Tuesday, September 15, 2009

amusing faq I just read

My friend posted a personal FAQ in response to his company getting acquired:

It depends how you define rich. If you define rich by the amount of $ you have, someone will always have more $ than you. Conversely, you will always have more $ than someone else, even if you are unemployed. Under this definition, you'll be half inferior/half douchebag - so don't go down this path.

I found this amusing and well-said.

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

I want to be half inferior and half douchebag. At least, god should give me the chance.

Niniane said...

Well, the point of the quote is that everyone can be half-inferior and half-douchebag at all times.

writer said...

I think I just aim to be all douchebag.

You may be like, "Well geez, you're such a douchebag," but to that I'll just say, "well fuck you, I'm rich."

Anyway, that answer is nonsense. The definition of rich is simply whatever income level you feel makes you comfortable (i.e. if you think the amount of money you make right now makes you comfortable) multiplied by 25. Once you have that, you can invest it in tax-free municipal bonds at 4% (long-term average) and enjoy the same income stream without ever having to work again.

* there is some fudge factor to account for interest rate variability, market illiquidity, and inflation, but that can also be covered by the fact that you don't pay taxes on any of the earnings so you get a good bit of padding there.


Oh, I just realized you're probably talking about one of the FriendFeed guys.

Niniane said...

It was not a FriendFeed person.

Also, there is no guarantee that "having the same income stream without having to work again" will ensure happiness. Plenty of Microsofties retired and were bored and got depressed from not feeling useful. The point of this quote is that emotional riches is the top priority, and material wealth does not necessarily translate into emotional riches.

s said...

I think the word "rich" is most commonly used to refer to a state of material wealth, and words like "fulfilled" are used for the emotional state. I've often seen richness phrased in economic or risk-management terms, e.g., "I don't need to worry about having enough money for food, shelter, and health care for the foreseeable future" or "I have enough material/community resources that my parents/children won't starve if I were to get hit by a bus." It was kind of jarring to see that your friend brought up a competitive aspect.

Jake said...

I'd rather be rich and unhappy than poor and unhappy.

I'm with writer, the answer is a cop-out. Everyone knows rich when they get there... even though they may not necessarily feel content when they arrive, but that's another question.

Anonymous said...

Well, 知足常乐。 But that's extremely hard to do. People are greedy by default. Perhaps evolution theory can explain it.

I always tell my friends, there's no such thing as 知足. To really really 知足 one has to at least 落发出家。