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

The Money/Time fallacy

thoughts.maayank.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 42 posts

Re: The Money/Time fallacy

#21

Post by frankus »

My first question when considering outsourcing a task is this: is it a chore or a project?

A project is some usually non-recurring task in a field that I enjoy and/or would like to get better at. A chore is some usually recurring task in a field that I either don't enjoy or see no need to improve my skills in.

My advice is to outsource chores (to the extent that you can afford) and prefer a DIY approach to projects (to the extent that you have time).

Chores can usually be outsourced at a profit, since they can often take advantage of economies of scale (e.g. a lawn maintenance service can afford really nice mowers that work even on long or wet grass and that do the work of two or three push-behind mowers).

Re: The Money/Time fallacy

#22

Post by stephengillie »

grecy wrote: post #18

I agree 100% and would even expand the idea a little further. Let's say I make $100/hr at my job. My car breaks down, and it's only $80/hr for a mechanic to fix it. Seems smart. Now my deck needs repainting, and it's $30/hr for someone else to paint it. Gardening? $20/hr. Washing machine broken? $50/hr. Daycare? $30/hr. Housecleaning? $30/hr... etc. etc. etc. Because I'm a Software Engineer, pretty much every service…

Transport, work clothes, work lunch, daycare and even rent/mortgage# must be paid simply to go to work.

I disagree on work clothes and rent, and transport to some extent. You must wear some clothes and have some shelter, and you eventually will need to travel somewhere, even if just to the store for food.

Re: The Money/Time fallacy

#23

Post by grecy »

stephengillie wrote: post #22
grecy wrote: post #18

I agree 100% and would even expand the idea a little further. Let's say I make $100/hr at my job. My car breaks down, and it's only $80/hr for a mechanic to fix it. Seems smart. Now my deck needs repainting, and it's $30/hr for someone else to paint it. Gardening? $20/hr. Washing machine broken? $50/hr. Daycare? $30/hr. Housecleaning? $30/hr... etc. etc. etc. Because I'm a Software Engineer, pretty much every service…

Transport, work clothes, work lunch, daycare and even rent/mortgage# must be paid simply to go to work. I disagree on work clothes and rent, and transport to some extent. You must wear some clothes and have some shelter, and you eventually will need to travel somewhere, even if just to the store for food.

Agree. My point is that all those costs are much higher when you go to work.

Re: The Money/Time fallacy

#24

Post by grecy »

dfxm12 wrote: post #3
stephengillie wrote: post #2

I refuse to peg every remaining second of my existence to the highest hourly rate someone else will pay me for it. I won't say "My time is valued at $XX per hour, so it makes sense to pay $XX for someone else to do this." Valuing all time at an hourly rate is logical if a human is trying to maximize the amount of money made across their life - since you could theoretically pay for this task to be done while working,…

Eventually, you will come across a situation where you need to decide if you will "work" in your free time (painting your house, mowing your lawn, etc), or if you will pay someone to do this so that you can free up your own time to "maximize life enjoyment". The time = money equation isn't just about always earning money, it's about cost savings & cost avoidance as well. You have to decide, what makes you happiest? I…

> you might even pay a premium to have someone paint your house for you.

Until paying for stuff starts to mean you have to go to work more, thus cutting into your "free" time from the other direction. i.e. you're not spending your "free" time painting your house, you're spending it working to pay someone else to paint your house.

Re: The Money/Time fallacy

#25

Post by [deleted] »

grecy wrote: post #23
stephengillie wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Transport, work clothes, work lunch, daycare and even rent/mortgage# must be paid simply to go to work. I disagree on work clothes and rent, and transport to some extent. You must wear some clothes and have some shelter, and you eventually will need to travel somewhere, even if just to the store for food.

Agree. My point is that all those costs are much higher when you go to work.

[deleted]

Re: The Money/Time fallacy

#26

Post by tvjunky »

maayank wrote: post #8
dfxm12 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eventually, you will come across a situation where you need to decide if you will "work" in your free time (painting your house, mowing your lawn, etc), or if you will pay someone to do this so that you can free up your own time to "maximize life enjoyment". The time = money equation isn't just about always earning money, it's about cost savings & cost avoidance as well. You have to decide, what makes you happiest? I…

You have to decide, what makes you happiest? If it is freeing up your time to do something else, then you might even pay a premium to have someone paint your house for you. Exactly, ultimately these are all pathways to the same question/answer.

So if you understand that opportunity cost is in fact about choice and trade off, why did you leave out the core of the principal? Focusing only on the money in this DIY / "pay for it" argument is what make it a fallacy. If you change your car repair example so that Don makes much less per hour than the repair cost. It still might make sense for Don to pay the mechanic to do the repair. Only Don can make that choice. Anyone one else is just giving their opinion.

Re: The Money/Time fallacy

#28

Post by maayank »

tvjunky wrote: post #26
maayank wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to decide, what makes you happiest? If it is freeing up your time to do something else, then you might even pay a premium to have someone paint your house for you. Exactly, ultimately these are all pathways to the same question/answer.

So if you understand that opportunity cost is in fact about choice and trade off, why did you leave out the core of the principal? Focusing only on the money in this DIY / "pay for it" argument is what make it a fallacy. If you change your car repair example so that Don makes much less per hour than the repair cost. It still might make sense for Don to pay the mechanic to do the repair. Only Don can make that choice.…

It's not a post about "The Only Ultimate Way to self-realization". It's a post about "given this statement I often hear, here where it works (and how to improve on it), here where it doesn't". If it doesn't work because of different reasons then:

a. Good, please contribute to the discussion

b. Different reasons resonate with different people. Therefore someone's "core of the principal" isn't the other's.

Re: The Money/Time fallacy

#29

Post by maayank »

eevilspock wrote: post #20
maayank wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly this article about the value of your life is written by an accountant, or at least someone who sees things as a bean-counter does. This assumes he holds that exact idea to which he replies in the article and that he holds it true to all things in life. At some point you do need to face outsourcing a chore or doing it yourself. I for example see no learning/entrainment value out of cleaning my apartment for the…

[Are you pretending that you are not the author?] But that's not what your article was about! You weren't pushing a rough awareness of opportunity cost, you were saying that it's a "fallacy" because in most cases you can't calculate it down to the penny. See my other comments. I for example see no learning/entrainment value out of cleaning my apartment What about the value of a less stratified society? Ever see Metro…

But that's not what your article was about!

First, relax. No need for name calling (in your earlier comment), no need for getting overly excited with exclamation marks. Maybe there's a case to be made for better authorship and I welcome feedback, but as an honest suggestion please read http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html. It is very helpful as a guideline for making constructive criticism.

Second, different reasons for why the principle doesn't hold water resonate with different people. If it doesn't resonate with you because some other reasons seem to you more profound then please add to the discussion (as you've done in different comments), just be wary to do it well even when very passionate about the subject.

Re: The Money/Time fallacy

#30

Post by eevilspock »

eevilspock wrote: post #20
maayank wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly this article about the value of your life is written by an accountant, or at least someone who sees things as a bean-counter does. This assumes he holds that exact idea to which he replies in the article and that he holds it true to all things in life. At some point you do need to face outsourcing a chore or doing it yourself. I for example see no learning/entrainment value out of cleaning my apartment for the…

[Are you pretending that you are not the author?] But that's not what your article was about! You weren't pushing a rough awareness of opportunity cost, you were saying that it's a "fallacy" because in most cases you can't calculate it down to the penny. See my other comments. I for example see no learning/entrainment value out of cleaning my apartment What about the value of a less stratified society? Ever see Metro…

"Written by an accountant, or at least someone who sees things as a bean-counter does" is not "name calling". It's an accurate expression of my reaction, which is a fair characterization of the voice of your article. Though PG is not god, feel free to ask him.

It's certainly no worse than "overly excited", which is a pretty lame dismissal of both my points and my passion. The exclamation point was incredulousness at your non-sequitor, you being the author of the article and the instigator of this whole thread.

Post reply on HN