7 ms·

5 minute walk then 20 minute wait then 5 minute walk back. When you're earning $50+ an hour, which many in cities are easily clearing, it starts to make a lot

5 minute walk then 20 minute wait then 5 minute walk back. When you're earning $50+ an hour, which many in cities are easily clearing, it starts to make a lot of sense to pay someone else to do your waiting for you.

ghaff 6y ago
Call ahead?
asdff 6y ago
Takeout is 15-20 minutes, delivery is 40-60. Call ahead, and the food will be ready by the time you get yourself together, walk out the door, and arrive at the restaurant.
- missedthecue 6y ago
  Right, but you can be doing other things during those 40-60 minutes
  - Agathos 6y ago
    I usually spend that time distracted with thoughts of where is my delivery, why is my delivery late, I'm so hungry, why did I even order delivery? The walk is a lot more pleasant.
OkGoDoIt 6y ago
This is maybe a reasonable argument for lunch on a workday, but doesn’t really apply for dinner or on weekends. There’s a counter argument to be made that for many people their productivity and creativity increases when interspersed with a bit of walking, change of environment, sunlight, etc. Anyway it’s largely a matter of preference. There’s are certainly occasions where it’s nice to relax and order door-to-door delivery regardless, although I’m never personally willing to pay the insane fees that apps like Uber Eats charge.
- chillwaves 6y ago
  Don't you see? My time is too valuable to do anything vaguely unpleasant. The entire economy would suffer if I had to pick up my own food.
  - TrackerFF 6y ago
    I'm probably going to get downvoted for this, but yes - that's spot on. It's exactly that kind of attitude I've seen far too often in the culture of well-paid tech workers. Their lives are all about optimization of time resources / time management, and everyone should bow to their needs - if it results in them shaving off some minutes here and there. After all, they're making $300k/year working on important products, so it's only natural that every corner that could be cut, should be cut - even if it means driving people out of business. When confronted with the logic, they regurgitate the same "But you see, my time is worth $xx, 24/7/365 - so 30 mins saved on task x is a net profit for me" (even though, in fact, they would not be working during those 30 minutes)
    - scarface74 6y ago
      We all pay people to do things that we could do ourselves that we would rather not do. Every time we eat out, pay a lawn service to cut our grass, have someone else wash our car. Yes. It is dumb though to justify it based on how much you get paid hourly. They don’t understand the real concept of opportunity cost.
      - brandonmenc 6y ago
        > It is dumb though to justify it based on how much you get paid hourly. imo my time is actually worth many multiples of what my employer pays me for it.
        scarface74 6y ago
        That’s fine. You can value your time however you want. But don’t pretend it’s done grand economic principle. But your time is only “worth” monetarily what the market will pay for it.
colinmhayes 6y ago
Walking around is usually one of the highlights of my day. Walking down the block isn't a chore, it's a pleasure. Delivery is cold by the time I get it half the time, I want stuff done well I've got to do it myself.
- nickff 6y ago
  You're explaining why you don't use delivery, but not why "it doesn't make sense".
  - colinmhayes 6y ago
    Would people really rather have cold food that costs more than walk for 10 minutes?
    - nickff 6y ago
      Other people may have a combination of: - better delivery options - an aversion to walking, or no walk-able options - higher risk tolerance for lukewarm food People differ in more than physical appearance.
    - austhrow743 6y ago
      In a central area of a city? Absolutely.
scarface74 6y ago
I hate this line of reasoning and so do many economists. It’s not the “opportunity cost” you should be measuring. It’s the “opportunity cost of the next best alternative.” If I am an hourly worker making $50 and going to get food would be an hour that I wouldn’t be working, then yes it is worth $50 to not spend it going to get food. But if I am choosing between watching Netflix and going to get food. The next best alternative pays $0. From a purely financial view it makes sense to get food.
- s1artibartfast 6y ago
  Most simply, some people value their leisure time as much or more than their hourly wage. I find this become more true the more someone is compensated and the more they have to work.
  - scarface74 6y ago
    I have no problem with that. Just don’t wrap it in some BS about opportunity cost and how much their time is worth. There are three concepts that HN commenters don’t understand - “Monopoly” and anti-trust - the legal concept of censorship. - opportunity costs.
- ByteJockey 6y ago
  I just want to make sure I'm following your train of thought correctly regarding this object. So, say, an hourly contractor who orders delivery so they can get back to work sooner still makes sense to you, right?
  - scarface74 6y ago
    If he would get more hours in during that time instead of going home earlier, then you could value the time saved against how much it would cost. If he makes $50 an hour and he can get an extra hour in working, if it is cheaper for him to order food then yes it makes economic sense. On the other hand if he were at home watching Netflix and he spent the money set aside for his utility bill to eat out and his lights got cut off , the opportunity cost wasn’t the $50, it was that he could have had lights.
mindslight 6y ago
If you aren't being paid hourly, this is utterly fallacious. If you are being paid hourly, you should be billing for thinking while walking down the street or taking a shower. That is some of your most productive time. Also as another commenter mentioned, cold food. Furthermore, avoiding all of the extra zero-use plastic waste they throw in the bag by default.
- austhrow743 6y ago
  Most high earning people have the ability to influence their pay through expending time and effort.
  - mindslight 6y ago
    Don't confuse spending time or effort with achieving results.
analog31 6y ago
Amusingly, you have to spend the same amount of time exercising, to work off the health effects of eating restaurant food.
wittyreference 6y ago
Speaking from when I lived in the middle of a major city: I am working and/or enjoying highly limited relaxation time. I am willing to pay a premium to have the food arrive, and have the time surrounding "getting food in hand" be minimized, so as to minimize work interruption or maximize current recreational activity. It's essentially the opportunity cost argument, applied to utility measure rather than literal dollars.

ghaff 6y ago

Call ahead?

asdff 6y ago

Takeout is 15-20 minutes, delivery is 40-60. Call ahead, and the food will be ready by the time you get yourself together, walk out the door, and arrive at the restaurant.

missedthecue 6y ago
Right, but you can be doing other things during those 40-60 minutes
- Agathos 6y ago
  I usually spend that time distracted with thoughts of where is my delivery, why is my delivery late, I'm so hungry, why did I even order delivery? The walk is a lot more pleasant.

OkGoDoIt 6y ago

This is maybe a reasonable argument for lunch on a workday, but doesn’t really apply for dinner or on weekends. There’s a counter argument to be made that for many people their productivity and creativity increases when interspersed with a bit of walking, change of environment, sunlight, etc. Anyway it’s largely a matter of preference. There’s are certainly occasions where it’s nice to relax and order door-to-door delivery regardless, although I’m never personally willing to pay the insane fees that apps like Uber Eats charge.

chillwaves 6y ago
Don't you see? My time is too valuable to do anything vaguely unpleasant. The entire economy would suffer if I had to pick up my own food.
- TrackerFF 6y ago
  I'm probably going to get downvoted for this, but yes - that's spot on. It's exactly that kind of attitude I've seen far too often in the culture of well-paid tech workers. Their lives are all about optimization of time resources / time management, and everyone should bow to their needs - if it results in them shaving off some minutes here and there. After all, they're making $300k/year working on important products, so it's only natural that every corner that could be cut, should be cut - even if it means driving people out of business. When confronted with the logic, they regurgitate the same "But you see, my time is worth $xx, 24/7/365 - so 30 mins saved on task x is a net profit for me" (even though, in fact, they would not be working during those 30 minutes)
  - scarface74 6y ago
    We all pay people to do things that we could do ourselves that we would rather not do. Every time we eat out, pay a lawn service to cut our grass, have someone else wash our car. Yes. It is dumb though to justify it based on how much you get paid hourly. They don’t understand the real concept of opportunity cost.
    - brandonmenc 6y ago
      > It is dumb though to justify it based on how much you get paid hourly. imo my time is actually worth many multiples of what my employer pays me for it.
      - scarface74 6y ago
        That’s fine. You can value your time however you want. But don’t pretend it’s done grand economic principle. But your time is only “worth” monetarily what the market will pay for it.

colinmhayes 6y ago

Walking around is usually one of the highlights of my day. Walking down the block isn't a chore, it's a pleasure. Delivery is cold by the time I get it half the time, I want stuff done well I've got to do it myself.

nickff 6y ago
You're explaining why you don't use delivery, but not why "it doesn't make sense".
- colinmhayes 6y ago
  Would people really rather have cold food that costs more than walk for 10 minutes?
  - nickff 6y ago
    Other people may have a combination of: - better delivery options - an aversion to walking, or no walk-able options - higher risk tolerance for lukewarm food People differ in more than physical appearance.
  - austhrow743 6y ago
    In a central area of a city? Absolutely.

scarface74 6y ago

I hate this line of reasoning and so do many economists. It’s not the “opportunity cost” you should be measuring. It’s the “opportunity cost of the next best alternative.” If I am an hourly worker making $50 and going to get food would be an hour that I wouldn’t be working, then yes it is worth $50 to not spend it going to get food. But if I am choosing between watching Netflix and going to get food. The next best alternative pays $0. From a purely financial view it makes sense to get food.

s1artibartfast 6y ago
Most simply, some people value their leisure time as much or more than their hourly wage. I find this become more true the more someone is compensated and the more they have to work.
- scarface74 6y ago
  I have no problem with that. Just don’t wrap it in some BS about opportunity cost and how much their time is worth. There are three concepts that HN commenters don’t understand - “Monopoly” and anti-trust - the legal concept of censorship. - opportunity costs.
ByteJockey 6y ago
I just want to make sure I'm following your train of thought correctly regarding this object. So, say, an hourly contractor who orders delivery so they can get back to work sooner still makes sense to you, right?
- scarface74 6y ago
  If he would get more hours in during that time instead of going home earlier, then you could value the time saved against how much it would cost. If he makes $50 an hour and he can get an extra hour in working, if it is cheaper for him to order food then yes it makes economic sense. On the other hand if he were at home watching Netflix and he spent the money set aside for his utility bill to eat out and his lights got cut off , the opportunity cost wasn’t the $50, it was that he could have had lights.

mindslight 6y ago

If you aren't being paid hourly, this is utterly fallacious. If you are being paid hourly, you should be billing for thinking while walking down the street or taking a shower. That is some of your most productive time. Also as another commenter mentioned, cold food. Furthermore, avoiding all of the extra zero-use plastic waste they throw in the bag by default.

austhrow743 6y ago
Most high earning people have the ability to influence their pay through expending time and effort.
- mindslight 6y ago
  Don't confuse spending time or effort with achieving results.

analog31 6y ago

Amusingly, you have to spend the same amount of time exercising, to work off the health effects of eating restaurant food.

wittyreference 6y ago

Speaking from when I lived in the middle of a major city: I am working and/or enjoying highly limited relaxation time. I am willing to pay a premium to have the food arrive, and have the time surrounding "getting food in hand" be minimized, so as to minimize work interruption or maximize current recreational activity. It's essentially the opportunity cost argument, applied to utility measure rather than literal dollars.