What Does 'Living Within Means' Mean?

As a matter of perspective, there are two varying interpretations on the idea of living within means. Interpretation could be either:

1.      Keep expenses below revenue, and the other;

2.      Keep revenue above expenses

The first one is what I call the Expense-side interpretation. The second one is the Revenue-side interpretation. And these two interpretations, though they point to the same idea about living within means, suggest two distinct financial attitudes of individuals.

I believe, the Expense-side interpretation is more prevalent and more automatic than the Revenue-side interpretation. Based on my personal literary research, lots of what I read put emphasis much on the idea of ‘keeping expenses below revenue’ while the second one is not. And there is a perfect reason for that. Whichever interpretation a man would choose, his interpretation is hinged on his financial attitude.

Financial attitude can be broken down into two general types. An individual is either financially aggressive or financially dormant. And in these two financial characters can be seen which interpretation, either Expense-side or Revenue-side, an individual subscribe into. A financially dormant person believes that the interpretation of the idea of living within means is ‘keep expenses below revenue’. On the other hand, a financially aggressive person believes that the appropriate interpretation of the idea of living within means is ‘keep revenue above expenses’. 

Meanwhile, financial aggressiveness, for the sake of this article, means having the desire to improve and expand financially and having the consistent natural attitude of putting into action all plans to realize the financial goals. The aggressive ones always look for opportunities to earn and have additional income. On the other side, the dormant type is a person who is yet to discover his financial aggressiveness. He is hesitant to explore means other than what he currently has.

The two interpretations suggest two different working financial paradigms. And this is what separates the rich from the poor. Rich people and poor people think differently. The Rich Party thinks that it only needs to keep revenue above expenses to survive. The Poor Party, on the contrary, believes it only needs to keep expenses below revenue in order to survive. I am delighted to have liked the interpretation espoused by the rich people. With this, though I am poor financially, I already consider myself as a member of the The Rich Party. I am a poor man who is committed to become rich; a poor man who believes that the real interpretation of the idea of living within means mean ‘keeping revenue above expense’.

The Revenue-side is of a positive tone while the Expense-side is of a negative one I believe. A Revenue-side believer focuses his attentions, plans and actions onto making more revenues while his expenses of a secondary concern. An Expense-side guy, on the contrary, focuses mainly on keeping his expenses below his income. He has no much plan to expand his revenue as much as his plan to keep his expenses down. 

Poor and Rich people have different kinds of struggle. Poor people are on the burden or struggle of keeping the expenses below their revenues while rich people have no such kind of problem. Rich people’s only ‘problem’ is their persistent behavior of always looking for opportunities to expand financially and to have additional income. A poor man is mostly focused on keeping check his expenses. A rich man is mostly focused on keeping check for more revenue sources.

So what does living within means mean?