3 ms·

Perhaps they have an opportunity that they can't get financing for against the 180k cashflow? It could definitely make sense. A question I love to ask people is

by cellis 11y ago

Perhaps they have an opportunity that they can't get financing for against the 180k cashflow? It could definitely make sense. A question I love to ask people is, "would you take 1m cash today (post-tax), or a 1mm salary at a job for 10 years where you have to do the work?". For instance, I might take the 1mm and found a startup/speculate (unlimited upside, and -5mm downside), while someone else might take the 6mm (after taxes) over 10 years. It's simply a matter of opportunity cost.

lifeisstillgood 11y ago
Will you take 111k today or a job paying you 33k pa for the next thirty years? That's the ratio 20k : 180k. Oh and you can't go out and get another job - that 110k has to last the next three decades. It's clear cut throat exploration. And I utterly refuse to believe this paralegal just suddenly took it into his head to forge those signatures and everyone else at the company were poor naive innocent dupes
- mikeash 11y ago
  Companies love to set things up such that illegal activity is never ever ever tolerated, but at the same time set up metrics and goals that are impossible to meet legally. Then you just keep firing people who underperform, and the rest happens by magic. This lets them reap all the benefits of illegal activity, while letting low-level employees shoulder all the blame.
mikeash 11y ago
Your question is an interesting hypothetical, but I don't see how it's relevant here. How does "where you have to do the work" fit in? Sure, it's a matter of opportunity cost, but taking $20,000 today instead of $500/month for 30 years is effectively taking out a loan at 30% interest. Even if it's worth it, you can do a lot better.
jrochkind1 11y ago
Perhaps. Or perhaps they got ripped off. We don't know enough from the hypothetical with no details except a hypothetical present value and full value. We could know more if we looked into details of individual cases. Like, say, the Washington Post did. https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/social-issues/how-companies-make-millions-off-lead-poisoned-poor-blacks/2015/08/25/7460c1de-0d8c-11e5-9726-49d6fa26a8c6_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/social-issues/how-compa...

by cellis 11y ago

lifeisstillgood 11y ago

Will you take 111k today or a job paying you 33k pa for the next thirty years? That's the ratio 20k : 180k. Oh and you can't go out and get another job - that 110k has to last the next three decades. It's clear cut throat exploration. And I utterly refuse to believe this paralegal just suddenly took it into his head to forge those signatures and everyone else at the company were poor naive innocent dupes

mikeash 11y ago
Companies love to set things up such that illegal activity is never ever ever tolerated, but at the same time set up metrics and goals that are impossible to meet legally. Then you just keep firing people who underperform, and the rest happens by magic. This lets them reap all the benefits of illegal activity, while letting low-level employees shoulder all the blame.

mikeash 11y ago

Your question is an interesting hypothetical, but I don't see how it's relevant here. How does "where you have to do the work" fit in? Sure, it's a matter of opportunity cost, but taking $20,000 today instead of $500/month for 30 years is effectively taking out a loan at 30% interest. Even if it's worth it, you can do a lot better.

jrochkind1 11y ago

Perhaps. Or perhaps they got ripped off. We don't know enough from the hypothetical with no details except a hypothetical present value and full value. We could know more if we looked into details of individual cases. Like, say, the Washington Post did. https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/social-issues/how-companies-make-millions-off-lead-poisoned-poor-blacks/2015/08/25/7460c1de-0d8c-11e5-9726-49d6fa26a8c6_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/social-issues/how-compa...