Comment by csdreamer7
6 days ago
> Microsoft pays well. The prudent move is to not increase spending until saving up at a bare minimum 6 months of "runway".
> I live in Washington. My accountant told me stories, one of which was a Microsoftian who got the big job, and promptly bought the most expensive house he could swing. He soon ran into trouble because he didn't have enough left to pay the property tax, and was forced to sell it.
> Never, ever, EVER assume that a high paying job is a guarantee for life.
I do not know why you wrote this. This wasn't a guy who blew all his money on a big house and was forced to sell it when he lost his job.
The guy's kid was born with a low functioning level of Autism that required expensive therapy to treat. You do not choose that. He had savings, but he may be taking care of the kid for the rest of his life. What is he suppose to do? Eat ramen to save up 40 years of out of pocket therapy treatment when he was fired from a position that Microsoft should have kept? No, that is ridiculous.
The point was when you get a high paying job, the first order of business is to build up savings because jobs are not guaranteed for life. 6 months of runway gives one time to find another position.
> The point was when you get a high paying job, the first order of business is to build up savings because jobs are not guaranteed for life. 6 months of runway gives one time to find another position.
That applies to 'any' job and is besides the point since I mentioned above he did keep savings. Your comments comes off as insensitive since few jobs will make up for the generous Autism therapy benefit.
The difficulty is if you demand that once given a benefit, that benefit must be given for life, then nobody will provide those benefits. The more costs are imposed on an employer for hiring people, the fewer they will hire.
As for sensitivity, it is neither sensitive nor virtuous to demand that other people fund one's sensitivities. It is sensitive and virtuous to freely donate one's own funds.
Microsoft has, for decades, been known to provide generous funding for autistic family members of their employees. It's sensitive and virtuous. Criticizing them for not giving more is a bit unfair.
2 replies →