<p>still, that's five years of your life that you can never get back. i would hate to spend that much time just waiting for it to be over. :-/</p>
<p>Of course you shouldn't do that if you didn't enjoy it. I hate this incredible prejudice that people seem to have against jobs that pay loads of money--"there's no way you can be happy at those jobs."</p>
<p>"jpps1 That's the point. You make so much money that you have a big fat bank account and no time to spend it. Then, after the first five rough years, you'll have tons more and can have lots of fun with it."</p>
<p>I don't see how that comment shows an interest in anything other than the money, and I still don't understand why you would give up 5 years for money.</p>
<p>The world of bussiness mergers, IPO's, and hostile takeovers really excites me. I would enjoy climbing up the corporate ladder and making a difference in the world.</p>
<p>see, now, that's a reason</p>
<p>I didn't say money was the only reason. If you read my other posts a little closer, you'd notice I said the work seems "thrilling." And of course, it's a major bonus to be paid extremely well if you like the work.</p>
<p>And even if you don't like it, the prospect of making $300K your first year out of B-School (and $100K out of undergrad) is pretty damned appealing.</p>
<p>And the comment I made about "big checking accounts" was in response to someone who said i-bankers work ridiculously long hours. I was making a point that early on, it's very beneficial as it allows you to build up a healthy bank account (as there is no real time to spend it).</p>
<p>for people interested in corporate law, i suggest you read anonymous</a> lawyer's blog. i know that's just one person's account, but i have to admit it put me off a bit.</p>
<p>as for me, i'd like to do something i love -- book publishing -- but a decent salary would definitely be a nice touch. i think people tend to think too much in terms of extremes, because in real life, you're not either filthy rich or dirt poor. you can be middle class and comfortable and have that be enough. that, in my opinion, is preferable to having an overprivileged life and no time to enjoy it.</p>
<p>I think you're guilty of thinking in extremes as well.</p>
<p>You can make tons of money and have time to enjoy it. As a matter of fact, if you worked in finance for 25 years (25-50) and were smart, you'd probably be able to enjoy a very comfortable early retirement. And yes, you'd have time to enjoy yourself for the 25 years before as well.</p>
<p>You know what I really want to do? I want to travel the world and see everything. I want to eat all the food the world has to offer, especially Chinese food. I want to ride a horse in Mongolia, pry in Tibet, walk on the Great Wall, and admire the Pyrimads. See the different lives of many is kind of like living many lives at once. I don't want to be bored in one city. I don't want to socialize with the same-old, same-old. </p>
<p>You know what, only money could make that happen.</p>
<p>Also, living on the margin is exciting. If you are very poor, you have prospect to gain a lot and lose very little. If you are very very rich, then you are da man. If you are just common, then damn it.</p>
<p>jpps1 -- i was referring to the original question, in which the choice was essentially between working with something you enjoy but being comparatively poor and working inhumanely long hours with a huge salary. it neglected to mention a middle ground, which is what i suggested. getting both the money and the satisfaction is of course ideal, and i'm not saying that's impossible. i was pointing out in context of the question that a sacrifice on either side isn't necessarily required.</p>
<p>I understood that until you glibly stated that "being middle-class and comfortable...is preferable to having an overprivileged life and no time to enjoy it."</p>
<p>how was that "glib"? i thought it was evident that the reply conveyed my opinion; in fact, i said so. if you disagree with me that's your prerogative. all i did was present a viewpoint. you're fully entitled to disagree, and i'll be glad to hear your arguments, but i never claimed that my statement was true for everyone.</p>