Convenient Tales About Riches Within Reach

By Sam Pizzigati


The world at large knew virtually nada about Sylvia Bloom for 96 years. Then she died in 2016. Now, just a little too late, Sylvia Bloom is getting her belated — yet richly deserved — 15 minutes of worldwide fame.

The New York Times has just published a heart-warming story of the caring, upright life Sylvia Bloom lived, and the remarkable — and hidden — fortune she quietly accumulated over the course of her 67-year career as a Manhattan legal secretary.

That fortune totaled, in the end, over $9 million. The bulk of that wealth, the Times account reveals, is going — per Bloom’s wishes — to help students from poor families advance their educations.

None of Bloom’s surviving relatives or law firm colleagues or fellow volunteers at the Henry Street Settlement, the social services agency set to get $6.24 million from her bequest, had any idea that their unassuming loved one and friend had saved anything remotely close to multiple millions.

Counting Pennies

Bloom lived frugally all her life in Brooklyn and commuted, by subway, to her job. The “high life” never interested her in the least. She led a simple existence. She counted her pennies. In the end, she put them all to good use.

Stories like Bloom’s have been popping up regularly over recent years. Leonard Gigowski, a Wisconsin shopkeeper, died three years ago at age 90, and left behind a “secret $13 million fortune” that’s currently funding scholarships. Grace Groner passed away in 2010 at age 100. She spent most of her life in a one-bedroom Illinois home, shopped at thrift stores, and left $9 million for her alma mater.

Convenient Tales

Our popular culture can’t seem to get enough of these life-affirming tales of modest multi-millionaire seniors. These stories make us feel good. They also, unfortunately, reinforce a message that our society’s richest — and their cheerleaders — find enormously convenient.

You don’t have to be money-hungry, commit vile acts or have remarkable talents to become wealthy, the tellers of all these stories of hidden millions suggest. You just have to be frugal; almost anybody, in other words, can become rich.

And if you don’t happen to become rich, the media coverage of these stories not so subtly hints, just look in the mirror for the reason why. You, too, could have resisted temptation and counted your pennies.

You, too, could have built a huge personal fortune. Shame on you. You chose not to.

The Millionaire Next Door

A couple of decades ago, two academic researchers — Thomas Stanley and William Danko — made themselves not insignificant personal fortunes by wrapping up that same theme in reams of statistics. Their 1996 book, The Millionaire Next Door, has so far sold over 4 million copies.

That thrifty fellow down the block with a six-year-old Ford, The Millionaire Next Door related, could well be worth millions. And those millions, the book stressed, all begin with frugality.

Conservative pundits have always loved this basic frugality-pays thesis. Stanley and Danko, the argument goes, have served up the ultimate secret to getting rich. “Hardly any” of the self-made rich the pair profiled in The Millionaire Next Door, as one commentator noted a few years ago, “had expensive tastes.” Instead, these millionaires avoided “new homes and expensive clothes” and “often invested 15 to 20 percent of their net income.”

Any of us could follow that lead, this analyst would add, so long as we understand “that building wealth takes discipline, sacrifice, and hard work.”

Reaping Rewards

But if “discipline, sacrifice, and hard work” build wealth, why do so many millions of disciplined, sacrificing, and hard-working Americans today have so little of it? Why is the “millionaire next door” — especially for our millennial generation — becoming a vanishing species?

Sylvia Bloom’s life offers some clues. Yes, Bloom lived frugally, sacrificed, and worked hard. But she also matured in a society — mid-20th century America — that endeavored to help disciplined, sacrificing, and hard-working people.

That help came in many different forms. Sylvia Bloom attended Hunter College, part of a system of free public higher education in New York City. She and her husband, a firefighter and later teacher, lived in a rent-controlled apartment. She commuted, for just a few dimes per day, on the world’s most extensive public transit system.

Sylvia Bloom’s young adult counterparts today? They confront a totally different reality. The sky-high costs of attending college have turned 21st-century young adults into life-long debtors. To find an affordable place to live, they squeeze into tiny apartments close to their jobs or plop themselves in distant exurbs, fighting traffic jams all the way to work — if not paying big bucks daily for scarce transit options.

Austerity Trumps Frugality

These millennials aren’t living the frugal life. They’re living the austere life — and not by choice. Our elected leaders have thrust this austerity upon them, with decades of public policies that have rewarded the rich with tax cuts at every turn and whittled away public services at every opportunity.

If Sylvia Bloom had been born a millennial, she’d be pinching pennies today to pay off her college debts. She’d be looking forward to years of hard work and sacrifice, with no hope of ever saving up enough to become a significant invester.

In her actual life, Sylvia Bloom had the good fortune to live her early adult years in a society much more caring than ours. She cared back — and chose to devote her own financial good fortune to helping others to the same support that so helped her.

Sylvia Bloom’s life does indeed offer up inspiration. Let’s not let our rich turn that life into a rationalization for their riches.

This entry was posted in corporate news, Corporate Welfare, culture, Economics, education, elites, Financial Crisis, Housing Crisis, Inequality, media, Media Literacy, news, propaganda, Social Control, Social Engineering, society and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Convenient Tales About Riches Within Reach

  1. Debt is truly the evil of our time. However disregarding conservative fiscal behavior is ridiculous. This is the only way for middle and lower income folks to build wealth. So the subjects profiled are certainly templates for doing so. Most folks want to live beyond their means. They want to be rich now. Taking out second mortgages if they have equity or racking up monstrous credit card debt. And there is the biggest debt strangulation culprit, the college loan. Will your academic pedigree translate into enough income to rid yourself of debt within 10 years? Unfortunately, the answer in often no. The math doesn’t add up. Is the system to blame? At this point, mostly. But building wealth is hard. More hard now than for our parents for sure. But if building wealth was easy everyone would do it. But anyone can do it. To some it isn’t even important. Do the extremely wealthy try to keep others from getting a leg up financially? Damn straight! They just call it maximizing market share. That sounds better than screwing the poor and eliminating the middle class. What’s are we to do? Save our pennies. Or if you prefer, store up your treasures in heaven.

    • I see your point and understand that conservative fiscal behavior should not be disregarded. At the same time, the multitude of ways the ultra-wealthy “maximize market share” (ie. rent seeking, monopolization, price rigging, outsourcing, lobbying/bribery, tax evasion, externalizing social/environmental costs, etc.) should not be disregarded either. We agree that the economic situation of the average American is far more precarious than it was 50 years ago, but far too often corporate media places the blame solely on the working class. Spending habits do play a part, though I would argue it’s relatively minuscule compared to the collective effect of the methods used to maximize market share (including a multi billion dollar ad industry which helps perpetuate the culture of consumerism and greed). The point is, if the economic and power elites had more limits on what they could get away with, everyone else would have greater means to live within.

      • I would never condone the behavior of a satanic power elite and their associated international corporate entities whether that behavior was elicit or not. My question is whether the US offers more or less opportunity for upward mobility to the average citizen?
        And does liberty provide this ability?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.