Originally Posted by hindsight2020

Yeah but that's the starving ethiopian argument (which always pops up). This is to say, compared to a starving ethiopian, we're all priviledged enough to fly an airplane, therefore it is unreasonable to be unhappy about such condition...well, no. Set the benchmark on a relevant datum instead. People strive to fulfill their passion in life, but one shouldn't be EXPECTED to STARVE in order to fulfill one's passion in life. That's where the problem lies. If the job compensated properly for the amount of time spent away from home, and was a more stable platform to provide for the things any job is supposed to provide for (regardless whether said profession is one's passion or not) then it would be a dream, otherwise it's just another crappy job.

The "I'd do this for free" mantra is illogical in its core argument. It doesn't matter if you get enjoyment out of something, if you cannot satisfy one's basic needs, satisfying your self-fulfillment is irrelevant. In other words, you cannot meet your self-fulfilment (higher order) without meeting your basic needs first (lower order). Furthermore, suggesting you CAN do it in reverse is fundamentally disingenuous....parents/trust fund doesn't count as it is an artificial subsidy. Which is why an unmarried 24 y/o male living 5 minutes from base is the only scenario that can actually fulfill his basic needs on a regional gig pay/schedule and therefore has the luxury to wonder if he is being self-fulfilled by a flying gig. Everybody else cannot even visit the question with a straight face, unless you don't need the money. So spare the "do it for the love of it" feel good until you make mortgage on the 2nd.