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

Derek Sivers and the Art of Enough

brendancahill.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 84 posts

Re: Derek Sivers and the Art of Enough

#71

Post by bob33212 »

war1025 wrote: post #7

I remember when I was in college trying to figure out what to shoot for in life, I had the realization that if you shoot for "more" it's a goal you'll never reach. There is no end to it. But if you shoot for "enough", there is a very definite point between "more than enough" and "not enough". It's a nice goal to shoot for. When you are above "enough", it means you can relax and enjoy life.

But then you have to answer the question of what makes you happy. For some people buying an ocean front house and fishing or playing golf all day is the answer. But for the successful entrepreneur type that isn't "enough" usually

Re: Derek Sivers and the Art of Enough

#72

Post by freddie_mercury »

sjg007 wrote: post #67
lukego wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He also acquired a second nationality, renounced US citizenship, and moved to a country that doesn't tax foreign sourced passive income. It's the most extreme example I've seen of planning your whole life around tax optimization. Understandable though if you've read his book because he's had big problems with the IRS in the past and probably really wanted to show them his "FU money."

I was under the impression that the US does not allow you to revoke your citizenship purely for tax reasons.

It doesn't but all that means is the form for renouncing has a checkbox asking "are you doing this for tax reasons"? And you check "no". Then during the consular interview you spew some line about how you no longer have attachments to the US -- "I haven't been back in over 3 years, own no property, let my driver's license expire" and you do have attachments in your new country "All my friends are here and I even spend Christmas here!"

It is more of a retroactive "if we find out later you lied we now have a legal basis to add extra penalties" but in practice nobody is really checking or cares. The underfunded IRS doesn't care about the tiny number renouncing and the consular officials doing the interview certainly don't care.

Re: Derek Sivers and the Art of Enough

#73

Post by war1025 »

bob33212 wrote: post #71
war1025 wrote: post #7

I remember when I was in college trying to figure out what to shoot for in life, I had the realization that if you shoot for "more" it's a goal you'll never reach. There is no end to it. But if you shoot for "enough", there is a very definite point between "more than enough" and "not enough". It's a nice goal to shoot for. When you are above "enough", it means you can relax and enjoy life.

But then you have to answer the question of what makes you happy. For some people buying an ocean front house and fishing or playing golf all day is the answer. But for the successful entrepreneur type that isn't "enough" usually

> But then you have to answer the question of what makes you happy.

Self-introspection and awareness are helpful basically always, in my opinion.

If you don't know what you want, you'll never be satisfied.

Re: Derek Sivers and the Art of Enough

#74

Post by rapind »

DennisP wrote: post #49
rapind wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with this thinking is that only those privileged enough to take advantage of it get to pick how their tax money is spent. I disagree with (even despise) some of the ways government spends our money, but should I get to choose like some special snowflake while most don't have the same opportunity? This just enforces a rigged economy... and guess what? Many of the privileged few would support government pro…

I would certainly prefer a government that doesn't spend money on horrific things at all. It'd be great if I could pay my taxes without feeling dirty. I'm hopeful that maybe, with a lot of hard work and creativity, we'll manage to fix our democracy. But in the meantime, I don't think there's anything morally wrong about legally reducing taxes and sending the money to charity instead. I'd even argue that, since privil…

I'm criticising the system more than the individual. That being said, I've noticed that people will rail against big brother and all these rules and yet turn around and take advantage of any flaw in the system because they can (everyone else is doing it!). Proving that we need hyper-specific and cumbersome rules because no one is capable of policing themselves.

Re: Derek Sivers and the Art of Enough

#75

Post by cheez »

sjg007 wrote: post #66
tw04 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what's the path from living with 4 other people working 40 hours a week at McDonald's to filthy rich? Haven't gone to college, don't have a skill that sets you apart (music/art/etc), and aren't particularly intelligent or scrappy. Seems to me there's literally no path from A to B.

Well for McD's it's getting into management and going to McD school and then getting a franchise. McD's likes to promote from within. There are quite a few millionaires who have done this. I mean I am sure you have to work hard to do this and it isn't guaranteed either. I think a lot of franchised businesses can work this way.

I personally know of a husband and wife who own 8 franchises in a region and were able to send their children to the best schools in the world. High school education for the parents. They did exactly what you said.

Re: Derek Sivers and the Art of Enough

#76

Post by gamechangr »

tw04 wrote: post #22

"I became rich when I earned more than I spent" are words spoken by a rich man with 0 self awareness. I can tell you the second my life became infinitely less stressful: when I paid off my student loans. I too spent almost no money, went on almost no trips, and lived way, way below my means to make it happen in my 20s. It turns out as my income has increased my happiness has increased - and I'd agree with all the stu…

There should be some qualification, like "once you earn above $100,000, then you become rich when you earn more than you spend". Even that wouldn't be quite right for many expensive cities.

Re: Derek Sivers and the Art of Enough

#77

Post by tkiley »

simonebrunozzi wrote: post #59
tkiley wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had a bunch of equity in a startup that had a cost basis of, essentially, $0. Under normal circumstances, I would have sold this for $millions, and would have paid nearly 20% in capital gains taxes immediately. Instead, I contributed my equity to a CRUT. I paid zero capital gains taxes at that moment, and the CRUT pays zero capital gains taxes ever. Also, because a contribution to the trust is a contribution in par…

Thanks for this detailed explanation - it matches the conclusions I had after some research into the matter (stimulated by Derek's sharing his experience!). I don't think you should ever feel guilty or depressed for... not dying! Really. Think that, unlike most cases, when you will eventually die, instead of passing your large fortune to your heirs, it will all go to charity. That's beautiful, and nice, and better th…

Recently, I read back through some of my forum posts on HN and elsewhere from the past ten years. In hindsight, I see that I often erred on the side of harshness, and often conflated cynicism and intelligence. As I get older, I see increasing value in a bias toward kindness. Thank you for your kind words.

Re: Derek Sivers and the Art of Enough

#78

Post by sivers »

It's weird to come to my favorite forum, and see my name in the title of a post.

It's weirder to read comments claiming to know about my personal life and motivations, though they're all wrong. (Both the good and the bad.)

The public me is not me - https://sivers.org/publicu - so I don't feel a great need to correct the errors here.

But thanks (tw04, lukego, marcinzm, s_a_p) for the reminder that anything I do can be spun negative.

Re: Derek Sivers and the Art of Enough

#79

Post by charlesdm »

tkiley wrote: post #58
tossmeout wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I came here to ask the same, @tkiley. It seems the main benefits of your CRUT are (a) deferring your capital gains taxes until later and (b) allowing you to make deductions for charitable giving. But ofc those come at a cost, namely that you don't get paid until later (5% yearly), and that you have to give to charity. Can't anyone just give to charity and get a deduction? And doesn't everyone get taxed later when the…

You're right, a lot of the benefit is in deferring taxes to a later date. This deferral is quite valuable when you consider the time value of money and the fact that by spreading out $millions of gains over many decades, I get to put a lot more of the gains in a lower tax bracket, where if it all came in one year, it would basically all be taxed at 20%. When you combine decades of deferral with the sizeable charitabl…

I'm not US based, but just curious.

What happens to that capital, is it just sitting in a bank account waiting to be dispensed?

Could you invest or loan it to other companies you control at market rate for other purposes?

Re: Derek Sivers and the Art of Enough

#80

Post by jraby3 »

sivers wrote: post #78

It's weird to come to my favorite forum, and see my name in the title of a post. It's weirder to read comments claiming to know about my personal life and motivations, though they're all wrong. (Both the good and the bad.) The public me is not me - https://sivers.org/publicu - so I don't feel a great need to correct the errors here. But thanks (tw04, lukego, marcinzm, s_a_p) for the reminder that anything I do can be…

There are so few famous people online that have been so giving with their time, willing to reply to every email.

I think your (public) actions speak volumes about who you are.

Your writing (and also whenever you’re interviewed on a podcast) has had a huge positive impact on me. I appreciate it and you (or at least the public persona of you).

Post reply on HN