The Optimal Amount of Hassle

This really describes to me my lived experience as someone with autism and it mirrors my way of thinking as well, and in fact the crux of the social model of disability. Many things I was struggling with were honestly signs that I was a good person - having strong morals, not tolerating abuse and suffering, and so forth - and the people who were coined as "able bodied" were better equipped to turn a blind eye to it than I was and suffered less. The greater "disability" in my eyes was to be the kind of person who can sit and bear it. It's not a sign of weakness to feel sick in a deeply troubled and sick society.

I think some of this point may have been missed on the author, though. For some people, CEO or not, dealing with behavioral health issues and autism means you have limited choice over "what you can tolerate". We need a society that doesn't stigmatize people who need help, even FDR as they mentioned..it's OK to ask for the milk if that's what you need and it makes your life that much better. It's good to have a society who supports people who literally "can't take the hassle" due to their condition.

This thought feels a bit like a generalized version of that quote on ads:

> Half the money I spend on advertising is wasted; the trouble is I don't know which half.

But swap out money for time: “Half the time I spend is wasted; the trouble is I don't know which half.”

> But dealing with that hassle is the entire reason why it can be lucrative. “Where there’s pain there’s profit,” he often reminds people. There’s an optimal level of hassle to accept, even embrace.

There are more dimensions to the question than money. One could doubtless make more elsewhere, but the commute and colleagues matter, too.

Pay is generally proportional to stress.

"I was once on a flight with a CEO – he let everyone know that’s what he was – who lost his mind after we had to change gates twice."

He wasn't much of a CEO if he wasn't on a private jet.