Would you be incarcerated for ten years if you could earn £100,000 per year afterwards?

No.

But that's because i do not want to have a lot of money, i simply want others to have less than me.

My Perfect world would be that i am a tramp with barely enough to eat, as long as everyone else is dead or dying from radiation poisoning due to the nukes.
 
My answer is no. Deal breaker is the line about never being able to contact anyone you have ever known - that sounds absolutely horrendous and far worse than the incarceration itself.

Putting a set salary of £100k in the conditions devalues the thread a bit because it effectively rules out anyone who is on a decent wage (hence all the pay-cut posts). I think it would be better if it was phrased along the lines of a multiple of current salary, 'name your price' or whatever.

Some of the conditions however are quite interesting.
 
If I could do it with the girlfriend then probably yeah.. (that's probably a bit sad!)

However it's a terrible idea overall so no =p, just the thought of never working appeals to me =p.
 
Sounds like university except I didn't get the job at the end, didn't use a gym and didn't shower that often.

I sat all day every day in a very tiny room playing Ultima Online on an overclocked P4 (thanks OCUK) on a 56k modem for 2 years not talking to any IRL friends/family.
 
dirtychinchilla said:
Why would you give up your liberty for money? Madness!
Click to expand...

Money buys liberty. In fact, nowadays money is required for liberty. Being poor restricts your liberty a great deal.

For many people, this offer would be 10 years of somewhat reduced liberty in exchange for the rest of their life with greatly increased liberty. It's certainly not madness.
 
Infidelus said:
The fact you don't think £75k (a year) is a lot is very telling. There's a lot of people out there (myself included) that routinely live on less that £20k a year, so getting four or five times that every year for the rest of your life is actually quite a substantial increase ...
Click to expand...

Indeed - if I was earning that much now I'd be laughing, it would improve my quality of life hugely, doubly so if I was just being given it for doing nothing!
 
HangTime said:
Putting a set salary of £100k in the conditions devalues the thread a bit because it effectively rules out anyone who is on a decent wage (hence all the pay-cut posts).
Click to expand...

I'd call almost four times the national average a bit more than a 'decent' wage. :p

£118k puts you in the top 1% of UK earners.
 
JBod said:
Sounds like university except I didn't get the job at the end, didn't use a gym and didn't shower that often.

I sat all day every day in a very tiny room playing Ultima Online on an overclocked P4 (thanks OCUK) on a 56k modem for 2 years not talking to any IRL friends/family.
Click to expand...

When I left uni all I did for several months was get up at 1pm and play Quake 1 FVF till 4am every day.

It was amazing.
 
Infidelus said:
The fact you don't think £75k (a year) is a lot is very telling. There's a lot of people out there (myself included) that routinely live on less that £20k a year, so getting four or five times that every year for the rest of your life is actually quite a substantial increase ...
Click to expand...
Easy now tiger.

I'm simply stating that the 100k PA deal is already likely to be at least 25% worse due to inflation, potentially much worse if our economy falters over the next 10 years.

£100k PA (actually 75k in real spending terms) for the rest of your life (depending on age) isn't that much of a huge increase due to the impact of inflation over long periods making that "huge salary" the person sacrificed 10 years before slowly become worse & worse over the years.

It's a huge price (10 years of youth) for a benefit which at closer examination could easily be up-to 25% worse than first thought & would continue to deteriorate over time.
 
elmarko said:
Easy now tiger.

I'm simply stating that the 100k PA deal is already likely to be at least 25% worse due to inflation, potentially much worse if our economy falters over the next 10 years.

£100k PA (actually 75k in real spending terms) for the rest of your life (depending on age) isn't that much of a huge increase due to the impact of inflation over long periods making that "huge salary" the person sacrificed 10 years before slowly become worse & worse over the years.

It's a huge price (10 years of youth) for a benefit which at closer examination could easily be up-to 25% worse than first thought & would continue to deteriorate over time.
Click to expand...

Your previous calculation assumed a 5% payrise every year though. Realistically speaking, the majority of people get more like 2%, if they even get a payrise...
 
Haggisman said:
Your previous calculation assumed a 5% payrise every year though. Realistically speaking, the majority of people get more like 2%, if they even get a payrise...
Click to expand...
True, but I factored in promotions - very few people stick the same job for 40 years without a single promotion (which usually increases earnings by higher than 2%).

As I said, it was total napkin maths - but it's hardly setting the sights stupidly high it was unrealistic, just giving a possible example as to why the offer isn't as good as people may at first assume.

(it's not like it's a serious thread anyway lol).
 
Quick excel figures, assuming a 2% annual payrise, 20 year old earning £26k going in, coming out to £100k at 31. Retiring at 65, living to 100:

"Earnings" at end of life:

Work: £1,932,594.68
Get incarcerated: £7,000,000.00

So I guess the question could be rephrased as:

Would you be incarcerated for 10 years for £5mil and never having to work another day in your life? :p

Edit: assuming your 5% annual rise:

Work £4,385,814.26
Get incarcerated £7,000,000.00
 
elmarko said:
Easy now tiger.

I'm simply stating that the 100k PA deal is already likely to be at least 25% worse due to inflation, potentially much worse if our economy falters over the next 10 years.

£100k PA (actually 75k in real spending terms) for the rest of your life (depending on age) isn't that much of a huge increase due to the impact of inflation over long periods making that "huge salary" the person sacrificed 10 years before slowly become worse & worse over the years.

It's a huge price (10 years of youth) for a benefit which at closer examination could easily be up-to 25% worse than first thought & would continue to deteriorate over time.
Click to expand...

I have to disagree. £100k (or even £75k) is a huge increase - for an awful lot of people, and anyone that can't live extremely comfortably on that amount of money has something wrong with them.

Yes, in 10 years time inflation will probably take away some of that, but unless the world economy completely collapses (in which case we're all screwed anyway), I don't see it making that huge an impact on what is an extremely generous living wage.

Whether you're prepared to give up family/friends to achieve it is another matter that will vary depending on the person.
 
Infidelus said:
I have to disagree. £100k (or even £75k) is a huge increase - for an awful lot of people, and anyone that can't live extremely comfortably on that amount of money has something wrong with them.

Yes, in 10 years time inflation will probably take away some of that, but unless the world economy completely collapses (in which case we're all screwed anyway), I don't see it making that huge an impact on what is an extremely generous living wage.

Whether you're prepared to give up family/friends to achieve it is another matter that will vary depending on the person.
Click to expand...
I disagree, the fact that 10 years of youth is being trading off means the return requirement would need to be vastly higher than simply living very comfortably for a while.

The family element is indeed another aspect - but just the time/money conversion alone ins't great to begin with, really it's all dependant on how much you value your time & youth.

Personally, the reward is significantly too low to even consider (that's ignoring the other aspects which would put me off).

Nobody is talking absolutes or objectively here - it's all based on how the individual values time making the entire thing subjective.
 
Last edited:
Lysander said:
Half-swiped from somewhere else. Here are the conditions:

- For ten years you will be incarcerated in a modern, comfortable room which will act as a 'cell'. The size of your room is whatever size your main bedroom is at home. After ten years you will emerge to a guaranteed yearly salary of £100,000.
- You have access to a hot and cold shower, but your ambient room temperature can only be selected as either 12.5C or 35C.
- Clothes and laundry are done weekly for you.
- You have a choice of fast food or gourmet food. If you choose fast food, all room cleaning and pest control is done for you. If you choose gourmet, all cleaning must be done by you, as well as pest eradication. Alcohol is provided one evening only.
- You have day access to a music room with three instruments and a library of all records ever recorded within the decade of your choice.
- You have day access to a library of literature with all books and periodicals published within the decade of your choice.
- You have day access to a gym with all the latest cardio and strength equipment. No spotters.
- You have evening access to a home cinema system with all films ever made within the decade of your choice.
- Your room contains one television, black and white and only receives 4 channels.
- Your room contains one Pentium 4 computer and a 56k internet connection.
- You have access to the female of your choice, but for one hour and for only twenty times during your incarceration.
- After ten years you will have your guaranteed salary of £100,000, however, everyone you have ever known will have forgotten about you and you will never be able to contact them.

So, is it worth it? I'm tempted.
Click to expand...

Sounds like heaven, is there an option to stay in after 10 years?
 
Cost / benefit ratio is skewed negatively - yes £100k is a good salary fro the rest of your life without having to work, however you lose out on 10 years of your life. That's a significant amount of time. It's not worth it for any kind of money - I wouldn't want to miss out on 10 year's worth of experiences, life, and so on. Sure, one could argue that without having to work you could recover some of that lost time - but it's too much of a sacrifice, and I enjoy my life too much to want to do that sacrifice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom