logoalt Hacker News

Salgattoday at 5:35 PM4 repliesview on HN

You're still cutting your annual income in half though. That's pretty big no?


Replies

jbmchucktoday at 5:43 PM

I have the same feelings as the original poster as I get further into middle age and have a good retirement nest egg - for me there are things more valuable - free time and the things I want to do with it but can't get paid to do - than making more income than I really need.

show 1 reply
dw_arthurtoday at 5:46 PM

I don't have a family, so it's manageable. If I had kids there is no way I could work part-time.

asdfftoday at 5:49 PM

LCOL a good house might be 140k outright. Their costs are probably barely anything yearly against their returns.

bluecalmtoday at 5:52 PM

The thing is at some point there is very little to gain. Once you have a nice place to live and don't need to sweat over daily expenses there isn't much that significantly improves life quality other than just having more time (that is working less) for yourself and your family.

Add high taxes to this and working is even less attractive when they take 50% from you. No wonder many highly qualified people decide to pass on that deal and just do the bare minimum which in OP case is nothing.

show 1 reply