just how much income is a person "supposed to have"?


Backroads
 Share

Recommended Posts

Forgive me if this goes into matters too personal, but my mom and sisters and I were chatting about this today and really drew a blank.

We are instructed to live within/beneath our means. It's suggested we do our best to use our talents to be self-sufficient and charitable. Let's throw on top of that the variations in costs of living and the rather loose definitions of rich and poor.

The extremes of McMansions and dying of starvation aside, how much income should a person/family be looking for? When should they be looking to increase income and when should they be satisfied?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think there is some "definite limit" for either scenario. If your desire to increase your income is to satisfy your worldly desires that do not attest to your current needs (ex: a new car for the pleasure of its beauty and status) then, from my take of the matter, you're living beyond what is required.

 

If increasing your income would allow you, in regards to the former example, to afford a vehicle that would better suit your daily travels and miles per gallon, then your increase would be put to a need rather than a want. 

 

I think the balance of needs vs. wants are what drives the answers to these types of questions, and each are specific to an individual's personal scenario.

Edited by BeccaKirstyn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One scenario we discussed was a dual-income vs single income home. Should it be the goal, as a rule, of one partner to make enough to support the whole family, or should dual income of two more modest incomes be considered sufficient? Or should one income with potential assistance such as welfare be the fallback plan if the provider does not make enough?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet

One scenario we discussed was a dual-income vs single income home. Should it be the goal, as a rule, of one partner to make enough to support the whole family, or should dual income of two more modest incomes be considered sufficient? Or should one income with potential assistance such as welfare be the fallback plan if the provider does not make enough?

 

I don't think there is a one-size-fits-all answer to this, except that we know it's not the Lord's way for us to be on welfare as a fallback.

 

My experience is this:  for the first several years of my marriage, I was a stay at home mom.  I was very grateful for that.  Things were tight, but we made sacrifices to make it work.  But then as the years went by, financial problems arose, lay offs happened etc.  We received assistance from the church for a while, but one day I realized things were not likely to get any better.  So I went to my Bishop and I said, "I think it's time for me to get a job."  (I wanted his approval because the General Authorities talked a lot back then about how a mother's place is in the home.)  My Bishop agreed that me getting a job was a good idea in our situation. 

 

Even with two incomes, my husband and I live modestly.  If I could be a stay-at-home mom again until my kids are grown, I would do it in a heartbeat.  That said, I can see that working has given me some benefits that I needed, so I can see why the Lord didn't provide a way for me to stay home longer than I did.  Just like my favorite movie, It's A Wonderful Life...sometimes life doesn't turn out the way you planned--it turns out even better.

 

I admit though, being "poor", it's easy for me to look at others and think "do you really need all that?"  When I have those thoughts though, I remind myself that first it's none of my business.  What they do with their money is between them and the Lord.  Second, I don't know what kinds of charitable acts they may or may not be doing.  The Lord has helped my husband and I provide for the needs of ourselves and our children, that's all I need to concern myself with.    Frustratingly, I have to repeat this mantra to myself more frequently than I would like, LOL!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The simple answer is to do what the Lord tells you to do.  Keep that in mind as you read the below (as it's the caveat and exception to all of the below).

 

IMO, the answer is to never work for money.  (That doesn't mean you don't expect a paycheck or take a better job, it means money isn't the reason you work.)  I shall expound, because lots of people are having negative reactions right about now.

 

* Find work you love (or at least enjoy), and excel at it.  Be honest, have integrity.  In my experience, this leads to improved work situations until you are in the ideal situation for you.  It also leads you away from working with / for the dishonest and immoral.  Better to earn less and be happy than to earn more and be miserable.

 

* Don't let money be your focus / driver.  Yes, we need to provide our own way (unless the Lord tells us otherwise), but our focus should be on being a good employee and providing for ourselves and our family, and others when possible, not on the number of zeros involved.

 

* Don't let work push out the more important things (I think this goes with your question about 1 job or 2).  Family time is more important than a promotion that requires an 80-hour work week.

 

* Be generous (the scriptures make it clear, the Lord pays back generosity with even greater generosity) (generosity isn't always about money. Time, self, talents, trust, love, etc. can all be given generously - not that those excuse you from being generous with money, if possible, and if not possible, in your heart)

 

And here are numerous scriptures to guide one's thoughts on this:

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/2-ne/26.31?lang=eng#30

 

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/mosiah/18.27-28?lang=eng#26

 

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/jacob/2.18-19?lang=eng#17

 

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/46.7-9?lang=eng#6

 

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/104.15-18?lang=eng#14

 

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/59.18-21?lang=eng#17

 

...it may not seem like these are all on point, but I think they are...

FWIW.

Edited by zil
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finally found a related quote I was looking for.  Hugh Nibley, Approaching Zion, Chapter 15:

 

"But why did God give some superior advantages? Answer: to put their time, talents, and so on at the disposal of their less fortunate brethren, as God himself does when he makes it his work and his glory to exalt us lowly creatures (Moses 1:38-39)."

 

This is in part where the generosity bit comes from - God wants us to be like him (and he is exceedingly generous).  When we try, He blesses us so we can keep trying / try more.  (Yes, I know this is not a guaranteed path to financial wealth or even stability, that's not what I'm trying to say.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My take on it:

 

You should at least try to make enough so that you don't have to sacrifice your family's spiritual growth because of material needs.  For example:  It becomes more difficult to focus on choosing the right when you're starving - it becomes a big temptation to sacrifice one's moral principles just so you can feed your children.

 

In my opinion, a mother who has to leave the children to earn money is sacrificing her children's spiritual growth.  So keeping expenses to the minimum to provide that spiritual foundation is best - for example, a mother managing the household in a modest home is better than a mother having to delegate the care of her children to someone else and not having the time to manage the household better while she works to afford a fancier house.

 

A husband working for money even if he has to do a job he doesn't enjoy just so he can provide a foundation for spiritual growth for the family becomes a necessity.  Once you've achieved this, then you can try to figure out how to improve on your station by finding a better job you enjoy, getting more money to increase your resources etc., hiring a cleaning crew so you can do something more uplifting for you than scrubbing your floors, etc., and having the resources so you can magnify your service... like, being able to volunteer for whatever Relief Society is needing at the moment because you have the means to do so.

 

The way I see it, it would be awesome if I'm richer than Bill Gates.  It would just too awesome to be able to alleviate all the problems in the Philippines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding the cleaning crew, when I was younger, something in me prickled at the idea of "servants" (probably watched too much TV where only snobs had servants), especially in the case where one was physically capable of doing it oneself.

 

Now I believe that creating honest, fair-paying (or generous-paying, if you can) jobs may well be the best thing you can do with money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The extremes of McMansions and dying of starvation aside, how much income should a person/family be looking for? When should they be looking to increase income and when should they be satisfied?

 

Sufficient for your needs. Once your needs are covered, you are in the enviable position of choosing how best to serve God and your fellow man. If you can best do that by making more money, do it. If you can best do that by building low-income housing or campaigning for a political cause or visiting the grandchildren, do so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding the cleaning crew, when I was younger, something in me prickled at the idea of "servants" (probably watched too much TV where only snobs had servants), especially in the case where one was physically capable of doing it oneself.

 

Now I believe that creating honest, fair-paying (or generous-paying, if you can) jobs may well be the best thing you can do with money.

 

I think of money as an enabler... it opens up opportunity and choices.  My dad taught me about The Perfect Calendar.  No matter who you are, what you do, or how much you make, you're still going to have only 24 hours in a day.  So, you need to figure out what your Perfect Calendar is... and then find a way to achieve it.

 

So, in my Perfect Calendar, let's say I have 2 hours that needs to be dedicated to scrubbing my floors.  Now, I have 2 options:  I can scrub the thing myself for 2 hours, or I can write programs for 2 hours to earn money and then give that money to someone else who will scrub my floors.  I would rather write programs than scrub floors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone is entitled to as much income as he can convince someone else to trade for his efforts.

One's time, his talents, his skills, his likes (and dislikes), his strength (physical or mental, or artistic, etc.), these are his only true assets, along with the physical property (including money) he earned (and did not expend, trade or give away) are his to do with as he pleases.

Money is a certificate of value produced, given by someone who preferred that product or service more than anything else he could have bought with that same dollar. Money is only a medium of exchange of value because, when you present a dollar to a grocer in exchange for a steak, the grocer knows that you produced something another person valued.

The above is not true for food stamps and other welfare: there was nothing produced that anyone valued. Welfare is theft by proxy, and theft is destructive of value.

Welfare is not charity: welfare destroys — charity builds up; welfare weakens — charity strengthens; welfare undermines a man — welfare ennobles him, both giver and recipient. All who participate, willingly or unwillingly in welfare become less human, all who participate in charty become more godly (def: god-like).

One's non-theft income is a direct reflection on how much better the world is because he made other people better off. Service to others, even if paid in money, is good. The more people one makes better off, and the better off they are, the more income he will have.

So, the question, "Just how much income is a person supposed to have?" is a non sequitor. The correct question is, "Just how much better off should a person make others?"

Lehi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If increasing your income would allow you, in regards to the former example, to afford a vehicle that would better suit your daily travels and miles per gallon, then your increase would be put to a need rather than a want. 

 

I spent $500 instead of $350 because the $500 car has an intact windshield.  Does that count?   :P

 

(Well, and it's a Pontiac, so the shift linkage isn't held together entirely by old rubber bushings that come apart and leave it stuck in whatever gear it's in at the moment.  Had a chance at a better condition Dodge Neon for the same price, but with at least one of the four bushings failed.  Replacements are $22 for all four, but the repair takes longer than I was willing to work on the car in a stranger's driveway in the dark.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anatess and LP talked about sacrifices when a mother works outside the home. How much sacrifice is appropriate to keep a homemaker before other crucial things are lost? LP talked about how it was best for her family for her to work. My cousin is a sahm, her husband makes about 9$ at a pizza place. They live in a one-bedroom apartment provided by the pizza place, a bit of charity to an employee, if you will. They're expecting their 6th kid. In an urban Utah environment, this is abnormal. They're happy and currently looking for better housing, but again by modern Utah stance, not exactly well off with one income and requiring charity. Charity is something we all need to learn to take, of course, but how does that sort of home compare to a modest home you can afford?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a saying " the rising tide floats all boats"

 

The more money I make the more I spend. By spending money for goods or services I am adding to the economy and contributing to it's growth. 

 

For example I buy a nice watch, say I spend 3k. that money has a trickle down effect on the employee who sold me the watch who probably gets a commission, the owner of the store, the manufacturer of the watch and the employees who assembled it. With my purchase I have put money in all of their pockets they in turn will use that money to purchase other items. Food, shelter, household goods, etc. 

 

Now someone is going to jump on and say " that's absurd", "who needs a 3 thousand dollar watch", "that's wasteful" etc, etc. The short answer no one "needs" a 3k watch. The long answer is the rising tide floats all boats. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anatess and LP talked about sacrifices when a mother works outside the home. How much sacrifice is appropriate to keep a homemaker before other crucial things are lost? LP talked about how it was best for her family for her to work. My cousin is a sahm, her husband makes about 9$ at a pizza place. They live in a one-bedroom apartment provided by the pizza place, a bit of charity to an employee, if you will. They're expecting their 6th kid. In an urban Utah environment, this is abnormal. They're happy and currently looking for better housing, but again by modern Utah stance, not exactly well off with one income and requiring charity. Charity is something we all need to learn to take, of course, but how does that sort of home compare to a modest home you can afford?

 

Everybody's situation is different and each person decides what is good for them.

 

For me, if my husband only makes $9/hour, I wouldn't have 6 children.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was just talking about this 2 days ago with my kids.

 

I was driving the 2 kids over the bridge and I asked them.... if a truck hits us and I hit my head on the steering wheel and pass out and the car careens off the bridge to the water, what are you gonna do?  It led to a whole lot of discussion about how they're gonna kick the windows out... but then the water pressure is gonna make it difficult, so they'll have to wait until the car is completely filled with water... but then they'll run out of breath before they hit the surface especially since they'll be dragging me with them etc. etc... so one kid said, he'll work harder at the pool to practice swimming long distance and holding his breath and the other kid decided they'll have to put a hammer in the car...

 

Anyway, through all these discussions, the lesson I gave them was... it is always better to live one's life such that if anything happens, you are in a position to be the one to help instead of the one needing help.  Of course, there would be times when you'll need help, like me getting knocked out when the car falls off the bridge.

 

I'm thinking this lesson applies to income... live your life in balance such that you are the one in a position to help instead of the one needing help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was just talking about this 2 days ago with my kids.

I was driving the 2 kids over the bridge and I asked them.... if a truck hits us and I hit my head on the steering wheel and pass out and the car careens off the bridge to the water, what are you gonna do? It led to a whole lot of discussion about how they're gonna kick the windows out... but then the water pressure is gonna make it difficult, so they'll have to wait until the car is completely filled with water... but then they'll run out of breath before they hit the surface especially since they'll be dragging me with them etc. etc... so one kid said, he'll work harder at the pool to practice swimming long distance and holding his breath and the other kid decided they'll have to put a hammer in the car...

Anyway, through all these discussions, the lesson I gave them was... it is always better to live one's life such that if anything happens, you are in a position to be the one to help instead of the one needing help. Of course, there would be times when you'll need help, like me getting knocked out when the car falls off the bridge.

I'm thinking this lesson applies to income... live your life in balance such that you are the one in a position to help instead of the one needing help.

Wisdom indeed.

Which would follow living beneath your means. Your income might be great for getting by on whatever lifestyle you choose but may not leave much room for being the helper without some serious financial twisting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People fall on hard times in spite of their best planning and preparation. Sometimes the hard time outlasts the preparation and you need help. If I've learned anything it's that I'm in no place to judge anyone's situation, because I don't know all of the ways they've fought to stay or get out of it, and I don't know everything that's happened that they couldn't control. I know not everyone fights and some play the system, but I prefer to treat everyone as if they are trying as hard as they can.  (Though it's really really hard not to judge someone having a 6th baby when they have to rely on welfare to maintain life). 

 

Money can be lost as easily as it can be made, whether you're from old money or you're "new" money (you know what they say... only new money talks about all their money and expensive things). The things of this world are fleeting. We should certainly prepare, save, live within our means, etc. But when our brothers and sisters fall on hard times, we should willingly give what we can to help them back up. 

 

I've been on both sides, and believe me, I'd much rather be on the self-sufficient, giving end. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share