It's 10 P.M. Do you know where you money is?

well, there is a) little kindergeld here and b) college will cost you an arm and a leg, unlike in most of Europe.

So…my question nimh….How do you reconcile the fact that you are satisfied with having a vague idea of your financial standing at any given time, yet feel poorly toward someone who, because they anticipated the future and last year bet they would be around today, can splurge on something without vaguely wondering if this is going to effect their ability to pay for an unexpected bill? Hmmmmmmm?

Chai wrote:

So…my question nimh….How do you reconcile the fact that you are satisfied with having a vague idea of your financial standing at any given time, yet feel poorly toward someone who, because they anticipated the future and last year bet they would be around today, can splurge on something without vaguely wondering if this is going to effect their ability to pay for an unexpected bill? Hmmmmmmm?

Chai, if you are saving up for your car for two years in advance, you are NOT RICH.

Chai, you are the "Mistress of Succinct"

dagmaraka wrote:

well, there is a) little kindergeld here and b) college will cost you an arm and a leg, unlike in most of Europe.

That's true, and I certainly see how that makes a big difference for parents and college students.

But on reflection, I no longer see how it would make a big difference for the country as a whole. The costs of maintaining children and colleges are what they are. Every dollar a country spends on them diminishes its ability to save by one dollar. Whether this dollar is paid by taxpayers (as in Europe) or by students and parents (as in America) cannot affect the country's overall ability to save. So yes, European students and parents can save more because taxpayers pay for their schooling and childcare. But European taxpayers can save less for the same reason. On average, it makes no difference to the saving rate.

I'm thinking the only way that wouldn't be true is if our tax rates did not adjust accordingly. Meaning, if we pay the same in taxes as you do but don't get those benefits. But I don't actually know whether that's true.

if you were rich, you wouldn't have to take out a loan for a car.

Nah, Chai is wealthy.

Rich is for those who end up broke, or their kids end up broke.

Can "rich" be sustained without sucking off someone else's back, really? Hmm. Talking to self now.

I think the "don't pay too much mind" works pretty well so long as you have a pretty good stream of income and/or backup support .
My friend goes this way, but doesn't have the backup support (ran her credit in the ground, loaned off buddies a little too much, broke butted parents and fam).

It only seems to work when the rest is working, if that makes sense. If you have a big blow out of some sort, it can hurt.

That's just my own experience. Always been poor-ish (as far as income coming in), but never lacked.

There seems to be an incredible amount of tension in the A2K air today.

" It's just "why bother". Some people just do not care to be rich, period. May be hard to understand, but there are such people.

first off, in my example w/ nimh....I said "for arguments sake" when calling one person poor, one person rich....that was for simplicity or else we'd both be having to submit tax returns to prove our financial standing.