I remember discussing retirement with my microeconomics professor. Most people saturate their pipeline for consumption at around $40M of liquid assets per household member. Beyond that, it's really difficult to mismanage your consumption (e.g. in many cities, there are not many better places to stay in besides the Four Seasons/Mandarin Oriental). Besides that, I live a fairly thrifty lifestyle, so $1B actually won't change my standard of living - and I owe this luxury largely to the people around me. On the other hand, Grigori Perelman lived in his mother's run-down apartment in Russia and could barely afford basic groceries. He could've accepted the Millennium Prize for solving the Poincare conjecture and made himself $1M wealthier, but he rejected it largely because the people who had helped him solve the conjecture were not credited for their work. The applause that he received at the Fields Medal ceremony is evidence that we know what's right: there are more meaningful things in life than money.
The following 5 users say Thank You to artemiso for this post:
Favorite Futures: Gameplay Klownbine® Trading of Globex
Posts: 1,276 since Jul 2009
Thanks: 1,227 given,
throwing in the towel on this one
I changed my mind, and from now on will pay all bills with the adulation of others, earned from the efficiency tweaking of ninjatrader indicators.
There is no doubt that the literal handful of people who control most of the world's wealth assets would agree with this approach. There are four hundred individuals in the United States whose personal wealth exceeds that of the bottom 180 million. Most of whom would probably not even consider giving a dime to anyone, and engage in "philanthropy" that is self serving and favorably tax treated. They have that wealth by virtue of The Divine Right of Kings.
That's why the only realistic hope for such an offer would be one of those Nigerian bank officials previously mentioned, or possibly the income that might be obtained as a Funded Trader®.
Actually I could easily find good uses for a billion dollars without having to do much agonizing at all. Only a tiny fraction would be used for personal consumption. Wallowing in "luxury" is self destructive.
When the donor knocks on the front door, he will be redirected across the street to Khloe Kardashian, who would have no problem using the entire billion for personal consumption.
Thanks to all, for the opportunity to ponder the musings of those whose essences float in an ethereal thought-plane of illuminated existence, that ordinary animal-like carbon based beings like me cannot possibly comprehend.
"If we don't loosen up some money, this sucker is going down." -GW Bush, 2008
“Lack of proof that something is true does not prove that it is not true - when you want to believe.” -Humpty Dumpty, 2014
“The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function.” Prof. Albert Bartlett
Last edited by Zondor; February 8th, 2014 at 11:43 AM.
Too Late. It's not nonsense, it's a great question that you've already answered indirectly through your post. It has over 30 responses from many respected people on this forum giving their own sincere answer despite most of them are playful in nature.
Great response. This is the meat of your post and the most valued part imho. I agree. Though I wouldn't say my post is hypocritical or nonsensical because of my agreeance. It rests upon one of the most integral questions a trader has to face if they succeed. (How much is enough?)
What? We don't know who you're referring to here or what "it" or "bait" is. I suspect you know you could have offended one, if not two people here with your post by now. But it's okay because I know I wouldn't take offense to this and I'm pretty sure Artemiso wouldn't considering his prowess. Even so, I would expect you, considering your post count, to of at least been more clear in who you're referring to and to consider offense if unintentionally given.
Besides philanthropy has no strings attached either and isn't necessarily limited to charitable organizations. Results of philanthropy are not necessarily needed to justify it being given. If you help a man who had a heart attack on the street get away from moving cars it means you've helped a man live despite millions of others who will die in a similar situation throughout the world. Who can really quantify this anyways and how many people it might inspire? You can't.
I wouldn't say it's completely folly, although it does have a certain folly smell to it because it is abnormal. To answer it respectfully isn't engaging in folly, but correcting it. Maybe I'm educating you I guess. I'm certainly not discrediting you as a trader because I'm only responding to one of your posts specifically. So I'll dispel the folly through education? lol
Then again you could be referring to Artemiso so I could be partially wrong with my approach here. (partially)
If you say so. Although I could easily answer this, it's folly by nature because you're probably looking for a specific trait or answer that you could easily disagree with either way if someone answered. bait
Who is the author? We can only guess. Either way you've referred specifically to my thread by saying the question is nonsense.
What's "sucked it"? You've gotten "sucked in" by responding now if that's what you mean.
I hope you do well too as I hope anyone would do on this forum.
Last edited by Itchymoku; February 8th, 2014 at 01:44 PM.
The following user says Thank You to Itchymoku for this post:
What is your bias? That I'm just a young whippersnapper who doesn't know a thing about real money and the corruption of it's empowerment? To some extent that's true although I wish it wasn't. I have a difficulty judging tone in forum posts as well but I never ignore anyone on this forum, it's not part of my nature. I wish I could help everyone on here but I know I can't unless I first learn to help myself.
I'm partly kidding. The question is completely ridiculous, but I thoroughly enjoy reading people's responses because there is a part of me that wishes I had enough money to really understand why it isn't everything. I wish I made enough money trading that I could adequately be happy not having to make more. I wish I was at the point where I could just say @#$% it.
How much is enough? Honestly I'm divided and aware of this. I'm not hungry for money per se but for consistency, a solid living, and freedom. I know obtaining these things may require me to sacrifice nearly everything including those things I mentioned from time to time. I don't know if anyone on this forum has made one billion dollars trading and I don't care. It's such a large sum that I assume no one has. Why would you keep trading if you had one billion dollars? That's a great question. Maybe some people have become so accustomed to it they don't want to stop like how some people who've stayed in jail their whole life don't want to leave. It may provide them structure or seclusion. Who knows. Unasked questions are the most educational to me. I'm a seeker.
The following 3 users say Thank You to Itchymoku for this post:
My bias was that the question posed in the thread was ludicrous, silly and a waste of time in that there was/is not much productive value in waxing poetic on the topic. Save, I guess, the entertainment value. I apologize if that was terse or if I offended you.
The following user says Thank You to wldman for this post:
I'd like to re-phrase the question to something a little more difficult to answer. My starting assumption is that having more money than the proverbial $70K per year is not going to make me much happier. And since I work less than 20 hours a week now, I'd say that having more free time is not going to make me that much happier either.
"If you were offered $70K (inflation adjusted) guaranteed per year for the rest of your life to quit doing any gainful work, would you accept the deal?"
That would be a lot harder for me to answer.
It's basically the deal that my father took when he retired at 60. And lived another 30 years. Cursing a lot of the time that he ever quit working.
The following user says Thank You to suko for this post:
financial productivity is a big part of trading, but not the sole motivation. Financial goals are somewhat of a trap in this business. I still have them but they are secondary motivation. I learned to measure myself against other metrics and doing that is as valuable when you make 70 a year as when you make 70 a month.
I do not want to sound the wrong way, but when you need money or desire more money for things or as a measure and you do not get it, there is no escape from that being a failure. When you have a $h!t ton of money, more money is seldom the motivation.
The following user says Thank You to wldman for this post: