[dominotw]

> my life at Google was actually one of the least interesting

I am assuming, you don't really care about living an interesting life as you traded an interesting life for one that insn't.

Also, when I say "day laborer" I am not talking about educated people who do that for a while. I am talking about ppl stuck in that situation with no way out.

[debatem1]

I was a day laborer before I went into tech or got an education. And (like most people, I suspect) I do care about living an interesting life-- I just didn't know that I was trading that away. Didn't figure it out for a long time, actually.

[dominotw]

> I do care about living an interesting life

Why can't you simply reverse your course of action though. Now that you have better understanding of both sides of it.

[debatem1]

I did. I left Google to take a job that is both more interesting and that leaves me more time to do interesting things.

[crispyambulance]

interesting != happy != success != wealth

These are all different, often orthogonal things.

There are people who are "stuck" in a socio-economic dead-end who still lead happy and interesting lives, nonetheless. They are able to take their situation in life and make the best of it.

The OP can do the same. He certainly has far more opportunities than a day-laborer or subsistence farmer. In a way, that abundance of choice is a burden. But nowhere is it written that PHD's are guaranteed to be "interesting", or even more interesting than anyone else.

[dominotw]

> He certainly has far more opportunities than a day-laborer or subsistence farmer.

Exactly. That contradicts the totally meaningless platitude "life is what you make of it".