When I was much younger, the Beatles came out with two songs around the same time, and we used to joke about having them together on the same single 45 record.:
Can’t buy me love…
Give me money, that’s what I want.
I guess most of us have ambivalent thoughts about money. There is evidence that money — over a certain threshold — does not substantially increase happiness. That raises three interesting questions:
1. What is the threshold? There is one threshold that represents having enough at the moment to eat, drink, be sheltered and clothed. There is another threshold that represents a certain security that one will have enough for the duration, including certain life goals such as educating one’s children. This is a stretchy threshold. It changes as the stock market goes up and down. It also goes up for people with particular talent for finding things to worry about. There is yet another threshold that represents a certain independence from any particular job. With enough money, one has a certain confidence that he/she can always leave the current job if it gets worse.
2. Why is it that we tend to equate more money with more happiness? I remember seeing a $12,000 rocking horse in a Niemann and Marcus catalog, and the thought that crossed my brain was, “Well, there has to be something for people like Bill Gates to spend their money on.” But it’s still a rocking horse and can give just a rocking horse’s worth of pleasure.
3. Is there a point where happiness goes down when money goes up? Do people lose something by becoming too rich? They certainly lose privacy. Perhaps life becomes a little less safe. There’s probably some research out there on this.
3 responses so far ↓
aremo // September 17, 2007 at 10:51 am
I wanted to add an additional musing, one that I am particularly exposed to on a daily basis in New York City. I find that typically, and maybe this is an overly simplified generalization, people are living just barely within their means, no matter how much or how little they make. Interestingly, my friends who make more money are not saving anymore, and still struggling to pay their bills. Living in luxury apartments they can barely afford and leading a lifestyle that leaves them little room for savings or money management, my friends who are in a higher tax bracket seem to still be struggling as much as they were when their salaries were less. They are just struggling in nicer apartments and with more expensive meals and clothing. It makes little sense to me.
It is an interesting cycle and I am curious if it exists everywhere in our society or something else that New Yorkers just get pulled into. It is almost as if people would rather have things to show than be happy and plan for their future. I think this is indicative of issues of money management that seem to span across all salary levels. Maybe it has to do more with my generation and the feeling that you have to prove you can make it, and make it big, in New York. Everyone seems to be trying to “make things happen” and make the big bucks, but no one seems to be any happier when it happens or any smarter with their money.
walterlawless // September 17, 2007 at 7:58 pm
My favorite “tenet” about wealth goes like this:
Wealth is like health- having enough is good; a whole lot more does not make a big difference.
Kathryn // September 17, 2007 at 8:16 pm
Alexis,
I don’t think this attitude about money is confined to New York, nor is it confined to our time. After all, there’s a reason the Money chapter in the QOLTC book starts with Mr. Micawber talking about happiness and money (from Dickens’ David Copperfield.) Mr. Micawber was always on the verge of going to debtor’s prison, in spite of his clear statement about happiness being living within one’s means. That was about 150 years ago.
So why do people think it is important to have things (bigger apartments, meals out, stylish clothes …)? What makes it more important than planning for the future and saving? We used to have a joke that “He who dies with the most toys wins.” I think that there is an element of truth there — that is, many people experience a real drive towards improving their positions in the pecking order, and it’s easier to establish the position with things than anything else.
What if people felt they could brag about having saved up the money to pay for their children’s college educations? I think many people think only chumps do that.
There’s some anxiety in Money chapter and in our discussions about rising costs and whether people will be priced out of the basics. I guess it is worth remembering that the average house size is much larger than it was 50 years ago. Families have more cars. They eat out more often. And these aren’t seen as luxuries. So part of the problem is that we have ratcheted up our ideas of what is basic.
Kathryn