Moolah

Martha: You don't know me that well. I have worked jobs that many would never touch. You can carry the chip around until it becomes an anchor, or you can change your circumstances, the choice is yours.

Fair is a subjective word filled with emotion. Don't fall into that trap. If you think management or any other high paying position is a gravy train, than go for it.
 
Yeah right. Tell that to someone with an IQ of 85.

We are not all created equal. We cannot all have the high paying job, gravy train or not.

Fairness is important to talk about.

Chip? I don't need no stinking chip. I made it. I had a good, high paying job, am FI and ER'd.
 
Martha: You don't know me that well. I have worked jobs that many would never touch. You can carry the chip around until it becomes an anchor, or you can change your circumstances, the choice is yours.

Fair is a subjective word filled with emotion. Don't fall into that trap. If you think management or any other high paying position is a gravy train, than go for it.

If you spent some time reviewing the board, you would see that Martha is a retired law firm partner and that she has worked long and hard for the considerable success she has attained in life. I also bet that she could spot you 50 IQ points and still come out ahead. But the most amazing thing is that she is a caring person, who actually thinks about the inequality and unfairness in our economic system that conspire to quash the chances of many decent, honest and hardworking people. You should save your "pull yourself up by your own bootstraps" BS for someone else.
 
Martha: You don't know me that well. I have worked jobs that many would never touch. You can carry the chip around until it becomes an anchor, or you can change your circumstances, the choice is yours.
Well, that turned nasty in a hurry. You might want to consider Martha's support of those who not only lost the genetic lottery but who don't have the bootstraps either. Not everyone can haul their assets out of their recliners and start turning paychecks.

Fair is a subjective word filled with emotion. Don't fall into that trap. If you think management or any other high paying position is a gravy train, than go for it.
Perhaps we should look at the ratio of executive pay to blue-collar pay in the average MegaCorp. Hasn't it gone up by an order of magnitude in the last couple decades, especially with options finagling?

I don't begrudge a CEO for wanting to be paid well. However they're in a position to exert undue influence over boards of directors more commonly referred to as "lapdogs" and the corner office has become a winner-take-all competition not unlike professional sports. We stockholders & ticket-holders are reaping the consequences in spades...
 
CEO's are paid well because no one would want their jobs. With all of you highly competent financially independent executives retiring early, companies just can't find people to fill the top spots. If you don't believe me, let's ask Nords what kind of salary would it take for him to go back to work.
 
If you don't believe me, let's ask Nords what kind of salary would it take for him to go back to work.
That's the whole point of being financially independent-- no amount of money would persuade me to return to work. Most of the time we're not debating my occupation, only my price, but I have to draw a principled line somewhere.

Besides I'm lacking the fundamental hypercompetition gene that prevents some execs from ever turning it off. For a really scary example read Gene O'Kelly's "Chasing Daylight". KPMG's CEO was diagnosed with terminal brain cancer and only three months to live, and yet became even more competitive about dying than he did about living...
 
Include, along with "magagement," white collar professionals now making huge multiples over honest, hardworking blue collar workers.

I get the distinct impression you believe the average
white collar professional is something other than honest
and hardworking. That's pretty insulting and, more to the point
probably untrue.

I also doubt that my fellow slacker, white collar professional crooks
and i make all that much more than a similarly experienced blue
collar professional.

if I'm just sarcasm impaired here, then my apologies. I hope i am...
 
If you spent some time reviewing the board, you would see that Martha is a retired law firm partner and that she has worked long and hard for the considerable success she has attained in life. I also bet that she could spot you 50 IQ points and still come out ahead. But the most amazing thing is that she is a caring person, who actually thinks about the inequality and unfairness in our economic system that conspire to quash the chances of many decent, honest and hardworking people. You should save your "pull yourself up by your own bootstraps" BS for someone else.

What he said!

I definitely came out ahead in the birth lottery ( White, Male, Born of educated parents in the best country, I.Q. is allegedly above average, height is a few inches above average, etc.). I'm 33, and I've just been put in for a promotion that will put my base pay in the low 80's and total compensation approaching 90k. I am in negotiations for an IT management position at the end of the year that should put me right at 100k...BUT....

...I live in San Diego, very high cost of living. I am currently getting my Masters (which figured into my promotion) in a technical field, I've worked IT for 12 years now....and I'm posting this from work at 10:00 pm after getting here 14 hours ago....there is a price to be paid for everything.
 
It's all about how much you keep.. not how much you make.

So true. Where you live can take a huge toll on your earnings.
The 100k+ income in the Metro NY area will be reduced by:

-12%+ state/local/city taxes
-10k+ property taxes
-higher insurance rates
-some of the highest daycare costs in the country
-ave 3k month/36k annual rent if you can't afford 500k starter homes in the burbs or 700k 1 bedroom condos in the city
-higher costs on everyday items (16 dollar martinis anyone?)

Qualitatively, one will suffer from:

-longer commutes
-increased stress levels
-lower quality of life
-increased health hazards (so many people that we know in the area has cancer)

After 15 years in the business, I reached the 100k mark. But the jury is still out on where the increased responsibility, stress and work hours justify the money.:(

Barbarus, the grass is always greener on the other side....it's usually astroturf.
Thanks for creating productive topic of discussion.
 
So true. Where you live can take a huge toll on your earnings.
The 100k+ income in the Metro NY area will be reduced by:

-12%+ state/local/city taxes
-10k+ property taxes
-higher insurance rates
-some of the highest daycare costs in the country
-ave 3k month/36k annual rent if you can't afford 500k starter homes in the burbs or 700k 1 bedroom condos in the city
-higher costs on everyday items (16 dollar martinis anyone?)

Qualitatively, one will suffer from:

-longer commutes
-increased stress levels
-lower quality of life
-increased health hazards (so many people that we know in the area has cancer)

After 15 years in the business, I reached the 100k mark. But the jury is still out on where the increased responsibility, stress and work hours justify the money.:(

Barbarus, the grass is always greener on the other side....it's usually astroturf.
Thanks for creating productive topic of discussion.

I think it would be hard to live on $100K in NYC! Take $20.5K off the top for 401K and over-50 catchup, and that would be $79.5K gross. After taxes that would probably be no more than $50K. Fund my Roth fully and that would reduce that $50K take-home to $45K for this year.

That would leave me ($45,000/12) = $3750/month take-home on which to live in NYC and fund my taxable nestegg. Given what we have heard about rents and cost of living there, it doesn't sound easy at all.
 
:confused:

GUMBY: IQ's of 85, duh:confused:? "All aren't created equal," what mail-in law school failed to teach her the U.S. Declaration of Independence. Not being the literalist I pretend to be, nor the moralist Martha holds herself out as: equal results were never guaranteed because the intangibles make the difference. The from/to great experiment of redistributive social policy has failed anywhere at all times.

Just what the world needs more of, lawyers and their partners: at least she's retired. Pardon me Marse Gumby, I be out of place for questioning her a priori assumptions: I think she's:confused: wrong, so she's brilliant, even genius, and generous to boot, a regular Alberta Einstein and Mother Theresa in a single package and me, why I'm ust a dolt, y'all are SO sensitive to the pain of others: what's she gonna do, sue me for illiteracy and insensitivity? Did you argue her cases for her? What nonsense.

The truth is, as this is an anonymous forum, neither you nor Martha:confused: know me, nor do I know you. And, I am not gonna get into a match these unprovable bona fides with either of you. In my bio I have revealed as much of myself as I care, to what are essentially total strangers connected to one another only ostensibly, by a desire to enhance one's knowledge in order to FIRE.

It's this sort of ad hominem arguendo that makes forums tedious.
 
Last edited:
Well, where to start?

As I'm sure you are aware, the Declaration of Independence sets forth the reasons for separating from England. It contains soaring aspirational rhetoric drafted by Thomas Jefferson -- "We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal . . etc., etc. " -- but it does not govern our polity. That function falls to the US Constitution.

Moreover, the Declaration means simply that all people are equal in the eyes of the law. The religious among us would also say that we are all equally children of God. But the fact remains that as much as the law and the Lord accords each of us equal dignity, we are not and have never been born with equal ability, nor equal opportunity. As Laurence points out, some of us have "won life's lottery". Others have not been so lucky.

I will not disagree with you that hard work is necessary condition to success in our economic and political system. Yet, while necessary, it is not sufficient in and of itself. There are those who are not born healthy, white and male citizens of this great country. Those who are born to parents who can't or don't want to properly care for them, in neighborhoods where they will not receive a decent education. Some will fall victim to terrible diseases through no fault of their own. These people can work as hard as anyone could ask, yet many of them will still not find success in life.

It is my belief (and, by reading her posts, I think that Martha shares it to a certain extent) that part of the social compact is that those of us who have succeeded in our particular economic and political system have obligations to those who have not been able to succeed in that system. After all, if we had an alternative system, I may well have been unsuccessful. It has been said that the mark of a great society is how well it treats its weakest members. I agree. Right now, society treats me well, but it does not treat all well.

Based on your posts and your screen name, you appear to espouse an extreme libertarian view. It has been my experience with libertarians that they never acknowledge all the things that have been done for them in life. As Ann Richards once said about George H.W. Bush, "he was born on third base and thinks he hit a triple". Neither do they acknowledge all the areas in which collective action is not only useful but absolutely necessary (think environmental protection, immunizations, the court system, transportation, and space exploration as examples). In short, the libertarian view appears to be "I got mine, screw you," which seems to me to be the mark of an incredibly cramped and barren soul. I simply cannot believe that most people would be happy in a Hobbesian world of all against all.

With respect to my IQ comment, it was simply my way of saying that, in my observation, Martha appears to be very, very intelligent. I do not know you and cannot say whether her IQ would be 50 points higher than yours. To that extent, my comment was an unwarranted ad hominem atttack, for which I apologize. But I will never agree with your philosophy.

Lastly, although I find myself in agreement with her on almost every point, please be assured that Martha hardly needs me to "argue her cases for her".
 
Last edited:
Yeah right. Tell that to someone with an IQ of 85.

GUMBY: IQ's of 85, duh:confused:? "All aren't created equal," what mail-in law school failed to teach her the U.S. Declaration of Independence. Not being the literalist I pretend to be, nor the moralist Martha holds herself out as: equal results were never guaranteed because the intangibles make the difference. The from/to great experiment of redistributive social policy has failed anywhere at all times.

Just what the world needs more of, lawyers and their partners: at least she's retired. Pardon me Marse Gumby, I be out of place for questioning her a priori assumptions: I think she's:confused: wrong, so she's brilliant, even genius, and generous to boot, a regular Alberta Einstein and Mother Theresa in a single package and me, why I'm ust a dolt, y'all are SO sensitive to the pain of others: what's she gonna do, sue me for illiteracy and insensitivity? Did you argue her cases for her? What nonsense.

The truth is, as this is an anonymous forum, neither you nor Martha:confused: know me, nor do I know you. And, I am not gonna get into a match these unprovable bona fides with either of you. In my bio I have revealed as much of myself as I care, to what are essentially total strangers connected to one another only ostensibly, by a desire to enhance one's knowledge in order to FIRE.

It's this sort of ad hominem arguendo that makes forums tedious.
Let me step in here for a moment, Hayek, to point out what Martha is way too polite to point out to you. She meant literally what she said. She's spent time with people who have IQs of 85 and with others who have similar disabilities that prevent them from leading independent lives.

You can't tell those people to stop whining and to work harder. If anything, they're already working way too hard to keep from getting farther behind the eight ball. She's spent a good part of her law career attempting to weave a safety net under people who are overlooked or even ignored by society's safety mechanisms... like affordable health insurance or other social benefits. Walk a mile in the shoes of people facing those challenges... or the people trying to help them claim their "rights" and "entitlements".

It's also interesting to note that when she disputes your opinions and calls your words & claims into question, you end up attacking her personally. It would seem that the strength of your argument is weakened, perhaps even eliminated, by your personal attacks. Your insults don't lend credibility to your personality, nor do they make any of us motivated to know you better.

This is hardly an anonymous forum unless you choose to keep it so. Gumby's not a stranger, he's a classmate & a shipmate. Martha's not a stranger either because we've spent the last few years learning more about each other in an atmosphere of mutual respect. I've broken bread with a lot of people here and made many friends.

"Tedious"? Having to moderate the posts of people like you... I don't feel that a response is necessary, but if you do you'll need to send it to my profile's e-mail address. You have a nice life now.

[*click* added to "Ignore Poster" list]
 
And to top it off hayekcapitalist, I'll say what Nords was too polite to say. It's obvious you are a first class troll. Move on to a board that feeds your base instict. What makes this board so great is it doesn't tolerate or foster your kind. Begone!
 
GUMBY, Martha, et al: This dialectic commenced when I responded to the normative comment by BARB...in which the poster asserted that so many of the members of this forum make six figures and view it as an inherrent right to do so, and that it must be due to something beyond our control. If you viewed my posted reponse, I did take umbrage with that, but also encouraged him/her. Next thing I know Martha is inferring that I fail to recognize and allow redress of certain inequities and am told to not give me that pull up by own bootstraps "stuff." Then Gumby questions even the size of my heart, charitably spoken.

Recognizing that every person is unique, and thus, so is his or her story, and to postulate, that becasue one can do it, all can is poor logic. But, the dialectic, to be learned from anecdotal stories, such as my own, which is a "bootstrap" story, (parents didn't graduate from high school; I worked in the same sawmill/lumber yard/truss plant that my father died in), as a roofer, laid asphalt, U.S. Air Force, night classes at local community colleges; post USAF discharge as a firefighter in Fairfax County, VA; finished B.S. in Health Care Administration magna cum laude (phi beta kappa); worked up the food chain to become a hospital president; returned to school while my son was an infant to earn MBA with highest honors (phi kappa phi); wrote graduate textbook with then Dean of MBA, now College President; became a tenured professor at top southern liberal arts university; went to law school at U.TN; Medical School at U.A.B. (third in class, but felt stifled by the regimen of private practice, the intent was to "take over" my father-in-law's opthalmology practice) one year as a missionary in BAcold City, Republic of Phillipines and Bandung, Indonesia, when I quit, and people questioned my sanity for doing so, I worked for six months as a security guard at a local lime pit, in order to get my head together and plan my next move, and I actually rather enjoyed the solitude; like(d) investing better. What do I do now? Iteach at a small private school at which 70-80% of the students come from the inner-city and can't afford to pay the tuition, so we "help."No bona fide vitae right?

The secret predictor of success, is that there is no predictor. WE all know individuals born with what the general consensus would agree "all" of the advantages, and have watched them crash and burn, all the while wonddring what went wrong and what can we do to help. Like wise, those of humble, even some might say disadvantaged socio-economic circumstances rise to great heights. Dr. Ben Carson, Johns Hopkins neuro-surgeon, first to separate siamese twins joined cephalically, is an acquaintance of mine, and such an individual (read his biography Helping Hands). Onca again, is it nature or nurture?

I determined that the latter is the one thing we can do something about. I am not referring to the outlier, the person with the I.Q. of 85. But, to the one with an I.Q. of 100 who is waiting for something to happen for them, rather than them happening to it! Accepting responsiblity for the outcomes reasonably associated with decisions under the individuals control. We cannot control, or hardly influence, exogenous, macro events, we can decide to study hard, work hard, be honest, etc.. That's not bravo sierra hombre.We're are not talking MENSA here, rather success as a person; all of the Maslow higher needs, and a buy product, for those who make it a priority, will probably a modicum of financial independence. Many academic studies, and replicated for mass consumption by Danko and Stanley in The Millionaire Next Door, support my basic thesis.

So, here we are. Perhaps it was the nuance and we actually all agree on the big issues, perhaps not, but as a "newer" member of the forum, I won't accept second hand status.

Let's be friends.
 
Last edited:
GUMBY: IQ's of 85, duh:confused:? "All aren't created equal," what mail-in law school failed to teach her the U.S. Declaration of Independence. Not being the literalist I pretend to be, nor the moralist Martha holds herself out as: equal results were never guaranteed because the intangibles make the difference. The from/to great experiment of redistributive social policy has failed anywhere at all times.

Just what the world needs more of, lawyers and their partners: at least she's retired. Pardon me Marse Gumby, I be out of place for questioning her a priori assumptions: I think she's:confused: wrong, so she's brilliant, even genius, and generous to boot, a regular Alberta Einstein and Mother Theresa in a single package and me, why I'm ust a dolt, y'all are SO sensitive to the pain of others: what's she gonna do, sue me for illiteracy and insensitivity? Did you argue her cases for her? What nonsense.

The truth is, as this is an anonymous forum, neither you nor Martha:confused: know me, nor do I know you. And, I am not gonna get into a match these unprovable bona fides with either of you. In my bio I have revealed as much of myself as I care, to what are essentially total strangers connected to one another only ostensibly, by a desire to enhance one's knowledge in order to FIRE.

It's this sort of ad hominem arguendo that makes forums tedious.

Look, everybody! A walking anus!
 
Perhaps it was the nuance and we actually all agree on the big issues, perhaps not, but as a "newer" member of the forum, I won't accept second hand status.

Hayek, up to now I don't think I have read posts by any "newer" members of this forum that were as self-congratulatory, self righteous, and self-praising as yours, or any that showed as little respect for other accomplished individuals here as yours. If you feel you are being handed inferior status on this message board, perhaps you should at least consider the possibility that you may have thoroughly earned it.

Brewer, as my mother would have said, there is no need to lower yourself to his level.... :angel:
 
Brewer, as my mother would have said, there is no need to lower yourself to his level.... :angel:

You guys can feel free to try to teach the pig to sing. In the meantime, I will be climbing into the sty with a hog castrator at the ready.
 
GUMBY, Martha, et al: This dialectic commenced when I responded to the normative comment by BARB...in which the poster asserted that so many of the members of this forum make six figures and view it as an inherrent right to do so, and that it must be due to something beyond our control. If you viewed my posted reponse, I did take umbrage with that, but also encouraged him/her. Next thing I know Martha is inferring that I fail to recognize and allow redress of certain inequities and am told to not give me that pull up by own bootstraps "stuff." Then Gumby questions even the size of my heart, charitably spoken.

Recognizing that every person is unique, and thus, so is his or her story, and to postulate, that becasue one can do it, all can is poor logic. But, the dialectic, to be learned from anecdotal stories, such as my own, which is a "bootstrap" story, (parents didn't graduate from high school; I worked in the same sawmill/lumber yard/truss plant that my father died in), as a roofer, laid asphalt, U.S. Air Force, night classes at local community colleges; post USAF discharge as a firefighter in Fairfax County, VA; finished B.S. in Health Care Administration magna cum laude (phi beta kappa); worked up the food chain to become a hospital president; returned to school while my son was an infant to earn MBA with highest honors (phi kappa phi); wrote graduate textbook with then Dean of MBA, now College President; became a tenured professor at top southern liberal arts university; went to law school at U.TN; Medical School at U.A.B. (third in class, but felt stifled by the regimen of private practice, the intent was to "take over" my father-in-law's opthalmology practice) one year as a missionary in BAcold City, Republic of Phillipines and Bandung, Indonesia, when I quit, and people questioned my sanity for doing so, I worked for six months as a security guard at a local lime pit, in order to get my head together and plan my next move, and I actually rather enjoyed the solitude; like(d) investing better. What do I do now? Iteach at a small private school at which 70-80% of the students come from the inner-city and can't afford to pay the tuition, so we "help."No bona fide vitae right?

The secret predictor of success, is that there is no predictor. WE all know individuals born with what the general consensus would agree "all" of the advantages, and have watched them crash and burn, all the while wonddring what went wrong and what can we do to help. Like wise, those of humble, even some might say disadvantaged socio-economic circumstances rise to great heights. Dr. Ben Carson, Johns Hopkins neuro-surgeon, first to separate siamese twins joined cephalically, is an acquaintance of mine, and such an individual (read his biography Helping Hands). Onca again, is it nature or nurture?

I determined that the latter is the one thing we can do something about. I am not referring to the outlier, the person with the I.Q. of 85. But, to the one with an I.Q. of 100 who is waiting for something to happen for them, rather than them happening to it! Accepting responsiblity for the outcomes reasonably associated with decisions under the individuals control. We cannot control, or hardly influence, exogenous, macro events, we can decide to study hard, work hard, be honest, etc.. That's not bravo sierra hombre.We're are not talking MENSA here, rather success as a person; all of the Maslow higher needs, and a buy product, for those who make it a priority, will probably a modicum of financial independence. Many academic studies, and replicated for mass consumption by Danko and Stanley in The Millionaire Next Door, support my basic thesis.

So, here we are. Perhaps it was the nuance and we actually all agree on the big issues, perhaps not, but as a "newer" member of the forum, I won't accept second hand status.

Let's be friends.

Smart people don't tell everyone how smart they are..........:rolleyes:
 
Let's be friends.

Now that we have each stated our positions, I think it best if we just call it a day. I hope that we can have more constructive discussions in the future.
 
Back
Top Bottom