6 ms·
Not if your one desire is to run large corporations and you're easily bored.
by HeyLaughingBoy 5y ago
Not if your one desire is to run large corporations and you're easily bored.
- saghm 5y agoI'd consider myself easily bored, but I think $42 million would give me plenty of novel ways to entertain myself. (I definitely would _not_ want to run a large corporation though, so I guess it's a good thing I'd never get hired for one of these jobs anyways)
- FridgeSeal 5y agoHell, even if you managed a year or two, you’re still walking away with tens of millions that’s pretty close to financial security for the rest of your life.
- patrickdavey 5y agoTens of millions is only "pretty close to financial security". Wow.
- sitzkrieg 5y agoonly on HN
- vram22 5y agoReminds of that "temporarily embarrassed millionaires" quote ... /cc @sitzkrieg (sibling comment)
- vram22 5y agohttps://www.google.com/search?q=quote+temporarily+embarrassed+millionaires https://www.google.com/search?q=quote+temporarily+embarrasse...
- IAmGraydon 5y agoI think there's a part of the HN population that has delusions of becoming billionaires one day, so they talk about tens of millions like it's not much. They'll likely never have either.
- FooBarBizBazz 5y agoFinancial security in the Bay Area requires a house there ($2-3M, nowadays) plus $COST_OF_LIVING/4%. This is easily $5M net worth. It's in "two Googlers and a successful exit at some point earlier" territory. Granted, this threshold is less than $10M, but it isn't orders of magnitude less All of which is to say that it is basically impossible to stay in the Bay long-term unless you make an absolute fuckton of money. Well, you do have two other options. One is to commute in 2hr or more every day. Which a lot of service workers have to do. The other is to share a house or apartment with roommates (if you're single) or with another family (surprisingly common, because what else can you do?). These are both lifestyle decisions that differ substantially from what most people think of as "normal", past your 20s. What I'm saying is, merely living a "normal middle class" lifestyle in the Bay requires absurd money. So I can understand why people act like absurd money is normal.
- AYBABTME 5y agoYou don't need $5M to be "safe" in the Bay Area. You do need some money - enough to afford to get a mortgage on a place to stay - but once you get past that, things get easier. The thing is, it takes money to start making money. It takes money to start to be able to afford the things that will make your cost of living go down. It does suck, but it's not $5M.
- stackbutterflow 5y agoYou don't have to live in the Bay Area. You don't have to commute since they were talking about retiring with $42 millions.
- FooBarBizBazz 5y agoFair. Anybody with $42M has it made, anywhere.
- p1esk 5y agoMost people spend proportionally to what they earn, so I don't see why one year salary should necessarily provide the lifetime of financial security, regardless of what that salary is.
- 2muchcoffeeman 5y agoThat’s a trap though. It’s far more sensible for most people to live well below their means and create options for their future.
- p1esk 5y agoI've stated what I've observed and experienced. Whether it's a "trap" or "sensible" is irrelevant.
- 2muchcoffeeman 5y agoFair point. But it’s a bit ridiculous to get 42 million USD and not be satisfied. And the original comment is ridiculous to suggest that it’s not sufficient compensation.
- p1esk 5y agoIf your salary was $25k/year (a respectable amount for the majority of world population), would $1M seem like a lifetime financial stability? I think so. Yet if your salary is $250k/year, it probably wouldn't, and this would sound ridiculous to people who make $25k/year. If you make 25k/year getting 1M is almost as good as getting 42M, because you are not used to thinking about anything you can do with 42M that you can't do with 1M. However, if your salary has been 10M/year, you most likely can easily see many ways to spend 42M, which are not something you think about often when you make 250k/year. Does this make sense?
- zarzavat 5y agoMost people on $250k are just trying to “survive” (as in, have a house and a family) in a high cost-of-living area. If a house costs $2M then $250k is only just sufficient after deducting taxes and living expenses. Their spending is not so different from someone earning $25k in a low cost-of-living area. There’s nowhere in the world where the cost of living requires $10M/year. To spend that much money you are forced to spend it on high-end luxuries. Of course there are people who could easily consume that amount of money, but most people on that income would put it into investment instead of consumption.
- FridgeSeal 5y agoOh I agree 100%, personally it’s more money than I’d know what to do with, but I’m also aware that there’s a chunk of users here who’s respond with “well after tax this that, etc etc” with some justification as to why it’s not quite enough, so I thought I’d attempt to cover all bases hahaha.
- totetsu 5y agoLike lossing it all day trading XD
- _carbyau_ 5y agoMy one desire is to be financially independent. We don't all get what we want. With 42 million, he's fine. Time to care about someone else.