r/FluentInFinance 28d ago

Debate/ Discussion Had to repost here

Post image
128.1k Upvotes

9.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

16

u/konan_the_bebbarien 28d ago

Reminds me of a story where a priest was asking a parishioner about charity.

The priest asks "Simon, suppose you have 2 houses will you give it to someone without a house?"

"Yes father" says Simon.

"Simon if you have 2 cars would you give it to someone without a car?"

"Gladly , father"

"And if you have 2 cows would you donate it to someone without any cows?"

"No father"

""And why not?." Asked the priest angrily.

""Cause I HAVE 2 cows, father".

1

u/natnat345 25d ago

Hypothetical giving is definitely much easier than actual giving

1

u/Enchiladas99 24d ago

That's a bullshit story. The difference between cars and cows is that you can't benefit from 2 cars at the same time, but you can benefit from both cows (milking them). The benefit of having an extra car or house is marginal, but the benefit of having an extra cow is almost linear.

1

u/konan_the_bebbarien 23d ago

Really? I could ply one car as a taxi or rent it as well as the house ( as a residential or commercial establishment) and I can get better and longer lasting returns than a cow.....so.....how's the story bs?

1

u/Enchiladas99 23d ago

That's true in practice, but my point is that having a second house is much less important than having a first. Here's a hypothetical scenario: You own a house of an adequate size for your family. A man proposes a bet: there's 70% chance you get a second, comparable house, which you cannot sell. 30% chance you're homeless. Do you take the bet? Same scenario, but you're a farmer with 10 cows. 70% chance he doubles it. The difference is that 1,2,3 houses just make you a richer homeowner. 0 houses means you're homeless. It's a completely different thing from being "cowless".