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

On Time, Money and Health

todaypurpose.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 73 posts

Re: On Time, Money and Health

#31

Post by wmwmwm »

rheide wrote: post #7

I love cycling. Did my first solo touring cycling trip over ten years ago when I was in my twenties. I've done a cycling trip every couple of years since then, until I got a mortgage. Then I started focusing on my career and kept delaying the next trip, thinking "next year will be the year that I'll make time for it". Now I'm approaching my 40s, I have a medical condition that limits the enjoyment I get out of cyclin…

It used to make me sad that by the time my kids were old enough to cycle up big mountains, I might be too old/unfit to join them... but the massive growth in the last few years of electric bikes (mountain and road) makes me really excited that I actually might be able to keep up. I don't know if e-bikes would help given your condition, but if you haven't tried one, it might be worth a shot - they're amazing

Re: On Time, Money and Health

#32

Post by andi999 »

WJW wrote: post #30
alexpetralia wrote: post #4

One of my friends opined that if most people (limited to people on this forum, let's say) rationally priced in their future earnings, they'd be in debt more often, for longer and earlier in their life. The naive algorithm of "save as much as possible" might land high-earners with a huge nest egg they end up carrying to their grave. I think I agree with that.

> a huge nest egg they end up carrying to their grave Oh no! The tragedy of not spending everything you own! Sarcasm aside though, almost everyone will mispredict how much they are likely to earn in their lifetime and the opinion of your friend falters a bit in the presence of significant randomness. Estimating your future earnings too low is not really a problem, estimating too high can lead to serious problems when…

I am shocked as well that intergenerational wealth building is not a thing. I mean do people really think 'I was poor/had to earn everything so my kids should have it the same way'?

Re: On Time, Money and Health

#33

Post by andi999 »

namdnay wrote: post #28
TeMPOraL wrote: post #16

I've been recently thinking a lot along the lines of this article, which is why I was surprised to see this being given, as positive advice: > Make that extra money work for you. Invest into diversified index funds so you can use the power of compound interest, and use that “free money” in the later stage of your life. The earlier you invest, the better it is. It surprised me because what prompted me to think about t…

The average return of the MSCI World index since creation is more than 10% I believe… And for a long term investment the risk is minimal (there has never been a negative period of more than 8 years)

Housing market also never went down (I stopped reading news early 2008 though).

Re: On Time, Money and Health

#34

Post by kaycebasques »

Thinking of my life as a tradeoff between time, energy, and money [1] was a key factor towards my decision to take a 1-year sabbatical as of June. Similar to that trope about working with contractors: "time, quality, cost: pick 2" (i.e. we can do the work fast and high-quality but it will cost you a lot; we can do it high-quality and cheap but it will take a long time; we can do it cheap and fast but the quality will be low).

[1] https://kayce.basqu.es/sabbatical/prologue#tradeoffs

Re: On Time, Money and Health

#35

Post by pjc50 »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #16

I've been recently thinking a lot along the lines of this article, which is why I was surprised to see this being given, as positive advice: > Make that extra money work for you. Invest into diversified index funds so you can use the power of compound interest, and use that “free money” in the later stage of your life. The earlier you invest, the better it is. It surprised me because what prompted me to think about t…

Bank interest rates are near zero. Return rates on assets are much larger. Many Londoners are out-earned by their houses, especially once you take tax into account.

Re: On Time, Money and Health

#36

Post by pjc50 »

andi999 wrote: post #32
WJW wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a huge nest egg they end up carrying to their grave Oh no! The tragedy of not spending everything you own! Sarcasm aside though, almost everyone will mispredict how much they are likely to earn in their lifetime and the opinion of your friend falters a bit in the presence of significant randomness. Estimating your future earnings too low is not really a problem, estimating too high can lead to serious problems when…

I am shocked as well that intergenerational wealth building is not a thing. I mean do people really think 'I was poor/had to earn everything so my kids should have it the same way'?

Not everybody even wants to have kids. shrug

Also, the only companies who put intergenerational wealth building into their advertising material are the expensive watch manufacturers.

Re: On Time, Money and Health

#37

Post by anonyfox »

kaycebasques wrote: post #34

Thinking of my life as a tradeoff between time, energy, and money [1] was a key factor towards my decision to take a 1-year sabbatical as of June. Similar to that trope about working with contractors: "time, quality, cost: pick 2" (i.e. we can do the work fast and high-quality but it will cost you a lot; we can do it high-quality and cheap but it will take a long time; we can do it cheap and fast but the quality will…

*up to two

Re: On Time, Money and Health

#38

Post by pjc50 »

alexpetralia wrote: post #4

One of my friends opined that if most people (limited to people on this forum, let's say) rationally priced in their future earnings, they'd be in debt more often, for longer and earlier in their life. The naive algorithm of "save as much as possible" might land high-earners with a huge nest egg they end up carrying to their grave. I think I agree with that.

> rationally priced in their future earnings, they'd be in debt more often, for longer and earlier in their life

Future generations may not be offered a choice in this. After all, why should student debt start at age 18 and not age 5? Ouch.

Re: On Time, Money and Health

#39

Post by roland35 »

alexpetralia wrote: post #4

One of my friends opined that if most people (limited to people on this forum, let's say) rationally priced in their future earnings, they'd be in debt more often, for longer and earlier in their life. The naive algorithm of "save as much as possible" might land high-earners with a huge nest egg they end up carrying to their grave. I think I agree with that.

I think it is good to be conservative with your retirement savings though! It is much better to leave behind a large estate for your children/charities/whatever than risk spending the last years of your life pennyless due to a market crash or large medical expenses.

Re: On Time, Money and Health

#40

Post by kaycebasques »

anonyfox wrote: post #37
kaycebasques wrote: post #34

Thinking of my life as a tradeoff between time, energy, and money [1] was a key factor towards my decision to take a 1-year sabbatical as of June. Similar to that trope about working with contractors: "time, quality, cost: pick 2" (i.e. we can do the work fast and high-quality but it will cost you a lot; we can do it high-quality and cheap but it will take a long time; we can do it cheap and fast but the quality will…

*up to two

Fair point: getting 2 is the best case scenario!
Post reply on HN