October 18, 2008 at 1:50 pm
Comments posted to this topic are about the item Who Wants to Be Rich?
October 18, 2008 at 6:49 pm
Exactly... 😉
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 18, 2008 at 7:51 pm
I agree too.
[font="Times New Roman"]-- RBarryYoung[/font], [font="Times New Roman"] (302)375-0451[/font] blog: MovingSQL.com, Twitter: @RBarryYoung[font="Arial Black"]
Proactive Performance Solutions, Inc. [/font][font="Verdana"] "Performance is our middle name."[/font]
October 19, 2008 at 9:33 am
That's it? I wear you two out on the Financial Crisis poll 🙂
October 19, 2008 at 11:24 am
Steve Jones - Editor (10/19/2008)
That's it? I wear you two out on the Financial Crisis poll 🙂
Uh, I'm busy sacrificing my time so that I can succeed... 😀
[font="Times New Roman"]-- RBarryYoung[/font], [font="Times New Roman"] (302)375-0451[/font] blog: MovingSQL.com, Twitter: @RBarryYoung[font="Arial Black"]
Proactive Performance Solutions, Inc. [/font][font="Verdana"] "Performance is our middle name."[/font]
October 19, 2008 at 11:33 am
It's interesting to see the wealth distributions in different countries. A similar evaluation was done here a couple years back, though I have serious doubts about it's accuracy. Mainly because of the massive unemployment and casual labour (without tax declarations) that we've got.
The evaluation basically showed that if a person can afford to own a car, then they're in the top 10% wealthiest people in the country. Owning a house as well put a person into the top 5%. It's scary to think about.
That said, cost of living is much lower here. I find the US to be an extremely expensive place to visit.
Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability
October 19, 2008 at 11:19 pm
One of my coworkers owns a trailer park. He has pointed out that some of his tenants are perfectly happy if their family life is working and they have enough money to cover the bills. Okay, those aren't his exact words, but that's what they translate to. The basic gist is they've got the basics covered and aren't worried about all that other stuff. The market downturn... what market downturn? It doesn't enter into their world so it's not important.
K. Brian Kelley
@kbriankelley
October 20, 2008 at 1:49 am
I like that story about the violinist; it highlights one of the fundamental quid pro quos of life. If you want a car, you'll need to spend some money. If you want a Lambourghini, you'll need to spend a lot of money. If you want to play an instrument, you'll need to spend some time. If you want to be a virtuoso, you'll need to spend a lot of time. No gain without a price to pay.
Of course, the one major difference is that if you want more fancy cars, you just need to increase your income to cover the outgoings, whereas you can't change your overall allotment of time. If you want to be a virtuoso or a millionaire or a professional athlete or anything that requires high time and effort commitment, other areas of your life will lose out, and you have to live with that.
Me, I've worked out what are the most important priorities in my life, and spend my time accordingly on them. It means I'm comfortably off, but certainly not rich. It means I never come home to a house that'd pass the mother-in-law orderliness test. It means I don't have to schedule a "meeting" just to see my wife and kids. Perhaps I will start my own business at some stage, but only if it can be fitted in around my priorities.
Semper in excretia, suus solum profundum variat
October 20, 2008 at 2:35 am
I love the idea of having loads of money, having a great big house, not have to worry about whether we can afford to buy stuff every month, and giving my wife the option of giving up work.
But I would not want the money if it meant having to give up spending time with my wife and family, or doing a job that I don't enjoy. As things stand at the moment we're comfortable, even though we're having to rearrage our finances because we've just had a little'un.
At the end of the day there are more important things than money, and if you have to sacrifice your life for the sake of having some I'd have to ask the question - what's the point?
Of course that's not going to stop me having a little flutter every week on the lottery! 😉
October 20, 2008 at 4:31 am
This link puts into perspective that sudden wealth isn't the answer. The problems which existed beforehand are still present and a whole host of new problems will likely beset us.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/70165/winning_the_lottery_curse_or_a_blessing.html
The quote that one third of lottery winners are bankrupt within a few short years is something I've heard before. I know that a young man who win a lottery here in the midlands of SC within a few short days was already having issues. It's sad that a lot of folks see money as an answer to their problems when in reality it's not.
As for that violin virtuoso, I've been thinking about that and I would have to disagree with him. I spent many a year playing flute and piccolo. While I was a decent player for my years, I was no virtuoso. And I practiced... a lot. Especially during 7th-10th and then my first two years of college. 11th-12th was interrupted due to an academic magnet school where there wasn't a music program. I even picked up trumpet to play jazz gigs. But while I became technically sound in my playing (which is what all that practice amounts to), there's a talent gap I would never have been able to bridge. I saw it quite clearly my senior year in college when we had a freshman trumpet player come in who had certainly put in the time to be really good. But when he played, there was just no comparison. You became a part of his solos. He could feel and understand the music in ways others couldn't. Yes, you must practice diligently to reach the full measure of your talent. But to be a virtuoso means you have talent the average hack doesn't, no matter how hard he or she tries.
EDIT: fixed typo
K. Brian Kelley
@kbriankelley
October 20, 2008 at 4:34 am
One thing struck me in that editorial.
It's about being fair, now I totally agree with that being the correct way to go. But I do not believe that is the best way to getting rich. Look at the larger companies, they do as they want and they can handle the lawyers costs. Even if you have the right on your side, can you afford the process against one of em? Look at IBM, they helped Germany during world war 2 with their computers and the death camps, they are still around today and are quite successful.
October 20, 2008 at 5:11 am
@k Brian, don't forget that the violinist didn't say getting good was simply a matter of spending time; he was saying that not spending the time was a barrier to success. I agree with you that effort won't overcome lack of talent, but that goes for entrepreneurs too - plenty of business people who spend lots of time but aren't successful. However, entrepreneurs with talent still have to put in the time and effort.
@IceDread, I agree that large companies are very good at making their financial clout work for them. However, they still can't "do as they want", since it's amazing how small a moral misjudgement they can make and suddenly be on the hitlist of a huge number of consumers, thereby effectively losing their revenue in one fell swoop. And, whilst we're discussing being fair, it's only reasonable to point out that IBM today is a totally different company to what it was in the post-war years in the same way that Germany today is entirely unlike the country that went to war. I agree that IBM should have had to account for its actions after the war, but how long does one hold a grudge? I suspect 60 years is a little long....
That notwithstanding, though, I agree there are plenty of unscrupulous ways of becoming very rich, though I'm happy that riches in themselves have little enough interest to me that I'm not tempted in any way to exploit those avenues. One does have to live with oneself even after (if?) one manages to amass the wealth.
Semper in excretia, suus solum profundum variat
October 20, 2008 at 5:13 am
Steve Jones - Editor (10/19/2008)
That's it? I wear you two out on the Financial Crisis poll 🙂
Heh... the one time I agree with anybody 100% and you ask if "That's it?"... Where'd I put those pork chops? 😛
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 20, 2008 at 6:42 am
No one going to pick on the violinist? Hard not to understand his point, but no points for gracefully accepting a little adulation.
Most of us worry about money until we hit point x; where that point is often defined by how much time, effort, or stress we'd have to endure to go further. Happiness might be defined as knowing when you have enough. I find that the trap most people fall into (including me occasionally) is that enough seems to keep moving upward and then you're just on the treadmill. Are you happier than you were five years ago? Why not? Will another $10k really make you happy?
To go on about money for a moment, I think it's less about what you make than what you owe. There's a lot to be said for saving the money and then buying whatever thing you need (two exceptions are buying a first home and student loans).
October 20, 2008 at 7:34 am
I am rich - I have a loving and happy family, good friends and I am happy with my life. That is what makes me rich. I have never been too materialistic (I say too, because I do love my XBox 360 and it's toys). But I think society puts way too much credence into monetary gain.
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 49 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply