[dustinmoris]

Money doesn't buy financial security, because financial security depends on your lifestyle. Rich people become poor if they are so materialistic that they income cannot satisfy their lifestyle needs, therefore money couldn't buy them financial security.

Money can buy you opportunity, but not every opportunity makes people equally happy. Some people love to travel the world and see places for which you need very little money, some people like to drive their kids to school with an expensive car so they can dick measure with other parents and get a boost of self esteem when people look at their cars. Mostly the insecurities and desires in our lives determine which opportunities make us happy.

[loeg]

Here's the argument I think you're trying to make: Financial security is, at least, spending below your income. Also: people are different and enjoy different things.

I agree with those basic ideas! You're not disagreeing with me there. In fact, I already made a similar remark in my concluding sentence:

> You can have money and be unhappy, and you can be evicted because you can't meet rent and be happy, but it's probably easier to be happy when you aren't worried about paying the bills.

The piece you're either not considering or ignoring — which my comment spoke to — is that, controlling for local cost of living, the higher your income is, the easier it is to spend below your income. Necessities don't scale with income. Lifestyle choices can, but by definition, they are choices and can be reigned in. It's hard to choose between rent and food, though.

So I think your response, "money doesn't buy financial security," mostly comes from inaccurately interpreting an intentionally simplistic subclause of a larger argument and taking it too literally and without context.