I agree, but I'm going to go in harder.

The author seems to think that people have infinite time. Many points require an allocation of time that most people - in particular those with families and caring responsibilities - do not have.

Remove bad actors? What if the bad actor is the mother/father of your kids? What if they're a parent who requires care you/they can't afford so you have to do it yourself?

It's all so simple isn't it. 10 steps to banality.

It could be rewritten as "have enough money to do what you want without being overly concerned about the consequences, because you can make the consequences someone else's problem with your money"

The author was from Belgium before he passed away five years ago from cancer. His perspective may be rooted in the Belgian experience where health care is affordable, there is a social safety net, and cheap access to mental health support.

If you live in a place where you must care for your parent because professional care is not affordable then perhaps look into organizing or supporting political will to make it affordable (4. Be part of bigger things). And if you live in the US where this political will is destroyed before conception, then I guess find another blog post to help guide you to happiness.

For what it's worth, Peter wrote this a little more than a year before he died due to metastatic cancer. I suspect he understood quite well that time is finite.

I think the author - who passed away unfortunately - has more than enough to say about dealing with bad actors. Read his book The Psychopath Code.

just replying to the part about bad actors - he is talking specifically about narcissists and psychopaths. If you have to cut out your parent because of some inconvenience (and not because they are narcissists and severely affect your life), then that makes you not so empathetic, and that is absolutely not what he argues for in his book psychopath code.

Worth taking a 5 second look into Peter's background. He was overall a pretty amazing dude.

> If this means a cut in income, so be it

I mean, if I had the luxury of taking a cut in income without having to sell my house or whatever, I wouldn't mind. But as it stands, it's a luxury I and many others just can't afford.

And I don't 'waste' my time on commutes either, WFH and all. My commute, once the office is open again, is actually the main exercise I get (20-30 minute bike ride)

Just like in e.g. programming 'design principles' are called principles, not 'hard design rules all of which you must strive to follow to the letter' I'm pretty sure the author's intention is for these 10 things to be interpreted like the former, not the latter (also see sibling comments).