Kevin O’Leary Says He ‘Can’t Stand It’ When People Spend $28 on Lunch While Making $70,000

Spending $28 on lunch might seem like a harmless way to treat yourself during a busy workday. Maybe you’re ordering a salad, grabbing a sandwich with coworkers, or picking up takeout because you didn’t have time to prepare something at home.

But billionaire investor Kevin O’Leary thinks that seemingly innocent habit could be costing young Americans a fortune.

The outspoken Shark Tank star has repeatedly criticized people who spend nearly $30 on lunch while earning around $70,000 annually.

During a June 2025 appearance on The Diary of a CEO podcast, O’Leary told host Steven Bartlett that he couldn’t stand watching younger workers spend so much on midday meals.

His comments resurfaced in a November 11, 2026, article published by TheStreet, reigniting a debate about spending habits, financial responsibility, and whether wealthy people understand the pressures facing ordinary Americans.

O’Leary’s argument is straightforward: money spent on expensive lunches could instead be invested and potentially grow into substantial wealth.

But critics say the advice ignores rising living costs and the reality that people shouldn’t have to sacrifice every small pleasure to build a financially secure future.

Why a $28 Lunch Bothers Kevin O’Leary

O’Leary’s frustration centers on what he considers unnecessary spending.

During his conversation with Bartlett, he criticized young workers earning $70,000 who routinely buy expensive lunches.

He described the habit as foolish and encouraged people to consider what that money could become if invested over several decades.

Rather than viewing lunch as a one-time purchase, O’Leary evaluates it as money that could be generating investment returns.

That’s an important distinction.

When someone buys lunch, they’re spending money on immediate convenience and enjoyment.

When someone invests that same amount, they may be building wealth for the future.

O’Leary believes too many younger workers overlook that trade-off.

His broader financial advice frequently emphasizes living below your means, avoiding unnecessary purchases, and investing regularly.

The billionaire has also encouraged people to examine their spending habits before assuming they don’t earn enough to save.

How Much Does Spending $28 on Lunch Really Cost?

A single $28 lunch might not look particularly expensive.

But repeating that purchase changes the numbers considerably.

The cost of a $28 lunch habit

$140

5 days

$7,280

52 weeks

$72,800

10 years

Assumes lunch is purchased five workdays per week, 52 weeks per year. Figures exclude investment returns and inflation.

For someone earning $70,000 annually, spending $7,280 on workday lunches would consume more than 10% of their gross salary.

And that’s before accounting for taxes, rent, insurance, transportation, or other financial responsibilities.

Of course, this example assumes someone buys a $28 lunch every workday.

A person purchasing an expensive lunch once a week would spend $1,456 annually instead.

That distinction matters because O’Leary’s criticism focuses on repeated spending habits, not necessarily an occasional restaurant meal.

The Power of Investing That Lunch Money

O’Leary’s main argument involves compound growth.

Compound growth occurs when investment returns begin generating additional returns over time.

Instead of spending $28 every week, imagine investing that amount consistently.

Under a hypothetical 8% annual return, invested weekly contributions could accumulate into a substantial amount over several decades.

What investing $28 every week could grow into

Hypothetical 8% annual return, weekly contributions, before taxes and fees. Not a guaranteed result.

Illustrative calculation using a nominal 8% annual rate compounded weekly; actual returns fluctuate, and inflation reduces future purchasing power.

This is why O’Leary frequently recommends low-cost index funds rather than spending money on purchases he considers unnecessary.

An index fund allows investors to own a basket of securities designed to track a particular market index.

However, investment returns aren’t guaranteed.

Markets can decline, investment fees reduce returns, and future inflation affects how much accumulated money will actually purchase.

The illustration demonstrates the potential value of consistent investing, not a promise that skipping lunch will make someone wealthy.

Bernie Sanders Challenged O’Leary’s Argument

Not everyone agrees with the billionaire’s approach.

Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont criticized O’Leary’s comments during a May 2026 appearance on On Sunday with Jack Cocchiarella.

Sanders argued that wealthy investors can become disconnected from the financial circumstances ordinary American workers face.

His criticism reflected a broader concern about blaming individuals’ purchasing decisions for financial challenges that can also involve housing costs, healthcare expenses, and wages.

O’Leary’s argument focuses on personal responsibility and investment discipline.

Sanders’ response emphasizes the economic pressures that can limit people’s choices.

Both perspectives raise different questions.

How much financial progress can someone make by changing their daily spending?

And how much depends on larger expenses and economic circumstances beyond individual control?

For many households, the answer involves both.

O’Leary Doubled Down on His Position

Despite criticism, O’Leary has remained committed to his argument.

In a July 2026 appearance on Nicole Lapin’s Money Rehab podcast, he returned to expensive lunches.

This time, he emphasized how money invested over 28 years could potentially become much more valuable.

He questioned whether a $28 meal could provide enough enjoyment to justify giving up decades of potential investment growth.

Lapin challenged his position, arguing that people who are already saving and investing responsibly should be able to enjoy occasional purchases.

O’Leary continued defending his approach, saying he didn’t want people wasting money.

Their exchange highlighted a fundamental disagreement about personal finance.

O’Leary places considerable importance on maximizing long-term financial opportunities.

Lapin’s response suggests there should also be room for enjoyment within a responsible financial plan.

Is $70,000 Really Enough to Afford Expensive Lunches?

A $70,000 salary can mean very different things depending on where someone lives.

Someone earning that amount in a relatively affordable community may have far more disposable income than someone living in New York City or San Francisco.

Housing, transportation, insurance, taxes, and family responsibilities all influence how much money remains available.

Someone supporting children or paying substantial medical bills may have less flexibility than a person with the same income and fewer expenses.

That’s why a universal rule about lunch spending doesn’t necessarily work for everyone.

The better question is whether the expense fits comfortably into a person’s financial situation.

If someone is struggling to pay bills or carrying expensive credit card debt, regularly spending $28 on lunch might be an obvious place to cut back.

But if that person already saves consistently, avoids high-interest debt, and comfortably covers essential expenses, the occasional expensive lunch may not create a serious financial problem.

Small Expenses Matter, but Bigger Expenses Matter Too

O’Leary’s comments remind us that everyday purchases can add up to meaningful expenses.

Coffee, takeout, delivery fees, and subscription services may seem insignificant on their own.

Together, however, they can consume a noticeable portion of someone’s income.

But focusing exclusively on small purchases can also distract from larger financial decisions.

Housing, transportation, insurance, and debt payments frequently consume far more money than an occasional restaurant meal.

Reducing a major recurring expense may sometimes save more than eliminating every small luxury.

That doesn’t make lunch spending irrelevant.

It simply means a complete budget should consider both high and small costs.

How to Enjoy Lunch Without Overspending

You don’t necessarily have to stop eating out to improve your finances.

Instead, consider setting a realistic weekly lunch budget.

For example, someone who usually spends $28 each workday could prepare meals at home three days a week and buy lunch on the remaining two.

That adjustment would reduce restaurant meals without eliminating them.

Another possibility is choosing less expensive menu options or bringing leftovers from dinner.

People who enjoy cooking might also prepare several lunches in advance.

They could direct the money saved toward an emergency fund, paying down debt, or long-term investments.

The key is creating a routine you can maintain, rather than following an overly restrictive plan that quickly becomes frustrating.