You are 30 ... Would you rather have $50 million at 30 and die at 50 or have $100 at 30 and die at 70?

Doug Heffernan wrote:

sure, you could follow your dreams without $50 million, but you're not going to have the time and energy to do it like you would with the money. You have 8 hours of work a day and you might not have the money that you otherwise would've had to pursue such dreams. Right now I work 8 hours/day and what I'd really like to do is spend more time running, lifting, catching up on DVDs, reading books, pick up new hobbies, teach myself something I'll never learn in school, etc. Do I have time for any of that? No. I'm exhausted after being at work for all of daylight and I can only choose what I deem most important to me.

The tragic irony of your life is that *because* of your blind faith in the power of money to make life more satisfying, you spend most of your waking hours at a job that kills your spirit and leaves you deeply unfulfilled.

Do work you love with people you love and your problem will be solved.

50M not necessary.

So I suppose I should drop out of school with my 4k in the bank to pursue something that I have an extremely unlikely, off chance of succeeding in. Should I just drop my job so I can’t pay for books, rent, food, and bills? Should I drop out of school so I don’t have something to fall back on? I’m glad you have me figured out based on a few posts. I would be that guy who complained 50 mil isn’t enough, wouldn’t I? I suppose that’s why I don’t have a nice HD TV that I could afford if I wanted to, or spend my money eating out everyday, or spending my weeknights at bars. I live below my means and I’m not an ignorant athlete who whines about not being able to feed his family on $20 million a year.

Also, I’m sure you made giant leaps of faith on a daily basis when you were younger to pursue your dreams where if you failed you’d be living on the street, right? You went to school just like every other kid around you, had parents to finance you, and always had a place where you would have a roof over your head. Don’t call me a pussy for not having the balls because you know you did the same shit. You took the safe route too. (your reply: what I’m doing right now is exactly what I always dreamed about. Yeah, I’m sure.)

Would it change anyone’s opinion on me if I said I would invest the money, live off a small fraction of it, and donate it to a few charities when I died, or do your preconceived notions of me get in the way? Or would spending time with family be more respectable?

Nobody can say they’ve “been there, done that” and that you had $100 when you were 30 and have no regrets. You were never offered 50 mil and you have no idea how different your life would be or if you would have been happier or more miserable. You don’t know what the “other side of the fence” would’ve been like.

“Do work I love with people I love.” Sorry, it doesn’t always work out that way with everyone. What percentage of people do work they love with people they love? I’d have to say that’s a very low percentage, not that that’s not what I’m trying to do.

You sound like a big whiner. You're too exhausted after work to do anything else? Wah wah wah. What are you doing, construction? Wake up early, get a nice easy 6 mile run in, go to work, come home, then write the great american novel or whatever for 4-5 hours before you go to bed. Problem solved. Also, there are these new things called "weekends", which I hear are specifically designed to give you time to do whatever you want.

Oh and don't forget to use your lunch hour to catch up on your reading or whatever.

Sorry, Dan. Didn't realize how tough you had it. I have had it much easier than most, to be sure. College mostly free. I did have to work and save for many years to pay for a masters, but then got paid 30k/yr to get a Ph.D.

I mostly enjoyed my work and have structured much of my adult life to do work that I like with or near people I love.

I've never had 50M, but I have been deeply in debt and also had millions, and I stand by what I say about the value of money. It's nice to have it. It's nice to have lots. But if you'd rather die young with lots of money than work through your fifties and sixties with occasional back pain, then you have a very grim and limited view of work.

You are a college kid. When you are thirty, you won't have to worry about working a job you hate to stay in school. But you probably will have to choose between taking the job that pays the most and trying to find the most meaningful, satisfying work. You may think it sounds trite and cliched, but you are a headstrong 22-year-old. Consider the possibility that your elders may have some wisdom on this matter that could help you immeasurably.

Sorry, Dan. Didn't realize how tough you had it. I have had it much easier than most, to be sure. College mostly free. I did have to work and save for many years to pay for a masters, but then got paid 30k/yr to get a Ph.D.

I mostly enjoyed my work and have structured much of my adult life to do work that I like with or near people I love.

I've never had 50M, but I have been deeply in debt and also had millions, and I stand by what I say about the value of money. It's nice to have it. It's nice to have lots. But if you'd rather die young with lots of money than work through your fifties and sixties with occasional back pain, then you have a very grim and limited view of work.

You are a college kid. When you are thirty, you won't have to worry about working a job you hate to stay in school. But you probably will have to choose between taking the job that pays the most and trying to find the most meaningful, satisfying work. You may think it sounds trite and cliched, but you are a headstrong 22-year-old. Consider the possibility that your elders may have some wisdom on this matter that could help you immeasurably.

Sorry, Dan. Didn't realize how tough you had it. I have had it much easier than most, to be sure. College mostly free. I did have to work and save for many years to pay for a masters, but then got paid 30k/yr to get a Ph.D.

I mostly enjoyed my work and have structured much of my adult life to do work that I like with or near people I love.

I've never had 50M, but I have been deeply in debt and also had millions, and I stand by what I say about the value of money. It's nice to have it. It's nice to have lots. But if you'd rather die young with lots of money than work through your fifties and sixties with occasional back pain, then you have a very grim and limited view of work.

You are a college kid. When you are thirty, you won't have to worry about working a job you hate to stay in school. But you probably will have to choose between taking the job that pays the most and trying to find the most meaningful, satisfying work. You may think it sounds trite and cliched, but you are a headstrong 22-year-old. Consider the possibility that your elders may have some wisdom on this matter that could help you immeasurably.

Back when he was in his 20s, Roger Daltrey sang, "I hope I die before I get old".

He's 65 now and doesn't seem to be complaining about the quality of his life.

Your opinion IS immature because you are immature. That is not an insult, it is a simple statement of fact. You do not have the years of experience in life to inform that opinion. Nobody does at 22.

When you are 50, you are going to have a very different outlook. Yes yes, we know you don't believe that. Not many 22 year olds do. Yet oddly enough, the expected rash of suicides by those young men when they turn 50 never seems to materialize.

Go figure

When Doug was 11, he probably wanted to die before he was 20.

only me wrote:

You could follow your dreams without $50 mil - not a good argument.

I'd take the time - don't even have to think about it.

As you and others have rightly pointed out, you don't need the money to pursue your dreams. The people that really have the drive to succeed in life will make the time, and some of those people will be successful. But I think it's beyond arguing that $50 mil would make it MUCH EASIER because you wouldn't need to work.

For me, the issue isn't the money, it's the time (mostly) People are saying that 20 years more life is the best "time". I'm saying that the money would allow you to stop working and thus give you more time, that could be better spent because you're younger and have money.

Think of it this way: would you rather have 4-5 hours daily of leisure time for 40 years or about 13-14 hours (not working or commuting) for 20 years.

40 years = 41,600 hours (4 hrs. per day, not counting weekends).

20 years = 67,600 hours (13 hours per day, not counting weekends).

So taking the extra 20 years and continuing work may not be the best idea. If you love your job then great, take the extra 20. But if you'd rather be doing other things, take the money and quit working. You'll make up those 20 years. (And you'll be able to live comfortably - not all of us currently are).

The money!!! ANYONE who says different is a complete moron and a liar. Every day and twice on Sunday.

Cry me a river wrote:

Then how did you live and train in Thailand ?

Please, explain.

Sorry I am not at liberty to post all the information about my employment and financial life from 1996 to 1998, but let's just say I had a few lucky breaks in 1997 and 1998.

yeah, that's basically what I've been saying and people are livid and basically want me dead. Clearly watching the grandkids grow up, walking your daughter down the aisle, and taking care of your ailing parents make up for it 100 fold.

Doug Heffernan wrote:

yeah, that's basically what I've been saying and people are livid and basically want me dead.

Try to avoid drowning in your own hyperbole, Doug. You will probably evolve past that personality trait once you actually are a bit older and more mature.

The second option has no good side at all, and the first one's pretty bad, too. People who get handed huge amounts of money generally get screwed up--watch what happens to lottery winners. If you earn a decent living, you've accomplished something and can feel good about yourself, not just lucky. And no amount of money is worth being killed at 50. I'd be dead now if I'd taken that offer; I'd rather try to live well and reach 95 or 100--those age-group records are soft!

The second option has no good side at all, and the first one's pretty bad, too. People who get handed huge amounts of money generally get screwed up--watch what happens to lottery winners. If you earn a decent living, you've accomplished something and can feel good about yourself, not just lucky. And no amount of money is worth being killed at 50. I'd be dead now if I'd taken that offer; I'd rather try to live well and reach 95 or 100--those age-group records are soft!

I'm 29 now and have negative 20k, and I would still rather choose this situation and live 40 more years versus being loaded and living 20 more years.

Doug = not an informed opinion

Dude, you still have not answered the main points he stated. You keep "shitty" picking out small things. I have been reading this thread, and have noticed that YES, you have been complaining about Dougs posts, and NO you have not directly responded to any of them without coming off as offended. Dougs age was a mystery until he posted it. Yours was obvious. That being said, I was on the fence about 50mil or living until 70 until I realized I could do a lot more for my family with the money. Anyone who gives away 20 yrs of there life to use it to help there family is more selfless and mature then someone who chooses to live for 20 extra years. Neither is wrong, but it ultimately comes down to how you spend the 50mil. Im not sure if I can be that selfless, which is why I might go for the 70 years...then again, thats 20 more years away from my 4:09 mile.

I look at this a lot differently than most of you. No amount of money is worth years in ones life. Most of us can make our own luck. Train yourself properly, work hard, eat properly and stop thinking you are old at a young age. My friends and I have done just that. I am 73, and although I now conceed that I am aging I am not old. Life is still great fun although very challenging at times. My friends are mostly runners who used to run marathons and still run, jog or at least walk. We have found that many marathon runners do not really become old until they are in their 80s. If you think you are old, you may become older than your true chronological age. I wish you all an enjoyable and lengthy life.

OrvilleAtkins wrote:

Most of us can make our own luck. Train yourself properly, work hard, eat properly and stop thinking you are old at a young age. My friends and I have done just that. I am 73, and although I now conceed that I am aging I am not old. Life is still great fun although very challenging at times. My friends are mostly runners who used to run marathons and still run, jog or at least walk. We have found that many marathon runners do not really become old until they are in their 80s. If you think you are old, you may become older than your true chronological age. I wish you all an enjoyable and lengthy life.

good for you, but that's not the point of this thread. The point is that you have a choice between only those two options, and only those two. You have to surrender your life at one of those ages. The only difference is that if you chose to live a shorter life, you get $50 million. How long you would've lived based on how well you take care of yourself is completely irrelevant.