Enough

[jacob]

At this level of wealth, I would definitely ramp up my spending. By no means on 'stuff', but by outsourcing as much as I can. It just doesn't make sense to die with (tens of) millions... while washing dishes and mowing the lawn.

It does make sense from a renaissance viewpoint. What doesn't make sense is to get a full-time job as a dishwasher/lawn mower. Without knowing what goes into maintaining/organizing a lawn or one's cooking or dinner plates, the system begins to change. For example, [smart] people who hate doing dishes figure out a way to cook that involves less dishes. This has knock-on effects like minimalism, less complicated diet (fewer utensils), less shopping, ... if dish washing was outsources, no effort would have been spent on systems design because the waste had no personal cost.

The reason I have a big backyard vegetable production (bigger than what you see in the facebook pics from 2017) is that I hate mowing so much that I double dug a 4x20 sqft trench to remove this from my mowing efforts. So instead of paying the lawnmower-man I now get free vegetables => less shopping, driving, ...

Excess money should be spent on things that enhance or increase the system, not stuff that potentially undermines it. Outsourcing only makes sense for specialists (comparative advantage) in environments where the only "information" in the system is the dollar cost/market price.

[daylen]

@jacob Time for a rock garden?

[BRUTE]

I understand. However, is washing dishes brute's activity of choice? Or would brute rather...? And what about other household chores?

sometimes, brute would rather. but even though brute's place comes equipped with a dish washer, he has never used it. he finds a little bit of dish washing meditative.

brute likes the "flow" theory of money and lifetime spent lately. it's not about reducing everything to the shortest possible amount of time, it's about reducing the time spent doing what brute doesn't like doing, and increasing the time spent doing things he enjoys. doing the dishes is in the latter category.

[7Wannabe5]

brute likes the "flow" theory of money and lifetime spent lately. it's not about reducing everything to the shortest possible amount of time, it's about reducing the time spent doing what brute doesn't like doing, and increasing the time spent doing things he enjoys. doing the dishes is in the latter category.

Agreed. It's also important to note that we are cyclical and tending towards homeostasis in our functioning or flow. Once contractual obligations and counter-productive addictions are brought to a minimum, and a few basic self-care skills are obtained, money is not likely to be limiting factor. Once full-time employment is no longer deemed to be necessary, time is not likely to be a limiting factor. OTOH, vigor and attention are physiologically limited. So, if what you are mostly wanting to do with your time is something like "compose a symphony", then it can be helpful to also plan on "building a stone wall." OTOH, I highly do NOT recommend trying to achieve balance by pairing "study data science" with "watch endless episodes of 'Mistresses'."

[Bankai]

Diminishing marginal returns on time saved / spent doing other things?

I don't know about it. I can think of plenty of things I'd rather do. Even considering one tends to do 'chores' during the least productive time of the day (i.e. being already 'tired' both physically and mentally, since they don't require one's 100% attention/energy), there are still so many better ways to spend time when tired. One could watch all the movies nominated to the academy award for the best movie since it's been introduced (think Dragline suggested something similar). Or read all the 'classics' of world literature. Or go for an evening walk along the beach. Beats hoovering any time.

I agree that diminishing returns apply to *almost* everything. But to life itself, when one is in it's prime?

sometimes, brute would rather. but even though brute's place comes equipped with a dish washer, he has never used it. he finds a little bit of dish washing meditative.

brute likes the "flow" theory of money and lifetime spent lately. it's not about reducing everything to the shortest possible amount of time, it's about reducing the time spent doing what brute doesn't like doing, and increasing the time spent doing things he enjoys. doing the dishes is in the latter category.

Are we not talking about the same thing then with the only difference being our lists of '0 value, not like doing' are different?

It does make sense from a renaissance viewpoint. What doesn't make sense is to get a full-time job as a dishwasher/lawn mower. Without knowing what goes into maintaining/organizing a lawn or one's cooking or dinner plates, the system begins to change. For example, [smart] people who hate doing dishes figure out a way to cook that involves less dishes. This has knock-on effects like minimalism, less complicated diet (fewer utensils), less shopping, ... if dish washing was outsources, no effort would have been spent on systems design because the waste had no personal cost.

Yes, but... the system can only be optimised to a point. Eating the same, simple meal all the time in order to save time cooking/cleaning would be, for many people, past the point of diminishing returns and well into the negative returns territory. At the end of the day, there will still be *a time* required to maintain one's living quarters in order, no matter how well optimised the system is. If *money is not a problem*, it then becomes a question of either spending one's valuable life energy on '0 value, not like doing' tasks vs. tapping into practically unlimited resource* which allows one to direct this life energy towards something from 'some value, different degrees of like doing' pool.

*where the additional expense likely won't have any detrimental effect on one's finances with >99% probability

Outsourcing only makes sense for specialists (comparative advantage) in environments where the only "information" in the system is the dollar cost/market price.

There's a difference between having a skill and using a skill. One might have a skill of soap making, but still opting for a market solution as being orders of magnitude more optimal when considering both time and money. I guess what I'm trying to (unsuccessfully) communicate is that, although there's massive value in having a well-optimised system, there's also *life beyond the system* where one can, for example, tap into (practically unlimited) resources the system helped one to gather in order to save life energy. Maybe we are arguing about values: the value of living *true* to one's system vs. the value of optimising/preserving time/life energy. Or living *for* the system vs. the system being a *tool* to reach specific goals.

[BRUTE]

Are we not talking about the same thing then with the only difference being our lists of '0 value, not like doing' are different?

...

Eating the same, simple meal all the time in order to save time cooking/cleaning would be, for many people, past the point of diminishing returns and well into the negative returns territory.

that is probably it. brute eats the same 1-2 meals over and over again not because it saves him time cooking and cleaning (though it does), but because he likes it. brute would rather do the dishes a few minutes per day than watch Academy Award nominated for the same amount of time every day.

[2Birds1Stone]

What are the 1-2 meals brute most enjoys?

[daylen]

Rib-eye and filet mignon.. I speculate.

[BRUTE]

filet mignon.. does brute look like a fancy French ivory tower steak eater?

it's ribeye and ground beef, of course. eggs too. brute has been eating a lot of eggs with his ribeye recently.

[daylen]

Filet mignon is objectively the superior steak.

[Optimal_Solution]

Preferences can and do change over time. Especially when it is related to something that you do frequently.

Some people work for a lifetime and then can't imagine what they would do if they retired. They find meaning in the thing they've done for so long.

Some people wash enough dishes that dishwashing starts to sound better than watching a movie.

Recognizing that our preferences change AND that we can influence how our own preferences change seems to be one of the secrets that many in the ERE crowd have discovered. It is also part of what makes ERE so foreign to the average consumer. The average consumer is directed by marketing to pursue desires that are planted by the marketing. There is a lack of reflection and systems thinking.

[BRUTE]

Filet mignon is objectively the superior steak.

too lean. brute is not a rabbit. filet mignon is practically salad.

[DutchGirl]

The cow begs to differ.

[IlliniDave]

While the plants agree (grass excepted).

[Jason]

We were paying close to $600 per annum on streaming services. We just reduced to $240.00 per annum. I came to realize that one streaming service was "enough" where three streaming services was "FOMO." Obviously, we could live without any but that's not necessary at this point. It was a "micro-enough" realization. "Macro-enough" doesn't exist as "micro-enough" is based on probable i.e how many hours are/should we watch television and "macro-enough" is based on a possible i.e. meteor hitting house, flesh eating bacteria turns me into a torso, US is thrown into a chaos by invading gangs of topless Romanian biker chicks (one can dream). So I think its micro-out situation until one deals with the confrontation of the possible. Micro-enough is objective relation to self, macro-enough a subjective relation to self. The former is how much known can I live on, the latter how much unknown can I live with. Obviously time starts eroding the latter.