What is "financial health"?

Faust has defined “wealth” in the <What is “wealth”?> thread.

I wanted some wiggle room in talking about the subject but he closed the door very effectively (not a criticism of Faust - he was simply correct in a conventional sense). So again, I’m looking for a discussion of wealth in a broader sense than a mere definition from within economics. At the same time “The world is my oyster” is not the kind of discussion I’m looking for.

So… What is “financial health”?

Is there a tension between personal financial health and the financial health of a country? Can financial health only make sense in relation to the values of the subject? Is there any objective measure of financial health? Etc. etc.

Anon - just for the record, I wasn’t trying to fence you in. I think you have now asked the question you meant to. It’s possible that I have helped you, by defining a term that may come up here.

I think there are some objective measures. For instance, there’s a certain debt-to-income ratio that no one would consider healthy.

Yes, you definitely helped. I meant “wealth” in a broader, but not too broad sense. That’s pretty vague I admit. Maybe it’s still too vague - I’m not sure.

I agree that too much debt is almost objectively “unhealthy” - as is too much savings. I can’t go so far as to call it actually objective though.



Not if you are going to die tomorrow. Given that everybody eventually dies, there can not possibly be any consensus.

That’s brilliant, Sam. Except it’s wrong. You’d still be financially unhealthy - you would just have no reason to care.

I am not talking emo-economics.

You sound like you know what is good for everybody else. If that is all that economics can be for you, God bless you.