4 ms·

> Most people work but most dont necessarily have to I see this quite a bit on HN (the other day someone was saying to no fanfair that he doesn't work because

> Most people work but most dont necessarily have to I see this quite a bit on HN (the other day someone was saying to no fanfair that he doesn't work because he doesn't like the corporate setting) and other parts of the internet, enough so to assume it must be true, but this notion really confuses me, as it's certainly never been a choice for myself. Genuinely interested, maybe I'm missing a trick in life, how would you pay for rent, food, electricity, ect... I do genuinely think when I read things like this or see things casually mentioned in the news that there's some alternative route in life nobodies ever told me about

ornornor 5y ago
Everyone has an opinion on that matter, but if you’re making software engineer money then this might be a viable option: mrmoneymustache.com Maybe you’ve already heard of tha blog, maybe not. In a nutshell: rethink your life and your expenses so you’re able to save 50+% of your income. Put it into low cost ETFs (which particular one depends on what’s available where you live), and after a while (13 years at 50%, much less at more saving), you’ll have the option to not work anymore and still cover all your life expenses etc. Not selling anything, not looking to start a debate, just mentioning it because parent might be interested or curious.
- bodge5000 5y ago
  Huh, maybe that is it, at least here on HN. I'm perhaps a bit younger than a lot of the people on here (24), and maybe I dont earn as much, so the answer may well just be time, which is disappointingly not the bombshell I was hoping for, but does make a lot more sense. Cheers!
- csunbird 5y ago
  Might be true for people posting here and getting paid 300-500k per year, but this is simply not possible for people working for lower salaries in non SF companies, especially for people in Europe. If you are able to spend 300k a year, you will be working until end of your days anyways.
  - bodge5000 5y ago
    Bloody hell, if thats the amount needed, then yeh I'm a long way off. I don't even think I'm badly paid, but 300k a year is silly money
  - ornornor 5y ago
    I can tell you I’m paid nowhere near these SV-Unicorn numbers and saving over 50% of our net income is really not that much effort. And we’re renting, we don’t own.
madsbuch 5y ago
People have to pay for basic needs. But there is a wild difference from living in shared accommodation, consuming the non-branded products, biking, vacationing as a backpacker in hostels etc. to living in a private apartment, eating out, having a car, vacationing in hotels / resorts etc. As a person who spend most of my life studying on just a little income my expenses are only slowly increasing. Much slower than my earnings. My guess is if one got a permanent job early on it might be hard to imaging how to live frugally.
- bodge5000 5y ago
  Another commenter pointed me to the obvious that it probably does come down to savings, which makes sense because I do already do those things. I do have a car, but thats from pre-WFH, so I could probably get rid of that now, and I don't go away for vacations at all, I just stay at home or at most go to a caravan site. So yeh, might just be a waiting game.
themagician 5y ago
I think what people just learned over the last year is that half the population can stay home, and a third can work less or just not work at all, and the world didn’t collapse. There was enough money to go around. In many cases people got paid more to sit home than to work. Some things were more difficult, but it was a good trade off for minimum wage workers or people doing mindless office work.
sgt101 5y ago
There's a big gap between young single people's perception of the options available, and the view that comes with age and a family of dependents. I don't think anyone with kids thinks that it would be ok to not have a job for a protracted period, but if I was single I'd be able to quit work in six months.
- bodge5000 5y ago
  I am young, single, and don't have kids, or any dependants. By "quit work", do you mean (potentially) for good, or for 3-4 months? Because for me, even with a year of intensive saving, I don't see see how I could possibly live off that for anything more than another year.
  - dagw 5y ago
    More like "quit work" as in quit a regular '9-5' permanent employment. I've known (single, child-less) people who have managed to go a long time by repeatedly working intently a few month at whatever temporary job shows up (fishing industry, bar/restaurant work, construction, warehouse work etc.) and then taking several month off to do whatever.
bob33212 5y ago
It is very possible to have a room in an apartment and food and heat and a cell phone and used clothes and access to public busses for less than 14k/year in many towns and cities If you look at median net worth of individuals. You'll see that over 50% of people have enough money to live for years without working. Hence, the "most people" phrase. https://www.businessinsider.com/personal-finance/average-american-net-worth https://www.businessinsider.com/personal-finance/average-ame.... There are plenty of people who feel like they have to live in a high cost of living city. And plenty of people who feel like they have to drive a new car and live in a 4 bedroom house and take their family to Disney World. But those are all choices people make in how they want to live.
- bodge5000 5y ago
  14k/year is still quite a lot of money to just have laying around, assuming you wanted to retire for 20 years thats at least 336k, not even including all the "ad hoc" money you'd need to have. Maybe most people do have 350k in savings though, but yeh, sadly I do not

ornornor 5y ago

Everyone has an opinion on that matter, but if you’re making software engineer money then this might be a viable option: mrmoneymustache.com Maybe you’ve already heard of tha blog, maybe not. In a nutshell: rethink your life and your expenses so you’re able to save 50+% of your income. Put it into low cost ETFs (which particular one depends on what’s available where you live), and after a while (13 years at 50%, much less at more saving), you’ll have the option to not work anymore and still cover all your life expenses etc. Not selling anything, not looking to start a debate, just mentioning it because parent might be interested or curious.

bodge5000 5y ago
Huh, maybe that is it, at least here on HN. I'm perhaps a bit younger than a lot of the people on here (24), and maybe I dont earn as much, so the answer may well just be time, which is disappointingly not the bombshell I was hoping for, but does make a lot more sense. Cheers!
csunbird 5y ago
Might be true for people posting here and getting paid 300-500k per year, but this is simply not possible for people working for lower salaries in non SF companies, especially for people in Europe. If you are able to spend 300k a year, you will be working until end of your days anyways.
- bodge5000 5y ago
  Bloody hell, if thats the amount needed, then yeh I'm a long way off. I don't even think I'm badly paid, but 300k a year is silly money
- ornornor 5y ago
  I can tell you I’m paid nowhere near these SV-Unicorn numbers and saving over 50% of our net income is really not that much effort. And we’re renting, we don’t own.

madsbuch 5y ago

People have to pay for basic needs. But there is a wild difference from living in shared accommodation, consuming the non-branded products, biking, vacationing as a backpacker in hostels etc. to living in a private apartment, eating out, having a car, vacationing in hotels / resorts etc. As a person who spend most of my life studying on just a little income my expenses are only slowly increasing. Much slower than my earnings. My guess is if one got a permanent job early on it might be hard to imaging how to live frugally.

bodge5000 5y ago
Another commenter pointed me to the obvious that it probably does come down to savings, which makes sense because I do already do those things. I do have a car, but thats from pre-WFH, so I could probably get rid of that now, and I don't go away for vacations at all, I just stay at home or at most go to a caravan site. So yeh, might just be a waiting game.

themagician 5y ago

I think what people just learned over the last year is that half the population can stay home, and a third can work less or just not work at all, and the world didn’t collapse. There was enough money to go around. In many cases people got paid more to sit home than to work. Some things were more difficult, but it was a good trade off for minimum wage workers or people doing mindless office work.

sgt101 5y ago

There's a big gap between young single people's perception of the options available, and the view that comes with age and a family of dependents. I don't think anyone with kids thinks that it would be ok to not have a job for a protracted period, but if I was single I'd be able to quit work in six months.

bodge5000 5y ago
I am young, single, and don't have kids, or any dependants. By "quit work", do you mean (potentially) for good, or for 3-4 months? Because for me, even with a year of intensive saving, I don't see see how I could possibly live off that for anything more than another year.
- dagw 5y ago
  More like "quit work" as in quit a regular '9-5' permanent employment. I've known (single, child-less) people who have managed to go a long time by repeatedly working intently a few month at whatever temporary job shows up (fishing industry, bar/restaurant work, construction, warehouse work etc.) and then taking several month off to do whatever.

bob33212 5y ago

It is very possible to have a room in an apartment and food and heat and a cell phone and used clothes and access to public busses for less than 14k/year in many towns and cities If you look at median net worth of individuals. You'll see that over 50% of people have enough money to live for years without working. Hence, the "most people" phrase. https://www.businessinsider.com/personal-finance/average-american-net-worth https://www.businessinsider.com/personal-finance/average-ame.... There are plenty of people who feel like they have to live in a high cost of living city. And plenty of people who feel like they have to drive a new car and live in a 4 bedroom house and take their family to Disney World. But those are all choices people make in how they want to live.

bodge5000 5y ago
14k/year is still quite a lot of money to just have laying around, assuming you wanted to retire for 20 years thats at least 336k, not even including all the "ad hoc" money you'd need to have. Maybe most people do have 350k in savings though, but yeh, sadly I do not