3 ms·

The thing is, you can literally buy time. Pay for someone to clean your house. Pay for someone to clean your meals. Pay for someone to do your tax. And eventu

The thing is, you can literally buy time. Pay for someone to clean your house. Pay for someone to clean your meals. Pay for someone to do your tax. And eventually, if you have enough money, working at all becomes entirely optional. If you have 10 million dollars, you don't _have_ to ever work again to live a good life. You can choose to work more, either because you enjoy your work or because you want your life to be lavish instead of merely comfortable, but that's purely a choice.

RetroTechie 3y ago
Yes to some extent money is exchangeable for time (also if you consider options for maintaining health. Or safety). But lifetime is finite, and you can't buy more of it no matter how rich you are. And even the super-rich can get hit by a bus. Article: "The biggest problem with pursuing monetary wealth over everything else is the opportunity cost associated with it. How many hours will it take to scale your income from $250k to $500k? $1M? $10M? Will any amount of money ever be enough? What other forms of wealth will you have to sacrifice to get there?" The opportunity cost is NOT those of the person pursuing money. It's the opportunity cost of all those others having less because a few rich people took it all. Not getting a decent education because one's parents were poor. Missing out on social events because that costs money one doesn't have. Damaging health because doctors bill would be too high. Contributing less to society due to above & related factors. Multiplied by the # of poor people. That is the cost to society caused by wealth inequality / allowing to have super-rich people at all. Some wealth inequality is okay. Too much, and basically everyone is worse off. I regard money as lubrication oil: when you have none, machinery grinds to a halt. With just a little, you can get things running. With a bit more, things run smoothly. Adding tons more, doesn't help much. What point is there to have a few people whose machinery runs super-smooth, when that causes everybody else's machinery to grind to a halt?
- jocaal 3y ago
  I never understand when people preach about wealth inequality. The GDP per capita of the world is about $12k. In a perfectly equal world, that would mean everyone makes about that in a year. Seeing people on social media whining about wealth inequality while living in some of the most prosperous countries in the world is kindoff laughable.
  - Clamchop 3y ago
    Perfect income equality (which isn't going to happen anyway, nothing near it) would have cataclysmic consequences for economies. We can't talk about $12,000 or whatever per person as if that means something. Getting traction on this problem at the scope of the entire world would indeed be a huge lift. It's a shame that it's impossible to narrow the scope to something more realistic. As everyone knows, prosperous countries doing work to more equitably share that prosperity among its citizens is... a sin?
vouaobrasil 3y ago
True, but I meant for the typical person who has to work 9-5 to get their money. Like people who work 9-5 for tech companies...doesn't seem worth it to me.
euroderf 3y ago
Money is crystallized time.
fuzzfactor 3y ago
If you pay them enough, eventually your house cleaner, kitchen help, and tax filer won't have to work as hard as you. >And eventually, if you have enough money, working at all becomes entirely optional. Also eventually, if your expenses are low enough, working at all becomes entirely optional. It would seem to be possible for these approaches to meet in the middle somewhere depending on the individual. In terms of time one of the most lavish luxuries is to have the time to clean your own dwelling, make your own meals and low-tech stuff like that without having to be bound to only high-tech and/or high-earning action so strongly all the time.

RetroTechie 3y ago

Yes to some extent money is exchangeable for time (also if you consider options for maintaining health. Or safety). But lifetime is finite, and you can't buy more of it no matter how rich you are. And even the super-rich can get hit by a bus. Article: "The biggest problem with pursuing monetary wealth over everything else is the opportunity cost associated with it. How many hours will it take to scale your income from $250k to $500k? $1M? $10M? Will any amount of money ever be enough? What other forms of wealth will you have to sacrifice to get there?" The opportunity cost is NOT those of the person pursuing money. It's the opportunity cost of all those others having less because a few rich people took it all. Not getting a decent education because one's parents were poor. Missing out on social events because that costs money one doesn't have. Damaging health because doctors bill would be too high. Contributing less to society due to above & related factors. Multiplied by the # of poor people. That is the cost to society caused by wealth inequality / allowing to have super-rich people at all. Some wealth inequality is okay. Too much, and basically everyone is worse off. I regard money as lubrication oil: when you have none, machinery grinds to a halt. With just a little, you can get things running. With a bit more, things run smoothly. Adding tons more, doesn't help much. What point is there to have a few people whose machinery runs super-smooth, when that causes everybody else's machinery to grind to a halt?

jocaal 3y ago
I never understand when people preach about wealth inequality. The GDP per capita of the world is about $12k. In a perfectly equal world, that would mean everyone makes about that in a year. Seeing people on social media whining about wealth inequality while living in some of the most prosperous countries in the world is kindoff laughable.
- Clamchop 3y ago
  Perfect income equality (which isn't going to happen anyway, nothing near it) would have cataclysmic consequences for economies. We can't talk about $12,000 or whatever per person as if that means something. Getting traction on this problem at the scope of the entire world would indeed be a huge lift. It's a shame that it's impossible to narrow the scope to something more realistic. As everyone knows, prosperous countries doing work to more equitably share that prosperity among its citizens is... a sin?

vouaobrasil 3y ago

True, but I meant for the typical person who has to work 9-5 to get their money. Like people who work 9-5 for tech companies...doesn't seem worth it to me.

euroderf 3y ago

Money is crystallized time.

fuzzfactor 3y ago

If you pay them enough, eventually your house cleaner, kitchen help, and tax filer won't have to work as hard as you. >And eventually, if you have enough money, working at all becomes entirely optional. Also eventually, if your expenses are low enough, working at all becomes entirely optional. It would seem to be possible for these approaches to meet in the middle somewhere depending on the individual. In terms of time one of the most lavish luxuries is to have the time to clean your own dwelling, make your own meals and low-tech stuff like that without having to be bound to only high-tech and/or high-earning action so strongly all the time.