Money and Time: A hypothetical tradeoff.

[Rain Man]

If someone offered you the following deal, would you take it?

You work for a full year at 30% more than your current salary/wage level, but then you can't work at all or earn money the following year.

The bottom line is that, over two years, you'd make 65% of your salary on average, but you'd only work one of the two years.

[JBucc]

Maybe if all my friends got the same deal. Otherwise all that extra time would be boring.

[SLAG]

Yes, But I am too young to manage my money correctly

[ptlyon]

I'll take my chances with the lottery.

[Donger]

No.

[Bob Dole]

Bob Dole is trying to be a good teammate here, so Bob Dole's assumption is that he can take your tax dollars through government assistance during year two.

[chagrin]

Yes, I don't need much money to live on. Going back o work after a year would stink on ice though

[J Diddy]

I would be broke as hell 2 months into the non paying year.


Nah.


Nothing worse then being broke and bored.

[Iowanian]

If I could take that 30% extra, and parlay that into another business venture, and have the free year to get that and other revenue generation sources going for my longterm financial stability, and improved quality of life(by doing something I enjoy more)....with the option of coming back year 3 at the same salary+30%...

yeah.

If not....The current level of responsibility at home, and the fact I get stir crazy at home for 2 days....eh eh.