It is amusing to see all of the greed concerning the powerball drawing of over $500 million of dollars that is rapidly approaching. I have seen plenty of comments of people spending their money before they even have it, and it led me to ponder the two different attitudes that exist towards the acquisition of resources, the mentality of the tortoise and the hare. So therefore, in this light, I would like to compare the mentality of the gambler next door and the millionaire next door, and some of the implications of these differences with regards to their attitude towards resources and another aspects of worldview, given the difference between them.

A few years ago there was a lot of focus on the millionaires next door. What those researching the subject found was that it was hard to tell most millionaires apart from what could be termed “middle class” society because despite their wealth, most millionaires did not live a particularly flashy lifestyle. In fact, it could be argued that many of the millionaires next door are rather ascetic, living very austere lives in order to acquire wealth that they do not enjoy, and perhaps may pass on to their children or someone else after they are gone. But what drives them to increase wealth that they do not enjoy? Do they fear the possibility of risk so much that they feel the need to horde massive resources as as reserve? Do they think that the possession of wealth is itself something that makes themselves better than others, even if they never use that wealth? Do they plan to work hard for decades and enjoy their wealth much later on in luxurious retirement? Perhaps only they and their Creator knows for sure, certainly such mysteries are beyond me. But what can be seen is that most millionaires gain their wealth by seeking to expand the difference between the money they make (which they want to be as high as possible, naturally) and the money they spend (which they want to be as low as possible), and this mindset has some pretty obvious consequences.

But opposed to that worldview is that of the gambler next door. There are many forms of gambling, whether it is the lottery, the money gained from being an athlete or entertainer, or commission from sales. Such income can be highly variable and subject to a great deal of uncertainty. Often people who come into sudden wealth feel the need to show off that wealth through the purchase of a large house, fancy car, boat, plane, large entourage of assistants, to show off the increased status, without realizing the amount of money that is necessary to sustain that sort of lifestyle. It is this same sort of mentality (and it is a popular one) that eschews annuities with their low and long-term payments for the money right now. In direct opposition to the attitude of the millionaire next door, the gambler next door sees no future value of money (whereas the millionaire next door sees little or no present value to the money), trusting in providence to provide the resources when times get tough.

These two viewpoints are a bit of a false dilemma, because neither worldview is optimal in its implications and consequences. The millionaire next door is likely to disdain social obligations, seeing (almost?) all of those who are without as being lazy bums unworthy of help. Such people, used to living a very ascetic and strict life of self-discipline, are likely as well to be similarly austere in their wages to employees. On the other hand, the libertine lifestyle of the gambler next door leads to little or no savings for the future, and a reliance in fortune and luck as well as gravely risky behavior that can often lead to ruin and dissipation. Both of these extremes, not coincidentally enough, are the two poles of gnosticism–the ascetic and the libertine–that we are to avoid, and both of them look down on the lifestyle of generosity and sober and balanced moderation that we are to maintain. Now, none of us are perfect at this (I certainly am not), but it is that ideal middle course that I seek to steer, seeking to gain enough resources to live moderately (a task that I am not very good at) but at the same time neither seeking to punish the flesh by living a monkish lifestyle nor seeking extravagance and luxury either.

As is so often the case, a use of the trilemma and an understanding of patterns of human thought that show themselves in all walks of life can help us to avoid the unhealthy extremes of either asceticism that lead us to trust in our own self-discipline and look down on others, avoiding the need for voluntary charity and generosity or epicureanism and the focus on sating the lust of the eyes and the lust of the flesh and the pride of life through the means and resources that we possess for the moment as stewards. If we are wise, we will save, but also enjoy life and the ability to be generous to others, keeping ourselves in balance that allows us to enjoy life but also to be responsible at the same time. If that wisdom is hard to attain, at the same time it is worthwhile to avoid extremes, seeing that we cannot take our wealth with us, even as we need to be good stewards of what God has given us.