> By that same token, anyone who works more than you can look at you as doing the bare minimum, slacker.

I don't understand how you got to this perspective. It's really a spectrum. You can be a millionaire but not a billionaire. Both are successful, but one is greater than the other. Which in return, the billionaire could say the millionaire is a "slacker" in certain degrees of finance, even though both are successful compared to average income earners. But a 9-5 worker will never be able to tell a millionaire they're a slacker, because they're not as successful fiscally.

The original comment is about how "everyone who works a 9-5 if they work hard should be successful then" which the reality is having a 9-5 is not working "hard" in comparison to someone fiscally independent. It's the bare-minimum, again, everyone should be getting some fitness in through the week as bare-minimum, a lot of people don't do any. That doesn't make the people who do the 3 times a week walk successful in fitness, it makes them the bare-minimum. Now may that bare-minimum be difficult for the individual? It sure may, - but in comparison to the grand scheme of fitness it is not, above average. Where working a 9-5 is average.

>Maybe a one size fits all approach to your perspective is the problem with your outlook

My outlook? The fact you should work beyond the average and desire independence is holding me back? I don't understand how you would think that when the other avenue is just, "do the average 9-5" unless you believe a 9-5 is not average. I'm unsure as you didn't feel inclined to highlight any opposition, you just put up silly insults.

>What do the boots taste like? Never actually licked them myself

This is really odd as you're the advocate for a 9-5 but calling me the bootlicker? Your position is, 'work for someone that's paying me far less than they are getting paid, because that's success" where mine is "9-5 is the starting point, aim higher and work towards it because working for the man won't get you success.' Could you explain how my ideology is "bootlicking" while yours isn't?