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

The real use of money is to buy freedom

paraschopra.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 303 posts

Re: The real use of money is to buy freedom

#161

Post by cpher »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #111
guard-of-terra wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's so terribly wrong about those scenes? After applying cinema discount. They don't drink your juice in the USA? I will pick middle-class Indian over poor American every day, because: you won't get shot, you won't land in prison, you won't have to work three jobs for funny money, you'll have a real family and your children won't do drugs. Instead you'll be raking in some respect.

I live in Iowa; those things you mention are the comic-book version of America. Nobody is shooting anybody around here; only college students end up in jail, overnight, when they leave the bars at 2AM and wander in the streets and might hurt themselves.

I lived in rural Iowa for 4 years and currently live in inner-city southside Chicago. The contrast could not be more dramatic. It's not "comic-book" to describe certain neighborhoods like this. However, Iowans (and other midwesterners) are extremely sheltered from the lethal combination of drugs, no family structure, poor schools, etc.

Re: The real use of money is to buy freedom

#162

Post by benched »

coldtea wrote: post #144
dbecker wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real problem is: This additional freedom you can buy with money means less freedom for somebody else. This assumes that wealth is a zero-sum game, so it can be traded around but not created. It's hard to reconcile that view with the fact that standards-of-living have been growing, more or less worldwide , for the two centuries.

> This assumes that wealth is a zero-sum game, so it can be traded around but not created. And it very much is. > It's hard to reconcile that view with the fact that standards-of-living have been growing, more or less worldwide, for the two centuries. Those are not personal wealth. Increased standards of living are a kind of background element, as they are more or less shared by the population. Statistically they eve…

This trope is so tired. Yes, I live better than a medieval peasant, and I have access to more computing power than ever. Yet, the standard of living across my entire family and most people I know is blatantly lower, in terms of human basics like housing and togetherness, than in my grandparents time, despite the fact that my grandparents were factory workers without even high school educations, and I am an experienced software engineer.

Re: The real use of money is to buy freedom

#163

Post by malandrew »

coldtea wrote: post #142
miles wrote: post #21

Tim O'Reilly on money: It’s easy to get caught up in the heady buzz of making money. You should regard money as fuel for what you really want to do, not as a goal in and of itself. Money is like gas in the car — you need to pay attention or you’ll end up on the side of the road — but a well-lived life is not a tour of gas stations! Source: http://radar.oreilly.com/2009/01/work-on-stuff-that-matters-...

> You should regard money as fuel for what you really want to do, not as a goal in and of itself. A little ironic coming from Tim, who cheapened the whole publishing house he had built, and then added those horrible techno-babble conferences for quick bucks.

Does he still have control of the company or has his interest in it diluted to the point where he can no longer commit to the highest quality?

Re: The real use of money is to buy freedom

#164

Post by dasil003 »

sokoloff wrote: post #63
gchokov wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, just create a blank web page with black font saying "it's never going to be enough, give this thought up". Reminds me of another saying that software development time is never enough, except when you have hard borders and deadlines with the right priorities and vision - it will take exactly that time. Getting more money loosens the borders - you buy better houses, better cars, have bigger family, make bigger inve…

That's true to a point for everyone: that having more money from a low starting point primarily increases lifestyle. But as you add more and more money, I think that most people reach a turning point where "enough really is enough" and their worries about money truly diminish, but that lifestyle stops increasing. As I've grown in my own career, for sure my lifestyle increased. I literally subsisted on Ramen and $2 fr…

I actively worry about this and I'm skeptical of your thesis that people will naturally reach a point of "enough really is enough". Even in your own story you are saying that you have enough now, but up until this point your expenses have grown to meet your income. The same is true for me, and I worry that it will always be so. I tend to believe that the majority of people will continue to grow with their income to very high numbers. I don't see the majority of people making $1M/year living a comfortable $250k/year lifestyle and investing/donating the rest. Some yes, but certainly nowhere near 50%.

Re: The real use of money is to buy freedom

#165

Post by sanoli »

hkmurakami wrote: post #50
dsirijus wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I went a similar road (from $50 a month in an underground windowless garage with no utilities whatsoever, to a 200m2 penthouse). I'd put an accent on your point #2 - it really makes a huge difference to just shoot up some money into trivialities and mundane annoyances in your life just to make them magically go away. Because there's so many of them, most cannot afford that. I'd like to add a point though, maybe the m…

Was #6 because of how you dressed, or because you could host events at your new place, or some other factors? I'm curious since I have some acquaintances who are morbidly afraid of having members of the opposite sex approach them for their substantial wealth. They go out of their way to mask their material status.

Just get the 200m2 penthouse and you can stop worrying about #6 ;)

Re: The real use of money is to buy freedom

#166

Post by malandrew »

gress wrote: post #152
randallsquared wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both can be true at once. The richest are farther ahead than the richest were, in monetary terms, but the poor have made huge strides in absolute wealth as well: it's possible to live a 1950s upper middle class lifestyle on almost the same dollar amount in 2013. Our idea of what a middle-class lifestyle entails, though, is now far above that.

A 1950's upper middle class lifestyle involved owning a relatively large house, and sane working hours with in many cases only one wage earner. It's simply false that you can live this way today on the same dollar amount.

Even in among the lower middle class lifestyles, you'd have exactly the same minus the "relatively large house".

However, if you go back 50 years earlier, the lower class lifestyle was not that different from the favella living in slums around the world, where entire families lived in one or two rooms and everyone in the family who was able was responsible for contributing to making ends meet.

Re: The real use of money is to buy freedom

#167

Post by coldtea »

benched wrote: post #162
coldtea wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This assumes that wealth is a zero-sum game, so it can be traded around but not created. And it very much is. > It's hard to reconcile that view with the fact that standards-of-living have been growing, more or less worldwide, for the two centuries. Those are not personal wealth. Increased standards of living are a kind of background element, as they are more or less shared by the population. Statistically they eve…

This trope is so tired. Yes, I live better than a medieval peasant, and I have access to more computing power than ever. Yet, the standard of living across my entire family and most people I know is blatantly lower, in terms of human basics like housing and togetherness, than in my grandparents time, despite the fact that my grandparents were factory workers without even high school educations, and I am an experience…

I think we are in agreement!

I only gave the example to say that what's basic is relative (compared to current standards), so saying that a trailer-park person has more access to more things than a peasant doesn't mean anything.

Re: The real use of money is to buy freedom

#168

Post by agonz253 »

coldtea wrote: post #144
dbecker wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real problem is: This additional freedom you can buy with money means less freedom for somebody else. This assumes that wealth is a zero-sum game, so it can be traded around but not created. It's hard to reconcile that view with the fact that standards-of-living have been growing, more or less worldwide , for the two centuries.

> This assumes that wealth is a zero-sum game, so it can be traded around but not created. And it very much is. > It's hard to reconcile that view with the fact that standards-of-living have been growing, more or less worldwide, for the two centuries. Those are not personal wealth. Increased standards of living are a kind of background element, as they are more or less shared by the population. Statistically they eve…

>This assumes that wealth is a zero-sum game, so it can be traded around but not created.

>And it very much is.

You may be confusing wealth with money, which is in fact a zero-sum game. Wealth, on the other hand, can be created and it's been constantly created all the time throughout history. The section on the Pie Fallacy in this article may help clarify it: http://paulgraham.com/wealth.html

Re: The real use of money is to buy freedom

#169

Post by JoeAltmaier »

cpher wrote: post #161
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in Iowa; those things you mention are the comic-book version of America. Nobody is shooting anybody around here; only college students end up in jail, overnight, when they leave the bars at 2AM and wander in the streets and might hurt themselves.

I lived in rural Iowa for 4 years and currently live in inner-city southside Chicago. The contrast could not be more dramatic. It's not "comic-book" to describe certain neighborhoods like this. However, Iowans (and other midwesterners) are extremely sheltered from the lethal combination of drugs, no family structure, poor schools, etc.

Sheltered = have a stable community and a strong work ethic? To say we're 'sheltered' is similar to, say, the way a lighthouse is 'sheltered' by being built of the right stuff and having a strong foundation.

Re: The real use of money is to buy freedom

#170

Post by dragonwriter »

agonz253 wrote: post #168
coldtea wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This assumes that wealth is a zero-sum game, so it can be traded around but not created. And it very much is. > It's hard to reconcile that view with the fact that standards-of-living have been growing, more or less worldwide, for the two centuries. Those are not personal wealth. Increased standards of living are a kind of background element, as they are more or less shared by the population. Statistically they eve…

>This assumes that wealth is a zero-sum game, so it can be traded around but not created. >And it very much is. You may be confusing wealth with money, which is in fact a zero-sum game. Wealth, on the other hand, can be created and it's been constantly created all the time throughout history. The section on the Pie Fallacy in this article may help clarify it: http://paulgraham.com/wealth.html

> You may be confusing wealth with money, which is in fact a zero-sum game. Wealth, on the other hand, can be created

So can money.

Neither wealth nor money is zero-sum.

Post reply on HN