3 ms·
> You’re saying that someone getting a 33% raise won’t be affected by the extra money. This is absurd for people who are making a good professional income. Not
by jjav 5y ago
> You’re saying that someone getting a 33% raise won’t be affected by the extra money. This is absurd for people who are making a good professional income.
Nothing absurd about it. If you're making 300K, going up to 400K doesn't move the needle much. At that level you're already covering all your bills, paying for those vacations and investments and private school.
50K extra in pocket is nice, but nowhere enough at that level to change your life in an observable way. It's nowhere enough to move you into FU Money territory and since you were already covering all the basics, it doesn't move change much on that front either.
If I had kids (and I do), there's no way I would accept a 100K pre-tax raise if the tradeoff is having to spend a lot more time on the road away from home (as the example at the top of this thread stated).
- dpark 5y ago> At that level you're already covering all your bills, paying for those vacations and investments and private school. Sure. If you’re covering everything you need then another 50k/year probably lets you retire way earlier. Or $50k/year post tax pays for about a million in housing. It would pay for an au pair if you have a small child. It’s enough to have a partner earning a very good salary to stop working and stay home. > If I had kids (and I do), there's no way I would accept a 100K pre-tax raise if the tradeoff is having to spend a lot more time on the road away from home (as the example at the top of this thread stated). Well yeah, I didn’t say that it’s a good trade off for you (or anyone else in particular). I said it’s a lot of money.