4 ms·

I don't understand it either. I can't begin to list the comforts and options that come from being rich. Guess we all know. There's really no alternate reality w

I don't understand it either. I can't begin to list the comforts and options that come from being rich. Guess we all know. There's really no alternate reality where it's much better to be average and have little or no options. I usually take the view that I'd listen more to you if, to prove your point more empirically, you got reasonably rich and then just decided to give away all your wealth and resign to some lonely cabin in Maine.

nazgul17 9y ago
A person that thinks compromising his/her own time is not worth the money is already making a choice by not working as hard as you would. You should not discard that. And such a person will not choose to work hard for money in the first place, so you are asking for impossible (or very unlikely) data points. Also, why would someone give up money they already had? They either worked hard for it or obtained it by some luck. In both cases, throwing it away is not earning that person more time for hobbies or to spend with family.
jdietrich 9y ago
>I can't begin to list the comforts and options that come from being rich. I can't either, but for a rather different reason. What exactly does being rich get you these days? You get to sit in a slightly nicer seat on an aeroplane. You get to drive a car that has vastly more power than any sane person needs, rather than one that merely has substantially more power than any sane person needs. You get to own a house with a lot of surplus rooms to fill up with stuff that has no discernible impact on your standard of living. Rich people don't get access to a super-duper internet, they don't get to watch better movies or listen to better music, they don't really get to make better friends. Most material comforts are perfectly accessible to someone on an ordinary middle-class income. Never having to work again is cool, but most people are unlikely to reach that point. Your probability of accumulating that level of wealth before retirement age is remote, the hedonic treadmill is a powerful trap and most people find meaning and value in work anyway. Being average isn't better than being rich, but it isn't much worse either, at least not in a country with a sane government. The stuff that makes a real difference is mostly a matter of public policy - Germans and Scandinavians don't live in fear of a medical bankruptcy or an at-will dismissal, nor do they desperately want to own a home to escape shady landlords and rising rents.
- ShannonAlther 9y ago
  But wealthy people DO have access to better internet (speed and quantity) and have more leisure time to enjoy media. Also you can do other neat things, like pay for your childrens' education. THAT is a list that goes on for a while. And the statistically average American is barely treading water. I realize that the average European is better off, but that's not relevant to America right now.
  - jdietrich 9y ago
    Again, it's mostly public policy. I can get unmetered 100Mb/s broadband for $42 a month, because the broadband market in my country is competitive and well-regulated. Paying for your childrens' education is a completely alien concept in many countries, because public primary and secondary education is uniformly excellent and university is state-funded for all. Financially, the average European is a fair bit worse off than the average American. Gross median household incomes in Germany are about 25% lower than in the US; America has the sixth highest median household income in the world. GDP per capita tells a similar story. This simply isn't a question of money. Americans don't need to get rich, they need to vote for someone who gives a damn.
    - CourtyardHound 9y ago
      Have a look at this article to get a better understanding what a 25% lower gross median household income actually means: http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2017/05/role-social-security-wealth-head-head-comparison-germany-us.html http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2017/05/role-social-security-...
  - jriot 9y ago
    People with wealth don't have more leisure time because from my experience all their time is spent working to ensure their wealth doesn't dissipate. Furthermore, once you reach a level a certain level of wealth then you want more power.
- csa 9y ago
  First, let me say that I sort of agree with you. I say "sort of", because I think that the way you define rich only sounds like slightly higher up the chain of upper middle class to me. If that's the case, then I completely agree. That said, I personally define rich as being part of the capital class rather than the worker class. My perspective (note that some of these are a bit hand-wavy since the levels of money needed sometimes differ significantly and sometimes the lines are not clearly delineated): - You don't sit on a commercial airplane. You own your own plane or take charters. Slightly lower on the totem pole is taking commuter jets (something akin to semi-charters). - You typically/often don't drive a car for the purpose of transportation. Someone drives you. That said, you may own one or more cars. Some of these cars may not even be street legal, but they can be delivered to the track for times that you want to take them out for a spin. - You do, in fact, listen to better music than most people. This might be in the form of live music. It might be in the form of a very well-designed high end music system in a listening room -- music you thought you knew well will sound completely different. - You don't actually need to use the internet -- for the most part, you have people do those things for you. That said, if you need fast internet, you will probably live in an area that can accommodate your needs (depending on where you live in the US, access to fast internet is not a given even if you have the money). - Any "work" that is done is done because it is an interesting problem to work on. Other than that, there is very real unofficial work of building and maintaining social capital. Sometimes this is the ugly kind of social climbing that is dramatized on TV. Other (often?) times, it is cultivating relationships and having experiences with people you like somewhere between a little and a lot (more time with the latter). Since money and (to a lesser extent) time are not limiting factors, incredible experiences can be had. - Most things that people would consider "chores" are not a necessary part of your everyday life. No grocery shopping. No carpooling. No cooking. No restricted schedule due to child care (nanny almost always available). Those a just a few things that I think are or can be different/better for people in the capital class. Some things that are worse is that often times folks born into the capital class have existential crises. Avoiding this type of crisis comes down to good parenting (and perhaps good parenting advisers and nannies). Just my 2 cents...
mangodrunk 9y ago
Well, you can be rich and depressed. It doesn't necessarily buy happiness though it is a good foundation to work on other problems. It takes work and skill to get rich, and the reward may not be worth it to some, or it may be antithetical to their goals.

nazgul17 9y ago

A person that thinks compromising his/her own time is not worth the money is already making a choice by not working as hard as you would. You should not discard that. And such a person will not choose to work hard for money in the first place, so you are asking for impossible (or very unlikely) data points. Also, why would someone give up money they already had? They either worked hard for it or obtained it by some luck. In both cases, throwing it away is not earning that person more time for hobbies or to spend with family.

jdietrich 9y ago

>I can't begin to list the comforts and options that come from being rich. I can't either, but for a rather different reason. What exactly does being rich get you these days? You get to sit in a slightly nicer seat on an aeroplane. You get to drive a car that has vastly more power than any sane person needs, rather than one that merely has substantially more power than any sane person needs. You get to own a house with a lot of surplus rooms to fill up with stuff that has no discernible impact on your standard of living. Rich people don't get access to a super-duper internet, they don't get to watch better movies or listen to better music, they don't really get to make better friends. Most material comforts are perfectly accessible to someone on an ordinary middle-class income. Never having to work again is cool, but most people are unlikely to reach that point. Your probability of accumulating that level of wealth before retirement age is remote, the hedonic treadmill is a powerful trap and most people find meaning and value in work anyway. Being average isn't better than being rich, but it isn't much worse either, at least not in a country with a sane government. The stuff that makes a real difference is mostly a matter of public policy - Germans and Scandinavians don't live in fear of a medical bankruptcy or an at-will dismissal, nor do they desperately want to own a home to escape shady landlords and rising rents.

ShannonAlther 9y ago
But wealthy people DO have access to better internet (speed and quantity) and have more leisure time to enjoy media. Also you can do other neat things, like pay for your childrens' education. THAT is a list that goes on for a while. And the statistically average American is barely treading water. I realize that the average European is better off, but that's not relevant to America right now.
- jdietrich 9y ago
  Again, it's mostly public policy. I can get unmetered 100Mb/s broadband for $42 a month, because the broadband market in my country is competitive and well-regulated. Paying for your childrens' education is a completely alien concept in many countries, because public primary and secondary education is uniformly excellent and university is state-funded for all. Financially, the average European is a fair bit worse off than the average American. Gross median household incomes in Germany are about 25% lower than in the US; America has the sixth highest median household income in the world. GDP per capita tells a similar story. This simply isn't a question of money. Americans don't need to get rich, they need to vote for someone who gives a damn.
  - CourtyardHound 9y ago
    Have a look at this article to get a better understanding what a 25% lower gross median household income actually means: http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2017/05/role-social-security-wealth-head-head-comparison-germany-us.html http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2017/05/role-social-security-...
- jriot 9y ago
  People with wealth don't have more leisure time because from my experience all their time is spent working to ensure their wealth doesn't dissipate. Furthermore, once you reach a level a certain level of wealth then you want more power.
csa 9y ago
First, let me say that I sort of agree with you. I say "sort of", because I think that the way you define rich only sounds like slightly higher up the chain of upper middle class to me. If that's the case, then I completely agree. That said, I personally define rich as being part of the capital class rather than the worker class. My perspective (note that some of these are a bit hand-wavy since the levels of money needed sometimes differ significantly and sometimes the lines are not clearly delineated): - You don't sit on a commercial airplane. You own your own plane or take charters. Slightly lower on the totem pole is taking commuter jets (something akin to semi-charters). - You typically/often don't drive a car for the purpose of transportation. Someone drives you. That said, you may own one or more cars. Some of these cars may not even be street legal, but they can be delivered to the track for times that you want to take them out for a spin. - You do, in fact, listen to better music than most people. This might be in the form of live music. It might be in the form of a very well-designed high end music system in a listening room -- music you thought you knew well will sound completely different. - You don't actually need to use the internet -- for the most part, you have people do those things for you. That said, if you need fast internet, you will probably live in an area that can accommodate your needs (depending on where you live in the US, access to fast internet is not a given even if you have the money). - Any "work" that is done is done because it is an interesting problem to work on. Other than that, there is very real unofficial work of building and maintaining social capital. Sometimes this is the ugly kind of social climbing that is dramatized on TV. Other (often?) times, it is cultivating relationships and having experiences with people you like somewhere between a little and a lot (more time with the latter). Since money and (to a lesser extent) time are not limiting factors, incredible experiences can be had. - Most things that people would consider "chores" are not a necessary part of your everyday life. No grocery shopping. No carpooling. No cooking. No restricted schedule due to child care (nanny almost always available). Those a just a few things that I think are or can be different/better for people in the capital class. Some things that are worse is that often times folks born into the capital class have existential crises. Avoiding this type of crisis comes down to good parenting (and perhaps good parenting advisers and nannies). Just my 2 cents...

mangodrunk 9y ago

Well, you can be rich and depressed. It doesn't necessarily buy happiness though it is a good foundation to work on other problems. It takes work and skill to get rich, and the reward may not be worth it to some, or it may be antithetical to their goals.