Slashdot Mirror


If You Get Rich, You Won't Quit Working For Long (bbc.com)

An anonymous reader writes: You'd think striking it suddenly rich would be the ultimate ticket to freedom. Without money worries, the world would be your oyster. Perhaps you'd champion a worthy cause, or indulge a sporting passion, but work? Surely not. However, remaining gainfully employed after sudden wealth is more common than you'd think. After all, there are numerous high-profile billionaires who haven't called it quits despite possessing the luxury to retire, including some of the world's top chief executives, such as Amazon's Jeff Bezos and Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg. But it turns out, the suddenly rich who aren't running companies are also loathe to quit, even though they have plenty of money. That could be, in part, because the link between salary and job satisfaction is very weak. According to a meta-analysis by University of Florida business school professor Timothy Judge and other researchers, there's less than a 2% overlap between the two factors. In the long run, we derive job satisfaction from non-monetary sources, which include positive peer relationships, the ability to work on meaningful projects and even leadership opportunities.

406 comments

  1. So... by _xanthus_47 · · Score: 1

    Mo money mo problems?

    1. Re:So... by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I've seen people hit the lottery for $5 million, quit their job, and come back in a year poor. I can retire on a tenth of that, even planning for long-term inflation.

    2. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't think you can retire on $500k, especially given the fact that the government is getting ready to slash the social safety net and SS and Medicare. I don't think I'd attempt it for less than $2m. Remember you are going to be on the hook for your own health care.

    3. Re:So... by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 2

      I've seen people hit the lottery for $5 million,

      I'd like you to introduce me to some of your friends.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    4. Re:So... by gsslay · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is a common story, particularly among those who have been poor their entire life. It's all down to a mind set. If you have never had much money, money is something that you spend. Either simply on living, or on luxuries before it gets eaten away by basic expenses. Money is not something you consider long-term and save or invest. But if you're used to having money above that of living expenses, money is something you are used to planning about. You don't go straight out and spend it.

    5. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Purely anecdotal, of course, but I've seen both sides first-hand. I had some poor neighbors when I was in grade school and they won $10mil (this was in the mid-80s). They blew through it in a couple years and were right back where they started. When I was in high school, my cousin won $21mil in the lottery. They were fairly well-off prior to winning, and they're lifestyle barely changed at all. My cousin kept her job (despite hating it before she won the lottery), they live in the same house. You'd have no idea they'd had such a windfall.

    6. Re:So... by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Interesting
      I read these things and I'm dumbfounded.

      If I hit the lottery and had enough money where I'd never need to work again, I'd leave work so fast I'd leave skid marks out the door!!

      I frankly don't know if I'd even notify them I was leaving I might just never return....

      Ok, I'd tell them, I'm not *that* much an ass, but it illustrates my feelings.

      I work for one and ONLY ONE reason, to make money to support the style of life I enjoy when not working. Period, cut dried simple.

      If I had enough money to never have to work again, I would not. I have PLENTY of things I'd rather be doing with my time. I have lots of hobbies....I'd like to spend time traveling, doing photography, chasing women, etc.

      I just don't get it why anyone would still work if they didn't have to.

      I've heard of people that for some reason, associate their self identity with their work...and I've actually seen this happen, often to older men who retire and just seem to lose part of themselves. I thought, however that this was mainly the product of older generations.

      But my work, and I made a very decent living, is purely mercenary. I don't care about the work, other than doing it of as high quality I can to get paid for it. If the customer is happy, then they pay me and keep me around.That's it. I have no love for my work or vocation.

      I'd certainly NOT be doing any of this at all if I didn't have to do it for a living.

      I just can't imagine the mindset of someone, that could not find the world entertaining enough, to find things to do if they had their fiscal needs met for a lifestyle they like, and not have to work any more.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    7. Re:So... by starless · · Score: 1

      I've seen people hit the lottery for $5 million, quit their job, and come back in a year poor. I can retire on a tenth of that, even planning for long-term inflation.

      Of course - if you're OK living on $20k/year that is.
      https://personal.vanguard.com/...

    8. Re:So... by networkBoy · · Score: 2

      no one said you'd keep your *same* job.
      I'd still work (in fact I do have a "win the lottery" fiscal plan, even though I only play when the pot odds are at .90 or better), but it'd be working on stuff that interests me and that would be at least break even. If possible I'd hire on a couple of my mates that are in the same line of interest and start a small company, predominately to stay busy.

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    9. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I find comments (and internet articles) like this interesting. There are so many people out there who are dirt poor and somehow manage to live through retirement. I know that people in the world are increasingly more material and require more money but somehow, the majority are getting by without having millions or even 100s of thousands saved for retirement.

      The same thing goes with the cost of raising kids. Studies will tell you that you need tons of money to raise a kid but somehow, my parents raised 9 of us and they didn't spend the millions that studies suggest they would have needed.

      How much money does it take to retire (or raise a kid)? It costs however much you want to spend on it. (Which is different than however much the next guy is going to spend).

    10. Re:So... by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      Depending on where OP lives that's actually really doable.
      Where I live, if I want to be comfortable, I need 50K post tax/yr minimum. If I could bring in 75K post tax I'd be *set*.

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    11. Re:So... by skids · · Score: 1

      How much money does it take to retire

      That depends very much on your health, and in cases where your health is poor, whether you have insurance.

    12. Re:So... by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      My wife is a doctor here in the UK, and she's had several of these cases, including one who won the jackpot (£3Million) and blew it in a year - he's back on state aid and has developed severe depression. Thats the worst one, but she has had other large winners who have spent it all in a short time and ended up with nothing at the end.

    13. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If you're so unhealthy it leads you to burn through $5M you are probably too unhealthy to work...

    14. Re:So... by Frobnicator · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If I hit the lottery and had enough money where I'd never need to work again, I'd leave work so fast I'd leave skid marks out the door!! ... I work for one and ONLY ONE reason, to make money to support the style of life I enjoy when not working. ... I have lots of hobbies....I'd like to spend time traveling, doing photography, chasing women, etc. ... I just don't get it why anyone would still work if they didn't have to. ... I have no love for my work or vocation.

      There are plenty of reasons to continue working.

      Let's say you win $5M. After taxes you get about $2.5M. Assuming you're in your 30's that gives you 50K per year, except that when you account for inflation you are probably closer to 30K or 20K per year when you get old. Which will suck. So even if you get lucky and have an enormous windfall, you will want to spend it slowly. Maybe pay off your current house or get a slight upgrade, and perhaps step up to a 2017 model year car. You'll want to spend it slow enough that when you reach old age you can still pay for everything. Financial planning is important.

      As for reasons to continue working, you get social aspects, there are benefits like insurance benefits in countries that have private insurance (an area where USA sucks), there is a constant mental challenge. The work environment is not only about income. There are many mental / psychological / social benefits as well.

      I also know several people who became rich through various means. None of them work full time or put in overtime, they end up working 20 to 30 hours each week, and they take frequent extended vacations, but they are still working. You mention photography. If that is your true passion in life then it might become your new part-time job.

      If you're looking for a notable example of this, Minecraft's Notch, Markus Persson, wrote that after becoming a multi-billionaire selling Minecraft his life became a living hell. His social life was destroyed because money effected everything, he didn't have his work or his life passion, he spends time waiting for his friends (who have jobs and families) to have time, and he occasionally writes here on reddit about his struggles to keep his life interesting or feeling motivated to keep his life filled with interesting things.

      Personally, if somehow my bank account had 9 or 10 figures I know I would still keep my job, but instead of a 40 hour work week it would probably become a MWF 10-3 kind of job. Enough that I could keep my sanity and my social benefits, and enough it would still make me emotionally value my free time.

      --
      //TODO: Think of witty sig statement
    15. Re:So... by DiSKiLLeR · · Score: 2

      What? You're literally reconfirming what the parent said.

      Poor people, when they win the lottery, spend it all, and end up broke within a year or two.
      Rich people, when they win the lottery, don't change much (if anything) about their lifestyle. They most likely just reinvest all the winnings.

      --
      You can tell how powerful someone is by the magnitude of the crime they can commit and be able to get away with.
    16. Re:So... by fred6666 · · Score: 1

      I don't think you can retire on $500k

      How old? $500k is enough to retire at 75 but not at 30.

    17. Re:So... by plopez · · Score: 1

      you can live for decades in a nursing home on medicare. Would you want to? Also what happens when medicare goes away?

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    18. Re:So... by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      I don't think you can retire on $500k

      How old? $500k is enough to retire at 75 but not at 30.

      If you hope to see 95, that would be $25K a year if simply spent and not invested.

      If you invest it and get a 5% annual return, you'd have an indefinite (depending on inflation) income of $25K a year. Ideally, you want a rate of return that allows for inflation, though, or alternatively, take less and re-invest the remainder.

      A lot of people would certainly like to be bringing in $25K, but it's not exactly going to be high living.

    19. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow! Really? Like one of your friends? A family member? Someone in your town that you actually speak to on a semi-regular basis?

      Ohhhhh. When you say "I've seen people...." what you really mean is that you once heard a story about "this here guy who won the lottery and spent it all". No research. No knowledge. No thought. Just repeat what you think might be true and hope we swallow the story.

      So, incidentally, how did it feel when you voted for El Trump-O, the Cheeto-Bandito?

    20. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I hit the proverbial startup lottery to the tune of ~$12M two years ago (was very early employee at a company that eventually IPOed). I'm still gainfully employed in the same job I had before. Dunno what else to do with myself. Have a wife and kids and just don't like the prospect of quitting and doing fuck all. Might eventually start my own company at some point, but haven't figured out what I'd do yet.

      To be honest, you'd be surprised how much things go back to normal in terms of your psychology and long-term plans if you can make it through the first year post-windfall without doing anything foolish (which I mostly did).

      I can honestly say I'm no happier or fulfilled now than I was before this happened, though I live in a slightly larger house that I own (instead of rent) and I drive a newer car. The financial things I worry about are shifted as I no longer have to worry about saving for college or a house, but all the other things in my life are mostly unchanged and still present challenges (e.g. getting along with spouse, worrying about kids development, losing weight, staying healthy).

      Now that I've been on both sides, I can say that money doesn't solve a lot of problems, but when we don't have much, we tend to assume it will solve more problems than it actually does.

    21. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you consider keeping a human alive an accomplishment, then yeah, even torture chambers are "doing fine without money".

      I'll eat a bullet before going into those 21st century terrafoam cells. Being alive for the sake of being alive isn't just an insult to Life, it makes me a parasite. My supposedly $9001 oxygen tank and canvas bed gives the healthcarewhale a "noble" excuse to hold out its hand, as it always has, does, and will.

      Fortunately I have no interest in any death ceremony. Your seas of "doing fine" are being thrown into unmarked mass graves. Even explicit instructions and money set aside seems to be a toss-up on getting you a funeral and named slab, in New York. You're dead, good luck being pushy on the phone carousels and insistent with secretaries/receptioninsts running interference - you're going to fall through the cracks faster than hot mercury.

    22. Re:So... by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 2

      If I had enough money to never have to work again, I would not. I have PLENTY of things I'd rather be doing with my time. I have lots of hobbies....I'd like to spend time traveling, doing photography, chasing women, etc.

      In three years, you'd have already spent five or ten million on expensive traveling, expensive high-end cameras you can afford now, and so forth. Then you'd be poor and broke.

      The last people I saw show back up at work in just 2 years had a 9 month stint in Europe.

    23. Re:So... by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Let's say you win $5M. After taxes you get about $2.5M.

      You take it as an annuity and record it as income of at least $18,000 plus 2% inflation (so at least 40,000 over 40 years). That $18,000 goes into a 401(k), either by satellite employment or by creating a sole proprietorship and financing yourself. With an SP, you can put up to $120k into your 401(k) as a 100% match of your declared salary to yourself.

      When you reach retirement age and take it out, you pay retirement-age taxes on it. That's usually less, notably because that $18,000 is the top of your tax bracket, and it comes off the bottom of an inflated bracket. For us non-lotto-winners making e.g. $60k-$100k, the top $18k faces 25% in Federal taxes excluding social security; in retirement, the bottom tax bracket will be $20k instead of $9k for today's new entrants, so they'll put $18k in and save 25% on it, then take $50k out at a rate of $12k x 0% (standard deduction, single, 2060) + $20k x 10% + $18k x 15%.

    24. Re:So... by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 0

      I actually put $18k into my 401(k) this year. I planned to pay my mortgage off, but deferred twice my mortgage's value to 401(K) instead. It'll be paid off by the end of 2018. I make $75k.

    25. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The same thing goes with the cost of raising kids. Studies will tell you that you need tons of money to raise a kid but somehow, my parents raised 9 of us and they didn't spend the millions that studies suggest they would have needed.

      Well they certainly didn't raise the 9 of your in today's environment, what with the cost of healthcare and tuition and all. It would also be interesting to see what they spent on the 9 of you in today's dollars rather than decades ago.

      It's like the people who ask why you need student loans and don't just work full time over the summer like they did back in the 70's. They are utterly out of touch with the costs of today versus of yesteryear.

    26. Re:So... by lgw · · Score: 2

      5% after-tax return is more htan most people manage while drawing down an account. 5% is easy when you putting money in, because dollar-cost averaging makes volatility your friend, so you can make higher returns by accepting higher volatility. That totally doesn't work when you're removing money each month - you need to be in stable income investments (which is 2-3% now, basically inflation) or actually be good at juggling stocks and bonds and guessing where the economy is going.

      Also, right now if your over 60 but not yet getting Medicre, health insurance will run you $12-15k, and that's just barebones insurance. $18k is a more realistic budget for those years (and everything will change when Trump changes Obamacare, so it's hard to budget at all).

      It's one thing living on $25 when you're 24, but it's not happening when you're 64.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    27. Re:So... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There are so many people out there who are dirt poor and somehow manage to live through retirement.

      How many of those people deliberately planned to live "dirt poor" in retirement? Not many.

      After my mother passed away from breast cancer, my father sold everything and bought a trailer home for $10,000 and paid $400 per month for trailer spot. He lived on his $1,000 per month pension, banked his $1,000 per month Social Security benefits for eight years. When he was diagnosed with throat cancer and died six weeks later, all the money he saved from Social Security paid his hospital bills and funeral expenses.

      For my father, this was an ideal retirement as he died with no debts and wasn't a financial burden to the family. For my older brother, he thought it was embarrassing that his step-father died poor from not pursuing the American Dream of having it all. For me, I thought my father was a perfect example of living a modest lifestyle.

    28. Re:So... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      You can live very comfortably on $20k/year if you own your home outright.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    29. Re:So... by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 2

      Right now, I'm healthy. Will I still be healthy in 10 years? 20? 30??

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    30. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That depends entirely on the standard of living that you expect. In my case, I currently live in a studio (single-room apartment with kitchen and such) and my expenses total around €1000 a month. This includes €400 student debt, which will be paid off when I'm 40. Given my life expectancy (family history of good health generally, but fatal heart attack in moderately old age), that means that if I'd continue living like this (and that isn't hard, in fact I find it quite pleasant and I eat good food, I can tell you that) then I'll spend approximately €400k in my life to come.

    31. Re:So... by MitchDev · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Also depends on your lifestyle and how much waste you have in it.

      You don't need a new iPhone/Galaxy every year. You don't need $100+ dollar a month cell/smartphone plans. You don't need cable subscriptions to every channel in the universe... a lot of "How much do I need to retire?" questions need to be scrutinized through the lens of "What kind of lifestyle do you expect to have?"

    32. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was the middle of 9 children graduating college in 2008. I too would like to know how much money my parents actually spent raising us.

    33. Re:So... by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

      The jail / prison system takes over. At at cost of about $25-$34K /year before health costs.

    34. Re:So... by khallow · · Score: 2

      . I don't think I'd attempt it for less than $2m. Remember you are going to be on the hook for your own health care.

      Save four times as much just so you can burn it on the most unproductive health care on Earth? I bet two million dollars would buy me a very pretty pyramid.

    35. Re:So... by MitchDev · · Score: 1

      "I work for one and ONLY ONE reason, to make money to support the style of life I enjoy when not working. Period, cut dried simple.
      If I had enough money to never have to work again, I would not. I have PLENTY of things I'd rather be doing with my time. I have lots of hobbies"

      THIS.

      I loved computers before I joined the IT field. When I worked for a small company, I still loved computers and working with lots of different businesses and people and their computers. Then the econ crash caught up to the small company I worked and at almost everyone who wasn't blood relation/spouse to the two brothers who owned the business was let go.

      From there I joined corporate IT, and over the years, I hate it more and more, but I have a house to pay for, car payments, a wife and child. Medical costs are insane so medical insurance is a must, and even with the company I work for paying a ton of my insurance premium, I still shell out a couple hundred a month for a plan to cover my family.

      I've never been the kind who "lives to work". I work to pay for my life. If I were to hit the lottery, I'd be ready to retire the moment I collected my winnings, the only reason I'd even give notice at work is to give my boss and co-workers a chance to find and train a replacement, NOT because I feel any loyalty to "company".

      Apart from not driving 30 miles each way to anf from work each day, and wasting 8 hours of my day at work, my lifestyle wouldn't change much, except for getting out more for more exercise and family and friends time...

    36. Re:So... by guruevi · · Score: 1

      Average retirement is ~18 years, so if you had $500,000 properly invested and retired today, you could live a modest life somewhere in a quiet area of the US with minimum Social Security benefits. Most retirees at that income level will also have a small part time job or small business to supplement their income.

      Within 20-30 years (when you actually are going to retire) $500k indeed won't cut it. By then SS will have collapsed if the US keeps up it's current course as will any other social backup net currently in existence so 2M is probably a very modest minimum to have.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    37. Re:So... by Jason+Levine · · Score: 2

      I think this is the key. If you're poor or middle class, you work at whatever will pay the bills. If you enjoy your job, that's a bonus, but you don't always have this luxury. If you were to become rich (and assuming you didn't just squander your newfound wealth away), you might still work but it would be only on stuff you enjoyed doing.

      For example, I like my job as a web developer and I recognize that I'm lucky enough to like my job when many other people don't. However, if money were no object, I'd probably hang up my web dev toolkit and commit to writing full time. Unfortunately, said writing doesn't currently pay the bills so I can't just quit my job because I've published a novel and am working on my second one. Whether I'm rich or poor, I wouldn't be sitting around doing nothing. I'd still be working. It's just WHAT I'd be doing that would change.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    38. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I find comments (and internet articles) like this interesting. There are so many people out there who are dirt poor and somehow manage to live through retirement. I know that people in the world are increasingly more material and require more money but somehow, the majority are getting by without having millions or even 100s of thousands saved for retirement.

      The same thing goes with the cost of raising kids. Studies will tell you that you need tons of money to raise a kid but somehow, my parents raised 9 of us and they didn't spend the millions that studies suggest they would have needed.

      How much money does it take to retire (or raise a kid)? It costs however much you want to spend on it. (Which is different than however much the next guy is going to spend).

      And how much did your parents pay for daycare while they both worked to pay the mortgage?

    39. Re:So... by pnutjam · · Score: 2

      Whose going to retire in 20 or 30 years? We'll all be busy fighting over who runs Bartertown.

    40. Re:So... by MMC+Monster · · Score: 1

      As many of the other replies allude to, there's living and there's living well.

      When I retire I want to live well and in good health. Depending on what age I retire it will likely take over $1M.

      Retirement investing books are interesting. They talk about a 4% draw down on your investments during retirement in order to not run out of money too early and figuring out your expected life expectancy based on actuarial tables and your parents' health.

      Sure you can retire at 55 years old without a mega-buck, but the risks that you will either end up broke in a medicaid nursing home or die early due to lack of ability to afford medical treatment goes up dramatically.

      I plan to retire at 55, but only if I can get closer to 5M in equity investments. That way I can afford to live well while retired, traveling regularly and not concerned about food stamps.

      --
      Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
    41. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > What? You're literally reconfirming what the parent said.

      I think the sentence
      > but I've seen both sides first-hand.
      suggests that was exactly the point...
      Not everyone posts only to disagree :P

    42. Re:So... by cayenne8 · · Score: 2

      In three years, you'd have already spent five or ten million on expensive traveling, expensive high-end cameras you can afford now, and so forth. Then you'd be poor and broke.

      No, not really.,

      I'm pretty much debt free....

      And honestly, I own just about most everything I want for the most part. Sure, I"d buy a new camera or lens here and there, but while pricey they don't break the bank. I buy them now, just make it 1-3 purchases a year.

      But if I took home say, $5M in cash....in vested it and made 2.5% interest, that would be $125K a year.

      Being debt free, I could easily live comfortable on that the rest of my days.

      Actually with me being a bit older these days, it would be more than that annually...and again, I could easily live on that, have my toys and never run out of money or have to work again.

      As far as travel, thinking about it....with all the terrorist crap going on in the world, etc....there are PLENTY of place for me to travel in the US that would keep me well entertained, and I'd never even have to ponder leaving the mainland.

      I might hit some caribbean spots, but that's about it I think.

      No, I'm not one of those that would blow it.

      I could live VERY easily on $125K a year in New Orleans and be quite happy the rest of my days and not have to work again if it happened.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    43. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Interesting. I make around 1% in a week by trading my stash in the market with leveraged ETFs (right this second I'm at 0.91% and I'll close my positions before 1.00pm PDT) and I trade about 50% of the weeks. This is dramatically easier in a volatile market. This is in my 401k, so there's no margin or covered calls and I have to wait for trades to settle. 5% a year seems like someone else is making a profit with your money.

      My plan is to not be taking money out of the stash. It's to be trading it and taking out the profits on trades. I want the stash to be big enough by the time I retire for those profits to be a living income. So I have about 12 years to get an 8X gain, which is probably achievable, especially as I'm also paying in as fast as the law allows. I would never leave my money in the market waiting for the next crash. Just trading it in an out in a day and holding cash through the night makes you immune to overnight stock market plummets and you can cash in afterwards.

    44. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think you can retire on $500k,...

      It wouldn't surprise me that a basement-dwelling-neckbeard who is bad at math could retire or 500K.

    45. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If you're looking for a notable example of this, Minecraft's Notch, Markus Persson, wrote that after becoming a multi-billionaire selling Minecraft his life became a living hell. His social life was destroyed because money effected everything, he didn't have his work or his life passion, he spends time waiting for his friends (who have jobs and families) to have time, and he occasionally writes here on reddit about his struggles to keep his life interesting or feeling motivated to keep his life filled with interesting things.

      Boo-hoo. Poor little rich boy. I can hear the world's smallest violin playing just for him.

      The reason I'm so cynical is that this is 100% his choice. If he really hates his life that much, there is a trivially easy answer. He can just dispose of his money. I'd be happy to take it, and barring that, he can donate it to one or more charities. Suddenly he's needing to work for his daily bread, and life is great again. So why hasn't he done so?

      The mere fact that he isn't doing this suggests that his life is not that bad. I agree that he has problems and worries and troubles. However, it's both incredibly presumptuous and insulting to try to ask for pity having won a proverbial lottery.

      I could buy an argument that somebody like the Queen of England didn't have a choice to be born as a monarch so could try to play the pity card... but somebody like Notch? Yeah right.

    46. Re:So... by Lodragandraoidh · · Score: 1

      That is certainly true. It is also true you can survive on Dog Food for some time - but do you have quality of life, and how long can you keep that up before it starts impacting your longevity?

      --

      Lodragan Draoidh
      The more you explain it, the more I don't understand it. - Mark Twain
    47. Re:So... by budgenator · · Score: 1

      There are big hits in taxes that most would find unimaginable, friends of mine hit for over $200 million, which after adjusting for limp-sum payout and taxes netted them a check for a little less than 90 Million. Lots of people think they are worrying about money, when in reality they are worrying about bills, put just south of 90 Million in an account and you start worrying about money instead.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    48. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The trick to life is to run out of money and die at exactly the same time, just like landing an airplane is running out of altitude, airspeed and ideas while arriving at the designated point all at the same time. Or so says my dad, who is a multi-millionaire and will not run out of money before he runs out of time.

    49. Re:So... by lgw · · Score: 1

      Speculative gambling is not a retirement plan. "Look at all the money I make day-trading" is right up there with "I have the perfect system to beat Vegas".

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    50. Re:So... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      Whose going to retire in 20 or 30 years? We'll all be busy fighting over who runs Bartertown.

      Years? Try ~30 *days* from now. :-)

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    51. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do I read this right that you pay tax on it twice? Once when recording it as income, then again when it withdrawn as retirement income?

    52. Re:So... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 2

      ... and he occasionally writes here on reddit ...

      Um, I know things have slipped a bit here in recent years, but this is actually /. :-)

      [ But I wouldn't mind a link to some of his threads so I can read what he's written. ]

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    53. Re:So... by SQLGuru · · Score: 1

      That's actually my back-up retirement plan. Commit some mild crime that would lead to a decently long stay in a minimum-security country-club prison.

    54. Re:So... by Ogive17 · · Score: 1

      I think you're missing the intent of the article in that satisfaction is what keeps people coming back, not necessary compensation.

      If I won one of those large lottery jackpots, I definitely would not quit my job immediately. First, I wouldn't want to burn any bridges. Second, I don't hate my job.. but just like you I work in order to live. It's a good job with good compensation. Finally, I would get bored very quickly if I suddenly had 9-10 extra hours per day for me.

      My plan if I suddenly came into enough money to immediately retire would go something like this. First step is to set up proper financial planning.. etc. Basically set myself up to live off the investment income the rest of my life. I would let my employer know that over the next year or so, I would be looking to wind down my activities. I would not resign until I knew what my next step would be. Would I open up my own small business? Would I spend a year traveling to every NHL arena? I just cannot be idle.

      My wife, on the other hand, hates her employer and she would probably give 2 week notice immediately.

      --
      "Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
    55. Re:So... by Frobnicator · · Score: 1

      but this is actually /. :-)

      Doh! Of course, this is the green site. These days I spend more time over there than over here, so I had slipped over in my head.

      But I wouldn't mind a link to some of his threads so I can read what he's written.

      Easily done. Like most people the comments are generally replies to daily news, but sometimes he makes news by complaining about his life as a depressed rich person.

      --
      //TODO: Think of witty sig statement
    56. Re:So... by budgenator · · Score: 1

      I knew a guy who spent money earmarked for the electric bill on loto tickets, won $209 million, went through detox and got off a crack cocaine addition, got his shit together and started to live the good life only to die in his sleep on Christmas Eve two years after winning from a heart attack! The wife married the guy she was having an affair with before they won the lottery.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    57. Re:So... by balbeir · · Score: 1

      Be careful to select the right crime. Otherwise it's federal pound me in the ass prison.

    58. Re:So... by asylumx · · Score: 1

      The US median income is just shy of $52k. A conservative estimate of how much you'd need in order to retire at that level is ~$1.3m assuming you spend every penny you make every year and plan to continue spending $52k/yr after you 'retire'. Reality is, you can live a pretty exotic life with a family of 3 spending under $30k/year which puts your retirement account estimate at a much more reasonable $750k. That's all without any plan to depend on Social Security, or any other potential source of income.

      People need to reconsider their spending habits if they don't feel at least mostly financially free with half a million in the bank.

    59. Re:So... by asylumx · · Score: 2

      Quit thinking of it as income, and instead think of it as spending. $25k is actually a decent amount of spending each year (over $2k/mo). I mean, if you're not working then you don't need to live in a big city with high cost of living, and you don't need any long commute (which means not much expensive gas, or maintenance on an expensive car) because where are you going to commute to? You don't have to be in a rush to do everything anymore. Take your time -- walk, ride your bike. You have time to cook your own fresh dinner so no need to eat out all the time. Think about it, what are you going to be spending all your money on?

    60. Re:So... by Enigma2175 · · Score: 2

      They talk about a 4% draw down on your investments during retirement in order to not run out of money too early ...
      I plan to retire at 55, but only if I can get closer to 5M in equity investments.

      Really, you need $200,000 per year in retirement to be comfortable? That seems like a hell of a lot. I guess it depends on what your current standard of living is but that is around four times the median household income in the US, and people in retirement often have lower expenses than working people (kids have generally grown, house is often paid off, etc.). I am planning on retiring early but with nowhere near that war chest, probably closer to $1M in investments for a $40k annual income. Once Social Security kicks in it will just be extra income on top of the investment income. I am just not willing to exchange further years of my life for extra money at the end of it, I would rather retire when I still have the physical and mental ability to enjoy it.

      --

      Enigma

    61. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's say you win $5M. After taxes you get about $2.5M.

      You take it as an annuity and record it as income of at least $18,000 plus 2% inflation (so at least 40,000 over 40 years). That $18,000 goes into a 401(k), either by satellite employment or by creating a sole proprietorship and financing yourself. With an SP, you can put up to $120k into your 401(k) as a 100% match of your declared salary to yourself.

      When you create an SP to pay yourself, aren't you also paying standard payroll taxes on that declared salary?

    62. Re:So... by Pfhorrest · · Score: 2

      There are lot of people out there who are dirt poor, old, and just barely surviving by a thread, and only thanks to the sliver of social safety net we still have left. My parents are both among them, with my dad living in a falling-apart trailer on land that he's constantly on the verge of losing for tax or inspection reasons, and my mom drifting from one shithole bedroom shared with two other people to another. They've both got flaws that I could blame them both for their own circumstances, but then they also both made plenty of money in their prime, I'm told money comparable to what I'm making now, which the statistics tell me is about twice what the median individual American makes (or about the median American household). I live in a tiny trailer myself to save on rent, live a lifestyle that everyone I know describes as too cheap (refraining from buying fairly ordinary things most people have that "I can afford" but don't strictly need because having that money in the future is more important) and save pretty much every other paycheck, frantically trying to avoid their fate, but when I do the math I'm still not sure it's going to work out. If I'm lucky, our social safety nets will still exist when the time comes, and my own preparation will actually make for a nice retirement, but I'm not counting on it -- and if I lived like my parents, I'd probably starve or die of exposure at their age. And they're not even retirement age yet!

      Most people die miserable in poverty and you have to be filthy stinking "rich" to have any hope of avoiding that.

      --
      -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
      "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
    63. Re:So... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 2

      The trick to life is to run out of money and die at exactly the same time [...]

      I've noticed that whenever someone dies, relatives throw out 99.9% of their worldly possessions. So I'm doing my relatives a favor by throwing out everything I own and keeping a bare minimum of possessions for daily life.

    64. Re:So... by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

      federal prison has better health care then some states.

    65. Re:So... by strikethree · · Score: 1

      But if you're used to having money above that of living expenses, money is something you are used to planning about. You don't go straight out and spend it.

      Don't worry. Someone will steal that money from you sooner or later. Either through semi-legal means or just through outright straight up theft.

      The whole system is designed to part you and your money; either willingly or no.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    66. Re:So... by yes-but-no · · Score: 1

      People work because of fear of being a nobody. When you work, you think society/company needs you. You convince yourself you are making a difference and your existence matters. The hard truth is nobody gives a f if you are there or not; the world keeps chugging along.

      The day you are comfortable with being a nobody; you don't have to work [independent of your bank balance]. You can live like the bees/birds/butterfly without doing 'work'

    67. Re:So... by Pfhorrest · · Score: 1

      For someone living in a median house in the most populous state in the country, $25k/year will barely cover the mortgage.

      If you retire with $500k in spending cash and a paid-off house then yeah that works our pretty well, but then you just went and doubled the amount you need to retire.

      --
      -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
      "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
    68. Re:So... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      I just don't get it why anyone would still work if they didn't have to.

      Personally, I'm driven by the rush that solving a problem successfully brings me. Paying is optional. But I guess the old adage about the best job being your hobby if you can get paid for it applies...

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    69. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >You take it as an annuity

      Far too dangerous these days. You are betting that the state lottery commission never becomes insolvent or get caught up in budgetary freezes (which happened in Illinois a few years ago)

    70. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget about several decades of inflation eating away at your money. $200k average may start as $100k now and $300k by the time you're 80 just to maintain parity.

    71. Re:So... by mandolin · · Score: 1

      I agree regarding your father's lifestyle. I do think it's sad that your father dutifully stashed away (if I did the math correctly) $96k over the course of 8 years, only to have it sucked away in 6 weeks by cancer and funeral expenses.

    72. Re:So... by fullmetal55 · · Score: 1

      This is why I'm glad I live in Canada, if I win $5million, it's $5 million at the end of the day. yes I'd pay tax on interest and investment income but the winnings are tax free.

      That said, I enjoy what I do, and would plan on keeping my job for at least a few years, living off my income quite well, since the first thing I'd do is pay off my mortgage, pay off any and all debts, invest a bunch, and invest a bunch on training and education. I would probably go back to school, get a second degree etc.

        I think it's been said that it depends on how you've lived, if you only know money as something transitory in your bank account, it's hard to comprehend the numbers you have and will end up spending above your means because for the first time you have a means, and you can buy the things you want, like a fancy car, the latest xbox the biggest tv, a house to put it all in, furnish the house, go out to eat, eat expensive foods 3 meals of the day, take friends out to expensive meals, buy friends stuff, never say no to a loan request, all the things you've been denied being able to do for yourself with regard to money. and that's how money disappears very quickly. I think the first thing you should do is get a financial advisor, and someone to help manage your money. or if you have a plan, go for it. But you have to remember there are now 40+ hours a week that are unoccupied, what will you do during those 40 hours a week? Play games? Watch TV? Funny thing is retirees have a similar problem, just what to do with themselves. some end up doing nothing and some like it some hate it, some end up working a minimum wage job just for something to do. some take up hobbies, some end up going into consulting.

    73. Re: So... by slazzy · · Score: 1

      Also you might live to be 110 due to medical innovation or luck- there's a lot of factor to consider.

      --
      Website Just Down For Me? Find out
    74. Re:So... by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      The point of having equity and precious metal investments is that to a large extent they track inflation. Of course, if there's a total economic collapse the equity investments will likely be hurt extremely badly, but in a total economic collapse everyone is screwed anyway.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    75. Re:So... by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Houses and land far enough from cities can be quite affordable. You don't need an indoor swimming pool and bowling alley; a nice house can be $150,000.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    76. Re:So... by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Nobody really knows what's going to happen when SS runs out of money, but there's a good chance that SS will continue doing what it's doing now (but hiding): take the money from the general fund. If SS were suddenly cut in half, the spurt of recall elections would be dizzying.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    77. Re:So... by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      He's not asking for pity, Dumbo, he's giving you a free lesson in life that you're too arrogant to recognize.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    78. Re: So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I could retire on $500k easily. I only made $11k last year and survived on it. I have a roommate and watch my expenses. I even managed to put money into savings. I don't have debt and I live very simply.

    79. Re:So... by Pfhorrest · · Score: 1

      not in california, where that wont buy an empty plot of land anywhere but the middle of the fucking desert

      --
      -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
      "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
    80. Re:So... by grumling · · Score: 1

      Best way to beat Vegas is to day trade casino stocks.

      --
      "Well, good luck finding a judge that doesn't run a bestiality site."
    81. Re:So... by virtig01 · · Score: 1

      Sure you can retire at 55 years old without a mega-buck, but the risks that you will either end up broke in a medicaid nursing home or die early due to lack of ability to afford medical treatment goes up dramatically.

      And from the other side of it, the longer you wait to retire, the increasing chance that you'll get dead before you hit traditional retirement age.

      Best to consult family medical history and actuarial tables first. It'd be a shame to waste good (younger) years of your life toiling away for money that you won't be able or won't care to spend in your later (less-fun) years.

    82. Re: So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's gotta be the absolute dumbest reason to love living in Canada I've ever heard in my life. Fellow Canuck here and I think you're a moron.

    83. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, he is confirming what the parent said, with anecdotes. And he said he was confirming it. You seem confused.

    84. Re:So... by coastwalker · · Score: 1

      Most people retire on less than $500k so you are talking bullshit. You might want to rethink your assumption that all the idiots around you will continue to vote to kill themselves by voting for the end of the social safety net for the benefit of the 1%.

      --
      Facts are history now plebs have politics for religion on social media.
    85. Re:So... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2

      There's an old saying: money doesn't buy happiness, but it makes misery a lot more comfortable.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    86. Re:So... by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      5% was what I considered a conservative figure. Others have pointed out that if you want short-term stability, it wasn't even conservative enough. Since I don't have immediate need for asset stability, I do get better than 5%/

      But you've admitted that you're a professional short-term trader. A lot of us would prefer to spend less time on our investments than that. Indeed, investment advisers assert that short-term trading is a great way for most people to get rich quick and get poor quicker over the long haul, whereas a longer-term buy-and-hold strategy paid my mortgage.

    87. Re:So... by mjwx · · Score: 1

      I've seen people hit the lottery for $5 million, quit their job, and come back in a year poor. I can retire on a tenth of that, even planning for long-term inflation.

      You see the thing is, if I won the Euromillions tonight, which is £31 million I'd quit my job, but I would end up perusing the things that I like doing or would like to do. Hobbies that I have in my spare time or would like to take up, many of which can easily be turned into a cottage industry. As I wouldn't have to worry about a mortgage, even if I were relying on it to put food on the table I wouldn't have to work hard... in fact if you like what you're doing it hardly feels like work at all.

      If I did win the 31 million quid, I would end up spending some time per week managing my investments.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    88. Re:So... by PPalmgren · · Score: 2

      Money put into an eligible retirement plan like a 401k is referred to as 'deferred compensation.' Because the compensation is deferred to a later date, there's no income tax when you put it in but you pay taxes when you take it out.

    89. Re:So... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      I do think it's sad that your father dutifully stashed away (if I did the math correctly) $96k over the course of 8 years, only to have it sucked away in 6 weeks by cancer and funeral expenses.

      If he had went on Medicare, they would have taken everything. If he gone into a nursing home, it would have cost $10K+ per month. Dying isn't cheap.

    90. Re:So... by Zaowulf · · Score: 1

      Which just seems to highlight the fact that the costs of today are disproportionate and in many cases completely unreasonable.

    91. Re:So... by keithrc · · Score: 1

      Pretty, but very small pyramid, or large, but ugly- something in the 'barn wood and corrugated metal" oeuvre. Your choice!

    92. Re:So... by nealric · · Score: 1

      Country club prisons are a myth (at least in the United States). I have an family member in a minimum security "trustee camp" who committed a relatively innocuous white-collar crime. This was actually an upgrade from the minimum security prison where they were initially sent. It is not a happy place by any means. It has no heat or air conditioning (it's often 110F in the summer inside), few recreation opportunities, and constant harassment by the guards. Food is so bad, my relative lost 20% of their body weight within the first 6 months, and they were slender to begin with.

    93. Re:So... by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      That would mean pretty much abandoning my current friends and family, and leaving an area I'm comfortable in to one I'm not. It will work considerably better for some people than others.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    94. Re:So... by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      For a long time, SS was running an excess, which it had to invest in government bonds. If it's no longer running an excess, it's cashing in on those bonds. It's going to be quite a few years before SS runs out of its own money.

      Of course, that has a considerable impact on the current budget when it goes from buying lots of bonds to selling them, but it isn't really taking money from the general fund.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    95. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why the hell would you put income that you've already paid tax on into a 401k?

    96. Re:So... by rewardian · · Score: 1

      The same thing goes with the cost of raising kids. Studies will tell you that you need tons of money to raise a kid but somehow, my parents raised 9 of us and they didn't spend the millions that studies suggest they would have needed.

      How much money does it take to retire (or raise a kid)? It costs however much you want to spend on it. (Which is different than however much the next guy is going to spend).

      The most recent average I've heard is $280,000 to raise a child to eighteen. No idea when you were born, but if that were in 1980, the average adjusted for inflation would be $93,800. Purely by the numbers, that's a factor.

    97. Re:So... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      you can live for decades in a nursing home on medicare. Would you want to? Also what happens when medicare goes away?

      Die quickly!

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    98. Re:So... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      I do think it's sad that your father dutifully stashed away (if I did the math correctly) $96k over the course of 8 years, only to have it sucked away in 6 weeks by cancer and funeral expenses.

      If he had went on Medicare, they would have taken everything. If he gone into a nursing home, it would have cost $10K+ per month. Dying isn't cheap.

      Personally, I would rather my heirs get my estate, not some nursing home. My plans are that once it looks like curtains for me, and if I can still do it, I'm going to save my family the money and the stress by taking myself out.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    99. Re:So... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Sure you can retire at 55 years old without a mega-buck, but the risks that you will either end up broke in a medicaid nursing home or die early due to lack of ability to afford medical treatment goes up dramatically.

      I plan to retire at 55, but only if I can get closer to 5M in equity investments. That way I can afford to live well while retired, traveling regularly and not concerned about food stamps.

      So you planning on taking a trip around the world when you are 85? I'm all about saving and living well, but my experience with others indicates that retirement in mid fifties is pretty damn nice, as you are still getting around pretty darn well. In the sixties, there is a general slowdown biased toward the 70 year old end. The slowdown accelerates, and by the eighties, most people are pretty settled, and the early portion of the nursing home experience is kicking in.

      You will find nursing homes fighting over you for your millions. And you'll tend to live until they've just about emptied your bank account.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    100. Re:So... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Really, you need $200,000 per year in retirement to be comfortable? That seems like a hell of a lot.

      Some people actually plan to build a new house with a new mortgage after retirement. Seems crazy to me.

      I guess it depends on what your current standard of living is but that is around four times the median household income in the US, and people in retirement often have lower expenses than working people (kids have generally grown, house is often paid off, etc.).

      In many states, retirees are exempt from many taxes as well. I don't need as many dress clothes nor does my better half.

      I am planning on retiring early but with nowhere near that war chest, probably closer to $1M in investments for a $40k annual income. Once Social Security kicks in it will just be extra income on top of the investment income.

      That should be sufficient. I have two retirement accounts - one untouched so far, and now that I've started collecting SS, I'm making more than when I retired.

      p> I am just not willing to exchange further years of my life for extra money at the end of it, I would rather retire when I still have the physical and mental ability to enjoy it.

      Exactly. End weighted money tends to go to a nursing home anyhow. You probably already have this figured out, but take the SS retirement at 62. You will make less money per month, but the amounts are based on actuarial tables, so the concept is total money extracted. My rationale is that if you wait until the latest possible time to start collecting, you'll just be getting more money at a time when you're starting to slow down and not need as much. As well as possibly die in the intervening years and never collect anything at all.

      The best career move I ever made was retiring at 55 years old. The wife and I go on several vacations a year where we are physically active, hiking and such, and no one except deluded people live forever. I always sum these things up by noting that there are stories about these ancient people who run marathons and such, and for some weird reason way too many people envision themselves like that at 95 years old. Shit, most of us will be dead before hitting that age.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    101. Re: So... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Also you might live to be 110 due to medical innovation or bad luck

      Fixed that for you.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    102. Re:So... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Most people die miserable in poverty and you have to be filthy stinking "rich" to have any hope of avoiding that.

      You're damaged goods, man. It's pretty obvious that your parents didn't plan well, and you are fearful of falling into the same problem that they did.

      But unless you have an odball definition of filthy stinking rich, "miserable poverty" is not the only alternative.

      You are on the right track, of living well within your means, and saving money. That part's good, and the basis of a happy dotage. But that anxiety and fear of falling into the same situation as your parents is gonna eat you up. Do you have anyone you can talk to about that?

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    103. Re:So... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      A lot of people would certainly like to be bringing in $25K, but it's not exactly going to be high living.

      A lot of people aren't going to live to 95 either. And we are living a little less long of lives than we used to in America http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/08/....

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    104. Re:So... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      For someone living in a median house in the most populous state in the country, $25k/year will barely cover the mortgage.

      Plain and simple. If you have a mortgage, you better be pulling in as much per year, plus raises as if you continued working.

      In other words, you can't realistically retire holding a mortgage. When I paid off my mortgage, it was like getting a hundred percent raise. Now retirement became a given.

      We even had many dim bulbs who retired in our area, and built a new house when they retired. Not a modest Cape Cod, but Big multi-story McMansions. Now they are in their 80's, and are half broke, and 85 year old couples tend to not like stairs and cleaning 5-6 bedroom houses very much. And since most of the developments won't even allow single story homes around here these days, my single story ranch has zoomed in value around 300 percent. Friggin RE agents are pestering the hell out of us to sell.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    105. Re:So... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      . I don't think I'd attempt it for less than $2m. Remember you are going to be on the hook for your own health care.

      Save four times as much just so you can burn it on the most unproductive health care on Earth? I bet two million dollars would buy me a very pretty pyramid.

      I have a suspicion that it will get really ugly if everyone is put on the hook (good choice of words, BTW - for their own healthcare. Because it's pretty importnt that some of the supporters of that bit of silliness are going to be a little upset when they find out that they can keep there guns, but will lose their medicaid, and food stamps.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    106. Re:So... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Reality is, you can live a pretty exotic life with a family of 3 spending under $30k/year which puts your retirement account estimate at a much more reasonable $750k. That's all without any plan to depend on Social Security, or any other potential source of income.

      Absolutely correct. I think that too many people not near retirement age think that they will buy a new house, go on vacations every month, and golf every day and eat out 7 days a week, and a slew of other things.

      When in fact, as a person who retired young, the better half and I live very well, go on several vacations a year, one extended one in Florida, and a lot of time, hang around the house. I'm not spending money on suits, her, her workplace dresses. No mortgage, and taxes are lower. But if I had known then what I know now, I would have retired at 50 instead of 55.

      People need to reconsider their spending habits if they don't feel at least mostly financially free with half a million in the bank.

      I think they don't understand the financial social and personal aspects, as well as having been fear mongered by investment counselers. You can't be a spendthrift in retirement, but you never should be one anyhow.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    107. Re:So... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      This is a common story, particularly among those who have been poor their entire life. It's all down to a mind set.

      I'll probably get hell for this, but for many of the people who win, we find out why they were poor to begin with. Not everyone is proficient with money. Not everyone makes good life and financial decisions. And worst of all, they are into gambling, which is one of the most efficient ways to go broke. So you have some poor schmedlock who is into gambling that wins more than they ever dreamed of having - yup - that's a person who is a prime candidate for an impressive burn rate.

      If I won the lottery, the first thing I would do is consult a financial lawyer, and the second thing is demand no publicity.

      Guess I'd have to play it first.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    108. Re:So... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      I read these things and I'm dumbfounded.

      If I hit the lottery and had enough money where I'd never need to work again, I'd leave work so fast I'd leave skid marks out the door!!

      First thing you want to do is contact a lawyer, Then keep your winnings as quiet as possible,and for gawd's sake, don't tell your relatives! Take the money as an annuity if possible.

      Then you go to HR and put in a regular two week notice. Then spend the next two weeks trying wipe the grin off your face. Call your boss by some weird made up nickname.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    109. Re:So... by Pfhorrest · · Score: 1

      But unless you have an odball definition of filthy stinking rich, "miserable poverty" is not the only alternative.

      That's why "rich" was in quotes. The closest alternative to miserably poverty, a moderately safe life where you're not constantly having to bribe other people to let you exist in their space (renting, be it land or money to buy land) and have savings beyond that to cushion your fall once you're unable to work, which should be a reasonable standard of living that almost everyone should be able to expect in the modern developed world, is in fact a standard of living far and beyond the reaches of the vast majority of the country today.

      I make more money than 75% of individual Americans, live more cheaply than most of them, and it's still looking like I might only finish step one (pay off a house) just in time to die, unless I either move to a shit hole in the middle of nowhere (where almost nobody lives, for good reason), or else move to what may as well be a different country (where many fewer people than all the people poorer than me in my area live, so not something reasonable to expect of me unless you expect almost the entirety of California to leave the state too), in either case abandoning everyone and everything I know and love, just for a chance to live a life not worth living, having given all of that up to attain it. And 75% of Americans are worse off than that. We're all well and truly fucked, except those who were born early enough and had opportunity and foresight enough to hop on the real estate train before it pulled away and abandoned entire generations to a miserable inevitable death.

      --
      -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
      "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
    110. Re:So... by Pfhorrest · · Score: 1

      That's why I said:

      If you retire with $500k in spending cash and a paid-off house then yeah that works our pretty well, but then you just went and doubled the amount you need to retire.

      --
      -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
      "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
    111. Re:So... by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      So at $2M savings, assuming you've got it invested in say a 401k, and using the typical 4% rule, that would give you $80k/yr to live off of. And in retirement, you typically don't need as much as when you're working...people tend to argue that point, and we can if anyone cares. At $80k, if you can't be comfortable, you're doing it wrong.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    112. Re:So... by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      At least you'll have free sex.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    113. Re:So... by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      I was the middle of 9 children graduating college in 2008. I too would like to know how much money my parents actually spent raising us.

      Having raised a kid who graduated college in '12, I'd estimate that pre-college, I'd spent $150-200k, then another $140k (out of state tuition) for college. I'll qualify this by mentioning that I live in northern VA...high cost of living, and that I certainly could have done it for less, but I've got a good job, and she's my only kid. I'd say that daycare expenses were probably what did the most damage pre-college...single dad w/o family nearby, so it was my only option.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    114. Re:So... by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      Big families like that tend to not use daycare. The older kids, or other family members pitch in.

      One more point... While it's expensive to raise a kid, it becomes less expensive to raise the 2nd, 3rd, etc. You've already got things in place that can be used by the siblings.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    115. Re:So... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1
      Sweet Jeebuz, Eeyore, you must be a blast at parties.

      With your attitude, I suspect your retirement will be just the sort of hell you think it will be.

      And the money issues will be the least of your problems.

      When I first entered the workforce, back in the 70's I was told - "No use saving for retirement, inflation is going to eat up anything you save, and Social Security is going to be bankrupt in a few years." You'll never be able to retire!"

      But I was stupid. I didn't listen to the smart people. I saved money, and over time, it accrued. I invested well - which means not buying what the smart people bought. I had more than one TDA/TSA account.

      I kept my cars a few years longer, and didn't buy a new wardrobe for every season. But I drove nice cars, and I dressed well. I didn't refi my house and buy an Escalade with the "free money" like the smart people did, or take yearly trips to Disney World with that money. But I've been to Disney World. I didn't eat out 7 days a week, but I ate well.

      My favorite smart person story was about the guy who would come down and brag about his retirement plan. He was invested 100 percent in tech stocks in a system that allowed you to choose the investment options. He was a multi millionaire - for about 6 months. He was smart. Then the dotcom bust happened. And he rode his entire investment down to nothing.

      Now my slower tactic was a gamble. I could have contracted some horrible disease and died without realizing any of my though out plans. Then again, I could have done the same if I didn't.

      But the interesting thing is, in the end, the naysayers who thought I was an idiot for saving money were right. They personally cannot retire. They have a McMansion that they refied several times, and still owe a lot on it. They didn't even start seriously thinking about retirement until their mid-50's, then when the truth of their foolishness hit them they invested in risky vehicles, which is the complete opposite of how it should be done. But now they are in their 60's, still owing a shitload of money on their houses, and through foolish investments, are looking at the impossibility of surviving on a social security payment that is half of what their mortgage payment is. And many plan on essentially working forever. A plan just as foolish as any other they made.

      One of the issues that this has all driven home to me is that even with smart people - and I worked with very smart people - many of them aren't very good at handling money and investments. Yet until we adopt a system that kills people at a certain age if they can't support themselves, it's probably best to have an outfit looking out for them. But dude all of that isn't your issue. You seem to be doing the right stuff, and should be able to retire okay.

      But none of this seems to make you the least bit happy, and you've developed a serious Eeyore outlook, and that is pretty concerning.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    116. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what you're saying is that you lack all imagination. You have nothing you'd rather be doing than work? Considering the way you made your money I guess that isn't surprising, you're probably already doing something you really like.

      For most people, they will die while working a job they dreaded going to every day.

    117. Re:So... by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      Right, so expect only $40k of income from that $1M of 401k investments. Unless you've got other income...pension, Social Security, etc., it's gonna be difficult to make it on that.

      At 58, I've been doing a lot of reading on this, and often wondered why you should be aiming to maintain the principal balance. Assuming you don't care about leaving an inheritance, shouldn't the ideal goal be to die broke? What's that quote?...I want the last check I write to bounce. Anyway, I'm planning to read this book soon.

      https://www.amazon.com/Die-Bro...

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    118. Re:So... by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      What LGW said. AC, how long have you been doing it? Have you survived the down markets?...crash of '88?...internet bubble?...great recession? FWIW, I have been investing since '82. It's been easy to make money in the market for the last few years...my 401k is up 15%, and it's mostly all in the S&P, so low fees, and no work on my part. But, as you get close to big financial events (new mortgage, putting the kids through college, etc.), it's not prudent to risk the market volatility.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    119. Re:So... by asylumx · · Score: 1

      If you're not working, why do you need to live in expensive California?

    120. Re:So... by asylumx · · Score: 1

      For someone living in a median house in the most populous state in the country, $25k/year will barely cover the mortgage.

      So, move. Quit making excuses!

    121. Re:So... by asylumx · · Score: 1

      You don't need to spend $500k on a house. That's ridiculous -- you can get a beautiful house on a large plot of land *almost* anywhere in the US for 1/4 of that. You need to re-examine your constraints if you're stuck on that.

    122. Re:So... by asylumx · · Score: 1

      Yup, that's a life decision. It's disingenuous to claim it can't (or even shouldn't) be done though. It clearly can be done, and people do it. $25k is a lot of money if you're not wasting it like a sucker on things that don't make a difference (most consumer goods).

    123. Re:So... by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      "Ohhhhh. When you say "I've seen people...." what you really mean is that you once heard a story about "this here guy who won the lottery and spent it all". No research. No knowledge. No thought. Just repeat what you think might be true and hope we swallow the story."

      You weren't too lazy to write an uninformed complaint, but were too lazy to google for yourself. Go figure. I'll start you off with this one, you can google others.
      http://www.usnews.com/news/art...

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    124. Re:So... by Pfhorrest · · Score: 2

      Because the only reason to live anywhere in an enormous geographical area is because your job is there, and not because you, like tens of millions of other people, were born and raised there and all your family and friends and loved ones and your entire life is there?

      Why don't all retired Brits leave the UK and move to eastern Europe somewhere that it's much cheaper? That's about the same scale we're talking here.

      --
      -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
      "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
    125. Re:So... by Pfhorrest · · Score: 1

      Yes, because the best solution to this problem is to relocate tens of millions of people. That's totally a feasible thing to suggest, to just mostly empty out the third largest and most populous state in the entire country. That's not crazy at all.

      --
      -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
      "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
    126. Re: So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was the man she was having the affair with!

      Long story short: we poisoned him.

  2. You may not "quit working" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    ...but exactly what it is you "work" on will quite likely change since you're now free to choose something you find enjoyable or fulfilling.

    1. Re:You may not "quit working" by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This is exactly true. I do many things for a buck, but I wouldn't do what I presently do. I would like to think I'd be productive and busy, but I would be doing the parts of the job I want to do, and either abdicating or paying someone to do the nasty stuff.

      The salary thing is a red herring. HR usually uses that to justify low (i.e. "market") wages. But they neglect engagement and retention. When paid market wages I tend to optimize the "life" part of work/life balance, and consider my job to be fairly disposable (i.e. I won't put up with a lot of crap, and don't think twice about calling a moron a moron). If I were rich I would never take such a job, which is ironic considering I don't need the money, but such places tend to have very bottom line attitudes about the parts of the job I enjoy too.

    2. Re:You may not "quit working" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Very few people have a job that they really enjoy. So they think "If I had a lot of money I would immediately quit working". But, the truth is, doing nothing all day is actually quite boring.

    3. Re:You may not "quit working" by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 2

      I loved the job I had in College. I'd gladly work in a small bookstore again if money weren't an issue, and such things still existed.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    4. Re:You may not "quit working" by gsslay · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Exactly. I was suddenly rich I wouldn't stop work. Well, only for a year or so. But the work I went on to do would then be something I enjoyed, no matter how badly paid it was. I would forever be in the position of never having to worry about losing the job, or being able to quit if I decided I didn't like it.
      This is why born-rich politicians (pointing no fingers) will never be able to understand the working lives of the rest of us. They've never been in the position where losing a job is disastrous. They've always had the luxury of choosing what job they'd like, to what degree, and taking a break from it all whenever suits them. That freedom truly changes the nature of your working life entirely.

    5. Re:You may not "quit working" by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      There are a lot of jobs that would be quite fun if you worked for a company that didn't have to do more than approximately break even.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    6. Re: You may not "quit working" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      ^^^ came here to to say this. I recently am coming off a 12 month break of doing nothing. Literally nothing. Sleeping until noon, going to bed at 4am, playing video games and chilling. I did keep the house clean ;). The only productive thing I did in those 12 months is cook and clean the house. Every night dinner on the table. I felt like a stay at home mom, except I'm a single father.

      My experience, at first was cool, it was something new. Quickly wore off, now I'm at the point where I only interact with family and 1 friend IRL and I find myself feeling deeply depressed. I have no goals, no motives, and that's just no life to live. I wake up feeling sad, like another day of nothing. I love going to sleep because I get a break from my boring life. I truly believe this experiment has left me with clinical depression. When I worked I was never this sad. Never was my sleep schedule so off when I worked.

      I guess long story short is I agree. Humans need to have a purpose. Or atleast something that gives them pleasure. Sitting around doing nothing all day even with money, is quite boring and not fulfilling at all. I can't wait to get back to work.

    7. Re:You may not "quit working" by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Very few people have a job that they really enjoy. So they think "If I had a lot of money I would immediately quit working". But, the truth is, doing nothing all day is actually quite boring

      You know, a few years ago, I had about a 7 month gap in between contracting gigs.

      My typical day was, wake up, walk the dog....jump on my motorcycle and hit the gym for a couple of hours.

      I'd come back home, have some lunch, look for jobs about an hour or so, and then often after showering and dressing, I'd jump on my motorcycle and run around town (living in New Orleans). I spent days seeing the art museums, WW2 museum, all sorts of neat things. I might have left out earlier and met friends for lunch somewhere....

      Usually by about 3-4pm, I'd usually meet some friends at one of our MANY fine drinking establishments, for a few...and then come home, etc.

      For 7 months, lather, rinse, repeat. I had NO problem finding things to do.

      I thought to myself, "Man, if I won the lottery, this would likely be a large part of my life, and hell, if I got tired of this, I could always take a vacation.

      Seriously....how could anyone get bored with all the money they ever need, and a bit of imagination?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    8. Re:You may not "quit working" by ghoul · · Score: 2

      This is kind of the reason we dont like hiring people with family money. They have no commitment to the job. We need to be able to plan on the person being around to do their job when the going gets tough.

      --
      **Life is too short to be serious**
    9. Re: You may not "quit working" by spudnic · · Score: 1

      You should take up drinking or light recreational drug use.

      --
      load "linux",8,1
    10. Re:You may not "quit working" by skids · · Score: 1

      I'd probably tell my employer: I like doing stuff, and I'll still work some part time, but I am not getting up at 7AM anymore unless I damn well feel like it.

    11. Re:You may not "quit working" by ausekilis · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I knew a guy that was a seasonal worker. He'd work for ~6 months in the spring/summer so he could hit the slopes wherever and whenever he wanted for the rest of the year. While I like my job and coworkers, I'm actually a bit envious that he was able to do that.

      Go ahead and ask any retiree too, that "free time" gets filled up quick.

    12. Re:You may not "quit working" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I sold out of a company a few years back and got a bit of cash (though not enough to retire) and lots of free time. I did that stuff for a little while, but then got bored and started another company. Basically, you are right, but the inherent problem was that all my friends were not in the same position as myself. I could imagine back at the start of my career, when everyone didn't have families, mortgages etc, it would have been a lot more fun. But people get really busy in middle age and basically you either have to go hang out with retired people, or get used to hanging out by yourself a whole lot.

      In contrast, many friends who had worked themselves into senior positions at big companies had extensive social lives based almost entirely around their workmates and business activities. Personally I found that a bit odd but it is just the way things are now, particularly in tech. If you have made it yourself outside such circles, then it is quite a lonely existence, and this was part of why I just went back into business much earlier than I really needed too.

    13. Re:You may not "quit working" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see you have no kids. This is the reason why it worked for you.

    14. Re:You may not "quit working" by Some+nick+or+other · · Score: 1

      I suspect there's a selection effect: the kind of people who get filthy rich are the kind who are extremely motivated by money. So they wouldn't stop working. If they see money as score and the highest score wins, then they keep working even after they're rich. On the other hand, the kind of people who would quit after $10M may not have the ruthless drive to get there no matter what it takes.

    15. Re:You may not "quit working" by RabidReindeer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is kind of the reason we dont like hiring people with family money. They have no commitment to the job. We need to be able to plan on the person being around to do their job when the going gets tough.

      In other words, we want them desperate, not invested!

    16. Re: You may not "quit working" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Weird. I have no shortage of things I could do indulging my hobbies, reading, listening to music, walking, cycling...

    17. Re:You may not "quit working" by w3woody · · Score: 2

      Exactly right. I do software development, and I'd probably continue doing software development. But I'd be a hell of a lot pickier about the sorts of projects I choose to work on. Ironically people I know who have been in a similar position find themselves even making a larger salary in the long run, because they are able to take greater risks while picking things they like and want to do (and are good at) rather than just looking for whatever they can that they may be good on, but which pays.

    18. Re: You may not "quit working" by RabidReindeer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      OK, here's your purpose: find a purpose. Make a full-time job out of it.

      Look around. What interests you? people, things? animals? making stuff?

      If you like dealing with people, consider some of the old standbys. Toastmasters, the various "Loyal order of Water Buffalo" organizations, food banks, Habitat for Humanity, check out Meetup for local groups and see if any of them are doing things that interest you. Maybe join a local amateur sports team.

      If you like things, how do you like them? making them? collecting them? both? Here again, there are places you can go and/or stuff you can buy and play with - since you apparently aren't entirely lacking in funds.

      Same with animals. Work on/buy a farm or ranch, consider raising alpacas, volunteer at an animal shelter, whatever.

      Or travel, explore. Even if your budget is limited, you can travel virtually for free these days.

      Grow things, even if it's just a balcony garden. Draw, craft, become an Internet curmudgeon - there's no expertise required beyond what you claim for yourself. Since you're already cooking, tune into some of the cooking shows on TV/Internet and learn how to cook like a pro from the pro's.

      Become an artist - people will think you're unemployed anyway. Buy a 3d printer and play with it. Sculpt, paint, bend wire, draw, make art using chainsaws and/or explosives.

      If you're depressed, and can't explore, then you can spend your time and money talking to mental health professionals. It's good for the economy.

      It's a big world and there are plenty of things to do. Finding a direction and getting started is the hard part.

    19. Re:You may not "quit working" by Moheeheeko · · Score: 1

      The issue here is that people spend so much of their lives working to get by that they have no time to develop hobbies, so when that check comes they have no idea what to do with themselves.

    20. Re:You may not "quit working" by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      I'd have it made it if I hit the lotto. I'd get a bigger house, and have a recording studio built in or near it; then fill said studio with gear, so I could pursue the music I've been doing for most of my adult life, composing and recording songs (instrumental mostly).
      Purpose would not be an issue, boredom would not be an issue. I have add'l hobbies anyway that would provide me with a break from music when I needed it: Astronomy, photography, art, and a tour of Europe. Man that sounds good.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    21. Re:You may not "quit working" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >...how could anyone get bored with all the money they ever need...

      One sad & common reality is that people who 'get rich quick' spend all their money real quick too. They find themselves having bought a bunch of fluff or helped out others... suddenly they themselves are taking out loans and have mortgaged themselves back to work again.

    22. Re:You may not "quit working" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I don't see that working out. Financial pressure might help in making sure they stay on and maybe extra-hard pretend to work hard, but it doesn't actually provide motivation (in the proper sense, not the gun-to-your head sense).

    23. Re:You may not "quit working" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You may not hire them, but tons of non-profits will.

    24. Re: You may not "quit working" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1.5 hr commute 1 way. 50+hrs work. Really, hobby. First world problems.

    25. Re:You may not "quit working" by chihowa · · Score: 1

      This is kind of the reason we dont like hiring people with living relatives or legal records of their existence. They have no commitment to the job. We need to be able to plan on the person being around to do their job when the going gets tough.

      --
      If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
    26. Re: You may not "quit working" by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 3, Informative

      My experience, at first was cool, it was something new. Quickly wore off, now I'm at the point where I only interact with family and 1 friend IRL and I find myself feeling deeply depressed. I have no goals, no motives, and that's just no life to live. I wake up feeling sad, like another day of nothing. I love going to sleep because I get a break from my boring life. I truly believe this experiment has left me with clinical depression. When I worked I was never this sad. Never was my sleep schedule so off when I worked.

      I'm in a similar position, though not of my choosing, and completely understand what you mean. I'm 53, debt-free and financially independent for my current and foreseeable future (looking 50+years out) according to my budget, even without a job, so don't need to work. I still do work 3/4 to full time because I think I'd be bored and have also never been w/o a job. I'm in this position because I was very happily married to a wonderful woman, who was 19 years older than me, for 20 years and we lived responsibly accounting for the fact that she would retire before me. Instead, she died, literally in my arms, of a brain tumor in Jan 2006, just seven weeks after diagnosis. I'm still a bit lost and without direction because she was all that really mattered... The only thing I can really disagree with you is that my experience was never cool.

      Remember Sue...

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    27. Re:You may not "quit working" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Very few people have a job that they really enjoy. So they think "If I had a lot of money I would immediately quit working". But, the truth is, doing nothing all day is actually quite boring.

      Well that's true but I could use a long break from all the moronic bullshit that I put up with all day everyday, not to mention not having to put up with all the moronic bullshit on the subway, coming and go from work. I'd catch up on sleep, rested like I've never seen for decades and then after I'm feeling better, I'd think about doing something meaningful.

      So sure, if I won $1M+ in a lottery, I'd quit my fucking useless job and get out of the fucking useless, frustrating city that I live in.

    28. Re:You may not "quit working" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is kind of the reason we dont like hiring people with family money. They have no commitment to the job. We need to be able to plan on the person being around to do their job when the going gets tough.

      Interesting.

      In other words, you prefer to hire people who do not necessarily have any interest in the the work they need to do, as long as they need the money from doing it, instead of finding people who are actually passionate about what they do, rather than out to primarily earn as much money as possible.

      Not a path to success, if you have any actual vision worth pursuing, that's for sure.

      I'll continue hiring people who actually like what they do with us the most, and put the salary at the second spot (or lower, given their personal preferences and circumstances) on their list of priorities.

      Funnily enough, that has proven to work well, for both parties. Note: I still pay well.

      Go figure.

    29. Re:You may not "quit working" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. You can now pick and choose your job. You no longer need to fear being sacked, and can take as long as you want to find a job you will enjoy with hours you can stand rather than having to take shit work because the alternative involves homelessness.

      Personally I have that many hobbies and "on hold" non-work projects that I would take at least a year off "work" just so I could focus on them. But my wife would probably drive me back to work eventually.

    30. Re:You may not "quit working" by ghoul · · Score: 1

      Oh people with no legal records of their existence are very committed to the job. As they say in Hamilton , if you want it done right get an immigrant to do it.

      --
      **Life is too short to be serious**
    31. Re:You may not "quit working" by ghoul · · Score: 1

      Not every job is pleasant to do or not all parts of even a generally pleasant job. There are jobs which have only pleasant parts - they are called hobbies and you dont get paid to do them. Money needs to be the motivator to do the unpleasant parts of a job and all real jobs have unpleasant parts. Hence if you have someone for whom money is not a motivator at all(note I said a motivator not the only motivator) then it is difficult to plan around the person being around when unpleasant stuff comes up.

      --
      **Life is too short to be serious**
    32. Re: You may not "quit working" by butchersong · · Score: 3, Informative

      This is why I farm even though it isn't super profitable. When you have a lot of land there is always something to do and you get plenty of daily exercise. You can setup experiments for different fields, work on optimizing breeds of livestock for your climate and needs, decide you need a new pond or you try out new direct marketing strategies... you're never bored.

    33. Re: You may not "quit working" by yes-but-no · · Score: 1

      . I have no goals, no motives, and that's just no life to live. I wake up feeling sad, like another day of nothing.

      Another life begins when there is no goal; no motive. Take up spirituality and you can be at ease even staring at a a wall for 24 hours and be in bliss. The real magic will be the universe will find surprising ways to entertain you when your hands are totally empty; you won't know how each day is going by.

    34. Re: You may not "quit working" by yes-but-no · · Score: 1

      that's the risk of having attachment to the scene; however deeply fulfilling loving partner it may be, the object can be taken-away/snatched-away. Hence focusing more on the seer, you can stay atleast calm rather than lost/depressed. And as they say you hv to love; not love something/somebody [ie love undirected].

    35. Re: You may not "quit working" by turbidostato · · Score: 1

      "OK, here's your purpose: find a purpose. Make a full-time job out of it."

      Exactly my thoughts. Of course you wouldn't quit working if you get rich... if only you redefine "working" as "whatever you are doing from dawn to dusk".

      If that would be my case, I know I'd have to expend quite a long time just to learn how to get the best profit from my money and make sure I don't lose it stupidly -work. Then, I might socialize to meet my new pairs -work. With social ties and secured profits, I might travel or find a hobby and write a blog or magazine articles, about them -work. Maybe if along the way I find something not only interesting but capitalizable, I might set apart some money for a startup -work, or write my generations' novel -work or... work, work and more work.

      But then, all of this may be "work" but certainly I wouldn't consider a "job": not having to forcibly take the disgusting parts of it because I'm under financial stress. C'mon, that's no work!

      As others have said, if winning a loto is such a stressful proposition, I certainly volonteer to take the burden out of him so he can go back to his comfortable previous life.

    36. Re:You may not "quit working" by turbidostato · · Score: 1

      "On the other hand, the kind of people who would quit after $10M may n2ot have the ruthless drive to get there no matter what it takes."

      I think it's from The Great Gatsby (not the literal words): getting rich is easy; you just need not to desire anything else.

    37. Re:You may not "quit working" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having friends with similar schedules makes all the difference, I took a sabbatical, money wasn't an issue, but all my friends had full-time corporate jobs like I used to, so they were never available for doing anything spontaneous (trips), during weekdays, or drinking (except on Fri/Sat).

      I found new groups of people, but being 30-something it's not quiet as easy to find new friends, especially when you "don't work". A lot of people kept me at arms-length. I really only connected with a couple new folks while most my old friendships began to fade, we had less and less in common as the months went by.

      At the end of the day I felt like I was losing my identity - I used to be well respected in my job and had a lot of great relationships based on mutual interests and lifestyles, now I'm just some guy that doesn't work and spends all my time having fun. Even if I could afford it, people didn't respect it which bothered me, so I cut my sabbatical short and went back.

    38. Re:You may not "quit working" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just dependable, people who need the money will almost always show up for their shift, people there for extra money will bail the moment they have something better to do. Filling in a shift with 20 minutes notice is very not fun for everyone else involved.

    39. Re:You may not "quit working" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about you plan so the going never gets tough?

    40. Re: You may not "quit working" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry to hear about your wife's passing and it's effects on you. I hope that you'll be able to move past your grief and find happiness.

    41. Re: You may not "quit working" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You didn't say how much money you had. I have a couple of friends who have lots of time on their hands and they are always busy doing all the great things you could be doing if you only had the money. The other thing they have though is friends all over the world who are from a similar income level as they are, who they met when they were getting rich. That makes a big difference. They still can't stop their parents and siblings from getting sick or dying, however, so that's the same for everybody.

    42. Re:You may not "quit working" by ghoul · · Score: 1

      You are comparing Apples and Oranges. I have no problem with people for whom money is not motivator number 1 but I need it to be on the list. Doing meaningfull work maybe great but my line of business (IT software development) most work is meaningless and will be replaced in 2 years. At the same time it is hard work. So I need to be able to use money as a motivator.

      --
      **Life is too short to be serious**
    43. Re: You may not "quit working" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but you repeat yourself.

    44. Re:You may not "quit working" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You want to hire people who you can kick around a bit and they won't complain. Nothing inspires diligent working practice more than the threat of dying in a cardboard box underneath a freeway.

    45. Re:You may not "quit working" by Zaatxe · · Score: 1

      I have a workmate who buys lottery tickets from time to time and he loves what he does here so much that he said that if he won big money on the lottery we wouldn't even know or notice. And I believe him when he says that.

      --
      So say we all
    46. Re: You may not "quit working" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny, I have all those symptoms of depression, and have had, ever since I started working. "Doing nothing productive" describes the vast majority of office jobs I'm afraid.

    47. Re:You may not "quit working" by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      "I do many things for a buck, but I wouldn't do what I presently do. I would like to think I'd be productive and busy, but I would be doing the parts of the job I want to do, and either abdicating or paying someone to do the nasty stuff."

      A gold star for the best guess as to what he does, and what the "nasty stuff" is.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    48. Re: You may not "quit working" by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      As a single father, I'm saddened to read that you have no motivation. Been there, done that myself for seven years. If you can't find it in you to get off your ass for the kid(s), you should give them up to someone who does.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    49. Re:You may not "quit working" by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      Not certain of your definition of filthy rich, but there are many small business owners at the $10M level who got there simply by working their asses off...my dad, uncle, and close family friend all started off poor, and did this. They take risks that others are either afraid, or don't have the insight to do. Many of them live a miserly life...read The Millionaire Next Door (written in '96)...you'll need to adjust for inflation.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    50. Re:You may not "quit working" by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      This is kind of the reason we dont like hiring people with family money. They have no commitment to the job. We need to be able to plan on the person being around to do their job when the going gets tough.

      In other words, we want them desperate, not invested!

      If they're invested then they would be committed. What I really want in an employee is someone who's going to take ownership of whatever tasks I give them.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    51. Re:You may not "quit working" by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      This is kind of the reason we dont like hiring people with family money. They have no commitment to the job. We need to be able to plan on the person being around to do their job when the going gets tough.

      In other words, we want them desperate, not invested!

      If they're invested then they would be committed. What I really want in an employee is someone who's going to take ownership of whatever tasks I give them.

      I laugh.

      An employee who's desperate won't "take ownership", they'll simply do whatever it takes to keep the job. It is to "ownership" what a confession extracted by torture is to truth.

      The level of investment, hence ownership really doesn't relate to the person's desperation. It really doesn't even relate to whether or not they need the pay. To get people to invest in the job, you have to provide an incentive and money is often the least of incentives, even among those who don't have much money to begin with.

    52. Re:You may not "quit working" by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      You're the one who jumped to the completely illogical conclusion that people want their employees desperate. Nobody else here stated that. Far from it in fact, a desperate employee is probably distracted by whatever is causing their issue. To my knowledge, none of my ~50 employees are in that category.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
  3. There's "work" and then there is "work" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I suggest you watch that last Family Guy episode where Stewie takes a job at a printing company. That's the average persons job. No rich person would tolerate that kind of work for 5 minutes. What rich people call work the rest of us call "a dream come true." I'll happily do Jeff Bezo's job for 25 cents an hour.

    1. Re:There's "work" and then there is "work" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'll happily do Jeff Bezo's job for 25 cents an hour.

      That's understandable, but quite naive. There are plenty of executives with grey hairs from constant pressure and worrying. The common employee lives a more comfortable, relatively worry-free, sheltered life without having to worry whether his labor will bring in a salary. The downside, of course, is the employee makes a lot less than the executive.

    2. Re:There's "work" and then there is "work" by ErichTheRed · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "That's understandable, but quite naive. There are plenty of executives with grey hairs from constant pressure and worrying."

      Having worked at a bunch of big companies, and having done IT support for executives, I disagree. The only thing executives have to worry about is being the public cheerleader for the company. Their lives are immeasurably enriched by the company's resources. It looks like very nice work if you can get it. In many cases, executives "work" on the boards of many companies, and receive salary/perks from each one. Things I can think of that they have access to include "forgiven" loans for personal real estate purchases, corporate jets, and basically every personal expense paid for by the company in one form or another.

      Even smaller business owners are much better off than the average wage-earner. All of a business owners' personal expenses can be funneled through the business, resulting in a much lower tax burden. The owner's business can own all their houses, cars, etc. as assets.

      "The common employee lives a more comfortable, relatively worry-free, sheltered life without having to worry whether his labor will bring in a salary."

      See basically every offshoring/H-1B replacement worker story out there. The common employee is seen by the executive class as disposable. That's not a worry-free lifestyle. Common employees have to worry about paying their bills, something an executive will never worry about.

    3. Re:There's "work" and then there is "work" by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      The common employee lives a more comfortable, relatively worry-free, sheltered life without having to worry whether his labor will bring in a salary.

      Wrong century. The common employee these days is more apt to be worrying about whether they'll still be an employee six months from now.

      To be fair, the same is true of the executive ranks, but when you can take a couple of million with you when you go - even if you wrecked the company - then your worries are of a different nature.

    4. Re: There's "work" and then there is "work" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many employees, in reality, worry if their wages will cover the mortgage and food bill, whether their job will be there next year, whether they will ever have enough to retire and how they would cope if they became ill, or how they'd be able to take a career break for six months to nurse a dying parent, and the fact that they have relatively little control over this.

      Time and again studies have shown that, on average, workers at the lower end suffer more from stress.

    5. Re:There's "work" and then there is "work" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I contracted for a large public services consultancy a few years ago. They were having an actual concern that upper/middle manager suicide stats were becoming too hot to handle, because they had to juggle delivery risk with potential high profile press ridicule. This was particularly within health-care, but they were spotting a trend.

    6. Re:There's "work" and then there is "work" by gander666 · · Score: 1

      Damn, and my mod points expired.

      --
      Suppose you were an idiot and suppose you were a member of Congress ... but I repeat myself. - Mark T
  4. Unsubstantiated anecdotal prediction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only reason I want to get rich enough to never work again is so that I can work on what I want.

  5. Exception by slipped_bit · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'll be the exception.

    1. Re:Exception by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      :) it's a good option as well.

      Of-course there are those who can relate to this joke:

      Powerball Interviewer: "Congratulations on winning the $140 million dollar Powerball lottery." Farmer: "Thank you." Interviewer: "Do you have any special plans for spending all of that money?" Farmer: "I'm just gonna keep farming until the money runs out."

  6. My guess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Maybe the kind of people who would quit are less likely to get rich?

    1. Re:My guess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh! That's a good one! That's funny. "Maybe the people who quit are less likely to be rich". That is good.

      It is a myth to say that you can work yourself rich on your own dime. You can only become rich with Other People's Money. Think about it for a minute and you'll see that it's true. I mean, it's not like you're thinking about anything else, right?

    2. Re:My guess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      tl;dr

  7. The Interest of Science by colinrichardday · · Score: 4, Funny

    I don't know if sudden wealth has that effect, but in the interest of science, I'm willing to find out.

    1. Re:The Interest of Science by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 4, Funny

      We're glad you feel that way and are willing to donate your entire wealth, along with other donors, to someone in order to test if they continue working.

      Thank you,

      - Science

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  8. One reason: by JamesTRexx · · Score: 2

    If you do what you love, you'll never work a day in your life.
    -Marc Anthony

    --
    home
    1. Re:One reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There is a reason we still call it "work" and not "happy fun time".

    2. Re:One reason: by networkBoy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      for about 17 years that was my case.
      I recently was laid off as my team moved to Israel (among other things) but in fact I felt like I was paid money to go play all day.
      I only *worked* maybe 4-8 hours a month (meetings... ick), the rest of the time I did things I found so engaging and fun that I would often forget to take breaks, go to lunch, go home... I literally had to set an alarm on my computer to remind me of such things.

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    3. Re:One reason: by MorePower · · Score: 1

      It makes a cute quote, but it's not really the type of activity that makes work suck. What I "love doing" is not dealing with deadlines, stress, or the responsibilities of other people depending on my work.

      Take away those pressures and even stuff like digging holes or cleaning is fun. Because as soon as it stops being fun you move on to something else.

      So really the only way to "love what I'm doing" is to not "have to" do it, and be able to stop doing it and move on to something else whenever I want. Which describes no job ever, pretty much by definition.

    4. Re:One reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I once made the mistake of turning my hobby into a career, all it did was cause me to start hating my hobby.

    5. Re:One reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you do what you love, you'll never work a day in your life.

      -Marc Anthony

      If you major in what you love, you will never work a day in your life.
      --Unemployed Philosophy Ph.D.

    6. Re:One reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What kind of work was it?

    7. Re:One reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you do what you love, you'll never work a day in your life.

      -Marc Anthony

      If you are doing J-Lo every night, you never work a day in your life either.

      -Marc Anthony

    8. Re:One reason: by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      If you do what you love, you'll never work a day in your life. -Marc Anthony

      Until the day it's no longer something you love. Then you'll be like in a bad marriage, resenting your choices, and with nothing you love to fall back on. You'll also have become so invested in what you do as being a central part of who you are that the loss of enjoyment will seriously damage you. Depression, lower self-esteem, lack of direction ...

      Work should never define who you are. Unfortunately, when it's something you got into because you enjoyed it, what do you do when it's gone? Who are you? You're not a programmer, designer, whatever. You're nameless. Useless, since you no longer have a job defining who you are.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    9. Re:One reason: by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      A lot of us did that with coding. It was fun, it was exciting, it was new. But it's become toxic, and only people who are co-dependent stay in a toxic relationship.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    10. Re:One reason: by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure it's that clear cut. I spent about five years living somewhere very cheap, so I only needed to do paid consulting about 1-2 days a month to cover my cost of living and fill up my tax-free savings allowance. I spent a lot of the rest of the time contributing to open source projects, but I found that it was quite hard to find the motivation to completely finish something (without being distracted by the next project) if no one was paying for it. I took a few 'jobs' where I'd quote well below the odds to work on something that was high on my to-do list anyway, just so that I'd have an externally imposed deadline to finish it. I probably got 80-90% through it at about the same speed as I would have doing it for fun, but the last 10-20% was far easier to finish when you know it matters to someone else. The money doesn't really matter, it's just the easiest way of proving that the work has value to someone else.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    11. Re:One reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you do what you love, you'll never work a day in your life.

      -Marc Anthony

      LOL, bullshit.

  9. Try me by mridoni · · Score: 1

    Enough said

  10. I'd definitively still work by Sebby · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Though I would probably switch careers, or potentially simply get involve more in my hobbies, or else pursue things I've not had time to. But in the end, I'd definitively still be 'working' - I would just have the luxury of choosing exactly what that work would be, at any moment.

    --

    AC comments get piped to /dev/null
    1. Re:I'd definitively still work by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Indeed. I'd probably implement some open-source gizmo or technology that I always wish existed in practice, such as "Dynamic Relational" or a server-centric GUI standard to replace the fat-client HTML/CSS/JS stack mess that exists now so that the server controls most rendering decisions instead of clients (with gazillion brands and versions).

      I'd scratch tech itches and fix stupid standards.

      I've been an applications programmer, not a systems programmer such that I'd probably have to dig into C or C++ some more and unlearn things like relying on automatic garbage collection. Then again, maybe all I need is something that serves as a demo of the idea using higher-level languages and libraries, and if it catches on, systems programmers will make a tighter implementation of it in C/C++.

    2. Re:I'd definitively still work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I'd still work, but it would be with a guitar in my hands in my home studio, or for a non-profit.

      Just because you have all the money you'd ever need wouldn't do "things".

    3. Re:I'd definitively still work by Solandri · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Pretty much everyone I know who is extremely wealthy ($250k/yr+ including three guys making over $1 million/yr) is a workaholic. If they find they have some free time, they don't go to the beach or watch TV or read slashdot like you and I would do. They use it to do more work. Whether that's their personality or because they just happened to find a job they love to do, they enjoy working so much that their spouses have a hard time dragging them away from it long enough just to go on vacation with the kids. That's what the wife of one of the $1+ million/yr guys complained to me about when I stayed at their house for a weekend. She kept having to pull phones, tablets, laptops out of his hands during their vacation because he kept trying to work. Eventually she conceded and let him work for a few hours each evening back at the hotel, in exchange for him not doing anything work-related the rest of the day while they were sightseeing with the kids.

      Most people probably believe rich people are like the stereotype of the fat cat banker who works 4 hours and takes off to play golf the rest of the day, because that's what they fantasize being rich is like. But the rich people I've met are the exact opposite of that. Another of the over $1 million/yr persons I know epitomizes TFA. His family (landlord for my business) owns a good chunk of the land in Southern California and they probably pull in several hundred $million/yr in lease and rental fees. It's all passive income so they don't have to lift a finger, but he works pro bono as an accountant for the city he lives in, often putting in 10-12 hour workdays. (The third one works 8 hr/day at his law practice, then goes home and helps run his wife's business the rest of the evening.)

    4. Re:I'd definitively still work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just to swap anecdotes, the really wealthy people that I've brushed up against in NYC have inherited real estate wealth, and are basically real degenerates. Incoherent, drug-addled, wanna be actors, relatives on trial for murder, etc. Most of the business owners I've known have been similarly illogical, scam-artist types. Meh.

    5. Re:I'd definitively still work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's all passive income so they don't have to lift a finger, but he works pro bono as an accountant for the city he lives in, often putting in 10-12 hour workdays.

      Filthy rich and still and still taking up space in a job that could be supporting one or more people who actually need the money. SMFH.

    6. Re:I'd definitively still work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meh. He's saving taxpayers that money, in theory.

    7. Re:I'd definitively still work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I call bullshít on this. Someone who has inherited a shitload of wealth, didn't gain that wealth through being a 'workaholic'.

  11. Nonsense. by ScentCone · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The notion that there's no correlation between the paycheck and satisfaction is absurd. How many people would keep enjoying those "peer relationships" at the office if their paycheck was cut to 10%?

    For the VERY SMALL number of people who have a had a large windfall but continue to do higher-level executive work, it is indeed the labor-of-love thing, or the awareness that what they know and can do can generate even more piles of money so they can do things like ... start rocket companies, etc.

    But those are vanishingly infrequent circumstances. The average or even upper-middle-class employee may not describe their salary as THE thing that makes them happy, but you can bet that if it was slashed to the bone, it would be the thing that makes them unhappy.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    1. Re:Nonsense. by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The notion that there's no correlation between the paycheck and satisfaction is absurd.

      There's research that shows that there's a point where your salary desire is sated, and more money while nice ceases to be the primary reason you work. In other words, once people are compensated at 100k/year they are more likely to be motivated by ping-pong tables and free soda type perks than 101k/year, even if the 1k is worth more.

      Obviously, the majority of people have not hit that level yet.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    2. Re:Nonsense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're looking at the relationship the wrong way around - the 'research' basically says this: Above a certain salary (some figures suggest about £70,000/$90,000) it seems that more money doesn't bring more happiness. Up until that point it does indeed make people happier so you're correct in what you say that by cutting the salary to 10% of what it was would make people unhappy, but if your salary was already 10 million then cutting it to 10% of that wouldn't make that much difference to you.

    3. Re:Nonsense. by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      That is bullshit, but we are talking about rich here anyway, not 100k a year. No one is going to pick soda perks over $1,000 either.

    4. Re:Nonsense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm over 100k a year, I would still take the money over the ping pong table because I really dont care for ping pong.

      My official cutoff is the point where money does not matter in my life at all. At this point it would be somewhat double what I make today.

      If I was older and had no debt, I might already be at the magic number.

    5. Re:Nonsense. by AuMatar · · Score: 2

      I'd pick free sodas over 1K per year. I drink a lot of diet coke, and I don't want to have to remember to buy a 6 pack ever morning. Even if I come up slightly behind in dollars the convenience factor is more than worth it.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    6. Re:Nonsense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An arbitrary cut like you describe is not realistic though. We are talking about real life where market rate pay for a specific job is fairly set. Take secretary vs. CEO. The secretary probably IS making 10% or less than the CEO yet could easily have greater job satisfaction. The reason being the expectation of pay for a secretary is not 10x what the secretary makes.

      So your scenario is absurd and you don't get that different jobs have different characteristics that contribute to pay level. In other words - more fun, easier and generally more enjoyable jobs pay less while harder, more stressful jobs generally pay more. The "baseline" pay-work is already adjusted such that people feel pay-work ratio is already in equilibrium and thus other factors primarily influence job satisfaction.

    7. Re:Nonsense. by 110010001000 · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Then you are stupid.

    8. Re: Nonsense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it's not bullshit, there really is research about this.

    9. Re:Nonsense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah. please open your books, i'm very confident I can point out many many fiscally imprudent decisions for which we may now all freely label you a stupid can't understand normal thinking.

    10. Re:Nonsense. by ghoul · · Score: 1

      I would like to know where these people were doing their research. In the Silicon Valley 100K is a bare survival salary if you are supporting a family.

      --
      **Life is too short to be serious**
    11. Re:Nonsense. by Sebby · · Score: 1

      I'd pick free sodas over 1K per year. I drink a lot of diet coke, and I don't want to have to remember to buy a 6 pack ever morning. Even if I come up slightly behind in dollars the convenience factor is more than worth it.

      Plus, you don't get taxed on that extra $1K. Neither does the company, since it's an expense on their side.

      Oh shit! Now the IRS is gonna come after us for not paying those taxes, even though Wall Street owes way more than we do! RUN!

      --

      AC comments get piped to /dev/null
    12. Re:Nonsense. by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      once people are compensated at 100k/year they are more likely to be motivated by ping-pong tables and free soda type perks than 101k/year

      We have a ping-pong table at my office. I've never seen anyone play on it.

      EVER.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    13. Re:Nonsense. by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

      There's research that shows that there's a point where your salary desire is sated, and more money while nice ceases to be the primary reason you work.

      This. To put it another way, one of the primary contributors to happiness is not having lots of money, it's having enough.

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    14. Re:Nonsense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The notion that there's no correlation between the paycheck and satisfaction is absurd.

      There's research that shows that there's a point where your salary desire is sated, and more money while nice ceases to be the primary reason you work. In other words, once people are compensated at 100k/year they are more likely to be motivated by ping-pong tables and free soda type perks than 101k/year, even if the 1k is worth more.

      Obviously, the majority of people have not hit that level yet.

      That's either faulty research or propaganda. The more money (in meaningful quanta jumps) I'm paid, the more satisfied I am with my job. I don't give a damn about stupid trash like company parties, ping pong tables, or other such nonsense. I'm wealthy enough that I can easily afford those things, at far higher quality than what a company would provide, myself. I'm quite certain that if my current six-figure salary were quadrupled, I'd be quite a bit happier in my job.

      As it is, I am dissatisfied enough that I have already made plans to resign from my job.

      What could make me stay? Paying me quadruple my salary would do it. Ping pong tables, massages, free soda, free lunches, and other such stupid perks will not budge me.

    15. Re:Nonsense. by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      No one is going to pick soda perks over $1,000 if offered the choice (or few people will). But they are still made more satisfied with their job if they get soda perks instead (again, past a certain salary level).

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    16. Re:Nonsense. by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      What could make me stay? Paying me quadruple my salary would do it. Ping pong tables, massages, free soda, free lunches, and other such stupid perks will not budge me.

      This is actually agreeing with my point. You're not leaving to take a new job paying quadruple. You're just saying that at this point, the non-financial negatives make the job not worth while. And, based on your "paying quadruple" line not "more than my next job", you're willing to take a salary hit to be out of there.

      It's really a kinda standard economic point, when you start having more money, you're willing to sacrifice some to have your work time (2000 hrs/year) be more pleasant. It's such standard microecon that it seems non-contraversial.

      Now, you might not like soda and ping-pong. But maybe it's being around smart people, or getting to use explosives (if a demolitions engineer) or disrupting industries.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    17. Re:Nonsense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you source your own aspartame, caffeine, CO2, etc, etc? Obviously that will be cheaper than buying diet coke.

      If you don't, then you are stupid.

      Or, just perhaps, it isn't worth your time.

    18. Re:Nonsense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I left a job with ping-pong tables for a job with no ping-pong tables or free soda and took a $3k pay cut to do so.

    19. Re:Nonsense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Salary does not provide job satisfaction. I'm sure you would take a job shoveling coal into the furnaces of hell for a million dollars per year. You wouldn't like it though. A low salary will leave workers dissatisfied. A proper salary takes away that dissatisfaction. Nothing more.

    20. Re:Nonsense. by budgenator · · Score: 1

      Yeah but they have it.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    21. Re:Nonsense. by Lodragandraoidh · · Score: 1

      There's research that shows that there's a point where your salary desire is sated, and more money while nice ceases to be the primary reason you work. In other words, once people are compensated at 100k/year they are more likely to be motivated by ping-pong tables and free soda type perks than 101k/year, even if the 1k is worth more.

      Obviously, the majority of people have not hit that level yet.

      That number for me would need to be $150,000 - as that would allow me to set aside a rainy day fund without having to cut basic things to the bone. My current problem is year over year - I end up with cash flow problems due to unplanned breakdowns that require significant outlay beyond what I've set aside - including dogs and cats getting older and costing more when they need to go to doctor, breakdown of home appliances and integrated components, and automotive repairs (I don't have a car payment - but things are breaking down on my car that require outlays), realestate tax increases, etc. On top of that - health care cost increases, and need to continue feeding 401K also takes a hit. I think this is releative to regional differences in standard of living. In California - that number may be significantly higher than that I think is appropriate.

      --

      Lodragan Draoidh
      The more you explain it, the more I don't understand it. - Mark Twain
    22. Re:Nonsense. by Pascoea · · Score: 1

      My official cutoff is the point where money does not matter in my life at all. At this point it would be somewhat double what I make today.

      Yup, same boat (well, except for the "over 100k" part. Getting close, but not quite there) and still constantly worry about money. I don't live extravagantly, nicer house, 2 used but nice enough cars, etc, but it's still pretty easy to burn through that kind of money pretty quickly when you factor in a wife, couple of kids, college loans, etc. On the other hand, I remember making 50k/year thinking the exact same thing "at this point it would be somewhat double what I make today and I'll be set." I'm (nearly) double what I was at that point, and still not "set". Would I ever be set making 200k a year, or would I be in the same place thinking "if I only made 400k I'd be set"?

      If I was older and had no debt, I might already be at the magic number.

      Yeah, I hear ya there!

    23. Re:Nonsense. by Pascoea · · Score: 1

      "but if your salary was already 10 million then cutting it to 10% of that wouldn't make that much difference to you."

      Bullshit.

      Really? You really don't think a cut from 100k to 90k is going to hurt as bad as getting cut from 10m to 9m? Someone making 100k having to trim out $800/month could mean anywhere from "the amount of money saved gets slashed" to "potentially missing house/car/utility payments" depending on the household. On the other hand, losing 1m/year would range from "I only put 8m in my bank account this year" to "shoot, now I have to sell the Bentley".

      I guess the point I'm trying to make is that the person making 100k/year is FAR more likely to being close to overextended than the person making 10m/year. And correcting for an over-extension at 10m is way easier than a similar correction at 100k.

    24. Re:Nonsense. by AuMatar · · Score: 1

      Or I make enough money that the 1-200 in profit I'd get after taxes over buying it myself is worth it for the convenience to me. If you're making 6 figures, as even an entry level programmer comes close to if not achieves these days, the money doesn't mean much.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    25. Re:Nonsense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I routinely have to lobby AGAINST having table tennis, billiards, foosball, or any other "noisy" recreation in the office. If you blokes could find some way to blow off steam that was normal voice-level volume, I'd be on board. Oh, and that "NERF" nonsense doesn't count. It turns out that we can't count on everyone having the self-control not to shoot the people actually working.

      Arseholes.

    26. Re:Nonsense. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      More likely obese from all that soda. :-) That's why he is willing to give up $1000 a year for free soda.

      Then again, 250 days a year, there are plenty of Americans who go through $4 a day of soda.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  12. Or course not. by Qbertino · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is quite obvious and has been covered since the days of ancient Greece.
    I've said it before.
    Humans need to feel love, a sense of competence and a sense of purpose.
    The amount of money you get beyond roughly 75 000 Euros per year has near to no influence on your happiness.
    In fact, if you tie your happiness to riches, you'll get depressed quite soon, even if you don't lose your wealth.

    I'd probably work even more if I'd win the lottery.
    Albeit on projects that I fund myself because I care about them.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
    1. Re:Or course not. by 110010001000 · · Score: 0

      Bullshit. The guy earning 100,000,000 Euros a year is happier than the guy earning 75,000 Euros. Why? Because he can lose his job at anytime, or choose to work on something else, or retire. The 75,000 Euro guy doesn't have that luxury. He NEEDS his job.

    2. Re:Or course not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed, it would be better said that anything "above 75K" reaps diminishing returns. 65K to 75K can relieve a huge burden of "worrying about how the bills are going to be paid next month", while 75K to 85K is closer to "I can get a new car instead of used" or "We can get that furniture set we wanted instead of the one in the bargain department!"

      Yes, it's nice to start buying things you want, but then you have the things you want and they lose their charm. Not worrying about HOW to pay the bills all month every month, however, is an ENORMOUS jump in quality of life. 85K to 95K means you can buy 2 things you really want, per year, instead of one -- or that you can take one extra vacation (if that's your roll)

      95K to 105K can be almost imperceptible. That might just cover a medical bill and mean you can stop cutting coupons, if you want to, and won't have to trim fat anywhere else. 100K to 1M is going to change your way of life, certainly, but it took $900K to do it instead of $10K.

    3. Re:Or course not. by jareth-0205 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Bullshit. The guy earning 100,000,000 Euros a year is happier than the guy earning 75,000 Euros. Why? Because he can lose his job at anytime, or choose to work on something else, or retire. The 75,000 Euro guy doesn't have that luxury. He NEEDS his job.

      Pretty much your every post on this subject starts with "bullshit", which almost no actual justification.

      Try to understand that not everybody is made happy solely by money (or stability). Being able to do *anything* is in itself a stress. Ever felt guilty about not doing anything on a lazy Sunday? Imagine that for the rest of your life.

    4. Re:Or course not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I don't think you understand what makes people happy.

      Lottery winners have a high suicide rate because they get to find out the hard way that money can't create happiness. I think you also might mistake different emotions / feeling for happiness. Being able to be lazy(retire) doesn't make you happy. Having money gives you more options but it doesn't make you happy.

      Most people would, in the long run, take the $75,000 job that they love to go to every day vs. a $1,000,000 job that they hate. If you don't think this is true then you don't know what you are talking about. I have had very close relative make decisions to leave 7 figure job to go back to a 6 figure one (and i'm talking about a 6x pay cut). Sure, having the 7 figure job probably made it easier to find the 6 figure one but the point is that people will take huge pay cuts if it improves their lives.

      Basically, your life is limited - having more money to put up with misery is not worth it.

    5. Re: Or course not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    6. Re:Or course not. by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      I don't think you understand what makes people happy.

      And from there, we can draw a further conclusion.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    7. Re:Or course not. by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 2

      I'm calling bullshit on your bullshit.

      You are so focused on the destination that you forget the journey is even more important.

      For every rich person I could show you 10x poor people who are far happier. There are people who have absolute NOTHING that far happier then the rich guy who has to constantly worry about how to keep and increase his wealth, how his financial portfolio is doing, that his trophy wife is spending more then he can make, etc.

      Money != Happiness, although it can buy a little temporary pleasure.

      Life is what you make of it, not what you got. Money only provides the potential to enjoy more freedoms, and pursue new interests.

      At the end of the day, the amount of money STILL does't satisfy the soul's deep need to create. Any true artist wants to have their art appreciated. The money is just a convenience to be able to KEEP doing the same thing.

      My first love is coding. There is no amount of money that could even come close to replacing it. Because regardless of how much I have or don't have I STILL want to write great code.

    8. Re:Or course not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He needs 75000 Euro a year?

    9. Re:Or course not. by ninjabus · · Score: 1

      Plenty of people can come into a windfall and retire on the savings. We don't hear about these people, because they don't have an interesting story for the media to present. Saving a million dollars and retiring at 40 to raise your kids and fix motorcycles isn't really a hook, and the kind of person who would do that is probably not the attention seeker.

    10. Re:Or course not. by khallow · · Score: 1

      The 75,000 Euro guy doesn't have that luxury. He NEEDS his job.

      Unless, of course, he saved money instead. 75k Euros goes pretty far. In particular, it's a lot of "fuck you" money, if you save it.

    11. Re:Or course not. by lamer01 · · Score: 1

      75K Euros? Really? I guess in Europe where you guys have a social net. With 75K in NYC you'd be a sharing a room, barely able to go out, and god forbid you lost your job.

    12. Re:Or course not. by w3woody · · Score: 1

      My understanding was that the $75,000 (or €75,000) cap was a statistical average across regions with varying levels of cost of living and across varying groups of people--including those who definitely report greater levels of happiness and those who do not. And my impression was that the structure of the questionnaire was capturing the happiness which comes from socio-economic stability: at around $75,000, on average, you have achieved a degree of socio-economic security which means you are no longer worrying about where your next meal is coming from, if the roof over your head will be there next year, how you're going to pay for the kid's clothes, and if you can afford a vacation. (And as that number rises, the cost of the vacation or the car or the clothes may increase--but the fact that you will have access to them at some level does not.)

      Meaning if you suddenly found yourself flooded with riches, and you are not able to use that money to find happiness, learn to shop better.

    13. Re:Or course not. by lgw · · Score: 2

      The amount of money you get beyond roughly 75 000 Euros per year has near to no influence on your happiness.

      Presumptuous of you to speak for others.

      What you're talking about is the "utility curve" - the increased happiness that increased money brings is not linear. It's often more than 1:1 when you're broke, and much less than 1:1 when you have a lot. But different people have different curves.

      When you apply mathematics to investment decisions, you have to allow for the individual's utility curve before you can really plan anything (and many people don't know, of course). x^-2? x^-3? log(x)?

      And obviously the more dependents you have, the more you need with any curve.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    14. Re:Or course not. by lgw · · Score: 1

      Money != Happiness, although it can buy a little temporary pleasure.

      They say that money
      can't buy love in this world
      but it'll get you a big long limousine
      and a sixteen year old girl
      and a half-pound of cocaine
      on a hot September night
      and that may not be love,
      but it's all right

      - Randy Newman, It's Money That I Love

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    15. Re:Or course not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try to understand that the great majority of people don't have stability and would gladly trade the anguish of too much freedom/choice for it. In my experience, the people who are "driven" and "passionate" about what they do and don't do it for money are the absolute worst people to work with/for. They are incredibly myopic and are incapable of understanding anyone else's motivations and can't possibly comprehend why you would want to take the day off of work to attend your child's school activity or why you would want something like paternity leave to bond with your child. "Why wouldn't you want to work 16 hours a day since working is how I derive all of my self esteem and personal value".

      MOST people in the real world would tell their bosses to shove it the second the lottery check cleared. They may start their own business doing something they enjoy, or they might move from job to job doing something that interests them or learning a new skill and then move on to the next job.

      Me personally, I'd jump from job to job with the specific goal of not putting up with any bullshit. I'd tell shitty bosses to go fuck themselves, and I'd tell whiny entitled pain in the ass customers to fuck off. I'd have fun with it, leaping from job to job trying to set things right.

    16. Re:Or course not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should get a job being a shill for corporate America...

    17. Re: Or course not. by Miamicoastguard · · Score: 0

      Stopped reading at psychologist. Bullshit.

    18. Re:Or course not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The amount of money you get beyond roughly 75 000 Euros per year has near to no influence on your happiness.

      Then how do you explain the wealthy? The one really rich guy I had to interact with on a contract gave me the distinct impression that money was everything and if you were not filthy rich you were someone to be stepped on and ground under. The guy gained happiness by making other people miserable. He certainly could get away with the things he does on 75,000 Euros a year. By the way he talked, all his friends shared this viewpoint as well, but fortunately I never had to meet any of them.

    19. Re:Or course not. by apoc.famine · · Score: 1

      I'd disagree with the 75k cap on happiness. That's solidly upper-middle-class where I live, and you can have a very nice life on that sort of salary and put away enough for retirement. But you can't have a Tesla. You can't lounge in Bali, be an opera patron, etc.
       
      My wife and I are somewhat frugal, drive an old car, and are putting away 15% of our income into retirement. We still end up with ~10k in savings at the end of every year. That goes into either large repairs or renovations on the house or into the mortgage.
       
      That 10k/year isn't Tesla money. Once we need a new car, that money is gone for a couple of years. If one of us is out of work for a couple of months, that money is gone for the year. If I had another 25k of play money every year, that would make me happy. That's Tesla money. That's fancy vacation money. That's a season pass to the Opera money, rather than 1-2 shows per year.
       
      If I stretched myself thin, dropped my retirement contribution and safety nets, I could do these fun things. But I'm not willing to take that risk. Right now, all of my extended needs are taken care of, and my future finances are looking really good. There's really not much else there that I would need, so any extra money would go directly into leisure activities, which would make me happier.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    20. Re:Or course not. by MorePower · · Score: 1

      Ever felt guilty about not doing anything on a lazy Sunday

      Um, no? On the rare occasions that I get a lazy Sunday where I don't have to work and I don't have a bunch of chores back-logged from not being able to do them when I was working, the thoughts I usually have are "why can't every day be like this?" and "Damn, it's over already?"

    21. Re:Or course not. by Pfhorrest · · Score: 1

      A lot of happy poor people are happy because they're living in the moment and not worrying about the future, and poor for the same exact reason. I grew up with a carefree, I'm-awesome-the-world-is-fundamentally-good-and-everything-will-work-out-for-me-somehow attitude. That plunged me into abject poverty the moment I hit adulthood. I thought for a while it was a run of bad luck, just a bunch of unfortunate problems for me personally that weren't my fault and weren't indicative of the state of the world, and things would get better, and so long as stuff wasn't actively bad right now I was happy-go-lucky again.

      After enough of that shit for long enough I realized that life is naturally shit, almost everybody fails constantly at every aspect of it, and you have to nut the fuck up and constantly work your goddamn balls off at kicking its fucking ass or else such "strings of bad luck" will destroy the entire rest of your life. Now I'm a moderately well-to-do but miserable, stressed out, angry "workaholic" as far as my lazy happy-go-lucky perpetually-in-poverty family are concerned, except I don't like working, I fucking hate it, I am working so fucking hard so that someday, maybe, someday I will be able to actually have the security I naively thought was the natural state of the world when I was young, and then, and only then, will I maybe be able to relax again and kick back and be happy, because even if I quit doing the stress-induced "workaholic" shit right now, even if I tried living like I was happy-go-lucky again, I couldn't actually be happy because now I know that there is going to be another "unfortunate disaster" right around the fucking corner any goddamn minute and I am not safe from it yet, maybe I'm safe from one or two by now but not long term, "relaxing" just means wearing away the tiny buffer between me and poverty that all my hard work has managed to achieve, and would do nothing but make waste all of that effort.

      --
      -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
      "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
    22. Re:Or course not. by MoaDweeb · · Score: 1

      Money can't buy love but it sure can rent it.

      --
      New Zealanders are well balanced with a chip on each shoulder. One represents Australia, the other the rest of the world
    23. Re:Or course not. by budgenator · · Score: 1

      Dude it's not the 75000 Euro a year that they want, it being in the income percentile that currently earns 75000 Euro a year.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
  13. Reasons to work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    positive peer relationships, the ability to work on meaningful projects and even leadership opportunities

    Yep, that's why I go to work at the Amazon fulfillment center. Definitely NOT to keep a roof over my head and food on the table.

  14. Go Work for a Charity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you get rich and you feel the need to be engaged and productive, go work for a charity. Continuing to work just to make other people richer is head-slappingly short-sighted.

    Take a salary, it will be a shit salary, but that paycheck will keep your head in the game - you'll feel an obligation to work through the hard parts of the job rather than walk away since you don't "owe" them anything.

    FWIW, that's what I did.

  15. Depends on what you mean by working by GrumpySteen · · Score: 1

    If you count working in my garden as work, then yes, I would continue working for the rest of my life (or at least as long as I'm physically able to).

  16. Re:I quit by clm1970 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I'm not rich and I walked away from my tech job. I do not suffer from self actualization ever. I live a fulfilling life.

    I live pretty cheap. I have a lot saved for retirement (>1 Million). If I could figure out medical for my 3 kids I could walk away.

  17. So why not decouple earning money and working? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps because the average person wouldn't take the tsunamis of shit flowing downhill and an equitable society would make too much sense to be ruled by a bunch of entitled assholes.

    Universal income.

  18. Money? Pfft. Power. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    Who gives a shit about money once you reach the level where you have more than you can spend?

    What makes these people continue working is the, perceived or imagined, power their "employment" gives them. You think they'd continue working for someone with that kind of money? Or in any real job, for that matter?

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:Money? Pfft. Power. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that's why the "world's top chief executives" continue working. it's an ego-driven power trip, nothing more.

      if i had more than enough to even just have a modest living, i wouldn't work for money, i'd volunteer instead, perhaps go back to school.. but certainly wouldn't be someone's slave for a pay check.

    2. Re:Money? Pfft. Power. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      You'd only have to ask any of those 100+ million people if they'd work a normal 9-to-5 job, despite the money they have?

      I don't think you'd find a single one. It's not about money. It's about an ego trip.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  19. It's not about "not working" by phorm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's about doing what I want to work on. If I were suddenly flush in cash I could go back to school for stuff I want to learn, afford to build a full shop with the tools I want to work with, and not worry that "failure=lose house" if I wanted to start my own business

    1. Re:It's not about "not working" by Moof123 · · Score: 1

      This.

      We inherently like being productive. I personally am looking forward to early retirement, but not because I hate to work.

      When the work is interesting, the customer is engaged, you have the tools to do your job, and the BS level is low you would have to put arm guards at the door to keep me out on even the weekends. Sadly, I find that in corporate America there is a lot of mundane work (especially documentation) that really doesn't need to be as onerous as it is, the customers are indecisive and slow to respond to requirements questions, and the company policies have precluded really having much fun.

      So I am saving like mad to retire before 50. I expect that once I have assured financial independence that I will still end up finding some interesting work at a lower wage, perhaps even as a volunteer, and by having FU money and no need for job security I will be able to find something really fun to work on. Going and taking classes just to learn neat stuff is high on the list of possibilities as well.

    2. Re:It's not about "not working" by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      not worry that "failure=lose house"

      - that's my life and there is no greater motivator than 'failure=lose everything'.

    3. Re:It's not about "not working" by dcollins · · Score: 1

      This is the best statement of the situation. I loved programming; I seriously thought it was the best thing I'd ever known from age 11-25. Then I had a software job for a few years and found: I friggin' hate having to implement other peoples' boneheaded designs. It's the worst and I felt physically unwell every day.

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
  20. Cap net wealth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No individual human being should be allowed to accrue wealth beyond a reasonable limit indexed to inflation - say $10 million.
    Otherwise wealthy people are going to constantly leverage their wealth to distort economies in their favor at the expense of civilization.
    A limit encourages reinvestment in public entities - businesses, NGOs, foundations, et cetera - and encourages individual pursuit of more than just wealth for wealth's sake.

    We as a species have the capability to provide clean water, feed, house, educate, and entertain everyone on the planet; we have not yet as a species had the courage to unify behind a platform that would do this, at the expense of a relative few.

    1. Re:Cap net wealth by c5402dc53929211e1efb · · Score: 1

      Finally someone who gets it. The entire direction of our species and the biosphere is being negatively impacted by wealth concentration.

    2. Re:Cap net wealth by lgw · · Score: 1

      No individual human being should be allowed to accrue wealth beyond a reasonable limit indexed to inflation - say $10 million.

      You've never worked under a bad CEO? Never seen your job vanish because there was an idiot at the top? We want people who are good at that job (i.e., not idiots) to keep doing it as long as they can.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  21. You you you by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

    And if you keep using the word "you" in headlines, I'll get sick of the clickbait.

    I, for one, would certainly not keep working if I made a few million. But the kind of people who tend to make a few million are exactly the kind of people who work and make money for the love of work and making money, of which I am not one.

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  22. Re:I quit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am in a similar boat. Two kids, half a million saved up at age 43 and looking at options to switch to something more meaningful. Obamacare was a great option, but now that Herr Trump is in charge, that may not be possible soon. Health Care has me hostage right now. With our overpriced insurance options, I am uncomfortable switching from my current employer for a while longer.

  23. Brought to you by corporate headquarters... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dear valued employees, in order to maximize the amount of job satisfaction you receive we have diverted 10% of your base pay and established a more robust company picnic program. You are welcome :D

  24. Re:I quit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If I could figure out medical for my 3 kids I could walk away.

    Don't worry. Der Trumpenfuhrer has promised that he will replace the evil Obamacare with something really great. It must be true, because HE PROMISED. And Republicans have only controlled Congress for 18 of the last 22 years, so its clearly not THEIR fault that we have shitty healthcare.

  25. Lottery by Rik+Sweeney · · Score: 5, Funny

    If I ever won the lottery, I'd still go to work every day, and make sure my work colleagues knew that I'd won the lottery and didn't actually need to ever work again.

    Why? Because it'd really piss them off.

    1. Re:Lottery by Major+Blud · · Score: 2

      If I ever won the lottery

      I know what I'd do. Two chicks at the same time.

      --
      If you post as Anonymous Coward, don't expect a reply.
    2. Re:Lottery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn straight. I always wanted to do that, man. And I think if I had a million dollars I could hook that up, cause chicks dig a dude with money.

    3. Re:Lottery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not all chicks.

    4. Re:Lottery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great! And after a few years of non-stop fucking on the beach, what are you going to do?

      (Yes, I'm sure you'd like to find out. But seriously: what will you do next?)

    5. Re:Lottery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I tell my friends, "I'll still come to work, in that same old car, but it will be towing a 40-foot yacht"

    6. Re:Lottery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, the kind of chicks that would double up on a guy like me.

    7. Re:Lottery by neoRUR · · Score: 1

      If I won $5 million in the Lottery, then I would re-invest it all in the Lottery to win the $50 million.. $5 million just doesn't cut it today..

  26. Continut Working on My Own Terms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and even leadership opportunities

    I certainly would not be doing that, I could see myself working for free in my current position if I could just do the SW related stuff, but all the crud I seem to have to deal with from marketing/program management types because they can't be bothered to learn our product would be right out as would any tier one customer support.

    I'd love to be able to just fix all the known bugs that never get attention because they're not understood by management or implement automated testing on a larger scale.

    I don't understand why people with significant wealth would want to run a company or organization rather than work on the project directly, but each to his/her own.

    1. Re:Continut Working on My Own Terms by Gorobei · · Score: 1

      and even leadership opportunities

      I certainly would not be doing that, I could see myself working for free in my current position if I could just do the SW related stuff, but all the crud I seem to have to deal with from marketing/program management types because they can't be bothered to learn our product would be right out as would any tier one customer support.

      I'd love to be able to just fix all the known bugs that never get attention because they're not understood by management or implement automated testing on a larger scale.

      I don't understand why people with significant wealth would want to run a company or organization rather than work on the project directly, but each to his/her own.

      Um, because senior leadership is basically just fixing bugs and optimizing space/time/resources at the scale of the company rather than at the project/code level?

      Now, most senior leaders suck at this just like most programmers suck at their jobs. That's just a fact of life. But if you luck into a good leader...

      Maybe they listen to you about the crud you have to deal with from program management types. Then they think hard, figure out the correct metrics, run a few tests on current projects, come up with a better implementation, and get it adopted (i.e. pushed to production.) It takes a year, but the organization is better in the end (well, except to some project managers who were doing the wrong thing to begin with.)

  27. This is self-evident by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 1

    I've had people tell me for years the same thing: "If I had Bill Gates' money I'd quit working". Okay, then you would *never* get Bill Gates' money because you would quit long before you had billions of dollars.

    1. Re:This is self-evident by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      I've had people tell me for years the same thing: "If I had Bill Gates' money I'd quit working". Okay, then you would *never* get Bill Gates' money because you would quit long before you had billions of dollars.

      But most of Bill Gates money came (comes) from his investments in Microsoft, not from salary, etc... so He could have quit whenever he wanted to and still made his billions. Same for many of the rich people mention in this thread.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  28. some nefarious cleansing of the historical records by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    goddamn it, can't find the relevant troll, you know the one, so I'll just have to post the original story : ESR Writes on "Surprised By Wealth"

  29. Brought to you by the people with lots of money by Tyr07 · · Score: 1

    Ugh what a one-sided report / study.

    Obviously even if you're paid a lot, flipping burgers at mcdonalds isn't going to make you happy even at high wages as other jobs would, but there is a minimum.

    Your basic needs and some extras need to be covered without stress of running out of money.
    1. Home you enjoy living in
    2. Food of your choice
    3. Vehicle in good shape
    4. Money for vacation and entertainment

    etc etc.

    If you can't afford those things,then you'll be less satisfied with your job.

    Let's say salary can have a minor impact in improving job satisfaction from the base satisfaction of the job itself, however salary can have a significant impact in lowering job satisfaction from the base level.

    If you gave a job a 6/10 for work satisfaction but the wages were low so you were struggling each month to make ends meet, you might rate the job a 4/10 or such.
    If the wages were way more than you needed, you might still give it a 6/10 or 7/10.

    Plus their studies probably all related to higher paying jobs in the first place. "Oh I see, you're a surgeon, and you're roughly just as satisfied as this surgeon who makes more / less than you. Hmm interesting...both the same level of satisfied with their luxury home and yacht..alight..seems salary isn't that important"

    1. Re:Brought to you by the people with lots of money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most of these studies usually involve lottery winners. Looking at people who made little and suddenly came in to a lot of money. Usually not surgeons or such.

  30. Winning vs Earning by slew · · Score: 1

    When you fall into money, usually it is mostly luck. People who work just as hard, in the same field in similar circumstances sometimes have wildly different outcomes.

    However, those that *feel* their hard work has earned them their money and not luck, often have the type of personality that seeks some sort of validation (either internally or from other people) and thus will often not stop working.

    However, those that *feel* that their luck has earned them their money generally think that it is an unrepeatable event and probably aren't as likely to keep working. This is the "lottery" winner type, but could be "inheritance" or other windfall. Unfortunately, this type of life is really not easy as it complicates social interaction so it tends to be isolating. Your friends and family still have to work so their time isn't as flexible, and after a while, those that actually matter will probably end up resenting any handouts. However, some folks like isolation, so it isn't necessarily bad, but probably bad for many people, more than they would like to admit. For those that don't seek isolation, they probably need to keep working in some capacity, but often they don't know how and that is a problem in itself.

    1. Re:Winning vs Earning by ghoul · · Score: 1

      I wonder how many millionaire introverts spend their days posting on Slashdot

      --
      **Life is too short to be serious**
    2. Re:Winning vs Earning by slew · · Score: 1

      I wonder how many millionaire introverts spend their days posting on Slashdot

      I hope that number is zero. There are zillions of better ways to spend your days in isolation. ;^)

    3. Re:Winning vs Earning by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      I wonder how many millionaire introverts spend their days posting on Slashdot

      I hope that number is zero. There are zillions of better ways to spend your days in isolation. ;^)

      At least one. But I don't post all or every day.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  31. Money doesn't buy happiness... by dargaud · · Score: 1

    ...but it sure makes misery easier to live with !

    --
    Non-Linux Penguins ?
    1. Re:Money doesn't buy happiness... by Moof123 · · Score: 1

      To quote an acquaintance who has seen booms and busts in his personal financial life:

      "I've been rich and poor. Being rich was better."

  32. Living Proof by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Take it from someone who achieved FIRE(Financial Independence, Retired Early) through marriage, I have a chronic illness that precludes me from working even a part time job, it's hard enough to do stuff around the house even at times. I watch TV, browse the net, read stuff, and play PC games all day, and I'm losing my goddamn mind. I have hobbies I want to do that are very difficult because of a lack of energy, biking, hiking, kayaking, skiing, snowboarding. I also have practical hobbies, such as making a homestead, like gardening, raising goats/horses/chickens, but all that is extremely difficult or nearly impossible because of my health.

    I know this is a big side rant, but any of you that whine about welfare or basic income making lazy people, fuck you, I have all the money I need and I want to do so much but physically can't and it's killing me psychologically, and I am confident the vast majority of people under the same circumstances would feel the same way.

    Even though there is a percentage of society that is content with it, idleness is not, never has been, nor ever will be the default human condition, if it were, we would still be apes in Africa.

  33. It depends on who you are by houghi · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have been without work for 2 years in a row twice and the only reason I went back to work was money. I would have had money, I sure would have not gone to work. That does not mean that I was sitting on my sofa eating nachos. I just did more of what I wanted to do when I wanted to it.

    Ask people what they do in their free time and they will come up with "Movies, hanging out with friends and fitness". None of these are things you can do all day for a longer period of time (months on end) and the friends part will be limited as they work and will not be available most of the time.

    So I do believe that many people would go back to work, but not because of money, but because of boredom and lack of fantasy.

    So what did I do? I spend a lot more time with Open Source. No, I do not want to do that as a job as I would want to do my hooby in my free time.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    1. Re:It depends on who you are by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That does not mean that I was sitting on my sofa eating nachos. I just did more of what I wanted to do when I wanted to it.

      I think this is more of a revealing point. The fact that you felt a need to destigmatize the notion of what you were doing. The Protestant Work Ethic as enforced upon people by society and friends will make most people feel compelled to do something or otherwise they'll lose their friends. They might also lose their friends from pure envy, as plenty of people have envy (me included) of those who inherit a stock portfolio. In the end, that's the main difference between an unemployed bum and a trust fund baby. So, mixed in with envy is a serious frustration with the inequities of life.

      I know it's been said that you know who your true friends are when you lose your money/house/etc. I'd say, the same is true when you gain money when it's those people who stick by you even when you aren't intent on buying their friendship or granting them the same sort of unfair no-work life.*.

      * And on a side note, I find it rather hilarious that the same people who decry unemployed bums getting government hand-outs have no problem with trust fund baby getting mom's/dad's hand-outs. Perhaps because it's not "their" money being given out, but either way the person who gets the money didn't earn it--unless one has some sort of twisted notion of "lack of time with parent because they were always working" == "earned trust fund money". Otherwise, the real question is whether said unemployed bums can be afforded--which seems to be a possible real question if automation is the doom and gloom it's suggested to be--I doubt it because smart AI is really hard and even "dumb" humans are really smart. Because at the root of "earn" and "envy" we really don't see "fair"--because capitalism by its very nature isn't "fair" (it's just better than a lot of alternatives)--, but we can "redistribute the wealth" to pay those unemployed bums just like trust fund babies with all the same fairness.

    2. Re:It depends on who you are by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it doesn't depend on who you are: it depends on who you are married to. Personally I've been known to go to work on holidays just to avoid my wife when she's feeling particularly whiny. Given a choice between staring at the wall of my work cube and listening to my wife's torrent of "oh my life is so hard" bullshit whingeing I'll take the cloth wall (and a good book) any day.

  34. It's about ego and power by Maavin · · Score: 2

    When you have that kind of money that the billionaires mentioned have, it's not about money anymore, it's about power.

    --


    Crivens! I kicked meself in me own heid!
  35. Ikea's Ingvar Kamprad is a star example... by MindPrison · · Score: 1

    The guy who started Ikea - super filthy rich beyond most peoples wildest dreams, walks around with casual clothes, sometimes people say that he looks like an old homeless person. But yet he has worked every day of his life, and STILL does at the age of 90.

    The thing is - rich people don't work for the man - they're THE MAN, we're not talking about their kids who literally fell into daddy's riches, we're talking those who follow the philosophy of earning more than they spend. Everyone can get rich, it's all a matter of attitude.

    This is exactly why lottery winners often end up poor again, because of poor money management skills. We had a TV show about a couple that won 4 millions in a super lottery, they ended up on a program called "The Luxury Trap / The Money Pit", these people thought it was now okay to spend more than usual, they didn't plan for the future but was basically thinking that with money like that - they had endless unlimited means, which...of course, they didn't. They in fact ended up with 2 millions in DEBT instead, and that was just after 2 years.

    I actually like to brag a little, so I will - I'll take myself as an example. I'm one of those people who doesn't like to work, unless I feel it's super meaningful...in which case I don't even consider it a job, but as an example. I'm a real cheapo, I am stingy too. This lifestyle helps me get what I want. I live in a large 3 story house and sometimes I'm unemployed for long periods of time - no wellfare income, but I get the odd jobs here and there that helps me pay the utility bills. But I don't live a life of pure luxury, I don't endulge by visiting luxury restaurants or purchase the latest and the greatest. When I see something that can reduce my living costs like a new mobile-phone plan, or cheaper internet - I jump right on it and reduce my costs right away. I purchase food in bulk and save up. And I repair my own house, I never hire people. I save and penny pinch, but yet I got tons of cool stuff, my great lab filled to the brim with components bought from shops closing down or someone giving up their hobbies - the secret is - I don't ever purchase at full price, and of course - I never purchase anything by borrowing money from someone or the bank. I keep costs down, and that way...I don't even have to be rich.

    Yet...I'm richer than most of my neighbors in the entire town, with their luxury cars, and jet-set lifestyle travelling all over the world, slaving away at a job they hate.

    --
    What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
  36. Inconceivable by ErichTheRed · · Score: 1

    I may be naive and not understand the whole picture here, but I have seen stories that are similar to this and have had a hard time believing them. Specifically, I've seen a couple of studies showing that people who are incredibly rich don't tend to be happier. As someone who's comfortable (not broke, but still worrying about money) I'm always looking over my shoulder for the next layoff/offshoring exercise...how in the world could you not be happy??? Having the freedom to do what you want, when you want, regardless of cost seems like a paradise. Never having to worry about paying a bill, how much a car repair costs, making your tax/mortgage payments on your houses? Sign me up...I guarantee I'll be happy. In my mind, anyone who goes from worrying about how much something costs, to where their next vacation will be and how they will get there, has a pretty good life. I forgot where I heard it, but the quote "whoever said money can't buy happiness doesn't know where to shop" comes to mind.

    Honestly, this should be everyone's goal in life -- to get enough wealth that you can live off the investment/interest income for the rest of your life, regardless of how you spend it or how the market performs. I'm sure there's more than a few people slogging through the world of investment banking or corporate law firms chasing this very same goal...and those are the only people for whom this is still possible, barring a lottery win or inheritance.

    1. Re:Inconceivable by evilsofa · · Score: 1

      You work to live. The people you don't understand are those who live to work. There's no guarantee at all that those who live to work will end up rich, and many if not most do not, but the study has found that those that do become rich by working skew heavily towards those who live to work. Those who live to work don't stop working; why would you stop doing something you like to do? If they are forced to retire, they will find something, anything, to keep themselves busy, usually driving their spouses/family/neighbors mad in the process.

  37. I've seen it. by jcr · · Score: 0

    A lot of the guys I worked with at Apple could have retired at any time after 2005 or so. They kept working because they liked what they were doing.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  38. I feel sorry for them by mschuyler · · Score: 1

    I quit as soon as I became financially independent and never looked back. It's been a dozen years of pure bliss so far. It's possible I will get into trouble, but very unlikely. If everything upon which my early 'retirement' is based were to fail, I would have a whole lot of company. If the actuarial tables are accurate, then no worries. I'm really sorry people need the daily grind to feel fulfilled and happy.

    --
    How about a moderation of -1 pedantic.
    1. Re:I feel sorry for them by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      Okay. How'd you do it and what do you do with your time? What are the things to look out for? I would seriously like to know. I'm 53, debt-free and financially independent. Not "fuck you" money, mind you, but enough to last me ~60 years on my current budget (plus discretionary allowances) -- not counting any future SSI or capital gains. I'm still working 3/4 to full time (by choice) but am thinking about a change.

      As I posted above, I'm in this position because I was very happily married to a wonderful woman, who was 19 years older than me, for 20 years and we lived responsibly accounting for the fact that she would retire before me. Instead, she died, literally in my arms, of a brain tumor in Jan 2006, just seven weeks after diagnosis. I'm still a bit lost and without direction because she was all that really mattered... Remember Sue...

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  39. Re:I quit by clm1970 · · Score: 0

    I doubt either of them can/will/would have fix(ed) it. Trump's plan will just be the GOP's disastrous answer to the Democrat's disastrous answer.

  40. No way by AndyKron · · Score: 1

    No way. I'm tired of getting shit on.

  41. 2 reasons for that by rodrigoandrade · · Score: 1

    1. They spend money as fast as they make it, so they can't afford to quit.

    2. They can afford to quit the daily grind to pursue something they actually enjoy doing. I know a guy who became an auto mechanic after retiring from a Fortune 100 at a relatively early age, with a handsome retirement plan and a fat bank account, simply because he enjoys working on cars.

  42. Work less and more relaxed... by MMC+Monster · · Score: 1

    Was discussing this with people I work with. We agreed that if we won it big in the lottery we would still work together. Just much less hours and under more relaxed conditions. (ie: 4 hour work days, no calls, no weekends, have a greeter at the front door, etc.)

    --
    Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
  43. Stick around and be an asshole? by swb · · Score: 1

    That was a fantasy at my last job, especially if I could pull of the "get rich" part without it being on TV news.

    Our offices were on 8 floors of a public office tower and there was an underground parking ramp. High-level execs had spaces leased there, and I figured if I was rich enough I could lease a spot down there for my high-end car and "accidentally" run into some of the people down there. I also thought it would be fun to have a designer re-do my office over some long holiday weekend with expensive furniture and art.

    But the real key was to keep working there totally without regard for anyone's opinion. Yes, business unit leader, your ridiculous idea is a total waste of money and is only designed for self-aggrandizement. Please, try to fire me over this. I have the top 5 employment law firms in town on retainer and a make-your-life-miserable

    Otherwise, I can't say that staying at a job when I'm totally rich would make any sense. When I could afford to travel the world at the highest standards of accommodation, I'm supposed to put up with my paltry vacation time or work's idea of when I should schedule it? That's crazy.

    About the only work I can see doing is getting so deep into a hobby I decide there's some business to be built there and I have enough time and money to explore it.

  44. "work" by c · · Score: 1

    I wouldn't quit working, but I'd definitely quit my job.

    People who start companies and then become billionaires through those companies are a different kind of person from the average windfall winner; they frequently keep on at the same "job", but the sort of personality which takes a company from scratch to being worth billions isn't likely to see what their doing as a "job" so much as an obsession. That and being at the helm of the ship has gotta be a lot more interesting than being chained to an oar.

    --
    Log in or piss off.
  45. The more obvious answer. by geekmux · · Score: 1

    Within certain personalities and types (such as those who attain the billionaire status), greed is unending.

    Across the aggregate, greed is a disease that has infected humanity, and will likely be its ultimate demise.

  46. Dumb assertion without context by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know a lot of folks, now retired, who only kept working so they wouldn't take too big of a cut in their government pension by retiring early. Remember that the only money some people will ever get once retired is their old-age pension.

    Oh, wait. I see now that this "research" was lead by a university professor. Well, the premise may be true in academia, but why not get Mr. Professor to interview some blue collar workers who are making themselves sick, struggling to make ends meet.

    1. Re:Dumb assertion without context by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Oh, wait. I see now that this "research" was lead by a university professor.

      Your anti-intellectualism is why this country is going down a gold-plated crapper.

    2. Re:Dumb assertion without context by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      Oh, wait. I see now that this "research" was lead by a university professor.

      Your anti-intellectualism is why this country is going down a gold-plated crapper.

      When you say 'anti-intellectualism' you are grouping "Womyns' studies" and "Physics Research" together.

      I have no problem mocking the average social studies graduate who do 'research' that 'proves' a culture of rape, but that doesn't mean that I disregard real science.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    3. Re:Dumb assertion without context by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      I have no problem mocking the average social studies graduate who do 'research' that 'proves' a culture of rape, but that doesn't mean that I disregard real science.

      Fair enough.

  47. stemming off boredom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think it comes down to keeping busy. I know people that retired only to go back to work part-time doing something that helps keep them busy and stem off boredom.

    Though with a lotto winning amount of money, I'm not so sure I'd go back to work, as much as go back to school part-time just to keep learning something new.

  48. Not entirely true... by mark-t · · Score: 1

    ... the link between salary and job satisfaction is very weak.

    I don't think this is entirely true... certainly if you do not feel that you are being paid fairly for the work you are doing, then you aren't going to be satisfied... so at least among lower income levels, I would suggest that this link is actually quite strong... I suspect that the relationship between salary and job satisfaction may resemble a logarithmic curve, where increased salary past a certain point offers diminishing returns on increased amounts of satisfaction, but just because there may be a negligible relationship between job salary and job satisfaction at the highest salary levels does not mean that the link between them is necessarily weak in general.

  49. My perspective by scubamage · · Score: 1

    I honestly have no interest in quitting my job if I find myself suddenly rich. What WILL happen though, is that the way I treat my job and the power dynamics there will drastically change. I will be far more emboldened voicing opinions about things that go on because I no longer am at the job because I "need" to be, but rather because I "want" to be. That makes a very big difference. I won't have near as much of an issue telling our director that he's being stupid when he is in fact demonstrably being stupid. Right now, there is always the spectre of being fired haunting me if I speak up when management makes a bad decision. I usually speak up anyway, but if I get shushed, I let it lie. I won't have to do that any more. Want to fire me? Fine, give me a call in a few months when you see I'm right, I don't need you as much as you'll see you need me.

    1. Re:My perspective by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Or you could get a job as an IT professional to do all the things you want to do on your job. You don't need money to be an asshole.

    2. Re:My perspective by scubamage · · Score: 1

      I have a job as an IT professional, specifically doing research and design for an extremely large carrier. That doesn't mean that my voice overrules my director's. And being free to speak your mind != being an asshole.

    3. Re:My perspective by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      That doesn't mean that my voice overrules my director's.

      Then you never been in situation where the director is doing something so stupid that you have no choice but to resign. My coworkers and I at one company got a director fired because he wanted everyone to sign copyright assignments for everything on the job AND at home. We told the HR person we weren't signing the document and would resign instead. Faced with a dozen resignations and potential lawsuits for something has absolutely nothing to do with our daily work, HR got upper management to fix the problem in a hurry. None of us checked out bank accounts before threatening to resign. We did it because it was the right thing to do.

      And being free to speak your mind != being an asshole.

      Then you're doing it wrong. No wonder you need money to grow a pair.

    4. Re:My perspective by scubamage · · Score: 1

      Then you never been in situation where the director is doing something so stupid that you have no choice but to resign. My coworkers and I at one company got a director fired because he wanted everyone to sign copyright assignments for everything on the job AND at home. We told the HR person we weren't signing the document and would resign instead. Faced with a dozen resignations and potential lawsuits for something has absolutely nothing to do with our daily work, HR got upper management to fix the problem in a hurry. None of us checked out bank accounts before threatening to resign. We did it because it was the right thing to do.

      Actually, I have. And you know what would have happened if we had stood up and done that? Within 24 hours contractors would have been brought in from India or China to do it anyway, and I would still have given up my job. I have a wife and kids that my losing my job would very gravely impact. As in, possibly cost us our home, cost my kids their access to education, etc. Right now, I need my job or else it directly impacts my family. It's noble of you to be willing to jump off a cliff on principle, but not all of us have that ability.

      Then you're doing it wrong. No wonder you need money to grow a pair.

      So, question, do you just get your rocks off being a dick for no reason? Real question. I've been respectful to you, and in turn you've been an ass. You haven't really added anything to the conversation other than trying to turn this into some kind of pissing contest. Power dynamics and politics are a real thing. You sound clueless about the industry at a fortune 500 level, and about basic human psychology.

    5. Re:My perspective by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      It's noble of you to be willing to jump off a cliff on principle, but not all of us have that ability.

      My coworkers and I had substantial artistic copyrights that existed independently of our jobs for years or decades. If we signed that copyright assignment form that included everything we created off the job that was completely unrelated from work, we would have stopped being creative individuals at home. No corporate job was worth that kind of sacrifice. Some of us had families, mortgages and car payments that benefited from the extra income of a corporate job.

      So, question, do you just get your rocks off being a dick for no reason?

      Nope. If someone is preventing me doing my job, I do whatever it takes to get the job done. At the end of the day, that's the only thing upper management cares about.

      You sound clueless about the industry at a fortune 500 level, and about basic human psychology.

      I've worked at eBay, Fujitsu, Google, Intuit, Sony and many other Fortune 500 companies over a 20+ year career. I got an A in psychology when I took it in college.

  50. I hope that changes, per CID 53469967 by raymorris · · Score: 1

    I hope you end up doing some work you really enjoy, something that "gets your juices flowing". Like this person said:

    https://news.slashdot.org/comm...

  51. Don't forget ego by tomhath · · Score: 2

    Whether they're politicians, business executives, athletes, or entertainment celebrities - people at the top of the food chain crave money and power. Bezos, Zuckerberg, Clinton, Trump, Ballmer, LeBron, whoever - they won't give up the ego boost unless they are forced to.

  52. That means by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Basic income now!

  53. Let's try it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd like to test that theory. Somebody make me rich, please.

    1. Re:Let's try it by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Meh... Get a job to buy your own prostitutes and blow.

  54. Robin Williams made a ton of money by raymorris · · Score: 1

    Robin Williams was paid $20 million for Bicentennial Man, $5 million for Night at the Museum, $3.5 million for the Crazy Ones. Money does not make people happy. Lack of money, or more specifically spending more than you make, can certainly cause stress, but most everyone on Slashdot is already in the top 2% richest people in the world. Being even richer than rich in no way guarantees any level of happiness.

    I notice pretty much everything you say starts with "Bull shit!". You don't *sound* like a joyful person. Maybe you haven't yet found what really makes you happy long term.

    1. Re:Robin Williams made a ton of money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Robin Williams had an unfortunate clinical depression and potentially other problems. Clinical depression has nothing to do with your physical situation. You can be a billionaire and standing in the middle of Disney World with people having fun all around you, and a beautiful lady (or man, whichever your preference) on your arm, and still want the world to go away because you just can't feel happiness at the moment. Being sad and depressed because your best friend passed is not the same as clinical depression. Chances are, after a week of mourning you will start feeling normal again. Not so with clinical depression.

      No, in the classical sense money does NOT make you happy. It does however, take care of a myriad of problems that can make you unhappy.
       
        Many celebrities are also in the predicament of spending much more than even they earn... so they have to work to continue to live. That is a different situation than someone who realizes there is nothing one can reasonably do with 5 mansions and 50 cars. Many are driven by fame anyway, not money. Very few rich people want to be famous.

    2. Re:Robin Williams made a ton of money by butchersong · · Score: 1

      Robin Williams had multiple ex-wives that were siphoning all of his wealth. He kept working because he could have gone to jail if he failed in his support payments. This was a major contributor to his depression.

    3. Re:Robin Williams made a ton of money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope they fined him a mil or so for "Death to Smoochie."

  55. So it's not wealth that motivates people, but work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So why do we give the most amount of money to the executives and claim if we didn't, they wouldn't do a good job? Why not just give them more work?

    It's not like they produce much of the product as it is, and their job is less likely to be outsourced. Neither is it like we have a paucity of people wanting high pay and prestige with light workloads.

  56. money doesn't solve everything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But it sure as hell solves a specific class of problems that most non-rich struggle daily with.
    My former boss was wealthy (>$100million net worth). He and his family had much the same problems as everyone else--apart from paying for their home, food, clothes, cars, and school.
    In addition, being wealthy adds a new class of problems. Until you've been both, comparing which class of problems is worse or more stressful is impossible.

    Most of his problems simply had bigger price tags involved and affected thousands of people (whom he cared about).

  57. You know what I'd do? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Two chicks at the same time, man.

    1. Re:You know what I'd do? by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Larry Ellison was reportedly taking a shower with two chicks when the maintenance crew turned off the water. Rich people problems.

  58. Re:I'm still working by davecb · · Score: 2

    I already had to make that decision. I have enough money that I could take early retirement, so now I only work for organizations I actually like. That means I end up doing things like six months pro-bono for a leadership campaign, and then three years with a start-up, because they were inherently worth doing. Now I'm with a hardware company, because I love their product.

    --
    davecb@spamcop.net
  59. Win or earn? by petes_PoV · · Score: 1

    After all, there are numerous high-profile billionaires who haven't called it quits despite possessing the luxury to retire

    I think whoever wrote this has missed the point.

    For these gazillionaires "work" is just another way to pass the time. It doesn't provide them (any more) with the necessary money to live on, so they have other goals for the work they do and the money they earn. Whether that is a rather adolescent "measuring up" contest, a messianic attitude to life, the desire to go down in history as past philanthropists have, or merely to have Mars' capital city named after them is irrelevant.

    I would suggest that lottery winners (to take a simple example) who return to work when they have the means to live comfortably are showing a monumental lack of imagination or simply are scared of change - the unknown life of a rich person and the choices it requires. However, for most people the idea of not having to perform in the daily 9 - 5 is all they would wish for.

    --
    politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
    1. Re:Win or earn? by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      I would suggest that lottery winners (to take a simple example) who return to work when they have the means to live comfortably are showing a monumental lack of imagination or simply are scared of change - the unknown life of a rich person and the choices it requires.

      If you're rich but live a "normal" lifestyle, no one is going to sniff around to swindle you out of your fortune. Most millionaires — as documented in the book, "The Millionaires Next Door" — are largely invisible because they avoid conspicuous consumption. I have an uncle in Idaho who drives a tractor for 16-hours per day for eight months and goes on vacation for four months. On the street you would think he was just another farmer. His net worth is $1M+.

  60. Haven't had to work for anyone in a decade++ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: My money works for me. I chose "ability to work on meaningful projects" for more speed, security, reliability + anonymity via what you already have NATIVELY in FASTER kernelmode vs. SLOWER usermode "so-called 'solutions'" that are security issue riddled (local DNS/antivirus) using FAR MORE RESOURCES doing less (addons that don't work fully anymore in "AlmostALLAdsBlocked" http://www.businessinsider.com/google-microsoft-amazon-taboola-pay-adblock-plus-to-stop-blocking-their-ads-2015-2/ or inferior imitations UBlock (uses hosts but provides no dns issue solutions) that are ILLOGICALLY "Bolt on 'MoAr'" inefficient & inferior + SLOWER http://superuser.com/questions/686041/which-leads-to-faster-browsing-an-ad-blocker-or-an-edited-hosts-file/

    APK

    P.S.=> My project = APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-4 32/64-bit https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=%22APK+Hosts+File+Engine%22+and+%22start64%22&btnG=Google+Search&gbv=1/

  61. Why work a minimum wage job after winning millions by GoodNewsJimDotCom · · Score: 1

    It is a fun social experiment to see how many people are now suddenly nice to you.

  62. Yep...been there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After my startup was acquired, I took a year off. I got to working out a lot, was in the best shape of my life, but eventually it got to a point where I missed being wanted or needed by anyone. Most people you saw out and about were elderly or parents were young kids. I just wanted a purpose again, so I got back in the game. I'm not super wealthy or anything but I don't really need to be working.

  63. This requires some thought... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    When PowerBall had a $1B jackpot, I bought some tickets like everyone else. But I gave serious thought about what to do with $500M after taxes in a lump sum. I wouldn't change my modest lifestyle or even quit my government IT job. My role model is Ronald Read, a janitor whom everyone thought was poor but left an $8M fortune to the local library and hospital upon his death.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/get-there/the-remarkable-life-and-lessons-of-ronald-read/2015/04/24/7c12a26a-e944-11e4-9a6a-c1ab95a0600b_story.html

    1. Re:This requires some thought... by JustNiz · · Score: 1

      >> I wouldn't change my modest lifestyle or even quit my government IT job.

      I bet you actually would, but If I'm wrong and winning wouldn't change your life in any way, why would you even buy a ticket?
      I'm reminded of a street sweeper from my hometown who won the lottery. He won the equivalent of $10 million or so. Neither he or his wife quit their jobs. He lived in council-provided housing provided to the poor (the cheapest, nastiest smallest house you could imagine). All he visibly did with any of the money was to buy the house he already lived in, and put the rest in the bank.
      After he had won, his daughter got married, they held the reception at the cheapest place they could find that had a bar, and everyone had to pay for their own drinks.
      Seriously people like that don't deserve to win, because it changed literally nothing.

  64. Life is not about money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is great confusion between working for a living and making something the work of your life. My ideals of life are not to have enough resources to sit and shit all day.. As humans we have developed the ability to raise above instincts and we give meaning to existence with agency and control over how we lead our lives. If you're successful you're also probably educated enough to know this.

  65. To work or not to work by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

    I don't think I'd continue a regular 40 hour a week job. OTOH, I wouldn't want to sit on my butt all day either. Maybe I'd do some kind of freelance stuff, whenever I got bored, and take a break when I wanted to.

    --
    Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
  66. Not B.S. at all! by King_TJ · · Score: 1

    The problem too many people have is a desire for a wealthy *lifestyle". That's a very different thing from wanting "nice things", IMO.

    on a $100K salary, I could finally pay all of my bills comfortably, without worrying that I had to stick way too much on a credit card one month, stressing about how I'm going to get that paid back down in the coming months. I'd be able to make bigger than the minimum payment on a couple of my existing loans, to get them paid off more quickly and free up a little extra money to do more fun things with, too. And I wouldn't have the problems I have now where in really cold winter months, my electric bill is sky high and really cuts into what I can afford to buy as holiday gifts for people.

    That's the kind of wealth I want ... not millions of dollars that force me to start dressing in expensive, fancy clothes for social events I'm expected to attend because of the new crowd I'm around, and the pressure to have an impressive sized and styled home, so those people don't think less of me when I invite them over.

  67. no, the answer is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Two chicks at once."

  68. was true for me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    UK resident here. A few years ago, I made maybe $15M after taxes when the company I helped to found was acquired. I invested $6M so I could retire one day, am just about done spending $5M on a really nice new home, have maybe $1M liquid cash and the rest tied up in my current home and a few other things. I assume most here would call this "getting rich" although maybe it's a low end example. Anyway, I could quit working forever, but...
    a) I don't feel bullet proof (that would take twice what I have, and maybe - if it happened - twice again...) - can't tell you why!
    b) I'm an engineer, and I love designing software and hardware. I love my job. (Maybe the best luck I ever had.)
    So I'm working quite hard. Late into the night, through the weekend. Harder than I worked in the year or so before I got the money. It feels good to play a part in the world, to make a (small) difference. Maybe it's a better example to my kids. Of course I'm doing it because I want to, not because I have to (like almost everything, for someone in my very fortunate position). Guilt is a fairly regular problem; I do some things under the radar for good causes, that helps a little.
    I am now certain that no amount of money would stop me working. But when I drive somewhere for a meeting, I'm driving a Tesla, which is nice.

  69. IHTFP by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    we derive job satisfaction from non-monetary sources, which include positive peer relationships, the ability to work on meaningful projects and even leadership opportunities.

    Wait, you can get those from a job?

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    1. Re:IHTFP by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      Yes, you really can. It is genuinely amazing when that all happens.
      I really do miss that.

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
  70. the main reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You forgot the main reason for continuing to work: getting away from the wife and kids for 8 hours.

  71. FTFY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > remaining gainfully employed ...

    Remaining gainfully BUSY... is what makes most people happy. Volunteer work, association memberships, hobbies, passing forward what they've learned, being involved with things bigger than themselves, etc.

    Don't tell us that commuting to work, juggling with deadlines and incomplete resources, all while attending obligatory meetings, etc. is preferred to other involvement with life. Busy? Yes. Clocking in? No. That person just hasn't found their further calling yet.

  72. It's not about the money by IWantMoreSpamPlease · · Score: 1

    It's about the power, and the ability to stay in the limelight and feed ones ego.
    Every met anyone disgustingly rich? I mean Jeff Bezos level rich? I have. Dirtbags, all of them. Yes, they might put on a friendly face, but everything they do has an ulterior motive behind it.
    Sooner or later a 100 million/yr salary stops being about the money, and starts being about the power you can wield with that kind of money.
    *That's* why they continue to work. Power, self-serving, and ego. Anyone who says otherwise is selling you something

    --
    So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
    1. Re:It's not about the money by JustNiz · · Score: 1

      Interesting. I definately think that a large part of what you say is true, but also I suspect that people such as Bill Gates that create an entire global company have ahard time letting go even though they have no need to go to work.
      I mean I think you also have to be the kind of person that derives pleasure from putting on a tie and going to an office every day for 8-10 hours. There apparently are plenty of people out there like that but that totally isn't me.
      I'd never be as rich as Bill Gates because after the first say $2 million hit the bank (or whatever amount I decided I need to live on reasonably sustainably) I'd walk out of the ratrace for good with no regrets and not even a second glance back.
      That doens;t mean that I would just sit at home all day though, or at least not work on some opensource project or something.

  73. loath, not loathe by Quirkz · · Score: 1

    Loath = unwilling, reluctant
    Loathe = deep-seated hatred

    1. Re:loath, not loathe by whatteaux · · Score: 1

      Loathe = deep-seated hatred

      Nope.
      loathe = despise.
      It's a verb, not a noun (which 'deep-seated hatred' is).

  74. Money = freedom by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    I agree that sitting at home all day will get quickly boring, but money represents freedom.
    If you don't need to work to live, then suddenly you can choose to work on what project makes you happy, not what earns money.

  75. I would love to become an exception by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Count me in those that would quit IMMEDIATELY. Like my work area, nothing against my bosses/company/peers/etc, but I would prefer going to beaches and banging my wife than typing on a keyboard all day. I would not look back.

  76. Meanwhile, at the other end of the spectrum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You've got people who aren't working and don't have any money. Could we figure out a way to meet in the middle?

  77. Define "Work" by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    I think a lot depends on what you define as "Work" or going back to "Work".

    For example should I win say 5 million dollars, I wouldn't need to work for money really. Perhaps I always wanted to be a writer, however could not due to the fiscal risk involved. Maybe I make it as a writer, maybe I just waste my time, but it would be something I'm doing that presumably makes me happy. Does that mean I'm "working" again? I suppose so, however it isn't quite the same as going back to being an office drone or something.

    Perhaps one of your hobbies becomes your passion and you pursue that. Maybe it's wood working, and you make artisan furniture... Pretty soon you'll have a barn full of furniture, do you sell it, break even, give it away, donate it to charity, again does all that classify as "work"...

    1. Re:Define "Work" by Quirkz · · Score: 1

      This seems right to me. More, it probably won't be 40 hours per week (call it 50-60 hours of time devoured when you add commute and related activities) dedicated exclusively to one thing (unless you really love that one thing) but several part-time activities that make up a full day. I think doing anything to the exclusion of the rest of your life is kind of frustrating. I could see replacing one full-time job with three separate part-time hobbies/jobs, and being much enriched by the variety.

  78. I'll work until I drop dead. by Brannon · · Score: 1

    So I guess I'm one of the guys that you "can't imagine". I find work fulfilling.

    People are different.

    1. Re:I'll work until I drop dead. by Enigma2175 · · Score: 1

      So I guess I'm one of the guys that you "can't imagine". I find work fulfilling.

      People are different.

      Exactly. But the title says "If YOU get rich, YOU won't quit working for long" which is bullshit. There are TONS of people who would quit working immediately and never work again. I'm one of them. It sounds like you're not (NTTAWWT). But the article implies that ALL people feel the way you do, which is just wrong.

      --

      Enigma

  79. "Retirement" by bluegutang · · Score: 2

    Retirement doesn't mean you stop working.

    It means you stop choosing your work based on the salary. (So you switch to a more rewarding job, or you pursue a hobby full-time, or you hang around the house - whatever feels best to you.)

    In a real sense, those tech CEOs with billions ARE retired.

    1. Re:"Retirement" by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

      Think so, eh? Walk a mile in their shoes and tell me that.
      Take Gates, he's retired. Still working? What a PIA. Every day is a shot at someone to part you from your money.

  80. They keep working because they are sick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They are mentally ill. They don't see all the money they have as being enough. They think they need more so they keep working.

    Like old people who lived through the depression. They have plenty of money, but keep and reuse tinfoil because they think they need to.

  81. Here is what I would do with $5 Million by Lodragandraoidh · · Score: 1

    1. pay off the bills & repair everything -= $200,000 would do it (close out mortgage, student loans, and a few long term odds and ends and pending maintenance).

    2. fund for children to finish college -= $100,000 ($50,000 per child - 2 children)

    3. fund for wife and myself to further our educations -= $100,000 ($50,000 each) (education is very important - never stop learning)

    4. diversified investment fund: $2,000,000 --- stocks, bonds, money market

    5. entreprenurial fund: $2,600,000 -- would retire from current job early, and use these funds to start my own businesses. I would continue to work every day until I run out of these funds, or die - whichever comes first. Profits would pay our annual bills (food, taxes, maintenance/replacement etc), and otherwise be rolled back into the fund. This would be frugally managed.

    Can't imagine not having something valuable to contribute. If I was insanely rich (billions of dollars) I would definitely be investing in organizations and businesses that I believe in - and probably could justify upgrading some things to make that easier to accomplish.

    Would there be some parties, vacations, and trips abroad in there? You betcha. However, I can't see just partying or wandering aimlessly. Life has to have meaning, and meaning comes from within.

    --

    Lodragan Draoidh
    The more you explain it, the more I don't understand it. - Mark Twain
  82. I wouldn't quit working by p51d007 · · Score: 1

    Believe it or not, I actually ENJOY working. Gives me purpose in life.

  83. Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The rich get richer because they continue doing what made them rich.
    Ditto for the poor.

  84. Who needs pay raises? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "there's less than a 2% overlap between the two factors. In the long run, we derive job satisfaction from non-monetary sources"

    Great, now I can start with the massive pay cuts without worry.
    - Some PHB

  85. Busy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... Without money worries, the world would be your oyster ...

    I'm surprised nobody has mentioned these issues yet. There would be three worries:

    1) How to keep that money, this is doubling troublesome for people who've never learnt to save money; who see it as something that disappears at the end of the month.

    2) How to deal with friends and strangers demanding expensive gifts. Suddenly one is a responsible for other people's entertainment and problems.

    3) You can keep busy if want to, you can define yourself by your job if you want to: Being rich doesn't change that. What it does change, is you are no longer one of the little people; waiting for your next pay-cheque, sacrificing your little luxuries so a family member can have that surgery/medicine to to improve her life, dreaming of the day you've saved enough to have an overseas vacation. You no longer have the troubles of a working stiff and that has a big toll on your social life.

  86. This is why Universal Basic Income would work by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 1

    People LIKE working. They LIKE doing things. I'm always wary of people that say that people with a basic income would just be lazy and do nothing, because it sounds to me like they're projecting THEIR laziness on the people that are getting an income.

    I have so many things I'd like to do. I'd go back to school, work for charities and non-profits that would normally be impossible for me because they don't pay enough to support an adult or two. I've already got a plan for lottery winnings (on the rare occasion that I play the lottery) where most of it goes into investments and just pays me a salary from the interest I make on investments. Protect the majority of the capital and invest the rest, pull a small-ish salary and never worry about whether the job I'd love to do pays too little.

  87. Try me by DMJC · · Score: 1

    Let's try an experiment. You give me $20 million, and we'll see if I show up to work next year. No takers? didn't think so.

  88. Wanna Bet? by thundercattt · · Score: 1

    Give me 50 mil lotto winning. I guarantee I will be in a hammock the rest of my life.

    1. Re:Wanna Bet? by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

      That'd get old in like the first week or so.

  89. When you're paid enough, you get other criteria by Kjella · · Score: 1

    That could be, in part, because the link between salary and job satisfaction is very weak. According to a meta-analysis by University of Florida business school professor Timothy Judge and other researchers, there's less than a 2% overlap between the two factors.

    Because we trade away one for the other in context, say you're a doctor. You could run a private clinic for fat cat clients and make big bucks. Or you could work for "Doctors Without Borders" doing humanitarian work for shitty pay and great job satisfaction. But you wouldn't go flip burgers at McDonald's for shitty pay and shitty job satisfaction. This could get very confusing for a statistician, because if you average it out the low wage earner seems pretty happy but really it's a mix of no choice and deliberate choice. That means we tend to get happier when we increase our potential, being eligible to get a $60k job and picking a $30k job will be completely different than when a $30k job is the most you can make. And if your priorities change you can probably find a $60k job later. Having attractive job skills is never a bad thing, even if you're not profit-maximizing.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  90. I climb trees for a living. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll never be rich but I love my job and I'll do it for the rest of my life or die trying.

  91. Buy your employer by manu0601 · · Score: 1

    If you are rich enough, you can buy your employer. Funny things can start there.

  92. Began reviewing this in earnest. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Always open to sound financial advice, I began reading this in earnest. Somewhere in the first sentence I realized that this information is not useful to me.

  93. PhD student here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm working longer hours than if I'd started working for a company, and I'm paid less per hour than a company job (in my country, PhD positions get a salary.) I probably won't be making more money than people working for private firms after I graduate either, assuming I keep going into fundamental physics research. But I'm still here, doing what I want to do. If I won a million dollars, I'd still keep doing the same thing, I'd just be less worried about the financial situation.

  94. $60k/year. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If I could make 60k/year until I'm 90 without working, I'd be comfortable with never working again. Even if I live longer than that, I'd put away any money I didn't use, and there'd probably be plenty. I didn't grow up really poor, but we weren't all that well off. It's taught me to be a bit on the frugal side. I made $13k last me almost 2 years of unemployment quite happily. I like gaming, outdoor activites, and animals. The closest thing to work I'd probably do some volunteer work to an animal sanctuary.

  95. It's true. by LinuxLuver · · Score: 1

    My father died and left me more than enough so that I never wanted to work again I don't have to. The earnings on the capital annually is more than I earned each year by working. So instead of paid employment I split my time between volunteer work and things to sell. Stuff I always wanted to do, but couldn't. I'm visit than ever and enjoying every minute of it. It's given me a glimpse of what a world on a universal basic income could be like. Positice, constructive people doing positive constructive things..... And negative, destructive people free to fund their own destruction. Hopefully there would more of the former as time went on.

    --
    Only boring people are ever bored.
  96. Not rocket science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Kind of a silly article IMO. You've got to do something. The question is whether and to what extent you can purposefully structure your own time. I'm not rich, but I'm in a position where I'm free to choose my own projects whether they pay well or not. So I do the work I want to. I also take time to exercise, which I wasn't doing enough of before.

    My transition was hard, partly because it coincided with the death of my mother and a move, so I was completely unmoored. I thought of pursuing new full-time work; I still do occasionally. But most of the time I value the freedom I have to work on whatever I want to work on, and if there's a day when I'm unmotivated and can't get it going, I'm OK with that. But mostly I'm happy filling my days with satisfying work on projects that interest me. I've given up on trying to make my mark, and on caring what other people think, outside my tiny circle.

  97. Let's define work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When we say "stop working" it might help to first determine what "work" means in this context. For most working class people this surely means "exchanging some of my time for enough money to afford a modest lifestyle." So in that sense, no, no one keeps "working" after they are rich; they might exchange their time for something else (a cause they care about, or fame, or whatever), but not for money. They can afford their lifestyle without additional money; that's what being rich means.

    But to say we'd stop working in the sense of "doing anything important" is absurd. Humans like to contribute, and like to build things. Look at any hobby club; look at the things you've probably made in your free time. The truth of the matter is that there are things that are worth doing that don't make money or shouldn't make money. I know personally I'd rather everyone have enough time to be an amatuer musician than to have a few professionals who turn it into a money-making endeavor. There is research that can't get funded that people would love to do. I know I'd love to spend a few hours a week doing cutting-edge AI research, a few hours exercising, a few hours playing music, a few hours teaching people how to use computers.

    The fact is that most of what's meaningful (and I'm using meaningful here to mean useful to someone 50 years from now) actually doesn't make money. And rather than trying to make all of society into neatly-defined "jobs" and "career paths" maybe we should just admit that hobbies provide real benefits, that just aren't measured in monetary terms.

    The likelihood that someone would pay you to do math research is basically none, but the potential value of that research is huge. If you have money and understand that, you're going to work your ass off, it's just that you'll be working for a reason other than money.

    And if eventually we could move to a society where we have robots powered by e.g. geothermal energy that do all the work for us, we'll have to contend with everyone being "rich" by this definition. And there will be no economically benefical work to be done. But I don't think that'll be a problem; I think it can be a golden age, so long as an elite few don't control all the machinery. We're not there yet, but we're closer than people think. Society would not collapse if we all took fridays off.

  98. Maslow Needs by NewYork · · Score: 1

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs

  99. Money, Power and Poor Planning by dcw3 · · Score: 1

    You've got several issues here.

    1. Many of those mentioned aren't just wealthy, they're in powerful positions. Stop working...lose much of that power, even though you've retained the money.

    2. For many others who could easily afford to quit work, having something meaningful to do is still important. If you love your job...why quit. Anecdote: I could retire comfortably now, and plan to leave my company in a couple years, when I can collect full pension. But, I'll still find something meaningful to do with my time...volunteer work, most likely.

    3. And, we've all heard of the lucky few who've hit it big in the lottery, or got some other windfall, only to be broke a year later. There are many articles and studies on this. It all comes down to the simple fact that the vast majority of people simply don't know how to manage money, or have the self discipline to live on a reasonable budget.

    --
    Just another day in Paradise
  100. Re:I quit... Obamacare may be imperfect, but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    from my point of view the critical POSITIVE is that cost aside, I CAN actually buy health insurance.

    I lost my Corporate job in 2015. I have medical 'history'. Before the Affordable Care Act, once Cobra ran out I probably would have been unable to buy insurance at all. Under the assumption of the continued availability of coverage under ACA, I have been building up my own independent enterprise.

    Trump says he favors retaining the prohibition against insurance disqualification for preexisting conditions. I hope so... Expensive insurance gets built in to the consulting rates. "I'm sorry, but you might actually USE it, so No Insurance for You" probably destroys my business, and puts me back in someone else's cube.

    I understand the viewpoint of those who complain "I'm healthy why should I pay for your problems", but think that viewpoint flawed. Consider that most people who have medical issues were themselves once healthy and may in many cases become so again (my own surgery was 12 years ago, I am now doing quite well, thanks for asking).

    The infrastructure (physical, institutional and financial) needs to be built and maintained so that if you DO need it, it is there. That costs money. In the USA, it costs far too much vs the rest of the developed world, but we must deal with the world as it is until change is made to happen.