Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Dave Long (
Date: Wed Aug 16 2000 - 13:00:56 PDT

> I think folks' definitions of FUM (*great* acronym!) may vary. For me,
> FUM would be $100K/yr before taxes, independent of what I happen to be
> doing for/producing at work.

FUM is actually a poor acryonym; FUR (resources) would actually
be a better one, as the money is only important in so far as it
is the limiting factor.

For instance, high 6 figures may kick off your $100K pre-tax
figure, and somewhere in the range of 7 figures you should be
able to conservatively cover that post-tax, perhaps even with
some allowance for inflation.

So, if you chose your parents right (without even needing to
trigger the estate tax about which Mr. Bolcer is so worried),
or if you choose whom you divorce right (and in which state
you married them), or if you manage to acquire the capital in
a less traditional manner (if a day at the startup races: you
choose the horse right), you can have that FUI{ncome} while
doing not much more than sitting around in sulfur springs.
(hot-ium cum dignitate?)

Now, imagine you had even more money. I doubt having twice
as much money means that one's fingertips take twice as long
to shrivel up, and unless someone offers a useful $5000/day
seminar on "hot spring enjoyment" or there is a spendy line
of designer birthday suits available, additional money can't
(even if one is a BOBO) have very much of a positive effect.
Get enough beyond FUM, and it's merely Nice To Have Money.

I'd bet many on FoRK have at least experienced the few orders
of magnitude between 3 and 5 digits; that experience should
show that life involves many activities for which time and
attention matter more than money. Native attentiveness may
vary slightly, but we all get the same amount of time in our
day, so paying attention to money figures alone is akin to
being myopic about bandwidth while ignoring latency.


> To put this whole thing another way: the first time I hear a > billionaire say "there's more to life than money; all the sacrifices
> and so forth it took to get here weren't worth it" I'll shut up and
> eat my serving of crow.

I doubt you'll find many billionaires (beyond those who have
cause to believe they stand a good chance of soon needing to
get into heaven) who would defend the statement that "there
is a disutility to great wealth", but you probably will find
several defending of "there's more to life than money".

_The Meditations_ of Marcus Aurelius might be a good start;
the classics in general, having been written by and for the
folk with FUM at the time (think schole/libertas), are full
of such opinions.

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Aug 16 2000 - 12:49:57 PDT