Money or time?

[panamaican]

um. The 750k year obviously. You do that for three years and you've made over 2 million dollars wheras the other option only nets you 300k.

So after three years you can retire and do whatever you want while the 2 mil makes money for you. Otherwise, it'll take you you, what, 20 years to make the same money if you're not working and getting 100k each year.

Not exactly because after taxes, that $2 mill is close to $1.2 million (assuming 39.6% fed rate and no state taxes) and if you're making 5% annual on that, it's $60k annually. You need to be bumping up against 8-10 annually to get the $100k.

 

[xhaydenx]

I think you're missing the spirit of the question.

Let's imagine that you're locked into a 70 hour work week for the next 20 years if you choose that option. What's your choice then?

Oh, well if I can't retire before 20 years on the 750k a year option then yeah, I'd take the 100k a year for sure.

Not exactly because after taxes, that $2 mill is close to $1.2 million (assuming 39.6% fed rate and no state taxes) and if you're making 5% annual on that, it's $60k annually. You need to be bumping up against 8-10 annually to get the $100k.

You're still going to be paying taxes on the 100k a year, right? That's all I have for your post. You dropped way too many numbers for my dumb ass.

 

[Grob]

People on their deathbed always wish for more time, never money.

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

I find it funny when people think life is about working all the time

When you're on your death bed you won't be thinking about work but you'll remember the memories of a life well
Spent with friends and loved ones.

That's life. Work is dog shit

 

[Anung Un Rama]

Given the parameters in the OP? Time and its not even close.

Now if it were $25k @ 0h/wk vs. $200K @ 70h/wk?

 

[Don Quixote]

I've always valued freedom and quality of life over financial success. So I'll take time. I've worked 50 + hours a week with only Sundays off. It's hard to enjoy life working those hours.

 

[minute bull]

Mime

Well, I for one appreciated this.

 

[Kraysla]

At this point in my life i'll take 100K annually without ever having to work again. Man, that would be sweet.

 

[MadSquabbles500]

So a random conversation had me thinking.

Is it better to work 70 hours a week and make $750k/yr or not work at all and make $90-100k?

Where you live is your choice, whether or not you're married is your choice. Kids? Also your choice. Spouse works...your.choice.

I think I lean towards not working but mostly because I'd rather have cash generating projects over a regular job. I couldn't sit home and do nothing all day, it would drive me crazy. But I have things I'd like to sink cash into if I had more time.

LOL it is better to not work at all for $90-100K. YOu have more time for investing and then make more that way.

 

[spin]

um. The 750k year obviously. You do that for three years and you've made over 2 million dollars wheras the other option only nets you 300k.

So after three years you can retire and do whatever you want while the 2 mil makes money for you. Otherwise, it'll take you you, what, 20 years to make the same money if you're not working and getting 100k each year.

So that's choosing time.

You're giving up time for 3-4 years to afford time for the rest of your life.

 

[Satsui Ryu]

The $100K easily. $750K is not a whole lot and in the end you have very little time to enjoy not that much money and a ton of stress. Only way I could see someone taking the $750K is if they are doing a labor of love.

With the $100K you would have the freedom to fill your time as you see fit and I think I could find ways of doing it. This maybe cheating the scenario, but I'd probably end up doing volunteer work. Time gets filled and very little stress is involved.

 

[Nameless Ghoul]

Shit I'd take 60k and time

 

[GordoBarraBJJ]

not working and making 100K?

I can work on benching 275, banging LA 10s, touching random people with teh jab, and filling rooms with uppercuts.

Sign me up.

 

[fortheo]

Having time is more valuable, no matter what some materialistic capitalistic, greedy fuck tries to tell you.

You can't loan out time, or borrow time. You can't win 10 extra years of time on a fucking scratch ticket. Money can be lost and gained back--time can only be lost, which makes it far more valuable.

 

[Turtlejuice]

A guy I used to work with, his girlfriends father was a high profile solicitor for quite a large UK law firm. He was earning mid/high 6 figures a year at least. During the week he wouldn't see his family at all, he would leave for the office before they woke up, and wouldn't get home until after they were in bed. His holiday was 8-10 hours of work a day in a hotel somewhere. He was set to retire in his 50s, had a nice house, nice family and was going to have a very comfortable retirement. He had a heart attack caused by stress in his 40s and died.

He worked his arse off in his prime years so he could have a nice retirement. Didn't see a day of it. You could say at least he will have provided a nice life for his family, but I guarantee his family would give it all up to have him back. Work to live, don't live to work.

TLDR: I'd take the 100k.

 

[Organic Damage]

Well 100K is over the threshold of the amount of money most people need to make for "peak happiness" before diminishing returns set in.

Plus if you're free the whole day, nothing's stopping you from working on personal passions or volunteering or what have you.

 

[Higus]

What kind of work would I be doing for 70 hrs/wk?
Who am I kidding, I'd take the 100K. There's probably no job in the world I'd love doing enough to be there 70 hrs a week.

 

[Oblivian]

um. The 750k year obviously. You do that for three years and you've made over 2 million dollars wheras the other option only nets you 300k.

So after three years you can retire and do whatever you want while the 2 mil makes money for you. Otherwise, it'll take you you, what, 20 years to make the same money if you're not working and getting 100k each year.

Run the math on that a bit more...

 

[PG29 red0 Jr]

I would take 90-100k with no job.

 

[sub_thug]

I'll take the $750k job for a few years, even if it's locked in for 10 years. After that, I could never work again, living very comfortably off investments and collecting $100k/yr for doing nothing. Not only would i be set, but so would my wife and kids. 10 years of hard work is worth that.