Up until now, there have been familial/personal obligations that have limited my risk tolerance in the past.  Subsequently, my ability to capitalize on potentially lucrative business opportunities and my ability to manufacture them has been limited.  Needless to say, education and experience is the next best alternative to becoming an entrepreneurial goliath.  It also doesn’t hinder the prospect of becoming exceedingly successful.  Intelligence is only part of the answer to being successful.  Success is as much dependant on uncontrolled variables in an environment as it does on one’s skill set and credentials.

(If asked for specific details on what obligations hinder success, say it's a personal/confidential matter that you would rather not discuss.)

I’d also like to add that I enjoy working within a command structure.  Even with my experience, there will always be those exceptional few, not limited by the law of averages, who will supercede me in various respects.  I am referring to extra-ordinary people such as you. The experience I gain from working with the prestigious people will benefit not only me, but the company as well.

hmmmm....actually taht is not a good response for a 45 year old....maybe better for someone in their mid 20s.

I guess i can only answer that question when i'm 45 year old panhandler

Wayne says

-----

There is nothing positive that could be inferred from "If you're so
<!-- D(["mb","well educated and so experienced, why do you need a job and take
",1] ); D(["mb","orders from me? If you\'re so smart, why do you need a paycheck?".
I\'ve said it to myself three times now, and there\'s no way it can be
interpreted in a good way.  There\'s no answer that would satisfy this
interviewer -- he obviously has it in for the interviewee.  The
interview ended the moment those questions were asked.

I\'d give him the finger in response.  I wouldn\'t really do that, but
you get the point -- there\'s no real reason to respond an antagonistic
interviewer, it won\'t change his mind, and you\'ll be wasting both time
and effort.
",1] ); D(["mb","
On 1/21/06, John Lai wrote:
",1] ); //--> well educated and so experienced, why do you need a job and take
orders from me? If you're so smart, why do you need a paycheck?".
I've said it to myself three times now, and there's no way it can be
interpreted in a good way.  There's no answer that would satisfy this
interviewer -- he obviously has it in for the interviewee.  The
interview ended the moment those questions were asked.

I'd give him the finger in response.  I wouldn't really do that, but
you get the point -- there's no real reason to respond an antagonistic
interviewer, it won't change his mind, and you'll be wasting both time
and effort.

Here's another reason as to why the question was asked:  this final question is the "make or break" question.  If the candidate truly deserved the impressive salary, then he would provide an equally impressive answer.  All other questions posed during the interview was just a formality.

If the job is worth 200k a year, then 45 year old needs to provide a 200k answer to the 100k question, or something like that.

The only reason the boss asked 'why do you need a paycheque' is because if the guy is so smart, by the time he's 45 have saved up or invested enough money to live the rest of his life w/o working again Bingo.

As usual, Master Bob gets the message loud and clear. 

I'm no boss, and I did not write this story. I took this passage from one of the "Rich Dad, Poor Dad" series because I found it very educational. I really got me thinking whether our traditional school system has prepared us adequately enough to ensure financially trouble-free lives.

45 year old says, "Because having a high salary job along with my large and reasonably secure passive cash flows does not destablize my financial situation.  If anything, it will support it."