Hacker News Reader

Comment by skybrian | Hacker News Reader

In a similar situation, I decided to take a leave of absence with no plan for what I was going to do. Since I wasn't sure I'd go back, I made sure other people on the team were prepared.

Then serious family stuff happened and I was happy to have the time to deal with it. After the leave of absence was up, I still wasn't sure and asked about extending, but they didn't go for that so I left the company.

Since then I've learned to play the accordion and now I'm tinkering with electronics to come up with a new musical instrument. No real desire to get a job. After a while I decided I'm fine with simply being retired.

So I'd say try the leave of absence?

View on HN

How do you support yourself? Do you have a family to support?

It sounds like he might be living off of investments or leftover savings from his previous position.

After a decade in FANG and living a not extravagant lifestyle, you could easily have a couple million socked away.

That at least gives you breathing room to do whatever for a few years.

For a few years? What kind of lifestyle do you have that a few millions only last a few years? I really doubt with that math you would have been able to save a few millions in the first place, unless you won a lottery.

Typical cash plus equity for an experienced engineer is going to top $300k/yr at the low end. Millions might be an exaggeration, but it's certainly trivial to save well north of $1M in a decade on that salary, barring misfortune like a health incident.

The argument was that if you're capable of saving that much, you're going to have a hard time spending it in only a few years, especially if you're not working.

>barring misfortune like a health incident.

Here is a reminder to everyone that a health incident is only a financial misfortune in the US.

If a health incident makes you unable to work, that's a financial issue in much of the world.

It's not just being unable to work, it's about all savings: "66.5 percent of all bankruptcies were tied to medical issues"

Not being able to work is one thing.

Not being able to work and have hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt because of it is a whole other situation

> that's a financial issue in much of the world.

Well, unless they have a pension. Which about half the countries in the world seems to provide, at least for government jobs.

There often are in the US as well for government jobs. But they usually depend on a significant number of years of tenure and defined benefit plans are pretty rare at this point for private employers. (Which isn't even necessarily a bad thing unless you think retirement benefits should be heavily tied to decades of employment with a single company.)

I envy the bubble you live in. If you have say $3M in the bank and you spend $50k / year then it lasts you 60 years doing nothing.

Way more assuming you’re generating interest (assuming you’re not a financial idiot who’s keeping $3MM in cash)

Beginning in 50s, health insurance alone is $25k per year in premiums with after tax money plus ~$13k out of pocket maximum per year.

Don’t know how a couple can afford to forego that, especially if they have assets that can be taken, the hospital will come for them.

Oh, I almost always forget how fucked up American healthcare system is. However with this much money, even a 1M stacked, one can live a happy life in anywhere in the world.

I have a friend living in Berlin working 10h / week for a SF startup remotely and meanwhile he enjoys playing music and building stuff for fun.

Yes, if I didn’t have passive income sufficient to pay for all of my and my family’s healthcare, I wouldn’t feel economically secure in the US.

And that means at least $70k to $150k in passive income per year.

That sounds very depressing TBH.

With 70k passive I could retire in Hungary. Just by having $150k in your bank account would give you 5-8 years of runway in Budapest to live a very good life.

The $25k for someone making $50k is a completely bogus number. It’s likely a little less than half that for a family of 4 on a Kasiser healthcare plan according to google.

Not bogus in NJ:

https://www.state.nj.us/dobi/division_insurance/ihcseh/ihcra...

Kaiser is an exception and is only available on the West coast. And maybe a little bit in VA.

Either way, the point about needing a ton of money for healthcare is valid. It’s a race to get to Medicare age before you get hit with a medical problem.

Edit: Here's the data for nationwide for a 40 year old. Based on the NJ pdf above, you can double the premium to figure out the cost for someone in 50s to 60s.

https://www.kff.org/health-reform/state-indicator/average-ma...

Edit: I just noticed you were claiming someone earning $50k won't pay $25k in health insurance premiums, which is right. I did not know that premium tax credits only took into account annual income.

I’m in Georgia and Kaiser’s website says there are 26 locations throughout Metro Atlanta.

Here's a list of all the places Kaiser offers healthcare, and it doesn't apply to most people in the US, so I don't consider it relevant for a discussion about healthcare costs for people in the US as a whole.

https://healthy.kaiserpermanente.org/doctors-locations

OP said they work for FANG and they are likely in California or Washington. It’s very relevant.

I live in Berlin, pay $5.3k health insurance with $1k deductable.

I was considering applying to remote jobs in SF but I think the time zone would mess with my family life.

$25k is a bogus number. I know several self employed people. The highest earner is paying $900 a month and the other is paying $800 for 2 people. Another person I know who is 1099 and makes less than $30k is paying about $75 a month.

Personally I paid about $30 per month working part time as a waiter in college making about $20k a year.

My parents just purchased a silver HSA plan on healthcare.gov for $2,000 or so per month, with a $13k oop max.

Here’s the source:

https://www.state.nj.us/dobi/division_insurance/ihcseh/ihcra...

A young person’s data points about healthcare costs are useless. It’s the 50s and 60s that get you, and when you actually need healthcare.

That’s unfortunate for NJ, the $900 person just turned 60 last Friday and the couple paying $800 are 63 and 64.

My brother in law is a low income 1099 earner and gets a special insurance for his kid that’s about $30, called PeachCare and it maxes out at $70 for 2 kids. Depending on income it’s $10-$35 dollar max per child.

$900 per month is $10,800 per year for 1 person, which is $21,600 per year for a couple, and I wrote $25,000.

My point is that there are significant healthcare costs, well into the tens of thousands of dollars, in one's 50s and 60s, and the data supports it. I don't know what the situation is if you earn $50k from investments every year, as I'm not familiar with the subsidy rules, but it would seem strange to me if the US government offered subsidies to someone drawing investment income from $3M.

Edit: It seems that you can get subsidies even if you are deriving your income from investments, so I guess you are correct that someone earning $50k doesn't pay the full premium price.

https://www.irs.gov/affordable-care-act/individuals-and-fami...

No one making $50k self employed is paying 25k in insurance premiums period. The people I quoted are probably making between $150-200k a year.

How old are they? Insurance gets a lot more expensive as you get older.

At a FANG they are probably living in a high COL - got to pay that mortgage

Also, if your friends are also earning similar amounts, then the activities they take part in are probably going to be more costly too. Which usually means if you want to continue being in the circle, or at least an active member of it, you’ll need to engage in some of those activities, especially if you have kids, and then things get expensive.

Throw in a healthcare issue and there’s not much wiggle room.

A couple million would let you retire and live off of say $60k/yr indefinitely if and only if you magically solved healthcare issues.

If you've say spent $100k/yr and still saved up $2m (still easily doable), then you don't want to retire yet because you're gonna eventually run out of cash. Sure it'll last more than a few years, but it's going to deplete the longer you go.

Also figure your healthcare costs increase drastically without being employed.

Also half of my statement wasn't a financial one, just an assumption that after a few years you might get bored and want to do something for employment anyway.

How old are you if you don’t mind me asking?

Late 40's.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com