[account73466]

I feel like it is hard for people to say what they truly love before they have at least $1M in their bank account. If you have FU money, your view on working at a FAANG vs building a startup can change. You will find it easier to know what you truly LOVE.

[neonate]

That assumes that the person doesn't change in the meantime. You might put your dreams on hold to solve the money problem, only to discover that you no longer have the energy or focus to accomplish what you could have in the past. End state: I wish I had done what I loved back then.

[account73466]

>> That assumes that the person doesn't change in the meantime.

In the meantime of what? I didn't suggest any action but merely suggested that sometimes money could clarify whether you do something because you love it or/and because you have to make money.

[siquick]

I'm glad all the great artists, musicians, writers, theorists, scientists, teachers, and inventors throughout history didn't read this post.

[alasdair_]

A remarkably large number of the most notable of those people came from wealthy families - that’s what allowed them the single-minded focus, instead of worrying about food and healthcare.

[CuriouslyC]

And a lot of them suffered in poverty to pursue what they loved. Is there survivorship bias there? Sure. You don't become great without taking some chances though.

[echelon]

> I'm glad all the great artists, musicians, writers, theorists, scientists, teachers, and inventors throughout history didn't read this post.

Except they did. Countless people have done the calculus and decided that their creativity wasn't going to put food on the table.

[sl1ck731]

If we want to equate them then we should aspire to write code that is meaningless while we are alive, while living our entire lives poorly or being completely ostracized in society?

I'm not sure the startup angle jives with the artist's.

[siquick]

Most of the code I've written in my life has been meaningless, but yes I get paid well. The ostracisation happened to a lot of devs during high school through the invention of the wedgee.

[account73466]

I am a scientist and thousands of scientists and engineers use my work.

Most great artists, musicians, writers, theorists, scientists, teachers, and inventors would not need to struggle as much if they would have some money to cover their basic needs. They would just avoid bullshit gigs and do they stuff with a greater focus. And if having $1M in their bank account would stop them doing what they love, then it is quite possible that they didn't love it in the first place.

[siquick]

Artistic pieces or songs are generally a representation of an event, a struggle, or a state of mind - if you lead a cushy life then no, you're not going to have the same output than if you were living on the breadline. There's a reason that history is dotted with songs and pieces of art that were written during times of struggle.

[account73466]

>> you're not going to have the same output than if you were living on the breadline

That is what poor people are told to justify their struggle.

[colordrops]

$1M is not FU money for someone in a major metropolitan US city with kids.

[s1artibartfast]

If someone doesn't hit FU at $1M in the bank, you probably never will, which is ok.

$1M is about 20 years of coast on a modest bay area mortgage + family healthcare.

[lotsofpulp]

And the remaining 30 years of life you have low ability to earn income, but face higher taxes and healthcare spend.

To me, FU money is passive investments which yield a couple hundred thousand a year from businesses that can keep up with inflation.

[s1artibartfast]

Perhaps that gets at my intended point, which is that different people have different comfort and stability thresholds.

If someone doesn't feel comfortable leaving a job to bet on a startup project with 20 years of mortgage payments in the bank, it is unlikely they ever will.

[marvin]

1 million is 40.000 dollars per year indefinitely, by the 4% rule, with a small risk of ruin that you'll most likely see coming years in advance.

It should be possible to live in the Bay Area on that, given that the place still has cashiers, cleaning personnel and maintenance workers. It won't be a middle-class lifestyle, but you'd have to make _some_ sacrifices in order to indefinitely work at whatever you want in the most expensive place in the world.

[abacadaba]

Never having visited myself, this is what I don't get about the bay area. How is it still a functioning city? How far out do you have to live to be able to afford rent on a non-tech bro salary?

[redis_mlc]

You posed some simple-sounding questions, but the Bay Area is a very complex real estate market to understand.

So I'll just give you some simple answers.

If you don't already own a house, it's not a functioning area for families, or those wanting to own a house, aka "priced out forever."

Commuting farther is an option in other parts of the USA, but not the Bay Area, since it's constrained by hills and the Bay.

The non-owners living here need a gaffe of some kind:

* shared accommodation

* fly into a city airport with a private plane

* know a Prop 13 owner (ultra-low property tax) who wants to rent to a friend

* find an in-law unit coming onto the rental market

* navigate the Sunset area flop houses

* connections to ethnic communities with below-market asks

* get employer to chip in

* homestead a sketchy area of Oakland

* be a multi-unit superintendent (those used to offer a free apt. on-site, but recently I heard of almost market rent being charged)

[lotsofpulp]

> It should be possible to live in the Bay Area on that, given that the place still has cashiers, cleaning personnel and maintenance workers.

There’s no reason pay for cashiers, cleaning personnel, and maintenance workers can’t rise, or to meet the demand of labor with a little bit of automation also. Making $40k per year as a cashier means $80k as a couple or roommates.

[boring_twenties]

Bay area on $50k/yr? Is that some kind of joke or did you mean to type 2 years?

[s1artibartfast]

Why not? If you have a partner, you would be able to cover half a mortgage, and if not you can get a roommate. I know tons of people who aren't in tech that make ~50K. It makes sense because 50K is pretty close to the median per capita income in SF [1] and a starting teachers salary [2].

[1] https://smartasset.com/retirement/average-salary-in-san-fran... [2] https://www.salary.com/research/salary/benchmark/public-scho...

[boring_twenties]

I mean, I don't live in SF so maybe I'm off base. But my impression is that even with a roommate you're looking at $1500-2000/mo. That's oppressive on $50k/yr.

[s1artibartfast]

How so? 3k a month is a lot of fun money.

[redis_mlc]

> you would be able to cover half a mortgage

Not in the Bay Area.

Looking at an excel for a million-dollar+ home is truly frightening. So many zeroes!

[s1artibartfast]

A million dollar home mortgage is about 5k a month. Half is 2.5k/mo, or 30k a year.

[AllegedAlec]

If you can live on 4% interest, you can live off of it indefinitely.

[boring_twenties]

For sure. Not in SF though, or so I thought anyway

[AllegedAlec]

True, 1M in savings gives you ~40K per year to live off. This wouldn't be sufficient in SF, but given that you're basically retiring at that point, you might as well buy a home somewhere else and then you'd be able to live comfortable off of that.

[CuriouslyC]

Or a lifetime of opulent living somewhere sane with low out of pocket health care costs.

[whiskyant]

$1M is nowhere near FU money, that's a joke to accumulate/spend here in the bay area.

I'd consider $5M closer to FU money.

[account73466]

Yes, that is why I say "at least $1M".

[NalNezumi]

I'd say it's less about the number in the bank account and more about the perceived safety you feel. Similar to the lower two layers of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. If you don't think that the worst outcome of pursuing something you truly love is manageable, you're less likely to put yourself up to that risk.

In US this might correlate more strongly to the numbers of zeros in the bank account or the salary difference to similar workers at FAANG. But feeling of safety is subjective and depend a lot on the environment you're in so I don't think that's universally the case.

[pickdenis]

> I feel like it is hard for people to say what they truly love before they have at least $1M in their bank account.

[edited to protect your feelings]

Are you saying that simple introspection is hard? I completely disagree, because separating extrinsic motivation (I do this for money) from intrinsic motivation (I do this for fun) really isn't that hard.

[account73466]

Instead of being rude, you could try to formulate your point without attacking a straw man.

[pickdenis]

What you're saying basically amounts to "people are blinded to what they love by their need for financial security". This may be true on some level, but anyone can see through it with a modicum of introspection. Or am I giving the average person too much credit?

[s1artibartfast]

I'm not the original commenter, but I think you are vastly oversimplifying the situation. Most jobs are not black and white in one category or the other. There are people who will never be completely happy with any job, and there are local maxima, where one might not reasonably expect a better fit to exist.

>Or am I giving the average person too much credit?

Another consideration is that this is an irrelevant question for your average person, or even 99.9% of the population.