• Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.

how much income per year is 'enough'?

Luck absolutely plays a factor in every person's condition. If Kobe was 5'6" he wouldn't be playing in the NBA. He could have put quadruple the practice time in during elementary school and he wouldn't have smelled an NBA career.

I'd reckon many of us on this forum are lucky due to our intellect (which is a very important trait in making money). Intellect is pretty intrinsic to our being, being dictated by genetics and early environmental influences (both out of our control).

First off, luck is only 1/2 of the equation. How many people out there are 6'6" in taller and NOT playing in the NBA? Luck has nothing to do with it. Was he born with the foundation to make it big in the NBA? Yes. But he could have sat on his ass, ate potato chips all day long and never even try out for basketball. But he didn't, he took what nature gave him and made the most of it. He's not the tallest, fastest or strongest guy in the NBA, so why then is he one of the best? Because he works his ass off and can do things other people can't. Plus I bet if he was 5' 6" and put the same drive, dedication and determination into going to med school instead of basketball, I bet he'd be a successful doctor. It's not what you are born with, it's what you do with it. And you know what? There are plenty of tall people out there who could have a chance at the NBA, but we'd never know because they were too either too lazy or never wanted to put in the effort. Just like how I know plenty of people who want to get to work late, leave early and half ass their job or education. They aren't going to become wealthy, and they won't make the NBA. I don't care if you are born with the biggest brain or the highest vertical, it's still up to you to work your ass off. We are all born with some ability to succeed; for some it is putting a ball through a hoop, for others it is saving lives, for some it is inventing something. I've seen cases of handicapped and disabled people becoming wealthy. It's up to you to find that ability, work your ass off, and make the most of it. Unfortunately most people don't have that drive.

Plus the arguement of the sports star/actor/famous person is ridiculous. Yes, some people are blessed, but some people win the lottery. They only represent a VERY TINY fraction of those who have become very wealthy. I work in several industries and have come across a LOT of self made millionaires. I can tell you for every sports athlete you can name, I can name 10 self made millionaire. And I'll tell you that not all of them were the smartest, the tallest, best looking or the luckiest. In fact I would say luck had nothing to do with their success. The common trait was that they all work hard and/or worked smart. They made the most of life and opportunities. When others quit, they pushed on. When others took the easy way out, they took the hard way through. Next time you get a chance, read through the FORBES top 500 richest people. One thing you'll notice is they are not athletes or musicians or people who you call "lucky" and you won't know 90% of the names. Because they aren't the Kennedy's or the Hilton's. They are average people, self made from the ground up. The other thing you'll notice is that they all worked hard and turned nothing into something. And it's probably not anything that you, or I, or anybody else couldn't have done ourselves if we just applied or sacrificed the same as those people did.
 
Last edited:
Well I hope you or someone you know don't get diagnosed with a cancerous tumor and require the skill and expertise of trained surgeon. I'm not sure theoretical physical models will do you much help at that point.
Are you pissed off at me or something? It reads like you are.

Also if you think money and contribution to human knowledge are inversely proportional, you are highly mistaken.
I do not think that. I think many people have become wealthy because they came up with new ideas. In fact, I think innovation is quite highly correlated with wealth.

Plus, it would be quite a wonderful world if we could all just take up philosophy, theory and sciences. Unfortunately, those things don't save lives, build buildings, keep our country safe from wars, or put us on the moon.
Actually, "theory and sciences" are integral in all those activities.

It's also not their fault that they happen to get paid a lot for what they do. If it wasn't in such high demand, then they wouldn't get paid.
I agree. I'm not sure what the relevance is.

Plus what does money even have to do with it? Say someone wanted to save lives? They obviously have to work and train very hard to do such. So the act of saving lives is not respectable?
I respect innovators. I respect the surgeon who comes up with a new experimental technique way more than the average surgeon who utilizes that technique after it's been tried and tested.

What if they were to go to a hospital in Africa and save lives for free. You still would have no respect for them? So is it just because they make money, makes them deplorable to you? But if they did the exact same thing and didn't make money, then that would be ok?
You think I care about money. It's not. It's an irrelevant variable. I respect an electrical engineer with a few semiconductor patents that makes 90K/year more than the average neurosurgeon who makes 500K/year.
 
Last edited:
First off, luck is only 1/2 of the equation. How many people out there are 6'6" in taller and NOT playing in the NBA? Luck has nothing to do with it.
It's just a question of probability. If you're 6'2" and in the NBA you have to be operating at 99.9999th percentile at that height. If you are 7'2" you probably have coordination at the 80th percentile and still be on the bench making 500K/year.

Was he born with the foundation to make it big in the NBA. Yes. But he could have sat on his ass, ate potato chips all day long and never even try out for basketball. And you know what? There are plenty of tall people out there who could have a chance at the NBA, but we'd never know because they were too either too lazy or never wanted to put in the effort.
No doubt. It's a question of probability. The person who is 5'6" doesn't have the chance, ever.

Just like I know plenty of people who want to get to work late, leave early and half ass their job or education. I don't care if you are born with the biggest brain or the highest vertical, it's still up to you to work your ass off an make the most of it.
I have never said anything otherwise. We agree.

We are all born with some ability to succeed; for some it is putting a ball through a hoop, for others it is saving lives, for some it is inventing something. I've seen cases of handicapped and disabled people becoming wealthy. It's up to you to find that ability, work your ass off, and make the most of it. Unfortunately most people don't have that drive.
I'd prefer if we were all born the same and drive alone was the differentiating factor. However, it's pretty obvious that there are a ton of traits which are not even distributed within our population which help our success: intelligence, looks, height, personality, etc. You agree (as you say below).

Plus the arguement of the sports star/actor/famous person is ridiculous. Yes, some people are blessed, but some people win the lottery. They only represent a VERY TINY fraction of those who have become very wealthy. I work in several industries and have come across a LOT of self made millionaires. I can tell you for every sports athlete you can name, I can name 10 self made millionaire.
And I don't disagree, at all. But it's a good illustration of how genetic luck can eliminate some people from certain competitions.

And I'll tell you that not all of them were the smartest, the tallest, best looking or the luckiest. In fact I would say luck had nothing to do with their success. The common trait was that they all work hard and/or worked smart. They made the most of life and opportunities. When others quit, they pushed on. When others took the easy way out, they took the hard way through. Next time you get a chance, read through the FORBES top 500 richest people. One thing you'll notice is they are not athletes or musicians or people who you call "lucky" and you won't know 90% of the names. Because they aren't the Kennedy's or the Hilton's. They are average people, self made from the ground up. The other thing you'll notice is that they all worked hard and turned nothing into something. And it's probably not anything that you, or I, or anybody else couldn't have done themself if they had just applied or sacrificed themselves.
Intelligence. On this forum we are likely all blessed to be all in the top 20%. I don't think we would reach the success we've had if we were in the bottom 20%. Top 20% is not average. It's anti-thetical to average. Do wealthy people not think they are lucky in terms of genetics (intelligence) or upbringing? I'd reckon most would say their success relies quite a bit on both those two variables.

On the Forbes 400 list the top 3 guys are Gates, Buffet, & Ellison. They went to Harvard, UPenn, & University of Chicago (getting the degree is just a piece of paper, but being smart enough to get in means a lot).

Anyways, I've already said I respect entrepreneurs a lot, so I'm not sure what your point is.
 
Last edited:
I think part of where you are getting bumped is that you are equating with the drive for more money with either greed and/or selfishness, which it does not have to be. Nor is it evil, nor is it a bad thing.

Note when you recant what you've accomplished in your life all of what you reference are things that you own, your cars, your boat, your planes, your house etc, and the things that you can do with your money, eat out, send kids to private school. That's great that is enough for you and it certainly a good life... for you. But (being devil's advocate here) who is the one being selfish? You've provided enough for you and your family. But if you think of the roads you've used, the social security you may be collecting, the police, fire department, public libraries, the military, government agencies, have you paid your share to not only support what you've used, but what others who can't afford to, have you paid their share as well? And did you not only pay what you've used today, but have you put in enough to sustain future generations' costs for these public things as well. Well based on your tax bracket, and the fact that things like social security and the deficit is going amok, the answer is no. If you sum up all that you've donated and paid in taxes, it may cover what you and your family has used, but it certainly doesn't cover the share of those who can't pay use.

Now consider, who has paid for them. Well, the very wealthy. The ones who make $372,950 or more (the top IRS tax bracket). These are the same people who "never have enough" because they know the more they generate, the more everybody benefits. That's because they pay way more to a public system then they will ever use. They subsidize the costs of roads and services that they will only use a tiny fraction of, yet the rest of the population will benefit from. And the more they earn, the more they pay and the more other people (not them) benefit. So while it is very easy to claim these people are selfish and greedy, the fact is, you have made enough for you and your family. But these people have made enough for themselves, and many others. So in that case, who really is the selfish one? You had the ability to make more money, but you chose not to. You chose to enjoy your life and cover your expenses. You had no interest in wanting more and generating more money for people other than yourself and your family to benefit from. So while some guy is out taking risks, burning the midnight oil to earn a few more thousand dollars and giving 35% in taxes for the benefit of everybody (not including charitable donations), you were probably enjoying time with your family on your boat or in your plane. So again, who is the selfish one in this picture?

Now please don't think I'm attacking you. I really am not trying to. I just don't want people to keep vilifying wealthy people and especially those who worked very hard to become wealthy because they always wanted "more". I want people to understand that most people think that many of these public and government things that we all use are not paid by you. The sad reality is that the average household income doesn't even cover the expenses that goes into funding these things like roads, military, police etc. let alone covering the share of those who are paying nothing or near nothing. If you are collecting social security who do you think is paying for that? I paid well over $150,000 in taxes last year and the chances are very high that I won't get a dime from social security when I retire. Not only that, but I have to save twice as much as my hard earned "not enough" money so I will actually have a chance to retire. So you tell me, would it be better than if I said screw it, work less, make less money, buy a boat and relax more, pay less taxes so that the social security runs out faster and not have enough when I retire, so when it's my turn to collect social security I double the burden on your children to have to support people like me and millions of others? No, that would be selfish. I'm going to work harder, pay more taxes, and put more into the pot, because more is never enough, and when it comes time to retire, I'll have enough to take care of myself. And when I die, what I don't spend, I'll give to charities and family so that they can benefit from my "more is never enough" attitude and they can put more back into the system.

Again, not attacking you in anyway, but I hope I can shed a little different perspective those who are always desiring for more. If you can look at the big picture then perhaps you can see why there is no reason to look down on them for what they do benefits us all.

Apparently I failed to express what I meant to say, because I agree with you, your financial overview works just fine, I think we are looking at things from two different perspectives. I guess mine is that "having enough" also works pretty well if you can find a place to live where the cost of living is such that on the continuum of "enough," the thin end of the scale works just as well as the thick end.

Mental ramblings follow... My daughter lives in LA, she and her hubby together make 4 times as much as the average around here, and that gets them what I would call a cottage. What buys a 1,200 foot house in LA buys a 3,500 foot house on 4 acres in East TN, etc.

I am not contrary to your concept of financial success, I think what I am having trouble grasping is how much it is necessary for some to make in order to have "enough." Probably it is cultural sticker shock, or generational sticker shock. I remember standing in a Ford dealership showroom in Miami, and looking at a new GT-40 for $14,000. Now you know why I am blown away, I guess I am just getting old. Better quit rambling, might get lost...
 
Are you pissed off at me or something? It reads like you are.

At you personally, no. Please don't take anything I'm saying personally and I'm not trying to attack you or anything. Sorry if you felt that I was. As we all know forums are not the best way of relaying messages. However, as you can see, the topic is something I am passionate about and what you have said so far has struck a chord with me on many fronts.

First of all, I've run the spectrum from poor to rich to back to poor and back to rich again. I've seen all sides of that prism and most of the people who seem to have a strong opinion on the topic have mostly have seen it from one side only (poor, rich, or typically right in the middle). What bothers me about what you say is, I'm a typical person whom you would classify you have no respect for, in that regard I take offense. The first reason is that you minimize what it took for me (and others, like doctors) to accomplish what I (and they accomplished) accomplished. When others skipped out and partied on Friday nights, I studied my ass off. When other people easy majors, I chose a hard one. When others decided to work 40 hours a week, I worked 80. When others didn’t want to take a position because they didn’t want to travel/clean toilets/fill in the blank here, I stepped up to the plate and did it. So in that regard, I earned it and so too I earn the money, fame or respect that goes along with it. Now it is your prerogative if you want to or don’t want to respect that, and you have the full right to turn your nose up to it if you like, but it would be no different than my right to flaunt my money in your face; both of which only fan the flames of animosity. All I’m suggesting is if you don’t have a ton of money, don’t scorn or look down on those who did regardless of how they got it, because they most likely worked very hard to earn it. And if you do have a lot of money, don’t flaunt it in the face of those who don’t. It’s a two way street.

Secondly, you minimize what people like me do on a daily basis. I don’t do deep physics and research. I don’t invent grand devices in the grand way you envision. Very few people can do that. So I don’t do some grand, life altering, historical work and I probably never will. What I do, will vanish the second I croak and probably even before then. However, that’s not to say that what I (and many others) do on a day to day basis isn’t important, valuable, affects our lives on a day to day basis and isn’t to be respected. In my work, I sometimes help facilitate saving energy or the environment by suggesting more energy efficient designs. I don’t develop that design and I don’t invent that product, but I am a conduit to helping that get employed. And my impetus for doing this is to make myself money. It’s a system that works. And even when I’m not innovating, the work I do is part of a life blood of work that needs to be done to survive and make sure this country moves forward. The same can be said for the fisherman, or plumbers, or people who builds houses, or the realtor that sells the house. We need these people on a daily basis. I can respect a person who picks up my trash as much as I can a person who invents some grand invention. Because we need those people who cut our hair, make our sandwiches, fix out toilets, build our houses, heal our patients, fight our wars, because without them, then you won’t have inventors and physicists to make these grand inventions. There is a support structure that allows these people to do what they need to do and each cog in that wheel has its own independent value and worth in the system.

Do you look down on the guy working out in the field picking heads of lettuce making minimum wage? He’s not making some grand life changing invention. But I have respect for him, because he is doing something I can’t or don’t want do. Just like Kobe Bryant does something I can’t do, and a plumber does things I can’t or won’t do. By that regard, I can even respect those working at McDonalds because that is something I benefit from and yet is a job I could never dream of doing. Again, everyone plays their role in this machine and we all have our parts. I just feel it is myopic to not respect everyone from the top of the pole down to the bottom and everywhere in between, when in reality, it is all interconnected.

Finally, I know for you it’s not about the money. But what I think you are doing is penalizing people for making money. In your case of the electrical inventor and the neurosurgeon, sure the electrical engineer has invented something, but what the neurosurgeon does, has a greater impact in the lives of people today and in the present and there is a heavy value and respect for that. Hence my comment about not wishing you or someone you love will have the need for a neurosurgeon. So while there is great value in the future for patents and things to come, there is a value, need and respect for things in the present. Say this neurosurgeon, saves the life of this electrical engineer who then goes on to invent some life changing device. In this regard, he’s partly responsible to the development in that invention and that has as much value of respect you have for the guy doing the inventing. In essence, these inventors, great minds, are nothing without the support structure behind them that help cultivate a society that will 1) allow them to do what they need to do. 2) appreciate and accept their invention/development 3) utilize that invention. I mean do you have the same respect for the inventors that build these wacky but useless inventions like socks with built in radios? I worked in the PTO (patent and trademark office) as a patent examiner. For every one real patent there are tens of thousands of useless patents that are neither revolutionary, nor life changing. Often patents are a micro evolution of an existing idea. Plus the process of a patent is a joke. It’s all about getting your idea out there on paper so that if someone uses it, you win the lottery. I have greater respect for the business man who takes that concept or idea and puts in an format that can be used by the masses and markets it in a way so that he take a simple concept or idea on paper and turns it into something realistic, tangible and useable for all to benefit from.

Again, not an attack on you, just a wildly different perspective. I know that I’ll never change our mind on this topic, or anyone else’s for that matter. This really is just an exercise. But it is at least good banter and may perhaps spark, you or someone else’s mind to at least ponder.
 
Apparently I failed to express what I meant to say, because I agree with you, your financial overview works just fine, I think we are looking at things from two different perspectives. I guess mine is that "having enough" also works pretty well if you can find a place to live where the cost of living is such that on the continuum of "enough," the thin end of the scale works just as well as the thick end.

Mental ramblings follow... My daughter lives in LA, she and her hubby together make 4 times as much as the average around here, and that gets them what I would call a cottage. What buys a 1,200 foot house in LA buys a 3,500 foot house on 4 acres in East TN, etc.

I am not contrary to your concept of financial success, I think what I am having trouble grasping is how much it is necessary for some to make in order to have "enough." Probably it is cultural sticker shock, or generational sticker shock. I remember standing in a Ford dealership showroom in Miami, and looking at a new GT-40 for $14,000. Now you know why I am blown away, I guess I am just getting old. Better quit rambling, might get lost...

Ahh, I think I see what you are saying. Sorry if I mis-read your post, it very much read and sounded like similar earlier posts about people frowning upon people who desire more and should be content with what they have. If I'm understanding you correctly now, you are more in amazement of what it has taken these days to achieve the same level of contentment you did with much less in your time. I guess based on your perspective, I also am somewhat amazed at the cost of living and dollar value over the years. Is inflation really that powerful? It sometimes boggles the mind.

Anyway, thanks for the experience perspective on things. Now that I see what you are saying I can see I have lots to learn based on your lifetime of experience. I'd be the first to admit that I foolishly dismiss the words of older people (as antiquated) and learn time and time and time again the folly of my ways. One thing I learn is that people who have just experience life, can be smart or not, but they are almost always wise, and never underestimate wisdom. I think there is A LOT for me to learn from your perspective. Just looking at a real-life perspective of the time-value of money is, well… pardon the pun, invaluable. :smile:
 
At you personally, no. Please don't take anything I'm saying personally and I'm not trying to attack you or anything. Sorry if you felt that I was. As we all know forums are not the best way of relaying messages. However, as you can see, the topic is something I am passionate about and what you have said so far has struck a chord with me on many fronts.
Okay.

First of all, I've run the spectrum from poor to rich to back to poor and back to rich again. I've seen all sides of that prism and most of the people who seem to have a strong opinion on the topic have mostly have seen it from one side only (poor, rich, or typically right in the middle). What bothers me about what you say is, I'm a typical person whom you would classify you have no respect for, in that regard I take offense. The first reason is that you minimize what it took for me (and others, like doctors) to accomplish what I (and they accomplished) accomplished. When others skipped out and partied on Friday nights, I studied my ass off. When other people easy majors, I chose a hard one. When others decided to work 40 hours a week, I worked 80. When others didn’t want to take a position because they didn’t want to travel/clean toilets/fill in the blank here, I stepped up to the plate and did it. So in that regard, I earned it and so too I earn the money, fame or respect that goes along with it.
"No respect" is not synonymous with "scorn". "No respect" is a neutral position. I don't think less of you for being a doctor - I also don't put you above the crop picker.

Now it is your prerogative if you want to or don’t want to respect that, and you have the full right to turn your nose up to it if you like, but it would be no different than my right to flaunt my money in your face; both of which only fan the flames of animosity. All I’m suggesting is if you don’t have a ton of money, don’t scorn or look down on those who did regardless of how they got it, because they most likely worked very hard to earn it. And if you do have a lot of money, don’t flaunt it in the face of those who don’t. It’s a two way street.
I've never said I had a problem with people who have money. I said it's an irrelevant variable to me.

Secondly, you minimize what people like me do on a daily basis. I don’t do deep physics and research. I don’t invent grand devices in the grand way you envision. Very few people can do that. So I don’t do some grand, life altering, historical work and I probably never will. What I do, will vanish the second I croak and probably even before then. However, that’s not to say that what I (and many others) do on a day to day basis isn’t important, valuable, affects our lives on a day to day basis and isn’t to be respected.
Why not? Respect is something which a select minority deserve.

In my work, I sometimes help facilitate saving energy or the environment by suggesting more energy efficient designs. I don’t develop that design and I don’t invent that product, but I am a conduit to helping that get employed. And my impetus for doing this is to make myself money. It’s a system that works. And even when I’m not innovating, the work I do is part of a life blood of work that needs to be done to survive and make sure this country moves forward. The same can be said for the fisherman, or plumbers, or people who builds houses, or the realtor that sells the house. We need these people on a daily basis. I can respect a person who picks up my trash as much as I can a person who invents some grand invention. Because we need those people who cut our hair, make our sandwiches, fix out toilets, build our houses, heal our patients, fight our wars, because without them, then you won’t have inventors and physicists to make these grand inventions. There is a support structure that allows these people to do what they need to do and each cog in that wheel has its own independent value and worth in the system.
I don't believe that. Everyone looks after their own self interest and attempts to work the job that is best for them. I'm not going to give someone respect for doing an average job. But really, why would anyone care about what I think? If I'm happy with my job and I make enough to fulfill my goals I don't care if someone thinks I'm less than dirt because of my job.

Finally, I know for you it’s not about the money. But what I think you are doing is penalizing people for making money.
No, I've already told you money is an irrelevant variable.

In your case of the electrical inventor and the neurosurgeon, sure the electrical engineer has invented something, but what the neurosurgeon does, has a greater impact in the lives of people today and in the present and there is a heavy value and respect for that. Hence my comment about not wishing you or someone you love will have the need for a neurosurgeon. So while there is great value in the future for patents and things to come, there is a value, need and respect for things in the present. Say this neurosurgeon, saves the life of this electrical engineer who then goes on to invent some life changing device. In this regard, he’s partly responsible to the development in that invention and that has as much value of respect you have for the guy doing the inventing. In essence, these inventors, great minds, are nothing without the support structure behind them that help cultivate a society that will 1) allow them to do what they need to do. 2) appreciate and accept their invention/development 3) utilize that invention.
The reason the US is a first world economy is because we have technical innovation. In fact, technical innovation is the major difference between crappy economies and good ones. It's one of the reasons a neurosurgeon gets to make 500K/year in the US. In fact, it's the reason that all of our "support industries" in the US are well paid compared to those same industries in 3rd world countries.

I mean do you have the same respect for the inventors that build these wacky but useless inventions like socks with built in radios? I worked in the PTO (patent and trademark office) as a patent examiner. For every one real patent there are tens of thousands of useless patents that are neither revolutionary, nor life changing. Often patents are a micro evolution of an existing idea. Plus the process of a patent is a joke. It’s all about getting your idea out there on paper so that if someone uses it, you win the lottery.
I agree. I just used 'patent' as a substitute for technical innovation. Most technical innovations are represented by patents - although most patents are probably worthless.

I have greater respect for the business man who takes that concept or idea and puts in an format that can be used by the masses and markets it in a way so that he take a simple concept or idea on paper and turns it into something realistic, tangible and useable for all to benefit from.
I have already said I respect entrepreneurs.
 
Mr. Payne,

I'm amazed (though i guess i shouldn't be... it is after all a big world out there) that you have no more respect for (example) a neurosurgeon than a crop picker.

Not because as a person, one is worth more or less than another. But you have one person who would rather hang out nights and weekends, and contributes nothing beyond the immediate picking of crops, vs. someone who spent FIFTEEN years of their life trying to better him/herself through long nights, long weekends and little else.

The drive required to even get into medical school is usually formidable. Personally, I'd rather be chilling at the beach, maybe getting drunk on the weekends. For some people though, I guess (money aside) doing completely mindless repetetive work is enough, and commands as much respect from you as the guy who will one day open up your chest, and spend 4 hours re-routing your blood supply to your heart.

cheers,
gerry
 
Mr. Payne,

I'm amazed (though i guess i shouldn't be... it is after all a big world out there) that you have no more respect for (example) a neurosurgeon than a crop picker.

Not because as a person, one is worth more or less than another. But you have one person who would rather hang out nights and weekends, and contributes nothing beyond the immediate picking of crops, vs. someone who spent FIFTEEN years of their life trying to better him/herself through long nights, long weekends and little else.

The drive required to even get into medical school is usually formidable. Personally, I'd rather be chilling at the beach, maybe getting drunk on the weekends. For some people though, I guess (money aside) doing completely mindless repetetive work is enough, and commands as much respect from you as the guy who will one day open up your chest, and spend 4 hours re-routing your blood supply to your heart.

cheers,
gerry

Peisberg I can see where your coming from but you're in a way labeling all crop workers as lazy people and people who get education and make it big as hard working people. They are all hard workers and important to society.

In a hypothetical situation, if all we had were neurosurgeons and crop pickers in this world and neither could figure out how to do each other task. If a crop worker gets hurt and there are no surgeons to care for him then that crop picker is dead. Without the crop picker the surgeon wouldn't have food and in the end he's dead as well. End result they are all just as important for all of societies survival and well being. Obviously that isn't the case in real life and there are tons of different occupations but in the end most of them are contributing to society.

Nerosurgeons have to do hard work to get/maintain their position and crop pickers have to do a lot of hard physically intensive work almost everyday. It's also about work condition you have to show respect for people who are actually putting their life on the line daily (miners, construction men, crop pickers, etc) vs for example a surgeon or a office worker who's life isn't ever really on the line on a day to day basis to do their job.

Just wanted to add in my opinion about your current debate and add in a bit more variables besides effort level and its relation to deserved respect, to see what you think. It's an interesting debate by the way.
 
Last edited:
Why not? Respect is something which a select minority deserve.

I would agree with this. Everyone has their own view of what constitutes respectable. For some, it's primarily a resume. For others, it's primarily financial wealth. And still others judge people by the content of their character (as MLK Jr. said). :smile:

I'm firmly in the last camp, BTW. And incidentally, there is a positive correlation (but by no means perfect) between having a strong character and obtaining worldly success.
 
This thread is wandering all over the place,but I'd like to help with one issue brought up about "respect" for different professions,and also to help keep me from falling into a pit of self loathing:wink: Survey after survey have time and time again revealed the same results,when a random population is asked which profession do you respect the most ... the Number one with more than 50% of votes always goes to doctors.....followed by univeristy professors, fireman ,police ect....
 
This thread is wandering all over the place,but I'd like to help with one issue brought up about "respect" for different professions,and also to help keep me from falling into a pit of self loathing:wink: Survey after survey have time and time again revealed the same results,when a random population is asked which profession do you respect the most ... the Number one with more than 50% of votes always goes to doctors.....followed by univeristy professors, fireman ,police ect....

I'm actually surprised by that I would of expected fireman to get top spot. Then doctors or police. But that is a pretty interesting statistic.
 
Mr. Payne,

I'm amazed (though i guess i shouldn't be... it is after all a big world out there) that you have no more respect for (example) a neurosurgeon than a crop picker.
A primary difference between a neurosurgeon and a crop picker is intellect. That is something which is 100% determined by luck (ie: genetics & environment). A crop picker, in the vast majority of cases, can't become a neurosurgeon. I'm not going to respect someone for being lucky.

Not because as a person, one is worth more or less than another. But you have one person who would rather hang out nights and weekends, and contributes nothing beyond the immediate picking of crops, vs. someone who spent FIFTEEN years of their life trying to better him/herself through long nights, long weekends and little else.
Working the fields isn't exactly an easy job. It's a job one does because of lack of options. Options, for many people, are determined through circumstances out of our control.
 
A primary difference between a neurosurgeon and a crop picker is intellect. That is something which is 100% determined by luck (ie: genetics & environment). A crop picker, in the vast majority of cases, can't become a neurosurgeon. I'm not going to respect someone for being lucky.

I disagree with that; I don't believe that is always the case. I've met several people who under-achieved way less than their intellectual ability. Basically they worked a minimum wage job, because they just didn't have the drive, ambition or desire to stay in school, stick with a job, take direction or whatever. I've also seen the opposite, where people who are not intelligent and over achieve way beyond what they should have been either through hard work, perseverance, or skillful negotiation.

You make it appear like everything is a complete roll of the dice, which I don't believe. One’s own determination is a large factor in where someone goes in life. You could have all the skill or intelligence in the world but you still need to work hard to make something of it. That’s what sets athletes and people like doctors apart is that they are not only lucky genetically, but they also work very hard in addition to make the most of it. Being athletically gifted doesn't mean you just wake up and play in the NBA or NFL. Look at Michael Vick. He is one of the most gifted athletes I’ve ever seen, but has only lived up to a fraction of his potential because of the poor work ethic, not to mention throwing his career away. Athletes still need to work extremely hard, much harder than just about anyone else. The same with being a doctor. You not only have to be very smart, but you need to work very hard as well. Having only one component of that equation isn't enough.

Having said that, I agree we are all born with a different level of skill sets and intelligence. That is luck because we have no control over that. However, what we do have control over is how hard we work, how hard we study, how much drive we have etc. Those are all factors within our control. And some people work harder than others and make the most of their intelligence or skills. That's what I choose to respect. If someone makes the most of what they have, regardless of what they were born with, I appreciate that the most. That's why I'll heavily tip, as a sign of respect, service people who I can see are really busting their ass. Likewise, by the very nature when a person has become an MD, I can see that they also busted their ass and made the most of what life has given them. There is no such thing as an easy jaunt through medical school, and they could have easily taken a much easier job route. But they didn't and that is what I choose to acknowledge and respect.
 
i saw a piece about this guy on tv a couple of weeks ago and think it makes an interesting footnote to this thread:

Farmworker to Surgeon: Immigrant Lives Dream

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10013111

btw, i agree he's an exceptional exception :)
Quinones-Hinojosa says he owes so much of his success to the many people who have extended a hand to him throughout his life.

and being sour to those who can lend a hand will get you no where. Embracing those who are doing better than you will do you more good than despising them.
 
When you state net is that after Mormon taxes?

And yes, some of us live in pricier 'hoods.

Try mines for example:

94024.png


Looks like we ranked 31st in the nation for zip codes in the last year the NSX was made. It's probably higher now since I'm still seeing $3million+ homes around here being sold in a matter of days with cash.

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/7/ZIP94024.html

If everyone from this forum lived in my 'hood there would be ALOT less NSX owners and NSX's would be worthless with the decreased demand.

My zip is #12 on the list. I wish i could afford a house in that price. lol.
For me, i think $250k/yr is enough (with $2~3M cash in hand) :biggrin:
 
My answer to the question... at this point in my life, time is becoming more valuable than money, so I'd say I'd need to make enough money to allow me to have the free time I need to be "happy". I don't need a big house (2000-2500sqft is plenty big), I do need space though, both in distance from my neighbor and the storage kind! I also need some self worth, which could be anything from being a father to changing the timing belt on an NSX. I'm a simple guy, so my "enough" level is fairly low.

Bottom line... I live in America and I'm surrounded by family and friends. How can I complain about anything? :cool:

Dan
 
Survey after survey have time and time again revealed the same results,when a random population is asked which profession do you respect the most ... the Number one with more than 50% of votes always goes to doctors.....followed by univeristy professors, fireman ,police ect....

Stop tooting your own horn you arrogant, non respectable prick!:biggrin::wink:
 
A primary difference between a neurosurgeon and a crop picker is intellect. That is something which is 100% determined by luck (ie: genetics & environment). A crop picker, in the vast majority of cases, can't become a neurosurgeon. I'm not going to respect someone for being lucky.

Working the fields isn't exactly an easy job.

BIAS ALERT: I'm a physician.

So you are saying the neurosurgeon doesn't work hard:confused: I know lots of people who are MUCH MUCH more intelligent than I am. However, they didn't have the work ethic or the endurance to survive 12 years of schooling(my case), major sleep deprivation, couldn't work at a high level/pace for 30+ hours etc etc to be a physician.

I agree that a researcher can impact society in a grander scale than a physician seeing patients every day. But if all these MS and PHD's were doing "landmark" research then many of our problems would be solved.:wink: I have done medical research and can tell you it isn't as glamorous as you might think. I personally saw that many of the researchers were just trying to figure out how to get grant money so that can justify there J.O.B. I prefer helping the sick and getting paid for it over "begging" for a hand out.:wink:
 
BIAS ALERT: I'm a physician.

So you are saying the neurosurgeon doesn't work hard I know lots of people who are MUCH MUCH more intelligent than I am. However, they didn't have the work ethic or the endurance to survive 12 years of schooling(my case), major sleep deprivation, couldn't work at a high level/pace for 30+ hours etc etc to be a physician.

I agree that a researcher can impact society in a grander scale than a physician seeing patients every day. But if all these MS and PHD's were doing "landmark" research then many of our problems would be solved. I have done medical research and can tell you it isn't as glamorous as you might think. I personally saw that many of the researchers were just trying to figure out how to get grant money so that can justify there J.O.B. I prefer helping the sick and getting paid for it over "begging" for a hand out.
You haven't rebutted a single point I've made.

Anecdotally saying that you know lots of people who are smarter than you (who couldn't make the cut) is of no meaning. The simple fact of the matter is that if you are not of *at least* a 90th percentile intelligence the chance of one becoming a physician is nil (a cursory look at the MCAT score distribution makes this abundantly clear). A 90th percentile intelligence means you are incredibly blessed. The simple fact that 90% of the population can not even enter your profession means that luck plays a huge role.

And I value the innovator, not neccessarily the researcher.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top