4 ms·

> 11 years is a great deal if she gets to live in a mansion afterwards. I guess that's a matter of opinion. I'm happy to work till retirement in a modest house

> 11 years is a great deal if she gets to live in a mansion afterwards. I guess that's a matter of opinion. I'm happy to work till retirement in a modest house if it means I don't spend any time in prison. Even 1 year in prison doesn't seem worth it for the mansion retirement package. (1 month is borderline for me.)

jeltz 4y ago
Yeah, I think I could even do 1 year but 11 years is way too much. The idea of living in a mansion is not worth losing that much of my life.
lelanthran 4y ago
> I guess that's a matter of opinion. I'm happy to work till retirement in a modest house if it means I don't spend any time in prison. It's a matter of perspective. Say you're age 38 (the age that EH was when she was convicted) with no children (she had no children at the time). You are going to spend the clear majority of your waking time (%75+) over the next 27 years confined to working, with the remaining 25% or less actually enjoying your freedom (holiday/vacations away, social visits, recreation, etc) before finally retiring. In effect you'll be enjoying not more than 6.75 years, awake, of freedom before retirement. Or, you could spend 100% of your next 11 years confined, and have the next 16 years after confinement, awake, of freedom. You'll still be under 50 when released, so lots of options to enjoy that freedom. I can see why some people will find the second option attractive. Personally, right now it's not for me (I have children I want to enjoy while they are growing), but I feel certain that if I did NOT have children, or a close romantic relationship which I wish to maintain, I'd much prefer the second option. The sooner I can stop working, the better my life and my voluntary contributions to humanity. I can't very well explore deep questions or meaningfully make my mark on the world if I'm stuck in a cubicle for more than 3/4 of my awake time.
- jeltz 4y ago
  I am her age, with no children and single and there is no way I would give up my years between 40 and 50 for more not having to work between 50 and 65. That trade is just a bad deal since you can never predict what your health will be, especially after having spent 11 years locked up. We only have one life and we do not know when it may end. Just think of all the meaningful friendships you will lose both due to being away and from the crime.
- quietbritishjim 4y ago
  > You are going to spend the clear majority of your waking time (%75+) over the next 27 years confined to working, with the remaining 25% or less actually enjoying your freedom (holiday/vacations away, social visits, recreation, etc) before finally retiring. You have substantially miscalculated: 9 working hours out of 15 waking hours per day you are at work (including mid-range commute and lunch break and generous 9 hours sleeping) is already only 60% of your waking time. Then taking into account weekends and annual leave / bank holidays = 38% of your waking time at work (or 41% if in USA with no annual leave and 10 federal holidays). Besides, you have equated being in prison with being at work. It's as if you're saying, they're both not enjoyable, and therefore the same. I am lucky enough to enjoy my job, but I've been in crappy menial jobs for summer work as a student and they're still better than being in prison - not just a bit better but so far off I don't see how you could compare them. If you are in a high pressure job where you hate working and are working a lot more than I just calculated then maybe by your logic (and I actually would agree with this) you should take some much lower paid job where you don't have ridiculous expectations on your life. You shouldn't need to hate your job more than going to prison to come to that realisation!

jeltz 4y ago

Yeah, I think I could even do 1 year but 11 years is way too much. The idea of living in a mansion is not worth losing that much of my life.

lelanthran 4y ago

> I guess that's a matter of opinion. I'm happy to work till retirement in a modest house if it means I don't spend any time in prison. It's a matter of perspective. Say you're age 38 (the age that EH was when she was convicted) with no children (she had no children at the time). You are going to spend the clear majority of your waking time (%75+) over the next 27 years confined to working, with the remaining 25% or less actually enjoying your freedom (holiday/vacations away, social visits, recreation, etc) before finally retiring. In effect you'll be enjoying not more than 6.75 years, awake, of freedom before retirement. Or, you could spend 100% of your next 11 years confined, and have the next 16 years after confinement, awake, of freedom. You'll still be under 50 when released, so lots of options to enjoy that freedom. I can see why some people will find the second option attractive. Personally, right now it's not for me (I have children I want to enjoy while they are growing), but I feel certain that if I did NOT have children, or a close romantic relationship which I wish to maintain, I'd much prefer the second option. The sooner I can stop working, the better my life and my voluntary contributions to humanity. I can't very well explore deep questions or meaningfully make my mark on the world if I'm stuck in a cubicle for more than 3/4 of my awake time.

jeltz 4y ago
I am her age, with no children and single and there is no way I would give up my years between 40 and 50 for more not having to work between 50 and 65. That trade is just a bad deal since you can never predict what your health will be, especially after having spent 11 years locked up. We only have one life and we do not know when it may end. Just think of all the meaningful friendships you will lose both due to being away and from the crime.
quietbritishjim 4y ago
> You are going to spend the clear majority of your waking time (%75+) over the next 27 years confined to working, with the remaining 25% or less actually enjoying your freedom (holiday/vacations away, social visits, recreation, etc) before finally retiring. You have substantially miscalculated: 9 working hours out of 15 waking hours per day you are at work (including mid-range commute and lunch break and generous 9 hours sleeping) is already only 60% of your waking time. Then taking into account weekends and annual leave / bank holidays = 38% of your waking time at work (or 41% if in USA with no annual leave and 10 federal holidays). Besides, you have equated being in prison with being at work. It's as if you're saying, they're both not enjoyable, and therefore the same. I am lucky enough to enjoy my job, but I've been in crappy menial jobs for summer work as a student and they're still better than being in prison - not just a bit better but so far off I don't see how you could compare them. If you are in a high pressure job where you hate working and are working a lot more than I just calculated then maybe by your logic (and I actually would agree with this) you should take some much lower paid job where you don't have ridiculous expectations on your life. You shouldn't need to hate your job more than going to prison to come to that realisation!