Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.
- 169
- 3
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
But the topic is the very rich, and approximately all of them “would've otherwise gotten paid that money for their time”, either through additional hours related to their position proper or through networking and continual learning. Heck, even just exercising or going on a walk in nature saves more money in the long run for the super rich than nickling and diming. But yeah, you and @Walterodim are right regarding not super rich, salaried engineers or whatever.
As I've written in another comment, I doubt that these thrifty billionaires are really actually anally obsessive about the price of their frozen broccoli. It's a combination of general ascetism and having a detailed mental model of what things cost. f3zinker has covered the latter, and I have a few things to say about the former.
I know people who went into business with the explicit goal of being able to raise their standard of living and maintain it with passive income alone. A thrifty billionaire would be their opposite: he really enjoys making his business grow but doesn't really care about his standard of living.
Like, I could be paying $5 for a haircut, but I pay $30 instead. Is the haircut itself really six times better? No, but neither place really puts a dent in my finances, and I enjoy the more premium experience enough to prefer it. However, I can imagine someone who simply doesn't care about shiatsu massage chairs at the hair washing station, terrycloth vs waffle towels or not having to listen to whatever radio station the barber prefers. Just like I can imagine someone whose life would be meaningfully improved by a brand new royal blue BMW Z4, while I don't really want a new car at all.
More options
Context Copy link
I don't think that even the very rich would otherwise be getting paid for the time you are talking about here. For one thing, their position (let's say a CEO of a megacorp) is probably still salaried and they still get no marginal income from working more. But also, your other examples are all things which don't actually bring in money. Networking and learning are useful, but they are not income streams.
Hmm, I don’t follow. CEOs are paid in stock and packages, their future income is predicated on performance, and networking/learning is simply tomorrow’s income for those with delayed gratification. Do you really think that it’s worth it for someone who makes a million a year to care about where they get gas or the price of the pizza they order? I would still say “absolutely not” except for the psychological benefit of making money seem more valuable.
For some sectors though, I would imagine time spent knowing how much things cost for an ordinary consumer is valuable learning a CEO could do?
e.g. If you are supper out of touch $15 vs $8 a month for twitter blue is approximately 0 difference to you, but it could put you on opposite sides of the marginal elasticity curve.
This discussion reminds me of "Neutral hours: a tool for valuing time and energy" (pdf link) by Owen Cotton-Barratt
Like whether clipping out a coupon is worth it depends on
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link