This is just a random question I thought of: Would you rather live on the bare minimum, barely making ends meet but you don't have to work a second in your life or would would rather live in a life of luxery, with nice cars, tvs, owning a house, but have to work really hard, like 80+ hours a week?
If you worked eighty plus hours a week that is roughly a twelve hour a day with no days off. You wouldn't really have a life so you couldn't enjoy your possession until you retire. Then you are too old to enjoy it all to the fullest.
The minimum sounds good, but then you can't have the luxuries every so often. I guess not working would be nice, but when I took a year off I found that I was bored out of my mind.
Giving the choices...well...I would rather work. At least then I would be doing something.
Of course there are these 2 extremes, but most people will probably just choose something in between. You need to work to have a little more than just the minimum, but you need free time as well in order to enjoy your life and your family. Without the time to do that, your life has no sense anyway!
Either of them sounds great compaired to working full-time and still not being able to make ends meet, which is the condition that a large percent of people experience.
If I got to choose, I would have the bare minimum, but that doens't mean I would still sit around and do nothing. The time and energy left over from not having to work full-time would be worth more to me than a tv or brand new car, and I'd like to think I'd spend it doing stuff that is valueable (even if it wasn't finacially rewarding)
Well, this is a thought i had also during my free time. In the end, i really didnt do anything much about it. I guess if u live in the bare minimum, u would live OK.. but then again, sooner (or later), you would surely wonder "why/what if i had this.. or that.." and you would want to get those possessions that you couldnt have through living in the bare minimum. And for those who are well off, i guess they do not need to be bare minimum. But that would come to a point when they are either bored by all the partying, they would do silly things (such as drugs). You know how it is these days. So i guess for me, it would be great to be bare minimum, BUT educate yourself to achieve better than the bare minimum. It takes a lot of discipline but it would be great to have the things you want in life, rather than wishfully hoping, and not getting it.
People living in America find that those who work less hours typically have the same conveniences as those who work more hours, regardless of wages. Of course wages do determine most everything, but not nearly as much as some would think. If you have any friends or relatives who make more/less money than you do, you know what I mean. Some of my friends are extremely poor but still have money to burn, while those richer folk have money to burn and invest/store away. This is probably due to the fact that Americans today do not think about retirement as much as they should. Those poor folk out there burn through their paychecks almost as soon as they get them, while the richer folk will probably have money to burn long into retirement because they saved up. This is just something to think about. I, myself, would have to consider which job I liked more. If the controversy is between something I like, but doesn't pay well, versus the job that pays well but I hate, I will pick the one I like over the other. It all depends, for me.