Author Topic: For The Love of Money - NY Times Op-Ed piece  (Read 5175 times)

dude

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2369

rocksinmyhead

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1489
  • Location: Oklahoma
Re: For The Love of Money - NY Times Op-Ed piece
« Reply #1 on: January 21, 2014, 09:03:32 AM »
wow! fascinating. I never thought about it like that, although I have certainly pondered, "what the hell do people DO with all that money?!"

goodlife

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 188
Re: For The Love of Money - NY Times Op-Ed piece
« Reply #2 on: January 21, 2014, 10:37:12 AM »
This is a very accurate piece. I personally know a lot of people like this.

oldtoyota

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3179
Re: For The Love of Money - NY Times Op-Ed piece
« Reply #3 on: January 21, 2014, 10:45:48 AM »
"In the months before bonuses were handed out, the trading floor started to feel like a neighborhood in “The Wire” when the heroin runs out."

Interesting read. Thanks!

TKE Super Dave

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 54
  • Location: United States
Re: For The Love of Money - NY Times Op-Ed piece
« Reply #4 on: January 21, 2014, 11:46:07 AM »

MrsPete

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3505
Re: For The Love of Money - NY Times Op-Ed piece
« Reply #5 on: January 21, 2014, 02:59:58 PM »
Interesting. 

My daughters and I were talking about this kind of thing last weekend, but we were talking about movie stars (and musicians) who make $$$$$$$ for one movie.  We agreed that we don't see why they'd ever bother to make a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th movie -- not when they've already earned enough for their children's children to be wealthy!  We agreed that it must be about the "need" for fame and popularity and the desire to stay in the limelight rather than fade away.  After all, from a practical point of view, even if the work were easy and fun, doing whatever you please is always more easy and fun.

I suppose people like stock brokers could experience this same kind of thing -- rather than needing the money, they want to command more and more power, more and more "wins".  It's a different faucet of the same idea. 

Albert

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1244
  • Location: Switzerland
Re: For The Love of Money - NY Times Op-Ed piece
« Reply #6 on: January 21, 2014, 03:35:02 PM »

My daughters and I were talking about this kind of thing last weekend, but we were talking about movie stars (and musicians) who make $$$$$$$ for one movie.  We agreed that we don't see why they'd ever bother to make a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th movie -- not when they've already earned enough for their children's children to be wealthy!  We agreed that it must be about the "need" for fame and popularity and the desire to stay in the limelight rather than fade away.  After all, from a practical point of view, even if the work were easy and fun, doing whatever you please is always more easy and fun.

Are you seriously suggesting here that people act in movies, sing or play sports professionally only or even mostly for money? All possible data indicate otherwise. Being adored is very pleasant for most people.

Poorman

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 260
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Orange County, CA
Re: For The Love of Money - NY Times Op-Ed piece
« Reply #7 on: January 21, 2014, 04:07:28 PM »
Interesting. 

My daughters and I were talking about this kind of thing last weekend, but we were talking about movie stars (and musicians) who make $$$$$$$ for one movie.  We agreed that we don't see why they'd ever bother to make a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th movie -- not when they've already earned enough for their children's children to be wealthy!  We agreed that it must be about the "need" for fame and popularity and the desire to stay in the limelight rather than fade away.  After all, from a practical point of view, even if the work were easy and fun, doing whatever you please is always more easy and fun.

I suppose people like stock brokers could experience this same kind of thing -- rather than needing the money, they want to command more and more power, more and more "wins".  It's a different faucet of the same idea. 

Has it occurred to you that doing whatever you please and working are not mutually exclusive?  Many highly talented people derive fulfillment from continuing to use their talents long after FI is achieved.  In fact, I would venture to say that many that are seeking FIRE on this board want the freedom from work because their current job does not utilize their talents in a satisfying way.  When you are in a position to "call the shots" at your given profession, like a a highly paid actor, athlete, or musician, it probably doesn't feel like something that needs escaping from.

AndrewJackson

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 13
Re: For The Love of Money - NY Times Op-Ed piece
« Reply #8 on: January 22, 2014, 01:05:18 AM »
What this article neglects to mention is that most investment bank/hedge fund traders make their money by completely ripping off their clients through horrendous pricing and fees. It has very little, if anything, to do with skill. How could you not end up with a + million dollar bonus when you are charging your clients 2% fees and 20% of the "profits" (returns above 0).

Iron Mike Sharpe

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 396
Re: For The Love of Money - NY Times Op-Ed piece
« Reply #9 on: January 22, 2014, 08:54:53 AM »
Interesting. 

My daughters and I were talking about this kind of thing last weekend, but we were talking about movie stars (and musicians) who make $$$$$$$ for one movie.  We agreed that we don't see why they'd ever bother to make a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th movie -- not when they've already earned enough for their children's children to be wealthy!  We agreed that it must be about the "need" for fame and popularity and the desire to stay in the limelight rather than fade away.  After all, from a practical point of view, even if the work were easy and fun, doing whatever you please is always more easy and fun.

I suppose people like stock brokers could experience this same kind of thing -- rather than needing the money, they want to command more and more power, more and more "wins".  It's a different faucet of the same idea.

Most musicians and actors don't make much money at all.  They struggle for years.  When they finally breakthrough, why would they quit doing something they love and are finally getting recognized for, on a large scale?