If only the trade offs were that simple! Few people want to spend their lives doing some thing they hate just to make the most money and most would jump at the chance to persue their passion and still earn a good living. But what if the choice is to work at a job that is reasonably enjoyable, if not necessarily wildly exciting, and pays somewhat better than average vs being part of the 90% in a glamour profession who barely get by, cannot support a family with any real financial security and must often rely on family or government handouts to make ends meet?
Most of us will spend 60-80 percent of our waking adult life between 20 and 70 earning a living. It would be foolish to go into a career that made us depressed every morning just to make the most money. Most of us will spend our lives between 70 and 100 (gotta love modern medicine) living off the savings we accumulate between 20 and 70. It would be folloish to spend those 50 years persuing a passion, no matter how enjoyabe, that left us in poverty during our old age.
Moderation and balance in all things is critical. I have a passion for photography but recognized early on that less than 10 percent of professional photographers make enough money to support the life style I want. And I am no Ansel Adams. So I chose a career in public policy analysis, which is also very rewarding but not with the same level of sheer joy that comes from producing a great picture. It is not the most lucrative profession on the planet but I do enjoy going to work every day and given a realistic assesment of my artistic talent, the fact I did not persue photography as a profession is why I can afford to support it as a hobby.
Definitely important to find that middle ground. I think I’d love to be a journalist, but going in to marketing/PR/communications is more lucrative and I still get to write and interact with media.
If only the trade offs were that simple! Few people want to spend their lives doing some thing they hate just to make the most money and most would jump at the chance to persue their passion and still earn a good living. But what if the choice is to work at a job that is reasonably enjoyable, if not necessarily wildly exciting, and pays somewhat better than average vs being part of the 90% in a glamour profession who barely get by, cannot support a family with any real financial security and must often rely on family or government handouts to make ends meet?
Most of us will spend 60-80 percent of our waking adult life between 20 and 70 earning a living. It would be foolish to go into a career that made us depressed every morning just to make the most money. Most of us will spend our lives between 70 and 100 (gotta love modern medicine) living off the savings we accumulate between 20 and 70. It would be folloish to spend those 50 years persuing a passion, no matter how enjoyabe, that left us in poverty during our old age.
Moderation and balance in all things is critical. I have a passion for photography but recognized early on that less than 10 percent of professional photographers make enough money to support the life style I want. And I am no Ansel Adams. So I chose a career in public policy analysis, which is also very rewarding but not with the same level of sheer joy that comes from producing a great picture. It is not the most lucrative profession on the planet but I do enjoy going to work every day and given a realistic assesment of my artistic talent, the fact I did not persue photography as a profession is why I can afford to support it as a hobby.
Definitely important to find that middle ground. I think I’d love to be a journalist, but going in to marketing/PR/communications is more lucrative and I still get to write and interact with media.