3 ms·
I wish everyone in the developed world understood and internalized this perspective. That goes double for software engineers, who are well-paid relative to the
by kcorbitt 9y ago
I wish everyone in the developed world understood and internalized this perspective. That goes double for software engineers, who are well-paid relative to the median wage almost anywhere in the world.
The rat race is totally opt-in. If you're getting paid as a software engineer in the USA[1] and you're making market rate for where you live, you can easily save >>50% of your salary and retire in 10 years. And really, what you're buying with those savings are options. If you love what you're doing, no one will force you to quit once you've accumulated FU money. For me personally, even money says I keep on working in my same career with little change. But the point is that it then becomes my decision, not something imposed on me. It changes your perspective (and stress level).
[1]: The US is an unusually good place for software engineers from this perspective: by moving from London back to Seattle I was able to nearly double my market rate while modestly lowering my cost of living. But even in London, it was possible to save a substantial fraction of each paycheck.
- hkmurakami 9y agoI'm wondering how such a person will cope with unexpected medical expenses in old age that aren't covered by medicare. As a US citizen, perhaps immigrating to a country with universal health care is a necessity. Come to think of it, the rat race really is a fear driven thing. Fear of not having health care when you need it, fear of not having retirement income, fear of keeping up pretenses of "success" vs your peers and classmates, etc.
- sdflkd 9y agoIf you're getting paid as a software engineer in the USA[1] and you're making market rate for where you live, you can easily save >>50% of your salary and retire in 10 years. Not well in the Bay Area, at least.
- kcorbitt 9y agoSince I'm currently living and working on the San Francisco peninsula, I can actually speak to this from experience. :) My family of 3 lives on a budget of $50k, and yes, our savings rate is >>50%. Of course, you specified living "well." I believe that we live well -- we're all certainly very happy, don't have any unmet needs, and are able to indulge in little luxuries like eating out once a month and visiting family in Europe once or twice a year. However, if living "well" to you requires having two late-model cars, a big house and eating out a few times a week, then yes, you will have trouble doing that while maintaining a high savings rate in the Bay Area.
- nunez 9y agoI say the same thing every time this comes up: I don't want to live like that, and neither do many, many people. I like driving nice, new-ish cars, eating out, using the latest technology, drinking Starbucks or whatever coffee I want and having fun, even if it isn't cheap (when I can afford it). I'm not alone here. I'm glad you've found a way to enjoy life on little means, but trying to say that it's the best way to live is disingenuous. $600k in savings and investments means nothing if I'm not doing things I don't like. Money is made to be spent.
- toomuchtodo 9y agoIt's entirely true money is made to be spent. I'd just rather buy my own time back instead of spending it on unnecessary luxury items. But then, I don't feel sorry when someone has to work their entire life to retire; that's their choice too.