Hacker News Reader

Comment by LatteLazy | Hacker News Reader

I think you're right. Though for 2mil quid a job, we could have done better just picking people and sending them cheques imho...

View on HN

It's a 10 year project. 2 mil becomes 200k per year. Still a lot, but then it's not really a purely job project. If you send 10000 people 200k per year you will end up with the same hole in your pockets of 20 billion after 10 years, but with a nuclear power plant less. And 10000 people with zero work experience.

Chances are that 10 years from now you're still going to be money in the hole with no nuclear power plant. Both scenarios have no plant after 10 years.

Sizewell C will be a "carbon copy" of Hinkley Point C, with construction equipment and personnel moving over to Sizewell as Hinkley is finished.

This should significantly reduce construction risk, as you have an experienced team who already understand how to build the thing.

With 2 million in the bank you can easily retire to a low cost of living area. That's 50k for forty years.

That's assuming no returns on investment. With £2 million you could spend £75,000 a year and reasonably expect to preserve your $2 million (and grow it by inflation) forever.

(Going with 3.75% rule instead of usual 4% rule so you have a safety margin.)

I'm very conservative and don't assume that I can't beat inflation after taxes.

True but equally they might end up with a nuclear power plant at the end of it which means while they paid £200k peer year for each job they get an asset at the end albeit unknown how useful it will be or whether it gets finished

Reply on news.ycombinator.com