It's not necessarily maximizing money, but maintaining lifestyle. It's extremely common for people to increase their standard of living as their means increase, and reducing that requires significant effort in some cases (e.g., people tend to buy as much house as they can afford, so any significant salary reduction could necessitate selling the house and uprooting your family). It's a minimal sacrifice in the face of having to work a job you hate, IMO, but it's still a powerful barrier for many.

Right.

> extremely common for people to increase their standard of living

That was a choice. But the opposite is "not a choice"? You choose to spend so much money that you are forced into work you may despise to support the spending choices you make, so there's no option to... not make those spending choices?

I'm unsure why you've quoted "not a choice", as I never said any such thing. I said it's difficult for many to decide to change their lifestyle to afford a less lucrative but more enjoyable job.

You've also got the cause and effect backward. You do the work you can be employed to do with the promise of (in your opinion, and relative to your skill and responsibility) competitive compensation. Years go by, you get used to living with that salary (plus yearly raises), and then you realize your job sucks. Now what do you do? Soldier on at BigCo1, switch companies to an effectively isomorphic position at BigCo2, or spend low 5 figures moving to and outfitting a new house for a 20% pay cut and a job you love? All three are choices, but #3 has the highest barrier to decision.

> I'm unsure why you've quoted "not a choice", as I never said any such thing.

TeMPORaL did, though, in the parent chain. That's why neogodless is quoting it. (This isn't a one-on-one conversation here...)

Choices aren't made equal. Some are easier to make, even unconsciously, than others. For example, choosing immediate pleasure is easier than immediate discomfort. A series of small, incremental choices over time is easier than one large step. Etc.

What is your point? It’s still a choice. It’s easier to spend more money than less money, great insight.

It's also easier to spend the same money than to spend less money. Given two easy things, most people won't chose the hard thing most of the time.

>You can make less money than "maximum" and still have a great life.

I think the bigger assumption here is "all companies are bad, so even if I change I'm simply choosing another poison".

What alternatives do you have in mind? trying to join a startup? That means having the money/idea for yourself and pitching to investors or being experienced enough that other founders want you on the ground floor with them (i.e. going back to spending 10+ years at "not an option" BigCo).