Will money buy YOU happiness?

[LS20]

id be delighted for a year, and then id become bored and jaded with the wealth.

 

[JLGatsby]

Originally posted by: BlinderBomber
What if I claimed you were brainwashed into believing that freedom was the key to true happiness? Isn't that the same, on some level, as being told what is best for the group is best for you?

Look back on history! Freedom and the independent mind has been the important factors in the advancement of human civilization. Your morality is blurred. You speak like a theoretical physicist where anything can go.

Biological? Find me the "Freedom" gene. Find any proof whatsoever that freedom is a biologically transmitted trait.

The proof is in our history! Since the dawn of mankind humans have STRIVED to be free.

Just like certain animals know what to do from the day they're born because of their instinct, such is our instinct. Freedom is our survival instinct.

 

[glutenberg]

Aren't we talking about personal happiness? If it makes you happy to give all your money away, then so be it. Generall, that's not the case.

 

[DaShen]

Originally posted by: glutenberg
Those statistics vary from study to study unfortunately, but yes, I agree. Money doesn't necessarily guarantee happiness but as you said, happiness is relative.

Regarding Warren Buffett. The guy can be a philanthropist only because he is rich. If he was making just enough to survive or even enough to live comfortably, do you think he would be a philanthropist. He sees there is more to life because he has the means to make it that way. Also, he's donating 85% of his assets to Bill Gate's foundation because he sees an opportunity to use his mass fortune to affect the world's condition. He receives happiness in the fact that he can make a difference in this world. Him not changing his lifestyle doesn't mean much other than the fact that he came from humbler beginnings and understands the value of not being flamboyant with one's wealth.

Regarding JK Rowling, did they also ask her if being homeless was wearing her down? She doesn't have an obligation to finish the books but it's her own ambition that drives her. Do you actually think she'd rather still be homeless and struggling to support her and her daughter? Sure, she was inspired by her condition to strive but that doesn't mean that she can't strive now that she's become rich. She merely has to strive for even greater feats.

If you look at the two extremes of being in abject poverty and wealthy, you will find that wealthier people are happier. When you have to skip meals because you can't afford to spend money on food, when you have to skip taking your sick child to the doctor because you can't afford it, when you don't know if you'll be sleeping on the streets one night or a bed the other, your worries are much greater in scale than, "do my friends like me only for my money?"

How do you become content with your life if you're restricted by monetary means? You ask why we don't just do whatever we want and yet that's the easiest question to answer. It generally stems back to money. We can't do whatever we want because people have to weigh the risks of differing levels of happiness. Most will have to settle for doing something they may not particularly enjoy because you can't live on your dreams as much as Hollywood has told us that we can. Dreams don't feed, clothe, or shelter you. At most they feed the soul.

Regarding your last point. You can definitely help people around you with an average income but with pure financial security, you can not only focus more on helping but you also have more means to affect a larger amount of people. That may not be what makes you happy in life but it leaves open that option.

Ask yourself how many people when they become "rich" actually go out of there way to help others? It is quite rare. The people that do realize that money is transitory and doesn't offer happiness.

Also, another point, by all world standards, I would say the vast majority of people that post on ATOT are at least in the top 15% richest people in the world. How are we restricted other than the restrictions we put on ourselves? For many of us, spending $100-300 on a plane ticket for a vacation (freedom again) is nothing, but to many people in the world that is more than a years salary.

As for J.K. Rowling, yes she was relatively unhappy homeless, but my point was to talk about the extremes and to point out that both sides have their own forms of happiness and unhappiness. Some homeless people would say they are more free to do what they want because they are not tied down to any money system or any system whatsoever. Again, it is a mentallity thing.

I say middle of the road and avoid extremes is probably the most calm life, but that doesn't even guarantee happiness. My point is this, to even put money and happiness together, is invariably a wrong way of thinking. You can make excuses saying that it buys freedom, which it doesn't because freedom is a mentallity again. Money can buy a relative amount of time, but what do you fill it with? Unless you are filling it with what makes you happy (what fulfills you), then you won't be happy, and chances are what fulfills you can be done whther you win the lottery or not.

 

[desy]

No such thing as freedom in a society, as soon as more than two people enter a room compromises are made. . .

 

[Syringer]

:music: I don't know what, they want from me
It's like the more money we come across
The more problems we see :music:

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: JLGatsby

Originally posted by: her209
Yes or no. Black or white.

Honestly, I think murder is up for toss in terms of good/evil.

Is it wrong to murder someone who is trying to murder you? What if the government makes self defense illegal? The government certainly is not to define what is and isn't "right/wrong. I just said you'd have to be insane to risk doing it.

You're getting into gray area. Remember, black or white.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

Originally posted by: JLGatsby

Originally posted by: BlinderBomber
What if I claimed you were brainwashed into believing that freedom was the key to true happiness? Isn't that the same, on some level, as being told what is best for the group is best for you?

Look back on history! Freedom and the independent mind has been the important factors in the advancement of human civilization. Your morality is blurred. You speak like a theoretical physicist where anything can go.

Biological? Find me the "Freedom" gene. Find any proof whatsoever that freedom is a biologically transmitted trait.

The proof is in our history! Since the dawn of mankind humans have STRIVED to be free.

Just like certain animals know what to do from the day they're born because of their instinct, such is our instinct. Freedom is our survival instinct.

The ancient Chinese, Egyptians, Greeks etc. might disagree with you.

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: BlinderBomber

Originally posted by: JS80
BlinderBomber: Is one truly happy even if his state of "happiness" is based on a lie or propaganda?

I think JLG makes a good point about freedom and true happiness. I tend to agree with him that people who are brainwashed to be "happy" are truly not happy inside (e.g. North Koreans, communists). They may show they are happy on the surface but are truly miserable inside because no matter how you see it repression is repression.

Absolutely not. True happiness is both a culturally-influenced and highly personal state of being. I think you're confusing what I'm saying, and that's probably because I'm not articulating myself very well.

What I mean to say is that cultures (not governments) help determine what makes you happy. Living under a repressive regime that takes everything you own and tortures you won't make you happy. Living under a regime that emphasizes collective good over individuality may lead to a genuine state of happiness.

What if I claimed you were brainwashed into believing that freedom was the key to true happiness? Isn't that the same, on some level, as being told what is best for the group is best for you?

Obviously I can't say for sure because I've never been in that situation. However, I had seen interviews of NK escapees who claim even though they *thought* they were happy, deep inside they felt that something was wrong and not everything was as it seemed.

But to directly answer your question, I would ask you to present evidence on how I am brainwashed, and reject your claim that I am truly not free and not happy. Tell that to a North Korean living in Pyongyang, then present to him evidence and I speculate he would realize he had been living a lie his whole life.

 

[JLGatsby]

Originally posted by: MagnusTheBrewer
The ancient Chinese, Egyptians, Greeks etc. might disagree with you.

No the educated of their society would agree. From the beginning of time people have revolted and fought wars over their freedom. Just because a society 3000 years ago was "successfully" enslaved that doesn't mean they didn't want to be free.

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: JLGatsby

Originally posted by: BlinderBomber
What if I claimed you were brainwashed into believing that freedom was the key to true happiness? Isn't that the same, on some level, as being told what is best for the group is best for you?

Look back on history! Freedom and the independent mind has been the important factors in the advancement of human civilization. Your morality is blurred. You speak like a theoretical physicist where anything can go.

Biological? Find me the "Freedom" gene. Find any proof whatsoever that freedom is a biologically transmitted trait.

The proof is in our history! Since the dawn of mankind humans have STRIVED to be free.

Just like certain animals know what to do from the day they're born because of their instinct, such is our instinct. Freedom is our survival instinct.

That simply isn't true. People have STRIVED to survive, which often means sacrificing freedom in order to participate in a system where they are guaranteed benefits - protection and food mostly.

Freedom has been willing sacrificed for thousands of years for survival.

My questions from my earlier post still stand: If "Freedom" is biological, where is the gene?

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: glutenberg
Those statistics vary from study to study unfortunately, but yes, I agree. Money doesn't necessarily guarantee happiness but as you said, happiness is relative.

Regarding Warren Buffett. The guy can be a philanthropist only because he is rich. If he was making just enough to survive or even enough to live comfortably, do you think he would be a philanthropist. He sees there is more to life because he has the means to make it that way. Also, he's donating 85% of his assets to Bill Gate's foundation because he sees an opportunity to use his mass fortune to affect the world's condition. He receives happiness in the fact that he can make a difference in this world. Him not changing his lifestyle doesn't mean much other than the fact that he came from humbler beginnings and understands the value of not being flamboyant with one's wealth.

Regarding JK Rowling, did they also ask her if being homeless was wearing her down? She doesn't have an obligation to finish the books but it's her own ambition that drives her. Do you actually think she'd rather still be homeless and struggling to support her and her daughter? Sure, she was inspired by her condition to strive but that doesn't mean that she can't strive now that she's become rich. She merely has to strive for even greater feats.

If you look at the two extremes of being in abject poverty and wealthy, you will find that wealthier people are happier. When you have to skip meals because you can't afford to spend money on food, when you have to skip taking your sick child to the doctor because you can't afford it, when you don't know if you'll be sleeping on the streets one night or a bed the other, your worries are much greater in scale than, "do my friends like me only for my money?"

How do you become content with your life if you're restricted by monetary means? You ask why we don't just do whatever we want and yet that's the easiest question to answer. It generally stems back to money. We can't do whatever we want because people have to weigh the risks of differing levels of happiness. Most will have to settle for doing something they may not particularly enjoy because you can't live on your dreams as much as Hollywood has told us that we can. Dreams don't feed, clothe, or shelter you. At most they feed the soul.

Regarding your last point. You can definitely help people around you with an average income but with pure financial security, you can not only focus more on helping but you also have more means to affect a larger amount of people. That may not be what makes you happy in life but it leaves open that option.

Ask yourself how many people when they become "rich" actually go out of there way to help others? It is quite rare. The people that do realize that money is transitory and doesn't offer happiness.

Also, another point, by all world standards, I would say the vast majority of people that post on ATOT are at least in the top 15% richest people in the world. How are we restricted other than the restrictions we put on ourselves? For many of us, spending $100-300 on a plane ticket for a vacation (freedom again) is nothing, but to many people in the world that is more than a years salary.

As for J.K. Rowling, yes she was relatively unhappy homeless, but my point was to talk about the extremes and to point out that both sides have their own forms of happiness and unhappiness. Some homeless people would say they are more free to do what they want because they are not tied down to any money system or any system whatsoever. Again, it is a mentallity thing.

I say middle of the road and avoid extremes is probably the most calm life, but that doesn't even guarantee happiness. My point is this, to even put money and happiness together, is invariably a wrong way of thinking. You can make excuses saying that it buys freedom, which it doesn't because freedom is a mentallity again. Money can buy a relative amount of time, but what do you fill it with? Unless you are filling it with what makes you happy (what fulfills you), then you won't be happy, and chances are what fulfills you can be done whther you win the lottery or not.

I would like to meet someone who actually says they enjoy being homeless because they can do more of what they want (it would have to be someone who has experienced both being rich and poor). You can't have someone who hasn't even experienced being rich giving advice about what it's like.

Like you said, happiness is a mentality but as always mentality is completely bound upon society and culture. You can go anywhere in the world and you will find that financial security is a universal desire. If you look at short term happiness, people can easily deny the desire for money but once you are in need of it, that's when the realization of monetary wealth comes into play. It's easy for me to say that money isn't everything until one day my parents (God forbid) get older and require medical treatment. You're going to do everything monetarily possible to help them and that puts you in a huge bind. Are you going to be happy knowing that had you been rich you could've helped your family more?

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: desy
No such thing as freedom in a society, as soon as more than two people enter a room compromises are made. . .

Not quite the same freedom that the topic is talking about. But yes.

 

[slayer202]

I think anyone who says no is either lying, or just doesn't realize it.

EVERYTHING is about money. Wouldn't you be happier if you didn't have to work? Or if you like your job, you can continue without really NEEDING it.

You can do anything you want, and give the people you love the things they need and want

 

[dfi]

Rarely does money make someone happy. Money, in and of itself, is rarely the end for most people. Usually, it is merely the means to an end. It sounds obvious when stated, but it's often forgotten. People forget that money is the means and not the end. They direct their efforts towards this false end. Once they've obtained money, they realize they are not happy because they have not reached the end. Even worse, treating money as the end may have lead them away from the true end.

Like the OP said, people have different definitions of happiness. So to address the OP's question of whether money makes me happy, it would be imperative to address the means that the money is obtained. How was the money obtained? How much effort exerted? Was anyone hurt physically or emotionally?

If the means with which the money is obtained is not addressed, then the discussion is not nearly as fun. A discussion of money obtained without effort becomes a discussion about the effect of money on others, i.e., how money affect those around you. That's not nearly as fun to me.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

Originally posted by: JLGatsby

Originally posted by: MagnusTheBrewer
The ancient Chinese, Egyptians, Greeks etc. might disagree with you.

No the educated of their society would agree. From the beginning of time people have revolted and fought wars over their freedom. Just because a society 3000 years ago was "successfully" enslaved that doesn't mean they didn't want to be free.

The educated of those cultures "agreed" that slavery was just fine thank you. From the beginning of time people have indeed fought wars over slavery, mostly who got to inslave who. All enslaved people want to be free to not have to do what someone else wants them to do but, it doesn't mean they don't want to enslave someone else.

The idea that freedom or the desire for it is biologically encoded in us is bunk, drivel and, demonstrably incorrect.

 

[JLGatsby]

Originally posted by: BlinderBomber
That simply isn't true. People have STRIVED to survive, which often means sacrificing freedom in order to participate in a system where they are guaranteed benefits - protection and food mostly.

Freedom has been willing sacrificed for thousands of years for survival.

My questions from my earlier post still stand: If "Freedom" is biological, where is the gene?

No people who give up freedom for security were simply sold a trick by a salesperson (politician) so they could be taken control of. They were suckered.

Ayn Rand said it perfectly...

"It stands to reason that where there's sacrifice, there's someone collecting sacrificial offerings. Where there is service, there is someone being served. The man who speaks to you of sacrifice speaks of slaves and masters. And intends to be master."

Where is the freedom gene? Same place the gene the birds or any other instinct heavy animal is.

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: BlinderBomber

Originally posted by: JLGatsby

Originally posted by: BlinderBomber
What if I claimed you were brainwashed into believing that freedom was the key to true happiness? Isn't that the same, on some level, as being told what is best for the group is best for you?

Look back on history! Freedom and the independent mind has been the important factors in the advancement of human civilization. Your morality is blurred. You speak like a theoretical physicist where anything can go.

Biological? Find me the "Freedom" gene. Find any proof whatsoever that freedom is a biologically transmitted trait.

The proof is in our history! Since the dawn of mankind humans have STRIVED to be free.

Just like certain animals know what to do from the day they're born because of their instinct, such is our instinct. Freedom is our survival instinct.

That simply isn't true. People have STRIVED to survive, which often means sacrificing freedom in order to participate in a system where they are guaranteed benefits - protection and food mostly.

Freedom has been willing sacrificed for thousands of years for survival.

My questions from my earlier post still stand: If "Freedom" is biological, where is the gene?

As you have said, people have a basic instinct to survive, hence, the reasoning for society and community development. It's a stronger guarantee of food and survival. In the current world, food has been replaced by money in essence. Survival depends on your monetary standing. More money means more insurance that you'll have at least the basics for life. Once you have the basics covered, that's when you can feel secure in pursuing other forms of happiness.

 

[jakedeez]

No money won't buy happiness. But poverty often leads to sadness.

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: BlinderBomber

Originally posted by: JS80
BlinderBomber: Is one truly happy even if his state of "happiness" is based on a lie or propaganda?

I think JLG makes a good point about freedom and true happiness. I tend to agree with him that people who are brainwashed to be "happy" are truly not happy inside (e.g. North Koreans, communists). They may show they are happy on the surface but are truly miserable inside because no matter how you see it repression is repression.

Absolutely not. True happiness is both a culturally-influenced and highly personal state of being. I think you're confusing what I'm saying, and that's probably because I'm not articulating myself very well.

What I mean to say is that cultures (not governments) help determine what makes you happy. Living under a repressive regime that takes everything you own and tortures you won't make you happy. Living under a regime that emphasizes collective good over individuality may lead to a genuine state of happiness.

What if I claimed you were brainwashed into believing that freedom was the key to true happiness? Isn't that the same, on some level, as being told what is best for the group is best for you?

Obviously I can't say for sure because I've never been in that situation. However, I had seen interviews of NK escapees who claim even though they *thought* they were happy, deep inside they felt that something was wrong and not everything was as it seemed.

But to directly answer your question, I would ask you to present evidence on how I am brainwashed, and reject your claim that I am truly not free and not happy. Tell that to a North Korean living in Pyongyang, then present to him evidence and I speculate he would realize he had been living a lie his whole life.

I'm just saying, who are you to say they are brainwashed? (I happen to agree with you that the principles that govern American life are "better" than those that govern the lives of N Koreans) You are certainly free, I'm not trying to dispute that. I am saying that your belief (as is mine) that freedom is "best" is a biased one. We just happen to believe that because our society emphasizes it. Just like we emphasize the accumulation of wealth.

Think about it this way - We consider Tiger Woods one of the best athletes ever, why? Because he can hit a ball into a hole a few hundred yards away with relatively great accuracy. We consider idolize guys like David Ortiz, Ty Cobb, Tony Gwynn, etc, why? Because they are proficient at a game called baseball.

Outside of our society these merits would have no worth. We have created the worth that surrounds these individuals. I would argue that we have done the same concerning our core values.

That being said, I'm not out to convince you... I don't want to turn this into an argument like with Gatsby, but I'd be curious to see what you think about that.

 

[JLGatsby]

Originally posted by: MagnusTheBrewer
The idea that freedom or the desire for it is biologically encoded in us is bunk, drivel and, demonstrably incorrect.

Create a human "from nowhere" with no social influences to shape him, just perfectly in his natural state, and enslave him, put him in a cage all day, he will not be happy.

Stick him in a cage in the forest, let he watch the animals and trees exist beyond his grasp. Let see the berries and streams he cannot feed from. Let him watch the other creatures run about, but he cannot. He will BEG for freedom every time. It's embedded in us. It's preset. It's part of being human. That's a FACT.

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: BlinderBomber

Originally posted by: JLGatsby

Originally posted by: BlinderBomber
What if I claimed you were brainwashed into believing that freedom was the key to true happiness? Isn't that the same, on some level, as being told what is best for the group is best for you?

Look back on history! Freedom and the independent mind has been the important factors in the advancement of human civilization. Your morality is blurred. You speak like a theoretical physicist where anything can go.

Biological? Find me the "Freedom" gene. Find any proof whatsoever that freedom is a biologically transmitted trait.

The proof is in our history! Since the dawn of mankind humans have STRIVED to be free.

Just like certain animals know what to do from the day they're born because of their instinct, such is our instinct. Freedom is our survival instinct.

That simply isn't true. People have STRIVED to survive, which often means sacrificing freedom in order to participate in a system where they are guaranteed benefits - protection and food mostly.

Freedom has been willing sacrificed for thousands of years for survival.

My questions from my earlier post still stand: If "Freedom" is biological, where is the gene?

As you have said, people have a basic instinct to survive, hence, the reasoning for society and community development. It's a stronger guarantee of food and survival. In the current world, food has been replaced by money in essence. Survival depends on your monetary standing. More money means more insurance that you'll have at least the basics for life. Once you have the basics covered, that's when you can feel secure in pursuing other forms of happiness.

I mostly agree, but the infusion of money was artificial, no?

 

[glutenberg]

I will admit, this question is a loaded question. There are implications of money directly buying happiness whereas it's the indirect effects of having money that encourages happiness. So, in that sense, I would say, no, it doesn't guarantee happiness but it can encourage it.

 

[LS20]

Originally posted by: slayer202
I think anyone who says no is either lying, or just doesn't realize it.

EVERYTHING is about money. Wouldn't you be happier if you didn't have to work? Or if you like your job, you can continue without really NEEDING it.

You can do anything you want, and give the people you love the things they need and want

were you much happier when you were 13 or when you were 16 and had your first job?

were you much happier when you got a real job over college wage jobs?

surely the best meal youve had in your life wasnt hte most expensive , right?

best night out wasnt at the most expensive posh bar/club ?


no money is bad. little money is bad. but beyond a comfort zone, MORE money is not necessarily better.

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: BlinderBomber

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: BlinderBomber

Originally posted by: JLGatsby

Originally posted by: BlinderBomber
What if I claimed you were brainwashed into believing that freedom was the key to true happiness? Isn't that the same, on some level, as being told what is best for the group is best for you?

Look back on history! Freedom and the independent mind has been the important factors in the advancement of human civilization. Your morality is blurred. You speak like a theoretical physicist where anything can go.

Biological? Find me the "Freedom" gene. Find any proof whatsoever that freedom is a biologically transmitted trait.

The proof is in our history! Since the dawn of mankind humans have STRIVED to be free.

Just like certain animals know what to do from the day they're born because of their instinct, such is our instinct. Freedom is our survival instinct.

That simply isn't true. People have STRIVED to survive, which often means sacrificing freedom in order to participate in a system where they are guaranteed benefits - protection and food mostly.

Freedom has been willing sacrificed for thousands of years for survival.

My questions from my earlier post still stand: If "Freedom" is biological, where is the gene?

As you have said, people have a basic instinct to survive, hence, the reasoning for society and community development. It's a stronger guarantee of food and survival. In the current world, food has been replaced by money in essence. Survival depends on your monetary standing. More money means more insurance that you'll have at least the basics for life. Once you have the basics covered, that's when you can feel secure in pursuing other forms of happiness.

I mostly agree, but the infusion of money was artificial, no?

All money is is a method for people of differing cultures to more easily interact with each other. At the base level, money is just bartering. Bartering is pretty much as old as it gets.