|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
posted July 29, 2010 06:23 PM |
|
|
of course, since everyone in USA is a millionnaire 
Quote:
"Working hard" seems to be some sort of obsession for many people. I don't want to generalize, but American folk usually seem to follow that line (Bin, Elodin, well technically Mvass doesn't really qualify but... )
All of them seem to ignore the fact that "working hard" isn't something to be proud of in modern ages. Yes, I agree, it's nice to be able to live as you like, not ask for money, earning it instead. But why the praise on the HARD part? Since ages we work as humanity to give a better life to everyone. How on earth working HARD most of your life fits that? Working HARD makes your work not enjoyable, unless you are a masochist. The constant weariness, the lack of energy after a whole day's work (HARD work means burning your energy through your 8-10hours of work time, obviously.. if you don't feel tired after that, you don't work hard, period.) means your social life, private hobbies, start to diminish, because you're exhausted and thinking about eating and sleeping, mostly.
This turns you into an amoeba, which lives to work. The amount of time and energy you have left each day is too slow to develop YOURSELF. Your knowledge, hobbies, wisdom. You are a corporate slave, you know nothing but the little job you're doing every day, the same traffic jams which consume another big chunk of your life, and the same old 4 walls in which you eat, sleep and watch TV. No room for creativity. Working HARD should be NOT condemned because it KILLS us, reducing us to work robots. Unless you see nothing wrong with that, I think you should reconsider your praise.
nice summary. I prefer developping myself rather than making lots of money and only be able to talk about my job or what happened in "secret story", which should get quickly tiresome to people knowing you.
same about my friends or girlfriend, I don't see the point in having friends you can never see because they work most of the time, and the rest of the time they are too tired.
You can read Hannah Arendt who has good arguments.
Christophe Dejours is interesting too, don't know if he is published in english.
Krishnamurti has very good and deep arguments, not only about work, but life in general.
Quote:
Oh, and if you start telling me how hard you work while STILL being able to develop yourself... that just means you're not working hard and you're praising something you're not doing. Or you're a cyborg. One or the other, you shouldn't do it
if you talk about elodin, I guess he has become a robot already
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 29, 2010 06:43 PM |
|
|
Quote:
]Lol mvass. How about you just look outside of your "everybody is rich in america" window and face reality? If you have a GDP of 45,ooo$ a year (2009), there have to be people who earn much less, because you have plenty of people who earn much more.
Yes, but "less than $45,000" is a rather wide range. Even someone working for minimum wage will earn more than that - and even unskilled entry-level workers are usually paid more than minimum wage.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 29, 2010 10:36 PM |
|
|
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted July 29, 2010 10:40 PM |
|
|
Mvass, I thought you were familiar with eastern Europe. 600-800 Euro is a lot higher than I expected. I've never heard the pay scale in Poland before, but I've talked to Milena (Lady_Milena) about this stuff a lot and I have an idea about the pay in Bulgaria. The impression I had is that the economy in Poland is a little better than in BG.
|
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted July 29, 2010 10:54 PM |
|
Edited by Binabik at 23:22, 29 Jul 2010.
|
@JJ
Just a quick note on that link you gave. You have to be very careful reading that because it's kind of deceiving. I'm still trying to sort it out myself.
For example in the first paragraph there are a couple cases where they are counting the same money twice.
Also, be careful if they are talking about household income or individual income. In some cases the household income includes people who aren't working. (that's what I'm trying to figure out because in some cases they don't tell you explicitly)
For example
"The median income per household member (including all working and non-working members above the age of 14) was $26,036 in 2006"
The way I interpret this is that a non-working 15 year old is included in the average.
"1.93% of all households.....and the bottom 20% earned less than $19,178."
The way I interpret this is that the 19K is total for the household, which might have zero people working or it might have 5 people working. Overall, the income per person is probably lower than 19K.
Anyway, I'm still trying to sort it out. Usually I go straight to the government source for this type of thing. But it takes a long time to figure out how they measure things. I have a lot of those government stats on my comp and I've been studying them for years. It'll drive you nuts reading too much at once.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 30, 2010 01:45 AM |
|
|
Binabik:
I didn't think it was that bad. It certainly was never that bad for my family when we lived in Russia.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
dimis
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Digitally signed by FoG
|
posted July 30, 2010 06:17 AM |
|
|
haha
Geez,
I posted a video in the end of page 25 and revived a 1-year-old dead thread, and within 6 days we are in page 32 with long posts, massive quoting, and almost no reference to the video. Seriously, who can follow the OSM ? And where can someone start in a torrent like this ?
Regarding "hard work" ... I can only laugh; haha. Repeat: haha Elodin, you are talking as if people in other parts of the world do not/have not work/-ed hard or harder than you. Of course here it is your pride for creating something in your life; which is understandable; and perfectly doable *especially* given the salaries/cash-flow in the US (I will come back to that since this is not the issue now). But then, the delirium starts ... the government will steal Elodin's money repeatedly, and provide "life-support" for ever to all the lazy guys in his society. Which, of course, is *not* the idea - at all. And all these, by a guy who claims to be religious. haha.
So, let's come to one aspect of that idea, by one of your examples, that people do not have an "equal start in life". What is your "humanitarian" approach for all those who got cancer ? Tough luck for them ? Exactly because by nature nothing is fare, people should intervene and change the way things naturally are - for the better (of everyone). So, when someone has cancer in your example, the point is not to give cancer to everyone, but what we, as a society now (either as inhabitants of a country or as humans in general - in the very least), can do to help them to have a "normal" life like the rest of the people. So, the approach, "tough luck" is not only silly. It is dangerous. You have survived by a series of accidents and you are not even aware of them. Is it a coincidence that so many people in the US go berserk and start random shooting at others ? Just think for a second.
Then, we have the discussion about salaries. Who can be a millionaire, with what salary, and what salary can offer you a living. This is also funny and Binabik gives his usual recital. But of course, nothing works better than slogans. So, where to start again ? On one hand Mytical - who, apparently, is good in managing his salary - claims that being a millionaire in 40 years is *doable* for him. However, he neglects how he starts the post " ... most of the amount over 21k a year would go directly to my bank account." So, essentially, nothing; exactly what JJ is describing. He already knows that if he had more money he would pursuit a better life realistically because he is not satisfied right now even though he saves money. Not only wouldn't he use the full amount of extra money for savings, he already admits that he would use more. And of course that warm cash is not even in his hands already. So, it is do-able but un-realistic. But in any case, I agree that you don't have to be a millionaire in order to live a comfortable and happy life. This is probably getting astray for an economics thread ... Ok, then, FoG, more or less confirms the same thing, and says that "living frugally as a single person" costs about 2k per month. And then we have Binabik, who claims that he can have a living with 13k a year. And the guy doesn't even add the smiley in the end. haha. Seriously, this one hell of a thread! He suggests living in a village in the middle of nowhere where people typically go when they retire and has nothing what-so-ever to do with the expectations and the way of life you want to have in the range of 20 to 60 (as well as that of your children - should they come into the picture). And then we wonder why the meaning of so many words is so ****** up in modern times and we can not communicate.
As of the salaries in the US; guys, I am amazed. I am amazed at the amount of money people earn, sometimes without any (serious ?) skills. But that's the standard. The salaries are higher compared to some european average (my guess is on all fronts and for every european country; I haven't really checked thoroughly), and the difference is even bigger compared to what people earn in Greece. I was also surprised when I first heard how much nurses make when I came in the US. But many things do not make much sense anyway; this is one of the least and I believe we are missing the point if we get stuck here.
____________
The empty set
|
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted July 30, 2010 06:34 AM |
|
|
I only scanned your post, and I'll read the rest later. But I saw this.
Quote:
And then we have Binabik, who claims that he can have a living with 13k a year. And the guy doesn't even add the smiley
Why is it that people find this so hard to believe? I know for an absolute 100% fact that it's true. Keep in mind that it's after tax, so all of that money is available to spend. It comes to over $1000 per month. I can EASILY live on that, and yes I can even save some money. 100% FACT.
|
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted July 30, 2010 07:07 AM |
|
|
OK I just checked.
So far this year I spent $5832.23 (per annum = 9998.11)
In 1999 I spent a total of $8740.42
In 1998 I spent a total of $10,367.53
9998.11 + 8740.42 + 10367.53 = 29106.06
With 13K per year
13000 * 3 = 39000
39000 - 29106.06 = $9893.94 put in the bank in 3 years time
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted July 30, 2010 07:13 AM |
|
|
If you decide to move into the hellhole that is New York City, you can't survive on 1k a month because for reasons unknown to me, it's a popular place and the cost of living rockets.
For a standard town (in many areas), you can definitely safely live on 1k a month. It's not debatable. I don't know why you guys insist Binabik is making stuff up. I'd say I could do it on $750 a month if I truly needed to, but since the forumers have cognitive issues even grasping 1k a month, I won't. The cost of living in Massachusetts is higher, but AFAIK Bin is an Ohioan.
Now that's with tight budgeting.
Of course, the real issue here is that I wouldn't want to spend 10+ ****ing years of my life living with such austere methods. So for convenient living, I'd put it more at 1.5-2k.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
dimis
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Digitally signed by FoG
|
|
posted July 30, 2010 07:21 AM |
|
|
I think you are getting the point gradually. You can also live on 0k. But that's not the issue.
____________
The empty set
|
|
dimis
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Digitally signed by FoG
|
|
posted July 30, 2010 07:24 AM |
|
|
Oh, and Binabik, apparently, since you own a house, all those numbers that you give are without even rent. haha. But go on, convince me, please.
____________
The empty set
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 30, 2010 07:28 AM |
|
|
But that doesn't answer the basic question:
If you DO live on less money that you actually earn or get, and if you DO save money - why becoming a millionaire at all?
Think forward: if you ARE a millionaire, will you change your lifestyle then?
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted July 30, 2010 07:33 AM |
|
|
I don't have a clue what this conversation is even about because this thread is so long. I just invited myself in on that one note. I think it has to do with saving and investing.
Saving large portions of money is worthless unless you plan on a way of having that money make even more money (opening a business or getting lucky on stocks or something). I make it a habit to set aside around 10% of my paycheck no matter what for reserves, and I've never had the stress of financial issues in my life, not that I've been a working professional for very long. 50% seems rather radical.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted July 30, 2010 08:10 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Oh, and Binabik, apparently, since you own a house, all those numbers that you give are without even rent. haha. But go on, convince me, please.
$240 per month property tax that I'm currently paying
+ 1 roommate
= $480 per month apartment
Get rid of the roommate? I'm sure I could get pretty close to that too, starting with half the gas and electric bills I'm paying now, the $500 lawn mower I wouldn't need, another $500 for the water softener I need to buy, trash collection and water bills I wouldn't be paying, $200 for the guy to put new springs on my garage door, etc etc.
And if that's still not enough for some reason, $480 per month is an apartment in a nice suburb, so I just go somewhere a little cheaper, but still pretty good. And don't forget, there was a few K per year left over.
Quote:
Think forward: if you ARE a millionaire, will you change your lifestyle then?
Not much. I'd probably travel a little more and give the rest away because I don't have any need for it myself. Well, actually I'd keep it and collect interest and give it away when I die.
Hey, so I'm not a materialistic person. If I cared about money and wanted to be rich, then I'd be rich. But I don't care. If we weren't getting so off-topic already I could tell you about walking away from a $250-300K job just because I didn't want to do it (it would have been a lot of overtime and only lasted a 1 year)
|
|
dimis
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Digitally signed by FoG
|
|
posted July 30, 2010 08:18 AM |
|
|
You are making my week. No further comment.
____________
The empty set
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 30, 2010 08:40 AM |
|
|
But that's exactly my point - you COULD become a millionaire, if you wanted to be one, but JUST BECAUSE you don't want to be one.
Because, if you WANTED to be a millionaire, you had reason to want it, and in that case you had a different lifestyle and/or a job you found stressful or boring or both, and then you wouldn't save what you save - you'd need to spend money just to deal with your life.
Let's assume you are a craftsman. You have a workshop, and you make toys for little children, from wood. You make them all by yourself, including paint, because you LOVE that. And you have buyers as well, people from the upper middle class, looking for something special as a gift for their grandchildren, whateve.
In the end, let's say you make 20.000 that way, and you are happy with your job and love your life.
Now, if someone came and said, hey, that is great stuff, we can make those toys in a factory, sll them for a third of the price, sell ten times as many and become all millionaires - would you do it?
You certainly wouldn't, just to become a millionaire - you MIGHT do it for fear of your business dying out (in case, for example, your earnings were declining over the past years). But otherwise - nope. For what? For becoming unhappy? Putting ourself out of a satisfying way to spend your time just to ave money?
You can even generalize this - I think, from those people who really get rich, mosst of them never wasted a thought on becoming so: they get rch because theyy LIKE what they do and excel in it, which means, they are rich anyway and earn some money at that.
It doesn't work the other way round, though.
|
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted July 30, 2010 09:58 AM |
|
|
JJ, you're an expert at totally changing the subject just so you can freaking argue for the sake of arguing.
You take what someone says, change it to something else, then argue about it. If you want to put words in my mouth, then create a second account named Binabik2 and argue with yourself. Because that's what you're already doing.
Let's go back to how this originally started. Angeleto had mentioned a couple times recently that nurses in Germany didn't get paid well. All I did was make a simple comment that nurses here were highly paid. It was a simple relativistic statement. Then to somewhat illustrate their pay, I made a comment that nurses could become a millionaire.
I said nurses CAN become a millionaire.
Where the hell did I say that nurses with children would become a millionaire?
Where the hell did I say anything about the effect on the economy if EVERYONE became a millionaire?
Where the hell did I say that nurses WANTED to become a millionaire?
Where the hell did I say anything about nurses who love their work or hate their work becoming a millionaire?
Where the hell did I say anything about nurses who want to live an expensive lifestyle becoming a millionaire?
Where the hell did I say anything about a nurse in city A or city B becoming a millionaire?
Where the hell did I say that a nurse WOULD become a millionaire?
Where the hell did I say that a nurse had to live in a cave without running water to become a millionaire?
I just said that nurses CAN become a millionaire. And you want to twist my statement into a million different things that I didn't say just because you love to fking argue.
And if you don't like the fking numbers, then there are a bunch of other ways to come up with a million using the pay range of nurses without resorting to cherry picking. And as long as you're sitting there jerking your meat and crunching numbers, don't forget a little thing called compounding.
I'm outta here! You want my password so you can put more words in my mouth and argue with me?
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 30, 2010 10:26 AM |
|
|
Oh, come on, get a grip and don't behave like a kid.
Quote:
JJ, you're an expert at totally changing the subject just so you can freaking argue for the sake of arguing.
You take what someone says, change it to something else, then argue about it. If you want to put words in my mouth, then create a second account named Binabik2 and argue with yourself. Because that's what you're already doing.
Let's go back to how this originally started. Angeleto had mentioned a couple times recently that nurses in Germany didn't get paid well. All I did was make a simple comment that nurses here were highly paid. It was a simple relativistic statement. Then to somewhat illustrate their pay, I made a comment that nurses could become a millionaire.
I said nurses CAN become a millionaire.
You can spare the rest - because you tried to "prove" that, by laying down YOUR life-style.
So what you ACTUALLY said was:
Nurses CAN become a millionaire - IF THEY ADOPT MY LIFESTYLE!
Now, correct me, if I'm wrong, but I don't think you are a nurse. Nor do you live the life of a nurse - how many hours per week are you working for the money you earn and how stressful is that job?
So the only way to show that you have a point is:
Show me a nurse who became a millionaire - by nursing, mind you, not by winnig the lottery or starting a second career on TV.
And then, go ahead and show me how many nurses there are and how many of them are a millionaire or on the best way.
Moreover, you have the amazing boldness to say, I COULD become a millionaire if I wanted to - BUT I JUST DON'T WANT TO EARN THAT MUCH MONEY, implying, that everyone who'd earn that much money should be able to save a ton and become one -
just because you get along with what you earn.
So for me, you prove nothing. It's just a big IF.
|
|
dimis
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Digitally signed by FoG
|
|
posted July 30, 2010 10:41 AM |
|
|
JJ, you shouldn't be saying that. No, no, no, no. Just no.
Seriously, I am waiting for the day to have the ability to rate threads. It's gonna be fun.
____________
The empty set
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
