Skip to main content

Having been both rich and poor, I can say with certainty that being either is like living in a completely different universe

When the civilization you live in runs on commerce and capitalism, money touches every aspect of your life. Thus, the more (or less) of it you have, the more (or less) agency you have.

I've had the experience of living in either of the two extremes. On one hand, living comfortably in a suburb with a well-off family. On the other, sharing a home with one or more professional-aged people and still just barely making rent, let alone having enough left over at the end of the month to put away. I've spent a lot of time around both types of people: people who grew up rich, and people who grew up poor. I've seen how being in both situations shapes your expectations for how much life can give, and how much it can take away.

From the very first moment that my brain was capable of forming long-term memories, I remember people telling me money can't buy happiness. "Can't Buy Me Love" by the Beatles has a nice, wholesome message - having someone genuinely love you is worth all the money in the world. In my experience, Western culture has taken this sentiment a little too far, especially given its propensity for consumerism.

Consumerism is a problem in our world today - as Tyler Durden so eloquently puts in it "Fight Club": "Advertising has us chasing cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don't need." Hoarding material possessions and flashy luxury commodities can't create happiness, because happiness is actually an internal skill that must be practiced. Getting more things doesn't teach you to be grateful; if you lack that capacity, it's like giving meth to a meth addict just so they can "taper off." It won't get rid of the problem.


Usually it's more wise not to listen to someone who walks around wearing this...fucking jacket.


The Beatles crooned that some of the most important things in life can't be bought with money, but being able to pay the rent and save for retirement go a long way when it comes to making life easier, making it easier to be happier. It affects your agency and the means by which you place value on nearly everything in life (which is also a component in actualizing happiness in one's life). This is because in a capitalism-driven world like ours, the amount of money you have has a direct relationship to the level of agency you have.

How do I define agency? It comes down to the conditions of your life in terms of the classic dichotomy of safety and freedom.


1. Freedom


Changing cities, countries, houses, apartments is easier if you have access to more money. This broadens the scope of jobs you're able to apply for, because you can afford plane tickets, moving trucks, movers, and whatever else you need to move your stuff, and yourself, to an entirely new place. If you have enough money, you can afford a car, which gives you the freedom to travel further from your home, faster - including job sites that aren't easily accessible via public transportation.

Without money, or when saddled with an abundance of debt, people can become trapped in a city or town because they can't afford the cost of moving without losing many of their possessions.

Say you get a job in Seattle - you life in Milwaukee. The job doesn't pay a ton, but if it works out, in 5 years or so you'll be in an excellent position to get a job that does. Maybe. The problem is that you can't afford to move most of your stuff. Like, everything you can't fit in the back of your coupe. You can't even afford a plane ticket. Taking this job and moving cities would mean getting rid of almost everything you own.

In addition to the sentimental value they may have, replacing a couch, or a Blu-Ray collection, or a set of kitchen essentials can be costly, creating yet another expense to be dealt with "when you have the cash to spare." Whenever the hell that ends up being.

While those who have never had to grapple with this scenario may roll their eyes and say something sanctimonious about how worldly possessions aren't important - just before flipping their Ray Bans down and driving away in the Tesla they bought with the profits from their million-dollar crowdfunded app - those of us who have experienced this dilemma know that it can get scary. 


2. Security


I've had instances in the past where I've been forced to consider legal action against certain people. Unfortunately, at the time I was unable to afford a lawyer - not even the money it would cost to serve someone to get them into small claims court. Well, I could have - I just would have had to figure out how to survive for a month without eating.

When you're well-off financially, any schmuck who dents your rear bumper is at your mercy. You can afford a lawyer, or time off work, or whatever it takes to deal with life when it goes off the rails. When you're not as well-off financially, you not only can't afford a decent lawyer, sometimes you can't even afford to take time off of work. 

Let me repeat that, to make sure it really comes through: when you don't have enough money, you can't afford to spend your time, time you own, to fix your problems, because you need to dedicate this time to earning enough money to keep yourself afloat.

Beyond legal matters, having a lot of money makes things like wisdom teeth or appendectomies a trivial matter. If you're poor, getting wisdom teeth taken care of isn't even an option, and more serious medical issues become infinitely more terrifying than they already are. I've seen people without health insurance adamantly tell EMTs not to take them to the hospital, because they knew what the debt would do to their lives - even as their stomachs were literally being burned from the inside by toxic chemicals.

With money, you can buy a home you'll never be evicted from, at least once you pay it off.  You can live in a safe part of town where you won't have to worry about your kids getting home safe. If you grow up rich, the thought usually doesn't even cross your mind. Kids who grew up poor know a different experience.

When you grow up with all your needs met, and then some, that which is considered "normal" is very different from those who have to fight tooth and nail just to make it through the month. To the latter, spending $7 on dinner can be a luxury. To the former, it's "cutting back."

When you're rich, having a lot of luxuries or advantages just seems like it's the way life is supposed to be at a resting, baseline level. So when you lose them, or feel as though you don't have enough of them, life becomes intolerable. That's where the stereotype of the rich person threatening to have someone killed over a minor scrape on the hood of their Miata comes from.

When you're not rich, you have to learn to appreciate every good thing you have. Ironically, poorer people have more opportunities to learn true happiness and gratitude because of these conditions; that doesn't necessarily mean being poor makes you happy, of course.

I grew up in a rich suburb and, five years after college, I've been fighting for every good thing I can get my hands on. I've struggled to pay rent, bills...I still have medical issues I eventually need to check in on, once I have health insurance again. I've shared my experiences with people who were far less fortunate than I while we both worked thankless, dehumanizing jobs, and learned just how much worse it could have been. Due to financial desperation, I've chosen to rely on people who, turns out, were completely untrustworthy. I've been genuinely afraid of eviction, physical harm, death, and homelessness...all from problems related to not having enough money.

I'm still fighting to get control of my debt. I haven't really been able to start my adult life yet because of it. I have friends who've suggested, when I needed a job, applying at the grocery store (after I'd worked my ass off for 4 years to get a college degree, going back to that kind of work was the last thing I wanted to do). These well-meaning friends of mine grew up in homes where any job was a job worth pursuing, such was the desperation they'd grappled with for decades.

I also have friends who scoff at accepting jobs for less than $45,000 annually, as though rejecting such an offer is the final test in a Wonka-esque gauntlet leading to adulthood. I've heard friends of mine angrily grumble about how miserable a cashier at a supermarket looked, saying, "if you hate that job so much, for god's sake, just quit!" As if the thought never occurred to them that, maybe the real reason that person was miserable is precisely because they can't afford to quit that job.

My generation was raised on many maxims, including "money can't buy you happiness." Those who didn't grow up rich (or at least middle class), learned that in a world run by capitalism, this idea is well-meaning, but reductive. As for those who did - there's a reason more people aren't outraged by the scale of the growing wealth gap in the United States. It's impossible to understand what it's like to not have enough until you've been there.

Comments

Popular Thing

Capcom's anti-union hiring practices

Last week , I wrote about the remake of "Resident Evil 2," which was announced just before E3. This week, I want to talk about something close to my heart - even more so, possibly, than "Resident Evil"...because the only thing I care about more than the "Resident Evil" video games are the rights of the people making them. "Resident Evil 2" centers around the story of two protagonists: Leon S. Kennedy and Claire Redfield. Before he went on to be the roundhouse-kicking poster boy of the franchise after the explosive success of "Resident Evil 4," Leon was a wet-behind-the-ears rookie who spent as much time complaining about how "nobody listens to me" as he did taking orders from civilians, despite being the only cop alive in the police precinct. After "RE2," Claire didn't see as much success. She next appeared in "Code: Veronica," my personal favorite of the series. Alyson Court, pictured above, re

"Solo: A Star Wars Story," AKA what pisses me off about my fellow nerds

***Minor spoilers for "Solo: A Star Wars Story" herein*** On rare occasions, I manage to avoid trailers before seeing a movie like "Solo: A Star Wars Story." I go in a total blank slate, and I get to enjoy or dislike the movie pure of externally-inherited bias. That said, apparently it was a particularly good thing I did so with this movie. A couple  of articles, as well as this video , have been circulating the web. The consensus seems to be that a good number of people wanted the movie to fail because they don't like that it was a movie about Han Solo that didn't include Harrison Ford as the lead role. Or, they didn't like that the project was greenlit at all. Or...name any of the millions of reasons people could have for hating a movie they haven't seen. I genuinely believe a lot of the Web-based hysteria comes not from people who saw the movie, but fans of certain reviewers. Apparently film critic Angry Joe, the Forbes writer Dani

Why the REmake of "Resident Evil 2" was inevitable

E3 came and went again, and while everyone else was freaking out over "Cyberpunk 2077" or "Dying Light," I was interested in another announcement that flew relatively under the radar. Anyone who knows me knows this...I am obsessed with "Resident Evil," especially the early games. "Resident Evil 2" is getting a remake. Arguably, "RE2" is the favorite among hardcore fans, aside from the legendary "Resident Evil 4." As far as the old-hat Resident Evils go, it's the one everyone can agree on. It's not the first time an old title got an "update;" in 2002, "Resident Evil," the first in the series, got a total overhaul from its original PlayStation 1 graphics on the Gamecube. Besides improved graphics and voice acting (and let's all thank our respective religious deities for that), it included new areas and new enemies, including Lisa Trevor - the unkillable face-collecting monstrosi