One of the arguments for hiring help around the house (usually house cleaners 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. The same sort of thing can apply to hiring companies for bigger jobs too, such as hiring painters to paint your trim.
This certainly can be the case if you have a limited number of hours available 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. So it’s certainly possible to essentially save money buy hiring help.
The truth may vary
But what if I have the cleaner come while I go out to the movies? I’ll be spending money on housecleaning and on entertainment. Or what if I just avoid cleaning until the dust bunnies began breeding in the hallway instead of hiring someone? Then money doesn’t enter into the equation, except maybe as an expense for allergy pills.
It’s not always about the money
I hate cleaning, and so I would like to hire someone to clean our house on a regular basis. It’s not a money-saving or a money-making endeavor though. It’s a convenience or a luxury. Me not having to clean the house and gaining some time to do something else instead is what I find worthwhile, and I’m OK with just saying that instead of trying to rationalize things away. Money is a tool, so use it for what matters to you.Posted in Spending Money on 03.27.13 with 6 comments.