On the other hand, you might have more in the place with higher average income. Remember that buying isn't the only way that you can get things.
Compare NYC with North Dakota. Things cost more in NYC than in ND, which is bad if you're buying, but there is a lot more free stuff in NYC than ND.
Plus, there's more opportunity to move up in NYC than in ND. In some cases, that opportunity is worth something.
Of course, this is counterbalanced by having more opportunities in terms of career, education, culture, and entertainment.
Yes. I'll go a step further - I try to be the least educated, least skilled, most poorly compensated person in a room as often as possible. Holding to this habit means you keep looking for better and better rooms full of people as you improve. Serve in Heaven instead of Rule in Hell...
This is an interesting point. Everyone has their preference point. Some people (like startup founders) can live on ramen income of < $20k/year if there's hope that they'll one day strike it rich. Other more conservative people prefer their steady salary of $80-100k at Corporation XYZ since it offers them a sense of stability. In addition to the class risk/reward paradigm illustrated here, I think this also illustrates how some people place higher value on change (read positive growth) and in turn, discount the value of stability.
0. Lack Of Respect For Time- A person who does not respect time will be limited in what he can accomplish in this world, regardless of talent. Besides your own, if you don't respect other people's time, your integrity depletes by the second until there is none left. Almost everything else is a byproduct of this, positive or negative.
It's interesting that you hi-lighted this. I just had an extremely annoying experience the other day with a VP in my company. Long story short, he decided to question what I was spending my time on and why client engagements took more than a 45 minute meeting like he experiences when doing a sales pitch(I perform most of the execution end of business relationships in my company -- things that take dozens of hours).
I decided after a couple meetings of having my time questioned like that that I had lost quite a bit of respect for him and will probably not suffer that kind of thing again without there being serious repercussions inside the company -- like a reorg so that we're no longer in the same management chain.
He absolutely didn't respect the 80 hour weeks I put in to keep the company afloat. Since that's time out of my personal time, and I could be doing something at another company for the 40 I'm supposed to be doing, it's a lack of respect for me.
Ask him to do a client engagement and let you observe so you can do better in the future.
One of you will learn something.
"I have less patience with someone who doesn't wear a watch than with anyone else, for this type is not time-conscious. In all our deeds, the proper value and respect for time determines success or failure."
1. Reddit/HN/Digg/etc.
2. Facebook (move to #1 if you play Farmville or are female)
3. Steam/xbox/playstation/WOW/Dwarf Fortress
4. Checking Email
5. Watching videos/movies/tv
6. Doing something pointless on your phone
7. Etc. Choose your own time-waster
Of course I only get around 5-10 a day...
=(
#2 and #6 are pretty much saying the same thing. Both speak to how people tend to be over-optimistic with work they're planning to take-on and are unable to take into account of the possible delays to doing that work. Also with #2, It's not clear if he's saying that planning itself is a ineffective habit or if its just the inability to take into account future events.
I'd lump #3 and #4 together as both of these are symptoms of the same problem as well, seeking constant distraction.
#5 is poorly described as it does not describe a habit. He should call this the "keeping up with the Jones's." Either way, I don't really agree that this make people ineffective. Misguided? Maybe.
Edit: fixed some spelling errors.
Why is everyone so concerned with efficiency? One might say "that machine is efficient" or "this machine is not efficient". Why is that? Well, machines are created and owned by humans for a specific purpose -- a coffee-maker makes coffee; a CPU processes logical operations; a carriage horse drags around a cart full of spoiled rich humans :)
We can talk about efficiency of things we own but we can no longer own humans. In a civil society, humans are owners of services that they exchange under conditions of a free and fair market.
There, I said it. Now stop talking about efficiency of humans. Start creating efficient things that efficiently do all the things we hate so we can all be a bunch of lazy fucks :)
