4 ms·

I've watched enough people grow up, become rich and powerful, then find in their 40s they have absolutely no skills to enjoy the fruits of their labor. They sto

I've watched enough people grow up, become rich and powerful, then find in their 40s they have absolutely no skills to enjoy the fruits of their labor. They stopped practicing empathy so long ago to get to where they were they don't even realize how much of life's genuine enjoyment they are missing. There are a few who have the time of their lives the whole way through. Not very many. In short, just because one can, doesn't mean one should. Understand that you are closing off doors as much as opening new ones - make sure that you don't forget which ones you deep down don't want to close off.

jesterson 6y ago
That's a very underrated thought, unfortunately.
watwut 6y ago
> They stopped practicing empathy so long ago to get to where they were In this case, I would worry more about those who were harmed in the process. Whether colleges or family or friends.
lihaciudaniel 6y ago
>Understand that you are closing off doors as much as opening new ones You can't have everything. You must sacrifice family if you want success and if you want family you must sacrifice success. Some people aren't even aware of that and blame the former for their lack of success.
- unfunco 6y ago
  I don't think that's true at all, pulling two obvious examples out of the air, both Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, two of the most successful men in history, are both seemingly dedicated to their families. Success is also a subjective term, success here is (I think) implicitly being defined as wealth, both Gates and Buffett are hyper-successful, and I know plenty of more-ordinarily successful people with families too. Actually, I'm almost certain I know more successful people with families than I know successful loners.
  - lihaciudaniel 6y ago
    >both Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, two of the most successful men in history, are both seemingly dedicated to their families. So the richest (for most part of time) and second richest man have privilege to spend time with family? What a surprise >Success is also a subjective term Let's not play the word game, if you made a billion dollar last year. You are successful, this is pretty much the normal definition of it. Don't change it to fit something like family matters, community matters or noble purposes imho
  - FireLiar 6y ago
    I don't view anyone who has amassed anything under $10MM in networth as successful; I believe me and the parent are in agreement on this. You cannot amass this much wealth in a reasonable -- 40-50 y.os need not apply -- timeframe if you have a family commitment. Even significant others may become detrimental to that end, if they cannot accept that they're #2 now. Close relationships take time. An absolute fuckload of time. In order to gain that amount of wealth, it takes years of 70+ hour work weeks. You will neither have the time nor inclination to spend time with tour loved ones if you're truly operating on all cylinders. If you're not, that's fine. That's your choice, but there's many more out there that don't have those kinds of personal hangups and will dedicate more time to winning. You would not be able to understand unless you've been there. Oh and Warren Buffett is not a paragon of family values. He has had falling outs with and disowned one of his children -- the rest is washed away by PR firms. Gates too. Melinda would barely see him in the early days of MSFT. Neither would his first newborn child, while Gates was wrapped up in the antitrust suits. These people were businessman first and foremost. They did not get to the top of the food chain by spending quality time with their children. Theire businesses (or passions) will always be #1 to them. Invariably, these men have spent less time with their children and wives than any poor south americans -- who happen to have higher emotional wellness than their American counterparts. This isn't about not having a family. Many high perfomance men have families, but they always take a back seat to their missions. Perhaps in later life when they're more established, that changes; I've seen it happen.
    - hopfscotch 6y ago
      You could have saved the time spent writing this and just said “I’m insecure about my inablility to connect with people”.
proverbialbunny 6y ago
When I was in my late 20s I won the bitcoin goldrush. I had more money than I knew what to do with and from that I fell into depression. It took me a while to come to the realization that I love doing things, eg I love programming, but I don't always have projects I want to be doing. Thankfully, I love just doing fun things, so turns out companies are perfect for giving me things to do. I'm not a workaholic, quite the opposite. I have hobbies and what not, but I enjoy working. Maybe I never learned how to enjoy the fruits of my labor, or maybe I have, being lucky enough to go through psychological growth bumping into these challenges and prospering from them. The human condition is odd, isn't it?
- simplyinfinity 6y ago
  A lot of people want to be rich and do 'nothing'- eg. sit on a beach all day or travel all the time. Most people will experience the same thing as you did, but don't know it before hand. People want to be useful and do something, what they don't want is crap bosses and poor work conditions. From what I've observed, people with good bosses & work conditions (including adequate salary to cover their needs and save some) tend to desire less to be rich as all their needs are covered. More often people under poor working conditions & pay desire to be rich as means to get away from their situation thinking it would solve their problems.
fxtentacle 6y ago
Not only that, you also surely close old doors for the mere possibility of success. The article opens with a story about an old lady which went to the US during one of the most immigrant-friendly times and then started a furniture store during the peak house construction boom time when land was still cheap. I'm pretty sure that a similar immigrant entering the US nowadays will not only receive a less warm welcome, but also struggle like the rest of us during the recession. But no matter her financial fate in the US, she'll probably have to sacrifice family relationships back home either way.
- tomp 6y ago
  The point isn't how much factors she had in her favour. The point is, she had objectively worse starting point that millions of other people, yet she overcame them and flourished. Luck? Maybe (even "certainly" to some extent). But how many of her richer, more educated peers didn't even try (because of excuses)?

jesterson 6y ago

That's a very underrated thought, unfortunately.

watwut 6y ago

> They stopped practicing empathy so long ago to get to where they were In this case, I would worry more about those who were harmed in the process. Whether colleges or family or friends.

lihaciudaniel 6y ago

>Understand that you are closing off doors as much as opening new ones You can't have everything. You must sacrifice family if you want success and if you want family you must sacrifice success. Some people aren't even aware of that and blame the former for their lack of success.

unfunco 6y ago
I don't think that's true at all, pulling two obvious examples out of the air, both Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, two of the most successful men in history, are both seemingly dedicated to their families. Success is also a subjective term, success here is (I think) implicitly being defined as wealth, both Gates and Buffett are hyper-successful, and I know plenty of more-ordinarily successful people with families too. Actually, I'm almost certain I know more successful people with families than I know successful loners.
- lihaciudaniel 6y ago
  >both Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, two of the most successful men in history, are both seemingly dedicated to their families. So the richest (for most part of time) and second richest man have privilege to spend time with family? What a surprise >Success is also a subjective term Let's not play the word game, if you made a billion dollar last year. You are successful, this is pretty much the normal definition of it. Don't change it to fit something like family matters, community matters or noble purposes imho
- FireLiar 6y ago
  I don't view anyone who has amassed anything under $10MM in networth as successful; I believe me and the parent are in agreement on this. You cannot amass this much wealth in a reasonable -- 40-50 y.os need not apply -- timeframe if you have a family commitment. Even significant others may become detrimental to that end, if they cannot accept that they're #2 now. Close relationships take time. An absolute fuckload of time. In order to gain that amount of wealth, it takes years of 70+ hour work weeks. You will neither have the time nor inclination to spend time with tour loved ones if you're truly operating on all cylinders. If you're not, that's fine. That's your choice, but there's many more out there that don't have those kinds of personal hangups and will dedicate more time to winning. You would not be able to understand unless you've been there. Oh and Warren Buffett is not a paragon of family values. He has had falling outs with and disowned one of his children -- the rest is washed away by PR firms. Gates too. Melinda would barely see him in the early days of MSFT. Neither would his first newborn child, while Gates was wrapped up in the antitrust suits. These people were businessman first and foremost. They did not get to the top of the food chain by spending quality time with their children. Theire businesses (or passions) will always be #1 to them. Invariably, these men have spent less time with their children and wives than any poor south americans -- who happen to have higher emotional wellness than their American counterparts. This isn't about not having a family. Many high perfomance men have families, but they always take a back seat to their missions. Perhaps in later life when they're more established, that changes; I've seen it happen.
  - hopfscotch 6y ago
    You could have saved the time spent writing this and just said “I’m insecure about my inablility to connect with people”.

proverbialbunny 6y ago

When I was in my late 20s I won the bitcoin goldrush. I had more money than I knew what to do with and from that I fell into depression. It took me a while to come to the realization that I love doing things, eg I love programming, but I don't always have projects I want to be doing. Thankfully, I love just doing fun things, so turns out companies are perfect for giving me things to do. I'm not a workaholic, quite the opposite. I have hobbies and what not, but I enjoy working. Maybe I never learned how to enjoy the fruits of my labor, or maybe I have, being lucky enough to go through psychological growth bumping into these challenges and prospering from them. The human condition is odd, isn't it?

simplyinfinity 6y ago
A lot of people want to be rich and do 'nothing'- eg. sit on a beach all day or travel all the time. Most people will experience the same thing as you did, but don't know it before hand. People want to be useful and do something, what they don't want is crap bosses and poor work conditions. From what I've observed, people with good bosses & work conditions (including adequate salary to cover their needs and save some) tend to desire less to be rich as all their needs are covered. More often people under poor working conditions & pay desire to be rich as means to get away from their situation thinking it would solve their problems.

fxtentacle 6y ago

Not only that, you also surely close old doors for the mere possibility of success. The article opens with a story about an old lady which went to the US during one of the most immigrant-friendly times and then started a furniture store during the peak house construction boom time when land was still cheap. I'm pretty sure that a similar immigrant entering the US nowadays will not only receive a less warm welcome, but also struggle like the rest of us during the recession. But no matter her financial fate in the US, she'll probably have to sacrifice family relationships back home either way.

tomp 6y ago
The point isn't how much factors she had in her favour. The point is, she had objectively worse starting point that millions of other people, yet she overcame them and flourished. Luck? Maybe (even "certainly" to some extent). But how many of her richer, more educated peers didn't even try (because of excuses)?