Fox's Journey: And Onto the Sunlight!

[guitarplayer]

OK I had a few goes at trying to write something in your journal the last few days, and never posted, so I will post now!

The best I can come up is that perhaps it might be worthwhile re-reading the ERE book?

It provides a nice and short solution to all the contemporary low level problems, @jacob kindly did the legwork this time round so we don't have to read some very old books like Walden or the Ugly Civilisation and translate to modern times (it being a good exercise nevertheless).

Apologies if this comes across completely out of the blue, maybe I need the ERE book re-read and just using your journal as canvas.

[TopHatFox]

@guitarplayer, I'm not sure if it is worthwhile to re-read the ERE book. The whole frugality thing is cool, but I'd argue it's limiting. Like, the less you need, the better; and the more you can do yourself, the better; but, ultimately, I need skills that let me earn a lot and that let me earn an income in a way that works for me. So far, that seems to be contracting, coding, and startups.

It's outside the scope of a frugality or a systems thinking book to teach me to code, teach me natural languages, or how to make a startup, or the physical trades, so it makes more sense to focus my attention on those more important subjects now. Furthermore, a lot of frugality books focus on stocks and bonds or other investments, but I wouldn't be surprised if most western governments ultimately default on their national debts, causing financial ruin to the investments and savings of their citizens. It makes more sense -- and I'd argue it's a lot more fun -- to develop lots of skills + the ability to meet a market demand to re-make wealth, rather than trying to survive off whatever you collected over a 5-10 year working period. Same with enjoying cheap travel while it's available, rather than post-FI.

-----------

@Scott2, yeah, it's interesting that a lot of super rich people are into the liberal arts, but I think it's because they're no longer scared to be poor, and because they don't need to rely on their degree to get them a job to eat, buy a house, etc. I'm not arguing subjects like history or political science aren't important, just that they have no place as a degree worth $20-60k/yr, and that's supposed give you a skill to survive once you graduate. Besides, these days you can often learn a subject more thoroughly and cheaper on YouTube or on a site like Kahn Academy, than paying a professor.

I'm curious what class signals you speak of per se. Like, wearing a nice button up and throwing in a fancy vocabulary word or an academic allusion? I find most people don't care about that stuff. For the most part, the venture capital staff just want to know if you have compelling evidence of a confirmed market for your proposed solution to a problem, and if you and your team can properly deliver the solution long enough to sell the company or to make consistent annual profits.

-------------

IOW, I think thinking that you want to work for the foreseeable future is much healthier than omg I need to quit asap. Work part-time + doing a lot of work yourself, or work a lot for your own business of course, but work nonetheless. I think this also makes you more resilient, and interesting. You have something you're striving for, even if the reason for pursuing it is personal and changes over the years.

[ertyu]

I'm curious what class signals you speak of per se.

Just the fact that you walk around with those "rules" you wrote out in your head is going to project a different vibe and mark you as other

Yes it's clothing and the right mannerisms/bearing but it's also much more subtle than that: what you appear to be relaxed vs grasping and tense about. What you think are worthwhile areas for a person to develop in. How desperate and uptight and rabid you come across as. Etcetera.

source: am also someone who was raised "in the wild" and went to a fancy libtard school on a scholarship. Like you, I do understand that if you fail, the machine moves on and your bones crunch as it passes over you. Unlike you, I am for some reason not intrinsically motivated to be rich or to jump class status; I also own the libtard label proudly - so from your pov, I probably seem stupid, which is fine, we judge "success" according to different standards. so while i've not jumped in class, i have been a tourist in rich-kid land and i get the "social capital" thing -- it's a whole different way of being more than it is a matter of clothes or fancy words and mannerisms

[TopHatFox]

@ertyu, just cause one has a strong grasp of reality, doesn't mean you present as such to rich ppl. That'd be like being totally honest in a job interview, or not lying as a politician. These rules are generally true for almost everyone. You can insulate yourself from them by doing smart things like buying a house outright, or choosing the right skills, or choosing the right parents, but yeah, unless you're in the metaverse, the rules still apply. I'd say they can change depending on the time period, but it was definitely worse in pretty much every historical time period (unless you're part of the very rich -- they had their own issues, like assassination or succumbing to vices). The relative peace we've had since WWII has been pretty amazing. Like, even in European history, it's war after war after war; it's pretty difficult to save and invest anything when soldiers come and burn down the farm.

I agree, if you appear desperate or tense, people are less likely to help you than if you appear confident and competent. That's probably just another rule though. It's definitely true that people are generally more likely to help the up-start coder or tradey than the desperate homeless guy or the guy just out of college looking for his or her first job.

I've noticed that successful startup founders are a lot more smug than the guys just starting out. It's a general sense of "I'm good, haha - I feel GOOD, THINGS ARE POSSIBLE." I get it, it's because things went their way and now they're enjoying the benefits. I'm not sure why the guys born into wealth are like that too, though, all they did was be born and adopt the mannerisms of their peers. Not as much hard work or a self-development arch there.

I do think that people that value the liberal arts as degrees or liberal arts colleges as foolish, especially if they come from anything but the upper class. It only hurts them in the end, unfortunately; like a xyz-studies major that comes from a poor background. I also think it makes sense to want to be wealthy, as it leads to more choices. If you want to have free time to learn whatever you want, or visit where you want, money, skills, or minimalism need to be paid.

Curious, what school did you go to?

[zbigi]

For the most part, the venture capital staff just want to know if you have compelling evidence of a confirmed market for your proposed solution to a problem, and if you and your team can properly deliver the solution long enough to sell the company or to make consistent annual profits.

From my experience, the young Ivy League founder of a startup where I was engineer #1, just got seed money from a angel investor billionaire on a song and dance. We were nowhere near any path to profitability and it wasn't even clear if the market will even exist (actually, we were nowhere near even being nowhere near), but the guy said "all right, I want to have a few bets in this space, here's $200k". I greatly suspect that it were the founder's overall personality and credentials that were key here.

[white belt]

@guitarplayer, I'm not sure if it is worthwhile to re-read the ERE book. The whole frugality thing is cool, but I'd argue it's limiting. Like, the less you need, the better; and the more you can do yourself, the better; but, ultimately, I need skills that let me earn a lot and that let me earn an income in a way that works for me. So far, that seems to be contracting, coding, and startups.

It's outside the scope of a frugality or a systems thinking book to teach me to code, teach me natural languages, or how to make a startup, or the physical trades, so it makes more sense to focus my attention on those more important subjects now. Furthermore, a lot of frugality books focus on stocks and bonds or other investments, but I wouldn't be surprised if most western governments ultimately default on their national debts, causing financial ruin to the investments and savings of their citizens. It makes more sense -- and I'd argue it's a lot more fun -- to develop lots of skills + the ability to meet a market demand to re-make wealth, rather than trying to survive off whatever you collected over a 5-10 year working period. Same with enjoying cheap travel while it's available, rather than post-FI.

One core principle of the ERE book is to develop skills. You are largely talking about things that are tactics, which are important but different in kind from an overall strategy. Developing a bunch of skills is certainly more valuable than not developing them, but developing skills without an overall strategy is also prone to failure at some point. The ERE book is attempting to give you the tools to develop your own strategy. As you say, finding resources to improve tactics is quite easy. Finding resources to develop strategy beyond just copying someone else's autobiography complete with survivorship bias is actually quite hard. Doing the right thing can be much more important than doing things right.

I don't know the best strategy to become a tech entrepreneur, but clearly if all it took is just learning to code and initiative then there would be many more successful tech entrepreneurs. The fact that it's a rockstar business suggests that there is much more at play. I think you and others are probably on to something when you start talking about the important role of social class in such pursuits.

[white belt]

These rules are generally true for almost everyone. You can insulate yourself from them by doing smart things like buying a house outright, or choosing the right skills, or choosing the right parents, but yeah, unless you're in the metaverse, the rules still apply.

I think it's limiting to assume everyone is operating with the same set of rules as you. Yes, to an extent some things are human nature. Read a religious text of choice to learn all about that. Yet, in the contemporary USA, class differences are a very real thing. To some, doing smart things include joining a gang to protect yourself. To others, they include positioning yourself on the right charity board to influence others on your pet projects. And everything in between.

Specifically relating to class in the USA, this still is the best thing I've ever read on the topic: https://web.archive.org/web/20151006183 ... n-the-u-s/

Note that social class and economic class are not the same thing. Winning the lottery doesn't immediately make one a member of the old money gentry. You can take the girl out of the trailer park, but you can't take the trailer park out of the girl... or so the saying goes.

Edit: I think @Scott2 hit the nail on the head.

[Scott 2]

In short - people hire, promote and deal with their friends. They make friends with people who are like them. If you want to play in a circle, you need to mirror their behaviors and values. Not perfectly, but exceptions must be infrequent and raised as acceptable for the given class.

This is much more than words. Dress. Leisure. Politics. How you approach the work day. Who you socialize with after work. What you talk about. How you think charity should be handled. It all gives off class signals. Since people tend to go on their gut, the signaling is also subject to both conscious and unconscious biases. Race. Gender. Height. Weight. Are your teeth straight? On and on.

The most influential book I read on this was: Empowering Yourself: The Organizational Game Revealed

https://www.amazon.com/Empowering-Yours ... 1449080340

It's written by a black guy who built his career as an executive in the 80's. A little dated, but the principles hold true.

One of the big challenges - you can't really fake it. Fitting in multiple social classes is extremely hard. So part of the price of ascending, is leaving behind those who got you there. That means diminishing your oldest relationships, including family. It is an expensive price. Many are not willing to pay.


The signaling that is valued can be extremely dumb. I brought an 18 year old bottle of Scotch to a work party one year. A couple of the executives were psyched for old whisky and got wasted. After that, I was in with them. It was one of the company stories, retold years later. I stumbled into it. I was just enjoying Scotch at the time and wanted to share with my friends. But I inadvertently mirrored a couple of the executive's values.

[jacob]

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0674248244/ is a nice description about the general failure to distinguish between the tactical, strategical, and cultural challenges. (I'm not sure that challenge is the right word here because it implies that it can be overcome.) Generally, "state" schools will give access to the tactical layer. "Elite" schools will give access to the strategic layer. For access to the cultural layer, one practically has to marry into it and even then...

Point being that people tend towards blindness to lower layers either taking them for granted as an explanation of their own success ("I did this on my own") or being blind to them and blaming others when they fail ("They just not as hardworking as I am"). Also known as attribution bias.

[7Wannabe5]

I agree with Scott 2 and white belt, although my ladder is clearly more Gentry than Elite. It's critical to recognize that it's not just signaling on top of signaling on top of signaling...all the way up. For instance, the Gentry truly values the Arts and the Sciences* more than they value Money/Power, except as a means to an end, such as "funding for my next super interesting permaculture project" or "not ending up living in a van at 81 performing outre tricks and/or sharing dull conversation with retired E3 executives with too much time and viagra on their hands in order to pay my Medicare Part B."

Interesting note might be that my rags to riches (L to E ladder) multi-millionaire friend actually started leaning towards G in his old age. I think it's difficult for E to maintain itself multi-generationally without some G in the mix. Maybe analogous to how even the most entrenched monopoly can't survive without some creative innovation at the margin. Or the reality that any dynastic inheritance scheme is likely to revert to the mean IQ (or worse!) Of course, this could also be avoided through inter-marriage/meme with extremely bright L class youth (such as yourself) and or even Underclass members( such as many of the little disadvantaged smart-alecs I teach), and that's why "Pretty Woman" was such a popular movie.

*One way to determine that which is truly valued is to "follow the hawt sex" in addition to "follow the money." G ladder hetero-females like the muscles, but they like them Artsy/Brainy/Edgy. Actually, same holds true for non-hetero females. For instance, my youngest sister recently revealed that when she was riding on her highest wave of being a semi-known Cultural Influencer she made out with super famous female punk rock star.

[chenda]

Or the reality that any dynastic inheritance scheme is likely to revert to the mean IQ (or worse!) Of course, this could also be avoided through inter-marriage/meme with extremely bright L class youth (such as yourself) and or even Underclass members( such as many of the little disadvantaged smart-alecs I teach), and that's why "Pretty Woman" was such a popular movie.

I once read it was a mandatory for the heir to the Thai crown to marry a commoner. My brief googling suggests this isn't actually true but it's a good idea. Find a suitably attractive, high IQ commoner and you'll likely produce lots of genetically healthy, high IQ babies to perpetuate the royal lineage. The House of Habsburg shows what can go horribly wrong with too much incestuous inbreeding.

[7Wannabe5]

@chenda:

Yup. Because I was probably the most G (likely to read a book) human in his circle, my multi-millionaire friend asked me for my opinion on how he might best enact the advice in a book on multi-generational wealth he gave me. Out of kindness, I did not tell him that his decision to adopt the child (not genetically his) of the drug-addicted prostitute he ended up with as most significant SO (due in part to deciding that not marrying was tactic towards wealth) was not a great move if his ultimate goal was simply imagining his conglomerated wealth continuing to compound even after his death. She was basically a sweet girl, but she routinely rolled through $20,000 in spending money per month (which he kind of found amazing or evidence that she was buying some "class" with her designer bags and travel), but she didn't even stick around while he was dying. But, I can't entirely blame her, because he left her living in abject poverty while she was a child, and didn't adopt her until she was 18.

Of course, L to E is not the same as born E.

[chenda]

@7wannabe5

Yes that's interesting, presumably he's a self-made millionaire and not old money. I imagine managed trust funds are his best option

[TopHatFox]

TURNING POINT, 02/10/2023

Some of the alumni requests are resulting in real application refererrals for coding jobs. Some of the alums even compliment the fancy resume I made + the skills I taught myself, or knit-pick this small-thing or that. It's looking good. Gonna drink some more coffee and reply some more. Also getting much better at flagship coding languages, even used transitions and transformations in CSS yesterday. Whoop whoop.

It looks like switching into programming is starting to look like a real possibility here. That's pretty darn cool. I also now know for sure that whether I have a job or not, it is a requirement to work on my own startups. Finally, I know firsthand what big things not to spend time on: namely, further formal education, or further career switching.

--------

Of note, GF of 3 years has decided for sure that she wants a kid + marriage (she was on the fence before), and I've never wanted kids or marriage. Even if I experienced some beyond-intervention and did, it'd be 10 years from now. There's no way I can make a startup, hold down a coding job, be a dad, and have time for random hobbies like the trades, language learning, or road trips. That means, I'll probably need to break up with her -- but she's so sweet.

Have any of you had to break up with someone that's otherwise good because of children or marriage? My guess is that all women eventually decide they want kids and marriage, so I suppose I must accept that my life will likely be a revolving door of LTRs, dates/STRs, or being alone. Admittedly, it's not all good, as she doesn't really have any specialized skills, so most of the $ would likely have to come from me. Still, she's feminine, kind, & thin, and that's quite uncommon these days.

-------

If anyone wants to give me 200K for a startup, I'm all ears.

[ertyu]

every time you make "all X are/want Y" assumptions, you're bound to be full of shit. be transparent about what you want and who you are; you might get fewer dates but you are much more likely to land on a double coincidence of wants

[TopHatFox]

@ertyu - very well, fair enough, "most"

[7Wannabe5]

As you probably already know, somebody who is manifesting as strong in her feminine energy in both the adult-like (kind) and child-like (sweet) quadrants is not going to be able to simultaneously manifest the kind of strong masculine energies: adult-like (dominance) and child-like (initiative) that generally correlate well with making and keeping resources such as land territory or money. It is also the case that somebody who is strongly identifying with feminine energies will be only able to keep her adult energy strong through finding "meaning" by "caring" for her "baby." However, it is not the case that the "baby" has to her actual biological human baby. It could be the rainforest, rescued animals, her class of kindergarten students, or the starving artists whose work she is trying to promote through her gallery.

IMO, which some may find controversial, one reason why many human males are happy with being married or having a long-term relationship without having children is that the desire to care for another human who is smaller and sweeter (more attractively vulnerable) is already satisfied by taking a wife. Of course, there is also a minority of men who are semi-consciously permanently infantile themselves, so they don't want to compete with their own children for access to the bosom of adult-feminine kindness/warmth/attention. If you can get in touch with your own feminine energy to the extent that you can figure out what/who you would find meaning in caring for beyond an actual human child or a sweet girlfriend/wife then you would better be able to form empathetic strong energy partnership with feminine female. This would also be helpful in convincing such a woman that the fact that you don't want marriage/children doesn't mean that you are a Peter Pan who will endlessly suck her dry of "warmth and kindness" until one day she finds herself completely depleted with no energy left except just enough adult masculine "killer" energy to cut you loose for good. etc.etc. etc.

OTOH, it's also important to try to discover how/who you can best support your partner in her masculine purpose. First, most obvious reason being that if you don't support her in her own masculine purpose, you are going to have to support her financially. Second reason, which is much more important in the long run, is that you are not going to be able to mature to higher levels of adult functioning together if you don't function as full adults in all energies together. Does this sound kind of complex and difficult? I hope so, because otherwise I wasn't communicating very clearly. NOT an easy task!

[TopHatFox]

I have an interview this week for a 80-100k WFH dev job. Hurray! My strategy is just to have strong examples of stuff I've done with the stack and bullet points they listed on the job description, as well as how I fit in with their company.

[TopHatFox]

APRIL 2023, UPDATES:


1. Coding Courses: I'm now 50% done with all the courses on TeamTreeHouse.com.


2. Interviews: I'm pretty sure the interviewers bailed despite the interviews going well; one of them even told me they had THIRTY other internal referrals. Goal is to do contract work via a coding contracting site, and take contract mining work whenever it comes through. The contracting mining company has been quiet too, unfortunately, even saying one of their clients wants someone "fresh out of school."


3. Relationship: I'm now OK with being alone until death. I tried co-habitating with the gf for a few weeks, and I noticed that sex frequency actually goes down, that requests to fix this or that go up, and requests to do normal tasks in a particular way (re: nagging) goes up, as well. This is the benign stuff, btw -- the worse part is if you marry and a lawyer takes away your house and kids, or if your gf gets fat, cuts of sex, goes hard woke, etc. It seems the best part of a relationship is the beginning. I've heard of living together-apart concept, and I think that that trend sounds appealing. I suppose the biggest risk is if you get sick or crippled, but there is no guarantee your significant other will stay with you during ill health, so you may be better off just getting good insurance or hiring a cheap foreigner to care for you on the off-chance something like that does occur. It's the same argument as "you should have kids to take care of you when you're old." Furthermore, your partner or kids can also get sick, and then YOU have to take care of them. I do think euthanasia solves a lot of this, of course only used when you're really crippled after a horrible car crash, fire, or some other calamity.


4. Home: I think it is better to own a small single-family house than a condo, apartment, or even townhouse. Most people don't take care of their homes, and you can get stuck footing the bill for other peoples' negligence in a communal-style building structure. I saw that happen in a downtown area, where a condo required owners to each pay $100K for repairs for the building. I'd rather have a single-family house in a smaller city than a condo in a bigger city. At least you can control the repairs and maintenance on just your house. I'd love to buy a house in Utah or Arizona, but I need $$.


5. Parents: I would love to move out of my parent's house. Living with the parent's while nearing 30 sucks. I want my own place outright, and I'm willing to go to the ends of the Earth to afford buying one. Plus, owning a house outright gives me all the time to work on startups, without the nagging of parents telling me to just get a job or help them with random technology questions (re: printer).


6. Languages: I've been learning German, and although it's similar to English, the learning process is definitely slower than the romance languages.


7. DIY: I've also been watching all the Renovision Youtube videos, and honestly, home DIY isn't hard, you just need the time to learn how to do it right, and be OK with it not coming out totally perfect. Truth is though, even when you hire a busy professional, they often don't do it 100% right. A careful DIYer can often do a better job than a busy professional. It's amazing what new tile, or a new vinyl floor does to a house.

[Salathor]

Interviewing does sound really hard right now. I was fortunate to get hired last month, but not in coding. I know a guy who is pretty high up in an important tech company and he said their hiring is going way, way down this year. But obviously, trends do not equal individual outcomes, so it's definitely still possible.

RE Housing--I'm with you. One of the things I'm looking forward to with this new job is getting a little more distance from both mine and my wife's parents. They are all amazing and very nice people, but I think just from a "flow of life" thing I am going to be happy to have a little more distance.

RE Living together-apart: I can't see this working, but I'm pretty deeply conservative. All I can see is heartbreak for you or the other person. I would prefer singleness, probably.