I can empathize with this, but for reasons the author doesn't mention.
You don't suppress your outward signs of wealth for the sake of your millionaire co-workers. You do it so that you can keep your non-millionaire friends.
You know, those fun people you hang out with and have for the last dozen years. The ones you have barbecues with on the roof of their (and until recently, your) shabby apartment building. The ones you rope into dirtbag backpacking trips, hopping chicken buses through Central America. And the ones who, through accident of fortune, now make roughly 15% of your currently inflated salary.
We say that money doesn't matter. But try buying that house you can now afford in that neighborhood with the gate and watch how it affects your friends the first time you invite them over for drinks by the pool.
I don't know what the solution for this is. But lying low seems to be a good plan until somebody comes up with a better idea.
I think, the reason to do it is something noble which is difficult to express - its part empathy for people who don't have these riches who may or may not be one's friends, and part a sense of continuity to self, that I am the same person, that I was yesterday - I still love the hard work, and would have done it irrespective of the outcome.
So I don't completely agree, that its to keep your non-millionaire friends. I think, people's tastes change with time and social standing. For example, if you are on Facebook, tell me how difficult it is to really like a joke of a school friend, who has gone in a different direction in life and perhaps gets 15% of your salary.
As a Dutch person this kind of behavior is the norm. It actually pervades all of society.
Dutch service (in restaurants) for example isn't bad because our waiters are rude. It's bad because we see the waiters as our equals and they're thus not as deferential as foreigners demand/expect.
Very often they also pretty much are our equals, as they're largely well educated students who might very well end up earning more than you in 10 years.
Even our royalty rides their bike to the restaurant in the rain... because that's what you're supposed to do.
I think what you're describing is the same thing as in Denmark. There's a sort of cargo cult egalitarianism which completely misses the point that one person can be paid to service another person without them being unequal (on a human level).
I've heard people talk about your supposed obligation to engage in a conversation with a taxi driver, or it being impolite to talk on your mobile phone in a taxi. It's bizarre and completely counter productive in societies as dependant on service industries as ours.
I am well aware that this perspective is completely incomprehensible to Americans, but for us it's just a value embedded very deeply into the fabric of our culture.
I highly doubt that it's counter productive though, as I doubt that society is harmed by expecting you to treat your taxi driver like a fellow human being of equal value, nor that it's bad to have the same expectations of your waiter as you have of your neighborhood college going kid who's just a bit too full of himself.
And yes; we are aware we're chasing away tourists with our service. We're like the French in that respect, as most of us wouldn't mind a little less tourists in town. :)
My point is that I can treat a taxi driver friendly, respectfully and as a fellow human being without treating him like a friend who's doing me a favour.
I'm not worried about tourists, they are plenty scared by the cost of living already, I'm worried about a culture where you don't say "no, I need someone else to do this task for me, my time is better spend on something else". When you're uncomfortable getting in a taxi, you're not going to hire a secretary for your office and then your productivity suffers.
Dutch service (in restaurants) for example isn't bad because our waiters are rude. It's bad because we see the waiters pretty much as our equals and they're not as deferential as foreigners demand/expect.
I don't think that's why service is bad. Believing that your customers are your equal doesn't seem to have anything to do with performing your job well, nor does good food service imply being deferential.
Dutch service is considered bad by some foreigners (including me at times) primarily because of incompetence and laziness, not a lack of deference.
In fact, I beleive that some of the best service in the world exists in the Netherlands, because it really comes from the heart of your server. Unfortunately, very hard to find amongst the staff who are too busy chatting each other up (or customers for that matter: I remember waiting 45 minutes for a menu so that I could order, I began waving at a member of the staff, and got a shy smile and a telephone number, sheesh!)
As a San Francisco resident, there is definitely a streak of egalitarianism here. Your comment about waiters makes me think of the local institution Zeitgeist:
From the reviews you can see the split in reaction: Some people think the staff are incredibly rude. Others, like me, love the place. As somebody who thinks of the staff as hardworking people trying to get a difficult job done, I've never had a problem with them. But they definitely aren't servile, and they won't take an ounce of crap from anybody.
If I had to sum up the culture, I'd say that nobody minds that you have money, and nobody minds if you enjoy yourself. But showy consumption is frowned upon, and acting like you're better than others because you have money is a definite faux pas.
That's an interesting view, but it's strange to me.
Where I'm from (Maryland), if you don't treat a waiter with respect, you won't get served by the restaurant. It's an offense that will get you tossed out and banned.
On the other hand, waiters have a job to perform and they're being paid to do so by the customer. If they want tipped better than average, they perform better than average. It's really simple.
The low-key thing doesn't fool anyone, though. Everyone knows where everyone really stands moneywise.
I say this as a guy who has friends who have gone on to be many, many times more financially successful than I'll ever be. In a couple of cases almost literally overnight. I want them to enjoy the hell out of their money. I would think it was kind of creepy if they didn't. Potentially even offensive.
Can you explain what's the point of buying a bike for 20000 or jeans for 1200 dollars if they are virtually indistinguishable from products costing a tenth of that?
There isn't, really, but it quells any concern of fit/finish.
When I was learning to play guitar (self-taught), I had the expected hard time. I didn't know what I was doing. So, sometimes, when something went wrong, I was inclined to blame the instrument. I mean, I'd only paid $200 for this guitar, amp, headphones, etc., in one package. They can't be any good, right?
When that guitar broke, I still wasn't any good at guitar, but I went out and bought myself a Les Paul. Les Pauls are expensive guitars but, most importantly, they're used by people who play guitar for a living and are taken on tours and all that jazz. I paid for the privilege of not having an excuse to blame the instrument any more. It's more guitar than I'll likely ever need.
Now, when I do something wrong, I at least know that the fault is mine and not the instrument. (Yes, I know it's a poor craftsman what blames his tools, but I was indeed a poor craftsman, and didn't know any better.)
I suspect it's the same thing with bikes, jeans, etc. You're buying a better quality product because it's better, and gives you a sense of satisfaction that you won't have to worry about a loose thread on those jeans, or a squeaky chain on that bike. You're rich, so it doesn't matter that it costs 10x the cost of the next best bike, and is probably only 2x better.
The feeling that you're a patron for someone's craft, that you're enjoying the finest experience the world has to offer and helping to maintain dying traditions in a disposable world. Tiny hidden details that no-one knows about but you and the maker. Feeling like you're standing a few feet taller because you have the strength of the individuals and brands who made your products behind you, and that no-one can fault you on taste.
Luxury that is distinguishable is about impressing people (especially people who can't afford the item). Indistinguishable luxury is about impressing yourself.
Is this correlated to low self-esteem or a touch of arriviste/imposter syndrome? Probably.
The key's in that "virtually". The returns from more expensive things are diminishing, but they are still there. Not so long ago I bought a new shirt for about 10x what I usually spend. It's not 10x nicer - but it /is/ that little bit nicer; every time I wear it it adds a little bit of joy to my day.
I've seen it argued that that's a much more effective way to enjoy money: rather than making drastic changes to your lifestyle, just make every little thing you do that little bit nicer.
It can get really silly though - I seriously doubt that 20K Euro Louis Vuitton skis are really better skis than much cheaper ones - you are just paying for the brand. Plus there is the common complaint about "all the gear - no idea" - where cost/amount of gear is often perceived as having a negative correlation with ability.
Although I haven't seen them, I would expect your Louis Vuitton skis to be very much visibly distinguishable from regular skis - and thus their purpose is to loudly broadcast a message of "I am very rich" on the slopes. Just as is the case with the very much distinguishable Louis Vuitton luggage lines.
My wife spotted them for sale in Courchevel 1850 - which is a very popular haunt for extremely wealthy Russians (and which oddly isn't that expensive to go to if you stay away from the places aimed at the private jet set).
It's basically art you can ride/wear. An original painting is virtually indistinguishable from a reproduction, yet people derive pleasure from buying originals.
Because they have $50m? It's an interesting psychological effect that as you have more money, you want to buy more expensive things purely because you can.
I remember my friend getting an internship at <MegaCorp> on about £15k for the year (totally tax free). While he was on that wage he refused to pay less than £30 for a t-shirt, whilst I would expect at least 2 or 3 t-shirts for that price.
jeans - whatever, but a $20k bike is very noticeably different to a $2k bike, particularly in weight; you could perhaps say the $8k > $20k jump was more buying it just because you could.
Put a couple of million in a long term saving account, hide a couple of years living expenses in a shoe box and get rid of the rest of it in other ways your friends won't notice. Done. Get back to living your life instead of worrying about money.
You can never actually stop worrying about money if you have millions. Short of not caring about what happens to it.
The FDIC covers $250k per savings account.
Is US Government paper safe? I wouldn't bet everything on it. Will the Euro be around in ten years? I wouldn't bet much on it. Could gold crash if the Euro vaporizes and money is forced into the dollar? Are equities at a decade high courtesy of Fed POMO shots and low interest rates chasing capital toward risk?
Let's say you want to give most of your wealth away and make a difference through charity. I don't see how you could not worry about that, it's important, and you can lose millions as fast as you can lose a few dollars.
The "zuckerberg's underlings" thing was a load of bullshit. I've seen a corvette, an r8, a lotus, and various other really nice cars at work. You can drive whatever you want, just don't be an asshole about it.
That depends on your net worth, your definition of 'expensive', and which Lotus you're talking about.
The Elise is on the high side of 'normally priced', but as commuters they're great because they get decent gas mileage.
A well-appointed Exige is close to $80k I think, and cuts the mileage in half. It's a track car, really, so anybody driving it on the streets is probably 'doing it wrong', but I've driven more serious cars as daily drivers so I'm not one to judge.
I can't really comment on the Evora because it's 'new tech', and is supposed to be expensive as such. They're expensive compared to the Prius, but they aren't really comparable either.
My point is that none of these are even $100k cars, and if you wanted one you could save for one. They're not Ferraris or otherwise requiring IPO money.
Exige is basically the same as an Elise. Sometimes they have superchargers.
An Evora is similarly priced to a decked-out Cayman. I mean, we're not talking Expensive for any of these.
(I've driven all of these, and much higher-end stuff, too.)
Yeah -- nice/hot cars are relatively common in Silicon Valley, just not in SF. (like, color alone isn't enough to identify Roadsters in the parking lot, and the same is almost true of F430s. I've never seen a 911 which wasn't the top of the line Turbo).
I ride a lot with my bikes and do triathlons but can't imagine spending 20k on a bike. Something between 3 and 5k is enough to have a superbike. A lamborghini I can understand, a boat I can understand but a bike. This coming from a bike nut.
They spend so much time and effort proving that they are not affected by their wealth it's embarrassing. Just goes to show that the industry is made up of some very immature people who care far too much what other people think of them. Naturally this doesn't apply to everyone and the story needs to be taken with a pinch of salt.
And so the Valley demonstrates its fixation on wealth through deliberate contrast to "those other places". Just demonstrates that pressure to conform to behavioral expectations associated with financial status affects everyone, even if in different ways.
That story makes google suddenly seem a lot less cool to me. If I've made a million because they value the work I do for them, I'll spend it however I damn well please, and I'm pretty sure one of the ways I'd enjoy it would be a nice car.
As someone else said here: counter-signaling. One of my first job was to be a valet at high-end events and clubs. I would often see people driving Ferraris while dressed with shorts and flip flops. Or I would see a guy driving a dirty old car while wearing a 30K$ watch. I can't say this is what's really happening here but it seems like a probable hypothesis.
$200k on a car and $7M on a house is all fine and dandy, but man, the $1.2k jeans is just way over the top. It's like you can get a perfectly serviceable equivalent for a quarter of the price.
$200k on a car is probably too much (once the novelty wears off) - you can get a nice luxury car with more performance than you can handle for $50k.
As for housing, it depends on the location. Zuckerberg's $7M house is actually relatively modest. You can buy the same house in the midwest for probably under $500k.
Even still, those things are relatively justifiable. You can't measure denim jeans worth by square footage or horse-power. I understand the difference between a $30 pair of jeans and a $200 pair (having been stupid enough to shell out that much myself), but beyond that I cannot really justify the cost.
Uh what? Palo Alto does look like a sleepy suburb for a billionaire town, but you see 911 turbos parked in a row beside each other like nothing. People aren't conceited about it.
I'm not a millionaire yet but the following really improved my lifestyle:
Pay someone to clean your house, your clothes weekly and fridge once every 3 months. It's socially acceptable even if you are middle class.
I'll echo the regular doctor checkups but do it also with your car. Less hassle in the long run.
Pay someone to handle your lawn (I live in Canada and snow removal is another thing I get done). You've just saved over an hour of time to spend on stuff you really enjoy.
Occasionally take a cab instead of taking the public transport just because you want to spend your time doing what you love.
I used to take a lot of cabs, but now I prefer public transport. More time for reading?
Also, some cars have much better warranty service than others. BMWs I think are free service for five years, and the leases aren't that bad compared to other luxury cars, even.
Philanthropy. You can blow all the money in the world on it nearly anonymously and barely make a dent in all the misery, disease and suffering in the world - but even a noticeable dent would be enough to give you sound sleep and happiness for the rest of your life.
Not that I would know as I blow my excess income on fancy shoes and other frippery. But I hear it's nice.
Regular checkups by the best doctors on earth, making it more likely that you catch something before it goes very wrong.
Stem cell therapies from Germany / Europe that stimulate adult stem cells to heal damaged joints / tendons / ligaments (Kobe Bryant used this in the off-season, and claims it worked wonders on his rapidly aging body (by athlete standards)). Great for someone over the age of 30 or 40 with some wear & tear to their body.
Financial security - socking away physical gold and silver in Switzerland (or whatever your value preference is).
Dual / multi citizenship. It's very hard to acquire citizenship in most of the preferable countries. The nicer European countries let very few immigrants in, ditto New Zealand, and so on. You can almost always buy your way in however, granted your character is up to par. Great option for escaping America if it keeps heading toward being a police state.
Use bulk leverage to get discounts on everything you would normally be purchasing. Pay cash for your car, whatever the type you buy, and save on interest. Call up the top insurance firms, they almost always have millionaire packages, pay 10 years out on your insurance coverages (home owners, car, health) and save. Also, buy the best insurance possible, including having a hefty life insurance policy for your loves ones.
Pay off all your debt, and never carry debt again (except for purposes of credit building). These days a lot of people are carrying $50k, $100k, etc. in student debt or debt in general (including vehicle debt, mortgage debt, student loans, credit cards).
Buying time is the real kicker, whenever you can manage to. Hire a personal assistant that works from a distance, but helps organize your life virtually. Your friends would never need to know the assistant exists.
Getting a virtual personal assistant isn't very expensive, most SF/SV engineers could probably afford it if they wanted to (whether they would need it is another question though..) The really expensive thing is getting a local person who can do "real" tasks for you in your area, there's a lot that can't be done on the net yet.
BTW, it seems like you are hellbanned PGenes. Contact an admin to fix it?
Are you speculating that I'm a previously banned member?
I am a previously banned (restricted really) member, but not PGenes (or whatever). I got 'hellbanned' for defending myself too aggressively against a sharp shooter that was being an asshole reddit style. Noticed that I could still comment and vote, but my comments no longer showed up to everyone else, waited weeks, and then left HN for a while because it was bullshit. Then I came back and made a new profile.
I just hope that some of that money will help to build at least a few startups that are actually useful (i know, usefulness is subjective but i'm sure you get what i mean).
If someone for "senior company management" is going to show up with baseball bat telling me what car I can or cannot drive should be prepared for a response they may not appreciate.
This entire article is nonsense. People in SV buy expensive cars, boats, planes, flashy watches/jewelry, and all the other shiny things that rich people in LA, NY, and Florida/Texas buy.
There's also a very poor underclass and a shrinking middle class - just like everywhere else. It's suburban America with boring office parks and shitty chain restaurants and Target stores and burrito stands just like the other 95% of the state/region. Everything is just way more expensive because there's so much money floating around here.
You don't suppress your outward signs of wealth for the sake of your millionaire co-workers. You do it so that you can keep your non-millionaire friends.
You know, those fun people you hang out with and have for the last dozen years. The ones you have barbecues with on the roof of their (and until recently, your) shabby apartment building. The ones you rope into dirtbag backpacking trips, hopping chicken buses through Central America. And the ones who, through accident of fortune, now make roughly 15% of your currently inflated salary.
We say that money doesn't matter. But try buying that house you can now afford in that neighborhood with the gate and watch how it affects your friends the first time you invite them over for drinks by the pool.
I don't know what the solution for this is. But lying low seems to be a good plan until somebody comes up with a better idea.