I paid $4,200 for it in San Diego, California. Maybe it can be cheaper elsewhere.
Side effects = NOTHING. Seriously. The operation is legitimately nothing, super duper quick. You walk into a room and in less than fifteen minutes you walk out with perfect vision. It's unbelievable.
Satisfied? Very much. I now have perfect vision. I still forget sometimes. Like I'll take off my shirt at the end of the night and will be pulling it away as if I had glasses on.
Or I'll even go to take off my glasses when I get in bed and realize I don't have glasses.
I will say...everyone throughout life treated me like a "very smart person"(tm) but now that is less so and I'm starting to think the glasses had something to do with it :D
I am always terrified of losing my job. It's a fear I've had even though I've been a top performer the entire five years I've been professionally working.
Maybe it's because I grew up poor or because I think things are too good in tech and about to crash any day.
My antidote? $100k in liquidity. Preferably not invested in the NASDAQ.
If tech crashes, you can take your liquid $100k and move to Thailand, Spain, Portugal, Turkey, etc. In these countries, you can live well for a decade, sometimes even thirteen years off just $100,000 USD.
I know $100k isn't much and it certainly isn't the $1M - $3M people want for retirement in the US. But it's enough to have peace of mind.
Retirement saving are interesting because for a whole bunch of public policy reasons most people have illiquid retirement savings.
> move to Thailand, Spain, Portugal, Turkey
Check your visa requirements: can you really move there without a job? While $100k is a 1% number it may not be enough to qualify for the "entrepreneur" visa.
I clicked your link and clicked on a couple tabs even but did not find data on what most people have liquid or illiquid. Can you point me to it?
$100k sounds like a lot but....I live in San Diego. All in, it costs about $4,200/month post-tax to live here. Sure, it can be done on much less. That means $50,400/year post-tax. So your $100k whether liquid or not only lasts two years max.
Let's say a real recession occurs and you lose your job. If your $100k is in the asset that crashed -- say real estate (which I like real estate) or speculative tech stocks -- oh boy. You're now probably at $70k hopefully. If it takes you 12 months from losing your job to finding a job. Now you're looking at only $20k left in your account....that is scary.
I know I am being paranoid because you'd get unemployment + could probably find a lower level job quick in the meantime + you would cut your $4200/month to bare minimum. But that's my point, I live in this fear and the $100k provides some peace of mind.
> Check your visa requirements: can you really move there without a job?
If you're willing to live a slightly rootless "digital nomad" life, you can ping pong across several countries spending 3-6 months in each back and forth to remain on a visitor visa indefinitely. Not ideal, of course, but you can do this until you get on your feet in a more permanent manner IE full-time remote work.
I grew up "how am I going to eat?" poor, and I find i'm the opposite with work and money. I take risks, see it all as one big game because I know being poor isn't the end of the world. It is really shit, but i'll survive it. I know what it is like.
Good point. Similar circumstances here, but excess risk taking can also backfire tremendously, especially as you get older. Rags to riches and back to rags. It’s easy to blow money away ... harder to hold onto it.
Receive salary > pay bills, buy food etc. > all the rest, transfer to a investment account at the oldest, most boring and slowest financial institution in your country to invest in the most boring, yawn-inducing and uninteresting investment fund. Don't touch this money ever.
In the worst of years you'll beat inflation and keep your savings, in the best of years you might make a % or two.
In the meantime, plan your post-employment life: what country to live in, what stuff/hobbies you want to keep etc.
Then when shit has hit the fan, cash in and execute above plan.
> Receive salary > pay bills, buy food etc. > all the rest, transfer to a investment account
One thing that has worked for me is to “pay myself first.” [0]
If £4000 comes in and your monthly outgoings are around £2000, invest the remaining £2000 immediately. The main benefit this gets me is that it forces me to budget better and come up with other streams of income (usually eBaying stuff) in case I come up short.
I didn't really learn "pat yourself first" until I was thirty. That set me back a few years, which took time to recover.
When I mentor young people right out of college, the first thing I explain to them is that very principle.
Take advantage of the 401K. Have a brokerage account that you automatically deposit into every month. Money that never passes through your checking account, is money you are likely to keep.
I 100 percent empathise with this thinking pattern.
I grew up in a poor family that struggled to find enough money. My endless fear is being unemployed, struggling to find a job, and sliding back to that dark place 15 years ago. Some would call that motivation for working harder, I still feel it as fear, and as a result, I do everything I can to acquire the resources to save me from that ever happening.
Great thoughts on alternative places to live as well.
We never had much money growing up, but in Australia it was never a problem. Sort of the opposite - with tall poppy syndrome, you sort of looked down on those too well off and out of touch or stuck up. Rather, I had 100% confidence I could grow up, get a good job, retire some day. Focusing on the end meant you missed the journey sort of thing. Pretty care free.
But I later spent some time in rich Asian cities and became aware of the high stress highly competitive environment there, all the way from early schooling. Now I am in the Bay Area and see the same sort of thing here, with there being such a huge difference in potential just by getting in the right schools or doing well on the right exams or interviews. Then things like this health care trap in the US is such a big shock. Even schooling, with such a huge difference between good and bad schools, good and bad neighborhoods. I can see why there is such a desire to better, or even maximize, ones situation.
I stopped fearing that when I became a freelancer. It's done wonders for my confidence, and I'm much more productive as a result.
It also helps to be married; two jobs give a lot more security than one. Even so, having savings that can last you through a downturn or possibly even fund an early retirement, is definitely a good idea.
Because hard work is not a safety net. The network and relationships you embed yourself in is the real safety net. Get social, get connected, get valuable to the networks you are a part of and expand them.
Not sure about Thailand and it really depends on your lifestyle, but 100k will get you through 2-3 years at most in the other countries, if you live in an urban setting, not really pinching pennies.
None of these "cash out your lifesavings of 100K" when you're a 20-something and go live in the woods/foreign-country plans are realistic.
Sure, it's theoretically possible, but it's much better to redirect that effort into finding a job you can live with in your own county. Nothing wrong with a bit of wanderlust, and you can certainly get that out of your system with the safety-net of a sustainable career. Do I sound like a parent yet?
The expat thing is done by every generation, it doesn't stick. Gen-X-ers (my people) went to Prague, had great times, made lifelong friends, saved nothing, often developed mild drinking problems, in the end they lost a few years of their earning potential. Did it develop character? Yes. Could it have been done in other ways? Yes. Was it worth it? ehh.
There are other ways to escape from the searing banality of a career inside of Mega-corps filled with assholes, HR drones, soul-sucking labor.
It's psychologically comforting and you don't need to be an expat for it to be realistic. I agree that most people underestimate the value of creating a sustainable low stress life in their home country. Many people I know in the US seem to think working here means building up constant stress that eventually needs to be blown off in an orgy of travel and degeneracy.
I have about 80k in liquidity and in the back of my mind it's reassuring to know that if something went wrong at my job or I burnt out or got fired I would be ok. With just my savings I could rent a room in my city for something close to 10 years, including all basic necessities. Even just taking a part time minimum wage job I could easily double that time frame.
As it is I live happily in a small space with a very frugal lifestyle. Paradoxically I think going to work knowing that I could walk away at any time actually makes me a healthier and more productive person/employee.
I can tell you that you can live in the center of a French city for like 10 years on that money. You won’t have a crazy lifestyle but you can live in the center and do groceries and the occasional restaurants and drinks for that money. Most people would take like 5 years to make that much AT LEAST.
Plus you can extend that period of time significantly (or even indefinitely) by doing some form of work, even if not highly paid. It doesn't have to be all or nothing.
I really like the idea of "barista FIRE": make enough "fuck you money" that you can survive on a low paid job and supplement it a little with your savings, while leaving enough in reserve for retirement.
> I can tell you that you can live in the center of a French city for like 10 years on that money.
What city, though? I live in a small city (coast, but still), and the absolute crappiest studio will chomp 500€/mo out of your wallet, which roughly translates to over $70k. Anything decent goes easily over $100k and that's rent alone.
Not OP, but I suppose the implication is that you would continue to do some sort of work, even if just random jobs to supplement your income. It would probably be hard to go a decade without earning a single penny (of course I'm assuming this is all happening well before traditional retirement age).
Rooms and studios from 10 to 24 sqm (~100-250 sq feet), half of them unfurnished. So cheaper than here, but still the absolute worst. Well, you can get something for even cheaper but then you start having last floors without elevator and extremely low ceilings, which my back won't ever consider again after the experience.
Can you get a long term visa without any job affiliations? I'm not sure that simply having the money is sufficient reason for an European country to give you a long-term visa (> 1 year), depending on which country you come from.
Also, some countries have a "negative privilege" situation, where even if you try to get a low-wage job, you'll have less priority than others, or your employer will need to pay an extra fee to be able to hire you. Many will resort to illegal employment to avoid that.
And do not forget issues about guarantors: some places are really strict about proving you have the money, and simply making a 1-year rent deposit in advance is not enough.
Overall, even when having the money, some people don't have the "privilege" of being able to spend it as they please, in the country of their preference.
good question, not sure about the visa but if you at least have a passport from a european country then you can travel and live anywhere there. I know several of my friends who have lived in Asia without actually working there.
I thought I could do that (in France) because I'm living on the cheap. But I guess you somehow needsf to pay the social security to get the benefits. I don't know how to do that when not having a salary (the social security "premium" is hidden and deferred salary) or are not searching for a job, or a kid/retirie. Otherwise it would mean being a freeloader.
I live in London (one of the most expensive places in Europe), and it'd take me 5-6 years to get through that. And I'm not overly careful with my money. Of course this is as a single person. It'd be different if you had a family to support, etc.
Rent just makes up the majority of my expenses. I was basing this on rent + bills at £800/month. Leaving £400/month for other expenses ~= £15k/year ~= $20k/year = 5 years.
£600/month is also definitely doable in London (even in Zone 2). I have quite a few friends who earn less than me that wouldn't even consider a room costing more than that.
Though not a bad idea, $100k cash is slowly being chipped away at with inflation every day. Due to how our financial system works, you are probably ticking off days of that decade yearly by leaving it in cash.
Invest it in index funds. That's pretty safe, and gives pretty good returns. The only way that's going to disappear is if the entire economy dies, and then money won't be any good either. If you want to prepare for that, you need to buy land.
Just to add, invest in broad-market index funds (or ETFs). Something which tracks FTSE All Worlds, MSCI World, maybe even S&P 500. Nowadays, there are hundreds of indexes that are so narrow I'm baffled how they're useful.
Absolutely. It's easy to get lost in the world of cryptic indexes. I generally use and advise S&P 500, because it's easy to find, remember and understand, and it performs very well.
I should probably look into MSCI World SRI, which is a socially responsible index (or a neverending collection of indices) that excludes all sorts of dirty and questionable enterprises like oil and weapons.
When you have 2300 ETFs in the US and 7000 globally, narrow indices are important ways to tailor your exposure as the broad index stuff probably has ten different vehicles to invest in..
Indeed, it's a cushion that gives incredible peace of mind. Not only job-related, but also gives the option to deal with all sorts of other life-related problems.
If you're terrified of losing your job, the first thing to do is look for another job, maybe a different field or higher level and higher salary. Give yourself a promotion.
Even if it's similar job at same salary, the point is to go through the process to get an offer in reasonable time. When you get the offer, you can decline the offer, if you're happy with current company.
I recommend everyone go through the job search process at least once a year or more.
Job search process takes skills, like everything else. It's much better to sharpen the interview loop skills while you're currently employed. You can take the time to analyze areas for improvements and learn the patterns in job search, interview loop process.
This is really true somehow. After working my first job for 8 years a friend asked me to come work with him somewhere else. They were desperate for techies and preferred hiring through existing employees so it would be quicker and there would be some level of guarantee about performance.
Before joining I thought it was a good time to do some interviews so I would know what my value should be and if maybe there were other (better) options than working with my friend. I had about 4 interviews and 2 immediately did an offer, that felt good. It took some time before I could "interview" at my friends place and meanwhile one of the companies started upping their offer to sway me to them.
The way I entered the interview at my friend’s place was totally different than if I wouldn’t have interviewed those other places. I felt empowered and like I had nothing to lose. I asked for (to me) ridiculous amounts of money and benefits and got them without them batting an eye.
But now here we are, a few years later, and the feeling is coming back. "What if I lose my job?", "Will I ever make what I make now?", "Why am I making so much more money than my way-more-educated friends?". These doubts are weird but they feel valid. I sometimes think if I lose this job there is no place for me besides a service desk or something.
I got another pay raise this week for my “excellent performance”. But I feel I just get this because I can talk to my manager about games we both play and he just likes me. Is this imposter syndrome?
I am an old person, still working, but here are a couple points I have lived by:
1)when you decide it is time to look for a new job, even if you have your sights set on a particular position, always fan your resume out to at least three places, and go to multiple interviews. You never know what opportunities exist unless you look. What you thought was your first choice might not be where you actually end up.
2)If you do go through the process of sending out resumes and interviewing, go into it with the attitude that if you get an acceptable offer for what you think will be an interesting position, accept it and move on.
As long as you leave a job on good terms, with a two week notice, you can always go back in the future. Never (never!) burn bridges. The world is small, and networks matter!
Always follow up with any job offer that you receive but turn down. Keep it short, keep it factual, be polite. Thank them for the opportunity. Note that if a company gives you a good faith offer, and you turn it down, it will be harder to get an interview there in the short term. In the long term, they took a chance on you once, they'll take a chance again.
Network, network, network. I cannot stress that enough.
If you're working in an assembly line or checkout at the grocery store, your productivity isn't as variable. Assuming customers/inputs are always lined up, you'll process a similar number every hour and the quality is somewhat static.
In cloud infrastructure, I notice quality of work is highly variable. Some engineers will bandaid everything to get the task done. It's easy to do that.
Other engineers create solutions taking into account the current technical environment, business requirements and future concerns. I don't think we should hide from this fact. Software engineering as a profession becomes worth more the more we realize there's a difference in quality and quantity dependent on the engineer's abilities.
> Some had very impressive careers, but when you realize that first opportunity was only because of a parental connection, suddenly it seems a bit hollow.
The first opportunity is always the toughest. Also grew up around wealthy people, vast majority of them fall into the category you describe.
I was lucky to meet someone early in my adulthood who would always stress "What part did YOU do?" "Show me YOUR code"
What I like about him is you can't get the bullshit you describe past him. He always breaks down what you say into the most simplest form to ascertain what truth exists within your words. He won't let you ride another person's coattail.
I think you can have your experience while understanding the massive disparity.
I am the same as you. Purely self-made. Handed nothing.
Here's a situation I saw which changed my view from yours to the person you're replying to:
My friend is successful. He did not go to college since he couldn't afford it. Rather he worked after graduating high school and attained a senior engineering role before his peers had graduated college.
Well...the company he was working for folded. He desperately took whatever the next job was because he was young and did not have much savings to fall back on nor a college degree. That next job was across the country and in his words "was a waste of two years". He stayed at that dead end job for resume purposes in a city he hated but had to relocate to.
Now I have another friend. That friend graduated college, moved to a new city. His parents paid for the first year of rent in the new city while he looked for the best possible job in software. He got a great job.
You see the massive disparity? The first guy essentially threw away two years of his youth working a cubicle farm job because he did not have inherited wealth to fall back on. Today, he's doing very well but that does not change what happened to him.
Seeing that first hand changed my "boot straps" thinking. The world isn't fair although I agree, you can make it more fair.
Certainly true. My main point is I have friends like your latter example, and the time I spent frustrated they had what I didn't left me further behind financially and emotionally. Changing my attitude to "what do I need to do to get what I want" and working towards my goals has left me happier and better off.
The first guy worked as an engineer long enough to get a senior role but didn't have any savings? 100% avoidable problem. It isn't like the second guy would get senior engineer pay for the whole year from his parents, and if the first guy lived cheaply like a student he would have more than enough to survive a year or more.
The point is that you don't have to "avoid the problem" if you are rich. You'll do better despite your failures.
Meanwhile when someone is poor they are expected to have zero failures in judgment and the poor generally have better judgment but when they do have a lapse the effects are catastrophical.
>Meanwhile when someone is poor they are expected to have zero failures in judgment and the poor generally have better judgment but when they do have a lapse the effects are catastrophic
You are 100% right.
And to respond to the other commenter -- the first guy didn't have much in savings because he was sending money back to his parents.
That's how bad it is. When you are born into wealth, there's a sort of "rubber band" helping you move up the ladder. When you are born into poverty, that rubber band pulls you down instead of propelling you up.
I can speak to this myself, I have helped my parents/family enormously at cost to my financial wellbeing.
And by the way....when a son/daughter does well, gets into software, makes a healthy $150k salary in SV, that does not change the financials at home. That $150k salary has to keep coming and you have to keep giving it to your family to make a real difference over time. At the same time, you have to pay SV rent, you have to buy a car, go on dates with your significant other, have a life of your own, etc.
It depends on the number of applications. If the number of applications is unmanageable, then credentials can be a useful first filter.
This is also why the SAT/ACT is still important in college admissions: they get a lot of applications, and they need to filter out some applicants to make it more manageable.
NATO existed to fight off global communism by keeping the Soviet Union out of Western Europe. This was directly in the US national interest because the US didn’t want to face a pan-Eurasian communist front in a future war.
What does NATO do anymore? The US, as the only global superpower with a homeland separated from any potential, conceivable enemy by the two biggest oceans in the world, is largely invulnerable to invasion. And without an enemy with an energizing ideology behind it, what is anyone allied against?
