Wealth or Happiness?

[Rei]

So I was on DA, and one of the artists I was watching posted this poll (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.).

When I thought about it, I truthfully had to say wealth... my reasoning follows:
I'd say happiness...
But what is happiness if not secured by wealth?
What happiness is there if you are struggling to put food on the table, and you can't provide what you want to for those you love? Humans are born materialistic. Every time a person cannot afford something he/she really wants, he/she may not be intensely unhappy. But in the back of the person's mind, he/she won't be happy till he/she gets it either.

Truthfully, I must say I work for wealth (though not blindly). Happiness is a state of mind I can place on myself if I want to; it is too easy to settle. One should be thankful and not take things for granted, but one should not settle either.
_________________________________________

Your views?

[rwyatt365]

Tough one…

If true and lasting happiness could be had without the security that wealth provides, then I would pick happiness hands-down. The problem with "happiness" is that it tends to be transient and dependant on circumstance (unless chemically altered ;) ).

So, if I assume that there could be un-enhanced, lasting, happiness independent of anything else, then I would choose…WEALTH.

Because if I had wealth (Bill Gates wealth times 10), then I could fake happiness pretty well!

[banzai]

I would say the pursuit of wealth (except in some cases) is not done out of pursuit of happiness, but avoidance of our fear of not having enough.

We live in a society where the chances of actually dying from something like starvation are very slim... yet we still have primal instincts to drive us to provide with enough for ourselves to survive. When these are applied in our day and age, we get a lot of what people think is "life and death" but really isn't.

For this reason, wealth will never make someone happy... it will just fill an in infinitively-large hole of fear. This is often called greed. ;)

This can be seen by studies showing that the actual increase in happiness from wealth is only in cases of extreme poverty.

[Henry]

So I was on DA, and one of the artists I was watching posted this poll (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.).

When I thought about it, I truthfully had to say wealth... my reasoning follows:

_________________________________________

Your views?

If the end of wealth is consumption because consumption makes you happy, and I think it is, then a certain degree of wealth is a prerequisite for happiness.

However, if you are using the internet, odds are you have enough money to be happy. I believe that, in the west, overall happiness peaks in the 50k per year region - eg anyone with a college degree and any sort of work ethic should have enogh income to maximize "happiness".

And personally, I can tell you that I have watched some very close people in my life go from lower middle class to having very, very high levels of consumption. The boosts in consumption make them a bit happier for a short period, and then it just becomes the baseline for their expectations and they don't wind up any happier when they go from spending 100k per year to 250k per year. Economists call this the "hedonic treadmill".

Irony: I'm happier with my small apartment, company car, and occassional meals out than said close persons are with a 6k square foot home, 3 luxury vehicles, and triannual lavish vacations to Europe.


Because if I had wealth (Bill Gates wealth times 10), then I could fake happiness pretty well!

You'd be amazed. Money simply ceases to be a concern. As it could be if you would restrain your standard of living and do work you are interested in.

[Danisty]

I'll take happiness, but I'm not naive enough to think money isn't important. I just need sufficient money though, not wealth.

[DeepPurple]

I chose wealth. I have never been particularly happy and I doubt I ever will be. Wealth brings so many possibilities and oppurtunities. If I had wealth I'd be happy more often, even if it did wear off every three days or so.

[Epicurus]

Happiness, but its really not one or the other. I could once again tough blame the other side, of people who is having this wealth wich is inducing this psychologic need for the same in the other people without. I don't care about worthless money wich you can't buy anything for when everyone is 100% happy. Tough I don't see how you could attain this happiness just like that, it takes more than a wishing well.

[ShaiGar]

What a thoroughly christian idea. You cannot be happy unless you are poor...

The Hindus have a better philosophy, one that actually works. You need to be strong in your Arthar (financial) as well as your Kama (sexuality) and your Dharma (Law).
If you are not strong in your financial, how can you ever be secure enough to be yourself, and thus truly happy?

I always go for the third option, Wealth and Happiness.

[Splittet]

Happiness by far ...

[Seven]

I think the next time around, I would work in the pursuit of happiness. In my younger years, rather than following my bliss, I chose a practical career path that lead to wealth. So today, I have a desk job in a glass tower in a big city making a decent pay cheque. I have a beautiful home with nice things and I travel frequently to faraway places. I am not unhappy. But some days I look to the mountains and ocean from my office in the glass tower and yearn to be in the great outdoors following my passion.

[OneBadMother]

Happiness hands-down. A miserable miser never shall I be.

[terencec]

I will choose wealth. It solves a lot of problems (buy off unhappy). I don't have to work and do what I like to do, read what I like, could not afford it now. Feel like a Coop slave.

[Mechanical Messiah]

Wealth. I'm already happy.

[logan235711]

Not sure if happiness can ever be achieved and has any meaning intrinsically--so wealth.

[Ijz]

Good question, hard to answer. I went for happiness however I don't think constant happiness is something attainable. Happiness implies that there are also times of unhappiness. I prefer the concept of being content and having less ups and downs in my life.

As for wealth, I've never been poor and always had sufficient money to prevent me from worrying about anything financially related. I'm also a minimalist so I wouldn't know what to do with the money anyway. When it comes to work I view money more as a tool of showing appreciation. Its not the money that drives my carreer, its the work that I do.

[Max T]

Wealth.

I see happiness partly coming from saving for wealth, achieving the wealth and the time afforded by wealth to pursue interests/opportunities far beyond a restrictive “career path”.

Wealth would personally not lead to greater consumption.
I’m 30yrs with a spending habit of a 22yr old. Personal spending rate has declined each year just as my friends are increasing theirs. Agree 100% with Henry’s irony regarding limiting consumption and becoming happier.

[INTJoe]

Wealth. I'm already happy.


But wealth can change this, do you see why?

I say "why mess with a good thing?" if I were you.

Personally, I chose hapiness, but I'm definitely wanting to build wealth as I grow. The main reason for this is probably a little too self-righteous, but I believe that I will get to a point where I can effectively dole out monies to righteous venues, such as cancer research, etc.

I am Christian, but I don't see why Christians have to feel like they have to remain poor to remain moral. I believe that if you are a good, righteous person, you should try your hardest to attain riches, because you can then choose where to funnel your money.

I mean it's a shame how much money gets funneled into strip clubs, and other vices year in and year out. I'm not saying these things can't be fun. But let's just say I've been there and done that, and there is so much more to life. Being a philanthropist should be high on every Christian's (and non-Christian's) virtues.

[bubbles]

I chose "happiness." Wealth is just a tool to attain happiness and happiness is why I want wealth.

[INTroJect]

An empty bag can not stand up straight. Good plain virtues will lead to both wealth and happiness.

[steph with a capital T]

Dude, this poll is bogus. If someone (like me) thought they could get happiness from wealth almost undoubtedly, then one would pick wealth. But because the end goal was happiness in wealth, should one have picked happiness instead? You need to define your terms better. "Happy but unwealthy"? "Wealthy but unhappy"? both? what???

Dammit...

[Firelie]

I've always said happiness. Having more money available has never made me any happier than normal. Then again, I'm not really getting stuff. If I want something, it's usually because I need it. Plus, there's a certain satisfaction in working hard and saving for things rather than just popping off and buying it straight out. I don't value things given to me as much as I value things I've worked for.

[Gavisi]

I'm guessing the assumption is that you can either do what you like and be happy, or do something you don't like that pays more.

I'd side with happiness, but only if I'm making enough money to have a secure life with some extra spending money.

[Hypomanic]

If given the choice of either/or I choose happiness!

What's wealth really worth if you can't be happy?

[Rohsiph]

I think it's been said in a few ways (didn't read through all the responses)--

but my happiness usually requires some form of wealth to exist, or at least access to some kind of luxuries.

I won't work just for wealth . . . there'll always be an end-goal in mind, always a plan to use acquired wealth to achieve something.

The idea of sitting on a pile of money (so to speak) actually annoys me . . . not to the degree that I want everyone with lots of money to spend it all, but I wish some of the iron-toothed capitalists in globalized economies would more often finance esoteric pursuits--why can't every millionaire back a $10,000 independent film by a young student every decade or so? It'd probably fail, and never make an impact . . . but there's the possibility that it'd be a phenomenon, and it would surely benefit everyone personally involved with the project.

But, sadly, this does not seem to be the mind of money-grabbers . . .

burn em all? Maybe not that far . . .

[danalaina]

Humans are born materialistic. Every time a person cannot afford something he/she really wants, he/she may not be intensely unhappy. But in the back of the person's mind, he/she won't be happy till he/she gets it either.

more than materialistic, we're born adaptable.

i've been at the extremes on both ends of the scale. i'll take happiness.

[Kfbr]

This poll sounds absolute, as in if you pick wealth you cannot have happiness and if you have happiness you cannot have wealth. The second is fine for me, I don't need wealth to be happy and I am perfectly happy living within my means.

It doesn't say happiness = poverty so I'm going to have to go with hapiness.

[terencec]

This poll sounds absolute, as in if you pick wealth you cannot have happiness and if you have happiness you cannot have wealth. The second is fine for me, I don't need wealth to be happy and I am perfectly happy living within my means.

It doesn't say happiness = poverty so I'm going to have to go with hapiness.

I am wondering how we can be always happy. If we are always happy, I don't think there is something called happy or sad anymore. It is because we get use to it (happy) quickly and don't feel "high" anymore.

If there is no always happy, wealth is better. We don't have to work and do what we like. We are still sad sometimes but we will be happier.

[INTJoe]

The idea of sitting on a pile of money (so to speak) actually annoys me . . . not to the degree that I want everyone with lots of money to spend it all, but I wish some of the iron-toothed capitalists in globalized economies would more often finance esoteric pursuits--why can't every millionaire back a $10,000 independent film by a young student every decade or so?

But, sadly, this does not seem to be the mind of money-grabbers . . .

burn em all? Maybe not that far . . .

What the hell? Get off your soap box. You sound like an idealistic weirdo. Are you sure you aren't NF? (The idealists)?

Why the hell would it be a good thing for millionaires to fund lame student films? I don't get it...

And what is wrong with Capitalism? Capitalism is fantastic.

Weird post, all around...

[Mechanical Messiah]

Capitalism is fantastic.

Wierd post coming from a Christian (i.e. one who professes to follow the teachings of a sandal-wearin' pacifist/communist hippy).


But wealth can change this, do you see why?

I say "why mess with a good thing?" if I were you.

I'm not particularly materialistic. I live well within my means, and feel no need to show off in any fashion. I'm just another face in the crowd, and see no reason to change that.

I want wealth for the security that it brings. Sure, I know that there are situations where money means nothing. But looking back over history, in every single disaster, plague, political upheaval (communist revolutions notwithstanding in SOME cases), etc., it's ALWAYS better to have money. I want security, maybe some land... some investments to play with. Is that so much to ask? Sure, I'm working toward all that... but I wouldn't turn down a handout.

I'm not too concerned about 'messing with a good thing'. If my happiness is so fragile that it'd be upset by a POSITIVE change in my financial situation... then it would've been pretty damn superficial to begin with. I reckon I could survive a substantial increase in my net worth with my happiness intact- and if I couldn't... then I haven't lost much anyway.


Personally, I chose hapiness, but I'm definitely wanting to build wealth as I grow. The main reason for this is probably a little too self-righteous, but I believe that I will get to a point where I can effectively dole out monies to righteous venues, such as cancer research, etc.

I am Christian, but I don't see why Christians have to feel like they have to remain poor to remain moral. I believe that if you are a good, righteous person, you should try your hardest to attain riches, because you can then choose where to funnel your money.

I mean it's a shame how much money gets funneled into strip clubs, and other vices year in and year out. I'm not saying these things can't be fun. But let's just say I've been there and done that, and there is so much more to life. Being a philanthropist should be high on every Christian's (and non-Christian's) virtues.

I can't argue with your "self-righteous" assessment.

[Rohsiph]

What the hell? Get off your soap box. You sound like an idealistic weirdo. Are you sure you aren't NF? (The idealists)?

Are you sure I included an MBTI type in my profile? :P

Why the hell would it be a good thing for millionaires to fund lame student films? I don't get it...

Why is it so good for them to horde their money? Why not take a few more chances?

It's how it used to be done--mostly . . . the rich would pay artists to write some poems, or a play, or a symphony that they would get to take some credit for, showing it off and such. I don't see why the Western world has pretty much completely abandoned that system.

(I suppose some "artistic industries" might still fundamentally work this way . . . but even if this is the case, I would point out that modern patrons appear to support primarily exoteric works, where I believe this was less the case, if entirely not the case, in past ages).

But really: if you have a net worth of $27.4m across all your financial investments, would spending $10,000 every few years to finance an art film hurt at all? That'd be what . . . something like .0003% of your money. You really can't throw that much to the arts?

And what is wrong with Capitalism? Capitalism is fantastic.

Could you please point out where I made an assertion that Capitalism is not fantastic? Is it calling dragon hoarders "iron-toothed?" I didn't mean it as an insult. And I specifically said it's probably going too far to change the system entirely, didn't I? :)

Weird post, all around...

You almost make it sound like this is a bad thing. I hope I'm just misinterpreting this last part of your message . . .

[INTJoe]

Wierd post coming from a Christian (i.e. one who professes to follow the teachings of a sandal-wearin' pacifist/communist hippy).


I didn't say all capitalists are good Christians. But I think I can be a good Christian, and still participate rather well in a capitalist market. I do appreciate the efficiency of the capitalist market. That's my INTJ-ness :)





INTJoe added to this post, 9 minutes and 42 seconds later...

Are you sure I included an MBTI type in my profile? :P

Why is it so good for them to horde their money? Why not take a few more chances?

It's how it used to be done--mostly . . . the rich would pay artists to write some poems, or a play, or a symphony that they would get to take some credit for, showing it off and such. I don't see why the Western world has pretty much completely abandoned that system.

But really: if you have a net worth of $27.4m across all your financial investments, would spending $10,000 every few years to finance an art film hurt at all?
.

No, you didn't include your type...so what are you? NF? lol. It's OK, we welcome other types here, to be sure. I guess I just assumed I was talking to an NT rational.

First: It is not good to horde your money if you are rich. This is why they invest in funds, land, etc. They are not hording their money, they are investing in other people/companies/countries....etc. If you think rich people aren't 'taking chances', you are deluding yourself. It's not like they've got all their money under their mattress. Or sitting at 84 different FDIC-insured banks, earning .25% interest. Their money is "out there" being trickled down to the rest of us.

Also, do you really think rich people don't support the arts? Of course they do! Who else does? Where does the money come from? When a new music building gets built on a college campus with some rich dude's name on it, why do you think that is? John Moores of BMC donated a music building on my college campus, and that is just one example. There are undoubtedly thousands of examples of uber-rich people giving to artistic endeavors. Museums, colleges, operas, plays, films, whatever...

[Mechanical Messiah]

I didn't say all capitalists are good Christians. But I think I can be a good Christian, and still participate rather well in a capitalist market. I do appreciate the efficiency of the capitalist market. That's my INTJ-ness

You're quite free to 'think' that, but Jesus made it pretty clear that that's not the case. Jesus had only bad things to say about rich people. The new testament, on several occasions, suggests that you ought to give all your money to the poor, and that you should NOT work for the future. Oh yeah... and nothing pissed off Jesus like the practice of capitalism within a temple. Capitalism may be fine and dandy with you and me... but Jesus (as described in 'the bible') was MUCH closer to the ideals of communism.

That's why I said that yours was a wierd post, coming from a Christian. In fairness... I was being a bit sarcastic. I realize that capitalism has been fully integrated into almost ALL strains of American Christianity- in spite of your holy text.

[siptpnr]

When I was younger, I would have taken Happiness without question. Happiness was good family and friends, community and cooperation, worth more than dollars in the bank. Now I'm older, I'm not sure how realistic any of these things are without Wealth. Some poor people have golden personalities that form happy families despite the hardship, but from my experience, the mainstream of people who don't have money tend to devolve into desperate, dangerous versions of themselves.

[Mechanical Messiah]

Some poor people have golden personalities that form happy families despite the hardship, but from my experience, the mainstream of people who don't have money tend to devolve into desperate, dangerous versions of themselves.

I've made much the same observation... and that's a very good way to word it. As the direct descendent of Poor White Trash (and arguably still fitting that description), I've BEEN poor... and grew up among them. It isn't a hard and fast rule... but poverty does nasty things to people, and it'll make them do nasty things to YOU. It's a cycle with numerous feedback loops (i.e., it's expensive to be poor).

I've said lots of times that money may not make you happy... but a LACK of money will sure as hell make you UNhappy.

[richirare]

Well, interesting post... My choice? Wealth, please keep reaing to know the reasons.

Money is the most powerful tool in the wolrd. There ain't nothing you cannot achieve with money. You REALLY want illness to dissappear? Put some money (like a fucking LOT of it) in medical research. You want the "third wolrd" to become an old expression? Put some billions in funding schools, hospitals and structures. And the list goes on. The real problem? People with money don't do that. If I got to choose being alone for the rest of my life but with the fortune of someone like bill gates I'd go for it. I'll do my best to solve whatever would be first in my list. THAT would make me happy, to know that people would not starve, die of illness or anything like that.

My dream in life is to gather the biggest fortune I can and amend the human errors that have followed us since day one.

I PROMISE that once I have a nice house and money enough for food and bass strings (:)) I'll start to give money away. I don't need anything else, but I do need to know that the world in which my children (and yours) are going to grow up is not as horrible as the one I'm living in now.

[Rohsiph]

Something about money as opposed to a more general concept like wealth: if a world-changing catastrophic event breaks down most of the economic infrastructure in the world, then everyone is back in the dark ages--money (in its current incarnation) means very little (especially any digital/non-physical "hordes").

Money (and wealth, more generally) helps to strengthen an illusion of security that makes life a lot easier to live. In the event that security is tested and fails (always a possibility), happiness can still exist even as money becomes worthless (and wealth becomes completely redefined).

[BadMojo]

Happiness, without a shadow of a doubt. I know many wealthy people who live shitty lives. Wealth does not fulfil all your needs, but happiness does by a small amount. Therefore, happiness is worth far more then gold.

[errrzarrr]

Happines!!!.
No doubt. Happiness is a such big concept, Wealth is also included in Happiness.
That's why I admire Thomas Jefferson so much (he was INTJ and some of Deist/Agnostic/areligious, just like me). Read about him and his Declaration of indepence of Virginia.

"[...] they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness.[...]"

I have a great admiration for him, and I am not North-American :P

As a Side note:
I observe from the poll that Wealth is prefered by 29.85% and Happiness by the majority: 70.15%. I point that out because people out there, specifically religious ones, says that people like us are Materialistic/Without-Spirit and don't care about any more than "terrenal and material" stuff. I'm Happy to know that.

[Antares]

I'd choose happiness, but what ultimately makes me happy is living life as I wanted and do experience many things, and a good way is travelling around the world. To achieve that, I'd actually need wealth. If I'm like... Oh, overflowing with $$$, then I'll make sure all my needs for 'happiness' are fulfilled, then use my money to help others. That would me plenty of happiness as well to know that one less person suffer in this world.

[TheConcertinist]

Money doesn't buy happiness, but it buys freedom, and you can use that freedom to help you find happiness. If you never end up finding happiness, you still have financial security, and that's HUGE.

[The Rose]

Happiness - if I could only have one.
Of course wealth can buy some happiness, but if my marriage is falling apart, my kids hate my guts, and I want to kill myself, money can't fix that.

[Snail]

If I were truly happy, living in an ideal world, achieving all necessary goals and requirements, then money would be meaningless. In order for me to be happy, everyone else would also have to be content, and if everyone else already had all that they needed, there would be no point in seeking money.