If I Were A Rich Man...

K, over at The Escapades of All My Fragments (which, by the bye, is possibly the best title for a blog I've yet run across), asks "What would YOU do if you had money? and how much money would you consider enough?"
Ah, the fundamental question. I was just thinking about this one, myself, this evening. Global National, my newscast of choice, did a story tonight on the five percent of the Canadian population who rely on social assistance. Despite our booming economy, the standard of living for these people continues to decline: when their incomes are adjusted for inflation, they're getting by, in many cases, on half what they did ten years ago...or less.
You know, that kind of pisses me off.
I strongly believe in the "hand up, not hand-out" philosophy, but come on. If you're going to give five percent of the population a hand up, you really should extend more than just one (middle) finger. I don't think welfare should be a viable career choice, by any means--but it's only fair to tie the benefits to the cost of living.
Global National made a point of juxtaposing the plight of those on social assistance with the record quarterly profit of our banks, which is simply obscene. Ditto oil companies. How much money can a relatively tiny group of high muckamucks really need?
(The answer, of course, is "all of it".)
My ambitions are nowhere near so high. Like an even hundred percent of the population, I'd like to get by without having to work. Ask my wife, who does our finances: with lifestyle adjustments, we could manage this right now. Ahh, picture it: me, lazing about at home, all day, every day, while wifey slaves away at work.
You know what? I don't like that picture one bit. I'd last at most a week before I'd simply have to get up off my fat ass and start earning some resemblance of my keep. I've been on welfare before. It was bad enough when the government was footing the bill. I'm indifferent to the government. I love my wife dearly. The guilt of exploiting her would make short work of me, I'm not at all ashamed to say.
So, stipulate: I only stay home if Eva gets to stay home, too.
Well, now, that requires a little more thought and quite a bit more capital.
The mortgage would have to be paid off, that goes without saying. Also the car. With that done,
we could live on comparatively little. Four hundred a week would be plenty.
Assuming we could retire at 65 (fat chance of that) and further assuming we lived just ten years of retired life, that means...hmm..$400 times 52 weeks in a year times ten years is holy shit, $208,000.00.
Half a sec: that's in 2006 dollars. Let's bring in The Inflation Calculator.

• I'll be 65 in 31 years.
• The Calculator's good up until last year, so let's go back 31 years from there and make it 1974.
• We insert $1.00 as a 1974 price, enter 2005 as the end year and find that what cost $1.00 in 1974, cost $4.16 in 2005.
• Applying that past data to the future, we multiply $208,000.00 by 4.16 and arrive at...

...$865,280.00.

That's a rough and ready figure, almost meaningless at this early date. The way the central bankers are terrified of inflation nowadays, it's doubtful everything will cost more than four times as much thirty years hence. Then again, the economy could go right in the crapper--you know, Peak Oil and all that. That'd up the figure dramatically.

Without applying a dollar figure, I'd say enough money--the point beyond which I'd begin to have too much money--is that amount that keeps me clothed, fed, Net-connected, and in books. Preferably with enough left over for one trip a year.

What would I do with money? Nothing special, really: nothing uncommon. I'd buy a lakefront lot and have a house built. I'd pay off the mortgages of friends and family. I'd carefully choose which charities to donate to, avoiding all those which seem to exist solely to perpetuate themselves. Most of all, I'd live modestly, not much different from the way I live at present.