3 ms·

So you are ignoring labor. I think it's a fun hobby but if you value yourself at $0/hr then a lot of things become attractive price wise :)

giantg2 5y ago
No, I'm not. This gets into a bigger debate by economists on how to value self labor. And like I said in the post, labor is minimized.
- nightski 5y ago
  OK you might not be, but your post did. Working in tech the entire cost of your produce for the year (you quoted $400-$500) is a few hours worth of income. I grow a garden and for me it's a lot more than a few hours of work (an order of magnitude more, maybe two).
  - giantg2 5y ago
    "Working in tech the entire cost of your produce for the year (you quoted $400-$500) is a few hours worth of income." This is highly presumptuous. We don't all make over $100k. On top of that, you're assuming that you could offset the cost of the produce by working a few more hours. Many of us are salaried, not hourly, and have restrictions that we aren't allowed to work for other companies. The option to work more hours in that scenario is not a valid one. Trying to account for opportunity cost doesn't work when there's no opportunity being lost.
    - leetcrew 5y ago
      there is an opportunity cost but it's hard to precisely measure. if you're a salaried employee making $100k, you can't just work extra and automatically get to $110k. it might improve your chances of a raise/promotion in the next year, but that's uncertain. or you could spend extra time learning new tech or doing interview prep. if you're willing to change jobs, I bet the latter option nets you a lot more than $400/year.
      - giantg2 5y ago
        "or you could spend extra time learning new tech or doing interview prep. if you're willing to change jobs," That's not really an option for me due to various family constraints, remote not being the best option for me, and my location being less than ideal. "it might improve your chances of a raise/promotion in the next year, but that's uncertain." It won't. Been there, done that, doesn't work.
      - ethbr0 5y ago
        Consulting for non-overlapping (with your employer) businesses is a very good answer. The majority of folks employed doing tech (day to day work is technical) aren't employed by tech (i.e. for a tech firm shipping product). And those that are (HN-wise) tend to be employed at more targeted enterprises. Both of which are to say... there are likely a lot of clients you could consult for after hours, fully disclosing to your employer, that your employer wouldn't have any competitive concerns about. And critically, consulting is almost always hourly. Which vastly simplifies the expectations and transactions.
    - nightski 5y ago
      I'm not assuming that at all, just putting a value on your time. You could consult (I do) and you might find your time is more valuable than you think. At the end of the day I'm not trying to convince you growing vegetables isn't worth it, it is! Just that justifying in terms of saving costs probably isn't that great of an argument. Most hobbies are not cost effective. But life would be pretty awful without them.
      - giantg2 5y ago
        "You could consult (I do) and you might find your time is more valuable than you think." I'd have to quit my current job. Most places around me (Philly area) pay below average and less than I currently make.
claudiulodro 5y ago
In the broader discussion about preparing for large recessions, it seems optimistic to assume that in a big recession you'll have a sweet tech gig making big bucks. Think of the labor more like building sweat-equity in a garden "startup" or "investment".

giantg2 5y ago

No, I'm not. This gets into a bigger debate by economists on how to value self labor. And like I said in the post, labor is minimized.

nightski 5y ago
OK you might not be, but your post did. Working in tech the entire cost of your produce for the year (you quoted $400-$500) is a few hours worth of income. I grow a garden and for me it's a lot more than a few hours of work (an order of magnitude more, maybe two).
- giantg2 5y ago
  "Working in tech the entire cost of your produce for the year (you quoted $400-$500) is a few hours worth of income." This is highly presumptuous. We don't all make over $100k. On top of that, you're assuming that you could offset the cost of the produce by working a few more hours. Many of us are salaried, not hourly, and have restrictions that we aren't allowed to work for other companies. The option to work more hours in that scenario is not a valid one. Trying to account for opportunity cost doesn't work when there's no opportunity being lost.
  - leetcrew 5y ago
    there is an opportunity cost but it's hard to precisely measure. if you're a salaried employee making $100k, you can't just work extra and automatically get to $110k. it might improve your chances of a raise/promotion in the next year, but that's uncertain. or you could spend extra time learning new tech or doing interview prep. if you're willing to change jobs, I bet the latter option nets you a lot more than $400/year.
    - giantg2 5y ago
      "or you could spend extra time learning new tech or doing interview prep. if you're willing to change jobs," That's not really an option for me due to various family constraints, remote not being the best option for me, and my location being less than ideal. "it might improve your chances of a raise/promotion in the next year, but that's uncertain." It won't. Been there, done that, doesn't work.
    - ethbr0 5y ago
      Consulting for non-overlapping (with your employer) businesses is a very good answer. The majority of folks employed doing tech (day to day work is technical) aren't employed by tech (i.e. for a tech firm shipping product). And those that are (HN-wise) tend to be employed at more targeted enterprises. Both of which are to say... there are likely a lot of clients you could consult for after hours, fully disclosing to your employer, that your employer wouldn't have any competitive concerns about. And critically, consulting is almost always hourly. Which vastly simplifies the expectations and transactions.
  - nightski 5y ago
    I'm not assuming that at all, just putting a value on your time. You could consult (I do) and you might find your time is more valuable than you think. At the end of the day I'm not trying to convince you growing vegetables isn't worth it, it is! Just that justifying in terms of saving costs probably isn't that great of an argument. Most hobbies are not cost effective. But life would be pretty awful without them.
    - giantg2 5y ago
      "You could consult (I do) and you might find your time is more valuable than you think." I'd have to quit my current job. Most places around me (Philly area) pay below average and less than I currently make.

claudiulodro 5y ago

In the broader discussion about preparing for large recessions, it seems optimistic to assume that in a big recession you'll have a sweet tech gig making big bucks. Think of the labor more like building sweat-equity in a garden "startup" or "investment".