13 ms·

"Three paychecks is a month and a half of income (rent and two car payments by my fevered calculations, which never stop)" Pay attention to those last three wo

"Three paychecks is a month and a half of income (rent and two car payments by my fevered calculations, which never stop)" Pay attention to those last three words. This is very important. I've been on both sides too, and to me those words are like a slap in the face: stark reality. If you're poor enough (relative to the costs of your life) you are at a constant exhausting deficit because you CANNOT stop calculating and recalculating the mechanisms of your basic survival. Even if you're not juggling bills and having to gauge what will blow up worst, you're projecting worst-case scenarios and trying to plan against adverse situations, which will come up more often for you (example: old car problems) "which never stop" Consider those words seriously. You can improve the quality and performance of a person a great deal by allowing them to function as they 'normally' would, rather than in constant emergency mode.

tasuki 5y ago
In many places around the world, poor people don't have "old car problems".
- Kye 5y ago
  They also don't necessarily find themselves in places that are entirely car-dependent. You can't really get by without a car in most of the US, and it's by design. Even in big cities.
- machello13 5y ago
  Could you explain what point you're trying to make?
  - StavrosK 5y ago
    I guess they mean that in many places around the world, public transportation is more usable, so people don't need cars.
    - faraaz98 5y ago
      or someone that's considered poor, can't afford one.
      - _underfl0w_ 5y ago
        Easier to do in some places than others. Public transport is nonexistent in several places here in Texas for example - you have to have a car (or know someone who does) to get to your job in the first place. But commuting puts wear and tear on the car, especially if you can't find work particularly close to where you live.
        swader999 5y ago
        I read a book once on extreme early retirement that advised to pick your place of work and house so that they were within walking distance of each other and also walking distance to a grocery store. The quality of the work and even your income weren't as critical as this. The idea being the goal was to finish work as soon as possible in your life when investment income could take over. Live in a one room rental, have one plate, a pot and a fork. Be a Spartan. That was the gist of it. Retire in five to ten years. Was compelling on some levels but orders of magnitude more difficult when you consider trying to bring a spouse and family into this.
        pnutjam 5y ago
        That's rich people advice. Poor people know that wages can vary so much from place to place.
        2cb 5y ago
        Or since this is tech we’re talking about, just work from home then live where you want, no need to be stuck in a tiny apartment in a big city.
        kelnos 5y ago
        I would find that kind of Spartan life to be pretty bleak and depressing. Sure, some people would like it, but I expect most people would not.
  - tasuki 5y ago
    The really poor people can't afford cars.
- sokoloff 5y ago
  I think people wildly over-estimate the costs of driving an older (say 5-15 years old) car and so are prone to over-pay for a new or newer car, believing they're making a good choice based on flawed data. (They remember the time they had to dump $1200 into repairs into some old heap that isn't even shiny anymore. They don't remember that for the last 24 months in a row, they saved $450 in payments, $200 in depreciation, $125 in insurance, and $20 in property/sales taxes each month. They could have a $1200 repair twice a year and still come out way ahead.) We drive older cars. I can think of 3 times in the last 25 years where we've had car trouble that interrupted or hampered motoring (a failed battery, a failed clutch release bearing, and an electrical short). The battery is a 20 minute swap; the electrical short indeed sucked [because it required a tow home and took me most of a day to find where the short was]; the clutch release bearing left the car limpable and she was able to drive it home with quick instructions on how to start the car and drive it with third gear selected for the whole trip. On one hand, I'm happy that the market (read: people) wildly underprices used cars, because it makes for cheap motoring for us. On the other hand, it frustrates me that people's third largest expense category is higher than it has to be and many of them could improve their situation by better optimizing this category. tl;dr: If you want cheap[er] motoring, buy a 4-8 year old Toyota or Honda and drive it until it's 15-20 years old. Drop collision insurance as soon as you've saved enough from this strategy to replace the car. Add that savings to your snowball.
  - ryandrake 5y ago
    Thank you! The days of those stereotypical used cars that fall apart at 100,000 miles are pretty much over. A 10 year old economy car, maintained basically (not obsessively), will probably outlast your need for it. Yes, a 1980s turbo Porsche or 1990s M3 will eat $10K+ a year due to constantly breaking. Not nearly the same as a 2010 Toyota Matrix, which you can probably get for $5000 and drive forever.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
  - sdenton4 5y ago
    (Consider also: just not owning a car. Bikes and transit for the day to day and occasional outlays for wknds in the mountains is cheaper than owning any car.)
bsanr2 5y ago
Tl;dr Poor people (and racial and ethnic minorities, and women, and queer folk) are not dumb. They just have to turn their equal cognitive resources towards things other (and more fundamental to survival) than their magnum opus/business idea/etc. Those who overcome this are HIGHLY effective, but it's not fair that we ask it of them. That's not how an effective or efficient or just society runs, and we leave money on the table and room for any adversaries we might have to maneuver when we doom whole classes of people to constant, pervasive desperation.
- username90 5y ago
  No, the solution is to acknowledge that they are dumb and therefore focus resources with the assumption that they are dumb. USA assumes that poor people are smart, Europe assumes poor people are dumb. The European way is much better, and yes poor people in American are dumb, just like they are in Europe.
  - domador 5y ago
    Is this sarcasm?
    - username90 5y ago
      No. I think that dumb people deserve good lives as well, having policies that only works for non dumb people is dumb.
      - domador 5y ago
        Hmm... I'd agree that policies should help everyone, including people who are "dumb"... but not that poor people are categorically dumb.
        username90 5y ago
        Not all poor people are dumb, but most are. And since we are talking about statistical level effects poor people being dumb will greatly influence them. So instead of asking "why are poor people fat, we should fix that!" you can also ask "why are dumb people fat, we should fix that!". The second gives a lot of different angles and can help find solutions the first question wont find.
chucky_z 5y ago
I’ve been extremely lucky moving to the Bay Area to be someone who has not failed. I grew up poor. Today, I have enough money for rent and bills, I still think and worry about them. The endless what if’s are a lifetime long curse, and there is no cure.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- lazide 5y ago
  Mindfulness, treatment/therapy, etc. can go a really, really long way though. Speaking as someone who’s been there. Investing in yourself is absolutely key. It’s something most folks from our background have been taught to not even attempt. Not doing it just reinforces the cycle.
- Applejinx 5y ago
  No, it's that you don't have enough margin (possibly because your lifestyle expanded to keep pace with your resources?) My parents died. They'd been sitting on property and had never tried to 'featherbed' their kids' experience, so we all grew up THINKING total failure was an option. I survived until I was over 50, very much living constantly with less than $1000 in the bank and a roof over my head (one exception to the latter, but it didn't last long) I went, at a stroke, from that, to more than $100k in the bank (quite a bit has now been turned into equipment for my work, but not all) If you have enough money to go for a YEAR with everything else collapsed and gone to zero… as in, however lush or humble your lifestyle, you lose all means of income, but it'll taka a year for you to burn through all your money and have none left… and then you have not lost your normal income after all… that would probably shut off the 'what ifs'. It's a margin thing. You can continue to keep track, you can continue to fill out your checkbook and all that, but if your margin is roughly a year before you're in serious danger then you will probably not burn extra cycles worrying about your finances. And if you do, the therapy to straighten that out won't be super hard. I bet you 'enough money for rent and bills' means you can always pay them, not that you've got 12 times that amount socked away. I absolutely wouldn't have ever had that except that my parents literally died and left it to me. I don't design my life to squirrel away 12x more money than I will ever need. I think it's unhealthy, though obviously my folks did something of that nature to create the situation.
pnutjam 5y ago
I noticed where the writer found out they were the lowest paid person. This is how the wealthy class really keep people from moving up. Your pay is forever tied to what you used to make. It's hard enough to break the circuit in your mind, it's near impossible to do so with your employer. At my current employer, they offered me a 10% paycut to convert from contract to FTE. I could not afford that, but I also can't afford to be out of work. I pushed back gently and eventually agreed to converting at the same rate. I knew other people in the same job were making at least $10k more. The next guy to convert, was able to negotiate harder and I believe he ended up with a higher rate, despite making less then me as a contractor. He used the knowledge of my pay (and my name) to negotiate, which I would never do to someone, since I started at the bottom. This impacted my relationship with my boss. The company did later give me a pay correction of about 5%, after 2 other team members quit for higher paying jobs. One of whom was making more then me and one who was probably making less.
- cryptica 5y ago
  >> Your pay is forever tied to what you used to make. It's not just a psychological "avoid the subject" kind of trick. They literally refuse to give you raises no matter what. In my last job, I was likely the top developer in the company (the company had hundreds of millions of $ of runway just sitting there) and I was putting constant pressure on my boss for a raise and promotion for years (they even admitted that I was one of their top devs). Instead of trying to give me a good deal, the CTO snapped and threatened me with violence - The next day, I continued the discussion and was still pushing forward with my demands (threatening to quit) and they refused to give me anything at all. I had a nervous breakdown right there (first time ever in my entire career) and I ended up rage-quitting (it got to shouting and personal insults). The only reason I took things this far was because I thought the system would finally yield some rewards once I showed enough initiative and ambition (backed by years of hard work and delivering great results). It didn't. The system is completely rigged. It's an illusion that there is any kind of meritocracy. Once you really buy into all the "you control your own destiny" rhetoric and start to push yourself and others beyond the limits you thought you were capable of (when you start to impress people with your skills and ambition), you realize that it achieves nothing. It's all a big show. "It's all a big club, and you ain't in it" - George Carlin
throwawaybbq1 5y ago
The last sentence struck a cord with me. Emergency-mode doesn't just have to do with money. Asking for constant status updates on projects has the same effect. I don't understand why some companies force this on employees/teams.
Izikiel43 5y ago
Coming from a country in constant economic crisis, thinking of what ifs all the time is the way of living, then moving to a 1st world country life suddenly enters easy mode, as you know problems in a 1st world country won't ever be as bad as what you used to know, and since you are used to having issues, budgeting and saving become easier. A lot of the things the author mentioned, I would also do, just because I don't see the point of wasting money if they are offered for free, and saying hello to the cleaning crew is just basic human decency, c'mon. Also, the paycheck stuff, anyone who has ever cared about money would throw a fit if the money is not in their account the next day, from what I gather all the author's coworkers never had an issue in their life.
magicloop 5y ago
That phrase "emergency mode" really hits home the underlying mental mode that drives an understanding of the situation. It only takes a few trigger words or phrases to take us back to past trauma and difficulties, like the tremors before an earthquake. I have first-hand experience of the "caste" system that can emerge in tech environments. It was my experience that our colleagues in the lower caste told scare stories (and you see the odd firing/letting go early to feel they are real) and you feel distant from the "upper" caste. But actual factual reality in my specific experience was a basically fair system with strong accountability. I was grateful, and benefitted from the experience overall. It is hard in such environments to "be normal" because the primitive part of the brain is in "fear mode". That part of the brain actually makes the most important decisions in your life. What is the way through? My opinion is to try and make honest real connection at a human level with your colleagues but that is actually hard to do. That is why the part of the story I found most painful was the comment about "bleached cotton". It was a delicate moment where friendship could have started but was cut off. Lastly, I thought it was an endearing turn of phrase to first introduce the engineer as someone from Harvard. And then later refer to the person as "Harvard" (instead of the engineer's actual name or some pronoun).

tasuki 5y ago

In many places around the world, poor people don't have "old car problems".

Kye 5y ago
They also don't necessarily find themselves in places that are entirely car-dependent. You can't really get by without a car in most of the US, and it's by design. Even in big cities.
machello13 5y ago
Could you explain what point you're trying to make?
- StavrosK 5y ago
  I guess they mean that in many places around the world, public transportation is more usable, so people don't need cars.
  - faraaz98 5y ago
    or someone that's considered poor, can't afford one.
    - _underfl0w_ 5y ago
      Easier to do in some places than others. Public transport is nonexistent in several places here in Texas for example - you have to have a car (or know someone who does) to get to your job in the first place. But commuting puts wear and tear on the car, especially if you can't find work particularly close to where you live.
      - swader999 5y ago
        I read a book once on extreme early retirement that advised to pick your place of work and house so that they were within walking distance of each other and also walking distance to a grocery store. The quality of the work and even your income weren't as critical as this. The idea being the goal was to finish work as soon as possible in your life when investment income could take over. Live in a one room rental, have one plate, a pot and a fork. Be a Spartan. That was the gist of it. Retire in five to ten years. Was compelling on some levels but orders of magnitude more difficult when you consider trying to bring a spouse and family into this.
        pnutjam 5y ago
        That's rich people advice. Poor people know that wages can vary so much from place to place.
        2cb 5y ago
        Or since this is tech we’re talking about, just work from home then live where you want, no need to be stuck in a tiny apartment in a big city.
        kelnos 5y ago
        I would find that kind of Spartan life to be pretty bleak and depressing. Sure, some people would like it, but I expect most people would not.
- tasuki 5y ago
  The really poor people can't afford cars.
sokoloff 5y ago
I think people wildly over-estimate the costs of driving an older (say 5-15 years old) car and so are prone to over-pay for a new or newer car, believing they're making a good choice based on flawed data. (They remember the time they had to dump $1200 into repairs into some old heap that isn't even shiny anymore. They don't remember that for the last 24 months in a row, they saved $450 in payments, $200 in depreciation, $125 in insurance, and $20 in property/sales taxes each month. They could have a $1200 repair twice a year and still come out way ahead.) We drive older cars. I can think of 3 times in the last 25 years where we've had car trouble that interrupted or hampered motoring (a failed battery, a failed clutch release bearing, and an electrical short). The battery is a 20 minute swap; the electrical short indeed sucked [because it required a tow home and took me most of a day to find where the short was]; the clutch release bearing left the car limpable and she was able to drive it home with quick instructions on how to start the car and drive it with third gear selected for the whole trip. On one hand, I'm happy that the market (read: people) wildly underprices used cars, because it makes for cheap motoring for us. On the other hand, it frustrates me that people's third largest expense category is higher than it has to be and many of them could improve their situation by better optimizing this category. tl;dr: If you want cheap[er] motoring, buy a 4-8 year old Toyota or Honda and drive it until it's 15-20 years old. Drop collision insurance as soon as you've saved enough from this strategy to replace the car. Add that savings to your snowball.
- ryandrake 5y ago
  Thank you! The days of those stereotypical used cars that fall apart at 100,000 miles are pretty much over. A 10 year old economy car, maintained basically (not obsessively), will probably outlast your need for it. Yes, a 1980s turbo Porsche or 1990s M3 will eat $10K+ a year due to constantly breaking. Not nearly the same as a 2010 Toyota Matrix, which you can probably get for $5000 and drive forever.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- sdenton4 5y ago
  (Consider also: just not owning a car. Bikes and transit for the day to day and occasional outlays for wknds in the mountains is cheaper than owning any car.)

bsanr2 5y ago

Tl;dr Poor people (and racial and ethnic minorities, and women, and queer folk) are not dumb. They just have to turn their equal cognitive resources towards things other (and more fundamental to survival) than their magnum opus/business idea/etc. Those who overcome this are HIGHLY effective, but it's not fair that we ask it of them. That's not how an effective or efficient or just society runs, and we leave money on the table and room for any adversaries we might have to maneuver when we doom whole classes of people to constant, pervasive desperation.

username90 5y ago
No, the solution is to acknowledge that they are dumb and therefore focus resources with the assumption that they are dumb. USA assumes that poor people are smart, Europe assumes poor people are dumb. The European way is much better, and yes poor people in American are dumb, just like they are in Europe.
- domador 5y ago
  Is this sarcasm?
  - username90 5y ago
    No. I think that dumb people deserve good lives as well, having policies that only works for non dumb people is dumb.
    - domador 5y ago
      Hmm... I'd agree that policies should help everyone, including people who are "dumb"... but not that poor people are categorically dumb.
      - username90 5y ago
        Not all poor people are dumb, but most are. And since we are talking about statistical level effects poor people being dumb will greatly influence them. So instead of asking "why are poor people fat, we should fix that!" you can also ask "why are dumb people fat, we should fix that!". The second gives a lot of different angles and can help find solutions the first question wont find.

chucky_z 5y ago

I’ve been extremely lucky moving to the Bay Area to be someone who has not failed. I grew up poor. Today, I have enough money for rent and bills, I still think and worry about them. The endless what if’s are a lifetime long curse, and there is no cure.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
lazide 5y ago
Mindfulness, treatment/therapy, etc. can go a really, really long way though. Speaking as someone who’s been there. Investing in yourself is absolutely key. It’s something most folks from our background have been taught to not even attempt. Not doing it just reinforces the cycle.
Applejinx 5y ago
No, it's that you don't have enough margin (possibly because your lifestyle expanded to keep pace with your resources?) My parents died. They'd been sitting on property and had never tried to 'featherbed' their kids' experience, so we all grew up THINKING total failure was an option. I survived until I was over 50, very much living constantly with less than $1000 in the bank and a roof over my head (one exception to the latter, but it didn't last long) I went, at a stroke, from that, to more than $100k in the bank (quite a bit has now been turned into equipment for my work, but not all) If you have enough money to go for a YEAR with everything else collapsed and gone to zero… as in, however lush or humble your lifestyle, you lose all means of income, but it'll taka a year for you to burn through all your money and have none left… and then you have not lost your normal income after all… that would probably shut off the 'what ifs'. It's a margin thing. You can continue to keep track, you can continue to fill out your checkbook and all that, but if your margin is roughly a year before you're in serious danger then you will probably not burn extra cycles worrying about your finances. And if you do, the therapy to straighten that out won't be super hard. I bet you 'enough money for rent and bills' means you can always pay them, not that you've got 12 times that amount socked away. I absolutely wouldn't have ever had that except that my parents literally died and left it to me. I don't design my life to squirrel away 12x more money than I will ever need. I think it's unhealthy, though obviously my folks did something of that nature to create the situation.

pnutjam 5y ago

I noticed where the writer found out they were the lowest paid person. This is how the wealthy class really keep people from moving up. Your pay is forever tied to what you used to make. It's hard enough to break the circuit in your mind, it's near impossible to do so with your employer. At my current employer, they offered me a 10% paycut to convert from contract to FTE. I could not afford that, but I also can't afford to be out of work. I pushed back gently and eventually agreed to converting at the same rate. I knew other people in the same job were making at least $10k more. The next guy to convert, was able to negotiate harder and I believe he ended up with a higher rate, despite making less then me as a contractor. He used the knowledge of my pay (and my name) to negotiate, which I would never do to someone, since I started at the bottom. This impacted my relationship with my boss. The company did later give me a pay correction of about 5%, after 2 other team members quit for higher paying jobs. One of whom was making more then me and one who was probably making less.

cryptica 5y ago
>> Your pay is forever tied to what you used to make. It's not just a psychological "avoid the subject" kind of trick. They literally refuse to give you raises no matter what. In my last job, I was likely the top developer in the company (the company had hundreds of millions of $ of runway just sitting there) and I was putting constant pressure on my boss for a raise and promotion for years (they even admitted that I was one of their top devs). Instead of trying to give me a good deal, the CTO snapped and threatened me with violence - The next day, I continued the discussion and was still pushing forward with my demands (threatening to quit) and they refused to give me anything at all. I had a nervous breakdown right there (first time ever in my entire career) and I ended up rage-quitting (it got to shouting and personal insults). The only reason I took things this far was because I thought the system would finally yield some rewards once I showed enough initiative and ambition (backed by years of hard work and delivering great results). It didn't. The system is completely rigged. It's an illusion that there is any kind of meritocracy. Once you really buy into all the "you control your own destiny" rhetoric and start to push yourself and others beyond the limits you thought you were capable of (when you start to impress people with your skills and ambition), you realize that it achieves nothing. It's all a big show. "It's all a big club, and you ain't in it" - George Carlin

throwawaybbq1 5y ago

The last sentence struck a cord with me. Emergency-mode doesn't just have to do with money. Asking for constant status updates on projects has the same effect. I don't understand why some companies force this on employees/teams.

Izikiel43 5y ago

Coming from a country in constant economic crisis, thinking of what ifs all the time is the way of living, then moving to a 1st world country life suddenly enters easy mode, as you know problems in a 1st world country won't ever be as bad as what you used to know, and since you are used to having issues, budgeting and saving become easier. A lot of the things the author mentioned, I would also do, just because I don't see the point of wasting money if they are offered for free, and saying hello to the cleaning crew is just basic human decency, c'mon. Also, the paycheck stuff, anyone who has ever cared about money would throw a fit if the money is not in their account the next day, from what I gather all the author's coworkers never had an issue in their life.

magicloop 5y ago

That phrase "emergency mode" really hits home the underlying mental mode that drives an understanding of the situation. It only takes a few trigger words or phrases to take us back to past trauma and difficulties, like the tremors before an earthquake. I have first-hand experience of the "caste" system that can emerge in tech environments. It was my experience that our colleagues in the lower caste told scare stories (and you see the odd firing/letting go early to feel they are real) and you feel distant from the "upper" caste. But actual factual reality in my specific experience was a basically fair system with strong accountability. I was grateful, and benefitted from the experience overall. It is hard in such environments to "be normal" because the primitive part of the brain is in "fear mode". That part of the brain actually makes the most important decisions in your life. What is the way through? My opinion is to try and make honest real connection at a human level with your colleagues but that is actually hard to do. That is why the part of the story I found most painful was the comment about "bleached cotton". It was a delicate moment where friendship could have started but was cut off. Lastly, I thought it was an endearing turn of phrase to first introduce the engineer as someone from Harvard. And then later refer to the person as "Harvard" (instead of the engineer's actual name or some pronoun).