One of the arguments for hiring help around the house (usually housecleaners and folks to mow the lawn) is that your time is worth more than what it would cost to hire help.
The argument goes like this: If you currently make $25 per hour, and you can pay someone $15 per hour to mow the lawn, you’re actually either saving money or making more money by hiring someone.
This can certainly be the case if you have a limited number of hours to work. For example, if I pay someone $60 to clean the house, and I spend that time working when I would have otherwise been cleaning, I could conceivably earn more than I spent.
But what if I have the cleaner come while I’m working my normal hours or while I go out to the movies? Or what if I just avoided cleaning until the dust bunnies began breeding in the hallway? Then money doesn’t enter into the equation, except as an expense.
Which might be fine. I hate cleaning, and so I would like to hire a cleaner. It’s not a money-saving or a money-making endeavor though. It’s a convenience or a luxury. My sanity and potential free time are what I find worthwhile, and I’m ok with just saying that instead of trying to argue about the monetary value of time.
Posted in Spending money on 03.01.10 with 13 comments.








