Just curious: If you would precommit to never work more than 40 hours a week, but otherwise you would try your best, what is the probability you could make millions? Not just you personally, but any rather intelligent and rational person.
I understand why having friends, families, experience, or just enough time to relax, is more important than making millions. My question is how much of a dichotomy it really is; in other words whether refusing to work 16 hours a day, for decades is the true rejection, or just a socially acceptable excuse.
I don’t know whether working really smart and hard 40 hours a week is enough or not to make millions. Or more precisely, I believe it is possible, but the important question is how probable it is. So far I can just say I don’t seem to have the personality traits necessary to work really smart and hard 40 hours a week for long time periods. Which I classify under “not having necessary skills”. But I believe that assuming the necessary skills, it is possible and decently probable (I just have almost zero evidence to support this belief, so I am not very confident about it).
That depends a lot on what I did the hours that don’t belong to the 39 hours of work. Depends on my interests, social life, who I know, which contacts I may have, my natural networking ability. I think your question was general, so my response is “depends on the person”
If it was personal to me: I’d probably pull off one million with high certainty, and several 25% would be my expectation. Meaning how much money would be in the bank when I looked at it when I was 55 years old.
The more relevant issue though is what is the 10% for a given person. Is my best 10% both in luck and effort around 5 millions? 15 millions?
Just curious: If you would precommit to never work more than 40 hours a week, but otherwise you would try your best, what is the probability you could make millions? Not just you personally, but any rather intelligent and rational person.
I understand why having friends, families, experience, or just enough time to relax, is more important than making millions. My question is how much of a dichotomy it really is; in other words whether refusing to work 16 hours a day, for decades is the true rejection, or just a socially acceptable excuse.
I don’t know whether working really smart and hard 40 hours a week is enough or not to make millions. Or more precisely, I believe it is possible, but the important question is how probable it is. So far I can just say I don’t seem to have the personality traits necessary to work really smart and hard 40 hours a week for long time periods. Which I classify under “not having necessary skills”. But I believe that assuming the necessary skills, it is possible and decently probable (I just have almost zero evidence to support this belief, so I am not very confident about it).
That depends a lot on what I did the hours that don’t belong to the 39 hours of work. Depends on my interests, social life, who I know, which contacts I may have, my natural networking ability. I think your question was general, so my response is “depends on the person”
If it was personal to me: I’d probably pull off one million with high certainty, and several 25% would be my expectation. Meaning how much money would be in the bank when I looked at it when I was 55 years old.
The more relevant issue though is what is the 10% for a given person. Is my best 10% both in luck and effort around 5 millions? 15 millions?
Is anyone’s 10% billions?