6 ms·

Does anyone else find it frustrating when people talk about not working too hard and already having enough, after they have become wealthy?

antisocial 6y ago
Wealth is relative, one can be a multimillionaire and still feel inferior to a billionaire. Even in billionaires, there is a ranking game.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
  Whatever. There's a big difference between feeling inadequate while sitting in your third vacation home and working 40-60 hours a week at a job you hate because if you were doing what you actually wanted to do instead you'd be starving in a ditch somewhere by now.
- toast0 6y ago
  Probably the best predictor of if you're going to be upset about people having more than you if you've got $10M is if you're upset about people having more than you when you have $100k. There will always be people who have cooler stuff than you. If you get upset about it when the cool stuff isn't like stable housing, food security, and decent transportation, the problem isn't lack of funds, it's your attitude.
richajak 6y ago
agree, but we are not their audience. They want to signal to their fellow successful friends that they are humble. For mortals like us, we have to be smart, work hard, persevere, etc. Life is a journey that I must do to my best ability.
pritovido 6y ago
Derek did not became wealthy. He gave the $22 million dollars he got from selling his company to a fund, and gets over $1000 each month, hardly "wealthy". Derek has worked in a circus and knows how to live cheap enough. He also has lots of friends so he does not need to pay for lots of things. I know people that earn in excess $10.000/month and spend it all or even get into debts.
- Mikushi 6y ago
  $22 million dollars is not "hardly wealthy". It's filthy rich.
  - pritovido 6y ago
    He gave those $22 million away. That is the point.
    - marcinzm 6y ago
      He didn't give it away, he put it in a foundation that pays him 5% per year and probably avoided paying taxes on it as a result.
    - coldtea 6y ago
      He didn't, he siphoned them in a "charity/fund" for tax purposes. That's a rich man's move 101. It only becomes an actual charity if he (knock on wood) dies young from my understanding...
- marcinzm 6y ago
  Wikipedia disagrees: >Derek Sivers transferred ownership of his company to a charitable remainder unitrust for music education, and had the trust sell it to Disc Makers. This agreement requires the trust to pay Sivers 5% of the trust's value annually (hypothetically $1,100,000 pretax, based on a sale price of $22 million as reported by Sivers)[4] until death, while upon death the remainder will ultimately go to charity. So he actually earns around $90k per month. The foundation was also probably a tax dodge more than some altruistic thing.
coldtea 6y ago
Well, it's not like you don't have enough money with Island et al... (Yeah, I'm joking)
- chrisblackwell 6y ago
  I get so many emails for him, people asking me to invest in their Soccer team or whatever.
cheez 6y ago
What if, learning to be happy with "enough", is how people get filthy rich? https://sivers.org/richand https://sivers.org/richand
- tw04 6y ago
  So what's the path from living with 4 other people working 40 hours a week at McDonald's to filthy rich? Haven't gone to college, don't have a skill that sets you apart (music/art/etc), and aren't particularly intelligent or scrappy. Seems to me there's literally no path from A to B.
  - johnpaulkiser 6y ago
    If there's ever a time to do it it's when all of information is virtually free. Unfortunately this also means there are an equal amount of cheap distractions.
    - tw04 6y ago
      You understand there is a large swath of the human race that just isn't that intelligent right? Saying "but the information is free!!!" means absolutely NOTHING to someone who can't comprehend it. That's ignoring the fact you expect them to decipher which information is accurate and inaccurate. How exactly do you expect someone who lacks critical thinking skills to determine who is telling them the truth and who is lying? The fact there are hundreds of thousands to millions of US citizens who believe in Q-Anon should tell you how flawed your logic is.
  - cheez 6y ago
    As you implied, it requires intelligence and a desire to achieve. So lazy dum dums are unlikely to be able to do it. Which sounds about right.
  - fredsanford 6y ago
    Watch Forrest Gump.
ip26 6y ago
Different advice for different circumstances. Do you get upset when elite athletes talk about the importance of avoiding overtraining, when they have already become elite?
- secstate 6y ago
  Apples and oranges my friend. Being elite and overtraining are orthogonal. By definition, overtraining is pushing your body too far too fast. No one can train for a 100 mile race by doing 3 50 mile training runs in a week. That's not how physiology works. Discipline and lots of hard work can help you be elite, but overtraining is never good. Never.
  - matwood 6y ago
    True, but a lot of novices use overtraining as an excuse to just not train. Actual overtraining is pretty hard to do for a typical weekend warrior.
  - iateanapple 6y ago
    > Being elite and overtraining are orthogonal. Not really - it can take a serious lifter weeks to recover from a competition deadlift whereas a new lifter can recover in 1-2 days.
raghuveerdotnet 6y ago
That is why I usually try to avoid advice from people who (explicitly) give advice. It is better to observe what they do than what they say. Even if you wind up not enjoying the wealth, you’ll have understood it yourself and not be cursing yourself for not having tried. Except for life and death situations, and situations involving technical expertise, this applies to everything. Most of the time it is just our laziness selecting for examples of success that allow it to stay while reaping the benefits of working hard. A mind virus discouraging responsibility.

antisocial 6y ago

Wealth is relative, one can be a multimillionaire and still feel inferior to a billionaire. Even in billionaires, there is a ranking game.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
Whatever. There's a big difference between feeling inadequate while sitting in your third vacation home and working 40-60 hours a week at a job you hate because if you were doing what you actually wanted to do instead you'd be starving in a ditch somewhere by now.
toast0 6y ago
Probably the best predictor of if you're going to be upset about people having more than you if you've got $10M is if you're upset about people having more than you when you have $100k. There will always be people who have cooler stuff than you. If you get upset about it when the cool stuff isn't like stable housing, food security, and decent transportation, the problem isn't lack of funds, it's your attitude.

richajak 6y ago

agree, but we are not their audience. They want to signal to their fellow successful friends that they are humble. For mortals like us, we have to be smart, work hard, persevere, etc. Life is a journey that I must do to my best ability.

pritovido 6y ago

Derek did not became wealthy. He gave the $22 million dollars he got from selling his company to a fund, and gets over $1000 each month, hardly "wealthy". Derek has worked in a circus and knows how to live cheap enough. He also has lots of friends so he does not need to pay for lots of things. I know people that earn in excess $10.000/month and spend it all or even get into debts.

Mikushi 6y ago
$22 million dollars is not "hardly wealthy". It's filthy rich.
- pritovido 6y ago
  He gave those $22 million away. That is the point.
  - marcinzm 6y ago
    He didn't give it away, he put it in a foundation that pays him 5% per year and probably avoided paying taxes on it as a result.
  - coldtea 6y ago
    He didn't, he siphoned them in a "charity/fund" for tax purposes. That's a rich man's move 101. It only becomes an actual charity if he (knock on wood) dies young from my understanding...
marcinzm 6y ago
Wikipedia disagrees: >Derek Sivers transferred ownership of his company to a charitable remainder unitrust for music education, and had the trust sell it to Disc Makers. This agreement requires the trust to pay Sivers 5% of the trust's value annually (hypothetically $1,100,000 pretax, based on a sale price of $22 million as reported by Sivers)[4] until death, while upon death the remainder will ultimately go to charity. So he actually earns around $90k per month. The foundation was also probably a tax dodge more than some altruistic thing.

coldtea 6y ago

Well, it's not like you don't have enough money with Island et al... (Yeah, I'm joking)

chrisblackwell 6y ago
I get so many emails for him, people asking me to invest in their Soccer team or whatever.

cheez 6y ago

What if, learning to be happy with "enough", is how people get filthy rich? https://sivers.org/richand https://sivers.org/richand

tw04 6y ago
So what's the path from living with 4 other people working 40 hours a week at McDonald's to filthy rich? Haven't gone to college, don't have a skill that sets you apart (music/art/etc), and aren't particularly intelligent or scrappy. Seems to me there's literally no path from A to B.
- johnpaulkiser 6y ago
  If there's ever a time to do it it's when all of information is virtually free. Unfortunately this also means there are an equal amount of cheap distractions.
  - tw04 6y ago
    You understand there is a large swath of the human race that just isn't that intelligent right? Saying "but the information is free!!!" means absolutely NOTHING to someone who can't comprehend it. That's ignoring the fact you expect them to decipher which information is accurate and inaccurate. How exactly do you expect someone who lacks critical thinking skills to determine who is telling them the truth and who is lying? The fact there are hundreds of thousands to millions of US citizens who believe in Q-Anon should tell you how flawed your logic is.
- cheez 6y ago
  As you implied, it requires intelligence and a desire to achieve. So lazy dum dums are unlikely to be able to do it. Which sounds about right.
- fredsanford 6y ago
  Watch Forrest Gump.

ip26 6y ago

Different advice for different circumstances. Do you get upset when elite athletes talk about the importance of avoiding overtraining, when they have already become elite?

secstate 6y ago
Apples and oranges my friend. Being elite and overtraining are orthogonal. By definition, overtraining is pushing your body too far too fast. No one can train for a 100 mile race by doing 3 50 mile training runs in a week. That's not how physiology works. Discipline and lots of hard work can help you be elite, but overtraining is never good. Never.
- matwood 6y ago
  True, but a lot of novices use overtraining as an excuse to just not train. Actual overtraining is pretty hard to do for a typical weekend warrior.
- iateanapple 6y ago
  > Being elite and overtraining are orthogonal. Not really - it can take a serious lifter weeks to recover from a competition deadlift whereas a new lifter can recover in 1-2 days.

raghuveerdotnet 6y ago

That is why I usually try to avoid advice from people who (explicitly) give advice. It is better to observe what they do than what they say. Even if you wind up not enjoying the wealth, you’ll have understood it yourself and not be cursing yourself for not having tried. Except for life and death situations, and situations involving technical expertise, this applies to everything. Most of the time it is just our laziness selecting for examples of success that allow it to stay while reaping the benefits of working hard. A mind virus discouraging responsibility.