3 ms·
I'm the opposite. If my living and food expenses are covered, I'll prefer full autonomy over no or minimal autonomy. You can only spend so many years doing thin
by meowface 7y ago
I'm the opposite. If my living and food expenses are covered, I'll prefer full autonomy over no or minimal autonomy. You can only spend so many years doing things you're asked to do which you don't really want to do before the value added by the extra money is outweighed by the value lost from life in general becoming more depressing and less inspiring.
- OJFord 7y ago> If my living and food expenses are covered, I'll prefer full autonomy over no or minimal autonomy. Where are you living and what will you eat?
- thedufer 7y agoYou can turn extra money pretty directly into time with actual autonomy (i.e. not working) pretty easily, though.
- meowface 7y agoThat's true, but it depends on the income rate, I guess. If I need to work a soul-sucking job for 15 years to be able to spend the rest of my life with mostly full autonomy, I think that trade-off isn't worth it. If it were working a soul-sucking job for 1 or 2 years to get enough to be autonomous for life, then it's probably worth it.
- thedufer 7y agoYes, there is some preferred balance between the two for any one person. But for reference, 15 years to retirement means shaving 25 years of full-time work off the typical career. That seems...pretty appealing.