4 ms·
> The solution, at least for me, is as elusive as ever. If you define "the problem" as "I want to work 80 hours/week + have a healthy family life", well, yes,
by stephen 13y ago
> The solution, at least for me, is as elusive as ever.
If you define "the problem" as "I want to work 80 hours/week + have a healthy family life", well, yes, that's always going to be elusive. I.e. impossible.
Pretty sure the answer is to just not work 80 hours/week.
> but it's not something I can decide to change either
It is probably convenient for you to think that, but unless you have some sort of mental health condition (delusions of grandeur, etc.), I doubt it.
One way or the other, you're making choices you want to make.
And that's fine, but you might as well be honest with yourself/others about why you're making them, and that you must implicitly be okay with the trade offs.
- AndrewKemendo 13y agoIt is probably convenient for you to think that, but unless you have some sort of mental health condition (delusions of grandeur, etc.), I doubt it. So what would you say to the young [insert famous and wealthy figure here]?
- stephen 13y agoWhat would I say? Just what I'd said; that searching for a "solution" that allows working 80 hour weeks + having a healthy family life is futile because, IMO, it doesn't exist. At least when you have kids. I could see a spouse being okay with "5-10 years of hard work" for lots of freedom after that. Hard to make that sacrifice with kids though, because after 5-10 years, they're basically not kids anymore. Ironically, if the 5-10 years works out, and the kids have a guaranteed life of luxury because of it, they might be grateful. But I don't think it usually works out that way. (Note that I'm only focusing on the "80 hours/week" thing. If you can pull off "changing the world" (or at least your pocket book) on 40 hours/week, more power to you.)