Sorry, I'm late to the party again ...
I really liked the book. Some of it is dated but so am I 
, so as Dragline said it was a blast from the past. I won't repeat what others have said. I'll just add my random musings.
The kid question: IMO, it’s easier and harder with kids than Terhorst suggests. Kids today (did I just say 'kids today'? 
) have more access to stuff and can see what they are missing. That can increase the 'demands' and peer pressure issues. OTOH, parents can opt for homeschooling or other alternative lifestyles more easily than before. I guess I'm saying there are more options now, but also more ways to drain a parent's wallet.
The college question is interesting. I think if I were just starting out, I'd do it differently than we did it. I’d put away what I was going to give each kid for college (25K? 50K? 100K?), and use the investment income from that money as their annual allotment. That would balance what you give them annually with what you give them for college, and leave a savings fund for emergencies related to each child. ("Sorry Junior, you don't get as much for college as your sister because I withdrew some of it for your bail money." 
)
I’m a little disappointed in the “your kids need you now” emotional blackmail that was in the book. It's one of my biggest gripes with sites like MMM, too. Sure, your kids need you, but they don’t need both of you around the clock for 18 years. That's just as extreme as working 80 hours a week and never seeing them. For me, the point of ERE is the freedom to do what you want with your life. If it involves work of any kind, you shouldn’t feel guilty that you are short-changing your kid because you aren’t at their beck and call 24 hours a day. Using that kind of an argument is no different than saying you should spend all the money you can on your child—only the medium of exchange is different. Teach kids how to care for themselves and fill their own days (based on what’s appropriate for their age). Show them what a healthy, engaged adult looks like. Be a role model, not a nanny <-- which does not require money or self-sacrifice.
Others' view of early retirement: I agreed with his take on people’s negative view of early retirement. It’s an upper/upper middle class view, but in my experience it's still accurate. Even if people are ok with the concept of retiring early, they will still judge you harshly if you have kids and aren’t indulging them, and you don’t also fill all of your free time with volunteer or charitable ventures.
Handling Change (p.123-126): I thought this section was very good. I'd never really thought about it since my own dance in and out of the workforce has been much more fluid than my husband's will be. Terhorst discusses how to manage change using the Holmes and Rahe stress scale. I can see now how proposing that DH retire at the same time that we sell our home, move to another state, and send our last kid off to college might be asking too much of him. I like 'clean breaks' but I can see how if a person doesn't, they need to manage the changes going into early retirement.
On to the questions ...
1. What are the similarities/differences between Cashing in on the American Dream and other books such as ERE, YMOYL etc?
It's dated and only really lays out a plan for those starting out in at least the middle class and above. It also relies completely on money, which makes it very different from ERE. ERE takes Terhorst's concept and shows that (1) you can start from anywhere and still achieve it, and (2) money isn't the only path (and maybe not the best path).
2. What do you think the "American Dream" represents (to Terhorst, to people generally in the 1980s, today, and to those outside of America)?
I'd never read this, probably because of the title. Cashing in on the American Dream sounds like a guide to getting all of the useless status stuff that people think proves a person is successful. Now I realize he means Liquidating the American Dream. (you'd think an accountant would get that part of the language right ) His formula is simple--sell off everything that stands for the American Dream, turn it into cash, and use it to finance a nomadic lifestyle.
What I think Terhorst doesn't understand though, is that he is basically asking people to trade in a rooted lifestyle for a rootless one. Some people are comfortable with that, but others aren't. Some people are satisfied living a nomadic lifestyle and still feel rooted living that way, but some people need more tangible, visible roots. Isn't there an old nomad v. homesteading thread that talks about this??
I think the book is more radical than it reads now remembering back to what the '80s were like. That was the era of the Bonfire of the Vanities and Working Girl. GenXers who didn't line up to follow their parents into mind-numbing careers to make as much money as possible were called slackers. Pardon the expression, but my family would have thought this book was a crock of shit. They would have seen Terhorst as lazy or worse, and thought he was somehow gaming the system. This is partially because of the family's lingering immigrant mindset. The goal was always that kids should achieve more than their parents. They thought of a job as a gift, so retiring early was an ungrateful act. They also wholeheartedly supported the women's movement (the '80s version) which meant they thought all women should make a point of overachieving and working themselves to death to prove they could do it, just like men. To the day she died, my mother thought I 'sold out' by taking time off to raise my kids.
3. How do Terhorst's numbers stack up today? Have you done any calculations for your situation? How do they compare?
You can absolutely make those numbers work, even in the US. What's changed is the number of items that people would put on the 'needs' list.
4. If you are interested in or are traveling retired, how do you think technology has changed remote investment options since the 1980s?
The internet is a godsend for good investors, and a path to ruin for bad investors. In some ways, people have more opportunity to screw up their retirement than secure it.
5. Terhorst, and others, have attributed at least part of their success to the era in which they were born. How important do you think this is in your own case/today?
*sigh* I miss the days of 8% CD rates. Sure, the Terhorsts were lucky to cash out during the high-flying '80s. OTOH, more people have access to the information they need to accomplish the same thing today. I also think it might have been easier for someone like him in the '80s (a middle-class white guy), but it's easier today for people who fought barriers other than financial ones in the past.
Great book. Thanks Sere!
Statistics: Posted by jennypenny — Wed Aug 12, 2015 6:28 am