P.T. Barnum’s aphorism hinges on a clear role reversal: money itself is neutral, but the relationship we form with it determines whether it helps or harms. When money becomes a “master,” it dictates priorities—shaping decisions, identities, and even values. Yet when treated as a “servant,” it becomes a practical tool that supports human aims rather than replacing them.
This distinction matters because it shifts the conversation away from how much money one has and toward how money is used. In that sense, Barnum’s line is less about wealth than about agency: who is steering the life—your purposes, or your purse. [...]
