Author Topic: If 1M is good, is 10M better?  (Read 30387 times)

Tasse

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4064
  • Age: 31
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #50 on: July 28, 2024, 06:28:52 PM »
I might still try to maximise my net worth solely for fun and for game-playing purposes

This perspective I really don't get. I mean, I get the gamification part, but money is power. "I might try to accumulate as much power as possible, just for fun--I'm not going to DO anything with it" is a very confusing stance to me. Isn't there a point at which you might as well give it away?

dividendman

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2388
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #51 on: July 28, 2024, 07:18:44 PM »
I might still try to maximise my net worth solely for fun and for game-playing purposes

This perspective I really don't get. I mean, I get the gamification part, but money is power. "I might try to accumulate as much power as possible, just for fun--I'm not going to DO anything with it" is a very confusing stance to me. Isn't there a point at which you might as well give it away?

I treat my budget like that. I don't really need to look for better deals or optimize stuff but I do. Each year I want to spend less than the last... at least in inflation adjusted terms. For the past 3 years I've spent less nominally (so a LOT less inflation adjusted), it's fun. My spending is down to 2.5% of my NW  when I retired (I FIRED 2 years ago). My planned spending was about 3.5% when I retired.

twinstudy

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 587
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #52 on: July 28, 2024, 07:50:16 PM »
I might still try to maximise my net worth solely for fun and for game-playing purposes

This perspective I really don't get. I mean, I get the gamification part, but money is power. "I might try to accumulate as much power as possible, just for fun--I'm not going to DO anything with it" is a very confusing stance to me. Isn't there a point at which you might as well give it away?

As you noted, humans love playing games and they are a good way to mine dopamine. So, while I don't want to work past my mid-40s and I do want to retire once I get to my stash figure, I find it fun to try to gamify things in the meantime. Past a certain point, most of it is game playing, whether people choose to accept that or not, so I might as well enjoy it. The 'power' of money is secondary and relatively inert to me, so if it means nothing to me, then I plan to do nothing with it. I might give some away, or spend some, but like I said money once earned is relatively inert.


Tasse

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4064
  • Age: 31
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #53 on: July 28, 2024, 08:03:59 PM »
I don't think gamifying your budget is comparable to trying to accumulate the most money possible just for the fun of it. Again, the gamification isn't the part that confuses me. I am just baffled by the idea that money is worth saving simply to have it rather than for increased safety/spending/giving.

Maybe that's not what you meant and I read the original post too literally. Thank you for feeding my curiosity regardless. I think I'm on the same page as you about money feeling "inert" in my life, but personally if I have money that means nothing to me, I figure I might as well give it to someone it will mean a lot to.

Ron Scott

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2002
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #54 on: July 28, 2024, 09:06:09 PM »
Well, happiness levels tend to increase with more money so that’s one marker.

Tasse

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4064
  • Age: 31
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #55 on: July 28, 2024, 09:14:19 PM »
Well, happiness levels tend to increase with more money so that’s one marker.

Do you really believe there's no upper bound to that effect?

twinstudy

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 587
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #56 on: July 28, 2024, 09:48:24 PM »
I don't think gamifying your budget is comparable to trying to accumulate the most money possible just for the fun of it. Again, the gamification isn't the part that confuses me. I am just baffled by the idea that money is worth saving simply to have it rather than for increased safety/spending/giving.

Maybe that's not what you meant and I read the original post too literally. Thank you for feeding my curiosity regardless. I think I'm on the same page as you about money feeling "inert" in my life, but personally if I have money that means nothing to me, I figure I might as well give it to someone it will mean a lot to.

As you say, we are on the same page as money being inert. The approach to FatFIRE is that you pick a stash number, work towards it (by increasing earning and keeping spending in check and reducing passive money drains) and you plot a course to it. With some luck and some diligence, you end up having (most likely) a 'surplus'. The same mechanism that gets you to the FIRE target in the first place is also the mechanism that most likely will produce a surplus, as you get good at the game. And of course having a surplus gives you increased safety and comfort and choices down the track. So all that is good in a general sense.

We both agree that the surplus is inert. The only difference is that you are motivated to define and give away the surplus, and I am not. Firstly because I see no point in reducing my safety barrier, or having to precisely figure out what the 'safety margin' is (impossible to figure out anyway as no one can see the future). Secondly and independently because I see no point in giving. I already contribute via taxes. I have a few small causes I care about, but on a broad level, I don't otherwise care, so I choose not to.
« Last Edit: July 28, 2024, 09:51:01 PM by twinstudy »

Tasse

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4064
  • Age: 31
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #57 on: July 28, 2024, 10:36:40 PM »
Well. I guess the difference is the not caring then.

To be 100% clear, I wouldn't call it a surplus until after achieving a very safe margin. I'm not advocating for a tight safety margin and I won't tell you not to keep saving for a 3% WR. But there's a point at which saving more is no longer meaningfully increasing your safety. And at that point I feel like the surplus might as well go to something useful.

I have been intentionally vague about WHAT to give to in this discussion. Whatever your small cause is, even if it's just treating your friends, seems to me like a better use of money that you don't need than letting it sit around unneeded.

Thanks for explaining your perspective; I disagree with it but I understand it better now.

Telecaster

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4155
  • Location: Seattle, WA
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #58 on: July 28, 2024, 11:41:31 PM »
$10 MM is better.  But not ten times better.

twinstudy

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 587
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #59 on: July 28, 2024, 11:56:53 PM »
Well. I guess the difference is the not caring then.

To be 100% clear, I wouldn't call it a surplus until after achieving a very safe margin. I'm not advocating for a tight safety margin and I won't tell you not to keep saving for a 3% WR. But there's a point at which saving more is no longer meaningfully increasing your safety. And at that point I feel like the surplus might as well go to something useful.

I have been intentionally vague about WHAT to give to in this discussion. Whatever your small cause is, even if it's just treating your friends, seems to me like a better use of money that you don't need than letting it sit around unneeded.

Thanks for explaining your perspective; I disagree with it but I understand it better now.

Yep, it is quite hard to know the surplus till you get there - and it's an ongoing exercise to define the surplus, since as you suggest, there is a lot of utility to having a safe margin.

I already do treat friends, but I didn't define that as 'giving', so maybe it's a definitional thing. Once I'm old, and I can more clearly define the surplus, I might well give in a more obvious charitable sense. I don't know that I'd want my money sitting around doing nothing - that doesn't seem useful, but then, it also doesn't seem hugely *not* useful...I'd have to think about it at that later date. So maybe I'm not so far from your position. But the main thing is, to be honest, in making the money, I am not thinking about "what I can do with it down the track". I am thinking, how do I win the game of FIREing. And I think this kind of game approach to FIRE is common among many adherents...and it is probably what leads to people with $10m+ stashes.

2sk22

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1707
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #60 on: July 29, 2024, 05:41:01 AM »
I mean -- better how? Better for what purpose? "Better" is a vague word. Whether $10M is better depends on your goals, and on what it would cost you to get to $10M.

I sometimes play the "what would I do if I had $10M" game. There are certain background worries that would go away, I think, though humans are built for worry, so maybe I'd find new things to focus on. Maybe I'd start a game company to bring to fruition a favorite video game idea. Maybe I'd shift my AA to such safe investments that I'd never worry about the stock market again.

But $10M has never been my goal. I'm quite content with my measly-by-comparison FIRE stash.
If a person gets to $1M early enough in life and keeps their spending in check, $10M can happen almost effortlessly.

I agree - we hit $1M about 14 years ago and are now approaching $10M using the STUN approach (Strategic Total Utter Neglect). Our brains are simply not wired to understand exponential functions.

The main thing for me is that I don't have the imagination to spend a lot of money. I have everything I wanted as a 16 year old (except for the Lamborghini Countach - which I have crossed off my list 😀).

Ron Scott

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2002
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #61 on: July 29, 2024, 06:00:54 AM »
Well, happiness levels tend to increase with more money so that’s one marker.

Do you really believe there's no upper bound to that effect?

I’m not sure.

For the person who would be happy with a nice apartment in the city and a second home on the beach in Florida half or more of a $10m stash could be spent on real estate. Say that leaves $5m for a retirement WR of $175k. Taxes and carrying costs on the residences could take maybe $125k, leaving about $4k a month to live. Would she be happier to spend $5k+ a month? Maybe there’s family who could use a little help…maybe there’s grandkids?

Perhaps there’s a limit. But $10m—nice as it is—is probably not it for many people.


EscapeVelocity2020

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5208
  • Age: 51
  • Location: Houston
    • EscapeVelocity2020
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #62 on: July 29, 2024, 06:16:46 AM »
As long as the $10M comes from passive growth in investments while I’m out living my best life, I’m not sure why anyone would put in effort to stop that from happening.  Sure, you end up paying more taxes which feels annoying, or have to put in more effort to mitigate taxes and perform stealth wealth (assuming you don’t want others to know you live below your means)…. But these trade offs are hardly enough to make me want to go all cash and stop my stache from growing.  It’s nice to at least eliminate the ‘money problems’ from life - doesn’t fix everything though.

Metalcat

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 20524
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #63 on: July 29, 2024, 06:18:52 AM »
Well, happiness levels tend to increase with more money so that’s one marker.

Do you really believe there's no upper bound to that effect?

Also, correlation is not causation. Ron has a PhD, he knows this.

Happiness also tends to correlate with autonomy, so it's no surprise that folks who have more professional autonomy are happier, and that also happens to be the folks who make more money.

But just because the autonomous, high earning folks are happier doesn't mean the average lower earning person can be happy trying to get to those higher levels.

There's a selection bias at play. The happier folks at those higher levels are the ones who don't burn out along the way.

There's a logical assumption happening that doesn't make sense. You can't assume that lower-level, lower paid folks are making less money because they don't want to make more. Most of them are camping at the fucking bit to make more.

Not everyone can just *choose* to become a happy, autonomous, well compensated executive. There's a selection bias at the top of the wealth pyramid.

But in a consumerism driven world, is it any surprise that virtually everyone wants more money, and that the people who haven't managed to get it are less happy???

But MMM folks aren't that same population. We also have a major selection bias. We're largely populated by the folks who aren't as driven by consumerism as a source of happiness, so general population data isn't necessarily generalizable to our subset.

Populational correlation data is useful, but not necessarily for guiding individual lifestyle decisions. It is worth looking at that data and asking oneself, why might I be different? What life circumstances and philosophical perspectives might make me an outlier to that data?

For me it's that I was raised by OG mustachian hippies, I'm related to extremely miserable wealthy people, and I've been studying human minds and bodies my entire life and believe that human connection, community, exercise, and time in nature are more valuable to my happiness than spending on shit.

I HIGHLY value financial security and am probably the most conservative person here, but I'm also extremely conservative about allowing my money-earning activities to detract from my other quality of life activities.

Everything in life is a trade off. For me, making a fair amount of money is an easy and enjoyable part of my best life. Yay for me, not everyone has easy access to that. But the second that work impacts my self care, time with loved ones, access to as much nature as I want, then the alarm bells go off and I pull back from profits and focus on other resources.

So yeah, more money is great, but it depends entirely on what it costs you to get it. And sometimes, the cost of getting more money is actually too expensive.

Metalcat

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 20524
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #64 on: July 29, 2024, 07:13:15 AM »
Well, happiness levels tend to increase with more money so that’s one marker.

Do you really believe there's no upper bound to that effect?

I’m not sure.

For the person who would be happy with a nice apartment in the city and a second home on the beach in Florida half or more of a $10m stash could be spent on real estate. Say that leaves $5m for a retirement WR of $175k. Taxes and carrying costs on the residences could take maybe $125k, leaving about $4k a month to live. Would she be happier to spend $5k+ a month? Maybe there’s family who could use a little help…maybe there’s grandkids?

Perhaps there’s a limit. But $10m—nice as it is—is probably not it for many people.

I have a beautiful city apartment and a summer home on the ocean in one of the most stunning locations on earth. They cost me less than 300K combined.

In a consumerism society, there will always be a way to spend more money on things that are relatively modest in terms of their benefits. No one is arguing that there isn't.

That's a feature of the MMM philosophy, not a flaw.

By focusing on spending less, you can sometimes be pushed to be more creative about your options and truly assess the value of them.

I always wanted a waterfront summer home. This is just something I always knew I wanted. By focusing on finding less expensive options, I pushed myself to explore less common locations. I made hundreds of phone calls researching different areas of the country.

I landed on a spot in the middle of nowhere, talking to a real estate agent who used to work in the same industry I used to work in. He and his wife were about our age, child free, similar professional backgrounds and interested. They were from Toronto.

They had taken a vacation out here one year and fell so in love with the area that they impulse bought a house that weekend. Then after coming here for a few summers, they dreaded going back to Toronto, so they left their life, their careers, and moved here.

I was like...well fuck, that's a hell of an endorsement.

There was a property that would make for a good AirBnB investment, so I figure "fuck it" I would buy it, spend a summer renovating it for rental, but also see if this place was as magical as it sounded.

And that's how I ended up buying a property 31 hours away on a remote island off of an island at the edge of the earth in a place I had never even visited. It was also an insanely good deal due to timing, so I didn't want to pass up this particular property.

Within a few weeks of getting here, I absolutely fell in love with the place and the people and now we live here as much as humanly possible and literally everyone who talks to me can see that I absolutely light up when I talk about it. My therapist says buying this house was the smartest decision I've ever made in my entire life.

My point is that if I had endless money and no reason to be actively frugal, I wouldn't have pushed myself to research the entire country, I would have just purchased a lovely river front cottage within an hour of my house, and it would have been lovely, but not massively happiness increasing like this house is. This location is world famous for its astounding nature and incredible people.

Having near-limitless money is convenient, but convenience is not always optimal. Frugality forces the kind of analysis and creative thinking that really pushes you to be introspective about the value of your lifestyle decisions.

Having the money to solve problems with obvious solutions is AMAZING. I'm a big fan of having enough wealth. The amount of cash I've thrown at health problems in the past few years is substantial and I'm insanely grateful to have just piles of capital to throw at expensive problems. I don't want to have to contemplate if thousands of dollars on walking aides is worth the investment, I just buy the expensive walking aides no matter how briefly I benefit from them.

BUT, while there are many decisions out there that simply benefit from more money, there are many, many more that benefit from deeper introspection and insight about self and happiness.

I'm sure that for many people, the expensive city condo and the expensive summer home really are the optimal choice, and spending millions on them really is the best use of their resources. Cool, good for them. But my point is that the cornerstone philosophy of this place is that people put blinders on and just look at the more expensive options as default "better," when there are often creative solutions outside of someone's comfort zone that might be far superior and just not considered.

I found MMM when DH and I were making absolute shit piles of money and we were kind of listless and bored with the lifestyle that more money could buy us. Neither of us were delighted with our jobs either and were on track for climbing the ladders we didn't really want to be on.

Our superiors were wealthier, but utterly miserable and we didn't really want their lives. Mustachianism pushed us to really quantify and qualify what we wanted from our lives, and it turned out that a much, much lower spend produced better outcomes.

Which worked out AMAZINGLY well when I became suddenly disabled and we lost my income, which was double his. So having an AWESOME quality of life that we could readily afford already on his lower income was fucking phenomenal.

And since becoming disabled, that same creative, frugal decision making has resulted in our quality of life steadily increasing since I lost my career.

So while I fully understand that other people have different preferences and lifestyles that truly benefit from more than 10M, ours really wouldn't. And we've put in an enormous amount of work reflecting and communicating to figure out what truly works for us.

I would say if a couple can go through losing a career, the bulk of their income, one partner developing severe chronic pain and losing their ability to walk properly, all during the pandemic, and they manage to come out the other side much happier, then something went right.

And I solidly credit that to our earlier years of exploring the value of spending less to get more.

A bunch of us recently did the Yale course on the Science of Well Being, and virtually every single lesson in the course was something that DH and I figured out through frugality. Not because we always spent less, but because we critically assessed every single trade off in our lives for the maximum benefit.

DH and I now both have careers we absolutely love. We both pivoted away from making more money and towards doing more meaningful and enjoyable work. We both have a deep commitment to health and fitness. Frugality pushed us both to give up alcohol, which actually makes socializing more fun and allows for much richer memories. It pushed us bot to socialize with friends at expensive restaurants, but to do challenging things together, which creates deeper bonds. It pushes us to travel with our animals instead of kenneling them, and that pushes us to try out some really unusual, off the beaten path spots, and focus more on nature-based adventures than tourism.

Most of all, and this is by far the most important thing. It's pushed us to really, heavily invest in loved ones. A 3 hour phone call with my dad on a Sunday morning, sitting on my deck that my neighbour built for me for free, watching the whales play in the harbour costs me a few cents for the tea bags in my pot, and is worth more than any activity I could go out and pay for.

I've worked with seniors for many, many years and few regret not spending more, but most regret not spending more time investing in love.

jimmyshutter

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 123
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #65 on: July 29, 2024, 08:04:47 AM »
1M isn't enough for me so 10M iwould be better but I personally wouldn't see much of a change in lifestyle from 1.5M to 10M. It could backfire with me losing some of my hobbies (home projects and fixing things like cars). I could see how having more money might take those away.

Ron Scott

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2002
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #66 on: July 29, 2024, 09:17:28 AM »
1M isn't enough for me so 10M iwould be better but I personally wouldn't see much of a change in lifestyle from 1.5M to 10M. It could backfire with me losing some of my hobbies (home projects and fixing things like cars). I could see how having more money might take those away.

If you have a somewhat frugal/savings mindset and are a bit handy you doing home projects until you can’t.

wageslave23

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1897
  • Location: Midwest
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #67 on: July 29, 2024, 09:25:24 AM »
I think what the OP was trying to get at (in a very convoluted way) was if you were to be given $10m for free, would you give up a portion of it because it would be "too much money". I.e, $3m is objectively better than $10m. If we take into consideration the tradeoff of earning $10m then of course the answer is no for most people.  Because most people quit around $1-3m. So since the second scenario is clearly "no", I'm assuming the first question.  And I would gladly have $10m for free and I'd rather have $100m for free. I think people here aren't being creative enough if they can't find ways to enjoy $10m if given for free. I'd buy a beautiful coastal house for $5m. If I had a billion I'd start thinking about buying a sports team for fun. Where I think the tipping point to hassle compared to enjoyment would be once you are in the top 100 richest people.  Then you become famous for your wealth and you start needing security and deal with stalkers and media harassment.  So maybe $10 billion+, is the threshold where I'd start to say "no, thank you" if given for free.

Dicey

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 23676
  • Age: 67
  • Location: NorCal
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #68 on: July 29, 2024, 09:46:36 AM »
As long as the $10M comes from passive growth in investments while I’m out living my best life, I’m not sure why anyone would put in effort to stop that from happening.  Sure, you end up paying more taxes which feels annoying, or have to put in more effort to mitigate taxes and perform stealth wealth (assuming you don’t want others to know you live below your means)…. But these trade offs are hardly enough to make me want to go all cash and stop my stache from growing.  It’s nice to at least eliminate the ‘money problems’ from life - doesn’t fix everything though.
I wouldn't take a paying, restrictive j-o-b again for anything. I would never go all cash either. My money grows passively, so that I will be able to do some great things with it, in my lifetime and posthumously. I give a lot of time and money to causes I care about now. I enjoy thinking about the ways I will be able to help them once I'm gone, the same way I do when I'm alive, only bigger.

Example: the Thrift Shop where I volunteer gives all their profits to our fantastic Trauma Center Hospital. It needs a face-lift and some new fixtures. We don't do it, because it would involve closing the store and loss of revenue. I could make a donation large enough to pay for the remodel and cover the lost income as well. We would love to have an electronic gate, and repave the parking lot. Yeah, I can make my donation large enough to include that as well.

I have ideas such as this for every charity I support. I'm letting my army of green soldiers continue to work for me so they can continue my work when I'm gone.

Tasse

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4064
  • Age: 31
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #69 on: July 29, 2024, 09:57:22 AM »
I think what the OP was trying to get at (in a very convoluted way) was if you were to be given $10m for free, would you give up a portion of it because it would be "too much money". I.e, $3m is objectively better than $10m. If we take into consideration the tradeoff of earning $10m then of course the answer is no for most people.  Because most people quit around $1-3m. So since the second scenario is clearly "no", I'm assuming the first question.  And I would gladly have $10m for free and I'd rather have $100m for free. I think people here aren't being creative enough if they can't find ways to enjoy $10m if given for free. I'd buy a beautiful coastal house for $5m. If I had a billion I'd start thinking about buying a sports team for fun. Where I think the tipping point to hassle compared to enjoyment would be once you are in the top 100 richest people.  Then you become famous for your wealth and you start needing security and deal with stalkers and media harassment.  So maybe $10 billion+, is the threshold where I'd start to say "no, thank you" if given for free.

I'd take any amount of free money offered to me. (ETA: I also would not stop my money from growing just to end up with less of it.) I just wouldn't keep the surplus or spend it on myself. It isn't so much that having $3M is better than having $10M, it's that I can think of so many better uses for $7M than sitting in my brokerage account, not even offering meaningful additional security. And I don't think whatever marginal happiness increase I'd get by spending $7M is worth more than what that money could do making the world better.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2024, 10:04:21 AM by Tass »

Gerard

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1610
  • Location: eastern canada
    • Optimacheap
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #70 on: July 29, 2024, 10:09:19 AM »
If 1M is enough, is 10M enougher?

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 25468
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #71 on: July 29, 2024, 10:20:40 AM »
If 1M is enough, is 10M enougher?

Yes.

With 10 mil there's no reason you can't live exactly the way you would with 1 mil - you just have more options and safety.  The question isn't is 10 better than 1.  This is obviously and trivially true.  The question is, is the extra you've got to do to get to 10 worth it for the options and safety that 10 will give.  That's very situation and person dependent.

Dicey

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 23676
  • Age: 67
  • Location: NorCal
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #72 on: July 29, 2024, 10:58:46 AM »
It strikes me that this thread is like the mustachian version of "What would you do if you won the lottery?" Fortunately, we would be a lot more responsible with it than the average joe-or-jane.

Metalcat

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 20524
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #73 on: July 29, 2024, 12:52:54 PM »
If 1M is enough, is 10M enougher?

Yes.

With 10 mil there's no reason you can't live exactly the way you would with 1 mil - you just have more options and safety.  The question isn't is 10 better than 1.  This is obviously and trivially true.  The question is, is the extra you've got to do to get to 10 worth it for the options and safety that 10 will give.  That's very situation and person dependent.

Also, making more money doesn't necessarily increase your safety.

People who experience burnout trying to earn more can have lasting, permanent cognitive damage. Not to mention the physical toll of neglect on your body that many people experience because of prioritizing work and money.

Just look at the state of our population. These folks aren't doing well, and work is a huge time and energy suck making the things that truly matter a lot harder to maintain.

If you can make more money while optimally investing in you and your family's well being, then awesome. I'm doing that and it's great.

But if crucial resources are being harmed by the pursuit of more money, then it's not increasing your safety, because a lot of the shit you want to protect doesn't get safer with more money than you need.

bmjohnson35

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 709
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #74 on: July 29, 2024, 02:14:54 PM »

For me, there is no question that 10M is better than 1M.  This is in absolute terms and not factoring in the additional time/effort it would take to obtain the difference. 

More Flexibility
More Security
Increased ability to be generous



bluecollarmusician

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 724
  • You call this Fi(re)?
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #75 on: July 29, 2024, 03:10:06 PM »
My points have all been around the fact that a range of 1-10M doesn't really capture the sense of the question being asked, it stretches too far into outlier territory for anyone close to either end of the question.

I actually feel like I didn't stretch it far enough:
if 1M is good, and 10M is better, is 50M better> i.e. what do people ACTUALLY think about money independent of time and FI/RE?

I have found people's replies fascinating, and definitely given me stuff to think about- but most of it is rooted in practical things like: "most people wouldn't find it worth it to work that long, etc."

@Dicey yes- it does feel like a "what would you do" mustachian lottery question, but what I am really trying to sus out is objective value of money, and how people view that.

If 1 hamburger is good, is 10 better? not usually.
If 1 wife is good is 10 better? Definitely not- 1 is more than enough :-p
If 1 week of full time with family is good, is full time living with family better?  Or time reading, or exercising, or walking on the beach, or riding bikes- or whatever: for most things even things you love "more" is not always better- it's all about balance.

Now money, and money "like" things are absolutely different: it's easier to store than hamburgers, and it doesn't get jealous like a wife. 
So my question is from the POV of readers here is more money unique like that, where "more is just always better."

I am dubious about this, and can't think of anything off the top of my head where there is no tipping point.  But it seems from most the replies that people think absent other constraints, more money is pretty much better.  I am dubious about this- I think that value usually comes from contstraint (i.e. a limited supply.) As F.Scott told us- "There is no boredom like that of the very rich." (or something like that...)
« Last Edit: July 29, 2024, 03:12:34 PM by bluecollarmusician »

bluecollarmusician

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 724
  • You call this Fi(re)?
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #76 on: July 29, 2024, 03:11:38 PM »
Hi @wageslave23
What I was trying to ask was (as the title of the thread says):

If 1M is good, is 10M better?
There seems to be an implicit assumption on the forums here that more money is always "better."

What do you think?  Is it? If so, why?  If not, why not?
At what point is more money a liability rather than a benefit?

I think that's exactly what was trying to ask... not sure why you would think that what I "meant" was

I think what the OP was trying to get at (in a very convoluted way) was if you were to be given $10m for free, would you give up a portion of it because it would be "too much money". I.e, $3m is objectively better than $10m.

?Not sure where you got that?
Anyway- in a very convoluted way, you actually answered from your pov very well- thanks:
I would gladly have $10m for free and I'd rather have $100m for free.

From your POV- more money is always better, up to a high limit of perhaps 10billion +.  Reasoning being that there are many creative ways to spend it, and more is better.


Although not a clear consensus it seems like the tendency is that more is better.


mm1970

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11918
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #77 on: July 29, 2024, 03:17:13 PM »
Wow, solid advice from @Metalcat as usual.  All that spoke to me, but especially the part about the pets.

I spent some time walking with my sis on this trip, and she asked when I was going to Hawaii, or Alaska, or whatever.  And...I'm tempted, but man I hate flying.  And did I mention I'm still suffering from whatever I had on this trip?  So tired.

We are very very likely going to adopt a dog in the next 2 weeks.  It makes traveling difficult.  We typically hire someone to stay in our house.  But...why go to Hawaii and hire someone, when you can drive to Bass Lake at Christmas and take the dog?  I'm aware they aren't the same type of vacation...

twinstudy

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 587
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #78 on: July 29, 2024, 05:22:46 PM »
I think what the OP was trying to get at (in a very convoluted way) was if you were to be given $10m for free, would you give up a portion of it because it would be "too much money". I.e, $3m is objectively better than $10m. If we take into consideration the tradeoff of earning $10m then of course the answer is no for most people.  Because most people quit around $1-3m. So since the second scenario is clearly "no", I'm assuming the first question.  And I would gladly have $10m for free and I'd rather have $100m for free. I think people here aren't being creative enough if they can't find ways to enjoy $10m if given for free. I'd buy a beautiful coastal house for $5m. If I had a billion I'd start thinking about buying a sports team for fun. Where I think the tipping point to hassle compared to enjoyment would be once you are in the top 100 richest people.  Then you become famous for your wealth and you start needing security and deal with stalkers and media harassment.  So maybe $10 billion+, is the threshold where I'd start to say "no, thank you" if given for free.

I've often thought about what I'd do if I found $100m lying around, which is about $94m more than I'd ever really need for FIRE purposes. I think I would hire someone to spend $94m buying up 85 or so rental properties, painting each of their roofs a funny colour (say purple) and then see if I could get enough income over time to have a whole neighbourhood with purple roofs. I'd keep the rest of the money for the whopping big land tax bill that I'd be accruing. I think I'd just do something nominal like that, as I cannot think of any real use for the money otherwise.

Metalcat

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 20524
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #79 on: July 29, 2024, 05:36:14 PM »
Hi @wageslave23
What I was trying to ask was (as the title of the thread says):

If 1M is good, is 10M better?
There seems to be an implicit assumption on the forums here that more money is always "better."

What do you think?  Is it? If so, why?  If not, why not?
At what point is more money a liability rather than a benefit?

I think that's exactly what was trying to ask... not sure why you would think that what I "meant" was

I think what the OP was trying to get at (in a very convoluted way) was if you were to be given $10m for free, would you give up a portion of it because it would be "too much money". I.e, $3m is objectively better than $10m.

?Not sure where you got that?
Anyway- in a very convoluted way, you actually answered from your pov very well- thanks:
I would gladly have $10m for free and I'd rather have $100m for free.

From your POV- more money is always better, up to a high limit of perhaps 10billion +.  Reasoning being that there are many creative ways to spend it, and more is better.


Although not a clear consensus it seems like the tendency is that more is better.

More money isn't always better though.

Having a ton of extra money can make it extremely challenging to exist in a world of extreme inequality. I mean, if you have WAY more money than you need and you just hoard it and don't feel some moral conflict, then...well...you have bigger issues than money can resolve.

This is a huge reason I've gravitated away from work that would be insanely lucrative. It's hard to hide certain levels of wealth, just by virtue of being affiliated with how you got it. The world becomes a different place and treats you very differently.

I have a personal preference for living and socializing among working class or lower middle class folks. I have plenty of upper middle class and upper class friends, but it's not at all my preferred population. Many of my current social circle are fishermen.

My relative wealth is already an ostentatious outlier in this community. Hell, the fact that I have all of my teeth makes me an outlier here, much less the fact that I'm on my 4th round of braces.

It would be remarkably difficult to coexist peacefully in this community if I were known to be in an extremely lucrative executive role with bonuses in the millions.

What I've seen up close from my 8 figure NW family members, and my ex's billionaire family is that enormous wealth can be unfathomably isolating. To possess a disproportionate share of what everyone around you wants can be incredibly difficult.

Imagine going to a restaurant with a bunch of families and the families can't afford for each person to have a meal, so they order one serving of fries and portion out a few fries to each kid. But you show up and order 10 full servings, take a bite or two from each plate, just getting WAY more food than you could ever possibly need, and they watch you just...not share any of it.

But if you do share, it becomes an expectation that you will always order 10 dishes, enough for everyone, and they don't even need to spend their money on fries, because 10 meals is nothing to you, you're going to order it anyway, because you like 10 different bites and you can afford it. But now you're also obligated to feed these families every single time. So other families join because they heard you buy everyone food.

At what point are you being used?

I'll never forget talking to an 8 figure NW clinic owner about how she never felt like herself with anyone because she had to be so vigilant to why anyone wanted to get close to her. She said that she felt like a blood bag around a pile of mosquitos. She was astoundingly lonely. A man who had similar net worth had what looked like tons of amazing friendships and he was known as the most likeable guy in the profession, but when probed, he too expressed profound loneliness. It was all an act, it was how he disarmed resentment for his success, but when his wife got cancer, the veneer shattered and he isolated completely because he wasn't actually close to anyone.

Obviously there are very wealthy folks who figure it out, and those folks are the ones who fit in with the other wealthy folks, who are comfortable in that community and enjoy their company.

I personally don't, I'll take a fisherman with a few missing teeth at a Newfie singalong any day over 99% of the many, many 10M+ NW folks I've met in my life. And a lot of people in that population don't have the temperament to fit in either, so they're kind of stuck there, struggling to fit in with the modest wealth folks and struggling to enjoy the company of fellow wealthy folks, and they just get fucking weird over time.

Most of the very wealthy folks I know who are happy grew up in wealth and that's where their community has always been. Granted, for every rich kid I know who grew up to thrive in that world, I know another, or several others, who have serious mental health and/or addiction problems.

Living with and among wealth can be remarkably challenging, so in no way do I think that it's a given that more wealth is better. I've seen enormous harms.

I'll take my little fishing village folks. They throw really fucking amazing parties.

twinstudy

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 587
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #80 on: July 29, 2024, 05:44:06 PM »
Two counter-points I would raise to that, although I also think generally @Metalcat raises good points:

1. You can earn lots of money and then put it into philanthropy, if you so desire. Earning lots doesn't prevent you from giving lots.

2. No one needs to know how much wealth you have. You can drive the same car (or buy a Ferrari but drive another car to work, if you even drive to work at all - I walk to work so no one knows what car I drive) and you can choose to live in the same house even if you have multiple other properties. People complaining about others knowing that they're rich, etc, almost always are the ones, themselves, telling others how rich they are. None of my colleagues knows what my net worth is.

bluecollarmusician

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 724
  • You call this Fi(re)?
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #81 on: July 29, 2024, 05:45:43 PM »

More money isn't always better though.


That is my opinion as well. 
My observation is that even many (or most) even on these forums don't agree. 

The story of your experience of life improvement post disability is a testimony to the nature of how difficulties and challenges in a unanticipated way can lead us to a much better life than we would have know otherwise. 

Thanks for sharing...
« Last Edit: July 29, 2024, 05:49:16 PM by bluecollarmusician »

Tasse

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4064
  • Age: 31
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #82 on: July 29, 2024, 06:00:08 PM »
I mean, if you have WAY more money than you need and you just hoard it and don't feel some moral conflict, then...well...you have bigger issues than money can resolve.

I think this is the blunter version of what I've been trying to say, lol.

deborah

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 15889
  • Age: 15
  • Location: Australia or another awesome area
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #83 on: July 29, 2024, 06:24:36 PM »
I’m happy with what I have and don’t want any more. I don’t even want an inheritance, and have agitated not to receive one.

I live in a country with “free” healthcare. It isn’t entirely free. Most medications are on the PBS that are subsidised by the government, so they don’t cost much at all. There are a few that aren’t - experimental drugs, very expensive drugs that haven’t been proven to give decent outcomes… Most other healthcare is cheap, but not things like cosmetic surgery that’s just because you want to look a little bit better. Some people do get terrible diseases, like cancer, go through all the PBS drugs and then hear of the latest fancy drug that might cure them, and pay exorbitant prices for something that’s not proven enough to be on the PBS. I’d rather be in the position where I don’t have that money. We all need to be aware of our own mortality, and be accepting that we can’t have everything.

Similarly, I could want a very expensive house, but the fact that I don’t have that sort of money allows me to stop and assess what I really want in life. I actually don’t want anything large. I want a nice place, where my garden is my own that I can potter around in. I’m not in a neighbourhood where I need a manicured garden to reflect the rest of the street. I want a small place where I can tidy it myself, and think that it’s mine.

I love where I live. It’s just beautiful looking out on the mountains. I’m sure there are nicer places in the world, but I don’t think I’d be as happy elsewhere, so there’s no reason to have more money for something nicer.

FIRE has given me health, happiness and contentment. Much more than when I was working. I’ve been retired for fourteen years, and when I left work, my savings weren’t 25 times my work income, they were 25 times my budget, which was less. So I have already been in a situation where I had more money available to me, and I much prefer my current life with less.

$10million would just be too much. It would allow thoughtlessness to enter my life. It would complicate my life because I’d have to do something with it (even giving it away takes time from other things I’d much rather do). And in a world where more and more people know more and more about you, it’s becoming more difficult to be under the radar. After all, $10million puts you into the wealthiest 6% in the USA, and the wealthiest 0.02% in the world.

Telecaster

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4155
  • Location: Seattle, WA
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #84 on: July 29, 2024, 06:30:39 PM »
I am dubious about this, and can't think of anything off the top of my head where there is no tipping point.  But it seems from most the replies that people think absent other constraints, more money is pretty much better.  I am dubious about this- I think that value usually comes from contstraint (i.e. a limited supply.) As F.Scott told us- "There is no boredom like that of the very rich." (or something like that...)

If that is the case, most of us are fortunate to have a constrained supply of money  :)


cannotWAIT

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 268
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #85 on: July 29, 2024, 06:41:14 PM »
I can't speak to the 10M figure, but growing up I spent a lot of time and at times lived with a very close relative with many multiples of that, and I would absolutely choose the 1M over the, let's say, 100M. That level of wealth absolutely warps all of your relationships--your romantic relationships, your relationships with your kids, your friendships, your business relationships, all of it. The money is the third party to every relationship you have. Even among people with similar wealth, things are weird and competitive and distant in a way that they're just not for the "millionaire next door." Everybody at some level is hoping to get something from you.

Metalcat

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 20524
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #86 on: July 29, 2024, 06:50:57 PM »
Two counter-points I would raise to that, although I also think generally @Metalcat raises good points:

1. You can earn lots of money and then put it into philanthropy, if you so desire. Earning lots doesn't prevent you from giving lots.

2. No one needs to know how much wealth you have. You can drive the same car (or buy a Ferrari but drive another car to work, if you even drive to work at all - I walk to work so no one knows what car I drive) and you can choose to live in the same house even if you have multiple other properties. People complaining about others knowing that they're rich, etc, almost always are the ones, themselves, telling others how rich they are. None of my colleagues knows what my net worth is.

At a certain point of wealth, it's extremely hard to hide by virtue of your connection to how you got it.

If you own an extremely valuable business, people will know. If you have an executive role at an extremely lucrative company, people will know.

It's just hard to have an 8-10 figure NW and manage to keep it really stealthy.

Up to 10M, some people can keep it pretty stealthy, but above that, especially if you've retired early, it's tricky not to leave a footprint. Like, I was just working for a startup founder. I can roughly guestimate his NW through a 2 min google of what he's affiliated with and the IPO info.

Metalcat

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 20524
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #87 on: July 29, 2024, 06:53:07 PM »
I can't speak to the 10M figure, but growing up I spent a lot of time and at times lived with a very close relative with many multiples of that, and I would absolutely choose the 1M over the, let's say, 100M. That level of wealth absolutely warps all of your relationships--your romantic relationships, your relationships with your kids, your friendships, your business relationships, all of it. The money is the third party to every relationship you have. Even among people with similar wealth, things are weird and competitive and distant in a way that they're just not for the "millionaire next door." Everybody at some level is hoping to get something from you.

Exactly!

Massive wealth is not a benign force that just lets you buy shit when you feel like it. It's a force in and of itself that needs to be managed, and not always in pleasant ways.

twinstudy

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 587
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #88 on: July 29, 2024, 07:44:18 PM »
Two counter-points I would raise to that, although I also think generally @Metalcat raises good points:

1. You can earn lots of money and then put it into philanthropy, if you so desire. Earning lots doesn't prevent you from giving lots.

2. No one needs to know how much wealth you have. You can drive the same car (or buy a Ferrari but drive another car to work, if you even drive to work at all - I walk to work so no one knows what car I drive) and you can choose to live in the same house even if you have multiple other properties. People complaining about others knowing that they're rich, etc, almost always are the ones, themselves, telling others how rich they are. None of my colleagues knows what my net worth is.

At a certain point of wealth, it's extremely hard to hide by virtue of your connection to how you got it.

If you own an extremely valuable business, people will know. If you have an executive role at an extremely lucrative company, people will know.

It's just hard to have an 8-10 figure NW and manage to keep it really stealthy.

Up to 10M, some people can keep it pretty stealthy, but above that, especially if you've retired early, it's tricky not to leave a footprint. Like, I was just working for a startup founder. I can roughly guestimate his NW through a 2 min google of what he's affiliated with and the IPO info.

Yeah, I think you're right. What's the most wealth a person can accrue completely stealthily? Assume two earners both with high-paying but 'normal' jobs that won't generate any news or unusual interest from strangers. So say a law partner/McKinsey partner/surgeon type career. Two people on $1.0-$1.5m a year combined can save $500k-$750k a year after tax. Compounded over a 15 year-period of peak earnings and you'd get $7.5m-$11 mil without compounding, maybe $15m-$30 mil with investments and compounding. But even then, people at that success level start doing 'newsworthy' things like joining boards and foundations, setting up charitable causes in their own name, and otherwise having a high profile, all of which wrecks the stealth part.

GilesMM

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2501
  • Location: PNW
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #89 on: July 29, 2024, 08:01:29 PM »
Two counter-points I would raise to that, although I also think generally @Metalcat raises good points:

1. You can earn lots of money and then put it into philanthropy, if you so desire. Earning lots doesn't prevent you from giving lots.

2. No one needs to know how much wealth you have. You can drive the same car (or buy a Ferrari but drive another car to work, if you even drive to work at all - I walk to work so no one knows what car I drive) and you can choose to live in the same house even if you have multiple other properties. People complaining about others knowing that they're rich, etc, almost always are the ones, themselves, telling others how rich they are. None of my colleagues knows what my net worth is.


You could live in this modest old house for decades, drive a battered old Cadillac, and eat McDonald's for breakfast despite having a few pennies saved (12 figures and counting).



Metalcat

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 20524
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #90 on: July 29, 2024, 08:19:41 PM »
Two counter-points I would raise to that, although I also think generally @Metalcat raises good points:

1. You can earn lots of money and then put it into philanthropy, if you so desire. Earning lots doesn't prevent you from giving lots.

2. No one needs to know how much wealth you have. You can drive the same car (or buy a Ferrari but drive another car to work, if you even drive to work at all - I walk to work so no one knows what car I drive) and you can choose to live in the same house even if you have multiple other properties. People complaining about others knowing that they're rich, etc, almost always are the ones, themselves, telling others how rich they are. None of my colleagues knows what my net worth is.

At a certain point of wealth, it's extremely hard to hide by virtue of your connection to how you got it.

If you own an extremely valuable business, people will know. If you have an executive role at an extremely lucrative company, people will know.

It's just hard to have an 8-10 figure NW and manage to keep it really stealthy.

Up to 10M, some people can keep it pretty stealthy, but above that, especially if you've retired early, it's tricky not to leave a footprint. Like, I was just working for a startup founder. I can roughly guestimate his NW through a 2 min google of what he's affiliated with and the IPO info.

Yeah, I think you're right. What's the most wealth a person can accrue completely stealthily? Assume two earners both with high-paying but 'normal' jobs that won't generate any news or unusual interest from strangers. So say a law partner/McKinsey partner/surgeon type career. Two people on $1.0-$1.5m a year combined can save $500k-$750k a year after tax. Compounded over a 15 year-period of peak earnings and you'd get $7.5m-$11 mil without compounding, maybe $15m-$30 mil with investments and compounding. But even then, people at that success level start doing 'newsworthy' things like joining boards and foundations, setting up charitable causes in their own name, and otherwise having a high profile, all of which wrecks the stealth part.

Also, I've worked with exactly those people. The public actually tends to assume that doctors and law partners have a lot more wealth than they actually do. So it's hard to be stealth when you have a job title that screams wealthy to the average person.

And within your own professional community, it's pretty easy to tell who is making more and who isn't, and it's pretty easy to tell what they're spending on or not spending on. So it's pretty hard to hide wealth. You can maybe blue the edges of exactly how much wealth, but it's actually pretty hard to hide with just a bit of key information about someone.

What is fairly easy to hide is debt. A heck of a lot of people appear more wealthy than they are, but have lost tons of money in business and gambling/addiction. But it's very very hard to hide wealth if people know what your job was, how long you worked at it, and what your basic lifestyle is.

It's much, much easier to stealth financial fire straights than it is to stealth substantial wealth.

It's easier to stealth a few million because of what we've been talking about all along. It's very easy to spend a fortune on a "normal" middle class life. So if your household makes 100-300K/yr, it's absolutely feasible that you're living a middle class looking lifestyle and blowing the bulk of that income.

Meanwhile if your Mustachian, you might be living a pretty nice "normal" middle class looking life and spending a fraction of that.

That's where stealth comes in, when the cost of a middle class lifestyle can absorb most of your estimated income. But at certain income levels, you really just exceed what could be reasonably spent on "normal" and it starts becoming self-evident when you don't inflate your lifestyle.

So if it's fairly easy to figure out that you make around 7 figures per year, and you aren't chartering yachts for family vacations, people are going to add 2+2 and find that it equals shit tons of money in the bank.

It doesn't even need to be newsworthy. If you were the president of a corporation, people around you will know that, and someone will figure out roughly what your comp was, and that information is socially valuable, so eventually most people will know. And it doesn't take much to observe your lifestyle.

It's just not that easy to hide basic information about yourself without engaging in very active obfuscation and deception, which is really fucking hard on a long time scale and not exactly pleasant as a day-to-day way of living.

spartana

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1373
  • FIREd at 36
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #91 on: July 30, 2024, 12:32:22 AM »
Two counter-points I would raise to that, although I also think generally @Metalcat raises good points:

1. You can earn lots of money and then put it into philanthropy, if you so desire. Earning lots doesn't prevent you from giving lots.

2. No one needs to know how much wealth you have. You can drive the same car (or buy a Ferrari but drive another car to work, if you even drive to work at all - I walk to work so no one knows what car I drive) and you can choose to live in the same house even if you have multiple other properties. People complaining about others knowing that they're rich, etc, almost always are the ones, themselves, telling others how rich they are. None of my colleagues knows what my net worth is.


You could live in this modest old house for decades, drive a battered old Cadillac, and eat McDonald's for breakfast despite having a few pennies saved (12 figures and counting).

Not hard to do when you have a $13 million dollar beach house in Laguna Beach CA. But kudos to him as he picked it up for $150,000 in 1971 (the same year my folks bought a place 3 bedroom SFH in OC for $21k). 

But this is a good example of wealth allow g you to buy things that may not necessarily bring you more happiness and maybe just cause more headaches. Headaches and unhappiness you may not realize until after trying all the fancy things that society tells you are THE BEST Things to buy and own and do. And because you have the money to do so you cam spend much of your time trying to live that way. And spend just as much time trying to unravel the expensive and time consuming choices you made verses ones you really enjoy more. Advertisers speak and those with money listen! Us low income folk (of the mustache sort) know better.
« Last Edit: July 30, 2024, 12:46:25 AM by spartana »

EscapeVelocity2020

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5208
  • Age: 51
  • Location: Houston
    • EscapeVelocity2020
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #92 on: July 30, 2024, 05:49:52 AM »
But you don’t have to buy headache inducing, high maintenance stuff just because you have 10M or more.  Maybe it gets harder for some folks to resist?  But not for a true Mustachian.  I still drive my 2015 Honda Fit and love being carefree about dings, parking spaces, being robbed, etc.  We will probably also downsize our home once our kids move out.  The only thing we spend more on is travel, but nobody seems too interested in out NW.  Maybe being an engineer and teacher helps, but more apt titles would be investors and philanthropists…

wageslave23

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1897
  • Location: Midwest
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #93 on: July 30, 2024, 06:37:04 AM »
Hi @wageslave23
What I was trying to ask was (as the title of the thread says):

If 1M is good, is 10M better?
There seems to be an implicit assumption on the forums here that more money is always "better."

What do you think?  Is it? If so, why?  If not, why not?
At what point is more money a liability rather than a benefit?

I think that's exactly what was trying to ask... not sure why you would think that what I "meant" was

I think what the OP was trying to get at (in a very convoluted way) was if you were to be given $10m for free, would you give up a portion of it because it would be "too much money". I.e, $3m is objectively better than $10m.

?Not sure where you got that?
Anyway- in a very convoluted way, you actually answered from your pov very well- thanks:
I would gladly have $10m for free and I'd rather have $100m for free.

From your POV- more money is always better, up to a high limit of perhaps 10billion +.  Reasoning being that there are many creative ways to spend it, and more is better.


Although not a clear consensus it seems like the tendency is that more is better.

Sorry, you're op may not have been convoluted, but several posters misinterpreted your op to mean "is it worth working for $10m". Which for most people the answer is clearly "no". Your original post would have been more clear if you had used a higher number such as $50m. Because again most people would clearly rather have $10m over $1m if they didn't have to work for it. So adding the qualifier that you don't have to work for it and using a higher number would be helpful to zero in on the question. But otherwise it's now become a very interesting discussion.

bluecollarmusician

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 724
  • You call this Fi(re)?
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #94 on: July 30, 2024, 07:05:09 AM »

Sorry, you're op may not have been convoluted, but several posters misinterpreted your op to mean "is it worth working for $10m". Which for most people the answer is clearly "no". Your original post would have been more clear if you had used a higher number such as $50m. Because again most people would clearly rather have $10m over $1m if they didn't have to work for it. So adding the qualifier that you don't have to work for it and using a higher number would be helpful to zero in on the question. But otherwise it's now become a very interesting discussion.

I too was surprised by the answers and the direction things went!  Just goes to show (me) how differently we can all interpret things and the way we think of it.  I think I was surprised how difficult it was to get people to think of $$ in isolation from "doing something to get it" and also as a "FIRE" stache.  It is an indicator to me how closely the value of money is associated in our minds with the things we typically do to get it.  Basically, the answers were quite a bit more practical than I expected, at least at first.  I agree, about clarity and bigger numbers: I should have done more figures like: If 1M is good is 10M better? If so is 50M better than 10? etc. or just simply "is more money always better?" I was just trying to come up with a catchy title.  And ironically, several posters said 10M was WAY too much and it would have been a better question if I used a smaller figure like 1M vs 3M.

Go figure.  Still- interesting to see the viewpoints.

 
Because again most people would clearly rather have $10m over $1m if they didn't have to work for it.

That seems to be true, and the reason seems to be "optionality"- (mostly). Refreshing to see other viewpoints though who question that being all positive. 

Appreciate your thoughts.

jrhampt

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2404
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Connecticut
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #95 on: July 30, 2024, 07:49:23 AM »
If 1M is enough, is 10M enougher?

Yes.

With 10 mil there's no reason you can't live exactly the way you would with 1 mil - you just have more options and safety.  The question isn't is 10 better than 1.  This is obviously and trivially true.  The question is, is the extra you've got to do to get to 10 worth it for the options and safety that 10 will give.  That's very situation and person dependent.

Also, making more money doesn't necessarily increase your safety.

People who experience burnout trying to earn more can have lasting, permanent cognitive damage. Not to mention the physical toll of neglect on your body that many people experience because of prioritizing work and money.

Just look at the state of our population. These folks aren't doing well, and work is a huge time and energy suck making the things that truly matter a lot harder to maintain.

If you can make more money while optimally investing in you and your family's well being, then awesome. I'm doing that and it's great.

But if crucial resources are being harmed by the pursuit of more money, then it's not increasing your safety, because a lot of the shit you want to protect doesn't get safer with more money than you need.

This is very true.  Just had a close family friend work himself literally to death recently at a fairly young age.  Probably double or more the net worth of our household, but now they will never get to enjoy it.  It's easy enough to do if you have a lucrative career that is a huge part of your identify.  You really have to be intentional about taking care of yourself and putting that first or it can kill you.  It is not worth it.  And as mentioned elsewhere in the thread, people do want things from you after you hit a level where it becomes harder to hide.

Ron Scott

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2002
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #96 on: July 30, 2024, 08:27:02 AM »
I am enjoying reading about how $1M is better than $10M. We’ve even got a few novellas in here!

Keep ‘em coming!

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 25468
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #97 on: July 30, 2024, 08:31:47 AM »
If anyone is overburdened with 9 million extra and wants to go back to the clean simplicity of 1 million, please PM me.  I'd be willing to assume this hardship as an act of charitable goodwill and personal sacrifice.

jeroly

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 797
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #98 on: July 30, 2024, 08:42:55 AM »
If anyone is overburdened with 9 million extra and wants to go back to the clean simplicity of 1 million, please PM me.  I'd be willing to assume this hardship as an act of charitable goodwill and personal sacrifice.
The humanitarianism of this forum has never been more on display than in @GuitarStv 's Frodo-like (was going to say Christ-like but that might've ruffled some feathers) willingness to assume the burden of the ring cross bucks.

Metalcat

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 20524
Re: If 1M is good, is 10M better?
« Reply #99 on: July 30, 2024, 09:40:34 AM »
I am enjoying reading about how $1M is better than $10M. We’ve even got a few novellas in here!

Keep ‘em coming!

Maybe I missed it, but I don't remember anyone saying 1M is better, only that "more" money isn't always better than less.

 

Wow, a phone plan for fifteen bucks!