I added a poll, so please revert back to the first page and participate.
I added a poll, so please revert back to the first page and participate.
Haha, third-tier ivy. Cornell is certainly the red-headed stepchild of the Ivy League. In legal education, we have this concept of the T14 (top 14 law schools). Top 50 is tier 1, 50-100 is tier two, and everything else is TTT or Third Tier Toilet. Then, the Amlaw top250 law firms are considered Biglaw, and everything else is considered $H!TLaw.Am I required to read a 137 page "study" from a third-tier-Ivy to participate?
I figured you were dead wrong on this point, but the little research I did seems to point to a correlation between IQ and earnings, but not between IQ and wealth. Ie. smarter folks tend to earn more, but aren't savvy enough to convert it into sustained wealth. Gigachads with Gigabrains are able to do both - earn an obscene income that translates into vast wealth.My point is that for most of us, there is no connection...between smarts or skills and money,
Aside from you strutting like a peacock for most of this recent post, this one nugget jumped off the page at me and it's the reason for whatever level of success I have attained. I'm not the best looking or the smartest but I have the drive and determination of any 10 normal people. I eat bricks and spit out pavement. I keep practicing my craft so that I continue to get better. I'm always looking for the best way to do things.Remember, while both of those traits are important, the final ingredient is drive.
I like the thinking here. Although not everyone drives a honda civic. For example, my gas mileage is better, but someone else with an XL might be much worse. I use a figure of $0.25 a mile because sometimes things break. And I spend a few dollars on other stuff like car washes and air fresheners. $0.25 a mile I'm comfortable with as a good number that leaves some room for increases in the price of gas (which are occuring now) and unexpected fixes.I think folks are grossly inflating the actual marginal costs to operate their vehicle. Gas should be $0.10/mile. Mileage depreciation is $0.05/miles. Insurance is not an incremental cost, it is something you would have for the vehicle anyways. Vehicle depreciation do to time/aging is not an incremental cost - the vehicular would lose that value regardless just from being in existence combined with the passage of time. You can buy 4 tires at $48/pop that last 40k miles - that's another $0.0048/mile. An oil change is $20. A Honda Civic costs $368/year for maintenance (due to increased mileage, I'll increase it 3x to $1,104) - over 40k miles/year, that's $0.0276. Total, I'm getting $0.1824/mile. You are able to then offset $0.56/mile against income.
LOL. You assume the data provided by the R/S companies is accurate. Thats a huge/bad assumption. Second, even if accurate, they probably cherry picked drivers/rides that were more profitable (surge, multiplier). In addition, what date range were the samples taken? If during the months the driver-set multiplier rates were in effect, very skewed data. Too many assumptions here and trusting an incredibly unreliable, dishonest comoany to provide data that could reflect poorly on them. Emough said.Les Ants,
I often hear a lot of complaints on here about what the Ants are earning. I'm here to dispel those myths using evidenced-based empirical research as opposed to the hit pieces run by often left-leaning news outlets.
Linked is a New York Times piece that summarizes and attempts to discredit the 136 page Cornell piece that is also linked. The study was conducted using data from both UBER and Lyft. This is the most rigorous study I have seen on the topic and the methodologies are sound. It adjusts earnings in ways that I have been advocating for for some time.
For instance, it nets out the time that ants are running both apps, ie. if you are running both apps for an hour, it counts it as an hour, not two. This is a huge adjustment for the denominator. It also only includes incremental costs and excludes things like insurance, which the Ant would be paying for regardless. It also deducts depreciation due to the aging of the vehicle, which again would happen regardless of Anting. It includes depreciation from mileage (note that the diminution in value of a vehicle has two components - the age and the mileage). The most controversial exclusion is wait time when not actively driving or en route to a pickup. If you believe that time should be included, you can deduct $2.50 from the levels below.
After applying this thoughtful analysis, the researchers concluded that part-time Ants, which they peg as 85% of the population, make $23.25/hour AFTER expenses or $46,500 annually based on 40 hrs. a week for 50 weeks a year. Full-time Ants make $17.40/hour or $34,800 annually. Many recent college graduates are making between $39-$48k as illustrated by the table below.
For a profession (Anting) that requires no education and very little skill, it appears that the Ants are being overcompensated.
View attachment 605557
Uber and Lyft hailed a Cornell paper’s conclusion that their drivers make solid wages. But others have questioned the researchers’ approach.www.nytimes.com
De La Creme
thanks. I didn’t distinguish between earnings and wealth and I should have. I don’t see much difference between working for and earning $200000 a year or $20000 a year. Sure there will be a difference in lifestyle but stop working (or die) and the flow of money stops. The wealthy guy can’t turn it offI figured you were dead wrong on this point, but the little research I did seems to point to a correlation between IQ and earnings, but not between IQ and wealth. Ie. smarter folks tend to earn more, but aren't savvy enough to convert it into sustained wealth. Gigachads with Gigabrains are able to do both - earn an obscene income that translates into vast wealth.
"each point increase in IQ test scores raises income by between $234 and $616 per year after holding a variety of factors constant. Regression results suggest no statistically distinguishable relationship between IQ scores and wealth."
.How important is intelligence to financial success? Using the NLSY79, which tracks a large group of young U.S. baby boomers, this research shows that …www.sciencedirect.com
The difference is that the Gigachad with the Gigabrain that earns $200k (or way, way, way more, hypothetically of course) has the opportunity to save and have their money start working for them. That’s nearly impossible on $20k. The average $200k earner increases expenses in lockstep with their earnings And never builds a capital base. The Gigachad sees earnings as a way to build capital. He save’s and invests furiously. He owns real estate, stocks, crypto, all sorts of assets.thanks. I didn’t distinguish between earnings and wealth and I should have. I don’t see much difference between working for and earning $200000 a year or $20000 a year. Sure there will be a difference in lifestyle but stop working (or die) and the flow of money stops. The wealthy guy can’t turn it off
First you work for your money, then your money works for you. Most of us will never get to that second step no matter how smart we are
Rigorous Cornell Study on Ant Earnings
Australian comedian John Cornell, known for his work with Paul Hogan, dies aged 80 at his Byron Bay home after battling Parkinson's disease for 20 years.www.abc.net.au
This was discussed elsewhere in the thread. Hourly is a helpful metric not only to compare to alternative employment options, which will tend to pay hourly, but it also tells you what you are receiving for your time. Employees, even those that are extremely handsomely compensated like myself, are essentially selling our time to someone else. We aren't entrepreneurs or creators - we are lending a portion of our day in exchange for a salary or hourly pay.Where this study lost me is right at the beginning of the report where they focused on hourly wage.
that whole hourly wage thing just rubs me the wrong way. Not to mention it really screws up their methodology. We are paid by the mile, not by the hour. They measure income by the hour but calculate expenses by the mile. That doesn’t make sense to me
Two things:The majority of the votes so far are for net earnings in excess of $18/hr. By far the most popular option is $25+. Thank you for confirming the empirical evidence.
I'm not too familiar with earnings during peak hours. I'm not even sure when peak hours are. I try to get a ride on my way home from work each night. I then drive Lux on weekend mornings from 6am-12pm.Two things:
1. Your poll, thus far, has a very small sample size, but yes, it does seem to be trending consistent with the study.
2. And this one is for everyone: Earnings are very dependent on where and when you drive and how well you know your market. Your earnings can very wildly and you have to play for the averages.
3. OP: When things are in full swing in your market, are your earnings double or triple what you are experiencing now? If so, your long term average is probably on par with the study and or DLC's poll.
4. DLC: Here comes the hotstepper... LOL