At what point is it not about the money

It is always about the money to some degree.

IMO if you could model it as a function, the limit would be the point where any additional income wouldn't change your lifestyle significantly. In other words, if you would still take Job A with salary 50K over Job B with salary 10mm because the 9.95 mm doesn't change your standard of living. For this to be true, you have to have wealth which provides you with a maximal standard of living.

Ya but most people on here would tell you that even when you have the wealth level to make that kind of decision, you still want to make the $10mm because you always want more. There is a reason that there aren't many MD's retired at 45 living in a $400,000 house comfortably. They could have easily put away enough money to barely need to work and do something they enjoy while supporting a nice lifestyle, but they continue to work harder and spend faster to keep up with their peers.

When it reaches the point where it is not about money

I find myself more interested in being a part of something big, perhaps I'm more addicted to the success (success is subjective) and accomplishment than I am the money.

when you are starin' through your rearview a la Tupac

it is always about the money. Agree with Captk. Once you get to level 1 you look at level 2.. and so on.. end of day its only keeping score but everyone wants more.

I think the MD retirement example is more due to the fact that no one wants to sit on their ass for 40 years doing nothing + the achievement factor. Things also change when you have a family/kids etc. There are a lot of miserable billionaires and a lot of very content hundred thousandaires. Personally, financial achievement is important in the near term and for long term security...but if an extra 5 million means I miss my grandchildren being born or have to move my 10th grader away from his school and wife away from her friends/family...I think a lot of men in that position would say it's not worth it. The perspective of someone in their 20's and someone in their 40's and 50's is quite different.

I agree with what everyone has been saying but there are exceptions. Yes, for achievement-oriented people like (most of) us it's a level 1 to level 2 to..... level "n" pay requirement system. But some people shirk larger rewards for internal satisfaction. My dad for example was an Ivy league MBA and undergrad who never had one bit of interest in money and has taught/researched it instead for 30 years for a fraction of what he could have made. That's where work becomes about satisfaction rather than money.

I think the limit is when your in a position to leave behind enough wealth to begin or continue a family legacy. Everybody has that top number

I find it pretty amazing to be a part of a group that makes big decisions, is in the newspaper, is praised at times and panned at times, getting to see the way that Market X responds to Situation Y. It's very existential and esoteric, but in my own mind it makes sense.

Completely agree...that's why I prefer M&A to being in S&T--it's the opportunity to play even a very peripheral role in something significant

when you die

For me personally, it's about money to an extent, but I'm in a team that's absolutely top-notch and yet manages to treat everyone down to the analysts like human beings. If you offered me say 20% more to go someplace else that wasn't a top-tier BB, I probably wouldn't leave.