←back to thread

164 points todsacerdoti | 2 comments | | HN request time: 1.072s | source
1. dixong ◴[] No.44466269[source]
Seems like the majority of arguments against the articles premise are the inability to sacrifice exorbitant living standards. I left big tech in 2022 and much happier living on a tiny fraction. It's called sacrifice. I personally don't understand why people need so much money. A family of 3 can easily live on $150k even in a HCOL area.
replies(1): >>44480911 #
2. OjotCewIo ◴[] No.44480911[source]
> I personally don't understand why people need so much money

- healthcare (where I live, we have public health care, i.e., my salary is taxed to oblivion, but if you want good for yourself and your family, you'll pay a second time, and seek out private practices / clinics)

- housing crisis, with unpreditable and unreliable rental market: you really want your children to start their own lives in small apartments that are owned by the family. And in the opposite generational direction: at some point your parents (or in-laws) will start dying, and the widow(er)s may have to be moved to different towns, apartments, assisted living facilities.

- healthcare#2: food supplements, therapy, gym, sports -- requires both a lot of money and a lot of time. No time for side jobs.

- home maintenance, car maintenance, etc.

In short, there's never enough money. If you don't spend your income all at once -- and you really should not spend it at once --, you will definitely spend it later, on valid things.

I guess it depends on how you view the world. Trustworthy and reliable? Then less money is fine, and the "sacrifice" that you mention only seems to apply to "exorbitant living standards". But if you view the world as hostile, unfair, at best indifferent and uncaring, then money equals safety, and you'll never feel you have enough of it -- even though you could be a responsible and frugal person already.