What is wealth?

[flyer]

For our family, wealth (in the financial sense) is having a great home, being
debt-free, having seven figures in savings, and the freedom to do what we want when we want to do it.

[CricketOnTheHearth]

UCGal has nailed it as far as I’m concerned:

Fancy stuff doesn’t represent wealth. Freedom from worries about money is wealth.

[CricketOnTheHearth]

UCGal has nailed it as far as I’m concerned:

Fancy stuff doesn’t represent wealth. Freedom from worries about money is wealth.

[CricketOnTheHearth]

UCGal has nailed it as far as I’m concerned:

Fancy stuff doesn’t represent wealth. Freedom from worries about money is wealth.

[CricketOnTheHearth]

UCGal has nailed it as far as I’m concerned:

Fancy stuff doesn’t represent wealth. Freedom from worries about money is wealth.

[CricketOnTheHearth]

UCGal has nailed it as far as I’m concerned:

Fancy stuff doesn’t represent wealth. Freedom from worries about money is wealth.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=briansd1]Interesting that so many are taking the philosophical approach to wealth.[/quote]

I hope you aren’t putting my comment in the “philosophical” bin. It is very practical, indeed.

Having time to do what you want takes cash, and lots of it. Even if you just want to sit there and do nothing, you have to have money to generate some income to pay for a place in which to sit.

You can have all the toys and square footage in the world, but if you have to work 16 hours a day to pay for it, you still aren’t wealthy as you don’t really get to use the toys and you truly don’t have the time to do what you want.

Of course, some have toys and houses they don’t use, AND they have time to do what they want, so they are really wealthy.

I like thinking about wealth in terms of time instead of money. It works for me. It keeps me focused on what I’m really trying to accomplish with my wealth-building activity.

If you need little more than you have, you are wealthy. That can come from having alot, or from not needing much, or a combination thereof, but for me it all boils down to – “how am I spending my time?”

Working all the time = not wealthy
Working some and playing some = average
Not working and doing nothing = pretty good
Not working and doing fun stuff = wealthy
Not working and doing extremely fun and expensive stuff that requires lots of expensive toys = really wealthy.

UCGal’s perspective is similar, and I think also not philosophical. Being free from worry about money is a very practical view of wealth.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=briansd1]Interesting that so many are taking the philosophical approach to wealth.[/quote]

I hope you aren’t putting my comment in the “philosophical” bin. It is very practical, indeed.

Having time to do what you want takes cash, and lots of it. Even if you just want to sit there and do nothing, you have to have money to generate some income to pay for a place in which to sit.

You can have all the toys and square footage in the world, but if you have to work 16 hours a day to pay for it, you still aren’t wealthy as you don’t really get to use the toys and you truly don’t have the time to do what you want.

Of course, some have toys and houses they don’t use, AND they have time to do what they want, so they are really wealthy.

I like thinking about wealth in terms of time instead of money. It works for me. It keeps me focused on what I’m really trying to accomplish with my wealth-building activity.

If you need little more than you have, you are wealthy. That can come from having alot, or from not needing much, or a combination thereof, but for me it all boils down to – “how am I spending my time?”

Working all the time = not wealthy
Working some and playing some = average
Not working and doing nothing = pretty good
Not working and doing fun stuff = wealthy
Not working and doing extremely fun and expensive stuff that requires lots of expensive toys = really wealthy.

UCGal’s perspective is similar, and I think also not philosophical. Being free from worry about money is a very practical view of wealth.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=briansd1]Interesting that so many are taking the philosophical approach to wealth.[/quote]

I hope you aren’t putting my comment in the “philosophical” bin. It is very practical, indeed.

Having time to do what you want takes cash, and lots of it. Even if you just want to sit there and do nothing, you have to have money to generate some income to pay for a place in which to sit.

You can have all the toys and square footage in the world, but if you have to work 16 hours a day to pay for it, you still aren’t wealthy as you don’t really get to use the toys and you truly don’t have the time to do what you want.

Of course, some have toys and houses they don’t use, AND they have time to do what they want, so they are really wealthy.

I like thinking about wealth in terms of time instead of money. It works for me. It keeps me focused on what I’m really trying to accomplish with my wealth-building activity.

If you need little more than you have, you are wealthy. That can come from having alot, or from not needing much, or a combination thereof, but for me it all boils down to – “how am I spending my time?”

Working all the time = not wealthy
Working some and playing some = average
Not working and doing nothing = pretty good
Not working and doing fun stuff = wealthy
Not working and doing extremely fun and expensive stuff that requires lots of expensive toys = really wealthy.

UCGal’s perspective is similar, and I think also not philosophical. Being free from worry about money is a very practical view of wealth.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=briansd1]Interesting that so many are taking the philosophical approach to wealth.[/quote]

I hope you aren’t putting my comment in the “philosophical” bin. It is very practical, indeed.

Having time to do what you want takes cash, and lots of it. Even if you just want to sit there and do nothing, you have to have money to generate some income to pay for a place in which to sit.

You can have all the toys and square footage in the world, but if you have to work 16 hours a day to pay for it, you still aren’t wealthy as you don’t really get to use the toys and you truly don’t have the time to do what you want.

Of course, some have toys and houses they don’t use, AND they have time to do what they want, so they are really wealthy.

I like thinking about wealth in terms of time instead of money. It works for me. It keeps me focused on what I’m really trying to accomplish with my wealth-building activity.

If you need little more than you have, you are wealthy. That can come from having alot, or from not needing much, or a combination thereof, but for me it all boils down to – “how am I spending my time?”

Working all the time = not wealthy
Working some and playing some = average
Not working and doing nothing = pretty good
Not working and doing fun stuff = wealthy
Not working and doing extremely fun and expensive stuff that requires lots of expensive toys = really wealthy.

UCGal’s perspective is similar, and I think also not philosophical. Being free from worry about money is a very practical view of wealth.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=briansd1]Interesting that so many are taking the philosophical approach to wealth.[/quote]

I hope you aren’t putting my comment in the “philosophical” bin. It is very practical, indeed.

Having time to do what you want takes cash, and lots of it. Even if you just want to sit there and do nothing, you have to have money to generate some income to pay for a place in which to sit.

You can have all the toys and square footage in the world, but if you have to work 16 hours a day to pay for it, you still aren’t wealthy as you don’t really get to use the toys and you truly don’t have the time to do what you want.

Of course, some have toys and houses they don’t use, AND they have time to do what they want, so they are really wealthy.

I like thinking about wealth in terms of time instead of money. It works for me. It keeps me focused on what I’m really trying to accomplish with my wealth-building activity.

If you need little more than you have, you are wealthy. That can come from having alot, or from not needing much, or a combination thereof, but for me it all boils down to – “how am I spending my time?”

Working all the time = not wealthy
Working some and playing some = average
Not working and doing nothing = pretty good
Not working and doing fun stuff = wealthy
Not working and doing extremely fun and expensive stuff that requires lots of expensive toys = really wealthy.

UCGal’s perspective is similar, and I think also not philosophical. Being free from worry about money is a very practical view of wealth.

[briansd1]

sdduuuude, some people love to work. That’s fun for them.

To me, wealth is not a lifestyle but how much money (or equivalent) you have net of liabilities.

I’m not saying that my goal is to be wealthy. Nor am I saying that people should not enjoy their lives in pursuit of wealth. Sure people should develop a lifestyle is is most comfortable to them.

But wealth is just a word to describe something just like “table” or “computer”. It’s not a philosophy of life.

[briansd1]

sdduuuude, some people love to work. That’s fun for them.

To me, wealth is not a lifestyle but how much money (or equivalent) you have net of liabilities.

I’m not saying that my goal is to be wealthy. Nor am I saying that people should not enjoy their lives in pursuit of wealth. Sure people should develop a lifestyle is is most comfortable to them.

But wealth is just a word to describe something just like “table” or “computer”. It’s not a philosophy of life.

[briansd1]

sdduuuude, some people love to work. That’s fun for them.

To me, wealth is not a lifestyle but how much money (or equivalent) you have net of liabilities.

I’m not saying that my goal is to be wealthy. Nor am I saying that people should not enjoy their lives in pursuit of wealth. Sure people should develop a lifestyle is is most comfortable to them.

But wealth is just a word to describe something just like “table” or “computer”. It’s not a philosophy of life.

[briansd1]

sdduuuude, some people love to work. That’s fun for them.

To me, wealth is not a lifestyle but how much money (or equivalent) you have net of liabilities.

I’m not saying that my goal is to be wealthy. Nor am I saying that people should not enjoy their lives in pursuit of wealth. Sure people should develop a lifestyle is is most comfortable to them.

But wealth is just a word to describe something just like “table” or “computer”. It’s not a philosophy of life.

[Author]

Posts