5 ms·
No question it’s better to be wealthy than poor. Most people here are talking about being rich vs just being normal. Put another way, there’s a HUGE differenc
by TedShiller 5y ago
No question it’s better to be wealthy than poor.
Most people here are talking about being rich vs just being normal.
Put another way, there’s a HUGE difference between not having enough and having enough. There’s almost no difference between having enough and having more than enough. You can play this out with anything: money, food, free time, etc
- carabiner 5y agoNormal among millennials is being poor. Six-figure debt while working an hourly job with zero savings.
- TedShiller 5y agoI don’t think six figure debt is normal. It also depends on where the debt is from. Is it something they had to do (borrow money for food and rent) or elected to do (borrow money for low income degree)?
- not2b 5y agoIn the US, for the young, it may mean that you went to college. You have the equivalent of a mortgage with no house. And this is new: in many cases someone from their parents' generation who got the same degree and the same job would be debt free, because college used to be much, much less expensive (even after accounting for inflation) than it is now. Example: University of California (Berkeley or UCLA, etc). Currently about $12k a year tuition. 35-40 years ago is was zero, with a couple of hundred dollars in fees.
- uberduper 5y agoThis is not normal. This is a vocal, and somewhat obnoxious, minority of millennials.
- TedShiller 5y agoMost millennials are hardworking and responsible. A very vocal minority are not.
- shukantpal 5y agoRegardless of that statement's truthiness, that's very much irrelevant for the OP. Nowhere did they say they were broke.
- sokoloff 5y agoThey did say “I’m at the bottom with nothing.” It’s not a long walk from there to “they said they were broke”.
- xvedejas 5y agoHourly job with zero savings, sure. But is six-figure debt really common? I can find that the mean indebtedness is five figures, surely the median (amongst those without mortgages) is much less than that?
- yellowcake0 5y agoNormal is still pretty shitty when compared to being a member of the aristocratic leisure class. Of course there are diminishing returns to the happiness value of money, but it's a hell of a lot higher than being a normal middle class American.
- TedShiller 5y agoImagine if a member of this super rich aristocratic class has depression. That must be hopeless.
- yellowcake0 5y agoWhy would it be hopeless? They have the time, energy and resources to address it properly. Someone with depression who works two jobs without health insurance and is too exhausted outside of work to do anything but watch TV, now that's hopeless.
- TedShiller 5y ago> Someone with depression who works two jobs without health insurance and is too exhausted outside of work to do anything but watch TV, now that's hopeless. I agree. Now take someone who doesn’t have any of those problems and is in fact super rich, who still feels the same. I’m not sure if that would be better or worse actually.
- aspenmayer 5y agoIt would certainly be worse. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs allows the truly rich to achieve stability and control over external events, situations, and outcomes. Rich people can afford to not do things that directly or indirectly contribute to depressive symptoms. This doesn’t mean they aren’t just as depressed as a poor person with depression, but the poor person has no assets with which to edify themselves.
- DarylZero 5y ago