I was taking a look at this article at Yahoo Finance about a University of Chicago law professor, Todd Henderson. He blogged that making $250,000 or more does not mean a person is rich and “we are just getting by despite seeming to be rich”. He then went on to name expenses like a nice house close to work, a nanny, and a lawn care service.
I completely agree. If I make $250,000 a year but spend $250,000 a year, I am not creating wealth. If I make $50,000 a year, live on $40,000 a year, and save the difference, I do create wealth. BUT, I definitely have more of an opportunity to create wealth making $250,000 a year than someone making $50,000 a year. How?
BY SPENDING LESS. It isn’t that hard to figure out. Spending less than you earn is the first step to surviving financially.
A nanny, a nice house close to his university, and a lawn care service are not necessities. Those are all called “luxuries”. I should know, Mr. BFS and I do have a biweekly housekeeper and a biweekly lawn service during the spring and summer…we know they are luxuries and budget as such. BUT THEY ARE LUXURIES NONE-THE-LESS.
Is Todd smoking something? If my husband and I can somehow save 35-40% of our income when we “only” make $80,000-$85,000 a year jointly (and are happy to boot), I think that a couple making $250,000 a year in Chicago has a fighting chance to build wealth too.
Sure, I do not have kids and childcare is expensive, but I bet there are cheaper options than a personal nanny. I also doubt that childcare is eating up the $165,000 difference between our salaries.
I usually try to be more sympathetic, but I just don’t feel like coddling anyone today. Whether someone is making $20,000 or $1,000,000, I just don’t think they should get coddled when they complain that their LUXURIES are costing too much. I splurge on luxuries, but you will never hear me whine that we can’t make ends meet because our housekeeper costs too much.
Todd, shut the heck up. You are being a whiny brat. That is all.
What do you think? Am I being too harsh?