How to Escape the Modern Rat Race
durmonski.com
durmonski.com
No, you are being influenced by media, which convinces you that things are a proxy for happiness and good relationships. It's the materialism that fuels our economic progress so I am not against it. But if you think you are in a rat race for money and success, it's because of human nature, not genetic survival.
In fact, as an example, isn't there some often quoted statistic about half a percentage of all living humans having descended from Genghis Khan?
The idea about people coming from Genghis Khan is unrepresentative in a couple ways. First, that a large number of people have a common ancestor does not mean that the common ancestor was in fact Genghis Khan. It could have been someone else associated with the Mongol conquest.
Second, six hundred years from now you or I may have a lot of ancestors, assuming you have kids (I already do). There is nothing remarkable about that.
The closest I got to explaining it to him is that Advertising as a profession in the US is the successor to WWII psychological warfare. People are being paid to use your instincts and your worst impulses against you. All day. Every day. It started out weaponized, and now it's industrialized.
To opt out requires a level of enlightenment (literally and figuratively) that few invest in, and some doubt they could achieve even if it were a priority.
We have black hat hackers attacking our brains, and only occasionally do the white hat hackers get any sort of publicity, and some of those have less substance but are more approachable than the real experts. These people are almost always standing on the shoulders of giants, and thus their work feels derivative (eg, Marie Kondo), which is off-putting to people. Their style-over-substance makes them in effect hyper-palatable people, which is a form of cognitive dissonance with the message.
The Fight Club line has always really resonated with me:
"We work jobs we hate to buy shit we don't need"
Live below your means. Tune out from all the consumerism. Suddenly you find that you have enough savings built up that you could support yourself for multiple years without working. Now you are no longer willing to put up with as much at work. Oddly, this builds a sort of respect from people and they bother you less. Now you have excellent work life balance and more than you could ever want.
And really the key to it all is just not wanting so much.
(Also try to keep the freak-accident / illness destroying your life type stuff out your mind.)
I have three.
If anything they have more options, they just have less concrete things.
Maybe those aren't true, maybe they're true up to a certain point, but in my experience, people will stretch their budget to put their kids in the better schools, and the rat race starts there. This might not be an issue if you're already a dual professional household earning $200k+ or something where you're deciding between $600k vs $1M houses, but more for whether or not a $80k income family should stretch and buy a $400k house or stick to a $300k house.
(numbers aren't accurate, just trying to show that there exists a tier of society that does have to make those tough choices between living comfortably within their means and offering their kids a meaningfully higher probability of future advancement).
I used to meet people in the NYC area who commuted 1+ hour each way everyday to work 8AM to 6PM at least, they were all doing it so their kids go to the best school district they could afford. I felt sad for them since it basically meant very little time with the kids during the weekdays, no gym, no visiting friends/family, cooking, but they all did it.
The most obvious and probably biggest expense item (at least in the US) would be tertiary education, but having been out a few years I don’t really notice what the additional benefit was of top-tier private university vs cheap state university, since I know plenty of state schoolers making FAANG money and plenty of Ivy Leaguers struggling to find jobs.
Though at least for me the primary/secondary property race you describe was not an issue, since I went to school in NYC, which has district wide school choice for middle school and universal school choice for high school. (NYC is a million kids so the city is split into districts for ease of administration.) Elementary school was geographically defined, but I also went to a school with a C rating, and plenty of people from that school ended up fine.
There probably is a point where "best available" isn't worth it, but I think for many people, they still feel that they need to do whatever they can. NYC is a great example, where unless your kid makes it into Stuyvesant or Brooklyn Tech or equivalent, many higher income parents feel compelled to move to the suburbs. Or even the current uproar where they diminished the testing to get into those schools.
That way, even if you were subject to feeling guilt over not providing the very best of everything, you can satisfy it this way.
"good enough" and "justified" must consciously and explicitly include some pie slice for "non-essentials" though. Some amount of "non-essentials" are in fact essential. Anything else is simply not living. So, once in a while, you do splurge on the expensive weekend.
Let me quote you one of my favorite posts: "You say 'I can't do XYZ because I have kids and a mortgage?' - well maybe you should have thought about the long term ramifications of your actions."
Kids are just the same - except the other way around!
So personally, when I'm old and retired, I plan to depend on the work your kids (and the kids of other people who also generously considered the "continued survival of the human race") while in the meantime maximizing the benefits that come from the freedom of not having kids.
You may not like this freeloader spirit, and governments generally encourage people to have kids by various means ("working economy, GDP growth and all that are important after all!).
But as it's not illegal to "abstain" from the rat race, I do not care much :)
And so to maximize this probability, people stretch themselves to live in neighborhoods bidding against other people also stretching themselves to live in the "best" neighborhood they can afford.
I teach my kids that it might be a poor ROI to work for material stuff, but I do teach them the importance of wealth in being able to obtain resources in the future.
happiness = things_you_have - things_you_want
It's much easier to reduce your desires than it is to buy new stuff. Your resources are scarce and your desires infinite. If you can convince yourself you have everything you want already nothing can touch you. Write down a list of reasons to not buy the new hotness.
Stoicism has more to say on this, for example negative visualization. If you feel upset with your spouse or kids imagine them being hit by a car and dying in your arms. Car or truck? Did the car stop, or speed off? Burial or cremation? What will you say to your family, their friends? Manufacture details and explore their emotional impact. The frustration just evaporates.
We're happy as long as we're going vaguely where we know we should be able to, to get what gives us satisfaction
If you go for your quest in life, you may become very fulfilled and happy even when failing to obtain any end goals.
There are of course no guarantees or strict rules in life, so are just very general cause-and-effects in play.
A deficit of things we "have" to do have made boredom a common thing in modern life instead of a rarity reserved for monks or nobility. And so so many of these things we do are seeking stimulation and novelty, not reproductive success.
You have to find other answers to the "what do you want to do" and "how will you mentally satisfy yourself" problems if you opt out. They won't solve themselves.
That's not like the selfish gene theory work at all. In species where sex is involved, the "quality" of the genes of your partner is as much as important for the destiny of your genes as the fact you are reproducing. That's why sports stars and millionaires marry and have kids with beautiful models instead of getting pregnant 1000 plain Janes.
It does not make so much sense since in modern society the survival rate is pretty high, but as the usually repeated mantra says ;"we humans are machines living in the current world with a 200k-year-old firmware "
https://www.eaj.io/eight-hours-a-day/
Sleep, Work, Consume Media...
Ultimately, I think people will be better off choosing intrinsic values that are not conditional on external forces or comparison to others. That said, as long as you can achieve your values, however vain they may be, more power to you!
Frankly speaking, your comment comes off a bit dickish to me, especially this part:
> You may trick your mind into thinking you genuinely enjoy self-improvement
Appreciate the feedback. I'm not trying to be a dick. I should have replaced "you" with "I" in my response.
For those who've found themselves stuck in the rat race, including myself, I think it's important to answer the question: Why is wealth and social status a poor value system?
My answer is: because wealth and social status are largely outside of my control.
Put another way, values are only bad insofar as they are hard to achieve.
Ok, then, the question is: What are better values than wealth and social status?
In my search for an answer to this question, I read Carol Dweck's book "Growth Mindset" where she argues that self-growth, in of itself, is a worthwhile value.
At first, I was convinced. Aha, I just need to value growth. Then, I will have motivation to engage in all these challenging activities AND I have a value that is entirely within my control (which makes it a good value). After all, I can grow as a person without fail.
Alas, after further reflection and trying to adopt this mindset, I realized that valuing self-growth, for me, was just a way of hiding from my true values: wealth and social status. That is, no matter how hard I tried to focus on growth as an end in of itself, I was always secretly still chasing after wealth and social status. Self-growth, for me, was just a way to disguise rat-race values. Put another way, Dweck's school of psychology tries to train you to focus on the means instead of the ends.
In order to escape the rat race, I believe you have to truly replace your old values with intrinsic values that are 1) ends in of themselves and 2) within your control.
As an aside, the mindset you describe, of only focusing on that which one can control, is referred to in psychology as having an Internal Locus of Control vs an External Locus of Control.
After reading Dweck's book, I focused on self-growth and learning as primary values. However, when my second startup hit a slog, I found myself losing motivation again. I realized, then, that I only chose self-growth and learning as a means to achieve status and wealth.
I began to question whether it was even possible to change my values. Perhaps rat-race values were so ingrained in me through my upbringing that it was too late to change. My question, then, was: Is it even necessary to have values? Wouldn't life be simpler without values?
I transitioned into a period where I tried to live without values. In reality, this meant my primary values were: momentary pleasure and emotional fortitude. That is, I tried my best to design life so that I was experiencing pleasure most of the time. And, in the face of hardship, I adopted a stoic attitude.
This, perhaps obviously, led me to a bad place where I lost motivation to continue working on my second startup, and withdrew from many of my social obligations.
Thankfully, I soon came to the realization that I have certain needs that my value system must support. Notably, I must make enough money to support myself. And, I must maintain a certain degree of sociability to stay sane.
After some consideration, I decided that my primary value going forward should be: devotion. That is, in whatever activities I endeavor, what ultimately matters to me is that I try my best. My goals in life will naturally change with time. Currently, my primary goals are making my startup a success and strengthening my relationship with my family. Later, it may be raising a family or contributing to society. Whatever my goals are, and regardless of whether I fail or succeed at achieving them, what ultimately matters to me is that I gave it my all. Devotion, as a primary value, passes the test of being within my control and also feels authentic based on my upbringing.
[1]https://twitter.com/ohtori_nu/status/1068525697713356804
[2]https://ohtori.nu/analysis/01_meike_disciples_of_abraxas_4.h... (The anime quotes from the famous german author Herman Hesse)
The "rat race" has already adjusted for insufficient means of material improvement and has now entered the "knowledge economy" mode whereby now the signalling revolves around virtue and moralizing.
TikTok has basically captured this entire new mode of engaging signaling, you can't open that app and swipe your feed without hearing someone lecture/preach/opine at you about some perceived collective wrong doing.
TikTok buries the button that allows you to "dislike" content and so curate your feed to better enable this economy of head-nodding and head-turning.
An entire platform that largely consists of people signalling virtues (how to be black; how to be white; how to not be a simp; how to not be one of _those_ people, etc, etc). I mean look at any of the "No Nuance November" content on TikTok
It's funny, IG was just materialist imagery accompanied by platitudes of self-liberation but TikTok realized people desire to stoke their moral indignation as a means of coping with increasing complexity of the world
On the flip side, when I see someone driving around in an old BMW they got for $3k and cleaned up themselves, I look on in awe. That’s the person to look up to. Not the person working themselves to death in a job they hate to drive a car that’s only the best for 6 months till the next year’s model comes out.
It brings long term happiness. Satisfaction. Its just great. One of best investment in quality of life I ever did.
If you instead, similar to how you describe, invest in something that you want to hold onto for a long time, that's a much better proposition. I have one expensive pair of boots. But I love them. I've had them for years. I treat the leather and polish them fairly frequently. I get them resoled. I expect they'll last me the rest of my life. Couldn't be happier with the purchase.
While not possible for everyone, and not easy for everyone to achieve, ikigai is the ultimate goal. If you can achieve that, you're outside of the rat race.
The question, then, is how do you balance: 1) making enough money for food and shelter with 2) your intrinsic values? Also, will making more than enough money help you further achieve your values?
The diagram presents a framework to find an optimal solution. "That which you love" is a function of your intrinsic values. The other 3 circles will help you efficiently convert your time into money to support what you love. I guess the better diagram would somehow convey the fact that, ultimately, what really matters is that which you love.
Saying it's outside of your control isn't entirely true. However, I do get not everyone can get to the center of that diagram; for some people it is within their control and for some it is not. To blindly dismiss it as a lack of control is a form of learned helplessness, however small, which for many is a root that creates depression. If you're depressed, this may be something you want to talk to a therapist about.
"makes me think of the rabbi who asked how it could be that God often showed himself to people in the olden days whereas nowadays nobody ever sees him. The rabbi replied: "Nowadays there is no longer anybody who can bow low enough."
The venn diagram has helped me. I'm lucky to be blessed to be in the center of it. In my experience, the venn diagram is correct. It represents what I've gone through quite well.
The status game is actually a valid strategy since, unlike developers, most people don't live in a merit-based society. Strong people associate with strong people. So whoever needs resources also has to appear strong. For non-developers, it's pitch day every day.
The easiest way to escape the rat race is to keep racing. Not to win, but to race.
Maybe their arrogance and inflated self-importance. But, then again, the hoi polloi are like that too.
I don't think that is how it works.
Yes it’s true in any circle you want to be well regarded - such as astrophysicist PhDs trying to write the next great paper - but broadly I don’t see the posturing he’s talking about being a universal or even majority thing.
I do like the article overall and I’ve saved it, but to me it doesn’t seem to be the epidemic it’s laid out to be. Lots of people are different.
For me it looks like bait for people who would summarize themselves as "I watched Fightclub and I am better than sheepeople".
Buying Porsche is not an issue for most of the people, so maybe audience for this article is "childless young professionals, who just sold a startup". Let alone most of the people I see that own a Porsche are 50+, that probably already have a big house and bunch of kids. Those people live on different planet and still they are nowhere near to 1% of the richest.
I see most of people are already committed to long term goals like rising children, buying a house. It takes for them a lot of time to achieve those goals. It is the silent majority that wakes up goes to work and just live their lives. All those people that realized, they will never buy a Porsche an what is even more important they don't need one.
I would say more eye opening would be: Presenting how much of that fake lifestyle is promoted and presented by media, social or otherwise, compared to how many people don't care and live normal life of paying off mortgage, being happy about an ice cream they were able to afford.
I think the "silent majority that wakes up goes to work and just lives their lives" is not a majority. Sure, people go to work but they are trying to make money to buy more things to show what they have. They don't necessarily need it to be a Porsche. The "luxury" goods that many people like to show off are as simple as a big screen TV.
One of my best friends, who does better dating wise than anyone I know, drove a 98 Volvo. He was making well over 150k, but had so much quiet confidence he had no need to project anything.
I make a similar amount, still wear clothes from Old Navy and when I do own a car it's the cheapest newish one I can find.
Both me and my friend are essentially social media / online dating free. If your obsessed with trying to impress people you'll only attract those seeking to take advantage of you. The insecurity of needing to be someone makes you an easy target.
Have you guys actually properly driven (ideally on track) proper race-ish car? Porsche has several models which are kind of you can take on normal roads for long drives and drive race track with great success/fun. Basically 911s above 400 hp with rear wheel drive or best caymans. Not many in that category and price levels. Actually typical american muscle car is more in the 'doesn't make sense' category since whole added value is just straight line performance, not overall driving quality. Maybe too european view but definitely common.
They might be minority in terms of sales, but those folks are out there. And they drive new models too.
I'm talking about the folks who finance cars they have no real capacity to afford. They aren't taking these cars to the track.
I always thought the fact of putting your life in true risk because of your financial situation could be one of the reasons (lack of public health). And this extends to public education, retirement plans, ... which forces people to the competition.
Just an opinion based on my personal experience though
Care to elaborate on what specifically you are investing in?
Seems like if you were wanting to survive "things going south" that would entail productive farm land and some sort of "back to the land" style prepper homesteading.
Farmland would be perfect, but unless you're actually a farmer and know how to survive on your own this is simply not in your reach. I'm just a software guy, really like this profession, but doing software mostly precludes having the knowledge of a farmer.
Also what is this site swiped? I haven't heard of it before.
There is also the thrill factor of high acceleration - something not at all addressed by the article.