Why Rich isn’t Rich; Proposing an Alternate Definition
The rich are rich because they focus on the long-term acquisition of assets… assets such as stocks, bonds, businesses and income producing real estate. Many times the rich will forsake meals, a steady pay check, a vacation, or the comfort of a nice home, to build or acquire real assets.
—Robert Kiyosaki, author of Rich Dad, Poor Dad
I remember reading Rich Dad, Poor Dad in high school and feeling awestruck. When I read things from Kiyosaki now, like the passage above, I just shrug. Is that what used to impress me? After seeing how people deal with money, many of the not rich things sound pretty good.
Just to recap, here’s how he distinguishes rich from not rich:
- rich: having lots of long-term assets, such as stocks, bonds, businesses, and income producing real estate
- not rich: giving up opportunity by desiring meals, a steady paycheck, vacations, and a comfortable home
In one sense, Kiyosaki is 100% right. By today’s values, rich is defined as possessing a surplus of value. Billionaires are rich. Mansions are rich. Rolex watches are rich. Cheesecake is rich. The thousand dollar fine china, that never gets used, is rich.
But there’s a catch: perhaps rich is not measuring the right values. After all, many of us do value the items in the not rich category. Some of the happiest people I know have every characteristic of the not rich category. They don’t have money bins to swim in, but I would certainly call them rich.
In my opinion, rich shouldn’t be about accumulating goods but rather about using them. If you don’t have a lot of money, but enjoy life to the fullest, you should be considered rich.
A revised definition
Under this notion anything that maximizes opportunity and allows us to enjoy life to the fullest is rich.
Penniless college students are rich. A cozy home is rich. A functional digital watch is rich. A homemade meal is rich. The bottle opener you got from college, for free, and still use to open wine bottles now, is rich.
I can summarize a new definition in one sentence:
Rich is having a usable surplus of resources, like money, time, or friends.
Some implications
The word usable is very important. It’s the main distinction I make with the mainstream. When you start looking at rich in this light, you immediately see why very average people are having the times of their lives while wealthy people are annoyed every day.
Here is what the definition implies:
1. A person with ten close friends is richer in friends than someone with no close friends but 300 online contacts.
2. A person who runs at a public park is richer in health than someone who never uses a $100 a month gym membership.
3. A college student who parties on a free and torn up couch is richer in assets than a businessman who possesses an Italian leather sofa but spends most nights in hotel rooms.
If you start acquiring usable wealth instead of just wealth, you will be much more efficient at being rich. That’s most of the difference, but there is one more key point.
Adding randomness to the definition
I would add one clarification, based on a discussion in the book Fooled by Randomness. It’s often said that doctors are not as rich as businesspeople. After all, Bill Gates crushes surgeons in net worth.
But what about comparing the average? You might find that the average businessperson lives a nice, but not spectacularly wealthy life compared to doctors who are almost always well-off. Taking into account the expectation, you could argue doctors are richer than businesspeople. And here’s what that definition might look like:
Rich is having a usable surplus of resources, like money, time, or friends, when considering all possible worlds.
Often, people who have incredibly high net worth have made many foolish or risky decisions along the way but happened to win the game of Russian roulette. This is why it might be improper to learn how to be rich only from the rich.
What this means
In the standard definition of rich, a higher paying job, and responsible spending, would automatically make me richer. That’s why people say the formula is as simple as earning more and saving a fixed percentage. Check out most personal finance websites to see this platitude regurgitated.
That thinking misses the tradeoff of it all. Higher paying jobs often require more work and more time at the office. You lose leisure time and family time. In short, you are acquiring the conventional money surplus at the expense of other surpluses. In this view, it becomes incrementally harder to be rich by forcing yourself since work has the potential to destroy the surplus. You break even or lose an average. If you want to try a different path to winning, consider relaxing.
All of the above discussion is why I don’t follow 99% of money articles. Most writers lecture me on what I should do to enjoy my money. They have a mentality that being rich is about doing things they know raise net worth or acquiring assets.
It’s not. In many senses, rich is about using what you have. It’s a pleasant path and one of little resistance.





10 Responses to “Why Rich isn’t Rich; Proposing an Alternate Definition”
I’d agree that the exec who works 80 hours a week is as much a wage-slave as the grunt who does it, but it’s not the money that’s causing the slavery. You don’t get rich by working more or saving more, but by making more intelligent investments, and figuring out how to decouple your income from your hours spent working.
You’re also ignoring the fact that money is power and how much power you have is proportional to how much control you have over what happens to you. An unemployed homeless man is no one’s slave, but he’s an easy victim of circumstance and predators. Money can’t buy happiness, but it can buy liberty.
By Jemimah Ruhala on May 8, 2008
Kinda like what my mother said to my sister, who was trying to decide between a doctor or a plumber to date.
The doctor may earn 5 times more than the plumber, but with his 3 ex-wives and 7 children, the plumber has more disposable income to spend.
By jrandom42 on May 8, 2008
Jemimah Ruhala: Thank you for your response. It was so good it raised several ideas, so here is my lengthy answer.
I agree that having too little money is constricting, but in a sense, that’s a point everyone understands. We’ve all experienced times we could have wanted more money.
The real issue in my mind is educating people that money alone is not glory. That’s a message missed by many college students and young business professionals, which are my main readers. I would love to help homeless people, but I suspect writing internet articles is not an effective way to do that.
I see executives that suffer with their family life. I see consultants who don’t sleep enough. I see investment bankers that sacrifice health for the almighty dollar. In my mind, these people have money and power but little control over the things that really matter.
I agree that decoupling income from hours working is one path to rich. What I suggest is that there are typical jobs with good work/life balance that should be rich jobs but don’t meet our societal definition.
By Presh Talwalkar on May 8, 2008
jrandom42: I would chuckle at the answer, though I happen to know many friends in medical school and I hope they are not destined to poor family lives.
I do agree with one point about appreciating service labor jobs. This comes from my friend that works in construction. He told me people who do hands on work can see their work product and tell their kids about it. They have a great work/life balance and some even have good pensions. And in retirement, they have the option to fix things around the house or help neighbors. There’s probably no better feeling than knowing others find you useful.
By Presh Talwalkar on May 8, 2008
I certainly did not graduate with any sensible ideas about money, I’ll give you that. I think I spent half my salary from my first corporate job on clothes and partying, just celebrating not being a poor student anymore. I learned about money management when I married my husband who dropped out of high school and spent a significant portion of his life on the streets. He is an expert in survival, wheeling and dealing, figuring out what’s really going on in the real world, and picking winning investments. I was sort of raised with the idea that if you’re rich, you’re probably a
selfish sinner, so my husband’s point of view was a very eye-opening experience for me.
I think the important thing to realize is that money is a means, not an end, and once your basic needs are met, it adds very little to your life unless you have a specific end in mind. The same is true for any measure of wealth, such as excess time; if you have too much time and nowhere to spend it, you become bored and miserable after a while. The ability to figure out a meaningful purpose for yourself is one thing that formal education really fails to deliver and what many people spend much of our twenties trying to work out.
I’ve switched jobs six times (all upward moves) since graduating five years ago and it’s become clear to me that happiness and satisfaction is not found in career advancement. I am working as a consultant now (and yes I do get enough sleep) and while I like the independence and the money, it does not provide self-actualization the way I was led to believe it would. Honestly, what keeps me going is the thought of early retirement and financial independence, after which I will be free to pursue my own goals, whatever I decide they will be.
By Jemimah Ruhala on May 9, 2008
Jemimah Ruhala: Thank you for sharing your story–it is inspiring for all of us. You hit on some great points: how formal education doesn’t prepare you to find meaningful purpose, how career advancement isn’t necessarily the path to happiness, and how money is a means to an end.
I would like to learn from you, and I think we all could benefit. Would you be interested in writing a guest post? Send me an email if you are interested presh@mindyourdecisions.com
Thanks.
By Presh Talwalkar on May 9, 2008
Presh, this is the best article I have read on money. Reading “Rich Dad Poor Dad” left me feeling cold…and now I understand why.
By Evangeline on May 28, 2008
Evangeline: Thank you for your kind words
I had a different reaction after reading “Rich Dad, Poor Dad.” I initially felt youthful motivation but after trying some tactics, I found myself surrounded by people I didn’t like and people who weren’t enjoying their lives. Along the way I saw moderately wealthy people having a great time. And that has made all the difference.
By Presh Talwalkar on May 28, 2008
That is what I love about your article. I can relate to being a “moderately wealthy person having a great time”. That is how I now define myself (after reading your article). Whereas after reading Robert Kiyosaki’s book, I felt like I was not rich enough. I dont like that feeling. So now I think: I am rich because I have a nice balance of money and time (not as much as Robert Kiyosaki) but enough to “feel” rich. Thanks for making me see things from a different perspective.
By Evangeline on May 29, 2008
Evangeline: Glad I could help! Another way to look at the situation is that you can reach maximum happiness without lots of money. The most comfortable couch was not my friend’s Italian leather sofa, but a free one I got in college. The best exercise I had was walking with my friends along the beach shore, not in a gym with a $100 monthly fee.
When you have found happiness, your sole goal is to preserve it by reducing risk. That means things like income stability, insurance, quality of health become much more important than chasing the almighty dollar.
You sounds like you are there, and I applaud you
By Presh Talwalkar on May 30, 2008