4 ms·

The thing is, this is achievable even at 10M. Hell, one can support the median household income at a reasonable SWR on ~ 2M. Underlying all of this seems to b

The thing is, this is achievable even at 10M. Hell, one can support the median household income at a reasonable SWR on ~ 2M. Underlying all of this seems to be paulg's assertion that billionaire founders 'deserve' their wealth and therefore our inequality and their relatively small contribution to the public purse is justified. I have no problem with founders being rich, but once you're earning 1%er income? You should be paying a hefty amount of taxes to support social spending. Think ~ 2/3rds, like it used to be before the regans and thatchers of the world gutted the social contract in the 80s.

toast0 4y ago
> The thing is, this is achievable even at 10M. $10M does get you a nice time, and you would never have to say no to any reasonable expense, but it's also definitely possible to overspend. There's some higher threshold where you really can be 'wild and crazy' and the only way to run out of money would be through bad investments. There's a difference between always flying first class, always flying on a jetshare, and always having your plane fueled up and ready to go. Also, between driving yourself to the airport, taking a car service, having your driver take you, or having your helicopter pick you up.
- overrun11 4y ago
  10M would give you a safe withdrawal rate somewhere between 300-400k a year. A fairly common household income for people on HN. It affords a very nice quality of life but you're certainly not living the lifestyle that most people think of as "rich."
  - shadowofneptune 4y ago
    That's the average? There's no way to measure it, but that's around five times the US median household income, at a percentile of 97%. It could not be close to the median for HN just by probability, and it's a rich man's income.
    - overrun11 4y ago
      I never said average. I said it's a fairly common household income on HN– which is true.
  - wing-_-nuts 4y ago
    >It affords a very nice quality of life but you're certainly not living the lifestyle that most people think of as "rich." I think maybe you're missing the perspectives of ...almost everyone outside of a very select few in VHCOL locations.
  - otikik 4y ago
    It’s the other way around. Most people think of it as rich. Tech workers in SF don’t.
- wing-_-nuts 4y ago
  I have to remind myself that there are people comfortable with such a 'wild and crazy' lifestyle. While I wouldn't mind being very well off, I have a visceral gut reaction to any of the sort of flashy spending that draws attention to myself. I also find that it isolates you from the experience of the common man, and life is lonely enough as it is.
  - type-r 4y ago
    it's interesting that it's very common to have a disdain / discomfort with showing that you have that money, but no such corresponding problem with just having it. if you're not going to give the money away, i don't see how there's any benefit to not spending. you're still way richer.
    - lanstin 4y ago
      Because it changes your experience in such a way that you will not fit in as well with your fellow humans, something many of us conscipusly enjoy and most of us somewhat need.
    - wing-_-nuts 4y ago
      Eh, any money you have invested generates income. That income can be used for your expenses or given to charity, depending on what your needs are for a given year. After I hit my 'retirement number', if I can find a job that will give me the flexibility I want in retirement, I plan on continuing to work 2-3 days a week and donating half my salary to charity. God knows local charities can use my money far more than they can use me as a volunteer. I like coding, and if I get paid and do good in the world, so much the better.
MuffinFlavored 4y ago
> SWR for anybody not familiar safe-withdrawl rate typically 1% of portfolio value a quarter = 4% a year i am guessing? theory is if your portfolio is invested in funds (mutual or ETF) tracking a broad-market index (S&P500) aka equities, and these equities go up 8-10% a year (return before inflation) on average over the long term and if you have a $2m portfolio basically 100% in equities sell off 4% = $80k/yr worth pre-tax (only taxes would be... long-term capital gains?) because your portfolio is appreciating 8-10% a year, it'll stay at $2m despite you sell off $80k/year because it's tracking the US stock market/"economy" which is supposed to be growing 8-10% a year and they "offset each other" with $10m this becomes $10m * 0.04 = $400k/yr pre-tax i too would like to have $10m so that I could live off $400k/yr and not need to work :) heck, i might even settle for $5m!

toast0 4y ago

> The thing is, this is achievable even at 10M. $10M does get you a nice time, and you would never have to say no to any reasonable expense, but it's also definitely possible to overspend. There's some higher threshold where you really can be 'wild and crazy' and the only way to run out of money would be through bad investments. There's a difference between always flying first class, always flying on a jetshare, and always having your plane fueled up and ready to go. Also, between driving yourself to the airport, taking a car service, having your driver take you, or having your helicopter pick you up.

overrun11 4y ago
10M would give you a safe withdrawal rate somewhere between 300-400k a year. A fairly common household income for people on HN. It affords a very nice quality of life but you're certainly not living the lifestyle that most people think of as "rich."
- shadowofneptune 4y ago
  That's the average? There's no way to measure it, but that's around five times the US median household income, at a percentile of 97%. It could not be close to the median for HN just by probability, and it's a rich man's income.
  - overrun11 4y ago
    I never said average. I said it's a fairly common household income on HN– which is true.
- wing-_-nuts 4y ago
  >It affords a very nice quality of life but you're certainly not living the lifestyle that most people think of as "rich." I think maybe you're missing the perspectives of ...almost everyone outside of a very select few in VHCOL locations.
- otikik 4y ago
  It’s the other way around. Most people think of it as rich. Tech workers in SF don’t.
wing-_-nuts 4y ago
I have to remind myself that there are people comfortable with such a 'wild and crazy' lifestyle. While I wouldn't mind being very well off, I have a visceral gut reaction to any of the sort of flashy spending that draws attention to myself. I also find that it isolates you from the experience of the common man, and life is lonely enough as it is.
- type-r 4y ago
  it's interesting that it's very common to have a disdain / discomfort with showing that you have that money, but no such corresponding problem with just having it. if you're not going to give the money away, i don't see how there's any benefit to not spending. you're still way richer.
  - lanstin 4y ago
    Because it changes your experience in such a way that you will not fit in as well with your fellow humans, something many of us conscipusly enjoy and most of us somewhat need.
  - wing-_-nuts 4y ago
    Eh, any money you have invested generates income. That income can be used for your expenses or given to charity, depending on what your needs are for a given year. After I hit my 'retirement number', if I can find a job that will give me the flexibility I want in retirement, I plan on continuing to work 2-3 days a week and donating half my salary to charity. God knows local charities can use my money far more than they can use me as a volunteer. I like coding, and if I get paid and do good in the world, so much the better.

MuffinFlavored 4y ago

> SWR for anybody not familiar safe-withdrawl rate typically 1% of portfolio value a quarter = 4% a year i am guessing? theory is if your portfolio is invested in funds (mutual or ETF) tracking a broad-market index (S&P500) aka equities, and these equities go up 8-10% a year (return before inflation) on average over the long term and if you have a $2m portfolio basically 100% in equities sell off 4% = $80k/yr worth pre-tax (only taxes would be... long-term capital gains?) because your portfolio is appreciating 8-10% a year, it'll stay at $2m despite you sell off $80k/year because it's tracking the US stock market/"economy" which is supposed to be growing 8-10% a year and they "offset each other" with $10m this becomes $10m * 0.04 = $400k/yr pre-tax i too would like to have $10m so that I could live off $400k/yr and not need to work :) heck, i might even settle for $5m!