Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Fuck you, Money

adgrok.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 116 posts

Re: Fuck you, Money

#71

Post by nostrademons »

wensing wrote: post #39
nostrademons wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What technology worker spends all day worrying about survival? It's not hard to save up a couple years living expenses on a software engineer salary, and it's not hard to find another job (or even found a successful company) if you have a couple years to do it.

With or without kids + family? I don't worry about those things, but 'it's not hard to save up a couple years living expenses' depends a lot on your ... dependents.

My experience is without kids, but it applies with kids as well. Half of American families manage to get by on $50K/year or less. If you make $100K/year and live like that, then for every year you work, you've saved up a year of security. That even assumes that your spouse doesn't work.

Whether you will do this depends a lot on your priorities. Some people want to get their kids the best toys, clothes, and vacations that money will buy. Others would rather give them the gift of parents that are not totally stressed out and have time to make it to their soccer games. There's not a right answer to this, but as someone whose family's household income hovered around the $50K mark for most of my childhood, I can say that you don't really suffer from not being able to afford a trip to Europe every summer.

Re: Fuck you, Money

#72

Post by lg »

steveklabnik wrote: post #65
kscaldef wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Wage slave" is always, in my experience, used in one of two derogatory ways: 1) In the original usage, as a condemnation of the whole capitalist system, or 2) In the sense that's more common in this crowd, to describe anyone who doesn't want to be a startup founder. Applied to technology workers (typically privileged & upper middle class), the term is offensive on multiple levels.

Even if tech workers are upper middle class, that doesn't mean that they're not bound to their job. The conditions may be better, it's true, but if they lost their job, they'd end up just as destitute. I only say this because it's something I've though a lot about recently, mostly while investigating the arguments of usage #1 up there. My parents are solidly middle class; but for most of my childhood, they basically…

You're still a cash slave. But calling people these names is silly.

Re: Fuck you, Money

#73

Post by steveklabnik »

rfrey wrote: post #68
steveklabnik wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can leave your job, sure. And then default on your mortgage. Or be unable to pay your rent. And not be able to buy food. (or, if you mean "leave America," then you can move somewhere else... and you _still_ have to either work for yourself, or for someone else.) There's an illusion of choice, but choosing to work between McDonalds and Burger King isn't really a choice.

Freedom is not the same as having no responsibilities. Slavery is not the same as having responsibilities. Environmental constraints are not the same as having no choices. Consequences for one's choices are not the same as oppression.

I'm not saying that you shouldn't work to eat; just that working for someone else isn't preferable to working for yourself.

It's much more efficient, you get to keep all of your economic output, rather than giving it to someone else.

Re: Fuck you, Money

#74

Post by steveklabnik »

kscaldef wrote: post #67
steveklabnik wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if tech workers are upper middle class, that doesn't mean that they're not bound to their job. The conditions may be better, it's true, but if they lost their job, they'd end up just as destitute. I only say this because it's something I've though a lot about recently, mostly while investigating the arguments of usage #1 up there. My parents are solidly middle class; but for most of my childhood, they basically…

I could quit my job right now. I'd need to get another one eventually, maybe in 6 months, maybe in a year, depending on how tightly I budgeted myself. I've chosen to live within my means; to build up enough savings that I don't need to be terrified of losing my job. I'd venture to say that virtually any other tech worker could do the same. If you feel bound to your job, and that you're at imminent risk of becoming de…

Just because your in a better situation, and are on the way to pulling yourself up out of wage slavery doesn't mean that you're not still in the situation that you're in.

I had an analogy here to drug dealers working their way out of a ghetto, and decided it was slightly hyperbolic.

Re: Fuck you, Money

#75

Post by steveklabnik »

lg wrote: post #72
steveklabnik wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if tech workers are upper middle class, that doesn't mean that they're not bound to their job. The conditions may be better, it's true, but if they lost their job, they'd end up just as destitute. I only say this because it's something I've though a lot about recently, mostly while investigating the arguments of usage #1 up there. My parents are solidly middle class; but for most of my childhood, they basically…

You're still a cash slave. But calling people these names is silly.

It's not silly. It's important to think about the situation that you're in, and try to improve.

Re: Fuck you, Money

#76

Post by thrdOriginal »

scott_s wrote: post #20
kscaldef wrote: post #16

I have to say, I nearly threw this article across the proverbial room after reading the second paragraph: > Before that point, you’re just adding frosting on the lifestyle cake of your wage-slave existence. Beyond that point, you can forget about aspirational consumer buying of 48-inch flat-panel TVs. You suddenly confront the most existential questions in human life: what do I do with my life? What’s a good life? No…

I think perhaps you're interpreting what he wrote too harshly. I took it to mean that once you have FU money, you have to confront these questions because there's nothing left for you to worry about. Much of our time and mental effort is spent dealing with and worrying about survival. (Not survival in the hunter-gatherer sense, but making sure you have enough money in the next few days/weeks/months/years to live on.)…

I remember one of my favorite philosophy professors talking about the various philosophers' ideas of "first philosophy", where first philosophy meant which philosophy is the root of all other philosophy (e.g. for Aristotle it is Metaphysics). Midway through the lecture the professor finally said something along the lines of "...this is nice and all, but what really should be first philosophy is figuring out a way to live in this world such that you can concern yourself with philosophy at all." I agree.

Re: Fuck you, Money

#77

Post by oziumjinx »

nostrademons wrote: post #71
wensing wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With or without kids + family? I don't worry about those things, but 'it's not hard to save up a couple years living expenses' depends a lot on your ... dependents.

My experience is without kids, but it applies with kids as well. Half of American families manage to get by on $50K/year or less. If you make $100K/year and live like that, then for every year you work, you've saved up a year of security. That even assumes that your spouse doesn't work. Whether you will do this depends a lot on your priorities. Some people want to get their kids the best toys, clothes, and vacations…

$50k a year in salary doesnt sound like enough to send your kids to college with their tuition paid for. Being able to do that enables them to not have to worry about student loans and decades of debt after they graduate. IMHO, that is something to strive for.

Re: Fuck you, Money

#78

Post by nostrademons »

oziumjinx wrote: post #77
nostrademons wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My experience is without kids, but it applies with kids as well. Half of American families manage to get by on $50K/year or less. If you make $100K/year and live like that, then for every year you work, you've saved up a year of security. That even assumes that your spouse doesn't work. Whether you will do this depends a lot on your priorities. Some people want to get their kids the best toys, clothes, and vacations…

$50k a year in salary doesnt sound like enough to send your kids to college with their tuition paid for. Being able to do that enables them to not have to worry about student loans and decades of debt after they graduate. IMHO, that is something to strive for.

It's not - I had virtually no college savings when I went to college, my parents borrowed almost the full amount (mostly in their names, so that my sister and I would be mostly debt-free when we graduated). Five years after graduation, it's paid off in full.

$50K/year is, however, low enough that you can get some really generous financial aid if you manage to get into an elite college. Nowadays it'll give you a full ride at Stanford/MIT/Amherst; in my time it was more like a 2/3-ride. Or a full-ride merit scholarship at a state school, if you could otherwise get into an elite college.

Also, weren't we talking about making $100K/year and spending like you have $50K/year? If you do that, in 4 years you've got your kid's college education fund.

Re: Fuck you, Money

#79

Post by cabalamat »

jdietrich wrote: post #28
frossie wrote: post #6

the reality is you’re doomed if you’re even asking yourself the question. You know what I think? I think people who tell themselves ‘if I make $X million, then I’ll stop working and do what I want’ never make that $X million. I'm not sure the OP has grasped the complete psychology of FU money. Surely the value of FU money is not to allow one to stop working, it is in the emotional pay-off for the security it represen…

In the world of high-stakes poker, it is commonly understood that the only way to make a million dollars playing poker is not to want to make a million dollars. If you care about the money, your lizard brain takes over and stops you from taking the risks you need to take. As soon as you see the chips on the table as dollar bills, you're finished. Practically the definition of greatness in poker is the ability to play…

> In the world of high-stakes poker, it is commonly understood that the only way to make a million dollars playing poker is not to want to make a million dollars.

Hence the saying; never play poker with scared money.

Re: Fuck you, Money

#80

Post by akeefer »

nostrademons wrote: post #71
wensing wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With or without kids + family? I don't worry about those things, but 'it's not hard to save up a couple years living expenses' depends a lot on your ... dependents.

My experience is without kids, but it applies with kids as well. Half of American families manage to get by on $50K/year or less. If you make $100K/year and live like that, then for every year you work, you've saved up a year of security. That even assumes that your spouse doesn't work. Whether you will do this depends a lot on your priorities. Some people want to get their kids the best toys, clothes, and vacations…

Keep in mind that taxes and such scale non-linearly with income: if you make $100k a year, you'll take home less than 2x what you'd take home making $50k a year. It doesn't invalidate your argument by any means, but it's something worth mentioning.
Post reply on HN