Hacker News Reader

Comment by keeptrying | Hacker News Reader

If you keep working past $10M net worth (as all these people undoubtedly are) its usually always for legacy.

I actually think Sam's vision probably scares them.

When enough ppl visibly leave and have real concerns, they can be in touch in exile, and all break NDA in synchrony.

If the stakes are as high as some believe, I presume ppl don't actually care about getting sued when they believe they're helping humanity avert existential crisis.

> its usually always for legacy

Legacy is the dumbest reason to work and does not explain the motivation of the vast majority of people that are wealthy.

edit: The vast majority of people with more than $10million are completely unknown so the idea that they care about legacy is stupid.

What do you think their motivations might be?

Speaking for myself, I'd keep working even if I had 100M. As long as I am healthy, I plan to continue on being productive towards something I find interesting.

What would you be working on though? I agree that I’d keep working if only since I like my work and not having that structure can make your life worse, not better; but if it’s “how I get to 1B” then that’s the kind of challenge that turns me off. I’m all for continually challenging yourself but I don’t want that kind of stress in my life, I’d rather find my challenges elsewhere.

There's also addiction to success. If you don't keep getting the success in magnitudes you did before, you will get bored and depressed, so you have to keep going and get it since your brain is wired to seek for that. Your brain and emotions are calibrated to what you got before, it's kind of like drugs.

If you don't have the 10M you won't understand, you would think that "oh my if only I had the 10M I would just chill", but it never works like that. Human appetite is infinite.

The more highs you get from success, the more you expect from the future achievements to get that same feeling, and if you don't get any you will feel terrible. That's it.

$10M doesn't go as far as you'd think in the Bay Area or NYC.

...the only two places on Earth.

$10M is never work again money literally anywhere in the world. Don't kid yourself. Buy a $3.5M house outright and then collect $250k per year risk free after taxes. You're doing whatever you want and still saving money.

The problem is if you are the type of person able to get to $10M, you'll probably want more, since the motivation that got you there in the first place will keep you unsatisfied with anything less. You'll constantly crave for more in terms of magnitudes.

No. Know lots of people in this bucket.

Of course there are some who want $100M.

But most are really happy that they most likely don’t ever have to do anything they don’t like.

Assuming they're 40, how far do you think $250k will go 20-30-40 years from now? It's not a stretch to think dollars could be devalued by 90%, possibly even worthless, within 30 years.

If portfolio is diversified enough it can be enough for decades? If dollar goes down some other things will go up. gold, Bitcoin etc.

The original comment was premised on them being income-generating assets, which gold and btc are not

They obviously don't keep it dollars. Diversify into equities, property etc.

I love how the comment I'm responding to literally says "then collect $250k per year risk free after taxes," and then you all pile onto me with downvotes telling me that's he's not just going to invest in treasuries (which is exactly the implication of HIS comment and not mine).

With 3.5M house just taxes, utilities and maintenance cost will ruin your remaining 7.5.

The neat part is that for a 3.5M house in the Bay area, the only maintenance required is changing the rain fly every year and the ground pad every couple.

And who is going to fix your shower when it leaks, and install solar panels, or redo your kitchen because your parents are living with you now and can't bear to leave their traditional cooking behind?

A whole new shower is less than $200 at REI, and solar generators ship directly to your house.

(And on a serious note - if your parents are both still alive and moving in with you while they have hobbies and self-actualization, you're way ahead of the game)

And labor is free, right?

I mean, you can pay someone to hold the sprayer up for you if you want. That is probably nicer when you've got soap in your hair.

Buy a house on a private beach in Florida and rent it out for $25k a week during the hottest months.

NYC and SF both appear to have ~1% property tax rates

Utilities are an order of magnitude less than being taxed ~$35k/yr and hardly worth worrying about while discussing eight figures

Maintenance can vary, but all 3 costs you mentioned combined would be 2 orders of magnitude lower annually than that net worth, which seems easily sustainable?

Maybe it doesn't if you think you're just going to live off $10M in your checking account... but that's generally not how that works.

at 5% rate that's a cushy 500k a year.

Which is why smart retirees don't fucking live there.

hilarious logical end progression of all those idiotic articles about $600k dual income households in the bay living "paycheck to paycheck"

Only if you have runaway expenditures due to the lack of self-control and discipline.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com