Hacker News Reader

Comment by jasonkester | Hacker News Reader

I can empathize with this, but for reasons the author doesn't mention.

You don't suppress your outward signs of wealth for the sake of your millionaire co-workers. You do it so that you can keep your non-millionaire friends.

You know, those fun people you hang out with and have for the last dozen years. The ones you have barbecues with on the roof of their (and until recently, your) shabby apartment building. The ones you rope into dirtbag backpacking trips, hopping chicken buses through Central America. And the ones who, through accident of fortune, now make roughly 15% of your currently inflated salary.

We say that money doesn't matter. But try buying that house you can now afford in that neighborhood with the gate and watch how it affects your friends the first time you invite them over for drinks by the pool.

I don't know what the solution for this is. But lying low seems to be a good plan until somebody comes up with a better idea.

View on HN

I think, the reason to do it is something noble which is difficult to express - its part empathy for people who don't have these riches who may or may not be one's friends, and part a sense of continuity to self, that I am the same person, that I was yesterday - I still love the hard work, and would have done it irrespective of the outcome.

So I don't completely agree, that its to keep your non-millionaire friends. I think, people's tastes change with time and social standing. For example, if you are on Facebook, tell me how difficult it is to really like a joke of a school friend, who has gone in a different direction in life and perhaps gets 15% of your salary.

As a Dutch person this kind of behavior is the norm. It actually pervades all of society.

Dutch service (in restaurants) for example isn't bad because our waiters are rude. It's bad because we see the waiters as our equals and they're thus not as deferential as foreigners demand/expect.

Very often they also pretty much are our equals, as they're largely well educated students who might very well end up earning more than you in 10 years.

Even our royalty rides their bike to the restaurant in the rain... because that's what you're supposed to do.

So perhaps SF is just more egalitarian ....

That's an interesting view, but it's strange to me.

Where I'm from (Maryland), if you don't treat a waiter with respect, you won't get served by the restaurant. It's an offense that will get you tossed out and banned.

On the other hand, waiters have a job to perform and they're being paid to do so by the customer. If they want tipped better than average, they perform better than average. It's really simple.

I think what you're describing is the same thing as in Denmark. There's a sort of cargo cult egalitarianism which completely misses the point that one person can be paid to service another person without them being unequal (on a human level).

I've heard people talk about your supposed obligation to engage in a conversation with a taxi driver, or it being impolite to talk on your mobile phone in a taxi. It's bizarre and completely counter productive in societies as dependant on service industries as ours.

Are you Danish by origin?

I am well aware that this perspective is completely incomprehensible to Americans, but for us it's just a value embedded very deeply into the fabric of our culture.

I highly doubt that it's counter productive though, as I doubt that society is harmed by expecting you to treat your taxi driver like a fellow human being of equal value, nor that it's bad to have the same expectations of your waiter as you have of your neighborhood college going kid who's just a bit too full of himself.

And yes; we are aware we're chasing away tourists with our service. We're like the French in that respect, as most of us wouldn't mind a little less tourists in town. :)

Yes, I'm Danish.

My point is that I can treat a taxi driver friendly, respectfully and as a fellow human being without treating him like a friend who's doing me a favour.

I'm not worried about tourists, they are plenty scared by the cost of living already, I'm worried about a culture where you don't say "no, I need someone else to do this task for me, my time is better spend on something else". When you're uncomfortable getting in a taxi, you're not going to hire a secretary for your office and then your productivity suffers.

Dutch service (in restaurants) for example isn't bad because our waiters are rude. It's bad because we see the waiters pretty much as our equals and they're not as deferential as foreigners demand/expect.

I don't think that's why service is bad. Believing that your customers are your equal doesn't seem to have anything to do with performing your job well, nor does good food service imply being deferential.

Dutch service is considered bad by some foreigners (including me at times) primarily because of incompetence and laziness, not a lack of deference.

In fact, I beleive that some of the best service in the world exists in the Netherlands, because it really comes from the heart of your server. Unfortunately, very hard to find amongst the staff who are too busy chatting each other up (or customers for that matter: I remember waiting 45 minutes for a menu so that I could order, I began waving at a member of the staff, and got a shy smile and a telephone number, sheesh!)

As a San Francisco resident, there is definitely a streak of egalitarianism here. Your comment about waiters makes me think of the local institution Zeitgeist:

http://www.yelp.com/biz/zeitgeist-san-francisco

From the reviews you can see the split in reaction: Some people think the staff are incredibly rude. Others, like me, love the place. As somebody who thinks of the staff as hardworking people trying to get a difficult job done, I've never had a problem with them. But they definitely aren't servile, and they won't take an ounce of crap from anybody.

If I had to sum up the culture, I'd say that nobody minds that you have money, and nobody minds if you enjoy yourself. But showy consumption is frowned upon, and acting like you're better than others because you have money is a definite faux pas.

The low-key thing doesn't fool anyone, though. Everyone knows where everyone really stands moneywise.

I say this as a guy who has friends who have gone on to be many, many times more financially successful than I'll ever be. In a couple of cases almost literally overnight. I want them to enjoy the hell out of their money. I would think it was kind of creepy if they didn't. Potentially even offensive.

I don't think fooling people is the goal. I think the point is not to rub other people's noses in it.

Can you explain what's the point of buying a bike for 20000 or jeans for 1200 dollars if they are virtually indistinguishable from products costing a tenth of that?

Because they have $50m? It's an interesting psychological effect that as you have more money, you want to buy more expensive things purely because you can.

I remember my friend getting an internship at <MegaCorp> on about £15k for the year (totally tax free). While he was on that wage he refused to pay less than £30 for a t-shirt, whilst I would expect at least 2 or 3 t-shirts for that price.

The key's in that "virtually". The returns from more expensive things are diminishing, but they are still there. Not so long ago I bought a new shirt for about 10x what I usually spend. It's not 10x nicer - but it /is/ that little bit nicer; every time I wear it it adds a little bit of joy to my day.

I've seen it argued that that's a much more effective way to enjoy money: rather than making drastic changes to your lifestyle, just make every little thing you do that little bit nicer.

It can get really silly though - I seriously doubt that 20K Euro Louis Vuitton skis are really better skis than much cheaper ones - you are just paying for the brand. Plus there is the common complaint about "all the gear - no idea" - where cost/amount of gear is often perceived as having a negative correlation with ability.

Although I haven't seen them, I would expect your Louis Vuitton skis to be very much visibly distinguishable from regular skis - and thus their purpose is to loudly broadcast a message of "I am very rich" on the slopes. Just as is the case with the very much distinguishable Louis Vuitton luggage lines.

My wife spotted them for sale in Courchevel 1850 - which is a very popular haunt for extremely wealthy Russians (and which oddly isn't that expensive to go to if you stay away from the places aimed at the private jet set).

Related: If money doesn't make you happy, then you probably aren't spending it right

http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~dtg/DUNN%20GILBERT%20&%20WIL...

It's basically art you can ride/wear. An original painting is virtually indistinguishable from a reproduction, yet people derive pleasure from buying originals.

jeans - whatever, but a $20k bike is very noticeably different to a $2k bike, particularly in weight; you could perhaps say the $8k > $20k jump was more buying it just because you could.

There isn't, really, but it quells any concern of fit/finish.

When I was learning to play guitar (self-taught), I had the expected hard time. I didn't know what I was doing. So, sometimes, when something went wrong, I was inclined to blame the instrument. I mean, I'd only paid $200 for this guitar, amp, headphones, etc., in one package. They can't be any good, right?

When that guitar broke, I still wasn't any good at guitar, but I went out and bought myself a Les Paul. Les Pauls are expensive guitars but, most importantly, they're used by people who play guitar for a living and are taken on tours and all that jazz. I paid for the privilege of not having an excuse to blame the instrument any more. It's more guitar than I'll likely ever need.

Now, when I do something wrong, I at least know that the fault is mine and not the instrument. (Yes, I know it's a poor craftsman what blames his tools, but I was indeed a poor craftsman, and didn't know any better.)

I suspect it's the same thing with bikes, jeans, etc. You're buying a better quality product because it's better, and gives you a sense of satisfaction that you won't have to worry about a loose thread on those jeans, or a squeaky chain on that bike. You're rich, so it doesn't matter that it costs 10x the cost of the next best bike, and is probably only 2x better.

Your Les Paul story reminded me of this study:

"Wearing a coat thought to be a doctor’s may improve attention." http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/03/science/clothes-and-self-p...

The feel good is that of the state of the mind.

"I wear a 1.2k jean and ride a 20k bike. I justify my success"

The feeling that you're a patron for someone's craft, that you're enjoying the finest experience the world has to offer and helping to maintain dying traditions in a disposable world. Tiny hidden details that no-one knows about but you and the maker. Feeling like you're standing a few feet taller because you have the strength of the individuals and brands who made your products behind you, and that no-one can fault you on taste.

Luxury that is distinguishable is about impressing people (especially people who can't afford the item). Indistinguishable luxury is about impressing yourself.

Is this correlated to low self-esteem or a touch of arriviste/imposter syndrome? Probably.

Put a couple of million in a long term saving account, hide a couple of years living expenses in a shoe box and get rid of the rest of it in other ways your friends won't notice. Done. Get back to living your life instead of worrying about money.

You can never actually stop worrying about money if you have millions. Short of not caring about what happens to it.

The FDIC covers $250k per savings account.

Is US Government paper safe? I wouldn't bet everything on it. Will the Euro be around in ten years? I wouldn't bet much on it. Could gold crash if the Euro vaporizes and money is forced into the dollar? Are equities at a decade high courtesy of Fed POMO shots and low interest rates chasing capital toward risk?

Let's say you want to give most of your wealth away and make a difference through charity. I don't see how you could not worry about that, it's important, and you can lose millions as fast as you can lose a few dollars.

No amount of being rich is going to make that stuff not happen.

> Short of not caring about what happens to it.

How about doing that then?

You can actually stop worrying if you want, and you'll probably do better by it. Go read Taleb's "Fooled by Randomness" for the details.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com