Would you rather be super-rich or super-smart if you would only be average in the other category?
... assuming the question means "mean" and not "median" or "mode", an upgrade to an average level of income sounds pretty sweet right now.
To be a little less flippant:
A) It's not getting what you want, it's wanting what you've got.
The ability to be content and comfortable while living on modest means is a learned skill. If you haven't learned it, it is unlikely that you will be content or comfortable even with exorbitant resources at your disposal.
B) Knowledge does more than income.
Being "super-smart" includes the ability to make one's resources go further. Why buy your own supercomputer when you can network a bunch of loss-leader-priced video game consoles? Why pay Toyota for a bleeding-edge hybrid when you can replace the engine and transmission in that old junkyard chassis with a turbine generator and a surplus DC-10 starter motor?
I should note that I define "super-smart" as "a whole lot smarter than I am". Oddly, a lot of people have been answering this one with "I'm already smart...", which makes me suspect that either their bar for superlatives are a lot lower than my own, or their egos are a lot larger.