101–110 of 215 posts
Isn't the "billion dollars destroyed" argument he makes just the broken window fallacy in reverse?
He invokes Excel as an analytical engine several times in this story. I am trying to figure out if he actually considers it to be a powerful statistical engine, or if he is merely using it synecdochically for the benefit of non-technical readers, in order to represent statistical software more generally.
The 'Solver' ( http://www.solver.com/ ) tool in Excel is widely used for many business optimization problems. If you have x & y quantities of two raw materials and products A and B consume different proportions of each raw material, then you can use the solver to determine the most optimal production strategy that maximizes your profit (or minimizes your labor requirements etc.)
Even better perhaps: "you only know that someone else will know it when they see it".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I wonder how many children get sent to college by dads like that. Given the amazing human capacity to rationalize everything, I would guess -- a lot.
I would guess a lot, too- because human beings are by nature hypocrites.
I'm so sorry for pointing this out, I loved the article, but was surprised that no one else raised issue with: "Like downloading MP3s, it was a victimless crime." After all these years we know better than to say this carelessly. Is stealing code from a hardworking programmer a victimless crime?
In his own reasoning "I’ve come to the conclusion that having a father who can pay for a top-notch education outweighs the disadvantage of being raised by a hypocrite."
Acting as if financial success equates to dishonesty. While in the very same piece the author praises free market, and money in exchange for true value does not compute. Does he believe, or not believe in the power of a free market, or has he come to develop a disbelief in honest trading?
He invokes Excel as an analytical engine several times in this story. I am trying to figure out if he actually considers it to be a powerful statistical engine, or if he is merely using it synecdochically for the benefit of non-technical readers, in order to represent statistical software more generally.
In high school there was a girl in my class that preferre to do everything in excel. And that included writing papers, because it made the formatting easy.
Isn't the headline offer he's talking about, which he goes into at the end, really just a very standard clause in a layoff agreement?
No, it really isn't. Not at any of the small businesses I ever worked for, where the guys at the top probably decide these things themselves. Not at a very, very large business I worked for, where the guys at the top probably didn't know the name of anyone in my building and everything was done by HR and Legal automatons. And not at any medium sized businesses I have ever worked for, either. The only time an agreemen…
"At my salary level, and with my expected advancement path, I could comfortably retire in my thirties." I've heard this or statements like it in quite a few articles over the years, but I've never actually met a retired thirties business consultant. Do they exist and am I just missing them? The only ones I know are well into their thirties, working 70+ hours a week, and looking forward to making even larger boatloads…
That actually undermines his main point -- that he stuck to his "morals" and forgone the "large" hush money check at the end. If he was making enough to retire by his 30s then $16k wasn't that significant of an amount. That means the didn't really lose a lot so his "moral" stance is more symbolic, and not the tough financial decision that article might imply.
So I'd say his main point wasn't "look at me, I stuck to my morals" but "I'm corruptible but not infinitely corruptible". (The reason for mentioning the $16k in the title isn't to say "look how much money I turned down" but to say "look how much money they offered me for this".)
"At my salary level, and with my expected advancement path, I could comfortably retire in my thirties." I've heard this or statements like it in quite a few articles over the years, but I've never actually met a retired thirties business consultant. Do they exist and am I just missing them? The only ones I know are well into their thirties, working 70+ hours a week, and looking forward to making even larger boatloads…
After 10-15 years at one of the top consultancies you could have completed outright the major capital purchases of your life (e.g. a house or two, maybe a boat) and could downshift to something much less stressful but you certainly couldn't stop working altogether. And these houses would be nice, sure, but we're not talking mansions with helicopter pads and servants here. Basically you would be established in a solid upper-middle-class lifestyle, but you would still need to work to maintain it.
The consulting business pays very good wages, but you don't get to build any significant equity - what you need to retire on - until and unless you make partner.