5 ms·

I can empathize with this, but for reasons the author doesn't mention. You don't suppress your outward signs of wealth for the sake of your millionaire co-work

I can empathize with this, but for reasons the author doesn't mention. You don't suppress your outward signs of wealth for the sake of your millionaire co-workers. You do it so that you can keep your non-millionaire friends. You know, those fun people you hang out with and have for the last dozen years. The ones you have barbecues with on the roof of their (and until recently, your) shabby apartment building. The ones you rope into dirtbag backpacking trips, hopping chicken buses through Central America. And the ones who, through accident of fortune, now make roughly 15% of your currently inflated salary. We say that money doesn't matter. But try buying that house you can now afford in that neighborhood with the gate and watch how it affects your friends the first time you invite them over for drinks by the pool. I don't know what the solution for this is. But lying low seems to be a good plan until somebody comes up with a better idea.

__alexs 14y ago
Put a couple of million in a long term saving account, hide a couple of years living expenses in a shoe box and get rid of the rest of it in other ways your friends won't notice. Done. Get back to living your life instead of worrying about money.
- adventureful 14y ago
  You can never actually stop worrying about money if you have millions. Short of not caring about what happens to it. The FDIC covers $250k per savings account. Is US Government paper safe? I wouldn't bet everything on it. Will the Euro be around in ten years? I wouldn't bet much on it. Could gold crash if the Euro vaporizes and money is forced into the dollar? Are equities at a decade high courtesy of Fed POMO shots and low interest rates chasing capital toward risk? Let's say you want to give most of your wealth away and make a difference through charity. I don't see how you could not worry about that, it's important, and you can lose millions as fast as you can lose a few dollars.
  - __alexs 14y ago
    No amount of being rich is going to make that stuff not happen. > Short of not caring about what happens to it. How about doing that then?
  - wpietri 14y ago
    You can actually stop worrying if you want, and you'll probably do better by it. Go read Taleb's "Fooled by Randomness" for the details.
rehack 14y ago
I think, the reason to do it is something noble which is difficult to express - its part empathy for people who don't have these riches who may or may not be one's friends, and part a sense of continuity to self, that I am the same person, that I was yesterday - I still love the hard work, and would have done it irrespective of the outcome. So I don't completely agree, that its to keep your non-millionaire friends. I think, people's tastes change with time and social standing. For example, if you are on Facebook, tell me how difficult it is to really like a joke of a school friend, who has gone in a different direction in life and perhaps gets 15% of your salary.
- mtrimpe 14y ago
  As a Dutch person this kind of behavior is the norm. It actually pervades all of society. Dutch service (in restaurants) for example isn't bad because our waiters are rude. It's bad because we see the waiters as our equals and they're thus not as deferential as foreigners demand/expect. Very often they also pretty much are our equals, as they're largely well educated students who might very well end up earning more than you in 10 years. Even our royalty rides their bike to the restaurant in the rain... because that's what you're supposed to do. So perhaps SF is just more egalitarian ....
  - adventureful 14y ago
    That's an interesting view, but it's strange to me. Where I'm from (Maryland), if you don't treat a waiter with respect, you won't get served by the restaurant. It's an offense that will get you tossed out and banned. On the other hand, waiters have a job to perform and they're being paid to do so by the customer. If they want tipped better than average, they perform better than average. It's really simple.
  - mseebach 14y ago
    I think what you're describing is the same thing as in Denmark. There's a sort of cargo cult egalitarianism which completely misses the point that one person can be paid to service another person without them being unequal (on a human level). I've heard people talk about your supposed obligation to engage in a conversation with a taxi driver, or it being impolite to talk on your mobile phone in a taxi. It's bizarre and completely counter productive in societies as dependant on service industries as ours.
waterlesscloud 14y ago
The low-key thing doesn't fool anyone, though. Everyone knows where everyone really stands moneywise. I say this as a guy who has friends who have gone on to be many, many times more financially successful than I'll ever be. In a couple of cases almost literally overnight. I want them to enjoy the hell out of their money. I would think it was kind of creepy if they didn't. Potentially even offensive.
- wpietri 14y ago
  I don't think fooling people is the goal. I think the point is not to rub other people's noses in it.
adrianN 14y ago
Can you explain what's the point of buying a bike for 20000 or jeans for 1200 dollars if they are virtually indistinguishable from products costing a tenth of that?
- scott_w 14y ago
  Because they have $50m? It's an interesting psychological effect that as you have more money, you want to buy more expensive things purely because you can. I remember my friend getting an internship at <MegaCorp> on about £15k for the year (totally tax free). While he was on that wage he refused to pay less than £30 for a t-shirt, whilst I would expect at least 2 or 3 t-shirts for that price.
- lmm 14y ago
  The key's in that "virtually". The returns from more expensive things are diminishing, but they are still there. Not so long ago I bought a new shirt for about 10x what I usually spend. It's not 10x nicer - but it /is/ that little bit nicer; every time I wear it it adds a little bit of joy to my day. I've seen it argued that that's a much more effective way to enjoy money: rather than making drastic changes to your lifestyle, just make every little thing you do that little bit nicer.
  - arethuza 14y ago
    It can get really silly though - I seriously doubt that 20K Euro Louis Vuitton skis are really better skis than much cheaper ones - you are just paying for the brand. Plus there is the common complaint about "all the gear - no idea" - where cost/amount of gear is often perceived as having a negative correlation with ability.
    - mseebach 14y ago
      Although I haven't seen them, I would expect your Louis Vuitton skis to be very much visibly distinguishable from regular skis - and thus their purpose is to loudly broadcast a message of "I am very rich" on the slopes. Just as is the case with the very much distinguishable Louis Vuitton luggage lines.

__alexs 14y ago

Put a couple of million in a long term saving account, hide a couple of years living expenses in a shoe box and get rid of the rest of it in other ways your friends won't notice. Done. Get back to living your life instead of worrying about money.

adventureful 14y ago
You can never actually stop worrying about money if you have millions. Short of not caring about what happens to it. The FDIC covers $250k per savings account. Is US Government paper safe? I wouldn't bet everything on it. Will the Euro be around in ten years? I wouldn't bet much on it. Could gold crash if the Euro vaporizes and money is forced into the dollar? Are equities at a decade high courtesy of Fed POMO shots and low interest rates chasing capital toward risk? Let's say you want to give most of your wealth away and make a difference through charity. I don't see how you could not worry about that, it's important, and you can lose millions as fast as you can lose a few dollars.
- __alexs 14y ago
  No amount of being rich is going to make that stuff not happen. > Short of not caring about what happens to it. How about doing that then?
- wpietri 14y ago
  You can actually stop worrying if you want, and you'll probably do better by it. Go read Taleb's "Fooled by Randomness" for the details.

rehack 14y ago

I think, the reason to do it is something noble which is difficult to express - its part empathy for people who don't have these riches who may or may not be one's friends, and part a sense of continuity to self, that I am the same person, that I was yesterday - I still love the hard work, and would have done it irrespective of the outcome. So I don't completely agree, that its to keep your non-millionaire friends. I think, people's tastes change with time and social standing. For example, if you are on Facebook, tell me how difficult it is to really like a joke of a school friend, who has gone in a different direction in life and perhaps gets 15% of your salary.

mtrimpe 14y ago
As a Dutch person this kind of behavior is the norm. It actually pervades all of society. Dutch service (in restaurants) for example isn't bad because our waiters are rude. It's bad because we see the waiters as our equals and they're thus not as deferential as foreigners demand/expect. Very often they also pretty much are our equals, as they're largely well educated students who might very well end up earning more than you in 10 years. Even our royalty rides their bike to the restaurant in the rain... because that's what you're supposed to do. So perhaps SF is just more egalitarian ....
- adventureful 14y ago
  That's an interesting view, but it's strange to me. Where I'm from (Maryland), if you don't treat a waiter with respect, you won't get served by the restaurant. It's an offense that will get you tossed out and banned. On the other hand, waiters have a job to perform and they're being paid to do so by the customer. If they want tipped better than average, they perform better than average. It's really simple.
- mseebach 14y ago
  I think what you're describing is the same thing as in Denmark. There's a sort of cargo cult egalitarianism which completely misses the point that one person can be paid to service another person without them being unequal (on a human level). I've heard people talk about your supposed obligation to engage in a conversation with a taxi driver, or it being impolite to talk on your mobile phone in a taxi. It's bizarre and completely counter productive in societies as dependant on service industries as ours.

waterlesscloud 14y ago

The low-key thing doesn't fool anyone, though. Everyone knows where everyone really stands moneywise. I say this as a guy who has friends who have gone on to be many, many times more financially successful than I'll ever be. In a couple of cases almost literally overnight. I want them to enjoy the hell out of their money. I would think it was kind of creepy if they didn't. Potentially even offensive.

wpietri 14y ago
I don't think fooling people is the goal. I think the point is not to rub other people's noses in it.

adrianN 14y ago

Can you explain what's the point of buying a bike for 20000 or jeans for 1200 dollars if they are virtually indistinguishable from products costing a tenth of that?

scott_w 14y ago
Because they have $50m? It's an interesting psychological effect that as you have more money, you want to buy more expensive things purely because you can. I remember my friend getting an internship at <MegaCorp> on about £15k for the year (totally tax free). While he was on that wage he refused to pay less than £30 for a t-shirt, whilst I would expect at least 2 or 3 t-shirts for that price.
lmm 14y ago
The key's in that "virtually". The returns from more expensive things are diminishing, but they are still there. Not so long ago I bought a new shirt for about 10x what I usually spend. It's not 10x nicer - but it /is/ that little bit nicer; every time I wear it it adds a little bit of joy to my day. I've seen it argued that that's a much more effective way to enjoy money: rather than making drastic changes to your lifestyle, just make every little thing you do that little bit nicer.
- arethuza 14y ago
  It can get really silly though - I seriously doubt that 20K Euro Louis Vuitton skis are really better skis than much cheaper ones - you are just paying for the brand. Plus there is the common complaint about "all the gear - no idea" - where cost/amount of gear is often perceived as having a negative correlation with ability.
  - mseebach 14y ago
    Although I haven't seen them, I would expect your Louis Vuitton skis to be very much visibly distinguishable from regular skis - and thus their purpose is to loudly broadcast a message of "I am very rich" on the slopes. Just as is the case with the very much distinguishable Louis Vuitton luggage lines.