Essentially, option one is my choice, except that I pay out about 38% to child support. Teaching high school English and coaching sub varsity basketball teams, I'm making 62k annually. I coach my team in the morning and am free after school. Summers off. Weekends off. Spring Break off. Many Holidays off. 10 sick days. I could have gone into administration for 70-80k, but involved longer hours, and a considerably shortened vacation. i could coach football and a third spring sport and bring in another 10k, but all these sports require long, after school hours.
I'd say Option 1. I've done a bit of both. My career currently is more like Option 2, but I struggle with it. Yes, I make quite a bit more money now, but I'm not nearly as carefree and happy that's for sure. I also have young children so I push back quite a bit when it comes to my hours.
60k a year for the rest of your life won't be a good retirement. You could advance and make double, triple, quadruple that of job 1 per year with advancement and retire very comfortable. All depends on the person. Old school style would choose opt. 2 if your retirement were a priority
I wish I could do it over again but now I do help my kids with their children by making sure that they do not have to work so many hours.
I'm very aware of my peers. Surroundings... the whole "Millenials" BS is 100% true. We/they love time off. But our generation, the ones that work hard, look at a career as something they need to craft and define themselves. There is no corporate ladder. We don't want pats on the back. We aren't looking to break our backs and be loyal. There is no certainty. The talented ones from our generation - we get the time off, we get the laid back environment AND we get paid. We force businesses to adapt to us. The talented ones of us do, anyways. In other words, bend over for me and pay me like a champ and bath in benefits or I'll go work for someone who will, sucker.
Young . . no Family . . . I'd be making the money but Older .. . I find calm and drama free life is sssooooo much better Rocket River
i disagree. 60k wont' make a good retirement if you're a consumer. suppose you could advance and triple your income, as long as you have a consumer mentality your expenses will triple as well. retirement starts with knowing how to save. edit: reading comprehension fail on my part. your last statement does put retirement as a priority. still. you can retire well with 60k/year and plus would have had all that free time to play while you were young too.
In option 1 you bring home about $1700 after taxes, insurance, etc. in option 2 $2400 (these are estimates based on what my wife and I make as we basically in the same 2 salary ranges) every 2 weeks. Does that additional $700 dramatically change your life? Probably not. But the additional free time will definitely make you happier and be less stressed. Without knowing what your level of ambition is in life I would advise option 1.
Option 1. Enjoying life is the purpose, making money is one of the means to achieve that purpose. I am not going to sacrifice enjoying life for some more money.
I saw the first option and thought: "Alright, Alright, Alright" second choice will be work like crazy but make a bunch of money... Then I see only +25k to work your butt off?! Please! Then I take choice #1 and head to Hawaii! I've recently had to make a choice in my life; head to a nice place and live on the beach, surf everyday and content myself without a bunch of material things. OR work like crazy in a city packed with people and make a lot of money (hopefully). At the moment I've chosen option #2 because I feel like I'd get bored quick with option #1, but I wouldn't be surprised if I ended up on an island in 20 years. Personally I am 23 and am hungry to make a **** load of money and have already started. I'll have time to rest/vacation/take care of the kids when I'm 40 and retired.
For me to take option 2 it would have to be for a lot more money, like enough to get rid of these student loans very quickly (under 35).
This is an interesting question because I'm only 19. However, I would still take option 1 in this case. Option 2 is not enough money for the physical and mental cost. If I'm not married for a while, I will probably grind out long hours and take the higher pay. Without a family, money is more valuable. If I can save my money when I'm single, I can take a lower paying/less stressful/less time-consuming job when I do have a family.
I consider option 1 to be the death of personal and career growth. While Option 2 sounds like equating your happiness with a "measily" 25k (tell that to those on food stamps), you're also investing in an opportunity cost 2-3 years down the line. Possibly with more work, possibly with less. There will be a day when I choose Option 1, but only when I've reached my limits and feel comfortable and secure in my goals. If your career doesn't strike any passion within you, then you've chosen the wrong job. Your job is where you spend 1/3 of your waking life. Like it or not, it's a part of who you are and how you handle and treat yourself. Remember that. But if it does strike passion in you, what a few extra hours mean to you? I see a lot of bottom feeders and dead weight in my industry for that exact reason. The lack of excellence, passion or intelligence disgusts me.
Number 1 for sure, no matter what your situation. If you're young and single? Travel. Have kids or a wife? Spend time with them. Old? Take it easy, relax, travel. If money becomes to tight, find a part time gig to supplement. My worst fear is ending up like my parents: Workaholics with little in their lives besides their jobs and occasionally myself and my sister. I appreciate everything they've done, but at the same time I feel terrible for them. No way I could live like that.
So I did some math. Last year, I worked approximately 15% what we in the office call "extra time." (Overtime implies you get paid above your salary. Extra time is just more hours for the same salary.) As much as it doesn't seem like a lot, the 25k difference of your two options is well more than the compensation I would have received if I were even paid time-and-a-half for the 15% extra time I put in on an annual basis. So as much as I really think that I would prefer the time, I'd be kidding myself if I said I'd take the worse of the two deals. So give me the money.
I'm not gonna judge people based off a simple response (since I admit I'll be in that pile), but I let people I work with know when they aren't doing their best, whether through motivation or harsh feedback. To me, I'm doing them a favor. To them, I'm a high strung douche, which is fine until they really can't cut it.
I basically live option two day job with an evening teaching job to boot. However weekends are all mine with never a work related interruption. With two kids, a mortgage, student loans, etc. 85k isn't that much. However I put away a lot into retirement because my goal is to get out of the rat race ASAP. Best way is to save up while I have the time and energy. So like anything you have to sacrifice to get what you want. And honestly how much time do you really spend with your kids during a workweek? With typical long commutes and kiddos earlier bedtimes? Maximize the weekends and instead of long vacations take a day off here and there.
Option 1, without a doubt. I'd rather spend my free time doing something I love, like traveling. I already value my airline miles/hotel points more than I do my cash. :grin:
