I believe what he means by this is part "more money will not solve ALL your problems" (ie: it's not a panacaea) and part "if you have food and shelter, everything else is a form of luxury". If you require a car to provide food and shelter, then I don't think that what he's said is invalid.
As an interesting corollary, it's actually a longitudinally studied and extensively documented fact that winning the lottery does not provide long-term happiness.
More often than not, it actually causes more problems than it solves. I forget the statistic off the top of my head, but some astounding percentage of lottery winners -- let's say 75% -- end up worse off within 5 years of winning than they were before they won. (Granted, a lot of that has to do with the fact that the type of person most likely to be playing the lottery is also the type of person who has no real concept of the value of how to manage a $XXX million fortune, let alone a $XXX million fortune acquired literally overnight).
Granted, a lot of that has to do with the fact that
the type of person most likely to be playing the
lottery is also the type of person who has no real
concept of the value of how to manage a $XXX million
fortune, let alone a $XXX million fortune acquired
literally overnight
That's it - I (anecdotaly) know several people who won the "internet start up lottery" (gotten very, very wealthy due to their start-ups doing well) and all of them are doing alright years after "winning the lottery".
