I recently saw a random internet stranger say "If I had $[specific dollar amount] it would solve all my problems."
If I were handed that specific amount of money, it wouldn't change anything for me. I'd throw it at my mortgage, my mortgage payments would become marginally smaller next time I renew, life would continue as usual.
But, even though receiving that amount of money wouldn't make a difference to me, I couldn't afford to give that amount of money away, even if it would solve all of someone's problems. Even if the person whose problems it would solve were someone I love, not some random internet stranger. It's just not an amount I could scrape together.
There's . . . something in there. Thinking about my previous post about socioeconomic classes, there's something informative or useful about the gap between the amount of money it would take for a positive change to be felt in your life and the amount of money you can afford to lose. There might even already be a word for this, but I can't think of it.
2 comments:
It would seem like the threshold for "amount of money you can afford to lose" is quite high. I have money I don't use, but it's supposed to help me retire one day, and not live in poverty.
"Afford to lose" might be more about someone's appetite for risk than socioeconomic condition.
Sorry for not letting months-old posts rest in peace, but I saw something on Twitter that immediately reminded me of this post:
Precisely!
None of us are one good day away from wealth. But all of us are one bad day away from poverty.— לֹא אֶעֱבֹד (@EurekaOhMy) February 20, 2022
Post a Comment