier times, and tell me that it is not worth putting a little more than a week's effort into the task of turning this thing around.

We once provided the most important resource for learning about early retirement that existed on the face of Planet Earth. My personal view is that the odds are good indeed that we will find our way back to providing that or even something better in days to come.

It's not the community that is bad, Ben. It is the one poster who betrayed the community's trust who is bad. I think it is a huge mistake for people to begin thinking that because we have tolerated intercst for so long that somehow that means that we are intercst-like in some fundamental way. He is not like the rest of us, Ben.

I honestly have no idea unless you mean "take him out" in that military way....

What I mean by "take him out" is to have his posting priviledges revoked at the various boards. An easy way to get started on that process would be to put up a post at the Motley Fool board saying that you paid $30 to Motley Fool and that you expect Motley Fool to honor its promise to its subscribers to revoke the posting privilges of posters who engage in intercst-like posting practices. Send an e-mail to TMFBogey with a copy to Tom Gardner pointing to the post and demanding prompt action. If 10 people did that today, I think there's a darn good chance that it would get us on the way to a complete resolution of the problem.

It could all start with you, Ben. Each time that a poster works up the courage to take action, it provides encouragement to others who have been thinking of someday doing something similar. If you were to put up such a post at Motley Fool today, you could start an anti-intercst avalanche.

You never know until you give it a try.


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ben
*** Veteran


Joined: 17 Feb 2003
Posts: 231
Location: The world is not enough

PostPosted: Tue Mar 08, 2005 5:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I am hopeful that we will be able to turn things around.

I am not so hopefull...I think Intercst have defeated the wave - you fought well, but was "betrayed" by one after the other who went to the dark side - even people like TH that started out on your side. What have you done Hocus to turn people to the dark side?
Quote:
He is not like the rest of us, Ben.

An evil alien trying to destroy the early retirment of human kind then?

I am no longer a member of fool.com - but only because my membership expired and I use plenty of time on other boards. I do not agree with you that Intercst is the anti-christ of ER.

A better way to change things would be if you focus on the things you do well; freedom/saving Etc. and leave the Intercst issue alone. I know you can't Wink so just consider it my 2 cents worth. Very Happy



_________________
Normal; to put on clothes bought for work, go to work in car bought to get to work needed to pay for the clothes, the car and the home left empty all day in order to afford to live in it...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hocus2004
Moderator


Joined: 10 Jun 2004
Posts: 752

PostPosted: Tue Mar 08, 2005 6:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

What have you done Hocus to turn people to the dark side?

People are scared of him, Ben. So they don't talk back to him. People are not scared of me. So they do talk back to me. I would rather see people talking back to me than see signs that people are scared of me.

focus on the things you do well; freedom/saving Etc. and leave the Intercst issue alone.

I have 20 projects that I need to be working on, Ben. If others will stop bringing up this matter, you won't see me coming forward with too many thread-starters trying to get it going again. (I of course do not mean by that that I will not put forward thread-starters dealing with substantive SWR questions.)

If deceptive comments re my plan or re SWRs or re the intercst matter or re whatever show up on the boards, I have an obligation to the community to file corrections. If such comments do not appear, I am off the hook. And if others step forward and file corrections, I am off the hook.


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
beachbumz
** Regular


Joined: 07 Feb 2005
Posts: 79
Location: Cocoa Beach, FL

PostPosted: Tue Mar 08, 2005 6:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hocus wrote:
Quote:
BeachBumb.


Now that hurts....

BeachbumZZZZZZZ Cool



_________________
Life is Good.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
beachbumz
** Regular


Joined: 07 Feb 2005
Posts: 79
Location: Cocoa Beach, FL

PostPosted: Tue Mar 08, 2005 6:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Hocus!
Quote:
If all you need to do to be FI is to be able to stay alive, FI is not so hard a state to achive. I have a lot of things that I want to be able to do with my life aside from just keeping it going. So I define complete FI in far morer expansive terms than that.


Ok, you got me, I agree now, you are NOT financially independent! Sad
Quote:
The rigid definition of the word "retire" used by intercst is a turn-off to millions.


If I understand Intercst correctly, his 'rigid' definition of retirement is one that says you no longer have to work to have the things you need or want. I think I pretty much agree with that, as well as pretty much everyone else on these boards, of course, with the exception of you. Smile(ok, everyone, please feel free to correct me on this if I'm mistaken). I would like to see some proof of your claim that his definition is a turn off to MILLIONS. Laughing
Quote:
You used my $38,000 number, but you neglected to include my $10,000 income number. So you did not examine my plan. All that you demonstrated is that it is possible to come up with a plan different from the hocus plan that may not work. We all knew that before you put up the thread-starter.


I will no longer beat this DEAD HORSE, so I will say for the LAST TIME, that I was simply showing that a situation like yours has at least some chance of succeeding without the need for the extra earned income in YOUR plan. I think it is pretty plain to everyone that I examined your plan without the $10,000 in it. That was the premise of my post, there was NO deception! Once again, you are blowing this out of proportion!!!

Beachbumz Cool



_________________
Life is Good.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ben
*** Veteran


Joined: 17 Feb 2003
Posts: 231
Location: The world is not enough

PostPosted: Tue Mar 08, 2005 6:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hocus; you might have had a new diciple in Beachbumz - he seemed very open to your plan (as am I) but seems you managed to turn yet another potential diciple to the dark side....

I doubt you have decided that I am a DCM yet - you and I have always disagreed on some of your main points in the Intercst/SWR debate but in a civil way - but you keep doing it; turning people to the dark side.... You are supposed to turn them towards the light! To SAVE them!

Cheers!



_________________
Normal; to put on clothes bought for work, go to work in car bought to get to work needed to pay for the clothes, the car and the home left empty all day in order to afford to live in it...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
beachbumz
** Regular


Joined: 07 Feb 2005
Posts: 79
Location: Cocoa Beach, FL

PostPosted: Tue Mar 08, 2005 7:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

hocus2004 wrote:
that was in response to posts putting the 'Hocus plan' in the 'land of busted retirements' on the original board that I posted on.

This is the sort of thing that you need to point out in your posts to give them balance, BeachBumz.


Here is the VERY FIRST sentence of my original post:
"I posted this over at Intercst's board in response to a post Intercst put up about Hocus' retirement in the section titled "Land of the Busted Retirements".

Am I missing something?

Beachbumz Cool



_________________
Life is Good.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hocus2004
Moderator


Joined: 10 Jun 2004
Posts: 752

PostPosted: Tue Mar 08, 2005 7:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ok, you got me, I agree now, you are NOT financially independent!

Not completely so. Neither are you. I have a line in my book where I say: "There is no such thing as financial independence, at least not as the concept is conventionally understood."

It is possible to achieve higher levels of financial freedom as one works one's way through life. But, unless you join a monastary, you are always going to have a desire for more money. So you will never reach a point where you are 100 percent free of all money concerns.

If I understand Intercst correctly, his 'rigid' definition of retirement is one that says you no longer have to work to have the things you need or want.

There have been a number of posters who have tried to put forward common-sense views as to what constitutes "retirement" at the Motley Fool board. The standard intercst response is to engage in smear tactics and thereby to drive them off the board so that the Sacred Nonsense Dogmas remain safe from questioning there.

I would like to see some proof of your claim that his definition is a turn off to MILLIONS.

Ask people you come into contact with in the outside world what they think of someone who leaves his job at age 40 and intends never again for the remainder of his days to do anything but golf, watch television shows, and post on discussion boards?

I don't find too many who find the intercst vision of early retirement too appealing. There are some who do. I don't say that the number who find appeal in the intercst vision is zero. I find a lot more support for the FoolMeOnce vision, the JWR1945 vision, the Wanderer vision, and a lot of other visions.

Intercst has described his vision of early retirement as gaining the ability to live a life of"Sloth and Debauchery." My experience is that there a whole bunch of people who just don't click with that. I do indeed estimate that the number of who find that vision an offensive one to be in the millions.

you are blowing this out of proportion!!!

I'm not trying to make a big deal out of it, Beachbumz. I think my comments were balanced. I said that it appeared to me that your analysis was put forward in good faith and that you made a number of good points with it. I also said that I don't think it is right to use my name in the thread title since you are examining a plan that I do not follow and do not endorse.

I think there is a measure of hostility to me coming through in some of the words you have posted. I think that the hostility is a result of the fact that you want to defend intercst and have not been able to find any reasoned way to do so. I think you should give up the effort.

Take away your desire to defend intercet, and I don't see any reason why you and me would not get along just fine, Beachbumz. It is your desire to defend intercst combined with my decision to tell it straight re intercst that is the source of the friction between us, in my assessment.


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hocus2004
Moderator


Joined: 10 Jun 2004
Posts: 752

PostPosted: Tue Mar 08, 2005 7:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

seems you managed to turn yet another potential diciple to the dark side....

I'm not looking for disciples, Ben. I come to these boards to learn about early retirement by engaging in reasoned discussion of the topic with others interested in exploring it. I don't see any need for anyone to be a disciple of anyone else.

I doubt you have decided that I am a DCM yet - you and I have always disagreed on some of your main points in the Intercst/SWR debate but in a civil way

I would not expect that there would be a single community member who would agree with me on every aspect of every question that comes up. That wouldn't be healthy.

I think we all need to agree on certain minimal ground-rules for debate. Intercst fails to meet those minimal ground-rules. There should be no controversy whatsoever on that one.

I think that the complicating factor here is that he was the founder of the first board. It is certainly counter-intuitive to think that the founder of a communiy is going to come to be the single most destructive force within the community.

It's a strange turn of events, but that's what happened. I didn't make it happen. I just reported that it did. Please don't shoot the messenger.


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hocus2004
Moderator


Joined: 10 Jun 2004
Posts: 752

PostPosted: Tue Mar 08, 2005 7:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Am I missing something?

What I am saying is that you should have included comment on the ugliness of intercst's posting tactics in the post you put to the board at RetireEarlyHomePage.com. He is not shooting straight when he puts up a post re the hocus plan at a board he calls "Land of Busted Retirements." You should call him on it.

Say that the tables were turned, BeachBumz. Say that I start a discusson board at PassionSaving.com, and I call one of the boards there "Interct-Mania" and I put up avatar on each of his posts with intercst in a straight-jacket? Do you think I would take any flak for that?

You know darn well I would, and rightfully so. Well, get over there and start giving intercst some flak for the damage he has been doing to our community for close to 34 months now. He has earned it. He richly deserves it. Now please go dish it out to him. Tell him what you think of his ugly posting tactics and what you are going to do about it if the nonsense persists.

Then come back here and tell me what sort of response you got, and we can talk about Next Steps.


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
beachbumz
** Regular


Joined: 07 Feb 2005
Posts: 79
Location: Cocoa Beach, FL

PostPosted: Tue Mar 08, 2005 12:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="hocus2004"]I do not understand why Hocus decides to talk negatively to poor beachbumz


Quote:
I believe that BeachBumz has made mistakes..


Yes, Beachbumz also believes that he made ONE mistake and it will not be repeated! I think several people have made this same mistake in the past and learned their lesson and I knew better, but....
Quote:
The most basic way to state them is to note that he should not put my name in the title of a thread that does not examine my plan..


My post was a response to a thread that was about {drum roll please} 'The Hocus Plan'. All I did (which was my mistake) was post a response that defended your situation.
Quote:
That's not the core issue, though. The core issue is the question of BeachBumz's motivation. Why is he twisting himself into a pretzel to try to avoid making note of the obvious bad faith being demonstrated by intercst? There are a number of possible motivations. That's another long post, so I'll just skip it for now.


There is only one person on this board that is twisting himself into a pretzel, and it ain't me! Laughing Intercst believes your plan is 'half-assed', he has a right to his opinion. My motivation was to show that your plan was not as 'half-assed' as maybe he thinks. This is my opinion, I have a right to it.
Quote:
The bottom line, though, is that I think BeachBumz is making a mistake in trying to phrase things in ways that step around the core issue--the animosity that intercst directs to anyone in this community who posts in an honest and informed way on SWRs.


Speaking of pretzels.... Shocked


Quote:
The issue cannot be sidestepped forecer. At some point, it needs to be confronted head-on or it will continue to do BeachBumz and lots of other fine posters harm.


Beachbumz, and I imagine the other fine posters, can take care of themselves. Very Happy
Quote:
The rest of us can obviously come to reasonable and workable definitions of the phrase "Eary Retirement" if we put out minds to it.


Here's my vote:
Retirement=Do what you want, when you want, where you want without the need of outside earned income.

Early=before age 60

Beachbumz Cool



_________________
Life is Good.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ataloss
**** Heavy Hitter


Joined: 25 Nov 2002
Posts: 559

PostPosted: Tue Mar 08, 2005 12:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
There is only one person on this board that is twisting himself into a pretzel, and it ain't me! Intercst believes your plan is 'half-assed', he has a right to his opinion. My motivation was to show that your plan was not as 'half-assed' as maybe he thinks. This is my opinion, I have a right to it.


I think you have a right to your opinion. I think on the merits of the plan I fall between your position and intercst's. OTOH I think it is a good plan if you don't mind working Laughing



_________________
Have fun.

Ataloss
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ben
*** Veteran


Joined: 17 Feb 2003
Posts: 231
Location: The world is not enough

PostPosted: Tue Mar 08, 2005 12:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
People are not scared of me

Well recent posts at fool.com seems to indicate that people fear that you might snap and become violent! I do not think anybody fear that from Intercst Laughing?
Quote:
I'm not looking for disciples, Ben

Well - diciples was probably the wrong word (inspired by you talking about whether raddr and ataloss can be "saved" I guess) but if we want to build the "wave" we certainly need followers in agreement that are not pissed of for a start?

Cheers!



_________________
Normal; to put on clothes bought for work, go to work in car bought to get to work needed to pay for the clothes, the car and the home left empty all day in order to afford to live in it...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hocus2004
Moderator


Joined: 10 Jun 2004
Posts: 752

PostPosted: Tue Mar 08, 2005 1:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It may be that we will be able to pull in some new people through my web site, Ben. I think that would be a good thing.


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
beachbumz
** Regular


Joined: 07 Feb 2005
Posts: 79
Location: Cocoa Beach, FL

PostPosted: Tue Mar 08, 2005 1:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="hocus2004"]Ok, you got me, I agree now, you are NOT financially independent!
Quote:
Not completely so. Neither are you. I have a line in my book where I say: "There is no such thing as financial independence, at least not as the concept is conventionally understood.".


I do agree that you aren't FI, but I don't agree that I'm not FI. I just spoke with Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, and they don't agree with your statement, nor do I. (Ok, I really didn't talk with them, but I'm guessing that's what they'd say. Laughing)
Quote:
But, unless you join a monastary, you are always going to have a desire for more money.


You really should preface these way out comments with 'IMHO' because that's what they are, they are not facts as you make them sound. (Could that be described as 'deception' Confused)
Quote:
so the Sacred Nonsense Dogmas remain safe from questioning there..


When I first began lurking the early retirement boards years ago, I was under the impression that they were discussing early retirement from the workforce. This is what I based my whole plan on; had I known that it was 'nonsense' I might would have done something different. Boy, am I glad I didn't. Cool
Quote:
Ask people you come into contact with in the outside world what they think of someone who leaves his job at age 40 and intends never again for the remainder of his days to do anything but golf, watch television shows, and post on discussion boards?


It's so much more than that Hocus! I enjoy all of the above, but also traveling and laying on the beach (but to each their own)! By the way, I spoke to a person today and he is extremely jealous, but happy for me!
Quote:
I don't find too many who find the intercst vision of early retirement too appealing. There are some who do. I don't say that the number who find appeal in the intercst vision is zero. I find a lot more support for the FoolMeOnce vision, the JWR1945 vision, the Wanderer vision, and a lot of other visions.


I believe that everyone has their own vision of retirement. If Intercst wants to lay on the sofa all day and watch tv, so what, that's his business. Everyone has different things that they enjoy doing.
Quote:
I do indeed estimate that the number of who find that vision an offensive one to be in the millions.


In the future you may want to use the term 'estimate' the first time you make a statement like that. Otherwise, people might see your posts as deceptive. (Just my opinion)
Quote:
I think there is a measure of hostility to me coming through in some of the words you have posted. I think that the hostility is a result of the fact that you want to defend intercst and have not been able to find any reasoned way to do so. I think you should give up the effort.


Wow, that's a very interesting comment. What you call 'hostility' I would call 'frustration'. Once again I find it extremely humerous that you say I want to defend Intercst when I was, in fact, defending your situation against a comment that he made. Hocus, you are the master at twisting meanings around. I guess that comes from your lawyer background Smile I do VERY MUCH agree that I should give up the effort.
Quote:
Take away your desire to defend intercet, and I don't see any reason why you and me would not get along just fine, Beachbumz.


There should not have been any friction between us Hocus. However, the friction was caused by you attempting to twist the meaning of my post that was in defense of you, not Intercst.
Quote:
It is your desire to defend intercst combined with my decision to tell it straight re intercst that is the source of the friction between us, in my assessment.


You crack me up with these comments, Hocus. At least it's good for a laugh. Laughing

Beachbumz Cool



_________________
Life is Good.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    NoFeeBoards.com! Forum Index » FIRE Board All times are GMT - 9 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 3 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
Designed for Trushkin.net | Styles Database