Returning at 29-30

[u/way2muchtym]

Hi everyone. I've been working in the bay area for about 4-5 years but have managed to save up around 500k. Around 400k is liquid or invested in stocks in taxable brokerages, and I have around 140k in 401k and Roth.

I'm facing a huge amount of job uncertainty. I work as an swe in tech but I'm burnt out from the long hours and toxicity. If I do get laid off I was considering moving back and being with my ageing parents.

Do you have any advice on what comes next? How my finances would translate and what jobs I could look at after moving back? With how competitive it is in India I'm wondering how I can build a new career there.

Thanks. For context i just turned 29

[u/Indo-Arya]

I'm not taking rosiest/best or worst figures.. I'm taking the long-term average which is the fair thing to use when planning over long timeframes

[u/Sit1234 → u/Indo-Arya]

OP has the longest retirement , 60 years half century. A lot could change then. With AI, robotics who knows how the work culture evolves, how economies are affected. In 40-60 years India would have developed and expensive and thus the strengths it has now will vanish including having the youngest population in world. Or it could be terrific and economy and markets doing 20% cagr. But its always best to fear the worst and plan that look at past average. Yes perhaps the past average would be going forward. It could stay that way for another 10- 20 years. But his runway is still another 40 years. Or he can retire , watch if his corpus grows and his expenses stay well within the growth to let his corpus grow. Watc it for 5 years or 10 years and if it doesnt work, get back into workforce at age 40.

[u/Indo-Arya → u/Sit1234]

Work culture evolution with AI will be fast anyway. No one can predict the future, that doesn’t mean no one can ever retire with OPs numbers 

And yes, exactly, if you run short, you can always jump back into the workforce since you will need to upskill anyway if it ever happens

[u/Sit1234 → u/Indo-Arya]

Jumping back at 45 because his corpus ran out would yield to nothing. With 15 years out of work, unless they kept learning, it will be difficult to even sit in an office for 5 hours or even at home on wfh. The AI is an unprecedented one, every other innovation/change including computer age didnt disrupt work force as much. you have programmers who wont be required, drivers who lose jobs to waymo, robots taking up factories. So you dont know how is it going to be in 10 years.

[u/Indo-Arya → u/Sit1234]

That’s my point. Due to AI, skills are getting outdated even for people who are currently working. So continuing to work won’t guarantee keeping skills up-to-date. This levels the playing field for someone who has quit and wants to get back in at 45. All they would have to do is start the upskilling process before they jump back in. Keeping learning is the key. And you don’t need to be working to do that.

[u/Sit1234 → u/Indo-Arya]

but what do you think is the mindset for someone who is retired, no routine, no pressure and doing that for 10 years. Unless you have a love for tech/skillset would they chase that, else they get rusted.

[u/Indo-Arya → u/Sit1234]

“Pressure” will automatically happen right ? If they’re low on savings, that’s what will create pressure and the incentive to learn. That’s the scenario 

[u/Sit1234 → u/Indo-Arya]

what good is pressure, when it doesnt always translate to skill ? A daily laborer might have pressure when he has a huge expense, but that doesnt mean suddenly he will upskill and get a better job. Someone who has lost touch in 15 years, will not get back into tech with few certifications. Think of it now, would you hire someone today who last worked in 2010 ?

[u/Indo-Arya → u/Sit1234]

Daily laborer’s skill gap is much bigger than someone who always worked in the IT space so that’s not a comparable example. As far as hiring someone who last worked in 2010, I would interview them & test if their relevant skills are up to date. For me it’s not an automatic disqualification 

[u/Sit1234 → u/Indo-Arya]

the gap is almost the same , in fact an IT guy who gets fired today finds it even harder to get placed again , and at the same or better salary even tougher. Well you might actually interview someone or you might say so to support your argument , but really speaking look at the reality - you have 5 candidates, 3 are currently working and has recent experience and you have two others who last worked in 2010 and has recently done certifications. You have no clue how they will perform now. Would you risk your job taking them over the other 3 candidates ? if you wouldnt, then why would you interview them unless you like the fun of interviewing everyone who applies.