Richer Than Rockefeller: Putting Wealth in Perspective

People should aspire to live happy rather than wealthy lives, because with this kind of thinking they could more easily achieve their goals in life, and most importantly be happy.

I like this post a lot. Really liked the stat on $50000 per year putting you in the top 1 percent of the world. How’s that for some perspective?

I just started a personal PF blog about the Joneses (http://forgetthejoneses.wordpress.com/) and breaking out of that keeping up appearances mentality, because I know that falling prey to it hasn’t brought me anything but grief.

I really dislike the way these sorts of articles force you to compare apples with oranges. Yes, it’s more convenient to travel by car than by horse, but automobile culture has proliferated to the point where the minimum standard for mobility requires a car (plus gas, insurance, repairs…) in most of the US. Yes, we have technological luxuries that people couldn’t have imagined a hundred years ago, but Rockefeller’s society was built around the technologies it had, and our society is built around the technologies we have. (For example, when we didn’t have air conditioning it was a lot more common to have a summer home in the mountains.)

Also, let me just say that I feel like these kinds of articles are ways to placate the working class / lower middle class and attempt to convince us that we should be all happy and sunshine and flowers despite rising costs for food, gas, and health care and income inequality that’s as bad as it was during Rockefeller’s day.

# 4 about keeping up with the joneses is my Everything loses a bit of its appeal as we get used to it. From a new pair of shoes, a new car, a spouse, or anything else – OR SPOUSE!!!

Keeping up with the Joneses is so last year. This year, modern people keep up with the Jameses

I did look up to my peer group when I was in high school and university, but over the years I’ve developed my own tastes. I run my own small company and decide what I want and need. Thank you for posting this article JD, indeed gratitude is an important quality to develop and behold.

The Global Rich List is sobering indeed. Each of us has a hand in our fates, when it comes to running our own finances – but when I read the bylines and countries of residence of the posters here, I see that each of us here has won the birth lottery by being born in the richest countries in the world. Each of us here has the very basics of life (including internet!) whereas in many third world countries clean water, electricity, and basic communications are very hard to come by.

As for being rich and feeling rich, the quote by Charles Dickens sums it best: “Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pound ought and six, result misery” I know seemingly rich people who live a lavish lifestyle yet are drowning in debt, and I know retirees living on a monthly pension of $3,000 who save money every month. That is also a matter of perspective.

Beautiful article! I don’t think it is apples to oranges either – Rockefeller was human wasn’t he – wouldn’t he have enjoyed what we have. I don’t think this proliferates lower class either it demonstrates being happy. Those that want to go on to make mountains of money still will and we need those kinds of people. But there are statistics that show wealthy MBA stars drowning in debt just a few short years after their career ended because they did not have the ability to be grateful for what they have. This article also demonstrates that we who chose careers less financially rewarding (teachers, social workers, police) are still rich and should be grateful for what we have. I think it gave me great perspective because I LOVE my A/C and will take that any day over a house in the mountains… Thanks J.D. this was a great article and gave me great perspective. I love my career choice but keeping up with the Joneses has been a challenge for me.

Chiming in to say I also enjoyed this article.

The first thing that came to mind after reading it is that this is the sort of mindset I’ve been trying (with very limited success) to encourage in my preschooler.

I remember two quotes:

“I am as weathy as Rockefeller because I have everything I want.”

Thoreau: “A man is wealthy to the extent that he has the fewest needs.”

[Both probably paraphrases, but I think of them often.]

@Emily H

“the minimum standard for mobility requires a car (plus gas, insurance, repairs…) in most of the US.”

This was kind of my point in writing this, most of the US does have it pretty well, but a lot of the rest of the world would gladly take a lot of things that are well below our “minimum standards”.

I do agree with your point about the societies being shaped based on the technology available, but it only goes so far. My goal in writing was just to encourage (myself mostly) to be thankful for what I have.

thanks for this JD.. i’ve had the new car itch lately.. and this just reminds me that i have everything i need right now.. i am thankful for what i have already

no need to go back into debt just for a new car.. i’ll wait until it is really necessary

Ahhh, the miracle of free-market capitalism!
And to think, there are those among us who think that it’s a bad thing!

Great post and very true!

I have also been thinking about what was brought up in the post. These are things that many Americans don’t realize. If you really want to reflect on American wealth/happiness vs. what exists in other countries I would recommend the movies City of God and Manufactured Landscapes. The book Jupiter’s Travels by Ted Simon also drives home this point and is a great read. These really put things in perspective.

Totally agree with the Sheryl Crow quote at the end of your post.

“It’s not having what you want, It’s wanting what you’ve got.”

One of my favorites about “satisfaction” (even though I disagree with about everything else SC stands for.)

“Rockefeller did have it better than us(average person on the net) because he had the world at his fingertips. To imply we have it better than him is like comparing apples to oranges. IMO”

Hardly. When I go to the Doctor I now have access to technologies that Rockefeller never dreamed of. If I save even a little bit ($1500) I can travel, literally, around the world in 1.5 days. Rockefeller indeed had certain portions of the world at his fingertips–the point is, however, that wealth has dramatically flowed “downward.” And, an extended point of this point is that we (US citizens) are amongst the richest people in the history of the world! As a US citizen I can look forward to the direct and indirect benefits of technology that I can only dream about.

Also, another thought: I’m from India, where often some wealthier families that could afford more, don’t, so that they can save for their great great grandchildren, who in turn splurge when they are young, and when they are older save for theirs… but in any case, those who choose to save live to a much lower standard of living than the average American by choice, but are often much happier. Why? Because they are grateful that their life is better than their parents, and relish the opportunity of living a life that, while well below their means, is more than enough to keep them happy – they’re grateful that their lives are better than those of their ancestors, and that is more than enough for them. Also, the poor, while in the far minority, are much more, uh, visible in India than in other countries (hence the unfair labeling as a second or third world country, which is not true at all if you actually do the comparison) so they have a visible reminder of what to be grateful for, and many do charity work or donate, recognizing that there are many more unfortunate than they are.

freedom for me was ditching my car in favor of a bicycle. Even if it took-literally- 5 – 7 more minutes to get somewhere, the ride is far more enjoyable.

It’s a LOT more enjoyable now that I know that I’m not burning gasoline and very- VERY- small amounts of petroleum products (a tire tube every few months and the plastic and shipping fuel that goes into some of the products).

For me, freedom comes knowing that I can use the power of my body to get me somewhere or accomplish something.

If this blog did nothing more than publish advice like “Be happy with what you have before you buy more stuff,” it would already be a net positive before even advising further.

One of the happiest things I’ve done lately is go through closets and such and discover things I own that I have not recently enjoyed. Books I always meant to read, DVDs still in their shrinkwrap as-yet-unwatched, etc.

I’m not so jazzed by this article. On one had you say that Rockefeller wasn’t so rich since he wasn’t afforded the conveniences we take for granted 100 years later, yet we should be happy with color TV (from the 1960′s) since it’s good enough.

That aside, there’s no reason that this same article couldn’t be written 100 years ago or 100 years from now.

Oh — and as for unprecedented mobility — between 1900 and 1910, just one set of my great-grandparents and their children lived in the following places: two different cities in Italy (Palermo and Milan), New York City, three different towns in southern Colorado (Trinidad, Hezron and Walsenburg), and Chicago. They were mobile.

They also went from having access to nothing but walking or trains to having animals for transportation to having their own truck all within the years between 1900 and 1920. The truck wasn’t a luxury vehicle — by then they were established as a major grocery in their area and they used the truck for deliveries. The way grocery stores worked back then was that people could send a note or phone in an order to the grocery store, and the grocer would package up your order and deliver it to your door. Hmm — sounds like a convenience I’d like to have.

They were not wealthy, but they were working their way into the American dream. It was hard work, but they achieved it with far less “advantage” than my generation had.

I resent attempts to belittle what they had in an effort to make our present conditions seem so much better. It shows ignorance of the past.

@Jenn
On my blog I write from a Christian perspective, but you are absolutely right – these principles are universal.

@db
Personally, I agree that I would like a lot of things the old-fashioned way, but my reason for writing this was to point out that even some people at the poverty line today can have some of the luxuries of the past.

I like how Daniel put it that, “wealth has dramatically flowed “downward.” –

To me the whole idea has been helpful because it changes my perspective from looking at what others today have that I don’t to realizing that I have things available to me that one of the richest men in history never did.

I don’t have more than Rockefeller had.

I don’t have a secure retirement.

I don’t know whether I’ll have a job next month.

I don’t have enough money to live by myself rather than with strangers.

I don’t know whether I will ever be able to afford to buy a house or have a family.

You know, I don’t even have air conditioning.

An iPod is not going to make up for this.

I recognize the value of gratitude, but it leaves a very sour taste in my mouth to hear someone else telling me to be grateful. It’s not that I’m bitter or envious or greedy.

It’s that I’m scared.

I enjoyed the global rich list tool. Being thankful for what we have is something that my husband and I try to do regularly. Its easy to see others with nicer cars or hear about vacations to Europe and want, want, want. But each night, I try to remember to be thankful for a roof over my head, food in my belly, pretty good health, a loving husband and a fuzzy dog.

I always find articles that suggest a “frame shift” interesting — looking at things from a different perspective from the typical American one. I think part of the reason I enjoyed this article is that I spend last night watching a Nova program about poor Ethiopian women who often live their lives as outcasts because there aren’t enough doctors or money to treat childbirth-related injuries that render them incontinent (fistulas, etc.). I’m fine — thanks. My life is easy and very good in comparison.

Do we have more physical comforts at our disposal than Rockefeller did? Sure. And I would prefer not to have been a typical woman for most of history or in many other parts of the world. Now and here is imperfect but pretty good.

Unfortunately, being more comfortable than 90% of the world’s population doesn’t eliminate the universal human vice of envy (one of the “seven deadly sins” since the 6th century). Frankly, I doubt that even Rockefeller had everything he wanted. Some things are not for sale at any price.

We try to go with being grateful for what we have, and making decisions about which of our wants make sense to pursue. An important facet of wealth that I want my children to understand is that they are among the richest people on the planet, have everything they need, and will never have everything they want. I am embarrassed about how ignorant I was of this until I was well into adulthood.

I actually came to terms with this just the other day. My car is a ’96 Taurus and it runs great, but as the years go by it has been spending more and more time in the shop. I got the thing when I was in high school (I just graduated from college) and I started wanting a new car right after the new-ness of my Taurus wore off.

But while I was driving the other day it occurred to me that I don’t need a new car. Sure, my Taurus may not get more than 30 miles to a gallon but that’s still pretty good. It may not be as sexy as a new BMW, but I’m in a relationship and I know that he doesn’t care what I drive. It gets me from point A to point B and really there is no reason to get a new one until my Taurus becomes unsafe to drive or it just doesn’t work anymore.

“If we change the way we think of “wealth” and compare our standard of living to Rockefeller’s, we’re doing pretty good. In fact, I would go as far to say the majority of Americans live an all-around more “comfortable” life than Rockefeller did. Who then, is actually richer?

How much do we really need to be happy?
If your household annual income is over $50,000, then you are in the top 1% richest in the world. (See for yourself at the Global Rich List.) And if we can agree that most of us are living a more comfortable life than a billionaire at the turn of the Twentieth Century, then shouldn’t we be happy with what we have?”

The main problem with this comparison is the assertion that wealth and standard of living are causally linked.

Standard of living is affected by spending, whereas wealth is brought about by investing. A strong income ($50,000 per year) does not equal wealth. If that $50,000 per year was obtained from investments, the “wealth” is the investment from which the $50,000 income was generated and is independent from a standard of living. Using that income to buy things creates a standard of living. Trading some of that wealth for things also creates a standard of living.

Do the majority of Americans truly “live an all-around more “comfortable” life than Rockefeller?” Do they have the time and opportunity that Rockefeller enjoyed? If one is working to make a household income over $50,000 per year, are they really richer and better off than someone who has enough wealth to generate passive annual income over $50,000?

Standard of living is relative. Wealth is relative. Rich is a relative term. Indeed, comfort is relative. Income is just a way to keep score. One persons standard of living and wealth would be considered a pauper’s existence to someone else.

It’s true that we should be happy with what we have, but many would trade modern conveniences for the freedom and opportunity created by billionaire wealth, even at the turn of the Twentieth Century.