4 ms·

> spend their money more or less on the same things proportionally I guess I must be misunderstanding you, because this seems obviously wrong. A very poor pers

> spend their money more or less on the same things proportionally I guess I must be misunderstanding you, because this seems obviously wrong. A very poor person spends ~100% of their income on nutrition and shelter, and their investment rate is 0%. A very rich person spends ~0% of their income on nutrition and shelter and their investment rate approaches 100%.

dgb23 4y ago
It's counter intuitive but its roughly the same percentages for most things. You'd be surprised at just how much a rich person spends on food, shelter transport etc. typically they will pay for very high quality, labor intensive and exclusive things. The difference is really just education and investment.
- dahart 4y ago
  > It’s counter intuitive but it’s roughly the same percentages for most things. Do you have evidence for this claim? I don’t believe it’s true. Take food, for example, the US government publishes the fact that food spending as a share of income declines as income rises. https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/chart-gallery/gallery/chart-detail/?chartId=58372 https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/chart-gallery/gallery... https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/ag-and-food-statistics-charting-the-essentials/food-prices-and-spending/ https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/ag-and-food-statistic...
bluGill 4y ago
A rich person lives in a mansion, and a poor person in a cardboard shack. And everything inbetween depending on wealth. Adam Smith observed years ago that when people get more money they typically spend it on 'better' housing. You will die, some religions will let you take it with you, but none that are popular today. So you may as well spend whatever you earn on things that you think will make you happy.
- dahart 4y ago
  Adam Smith was well aware that the rich man spent a smaller percent of his income on his mansion than the poor man did in his shack. The rich person also has, statistically speaking, a year’s income in liquid cash, a few mil in stocks and bonds, some expensive cars, maybe a boat, some expensive sports hobbies, a travel budget, good food at all times, and a will to divvy up all the wealth among their children.

dgb23 4y ago

It's counter intuitive but its roughly the same percentages for most things. You'd be surprised at just how much a rich person spends on food, shelter transport etc. typically they will pay for very high quality, labor intensive and exclusive things. The difference is really just education and investment.

dahart 4y ago
> It’s counter intuitive but it’s roughly the same percentages for most things. Do you have evidence for this claim? I don’t believe it’s true. Take food, for example, the US government publishes the fact that food spending as a share of income declines as income rises. https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/chart-gallery/gallery/chart-detail/?chartId=58372 https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/chart-gallery/gallery... https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/ag-and-food-statistics-charting-the-essentials/food-prices-and-spending/ https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/ag-and-food-statistic...

bluGill 4y ago

A rich person lives in a mansion, and a poor person in a cardboard shack. And everything inbetween depending on wealth. Adam Smith observed years ago that when people get more money they typically spend it on 'better' housing. You will die, some religions will let you take it with you, but none that are popular today. So you may as well spend whatever you earn on things that you think will make you happy.

dahart 4y ago
Adam Smith was well aware that the rich man spent a smaller percent of his income on his mansion than the poor man did in his shack. The rich person also has, statistically speaking, a year’s income in liquid cash, a few mil in stocks and bonds, some expensive cars, maybe a boat, some expensive sports hobbies, a travel budget, good food at all times, and a will to divvy up all the wealth among their children.