Money = Freedom

[JDBowden]

Hey

A friend of mine recently told me that, "money is the pathway to freedom."

This is his personal view of everything. It took me back a little... What do you all think of this? It is his philosophy of which he lives. It seems to make him happy, but it is an external to where no end can be reached as it is, "never enough." So, what's up?

jdb

[Pattern-chaser]

Hey

A friend of mine recently told me that, "money is the pathway to freedom."

This is his personal view of everything. It took me back a little... What do you all think of this? It is his philosophy of which he lives. It seems to make him happy, but it is an external to where no end can be reached as it is, "never enough." So, what's up?

I might guess that 'what's up' is Capitalism. It is a belief system that advocates the pursuit of profit and personal wealth over all other priorities. And, as you say, there are no limits set: however much money one has, it is never enough.

For some (many?) people, this will echo their own feelings. But others value different things, and their aims are different as a result. Some value love, some friendship, and companionship, and others still value privacy and solitude. And so on. And if it's money you value, for whatever reason, then you may well follow the route your friend has taken. Sad (IMO) but true.

[Ecurb]

An old-fashioned phrase called rich people "independently wealthy". It meant that they aren't dependent on working to get enough money to eat and live. Clearly, "dependence" limits freedom. As Marx suggested it makes us dependent on the owners of the means of production(in a capitalist society).

Of course one need not be obscenely wealthy to be independently wealthy (although being a millionaire barely qualifies, these days.)

[JDBowden]

Hey

A friend of mine recently told me that, "money is the pathway to freedom."

This is his personal view of everything. It took me back a little... What do you all think of this? It is his philosophy of which he lives. It seems to make him happy, but it is an external to where no end can be reached as it is, "never enough." So, what's up?

I might guess that 'what's up' is Capitalism. It is a belief system that advocates the pursuit of profit and personal wealth over all other priorities. And, as you say, there are no limits set: however much money one has, it is never enough.

For some (many?) people, this will echo their own feelings. But others value different things, and their aims are different as a result. Some value love, some friendship, and companionship, and others still value privacy and solitude. And so on. And if it's money you value, for whatever reason, then you may well follow the route your friend has taken. Sad (IMO) but true.

He and I are on vast opposite ends of the spectrum. I find the statement to be absurd, and frankly, depressing.

You stated, "...and others still value privacy and solitude." You used the word, "still." Maybe I am mistaken, but it sounds like you find privacy and solitude old/out dated models. Could you elaborate?

[JDBowden]

An old-fashioned phrase called rich people "independently wealthy". It meant that they aren't dependent on working to get enough money to eat and live. Clearly, "dependence" limits freedom. As Marx suggested it makes us dependent on the owners of the means of production(in a capitalist society).

Of course one need not be obscenely wealthy to be independently wealthy (although being a millionaire barely qualifies, these days.)

60 is the new 40.

Being a millionaire is the new poverty. Or at least it will be soon (as measured in USD).

[Pattern-chaser]

You stated, "...and others still value privacy and solitude." You used the word, "still." Maybe I am mistaken, but it sounds like you find privacy and solitude old/out dated models. Could you elaborate?

Yes — you are mistaken, as you suspected.

I meant only to convey that, while some seek X or Y, others prefer (in this case) privacy and solitude. It was just the end of my short list, terminated in a way that proved to be confusing. <blush> Sorry.

I could as easily have written "while still others value privacy and solitude", but perhaps that wouldn't've been any clearer?


My bad, as Americans say.

[AverageBozo]

Perhaps you’ve come across the expression, “Money talks. Everyone else has to listen.”

This heuristic, while debatably correct, purports that money is linked to power. If so, it isn’t difficult to see that more power affords one more options, I.e. more freedom.

There may be other priorities than money that are also linked to freedom, but that wouldn’t refute the notion that money is equivalent to freedom.

[LuckyR]

Several things. There's nothing special about money, it is just an agreed upon way of keeping score between different individuals. According to the independantly wealthy definition given, all retired people are in this category.

As to the effect of money, there is a zone on the low end where the lack of it causes extreme hardship. There is a large zone of wealth where gaining or losing moderate amounts doesn't really change much. Higher levels of money don't really add much in the way of true value.

[Leontiskos]

Hey

A friend of mine recently told me that, "money is the pathway to freedom."

This is his personal view of everything. It took me back a little... What do you all think of this? It is his philosophy of which he lives. It seems to make him happy, but it is an external to where no end can be reached as it is, "never enough."

Money gives you the ability (or freedom) to obtain the things that can be bought. In a very real way your friend is substantially correct insofar as most of the things that humans immediately desire can be bought. But of course there are many things that cannot be bought, some of which are undermined by money. Further, the things that money cannot buy are often held to be the more important things in life.

In general, though, the fact that money can provide one with leisure ("otium") means that it is an undeniable pathway to freedom. It also happens to be a pathway to various forms of slavery, and most of the wealthy pilgrims are on their way to slavery rather than freedom.

[JDBowden]

I see that money makes life easier, as in the sense of what LuckyR stated. If you do not have enough, it is difficult to live day to day.

It also does not bring happiness, however, $40,000 USD/year is the magic level of happiness. Anything below, you struggle to survive; anything above, is just "extra." Thoughts on this?

[Leontiskos]

...$40,000 USD/year is the magic level of happiness. Anything below, you struggle to survive; anything above, is just "extra." Thoughts on this?

It looks to be a rather silly idea, stated with zero justification.

[chewybrian]

First, I much prefer the Stoic idea of freedom. Stoic freedom is the ability to pursue your desires and avoid things to which you are averse without any impediment. This does not require any magic or superpowers, but only the willingness and/or wisdom to contain your desires and aversions to those things fully within your control. If you wish only to be good and to avoid being bad, no person or circumstance can impede you. If, instead, you are after money, power, esteem and such, well good luck; you'll need it!

Second, I think people conflate money with freedom or happiness due to conflating models with reality. We see that money can buy the things we think might bring freedom or happiness, and so we simply substitute money for these goals. This is about all we can manage, to work within a model, since we have no hard connection to objective truth. Of the models we could choose to use or create ourselves, "money=freedom" or "money=happiness" seem too simple, and evidence abounds that they are not that useful in the long run. LOTS of people win the lottery and end up miserable because they were caught in those models and had no backup plan.

[Ecurb]

Several things. There's nothing special about money, it is just an agreed upon way of keeping score between different individuals. According to the independantly wealthy definition given, all retired people are in this category.

I suppose some retired people are "independently poor", but in general you are right. At least they are free from the necessity of labor.

[AverageBozo]

I see that money makes life easier, as in the sense of what LuckyR stated. If you do not have enough, it is difficult to live day to day.

It also does not bring happiness, however, $40,000 USD/year is the magic level of happiness. Anything below, you struggle to survive; anything above, is just "extra." Thoughts on this?

Per person or per family?

[LuckyR]

Several things. There's nothing special about money, it is just an agreed upon way of keeping score between different individuals. According to the independantly wealthy definition given, all retired people are in this category.

I suppose some retired people are "independently poor", but in general you are right. At least they are free from the necessity of labor.

The way lifetime finances are supposed to work is that you earn and save during your working years and then live off of your savings in retirement. The classic formula is to withdraw 4% of your savings in retirement which is $40,000 per million dollars saved. So if you want to live on $31,000 a year (the US median income) and you have the average Social Security benefit ($19,000) you need $12,000 withdrawal from savings, so you need $300,000 saved (to live at the same level).

I agree with you that half of 65 year olds have less than the average savings of $425k so are, as you say are independently poor, but most aren't.