People choose to spend or not spend money for different reasons and simply having a bundle of cash at hand or some figures from the statement of your account on your bank application still doesn't create the impulsion to spend.
When we choose not to spend, we're agreeing with our reasoning, halting some impulse, and applying discipline to our excesses.
So when if we decide not to spend, that inaction alone can help us hold and divert into something more purposeful and this is one of the most important things in life. The necessity to spend happens when there's a need to do so, and not mainly because there's money to spend.
We mostly consider necessity when resources are limited
If people choose to spend because they have money, then it'll be difficult for them to create a structure, establish a spending culture or understand the onus of owning money.
The biggest downside is that no one will think about their future and they'll mostly be hard done by emergencies.
So, money is not meant to be spent alone, although this is the endgame, we now living in a world where we can gain more for holding money.
People have unique money beliefs. The general belief that having money is just the end of finance-based problems is not true.
The Metrics For Judging These Things Can be Strange
This means that the principle of owning and spending money isn't black or white, there are grey areas, and it's no longer within spend or not.
There are options on the table that holds more meaning and impact and most times we have to consider them. We cannot completely define money and the immediate problem it solves, we have to look at the unique ideologies of people and what they choose to do or not do, no matter the amount of money we have.
What I'm trying to say is that money might signal the end of finance-based problems on paper, but in real life, it's not, it's more.
Having More, Might Not Necessarily Equate To Spending More
There are people who have a lot of money and still choose to wear cheap clothes or dress poorly and there are some who go to the extreme of having enough money to buy good medical healthcare but still die because they chose not to spend.
This is what I'll call extreme maximalism. while it feels queer and uncalled for, It's easier to judge people who indulge in it from a distance, but we might never know the angle to the story unless we hear from them or wear their shoes.
I believe foolish people do not have unique money ideologies, so people who choose to act differently even when they have money, usually have some mind-blowing reasons why they do so.
While it's not justifiable to have money in the bank and still die from lack of adequate medical care, the only way we truly understand these people is to be in their mind, which is literally impossible.
I told @depressedfuckup in one of his posts that, stinginess to oneself might seem so simple on the surface, but there are psychological reasons why people become stingy to themselves and others at the expense of what's viable or normal.
A stingy person might be a big spender at one point in their life
......the psychological change that made them otherwise might be because they had children, and vowed to give their children better lives at their own expense.
Another example is that people who had troubled childhood and later go on to become millionaires in life, might not have that lavish lifestyle that's often associated with wealthy people.
While it's easy to attach their extreme minimalism to being stingy alone, it's important to understand that there are more elaborate reasons why people choose not to spend even when they have enough to do whatever they please.
Interested in some more of my works?
Reviewing A $400 Samsung Galaxy A72 (photos Included)
Hive's Scalability & The Compromise Of Commitments
Money: The Consequences Of Making The Right & Wrong Decisions
The Nigerian Economy: Monopolizing Incompetence
The Experiential Process of Understanding Money
A Case Of Theft On Hive: Here's Why Some People Choose Scam.
