The lesson here, if you want to safeguard a legacy, is to never stop caring about quality and your customers. People with no regard for your reputation will think nothing of destroying it to make a quick buck.

"Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[1] https://www.anothermag.com/fashion-beauty/10489/pierre-cardi...

If money is the motivator after that then you are in a race you can't win.

Yesterday I have been told $80K is the actual median income but $200K is minimum comfortable in SF (never been to there, can't confirm).

You can of course insist on living in an expensive place, but maybe it's worth trading in some choice in location for more freedom in how you spend your time?

[1] https://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/sydney-s-median-...

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25580987

[3] https://apo.org.au/node/276246

[4] https://www.facs.nsw.gov.au/providers/housing/affordable/man...

I guess what I’m trying to say is - coming back to the original comment that started this thread - in some expensive cities, 2M doesn’t really change your life much (at least, not to the extent that you can think “I’m rich now I don’t have to worry about money ever again”). Personally I’m thinking about moving to a less expensive area, now that remote work has become even more common.

Important note: all my reasoning is in AUD but probably OP meant USD 2M. That would be about AUD 2.6M. So, more than 2M but not by an order of magnitude.

Thanfully it's not mandatory to live in those cities...

They're not even the best cities to live, considering international rankings...

If people are teenagers or starry eyed 20-somethings dreaming of making it big in LA, NY, or SV, yes.

If people are 30 and above, they are very much interesting and places people want to live...

It isn't so much that people are overall satisfied at 70k, but that people with more are _no less_ satisfied. It is a plateau. Many will still want more and may be unhappy. At that point happiness must be sought by other means (love, community, esteem, self-actualization), which might indeed involve the application of money, but it requires doing something worthwhile (from the perspective of that individual). Something money enables, such as a bigger house isn't enough (by itself).

It isn't that money above 70k doesn't improve wellbeing, but that isn't sufficient by itself to do so.

Obviously there are much cheaper places to live than Malibu, but again, if I had the money I wouldn't mind living there.

You can go live on an island in Greece, or Eastern Europe, or Columbia - and 70K in those places will GO FAR:

Housing: Check Nightlife: Check Can't speak for the men, but good looking women: Check Cost of food: Check.

All depends where you want to live and lifestyle you want.

I think you meant Colombia :)

A quick search shows the median salary in Paris is about 50k euros, which is roughly 60k USD. But being on median income is usually not that great anyway.

I estimate I'd need about 30k€/y to be able to not skip on anything I'd want to do. (usual disclaimers apply: young-ish single man living alone, never had health issues, with no desire to live in any other way, etc)

I really doubt it's enough to live in (the real) Paris as a single person in the long run. It's estimated you need around 40k€ to live a modest decent life in Paris.

>and very, very low.

The median wage in the US is $36,000, less than half of that.

Also, if you are curious, I believe this is the study people frequently cite: https://www.princeton.edu/~deaton/downloads/deaton_kahneman_...

I live in the UK and I can assure you than earning £52k or £70k a year is not an insane salary and is certainly way below the income at which money no longer makes a difference.

Or this is £50k-70k after tax and per person in the household. In which case this means earning well in excess of £200k a year for both parents for a family of four, which is probably more realistic but also probably means this only applies to the 1%...

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/percentile-points-f....

Edit: And my comment was actually to the claim that 70k is 'very, very low'. Which it is not. The comments section of HN occasionally reads like it is perused only by billionaires.

I don't dispute that 70k is a very good salary but I can tell you that 70k is far from being the level at which additional money no longer makes a difference. 70k is indeed "low" in that respect, especially with a family.

An example: a good private school costs circa 16k a year. It makes a massive difference compared to your local state school. To be able to spend £16k a year cash you need to reach around this £70k income level before tax for both parents... For a single child. So IMHO, in the UK the level at which extra money no longer makes a difference to way of life or well-being is quite higher than £70k.

I do agree that claiming that $70k (£52k) is not even a living wage in some western cities seems outlandish...

I think the argument is a good private school doesn't make much difference.

I can't find it now but there was some research in the UK a few years ago that showed nearly all the superior results output from private education was determined by the input. Children starting at private schools were already ahead of their peers at state schools by a long way.

The point is that being able to afford a private school makes a big difference in what it brings to the child (education, environment, facilities, etc) and also to the potential stress and effort at the expense of quality of life it avoids (see what some people do to pass the 11+ and get into a grammar school)

This is just an example to illustrate that a £50k-70k income in the UK is far from the level where additional money no longer makes much difference to well-being.

It's absolutely the point. You are saying a private education is essential to wellbeing and I'm saying it's irrelevant.

(and I only learned that yesterday, despite being French I have always watched this movie in English)

Never heard of this before. Seems kind of an incredibly unpleasant thing to build.

- https://www.palaisbulles.com/dream.php

- https://www.challenges.fr/luxe/visite-guidee-du-palais-bulle...

The NYT obit [1] is nicely done, and its title is well-judged, too, Pierre Cardin, Designer to the Famous and Merchant to the Masses, Dies at 98

Cardin was a businessman almost more than he was a fashion designer; if nowadays we refer to "brands", it has much to do with him.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/29/style/pierre-cardin-dead....

I'm very much onboard with what you wrote, but I too saw this post and wondered what it was about him that took his death to HN's front page.

In practice, they usually end up being the most reliable and unbiased news sources probably because they are less subject to the pressure to write buzz pieces in order to drive viewership and therefore ad revenue up.

While the other successful private media organisations end up being either buzz article mills, more or less openly ideologically oriented outlets, or high quality news with more limited output.

I find the public news we get in our countries to be actually quite useful, even if a lot of them are currently under attack by governments seeking to reduce expenses and increase control by any means.

Hated having to pay the TV license when living in the UK, but now I appreciate the kindness of british couch potatoes whenever I watch/listen BBC World Service.

Contrasting it to software or an app (design), the thing could be used by millions and barely anyone knows who you are.

Maybe because fashion designers themselves get to appear on stage and cement their face in everyone's consciousness? Imagine if your software or app would display you, the designer, each time someone starts it up...

Hmmm Mark Zuckerberg comes to mind. The default "friend" for each new facebook account...

I guess I answered my own question?

Still, I'd bet an average person knows more famous visionaire/entrepreneur people (like Jobs and Gates) than famous fashion designers.

I doubt that's the case. Popular music cites eponymous fashion brands regularly. Listeners might not know what the actual person looks like, but they'd know the products and the names.

These are the first names that came to my mind. I guess a large majority of people have heard them.

It’s easy to overlook the value but from a basic and utilitarian perspective, the value begins with the quality of materials and the cuts of the fabric. This is not necessarily trivial and takes someone who is skilled with the trade to understand and pioneer. It’s equivalent to a highly skilled carpenter who makes high quality and special furniture. And eventually new techniques, cuts and fabrics will make it to the mainstream.

If this sounds far fetched, some high end fashion (read: ~$150-300 for a sweater) is all about the quality of fabric and the attention to detail in the fit. These items will usually feel better, fit better and last longer. You could think of it as the difference in quality and experience between a Mercedes-Benz and a Toyota. Sure MB probably has much higher markup, but the base cost represents much greater substance as well.

Then there is novelty and this doesn’t necessarily have much to do with the clothes you would wear daily. Fashion designers are artists and the runway shows are often about novel displays in colour, shape and fabric. That’s kind of like a show. People who buy these clothes are making a statement and the markup is very much a reflection of the scarcity of these items. Like a limited edition watch or a very very expensive charity dinner with someone famous.

Not arguing with you, but that piqued my curiosity. A very long time ago I worked at a high-end men's clothing store and I have a sweater that I paid about $75 for. It retailed for $200. An inflation calculator says that $200 is now worth over $400.

I wonder what an equivalent sweater would cost today. The brand has since gone mainstream, so I can't use them as a point of reference.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsche_Welle