8 ms·

> Hence the somewhat curious (and I think, very American) idea of the "Golden Years". If you put your head down and work hard, taking no vacations, until you're

> Hence the somewhat curious (and I think, very American) idea of the "Golden Years". If you put your head down and work hard, taking no vacations, until you're age 65, then you flip 180 degrees in the other direction and retire into a life of full-time leisure. So if you live long enough, it really won't be a waste; you cash it in all at the end! And this exact kind of thinking is what the societal overlords want you to subscribe to. Give them the best years of your life to get a degree of freedom later in your life, when the freedom won't matter anymore anyway, cause you'll be pissing in your diapers and be limited to a very small subset of things a healthy young person can do. I see it this way: when you're retired and old, the overall potential of what you can do with your life is much lower than that of when you were in your 20s and 30s. Why is that? Because an old person with the same amount of time and money can do much less with those resources than a young person. When you live your life like a run off the mill robot, living your life according to a set of societal expectations and rules set by other people, what's the point of such a life anyway? PS. OP, I wasn't addressing you, in case you feel I've attacked your point, I am just furthering it :)

orofino 13y ago
I always kind of shake my head at this. On a board with many people making 100k+ per year, who are the "societal overlords" you're referencing. Sure there are people that make much more than that, but anything beyond 80k allows a person to save quite a bit and "quit" the rat race earlier if they like.
- sliverstorm 13y ago
  This is part of why the "rat race" works/exists. People are always looking up to see who is above them, never down to see how far they've come. "I IPO'd for ten million dollars! Life is awesome!" quickly transitions to "Frank IPO'd for 5x what I did! That's not fair!"
  - VexXtreme 13y ago
    But that's human nature, we're designed to always keep climbing up and striving for more. It is not healthy to constantly compare yourself with people who are worse off. Sure, it induces a sense of gratitude to know that you have clean drinking water and no threat of being killed by a warlord today (unlike many people in Africa, for instance), however if we settled for that, there would never be any incentive to improve our situation further. Imagine what would've happened if every inventor and scientist in the history of mankind had that attitude. Also, not everyone on this board lives in Silicon Valley and works for a startup that spoils him stupid with catered lunches, scheduled massages and a 150K/yr salary. A lot of us are just normal middle class people living in economies that aren't that prosperous and the prospect of losing a job can really threaten our financial security. Also, if you work for a shit company that takes advantage of that, you can be in for a pretty miserable experience. So get off your high horse already.
    - metricman 13y ago
      Come on, human nature? Designed to keep striving? I've heard this referenced as "keeping up with the Joneses" when it's about matching consumption to your neighbors'. I never thought "keeping up with the Joneses" is part of my human nature. Or even my culture. The 'societal overlords' from previous posts you have now ascribed to human nature (??) are really 'society', perhaps influenced by some ultra-elite cadre, sure. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keeping_up_with_the_Joneses http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keeping_up_with_the_Joneses
      - dalek_cannes 13y ago
        If anything, Homo Sapiens was designed (read evolved) to be flexible because species that hard-coded their responses to the environment went extinct when the environment changed. So the only thing that could be coded into human behavior was to try to be "better". Better than what was left intentionally blank. At least, that's how I see it.
      - light3 13y ago
        There is a popular TED talk on motivation, he postulates that growth is one contributing component of motivation. This may be his anecdote, but this guy has helped many people get back their motivation. http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pink_on_motivation.html http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pink_on_motivation.html
- jessedhillon 13y ago
  Indeed. It never seems to never occur to some people that emergent behavior, arising from the (mis)alignment of incentives in a complex system, can give rise to behavior so bizarre and purpose-directed that it all seems deliberate -- as yet is nonetheless emergent. The whole system is a fractal, all the way to the top -- there are many uber-wealthy folks whose experiences are subjectively as miserable as Bukowski's was. You just can't believe it because you believe in a magical hierarchy with the free ones on top -- but so do the ones way up there. My god, if you're even able to leave a comment, you're already better off than 99% of people alive today! The "rat race" is a subjective, elective construct and, by definition you cannot escape it a long as you subscribe to it. The people you think have escaped it, or control it, are also trappe by it, no matter how hard that is for you to believe. The only ones who have truly escaped are the ones who have had a fundamental shift in the way they conceptualize work, career, goals, desires and everything.
  - rphlx 13y ago
    Our current global economic system was intentionally designed by (and for) a very small Elite, over roughly 4 centuries. Those at the very top are certainly not typical victims [1] of the system they carefully create; indeed, history shows they constantly and incrementally revise it to their benefit. [1] They're only victims if they go too far, trigger civil unrest, and wind up on the losing side of the guillotine. "I must Create a System, or be enslav'd by another Man's" -William Blake
    - grey-area 13y ago
      I'd contend that it wasn't designed to any significant degree. As the parent poster is trying to tell you, it just is. The system we have is just the result of the emergent behaviour of humans interacting, it's more down to chance than design, even if some elements seem predictable. We haven't yet found a way to fairly spread privilege in our societies, so we're stuck with the least worst system, but I would note that globalisation has actually raised living standards in many countries from India to China, in spite of, or perhaps because of its deleterious effects. People always want to hoard wealth (almost everyone does this, even those at the bottom), and it's hard to change that. It remains to be seen whether we can effectively temper human desires and spread that wealth and not end up in dystopia, but please don't try to blame things on a secret elite directing a carefully created system - it's a mirage and is not helpful. There are many contending forces vying for prominence in our societies, and in many ways corporations are more powerful than people or politicians (NB a corporation is not a CEO, it is a composite body). The guillotine you mention was actually far worse for the ordinary people of France than for the aristocracy (many of whom simply fled) - terror and denunciation was used as a weapon on moderate politicians and everyday citizens, and even eventually the chief proponent of its use.
- homosaur 13y ago
  100K is the point where you have the illusion of financial freedom because you can purchase a BMW, buy a nice home in a bland cul-de-sac with a bunch of nameless white dudes, and it's not until you're in your 40s and you're in danger to losing the job to a robot or a whipper-snapper that you understand that kind of "freedom" is actually enslavement. You made the wrong choice because you wasted your life buying plastic. I don't make 100K but I did recently have what you might call a religious epiphany about my job, my finances, and freedom. Luckily for me, I have little debt and actually like my job a lot so I'm not the hole some folks are, God bless them all. I just hope most of us aren't Bukowski's age when we realize we were building useless bullshit for useless people in order to buy useless plastic garbage. I know some of us are doing important work, but many of us are not. Jeez, guys, we get one chance at this. Most people are destined to live anonymous lives so at the very least try to enjoy it.
  - LekkoscPiwa 13y ago
    the misrepresentation is your post is the word 'buy'. You don't buy when a bank owns it and expects you to pay monthly payments. You buy when you own. Is it a big deal to loose job at 45 when you own house and a car or two? It is, but not as much because you don't have the obligation to spend half your previous salary monthly on payments. Which takes us directly to this where the problem really is: debt.
    - orofino 13y ago
      You're just playing with words though. People choose to use debt, I've got debt, on the car we just bought, that's it. I HAD debt, but the student loans are now paid and the house was sold. Am I lucky to make a good salary that allows me to pay these things down? Absolutely. However, I'm also responsible for the choices I make. Many people make more than I do and don't save as much, many More people make less and drive cars that are twice as expensive as mine.
      - LekkoscPiwa 13y ago
        I don't think I played with the words. No debt == freedom. And to have no debt isn't easy mostly due to social pressure - keeping up with the Jones. But it wouldn't really hurt to plan in such a way that before one hits 45 they are debt free and own house among other things.
eshvk 13y ago
It is funny you should say this. A friend recently had me interview for his company. He is a great guy, works too much, wakes up in the middle of the nights when he is on call. His boss started off by agreeing that yes, the friend worked too much. He may even have used the word burning out. He then hastened to tell me about his theory in life. Your 20s and 30s are meant to be a time for learning. Apparently, this "learning" involves working on these problems day in and day out. So the burning out was a good thing. Then, in your 40s, you start earning money. I could be a tech-lead or a manager, he said. Then, in my fifties, I could enjoy. He did this. He was happy with it, he said.
- LekkoscPiwa 13y ago
  My reply to this: anytime I see 50 year old bold fat guy in a Porsche 911 it's depressing. EDIT: should really be pathetic and sad and not depressing, but I think you get my point. Youth and health are so precious that no amount of money compensates ever.
  - throwaway1979 13y ago
    If even that were true! I really don't see my 40s and 50s being better than now. Personally, my biggest weakness is that I am passionate about the technology and getting my hands dirty. If I start getting practice in management, crafting bold powerpoints, dressing up, etc. I think I'd go far in tech in my later days. But I won't because I love getting my hands on code. sigh
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
  - brightsize 13y ago
    How about a 50 year-old slim guy with a full head of hair and a 911? Is that pathetic? Why? That would be me (minus the 911). I'm too frugal to buy a 911 but if another guy has socked away two or three million $ (or more) over the course of his tech career, how is this different than a 25yo with a big exit buying a 911? You seem a bit misinformed about age, a bit of an age-ist perhaps: I'm healthy and can bench press more now than in my entire weight-lifting life (since about 22). I agree with you that "kids" (i.e. people 20-30 :-) ) in tech are very often suckered into giving up their young lives to their tech employers. I saw this happening in the mid-90s at M$ and in their Seattle-area wannabes. I never participated in that, my time outside of the 9-5 norm was precious to me. You are right that "no amount of money compensates ever" for those years if they are lost.

orofino 13y ago

I always kind of shake my head at this. On a board with many people making 100k+ per year, who are the "societal overlords" you're referencing. Sure there are people that make much more than that, but anything beyond 80k allows a person to save quite a bit and "quit" the rat race earlier if they like.

sliverstorm 13y ago
This is part of why the "rat race" works/exists. People are always looking up to see who is above them, never down to see how far they've come. "I IPO'd for ten million dollars! Life is awesome!" quickly transitions to "Frank IPO'd for 5x what I did! That's not fair!"
- VexXtreme 13y ago
  But that's human nature, we're designed to always keep climbing up and striving for more. It is not healthy to constantly compare yourself with people who are worse off. Sure, it induces a sense of gratitude to know that you have clean drinking water and no threat of being killed by a warlord today (unlike many people in Africa, for instance), however if we settled for that, there would never be any incentive to improve our situation further. Imagine what would've happened if every inventor and scientist in the history of mankind had that attitude. Also, not everyone on this board lives in Silicon Valley and works for a startup that spoils him stupid with catered lunches, scheduled massages and a 150K/yr salary. A lot of us are just normal middle class people living in economies that aren't that prosperous and the prospect of losing a job can really threaten our financial security. Also, if you work for a shit company that takes advantage of that, you can be in for a pretty miserable experience. So get off your high horse already.
  - metricman 13y ago
    Come on, human nature? Designed to keep striving? I've heard this referenced as "keeping up with the Joneses" when it's about matching consumption to your neighbors'. I never thought "keeping up with the Joneses" is part of my human nature. Or even my culture. The 'societal overlords' from previous posts you have now ascribed to human nature (??) are really 'society', perhaps influenced by some ultra-elite cadre, sure. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keeping_up_with_the_Joneses http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keeping_up_with_the_Joneses
    - dalek_cannes 13y ago
      If anything, Homo Sapiens was designed (read evolved) to be flexible because species that hard-coded their responses to the environment went extinct when the environment changed. So the only thing that could be coded into human behavior was to try to be "better". Better than what was left intentionally blank. At least, that's how I see it.
    - light3 13y ago
      There is a popular TED talk on motivation, he postulates that growth is one contributing component of motivation. This may be his anecdote, but this guy has helped many people get back their motivation. http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pink_on_motivation.html http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pink_on_motivation.html
jessedhillon 13y ago
Indeed. It never seems to never occur to some people that emergent behavior, arising from the (mis)alignment of incentives in a complex system, can give rise to behavior so bizarre and purpose-directed that it all seems deliberate -- as yet is nonetheless emergent. The whole system is a fractal, all the way to the top -- there are many uber-wealthy folks whose experiences are subjectively as miserable as Bukowski's was. You just can't believe it because you believe in a magical hierarchy with the free ones on top -- but so do the ones way up there. My god, if you're even able to leave a comment, you're already better off than 99% of people alive today! The "rat race" is a subjective, elective construct and, by definition you cannot escape it a long as you subscribe to it. The people you think have escaped it, or control it, are also trappe by it, no matter how hard that is for you to believe. The only ones who have truly escaped are the ones who have had a fundamental shift in the way they conceptualize work, career, goals, desires and everything.
- rphlx 13y ago
  Our current global economic system was intentionally designed by (and for) a very small Elite, over roughly 4 centuries. Those at the very top are certainly not typical victims [1] of the system they carefully create; indeed, history shows they constantly and incrementally revise it to their benefit. [1] They're only victims if they go too far, trigger civil unrest, and wind up on the losing side of the guillotine. "I must Create a System, or be enslav'd by another Man's" -William Blake
  - grey-area 13y ago
    I'd contend that it wasn't designed to any significant degree. As the parent poster is trying to tell you, it just is. The system we have is just the result of the emergent behaviour of humans interacting, it's more down to chance than design, even if some elements seem predictable. We haven't yet found a way to fairly spread privilege in our societies, so we're stuck with the least worst system, but I would note that globalisation has actually raised living standards in many countries from India to China, in spite of, or perhaps because of its deleterious effects. People always want to hoard wealth (almost everyone does this, even those at the bottom), and it's hard to change that. It remains to be seen whether we can effectively temper human desires and spread that wealth and not end up in dystopia, but please don't try to blame things on a secret elite directing a carefully created system - it's a mirage and is not helpful. There are many contending forces vying for prominence in our societies, and in many ways corporations are more powerful than people or politicians (NB a corporation is not a CEO, it is a composite body). The guillotine you mention was actually far worse for the ordinary people of France than for the aristocracy (many of whom simply fled) - terror and denunciation was used as a weapon on moderate politicians and everyday citizens, and even eventually the chief proponent of its use.
homosaur 13y ago
100K is the point where you have the illusion of financial freedom because you can purchase a BMW, buy a nice home in a bland cul-de-sac with a bunch of nameless white dudes, and it's not until you're in your 40s and you're in danger to losing the job to a robot or a whipper-snapper that you understand that kind of "freedom" is actually enslavement. You made the wrong choice because you wasted your life buying plastic. I don't make 100K but I did recently have what you might call a religious epiphany about my job, my finances, and freedom. Luckily for me, I have little debt and actually like my job a lot so I'm not the hole some folks are, God bless them all. I just hope most of us aren't Bukowski's age when we realize we were building useless bullshit for useless people in order to buy useless plastic garbage. I know some of us are doing important work, but many of us are not. Jeez, guys, we get one chance at this. Most people are destined to live anonymous lives so at the very least try to enjoy it.
- LekkoscPiwa 13y ago
  the misrepresentation is your post is the word 'buy'. You don't buy when a bank owns it and expects you to pay monthly payments. You buy when you own. Is it a big deal to loose job at 45 when you own house and a car or two? It is, but not as much because you don't have the obligation to spend half your previous salary monthly on payments. Which takes us directly to this where the problem really is: debt.
  - orofino 13y ago
    You're just playing with words though. People choose to use debt, I've got debt, on the car we just bought, that's it. I HAD debt, but the student loans are now paid and the house was sold. Am I lucky to make a good salary that allows me to pay these things down? Absolutely. However, I'm also responsible for the choices I make. Many people make more than I do and don't save as much, many More people make less and drive cars that are twice as expensive as mine.
    - LekkoscPiwa 13y ago
      I don't think I played with the words. No debt == freedom. And to have no debt isn't easy mostly due to social pressure - keeping up with the Jones. But it wouldn't really hurt to plan in such a way that before one hits 45 they are debt free and own house among other things.

eshvk 13y ago

It is funny you should say this. A friend recently had me interview for his company. He is a great guy, works too much, wakes up in the middle of the nights when he is on call. His boss started off by agreeing that yes, the friend worked too much. He may even have used the word burning out. He then hastened to tell me about his theory in life. Your 20s and 30s are meant to be a time for learning. Apparently, this "learning" involves working on these problems day in and day out. So the burning out was a good thing. Then, in your 40s, you start earning money. I could be a tech-lead or a manager, he said. Then, in my fifties, I could enjoy. He did this. He was happy with it, he said.

LekkoscPiwa 13y ago
My reply to this: anytime I see 50 year old bold fat guy in a Porsche 911 it's depressing. EDIT: should really be pathetic and sad and not depressing, but I think you get my point. Youth and health are so precious that no amount of money compensates ever.
- throwaway1979 13y ago
  If even that were true! I really don't see my 40s and 50s being better than now. Personally, my biggest weakness is that I am passionate about the technology and getting my hands dirty. If I start getting practice in management, crafting bold powerpoints, dressing up, etc. I think I'd go far in tech in my later days. But I won't because I love getting my hands on code. sigh
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
- brightsize 13y ago
  How about a 50 year-old slim guy with a full head of hair and a 911? Is that pathetic? Why? That would be me (minus the 911). I'm too frugal to buy a 911 but if another guy has socked away two or three million $ (or more) over the course of his tech career, how is this different than a 25yo with a big exit buying a 911? You seem a bit misinformed about age, a bit of an age-ist perhaps: I'm healthy and can bench press more now than in my entire weight-lifting life (since about 22). I agree with you that "kids" (i.e. people 20-30 :-) ) in tech are very often suckered into giving up their young lives to their tech employers. I saw this happening in the mid-90s at M$ and in their Seattle-area wannabes. I never participated in that, my time outside of the 9-5 norm was precious to me. You are right that "no amount of money compensates ever" for those years if they are lost.