If you've grown up in suburban America, it's hard to completely escape the consumer culture that is so pervasive. It seems that one can prove her rejection of "materialism" by showing off an I Phone more than one version old. While this is certainly a generalization with plenty of exceptions, it is easy to see that most of the people we interact with-if not ourselves-seem to place great value on "stuff" and the money that buys that stuff. And while it is easy to agree that "money isn't everything" it is hard to see where we actually seem to follow this old adage. In your blog post of about 2 paragraphs, you will want to address some of the concerns below and perhaps add some of your own.
1. What is the "conventional wisdom" with respect to money and happiness? Have you experienced this view?
2. What is the author's thesis and how does it relate to the conventional wisdom?
3. The author gives a lot of attention to a critical "income threshold" for understanding the money/happiness relationship. What is this all about? What do you think of this assertion?
4. Evaluate the author's thesis. Is she correct? To what extent? What flaws, if any, are present in your view?
5. How are the views on money expressed in the article compatible with the views expressed by your family? Yourself? This is a great opportunity to discuss at home!
6. To what extent has money/income affected your college and career choice? If salary was not an issue, would you pursue a different major? Is this a valid criterion in the decision?
7. You own questions or comments.
87 comments:
Although most people would chose more money over less money, it is apparently true that the amount of money you have or earn only correlates with happiness in a few cases. I think that humans have a hierarchy of needs and wants, and once the most basic needs are fulfilled, only then do other needs and wants become relevant. We live in a society were most of our basic needs and wants are fulfilled relatively easily, so less important desires become the focus of every day life. If I don't have to be concerned with putting food on the table, I can then worry about buying myself an iPad.
Daniel Gilbert's statement in the last paragraph makes me wonder whether a balance of striving and happiness can be achieved. Is it possible that we are content with what we have while continuing economic growth? I supposed from an economist's perspective, the answer is no, because if we are content with what we have, there is no reason to work for economic growth as an individual or as a society.
Sharon Begley goes on for like an entire page about people's incomes and how they associate that with their happiness. I think that most people aren't satisfied with the amount of money they make because they think they deserve more or actually do need more. Like sure, who wouldn't want to make a little more money? But if you're getting on in life just fine without too much debt and are able to pay the bills, people should be happy with their income.
So because people want (or think they need) more money, they aren't happy.
I think this is true to some extent. I think (for some, not all) that those who tend to be on the wealthier side of the spectrum end up being more concerned about money because they have so much, but those who are in the middle-class area do their best to make enough money for the basic necessities to live and some wants here and there with the extra money they have left, and those middle-class people tend to know more about what (as the article refers to) "Grandma" was talking about with the health and friends (and I'd like to add family) that make you truly happy.
Since people always seem to want more money, many think that having more money makes one more happy. The author, Sharon Burgley, thinks that having money doesn't necessarily lead to happiness. She discusses that in the case of someone living in poverty, getting money and moving up to the middle-class does create happiness. But studies show that once a wealthy person becomes wealthier, they don't seem to get any happier. This makes perfect dense to me because a wealthy person already has an excess amount of money, when they get even more it's just even more excess money that they have nothing to do with. As someone living in poverty, getting enough money to raise themselves up to the middle class would greatly increase their standard of living and happiness. The author's thesis proves to be somewhat correct. In the case of the already wealthy, money does not buy happiness. But in the case of those in poverty, money will most likely lead to happiness.
The views of money in the article pertaining to the middle-class being content with the amount of wealth they have seems accurate as it pertains to my family. My family is very content with what we have and are not looking to be extremely wealthy. Even though college will be expensive, many colleges seem to be giving out a decent amount of financial aid, and I don't think my college or career choices will be affected much.
The conventional wisdom is that money can't buy happiness and this article seems to support that. It may be true that your life is easier being rich, in some ways it is harder be rich than poor. Items such as washing machines were once a luxury. Now they are found in almost every American home. Rich people are always trying to out compete each buying new stuff which actually makes them more miserable. A study was conducted and it was found that millionaires in America weren't much happier than slum dwellers in Calcutta. I haven't experience whether money makes you happy or not because I haven't made enough to give an accurate judgment.
The author had an interesting thesis. She stated that happiness can actually make you money and work more productive. I wouldn't agree with it in every single case, but generally I would. Money has affected my college choice, however not my degree I'm perusing. The more expensive colleges might make you look better, however it could cost you from 60,000 to 100,000 a year to just get an education. If salary wasn't an issue I would go to the best school possible.
People often regard one’s wealth with one’s ability to be happy. It is a generally accepted idea that wealth and happiness often times go hand in hand with one another. While this is not always the case, many of us share the belief that it often is. In “Why Money Doesn’t Buy Happiness” by Sharon Begley, she explains how wealth is only affective in creating happiness in certain cases. For instance, she states that “Americans who earn $50,000 per year are much happier than those who earn $10,000 per year… but Americans who earn $5 million per year are not much happier than those who earn $100,000 per year. She agrees that having money does lessen the stresses of those who are living in poverty but believes that it does not have much of an effect after that. I believe it may be true that those who still work for their money may not be happier than those who also work for their money at a lesser pay. However, I do not believe that the article provides enough evidence to conclude that those who still work are equally as happy as those who are so wealthy that they don’t need to work anymore.
The article also explains how wants become “needs” which “beings less emotional well-being than satisfying wants.” Many people can relate to the feeling of happiness that comes with buying something they’ve wanted for a long time. However, I believe that people have endless amounts of wants and will always have that satisfying feeling by buying them. Additionally, even if a want eventually becomes a need, many people will still be thankful for having what they do. While some people take their materials for granted, even the wealthiest of people are thankful for what they have and recognize their economic well-being, a gratifying feeling. For example, Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg donate billions of dollars to charity and are able to feel good by helping others. The article also mentioned how people should focus less on “economic growth” and instead on “policies that promote governance, liberties, democracy, trust, and public safety.” However, it neglects to mention that such activities require time, time is money, and people need money to support themselves and their families. While the article does make valid points that there are definitely other major factors that affect ones happiness such as relationships and health, I disagree with the article when it says money can’t buy happiness. It cannot buy someone a lifetime full of happiness without heartbreak, but it can make life much easier and allow you to focus on activities that make you happy.
Many people often link money with happiness; the "conventional wisdom" that the more material goods you buy, the happier you are. The author gives us an example of the iPhone, and its old versions. She points out the embarrassment one faces if they are not up to date with the latest technology. Similarly, it also relays the idea that if you do not have the latest technology in your possession, you can not possibly be happy. I agree with the author's assertion in that the generation we live in, technology is everything. Sometimes you feel frowned upon if you are not keeping up with the latest trends. Many people rely on their money not only as a source of happiness, but a deciding factor in many decisions. If money was never an issue, people would be able to attend their dream colleges, and careers of their choice. But, since there is a restriction, and money can not buy everything, we sometimes find ourselves limited by the financial struggles we face in our day to day lives. I do believe this is a valid criterion in the decision because due to things such as debt, money often veers us from choices we would otherwise be inclined to make.
The average American assumes that if you have more money, your life will be more luxurious and therefore more fulfilling and happy. Sharon Begley would argue against this claim, as she believes that to be happy, one only needs enough money to cover the necessities, and any extra money has little effect on happiness. The happiness gap from homeless or poor to middle class is very large, however the change in happiness goes down as wealth increases. I agree with this statement. If a lower class family doubles their money, their happiness would increase dramatically, as they could now afford the necessities and have less economic stress put on them, however, if millionaire doubled his money, the change in happiness would be minimal as he could already afford everything that he needed and most of his wants. As a teenager, I feel like I am most happy when I have a similar amount of money to the people who I spend time with. If they do something or all buy something, I want to have enough money to join them, but any money after that does not increase my happiness by much.
More money can actually reduce happiness in some cases. More money leads to more choices in products and luxuries, which may seem like a good thing, but sometimes simple is better. When we have a wide variety of choices, we will often come out doubting that the choice that we made was the best, which can cause anxiety and unhappiness. A real world example of this is Apple vs Android. The Android operating system offers a much wider variety in phones, many with better specs and more features than the iphone, however many people get iphones to avoid the choice that comes with Android and avoid making a sub-optimal decision. I think that this trend and “conventional wisdom” of money buying happiness will continue in the future. It is human nature to want more, and individual ambition is what allows the economy to grow. There would have to be a huge change in our society for this notion to disappear.
As seniors, we must decide what college, what major, and what career path we want to take. One major factor that drives our decisions is money. Many high school students will follow the “conventional wisdom”—receiving a large salary means a happier life—when choosing what major and ultimately what career path they want to take, rather than choosing something they actually like. For example, I believe a larger number of people, myself included, would pursue a major in the arts if money was not an issue since the job market for an artist or musician is so volatile.
Overall, the author’s thesis was that money doesn't buy happiness for the majority of people who are already wealthy or part of the middle class. She states that the health and social obligations are more important factors to happiness than money and that the only product of working harder for a larger paycheck is helping the country’s economy. I agree with this statement because as long as one is living well enough to splurge on wants, than it does not matter how much wealthier you are; furthermore, some jobs that make millions cause much more stress than a job at a fast food-chain, which may lead to more unhappy people that are wealthier.
I found the article interesting. The main idea was whether or not money buys happiness or if happiness gets us more money. The article talks about a poll that was taken to prove if money has an impact on happiness. The survey pointed out that people who make fifty thousand dollars a year are significantly happier than those ho make only ten thousand a year. The article then points out that people who make five million dollars a year aren't at all that much happier than people who make one hundred thousand dollars a year. So the impact of money on happiness is there but is not as significant as it would seem. However people who make more money help the economy far more than people who don't make as much so if we want the economy to be happy "Forget everything you've read over the past two pages."
The conventional wisdom regarding money and happiness is the thought that no matter what, the more money you have, the happier you will be. This is experienced by kids everyday especially seniors, because the kids whose parents by them nice cars seem to be happier than the people driving the old cars, and who have to pay for them. The kids with the old cars think every day how much happier they would feel if they had the new car. The author writes to move people away from the conventional wisdom and to realize that individual wealth does not necessarily increase the happiness of the individual. In fact, it is only definitely true for people who come from poverty and become middle class citizens. The author does also makes the point that from an economic standpoint, it is important that people continue to believe the conventional wisdom because it causes people to strive for economic excellence which then positively affects the economy. She points out that a person who makes $5 million is no more content with their life than someone who makes a simple $100,000. But, someone who makes $50,000 is considerably happier than someone who makes only $10,000. Nobody is happy with their life if they live in poverty, which explains why people who make middle class wages are much happier than the lower class. However, upper class citizens are not “happier” than middle class citizens just because of their money. The author’s ideas are definitely true, however, I fell like with money, you have more opportunities to find happiness as opposed to a middle class or lower class citizen who is working all the time so that they can support their life and even their families. If you have money, it allows you to be able to focus on the things that will make you happier, instead of survival. Money is definitely a hot topic in most households, whether or not you can get the new things that you want, or if you can go out with your friends instead of eating dinner at home for cheaper. When thinking about the schools that I want to go to, money is definitely one of the most important aspects when I think of making a decision. I don’t want to have a lot of college debt after I finish, and I don’t want to go to a cheap school where I won’t have as good of an experience. All kids want to make a lot of money, and personally, I think many kids would change their profession if money wasn’t the main priority in making their choice.
Conventional wisdom wants you to believe that money does in fact buy you happiness. I hear this all the time and even sometimes I believe it. I'm very happy knowing that I have money to spend on necessities and wants. The author however, believes the opposite. Money doesn't bring anymore satisfaction to your life unless it dramatically changes it. Once you have money, the more money you acquire does not bring back that same initial "happiness". It goes against conventional wisdom, but it does have some truth to it. I think she is correct. A millionaire is not going to be any happier than a billionaire and people who earn a high income aren't less happy than those who also have a high income, just lower than theirs. Her point of money bringing happiness to those in poverty or a rough time is very correct.
At home, my family shares the same view as the author. I am always told that money does not bring happiness and that I should never rely on money to bring me happiness. Although we might feel happy that we can afford certain things, it is not just the money that brings about this feeling. When I was younger I always thought the more money you had, the happier you were but I grew to realize that was wrong. However, money/income has affected my college and career choice. I do not want to waste my years in school training for a job that does not provide me with enough money. I chose nursing not only because it’s what I really want to do in life, but it pays really well. I think I would be happier being satisfied with what I’m doing along with earning a high income. If salary was not an issue I would just pick an easy major and just go for it. I think the article has a valid point about happiness and money.
The conventional wisdom about money and happiness is that money should be able to buy one happiness. This is because additional money gives us more choices, and satisfies needs and wants more, which in turn should make people happier. However, the author believes in studies by psychologist Dan Gilbert at Harvard University and others like him, who believe that “wealth increases human happiness when it lifts people out of abject poverty and into the middle class but […] does little to increase happiness thereafter.” According to the author, an example that refutes the theory that more choices give people happiness is that people are not happy being given so many choices due to the inability to make a decisive choice without feeling like they could have made a better choice.
While money may not be able to buy happiness according to the author, she does state that she believes that happiness can buy money. According to this theory, a person with a happy attitude typically earns higher incomes because their well-being makes them more productive and gives them other qualities that lead to higher incomes as opposed to people who are not happy.
Sharon Begley's thesis claims that money can improve one’s outlook on life to an extent, but eventually will have little impact. Personally, I believe that this claim is impossible to make. There is too much support to suggest the idea that more money can make us happier, at any level. For instance, the economist Adam Smith believed that humans are inherently selfish. With selfishness follows greed, and when the goal of one’s life is to constantly make money to support oneself within a capitalist system, how can we not have our expectations totally reliant on our economic prosperity?
We all know money is not the most important thing in life. Since we were small children, we have been told to value our friends and family above everything. But in order to support those friends and family, we have to spend. In order to spend, we have to work. My parents encourage me not to consider money to be the number one concern in life and to first focus on what makes me happy. Unfortunately, for me to reach my goals, it would take me going to an expensive college which, yes, costs a ton of money. If I could ask Sharon Begley a question, I would inquire if she thinks recent college graduates (who are up to their eyeballs in debt, of course) believe money can buy happiness. On the surface, they come from middle class families, which is supposedly when more money is no longer required for a content life. In reality, the students would give an arm and a leg to be free from their financial shackles.
Money, indirectly, can always buy happiness. Even when we buy food we make purchases based on what’s delicious and makes us content. Otherwise we would eat the bare basics of the food pyramid. Unfortunately, our modern society demands us to be money driven, as pointed out by Begley at the end of the article. It would be wonderful if we could all throw in the towel and say, “I don’t need money!” Currently, that just cannot be the case.
I dont really think money can buy you happiness. I mean sure it can buy you nice things that can make you happy for a little while but not in the long run. Happiness isnt defined on how many things you have. Its more of how content you are with what you have and who your with. You can be living in the slums or a third world country and be happy with what you have. In this article it did say that those who were cattle drivers were still almost as happy as those with high incomes. This is all personal preference.
Personally for me I would like a happy medium. I don’t need to be rich to be happy but I would like some money in the bank. However, if I am making a decent about of money and am content where I am I would be perfectly happy with where I am. Further, this is not why I would pick a job based off of how much money it would help me make. I will do what would make me happy and if that means having a job that pays a low amount of money then I would be happy.
I dont really think money can buy you happiness. I mean sure it can buy you nice things that can make you happy for a little while but not in the long run. Happiness isnt defined on how many things you have. Its more of how content you are with what you have and who your with. You can be living in the slums or a third world country and be happy with what you have. In this article it did say that those who were cattle drivers were still almost as happy as those with high incomes. This is all personal preference.
Personally for me I would like a happy medium. I don’t need to be rich to be happy but I would like some money in the bank. However, if I am making a decent about of money and am content where I am I would be perfectly happy with where I am. Further, this is not why I would pick a job based off of how much money it would help me make. I will do what would make me happy and if that means having a job that pays a low amount of money then I would be happy.
This article was very interesting and made some great points. I agreed with the author’s point about the “income threshold” because I felt if i was in that position i would feel the same. Basically, if a minimum wage worker were to become a millionaire, it would make a drastic difference in his life. But, if a billionaire were to become a trillionaire, there would not be much of a difference in happiness, if any improvement. There is a difference in these two gains of income. I think the author’s thesis was credible and showed little flaw throughout the passage. Her point that money does in fact buy happiness, through examples dating back to World War II all the way to iPods, was executed to the maximum degree of accuracy, in my opinion.
As for the college process, I think having money would make a huge difference in that situation. It would affect the process altogether. Everything would be done entirely on merit and how much one’s family earns would have nothing to do with it. Although it is on merit now, your family’s income has an effect on how much money you receive in financial aid, what schools you can apply to, and if you get accepted. People are getting jobs they hate and being unhappy simply because they need to make money to survive. That is not true happiness. I enjoyed the paragraph where it gave stats about people’s happiness around the globe, and to see that the inuits of northern Greenland were just as happy as average Americans was interesting considering how much less they have than us (in materials).
All your life all you hear is "money doesn't buy happiness," and most of the time you joke around saying this to your friends or oppositely, that you'd be a lot happier with x amount of more money. Although people say that "money doesn't buy happiness," on the inside, most people truely believe that if they had more money, their life would be much easier. Personally, I know that this has been how I've felt. Sharon Begly had made it clear that many people try to spend as little money as possible on everything, and much of their money goes to wants rather than needs, or wants that have become needs. Although people believe that money can make them happier, Begly has made it clear that this is not the case for middle class people, and only effects those who are brought out of poverty due to money.
Begly provides many examples focusing on the income threshold and how it relates to happiness. She states how when taking a survey of people from different incomes, the average rate from 1-7 was a 5.8, which I believe is relatively high. Most wealthy Americans came in at a 5.8, which is understanding. Surprisingly, many people of lower classes in other countries rated their happiness at 5.8, 4.6, ect... This goes to prove that even these poor people are just about as happy as the rich, proving that money doesn't buy happiness. Begly is using this to further prove her point that money actually does not buy happiness. This is shocking, yet not shocking to me at the same time. I am surprised by this because these people have so little, but at the same time, these people know nothing better and understand what "needs" actually are. Although Begly states that there isn't much of a change in happiness once people are brought out of poverty and has evidence to prove this, personally, I would think that people who nice from the middle class to the upperclass would be much happier because they can have more "wants" as well as needs. I do agree however, that people are never satisfied, like how Begly says "the economy is growing, but peopes happiness are not." People in the world are never happy and continuously want more and more.
The views discussed in the article are similar to the situations in my home. My family is very economically stable and I am very happy. Of course at times there's conversations about the scarcity of money, as with most people. However, my family does have many "wants," and when it comes to hurting with money, it is because of those wants, such as vacations or redecorating the house or food. Overall though, my family does have all the "needs" to survive. Money has influenced both my college and career life in a huge way. The college that I will be attending is going to be decided by how much each costs. I would love to go to a big named school, but this is not possible because of the high price. Scholarships will be very important. Also, when deciding what I want to be when I'm older, I would love to do something with culture or social studies, but other than a teacher, there aren't many stable jobs available. I would also really love to be a dietician, but the salary if a dietician is very low. Therefore, I've decided that want to be a pediatrician. In a way, this is very unfair however, it is the way life circulates. All in all, economics playa role in each individual's life differently.
According to the article, the conventional wisdom is that yes, money can buy happiness. Obviously this is not what people actually think, since I am bombarded every day with people and advertising to tell me to do what makes me happy, even if it means a low pay, because I’ll be happy, and being happy will erase all other problems in my life. The author’s thesis is that even though obviously everyone says that money is definitely the path to happiness, it actually only increases happiness when it lifts people from poverty into the middle class, and rich people are probably unhappier than middle class people because they want so many things and are constantly requiring the newest product or service. Is she correct? Probably, for some people. However, I think that happiness is less based on money and more on a state of mind. Rich people can be unhappier, if they always want to buy new things, but on the other hand, they could be happier, because they can afford more of the things they want and can recognize the fact that they should be happy that they are able to do so.
The views expressed in the article are similar to my views, except I really don’t see it as a negative thing if people want to be rich. Personally, I would prefer being rich, because I have greater freedom in pursuing activities, and money wouldn’t be as much of an issue for me. If salary was not an issue for me, then I’d definitely pursue an arts major instead of a science/engineering one, because arts majors are notorious for unemployment and low salaries, and I would never want money to be an issue in my life. However, just because I’m pursuing a different major, does not mean I’ll dedicate the rest of my life to a job that I hate just so I can have money. More money means that you have more flexibility for other activities, which is what is most important to me.
The "conventional wisdom" regarding money and happiness is that money does not buy happiness - however, the way Americans act does not support this concept, so it might be more accurate to say that most people believe (although they would not likely admit so) that money will make them happier, or make their lives easier. This view is evident when people discuss the things they would do with a million dollars, or when they buy a lottery ticket on a particularly rough day. The author's thesis contradicts this - it is that unless additional money would serve to lift someone out of poverty, it generally would not do much to improve his or her level of happiness, because more money leads to more wants after all needs are satisfied, and wants begin to become "needs".
Money and income have affected my college and career choices significantly. When I first started to think about schools to apply to, I wanted to apply to expensive schools in expensive cities such as New York, Boston, and Washington D.C. After researching schools and realizing how expensive it really is to go to college, I have decided that most of my applications will be sent to state schools, and, based on where I am accepted, I will probably choose one of the colleges that offers the lowest tuition. When college costs so much, and I still have two younger siblings, I have to be practical with my decisions in order to avoid graduating with a lot of debt. I also want to be a doctor, and my choice for medical school will likely be impacted by finance in the same manner, even though I plan to go into a relatively high-paying profession. However, the high salary is not really my motive for wanting to be a doctor, and I would probably choose that profession even if I would make much less. I do think, though, that potential salary is an important consideration in making a career choice because, depending upon whether one expects to start a family, it is important to ensure that a comfortable lifestyle can be maintained under one's salary.
According to the article, the conventional wisdom is that yes, money can buy happiness. Obviously this is not what people actually think, since I am bombarded every day with people and advertising to tell me to do what makes me happy, even if it means a low pay, because I’ll be happy, and being happy will erase all other problems in my life. The author’s thesis is that even though obviously everyone says that money is definitely the path to happiness, it actually only increases happiness when it lifts people from poverty into the middle class, and rich people are probably unhappier than middle class people because they want so many things and are constantly requiring the newest product or service. Is she correct? Probably, for some people. However, I think that happiness is less based on money and more on a state of mind. Rich people can be unhappier, if they always want to buy new things, but on the other hand, they could be happier, because they can afford more of the things they want and can recognize the fact that they should be happy that they are able to do so.
The views expressed in the article are similar to my views, except I really don’t see it as a negative thing if people want to be rich. Personally, I would prefer being rich, because I have greater freedom in pursuing activities, and money wouldn’t be as much of an issue for me. If salary was not an issue for me, then I’d definitely pursue an arts major instead of a science/engineering one, because arts majors are notorious for unemployment and low salaries, and I would never want money to be an issue in my life. However, just because I’m pursuing a different major, does not mean I’ll dedicate the rest of my life to a job that I hate just so I can have money. More money means that you have more flexibility for other activities, which is what is most important to me.
It seems to be that the conventional wisdom concerning money is that the more money you have, the happier your life will be. The author addresses this by pointing out that as Americans we opt to work harder and longer in order to enjoy a higher pay check. Which I find to be true knowing people that complain about having to work after school or about having to pick up extra shifts, but do it anyway to get the extra money. The author challenges this wisdom by looking into statistics that tell us how happy people in each income bracket are. The surprising fact, was that the happiest people were those whose income gains brought them into the middle class. After some thought, this makes sense. To be able to rise from struggling to provide basic needs, to being able to live comfortably or beyond basic needs is a big step. Once you’re living beyond basic needs, there isn’t much more to achieve, which when you think about it, makes it less surprising that happiness levels in people with salaries of $5 million weren’t much different than those with salaries of $100,00.
I agree that a raise in salary to get you above the poverty line must be much more exciting than one that only raises you higher in the middle class, but I think that she fails to neglect the fact that any salary can make people happy. I doubt anyone gets upset when they earn a raise no matter how much of a gap there is between their new and old incomes. While it is materialistic to say that I agree with the conventional wisdom, I do to an extent. After quitting my minimum wage job, and getting a job with a $9 per hour wage I was very happy. I enjoy making the extra money even if I don’t need it. I think that being able to buy luxuries makes people happier, but I only do to an extent. When you make an excessive amount of money, luxuries can easily become expected rather than “treats”.
In the article, the author generally concludes that money is not in fact the cause of happiness. I believe that her thesis is correct, however I believe that it can be subject to qualification. Personally I do not believe that having a fatter wallet will make your day to day life more rewarding or fulfilling, but I do think that it will make it easier for you to make the decisions that will lead to that fulfillment, make your life more comfortable, and open up your time for activities that do indeed cause you to feel accomplished and content.
Abraham Maslow suggested in his humanistic psychology theory of "self-actualization" that in order to achieve happiness, we needed to satisfy each level of a "pyramid of needs" which is commonly refered to as "Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs." According to Maslow, the bottom tiers of this pyramid needed to be met before the top tiers would be even capable of being met, and ultimately, when every tier is achieved, the individual would reach a perpetually satisfied and happy state known as "self actualization". The most basic tiers of this pyramid call for the individual to have his basic needs: food, shelter and water (for without these, he cannot focus on more personal and emotional requirements for happiness). As the tiers grow higher, Maslow suggests that man needs security: both safety and a sense of secure ownership over his career, employment, and property. Some people may live their entire lives struggling to satisfy the requirements to fulfill this tier and will therefore never have what it takes to ascend higher towards self actualization and perpetual happiness. Individuals who have plenty of money sail through the acquisition of these tiers as they can easily secure food, shelter, job and property security. This easily granted fulfillment of these early stages of the pyramid allow them to spend more time focusing on the upper tiers like friendship, intimacy, achievement, and self-esteem, while those who are not as affluent may be doomed to an eternal struggle to put food on the table instead of making something out of their own emotional identity. In short, I do not believe money can buy happiness, but I sure do think that it makes being happy a whole lot easier.
In the article, the author generally concludes that money is not in fact the cause of happiness. I believe that her thesis is correct, however I believe that it can be subject to qualification. Personally I do not believe that having a fatter wallet will make your day to day life more rewarding or fulfilling, but I do think that it will make it easier for you to make the decisions that will lead to that fulfillment, make your life more comfortable, and open up your time for activities that do indeed cause you to feel accomplished and content.
Abraham Maslow suggested in his humanistic psychology theory of "self-actualization" that in order to achieve happiness, we needed to satisfy each level of a "pyramid of needs" which is commonly refered to as "Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs." According to Maslow, the bottom tiers of this pyramid needed to be met before the top tiers would be even capable of being met, and ultimately, when every tier is achieved, the individual would reach a perpetually satisfied and happy state known as "self actualization". The most basic tiers of this pyramid call for the individual to have his basic needs: food, shelter and water (for without these, he cannot focus on more personal and emotional requirements for happiness). As the tiers grow higher, Maslow suggests that man needs security: both safety and a sense of secure ownership over his career, employment, and property. Some people may live their entire lives struggling to satisfy the requirements to fulfill this tier and will therefore never have what it takes to ascend higher towards self actualization and perpetual happiness. Individuals who have plenty of money sail through the acquisition of these tiers as they can easily secure food, shelter, job and property security. This easily granted fulfillment of these early stages of the pyramid allow them to spend more time focusing on the upper tiers like friendship, intimacy, achievement, and self-esteem, while those who are not as affluent may be doomed to an eternal struggle to put food on the table instead of making something out of their own emotional identity. In short, I do not believe money can buy happiness, but I sure do think that it makes being happy a whole lot easier.
In the article, the author generally concludes that money is not in fact the cause of happiness. I believe that her thesis is correct, however I believe that it can be subject to qualification. Personally I do not believe that having a fatter wallet will make your day to day life more rewarding or fulfilling, but I do think that it will make it easier for you to make the decisions that will lead to that fulfillment, make your life more comfortable, and open up your time for activities that do indeed cause you to feel accomplished and content.
Abraham Maslow suggested in his humanistic psychology theory of "self-actualization" that in order to achieve happiness, we needed to satisfy each level of a "pyramid of needs" which is commonly refered to as "Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs." According to Maslow, the bottom tiers of this pyramid needed to be met before the top tiers would be even capable of being met, and ultimately, when every tier is achieved, the individual would reach a perpetually satisfied and happy state known as "self actualization". The most basic tiers of this pyramid call for the individual to have his basic needs: food, shelter and water (for without these, he cannot focus on more personal and emotional requirements for happiness). As the tiers grow higher, Maslow suggests that man needs security: both safety and a sense of secure ownership over his career, employment, and property. Some people may live their entire lives struggling to satisfy the requirements to fulfill this tier and will therefore never have what it takes to ascend higher towards self actualization and perpetual happiness. Individuals who have plenty of money sail through the acquisition of these tiers as they can easily secure food, shelter, job and property security. This easily granted fulfillment of these early stages of the pyramid allow them to spend more time focusing on the upper tiers like friendship, intimacy, achievement, and self-esteem, while those who are not as affluent may be doomed to an eternal struggle to put food on the table instead of making something out of their own emotional identity. In short, I do not believe money can buy happiness, but I sure do think that it makes being happy a whole lot easier.
Most people do support the theory that "money buys happiness," but is this idea completely accurate? The author, Shawn Begley, believes that although people from the lower class believe money can buy them happiness, those that are currently wealthy do not feel joy with earning more money. When people go from being apart of the poverty group up to middle-class, they do experience happiness. They feel like they now have some money to buy "wanted items," along with the necessities. With rich people, studies found that the average happiness level on a 1-7 scale was 5.8. This number is shockingly low to what most expected their happiness to be.
Even though the author doesn't necessarily agree that money buys happiness, she does find that happiness buys money. Happier people get more done and are more enthusiastic with their jobs, which leads to promotions and a higher income. For me, I do believe money buys happiness. When I earn money at work, I feel like I can buy more items I want since it is now affordable. However, money and happiness does have limitations. For many people applying to colleges, myself included, some are simply unaffordable. Therefore, the money in this situation will not buy happiness if you can't go to your first choice college because of tuition. Money can buy happiness, but there is a limitation on the amount of happiness it can bring.
The views in the article about money are that it, unless you are in poverty, does not buy you true happiness. If you are in the middle class or above, money cannot buy you real happiness. I have grown up with the same principles as this article. That although money is a necessity to live (comfortably) it does not bring true happiness or life satisfaction. Money is obviously important to us all within the society that we live, but certainly, to obtain the most money possible should not be the most important goal in one’s life. The goals in one’s life should include finding love, true friends, fulfillment through work, and staying true to your family—which will all bring about real happiness and life satisfaction.
Money has definitely had some impact on the choosing of my major and possible career path. Ultimately, I want to end up in a job where I can be able to help others around me in a way that can possibly change their lives. Because of money though, I am limited in my options. I want to be able to make enough money where I can live the lifestyle that I have become accustomed to, but still fulfill my goal of helping people. I would like to major in either Biology, Chemistry, or neuroscience and follow on a pre-medicine track. Doing so would allow me to make money in a secure job and allow me to achieve my goal. Yet, I would really love to major in music and to play music for people for the rest of my life, but there is not enough money to be made in that field to live the type of lifestyle that I wish to live.
In today’s society, it is often figured that with the more money you have, you will have more happiness. However, this article written by Sharon Begley counters this view and believes that money will only bring you happiness when it lifts you out of poverty, and it does little to increase happiness thereafter. In this article, one point that was made was that with wealth comes more choices. Although choices many be seen as a positive thing, this leaves people overwhelmed and thinking that they could have chosen something even better. By having additional wealth, wants have a habit of becoming needs, and we become less satisfied with what luxuries we already have. I agree with this point that was made because in today’s society, people are always looking for the newest and most extravagant things. We aren’t very appreciative of the luxuries that are already given to us and are often looking for something better.
From this article, I can agree with the points that the author has made in that money can only buy happiness up until a certain point. Without money, we obviously would not be able to afford the necessities such as housing, clothing, and food, and without these essentials, we wouldn’t be able to live a comfortable and enjoyable life. However, once these necessities are taken care of, money doesn’t contribute much to our happiness. It was found that both a group of multimillionaires and a group of cattle-herding Masai in Kenya came from completely different economic backgrounds, yet they were still satisfied with their life in the same way. This article’s view on money are compatible with my life because at times I find myself wanting to get the newest Iphone, or wanting to buy new clothes. Once I get these things, however, it may be satisfying for a short amount time, but eventually it wears off and I am once again left wanting more things. Also, money has affected my college and career choices in that although some colleges seem perfect and fit for me, the tuition is a large factor that decides whether or not I can go there. In this case, it can be seen that money can potentially buy happiness, because with wealth, you can afford to go places you wouldn’t be able to otherwise.
After reading the article I can see where the author is coming from when saying money does not buy happiness. She states good objectives and provides proof to back these up. For example saying how "an American who earns $5 million per year are not much happier than those who earn $100,000 per year." The author's theory is that unless you are completely homeless or making substantially under minimum wage per year, money will not get you to happiness or make your life more happy than the average middle class citizen.
although I do disagree with the authors theory. Yes real happiness beyond money is to value your health, friends and relationships, but it is such a hard argument to say that a millionaire is not much more happy than a middle class person. There are so many more doors open to you when you have millions of dollars. I feel that everyone says money does not buy happiness because they do not have the option right now as being a millionaire and buying their happiness. But if someone was a millionaire I cannot see why they would not be overly content with their life.
It is the common belief or “conventional wisdom” that money will always increase one’s happiness. Yet, as it has been examined in Sharon Begley’s Newsweek article, that is not the case. Essentially, money is only a factor in increasing one’s satisfaction when it brings a person into the middle class from a life of poverty. It does not have a significant effect, however, when it makes the affluent even more wealthy. In fact, there is a possibility that too much money can be detrimental for “materialism can negatively influence well-being.”
I personally have wondered to what extent money drives happiness, and I found that this article gave an interesting insight. I was surprised to read that homeless people were ranked exactly half as happy as the average multimillionaire. I would have assumed the difference be much greater, however, this insinuates that Begley’s proposition is accurate. Also, I was not surprised to learn that happy people who show initiative and actively work to increase their well-being are more successful, become married, and earn a higher income. In this case, money does not necessarily imply happiness, but happiness can lead to money.
Most people agree with the fact that the more money you have, the happier you are. The "convential wisdom" is that more money generally increases happiness. An example of this convential wisdom is displayed with high school students. Usually students with nicer cars, phones, or clothes are happier than those who are less fortunate. In contrast, there are a some kids who are perfectly content with what they have.
The author makes an interesting point about how people who earn an income of $5 million per year aren't much happier than those who earn $100,000 a year. This is because both people live a comfortable lifestyle and the richer people just have more money that they don't know how to spend. The truth is that more money does increase happiness for poor people, but for the rich people it is health and having friends that makes them more happy. My family is middle-class and we are perfectly happy with our lives. There are wants that can't be satisfied, but our needs are fulfilled and we accept the fact that we can't own everything we want. Lastly, money has affected my college choice because some colleges I've looked at would put me in serious debt in the future. If money wasn't an option, I would chose the best college available whether it is the most expensive or not.
In the article "Why Money Doesn't Buy Happiness" many economic proofs and social proofs on how many doesn't truly make you happy are quite visible in society today. The "conventional wisdom" would say that money doesn't bring true happiness and they are partially right. From a straight forward, economics view, money does make you happier since having the most possible money left in hand after transactions and income will leave you with more to fit basic needs. The flaw in looking at things so clearly is that human psyche hasn't been experimented with, instead of using just "ceteris paribus" they need to examine actual humans; which ended up contradicting the positive statement. The underlying truth is that money will only make people going from poverty to middle class happier and then only a little bit after that. The income threshold is how once you get to a certain income, you aren't really any happier since there is always a newer and better want or desire. I feel that this is extremely sad because the only people who can now find happiness from money are people who have gone without it, and not the general population(middle class) and this is also true about the amount of products we have. Once we own many different "wants" we don't really find any happiness in having a newer product.
The view in this article are actually true, moreover; my entire immediate family completely understand what money can do. My brother, for example; falsely won a lotto ticket for about fifty-thousand dollars, and since my family is a little below middle class, my mom for about two days seemed way more optimistic until we found out it was faked. I also used to be middle upper class so I can comply that I definitely miss having a little more wealth, not for wants or desires, but for dealing with needs like food and home maintenance(shelter). On a similar aspect, money has much affected my choice college, although I am being recruited for track and might be getting some sort of scholarship. But, I have to assume being given no money so I haven't looked at almost any of the really big name, expensive schools such as ivy league schools. To conclude what I read, it surprised me the most to find out that happiness correlated with money. I am now looking into if that actually works since I'd rather be happier than have more wealth
In the article "Why Money Doesn't Buy Happiness" many economic proofs and social proofs on how many doesn't truly make you happy are quite visible in society today. The "conventional wisdom" would say that money doesn't bring true happiness and they are partially right. From a straight forward, economics view, money does make you happier since having the most possible money left in hand after transactions and income will leave you with more to fit basic needs. The flaw in looking at things so clearly is that human psyche hasn't been experimented with, instead of using just "ceteris paribus" they need to examine actual humans; which ended up contradicting the positive statement. The underlying truth is that money will only make people going from poverty to middle class happier and then only a little bit after that. The income threshold is how once you get to a certain income, you aren't really any happier since there is always a newer and better want or desire. I feel that this is extremely sad because the only people who can now find happiness from money are people who have gone without it, and not the general population(middle class) and this is also true about the amount of products we have. Once we own many different "wants" we don't really find any happiness in having a newer product.
The view in this article are actually true, moreover; my entire immediate family completely understand what money can do. My brother, for example; falsely won a lotto ticket for about fifty-thousand dollars, and since my family is a little below middle class, my mom for about two days seemed way more optimistic until we found out it was faked. I also used to be middle upper class so I can comply that I definitely miss having a little more wealth, not for wants or desires, but for dealing with needs like food and home maintenance(shelter). On a similar aspect, money has much affected my choice college, although I am being recruited for track and might be getting some sort of scholarship. But, I have to assume being given no money so I haven't looked at almost any of the really big name, expensive schools such as ivy league schools. To conclude what I read, it surprised me the most to find out that happiness correlated with money. I am now looking into if that actually works since I'd rather be happier than have more wealth
Generally, most people assume that having more money will make them happier. According to Begley, however, that is not the case. Begley provides solid statistics that back up her thesis: having a lot of money does not necessarily make a person happier than a person who does not have a lot of money. The author discusses a survey that shows how some villages and town, ones without even a little bit of money, are just as content as millionaires in the United States. Despite the solid evidence brought forth by Begley, there were some flaws in her article. The "Inuit of northern Ireland", the place that had the same happiness level as millionaires, might be invalid in this circumstance. This place in Ireland might be basing there happiness off of each other or places similar to them. It is a possibility that they are content with the way they are living in their current system. Who knows what they would say if they were given the chance to move to the United States and live the life of the average American. Speaking of Americans, we continuously strive to achieve the maximum amount of money possible, which clearly says something about us: we think money makes us happy. Unfortunately, our entire lives revolve around making money. Almost everything Americans do is to better themselves economically. So if we are trying to be as happy as possible while trying to make as much money as possible, then why doesn't money buy happiness?
Generally, most people assume that having more money will make them happier. According to Begley, however, that is not the case. Begley provides solid statistics that back up her thesis: having a lot of money does not necessarily make a person happier than a person who does not have a lot of money. The author discusses a survey that shows how some villages and town, ones without even a little bit of money, are just as content as millionaires in the United States. Despite the solid evidence brought forth by Begley, there were some flaws in her article. The "Inuit of northern Ireland", the place that had the same happiness level as millionaires, might be invalid in this circumstance. This place in Ireland might be basing there happiness off of each other or places similar to them. It is a possibility that they are content with the way they are living in their current system. Who knows what they would say if they were given the chance to move to the United States and live the life of the average American. Speaking of Americans, we continuously strive to achieve the maximum amount of money possible, which clearly says something about us: we think money makes us happy. Unfortunately, our entire lives revolve around making money. Almost everything Americans do is to better themselves economically. So if we are trying to be as happy as possible while trying to make as much money as possible, then why doesn't money buy happiness?
The conventional wisdom with regards to money and happiness is that “money can buy happiness.” Economists concluded from their observations about the sale of items between two people that buyers want to purchase the item for as little as possible, and sellers want to sell the item for as much as possible, and therefore, “more money must be better than less.” I have experienced this feeling before, on multiple occasions. For example, whether it was buying concert tickets or new clothes, having enough money to buy some of my favorite things demonstrates how money can buy happiness in the form of material possessions. However, as proven in the article, “Why Money Doesn’t Buy Happiness,” written by Sharon Begley, money can only buy happiness up to a certain point, then after that happiness does not increase much further. This idea is the contrary of conventional wisdom regarding money and happiness, though it is also a common idea in that people are taught from a young age to value relationships and family instead of money and material goods.
I agree with the author that money cannot buy happiness, but only to a certain extent. Indeed, some moral and mental values cannot be altered by money in order to further satisfy a person. However, there were not enough actual stories or quotes from people who have been in such a position that led me to be fully convinced by the author. In other words, the major flaw of Sharon Begley was that there was not enough support from everyday people, outside of the studies that were performed and explained, that helped me to believe that money cannot buy happiness. Of course, money is such a sensitive subject to most people because of the potential it has to fully control a person’s life. Thus, there is an obvious correlation between money and happiness.
A common assumption in regards to the relationship between money and happiness is that the more money you have, the happier you are. The author agreed to this belief to an extent, in that people from lower classes would essentially be happier if they had more money, but people that were already wealthy wouldn't gain much from it. I personally think that while money can buy you things that make you happy for a short period of time, such as a new phone or new clothes, it can’t buy long-term happiness. Money definitely has a major influence over choosing a college and career, considering that the price of tuition has been rising to huge numbers in recent years. It also affects what career you choose to pursue in that you have to consider how much your salary will be, and if it will be enough to support yourself, your family, and leave you happy with your life.
I think that one of the biggest reasons why people make the connection between happiness and money is the media. The media has grown tremendously in the past decade, and even in the past year. We see wealthy people like celebrities and pro athletes in the media every day, and are reminded of how wealthy they are and how content with their lives they seem. Even seeing friends and family on social networks with new cars or new phones makes us want to be just as good as them. With the media constantly promoting materialism, our society continues to see money as the sole source of happiness.
The concept that money often buys happiness has made a lot of controversy between people. Research has proven money can buy happiness to an extent, but having a plethora of money does not buy happiness. A lot of people believe that the richest people in the world are often the happiest, which is incorrect. For example, a person with a 1999 broken down car usually experiences more happiness than a man who has 4 2014 Porsches just sitting in his garage. Nowadays, people think they require the newest, greatest, and best innovations of the time to be truly happy. That is not true. The article stated, "Washing machines become necessities, the newly affluent don't feel the same joy in having a machine do the laundry that their grandparents, suddenly freed from washboards, did." This generation is programmed to always want more and more and will not stop until they reach the top. Several years ago people were content with what they had, but in recent years people are starting to get more greedy. I don't know where it all went down hill. It is always the simple things that make people get all warm and tingly inside that makes them happy. For example, health, family, friends, the bare necessities and having a good home to live in.
I agree with Sharon Begley and her view on why money doesn't buy happiness. Living in a healthy environment, having a descent job, and having loving family and friends is truly everything someone can ask for. It does make a lot of sense with her explaining that people moving from the lower class to the middle class are truly happy because they have money. But, people moving from the high class to the most wealthy class are not truly happy. They are always in fear someone will take their money, people are not being genuine, or others are being fake in order to get money from them. The really rich people in this world are not happy. It is very evident. My family believes that no matter how much money a person may gain from a bonus or something else they won't be necessarily happy in the long run. That thirst for more will be inevitable. I agree with what the author wrote, in my opinion. Money has been a big factor in where I choose to go to college and my career choice. My dream is to be in the fashion business, but I believe I won't receive enough money from that job to make me happy and afford all the bills. So I had to direct my future in another direction. If the salary was not an issue I would without a doubt go into fashion business and pursue my dream of traveling the world. Except, that is not reality and money is holding me back. I do feel, however, that money may not buy happiness, but not having money can lead to depression and sadness. With the world constantly improving and new inventions coming out almost every day people want to be in the norm and following the crowd. If they don't follow the crowd they won't fit in and people will get depressed. Money does not buy happiness.
The conventional wisdom on this topic is that money can in fact buy happiness. We have all heard this at some point in our lives and we may have even grown up believing it. In this article, Begley discusses the fact that after many economists have researched to prove this statement, it seems that it isn't true. What was discovered is that money can make people happier if it takes them from poverty to middle class. If a wealthy person continues to inherit money, it seems to decrease their happiness. As a member of a family in middle class, I would have agreed with this statement if we lived anywhere else. But, being as though Long Island is one of the most expensive places to live in the world I would say that getting more money would definitely make me happier. I'm sure my family would agree with me.
Personally, I think that money can buy happiness, if used correctly. Their is a quote by a fictional character, Blair Waldorf, who said, "Whoever said money couldn't buy happiness didn't know where to shop.". I think a very materialistic person would agree with this. I also think that money can buy happiness if you are spending it on someone else. I know that when I do something nice for someone and buy them something that they really wanted, or even something that means a lot, I always feel really happy after. Just because someone is wealthy does not mean that they are obligated to spend their money. I think that middle class people who are able to have their necessities are able to appreciate their extra money and use it to buy things that they really wanted rather than just spending it to have the next big thing. People who don't have a lot of money are able to focus on the things that really matter and find other ways to be happy. Money is not the only source of happiness but I think it definitely can contribute.
The conventional wisdom on this topic is that money can in fact buy happiness. We have all heard this at some point in our lives and we may have even grown up believing it. In this article, Begley discusses the fact that after many economists have researched to prove this statement, it seems that it isn't true. What was discovered is that money can make people happier if it takes them from poverty to middle class. If a wealthy person continues to inherit money, it seems to decrease their happiness. As a member of a family in middle class, I would have agreed with this statement if we lived anywhere else. But, being as though Long Island is one of the most expensive places to live in the world I would say that getting more money would definitely make me happier. I'm sure my family would agree with me.
Personally, I think that money can buy happiness, if used correctly. Their is a quote by a fictional character, Blair Waldorf, who said, "Whoever said money couldn't buy happiness didn't know where to shop.". I think a very materialistic person would agree with this. I also think that money can buy happiness if you are spending it on someone else. I know that when I do something nice for someone and buy them something that they really wanted, or even something that means a lot, I always feel really happy after. Just because someone is wealthy does not mean that they are obligated to spend their money. I think that middle class people who are able to have their necessities are able to appreciate their extra money and use it to buy things that they really wanted rather than just spending it to have the next big thing. People who don't have a lot of money are able to focus on the things that really matter and find other ways to be happy. Money is not the only source of happiness but I think it definitely can contribute.
Though some may like to believe that money can bring happiness through having grand luxuries such as jets and mansions, the truth is actually quite far from that perception. Sharon Begley goes into how wealthy millionaires aren't satisfied with their lives due to the fact that wants became necessities whereas luxurious materials once eyed on as a want, now became a necessity after incorporating those luxuries into their lives. This does prove a point that anyone can relate to. From eyeing at that new phone, you developed a want for it, but after you buy the phone you begin to feel as if the phone is just another part of your day. The phone to you then loses its significance compared to what it originally was as a want. This explanation truly exemplifies how money buying happiness is a conventional wisdom that convinces people that money can buy anything that you want. That is true, but after a while, you would become dissatisfied with what you have.
As for the part when the author gets into how people with lower income have more happiness than those who have high income, I would have to agree. It makes sense that the people with a lower income working into the middle class are more satisfied with themselves because they feel like they are accomplishing more. They work towards that goal of becoming wealthy and getting their wants. Meanwhile a rich millionaire is already wealthy whereas they already achieved that goal and have what they want. So one can say that those with lower income are happier because they have more they have more to look forward to with becoming wealthy.
In regards to the "conventional wisdom" between money and happiness, most people are breed into believing that a necessity to being truly happy is the amount of money in their wallet. There seems to be a sliver of truth in this, in that to a point people can be happier in their lives with the comfort of no economic burden. Sharon Begley believes that money in some instances, based on your standard of living, can in fact cause happiness. She goes on to explain how families living under the middle class and in poverty are living with less than just necessities for everyday; therefore if they were given money, it would cause a significant impact in their living and will generate happiness and comfort from their previous living style. But, given an already affluent family living in economic comfort, an increase in their income would do little to nothing to their overall "happiness" in life. I do agree with Begley in that someone with little money to start can find happiness with economic comfort and living a more luxurious life than previously. If you already have enough money to pay for the necessities of life, getting more money will not really increase ones happiness.
In our society today, I believe that the conventional wisdom between money and happiness continues to thrive in the regular teenage eye, as any student would be jubilant to get money and spend it on various luxuries such as a new Iphone or Jeep. The desire to keep achieving economic greatness allows our society to continue to advance in our work due to the dream to be that millionaire with no worries in the world. After all, the more money the happier.
It's the saying that everybody knows; the motto that has raised many questions: "Money doesn't buy happiness." Everyone has heard it and everyone has different opinions about it. In the article “Why Money Doesn’t Buy Happiness”, Sharon Begley proves this inquisitive statement to be true. Even though being in poverty and struggling to meet the basic needs is not an appealing way to live, it turns out that having money doesn’t necessarily mean one is satisfied with his life. Begley states that there is a difference between making $10,000 and $50,000 - one is a struggling situation and the other is more comfortable. On the other hand, there isn’t much of a difference between making $100,000 and $5 million, despite the much larger gap. Because all of the basic needs are met, the satisfaction of one’s lifestyle is entirely up to him, and not his income salary.
I found it very interesting that Begley went a step further to explain that although money doesn’t buy happiness, happiness can buy money. Studies have shown that people who are happier tend to be more productive and determined to get things done, therefore increasing their initiative and perhaps their income. As for my personal decisions, money has in fact played a role in my college decision. I am committed to play basketball in college and had been receiving contact from coaches from different kinds of schools. Some of these schools were very expensive, offering no financial aid, while others were able to offer full scholarships. It was in my best interest to take an offer for a scholarship and take out loans in a few years for graduate or medical school when I have no debt, if that’s something I’ll want to do. In the end, the situation is this: before I read this article, if you were to tell me that money doesn’t buy happiness, I would have completely disagreed with you. But now after reading about different kinds of income and the little impact it actually has on happiness, and ultimately, a way to reverse the motto, I am able to agree with the author’s main thesis.
It's the saying that everybody knows; the motto that has raised many questions: "Money doesn't buy happiness." Everyone has heard it and everyone has different opinions about it. In the article “Why Money Doesn’t Buy Happiness”, Sharon Begley proves this inquisitive statement to be true. Even though being in poverty and struggling to meet the basic needs is not an appealing way to live, it turns out that having money doesn’t necessarily mean one is satisfied with his life. Begley states that there is a difference between making $10,000 and $50,000 - one is a struggling situation and the other is more comfortable. On the other hand, there isn’t much of a difference between making $100,000 and $5 million, despite the much larger gap. Because all of the basic needs are met, the satisfaction of one’s lifestyle is entirely up to him, and not his income salary.
I found it very interesting that Begley went a step further to explain that although money doesn’t buy happiness, happiness can buy money. Studies have shown that people who are happier tend to be more productive and determined to get things done, therefore increasing their initiative and perhaps their income. As for my personal decisions, money has in fact played a role in my college decision. I am committed to play basketball in college and had been receiving contact from coaches from different kinds of schools. Some of these schools were very expensive, offering no financial aid, while others were able to offer full scholarships. It was in my best interest to take an offer for a scholarship and take out loans in a few years for graduate or medical school when I have no debt, if that’s something I’ll want to do. In the end, the situation is this: before I read this article, if you were to tell me that money doesn’t buy happiness, I would have completely disagreed with you. But now after reading about different kinds of income and the little impact it actually has on happiness, and ultimately, a way to reverse the motto, I am able to agree with the author’s main thesis.
The Conventional wisdom is the money cannot buy happiness and that the more money you have the happier you will be. Many people believe this and allow it to motivate them to get a good job and get promoted so that they can make more money and in theory be happier. Some people may spend their whole lives trying to make as much money as possible to make themselves happier The author believes that for the most part money cannot buy happiness unless it significantly changes a person's financial status. The author mentions multiple times that additional money has more of an impact on happiness if that money lifts the person out of poverty and into the middle class. I think that this is a valid point because with poverty comes many hardships and obstacles that a middle class citizen would not have to deal with. Being lifted out of poverty can help make a person feel better about themselves and therefore happier.
I agree with the author that money cannot buy happiness except in the case of a significant shift in a person's financial status. There is only so much that money can buy. Some people miss out on having a family and friends because they spend their whole lives working so they can have everything they could possibly dream of. In my opinion, this is what brings a person most of their happiness. Personally, I believe that money dictates many people's everyday decisions. Most recently, money has played a role in my college decision process. If you don't pick that right college for your major you may not be able to get a job and even if you do get a job it might not be a very good one. On top of this, college is extremely expensive and many graduates come out with massive amounts of debt. This being said I do not think money can buy happiness even though money people believe it cant. I also believe that it plays a significant role in people's everyday decisions.
The "conventional wisdom" with respect to money and happiness that the article discusses states that money does not buy happiness, it is your relationships with others as well as your personal well being that dictate your satisfaction with life. I agree with this idea because even though I can go out and buy a new video game and be happy for a few hours, there is nothing like having family and friends that support and care about you. However, money does not have to directly increase your levels of happiness. Someone who is financially secure has a lot less to worry about than someone who is living paycheck to paycheck. Lessened stress levels can lead to an increase in happiness.
In this article, the author uses statistics to support her claim that money does not necessarily buy happiness. This relates to the conventional wisdom that states that traditional values such as family and health prevail over money. I believe that the author's thesis is correct to an extent. She states that people who move out of the lower class into the middle class experience a much larger increase in happiness than those who are rich and become more rich.
For myself and many others, household income is a deciding factor in a student's choice of college. One must take careful consideration with financial aid, scholarships, and student loans when selecting a college. The price of college has risen much faster than the rate of inflation in recent times. College is now a major financial burden on families and students who must take out loans. I am applying to a few private colleges and Stony Brook. Public schools are a great alternative because they are much cheaper and offer similar programs to private schools
According to this article, it seems that having "too much" money could neutralize the statement, "money = happiness". Most of the public believes that the more money you have in your pocket the happier you'll be in life which isn't the case. It looks like there's a drop off point where money stops equating to happiness and it occurs in the income threshold of the wealthy. At this point in my life, more money can make me a very happy boy but there's a cutoff when it becomes meaningless. If salary wasn't something that concerned me in my future, I'd major in political science or philosophy. But seeing that there isn't much of a job market in the topics I love, I have to (or should) change it to maintain my definition of financial security for the future. My view on money is that you need it to "survive" in today's society, whether or not you like the idea. If you are able to live comfortably then happiness shouldn't be out of reach.
With most people thinking that money can buy happiness, I 100% disagree money does n't have a causation of happiness they may correlate but neither causes the other. I disagree mostly with the fact that so many rich and famous people suffer from depression and sadness. A recent example is Robin Williams, I'm not claiming that he was a billionaire, I'm saying he was well off, as most actors are. And with that he still had the deep sadness that he held onto. I also believe that if a person has a lot of money they may seem happy when using their money or having fun because they want to set up a mask to give a false sense off that money makes happiness.
According to the article, money cannot buy happiness. For starters, I know this, and I'm sure many others know this due to the various times that we have been told such by parents, teachers, books, and movies, like "The Devil and Daniel Webster." Just as well, this article attempts to prove that happiness increases greatly in a person who moves out of poverty and into the middle class, while happiness does not increase upward from that point as much. I agree with this as many people's needs are fulfilled in the middle class along with some general wants; however, if an absurd amount of wants are fulfilled, the person can take what they have for granted and become bored with already having everything that they do, like the Socs in "The Outsiders". I also agree wholeheartedly with the author's argument that additional wealth just buys additional choice--that it is great when a few choices are opened up, but overwhelming when there are too many choices-- as I have problems making the seemingly right choice among a plethora of options. The one thing I do know is that I don't need the newest iPhone when it comes out; as long as my phone works and has a reasonable amount of features, I will keep it and not be a slave to peer pressure and planned obsolescence. Speaking of choices once again, my choice of colleges is quite vast in regards to the actual options, but the price of certain schools has led me to rule them out as a choice on my own. However, having such options available to me will not be able to make me happy by themselves, as this article dictates.
Furthermore,the article goes on to explain how one can gain true happiness. According to the article, one can achieve this by valuing social relationships and enjoying what one does for a living, and I agree with that sentiment because again, everyone is told in their lives that money isn't everything by a variety of media sources. But, the article also states that happier people tend to be more productive and as a result, get more money from raises and such, which makes sense, but is not always truly significant as a doctor could hate his job and get paid nearly twice the amount of someone who loves his job and gets raises due to high productivity. Finally, I believe the last statement that economies truly develop when people believe that money can buy happiness because they strive to attain wealth is quite interesting, as something that is logically absurd can actually contribute to the growth of the nation according to the article. If this is true, then people don't really need to work as hard as they are just for possessions, for they are just excluding themselves from the happiness that they could be enjoying.
The conventional wisdom that is shown through this article is that money does NOT buy happiness. It is always thought in society that the more money you have, the happier you will be. There is only so many things you could buy with money and emotions, unfortunately, you cannot buy which are a very important aspect of human nature. If you lost your wife but you have all the money in the world, it will still hit you hard and money wont do you good at that point. I see this in the world we live in everyday. Especially living in Smithtown, which i would say is a pretty economically sound area. There are people who i see at work, wheater it be an old job or current. They would roll up in a Rolls Royce or Mercedes-Benz AMG (which obviously means they have money) and just be so mean and gloomy. On another note, i would really like to do Army ROTC down south, perhaps Georgia or Alabama, but i don't not have the funds to do that successfully. Money has put restraints on people and determining whether or not they could do something. So money limits me to a state school. And i would love to be a Personal Trainer the rest of my life, its what i love and i love seeing people transforming their bodies based on your expertise. I hate to say it but i would much rather live economically comfortable and not have to worry about losing my house and sleeping on the streets then doing something i love and barely being able to make ends meet. You are lucky if you could manage a low paying job with something you love. Obviously, being happy is more important to other people, but me, i would rather live a comfortable life.
The author starts the article by saying, "wealth increases human happiness when it lifts people out of abject poverty and into the middle class but that it does little to increase happiness thereafter." As practical as this may sound, I have to disagree with this statement. When we consider the happiness money brings, we must consider the stress and anxiety that lack of money brings as well-most coming from the pressure of loans and other debts. Sharon Begley implies in the article that once a person is in the middle class, money can no longer make an impact on their happiness. However, we must realize that many middle class families have crippling debt, inhibiting them from living comfortably without the constant worry of lingering debt. One can argue that the line is drawn once an individual or family has enough income that allows them to pay off debt in a reasonable time without them constantly on their mind. However, while these people may be able to live happily day-by-day with the amount of money they have knowing they have the debt under control, it is hard to argue that these people would not be happier with these debts completely gone. In this case, we can argue that money does buy happiness. I do agree with Begley that there is a point where the graph of money to happiness levels off, however, I disagree that this point is middle class status.
Another part of the article that I disagree with is when the author quotes the many statistics of the distant lands participating in the survey. The places stated are lands that are far less advanced than the Unites States. Because of this, it is not surprising that they imply money does not buy happiness, because even if they were given a million dollars, it would not buy them anything in their country. However, in America money can buy many things that will increase happiness. The question of the article is not whether or not people can be happy without money, but it is whether or not money makes people happier. Just because these people are happy does not mean that they would not be even happier if given more money. In this example that Begley gives, I have to disagree that these people in other countries are just as happy as millionaires in America.
One point that Begley makes that I agree with is when she says, "happiness can buy money." Many times in my life, I have been forced to do things I do not like to do and been allowed to do things that I love to do. In all my experiences, doing what I love has coupled success almost every time. When a person feels a sense of pride and live for what they are doing, they will be more enthusiastic and in many fields, enthusiasm and attitude make a huge difference in how one interacts with coworkers and how successful they are in general. On the other hand, if a person hates what he/she is doing, he/she will be sluggish and will not be successful in life. In this case, I agree that happiness can buy money.
.
.
The concept that money often buys happiness has made a lot of controversy between people. Research has proven money can buy happiness to an extent, but having a plethora of money does not buy happiness. A lot of people believe that the richest people in the world are often the happiest, which is incorrect. For example, a person with a 1999 broken down car usually experiences more happiness than a man who has 4 2014 Porsches just sitting in his garage. Nowadays, people think they require the newest, greatest, and best innovations of the time to be truly happy. That is not true. The article stated, "Washing machines become necessities, the newly affluent don't feel the same joy in having a machine do the laundry that their grandparents, suddenly freed from washboards, did." This generation is programmed to always want more and more and will not stop until they reach the top. Several years ago people were content with what they had, but in recent years people are starting to get more greedy. I don't know where it all went down hill. It is always the simple things that make people get all warm and tingly inside that makes them happy. For example, health, family, friends, the bare necessities and having a good home to live in.
I agree with Sharon Begley and her view on why money doesn't buy happiness. Living in a healthy environment, having a descent job, and having loving family and friends is truly everything someone can ask for. It does make a lot of sense with her explaining that people moving from the lower class to the middle class are truly happy because they have money. But, people moving from the high class to the most wealthy class are not truly happy. They are always in fear someone will take their money, people are not being genuine, or others are being fake in order to get money from them. The really rich people in this world are not happy. It is very evident. My family believes that no matter how much money a person may gain from a bonus or something else they won't be necessarily happy in the long run. That thirst for more will be inevitable. I agree with what the author wrote, in my opinion. Money has been a big factor in where I choose to go to college and my career choice. My dream is to be in the fashion business, but I believe I won't receive enough money from that job to make me happy and afford all the bills. So I had to direct my future in another direction. If the salary was not an issue I would without a doubt go into fashion business and pursue my dream of traveling the world. Except, that is not reality and money is holding me back. I do feel, however, that money may not buy happiness, but not having money can lead to depression and sadness. With the world constantly improving and new inventions coming out almost every day people want to be in the norm and following the crowd. If they don't follow the crowd they won't fit in and people will get depressed. Money does not buy happiness.
The "conventional wisdom" with regard to money and happiness is that money alone cannot buy happiness. No matter how valuable a material item may be, its value is no comparison to that of memories created with the people you love. In my life I have personally experienced situations in which spending time doing a simple activity with my family was considerably more precious than any other consumer item I could have purchased. I still carry certain memories with me today, while items that were considered "priceless" have been lost. In reality, it is time with loved ones, not material items, that it priceless and the key to finding genuine happiness.
The author's thesis is that in today's society, it is difficult to escape the overwhelming amount of material items surrounding us in every day life. Individuals are constantly trying to keep up with the latest and greatest, consequently, giving too much value to these items. Additionally, the author implies that many people agree that money isn't everything; but with the massive amounts of consumer goods purchased everyday, it is difficult to determine the sincerity behind this statement. The author's thesis relates to the conventional wisdom of money and happiness by saying many people agree money is not everything in life. However, the author's thesis also includes the idea that it is hard to believe people when they say "money is not everything" and then purchase the newest item on the market solely for self-satisfaction.
When I comes to money people seem to assume the very wealthy are very happy and the very poor are very unhappy. In this article Sharon Begley shows how that convention isn't really true. Her thesis states that money doesn't really buy happiness as people would like to believe. How easy would that be, if you work hard and make all of a sudden, you're happy. She also states how materialism has made wants, such as an iPhone, become to feel like needs making them less satisfying when we finally get them. Even as Americans in general are getting more wealthy, overall happiness isn't really changing.
In my own family when someone gets a job the question always asked is, "How much are they paying you?". I know that in my family it's very important that you can support yourself and make enough money to have extra to spare. But for college I know people that have to go to state schools for fear of being burdened with student loans. but, in the end money can't make you happier,its really "health and friends" that make your life better and truly make you a happier fulfilled person at the end of the day.
It's the saying that everybody knows; the motto that has raised many questions: "Money doesn't buy happiness." Everyone has heard it and everyone has different opinions about it. In the article, "Why Money Doesn't Buy Happiness", Sharon Begley proves this inquisitive statement to be true. Even though being in poverty and struggling to meet the basic needs is not an appealing way to live, it turns out that having money doesn't necessarily mean one is satisfied with his life. Begley states that there is a difference between making$10,000 and $50,000 - one is a struggling situation and the other is more comfortable. On the other hand, there isn't much of a difference between making $100,000 and $5 million, despite the much larger gap. Because all the basic needs are met, the satisfaction of one's lifestyle is entirely up to him, and not his income salary.
I found it very interesting that Begley went a step further to explain that although money doesn't buy happiness, happiness can buy money. Studies have shown that people who are happier tend to be more productive and determined to get things done, therefore increasing their initiative and perhaps their income. As for me, personally, money has in fact played a role in my college decision. I am committed to play basketball in college and had been receiving contact from coaches from different kinds of schools. Some of these schools are very expensive, offering no financial aid for athletics or academics, while others were able to offer full scholarships. It was in my best interest to take an offer for a scholarship and take out loans in a few years for graduate or medical school when I have no debt, if that's something I'd want to do. In the end, the situation is this: before I read this article, if you were to tell me that money doesn't buy happiness, I would have completely disagreed with you. But now after reading about different kinds of income and the little impact it actually has on happiness, and ultimately, a way to reverse the motto, I am able to agree with the author's main thesis.
It's the saying that everybody knows; the motto that has raised many questions: "Money doesn't buy happiness." Everyone has heard it and everyone has different opinions about it. In the article “Why Money Doesn’t Buy Happiness”, Sharon Begley proves this inquisitive statement to be true. Even though being in poverty and struggling to meet the basic needs is not an appealing way to live, it turns out that having money doesn’t necessarily mean one is satisfied with his life. Begley states that there is a difference between making $10,000 and $50,000 - one is a struggling situation and the other is more comfortable. On the other hand, there isn’t much of a difference between making $100,000 and $5 million, despite the much larger gap. Because all of the basic needs are met, the satisfaction of one’s lifestyle is entirely up to him, and not his income salary.
I found it very interesting that Begley went a step further to explain that although money doesn’t buy happiness, happiness can buy money. Studies have shown that people who are happier tend to be more productive and determined to get things done, therefore increasing their initiative and perhaps their income. As for my personal decisions, money has in fact played a role in my college decision. I am committed to play basketball in college and had been receiving contact from coaches from different kinds of schools. Some of these schools were very expensive, offering no financial aid, while others were able to offer full scholarships. It was in my best interest to take an offer for a scholarship and take out loans in a few years for graduate or medical school when I have no debt, if that’s something I’ll want to do. In the end, the situation is this: before I read this article, if you were to tell me that money doesn’t buy happiness, I would have completely disagreed with you. But now after reading about different kinds of income and the little impact it actually has on happiness, and ultimately, a way to reverse the motto, I am able to agree with the author’s main thesis.
A common theme in America is that the more money you have, the happier you are. The article "Why Money Doesn't Buy Happiness" by Sharon Begley puts an end to that thought. Having more money isn't a bad thing, or is it? Multimillionaires in America have an average happiness score of 5.8 but so do the Inuit of northern Greenland and Masai of Kenya, who have no electricity or running water. This proves that people don't need money to be happy. I mostly agree with Sharon Begley that money can't buy happiness but I'm sure there are several cases in the world that people are extremely happy and also have billions of dollars.
The income level of the business world has really persuaded me to choose a career in business. I feel like I have no choice but to be in the business world or become a doctor. Those are the two industries that make the most money and I feel that making a lot of money is important to me. If salary wasn't an issuer, I would probably try to get involved in something to do with sports because that's where my heart really is. Money can truly change people's lives and really change the type of people they are. If not handled correctly, money can be the reason for one's downfall.
The author believes the more money you have, the happier you will be. But this doesn't necessarily mean that money buys happiness. Just being in the presence of one another can light up someone's day. Though money doesn't directly buy happiness, it does buy many things that can make someone happy, and I do believe that is true. While most of the middle-class society is somewhat satisfied with their life, I personally believe that the life I live in is completely satisfying. Money is just a factor that is part of living and there was no avoiding it. There will always be improvement and money is a factor of that improvement. Money definitely plays a big role in choosing colleges. If I didn't have to worry about money at all, I would choose the best private school and the best major I can apply to. But because money does play a big role, my options are different. I am most likely going to choose a state school unless I have the opportunity of getting a scholarship that allows me to go to the school I prefer for a considerable/affordable price. If I were to go to the best college on the major I most prefer, I would have the best job I can have making a great salary. This also is part of the author's theory of happiness buying money. Being happy with a job can result in better/higher income. This theory, I believe, is also true.
The “conventional wisdom” in regards to money and happiness is that money can buy happiness. As additional wealth allows more needs and wants to be met, the more of those satisfied, the happier we should be. However, in a society where our basic needs can be met relatively easily, it is easy for wants to become our new needs. When we depend on meeting these wants, we will never be satiated because there will always be something better to have. As a person becomes wealthier, he or she does not necessarily meet more wants, but rather changes them to a higher level. Someone who earns $50,000 a year may wish to buy a new laptop whereas a person with a $500,000 salary may wish to purchase a boat. Once both of these wants are satisfied, they can easily grow accustomed to their former luxuries and move on to bigger and better things. Although money may bring temporary satisfaction, it is not enough to achieve the long term happiness that social relationships and an enjoyable career have the potential to bring.
Money has been a big influence in deciding what college I should attend and what career path I should choose. Originally, I wanted to attend schools in California. However, the possible expenses have made this idea less practical. To attend a private school in California would cost up to about $60,000 and every time I wanted to come home during the holidays, round trip flights from New York to Los Angeles can range from $400-600. Although it would be nice to have the money to afford these expenses, it is not the actual money that would provide me with happiness, but instead the idea that I can go to my top choice school and have the opportunity to study something I love. I also think that salary is an important factor when considering prospective careers. Having a stable income could very well be the deciding factor in living a comfortable life or a stressful one revolving around financial difficulties. Although I do understand that money does not define a person’s happiness, I do think it is still an important factor in providing more opportunities to being happy.
The conventional wisdom with respect to money and happiness is that money does not buy happiness. In "Why Money Doesn't Buy Happiness" Bedgley argues the opposite: that money does not, in fact buy happiness (in most cases). She notes that there is a "critical income threshold" which separates people whose happiness can be bought by money and people whose can't. This separation is quite simple: people for whom extra money means leaving poverty behind for a stable income tend to be happier the more money they have, whereas a person who makes $5 million dollars a year doesn't tend to be much happier than someone who makes $100,000 a year. This is because those who make a substantial amount of money make enough to fulfill their basic needs, thus the extra money they have goes to fulfilling their wants, unlike those who need to be lifted out of poverty. I agree fully with the authors claim that the conventional knowledge of money buying happiness is all a hoax to encourage citizens to engage in the economy. But I don't think that any middle or upper class citizen would give up their materialistic lifestyle knowing that their extra money doesn't buy them happiness, because now a days when basic needs are met so easily, ones happiness is measured by ones money.
I've always been told that money doesn't buy happiness. This article has reinforced that view for me but it has also opened up a new way of looking at the way I measure my own happiness, because sometimes it it true that we all measure how happy we are based on our material things, rather than our health or friends.
Money and income has affected my college decision greatly. My entire life I wanted to go to California for college, but now looking at the decision logically, I will most likely attend a state school or something else nearby merely for the financial benefit of doing so. As of now, I don't know what I want to major in in college, however when I am in the process of deciding this I will definitely take into account the probable slary of my future job, as I believe that this is a valid criteria for choosing a major/job because this choice will affect your life forever.
From the economist perspective, it is concluded that more money translates into greater happiness. However, author Sharon Begley counters the economist “wisdom” by claiming that money cannot buy happiness unless it brings a person out of a state of poverty. More money allows humans to satisfy more of their needs and wants, but sometimes the line between something we need vs. something we want is fuzzy. I agree with the statement that people have grown to consider luxuries one of their needs. I find it a little ridiculous when people become obsessed with getting the “next best thing”. I personally don’t feel compelled to buy things until I really need something. I found it interesting when Begley stated that “Satisfying needs brings less emotional well-being than satisfying wants”. This made me think about how many people take the most important needs of life (food, water, shelter) for granted.
Money has definitely been something that affected my college and career choice. My dream job is to work as an elementary school teacher. The typical response that I get when I tell people my dream career goes something like this: “There are absolutely no jobs out there and you’ll never make a decent living”. The negative feedback that I received made me start to reconsider what I wanted to get a degree in. But I decided that I would have a much more fulfilling life if I followed my heart. Choosing a career that fits my personality and brings me joy is worth way more than any sum of money so I’m going to go for it. I’d rather have a low paying job that makes me happy. I don’t want to end up with a job I hate and then wonder how my life would have turned out if I had chosen to follow my real passions instead.
According to the article, the conventional wisdom about money buying happiness is that it should. The author states that studies have shown that wealth increases human happiness when it lifts people out of poverty and into the middle class. It seems that once someone has their needs and some of their wants fulfilled, their happiness is no longer contingent upon the amount of money that they have. The author's thesis somewhat contradicts the conventional wisdom about money buying happiness. Sharon Begely stated that, "Americans who earn $50,000 per year are much happier than those who make $10,000 per year... but Americans who earn $5 million per year are not much happier than those who earn $100,000 per year." The point is that the contentedness with one's life is greatly increased when they are lifted out of poverty, but that is not the case when talking about a jump from the middle class to the upper class.
I agree with what Sharon Begely stated in her article "Why Money Doesn't Buy Happiness." I believe that money can buy some happiness in certain scenarios and cases such as one's jump from poverty. However, when people can live comfortably and then they receive an increase in salary I am not convinced that they will feel much happier, like the person that was previously in poverty did. Lastly, I found the last line of the article very interesting. "In other words, if you want to do your part for your country's economy, forget all of the above about money not buying happiness." This quote is saying that the country's economy thrives on the misinterpretation of money buying happiness because people are continuously striving for more money.
From the economist perspective, it is concluded that more money translates into greater happiness. However, author Sharon Begley counters the economist “wisdom” by claiming that money cannot buy happiness unless it brings a person out of a state of poverty. More money allows humans to satisfy more of their needs and wants, but sometimes the line between something we need vs. something we want is fuzzy. I agree with the statement that people have grown to consider luxuries one of their needs. I find it a little ridiculous when people become obsessed with getting the “next best thing”. I personally don’t feel compelled to buy things until I really need something. I found it interesting when Begley stated that “Satisfying needs brings less emotional well-being than satisfying wants”. This made me think about how many people take the most important needs of life (food, water, shelter) for granted.
Money has definitely been something that affected my college and career choice. My dream job is to work as an elementary school teacher. The typical response that I get when I tell people my dream career goes something like this: “There are absolutely no jobs out there and you’ll never make a decent living”. The negative feedback that I received made me start to reconsider what I wanted to get a degree in. But I decided that I would have a much more fulfilling life if I followed my heart. Choosing a career that fits my personality and brings me joy is worth way more than any sum of money so I’m going to go for it. I’d rather have a low paying job that makes me happy. I don’t want to end up with a job I hate and then wonder how my life would have turned out if I had chosen to follow my real passions instead.
When it comes to money, people generally want more of it as people typically connect wealth with happiness. While this may not always be the case case, it is also hard to believe that more money would not bring more happiness. In the article by Sharon Begley, she explained wealth affected happiness in only certain situations. One such instance was when she stated that Americans who earned $50,000 a year are generally more happier than those who earn $10,000 per year but the interesting thing is that she also stated that Americans who earn $5 million per year are not much happier than those who earn $100,000 per year. Obviously, no one wants to live in poverty so they tend to live less privileged lives but having more money does not necessarily mean that it brings more happiness. It is hard to argue that having more money would not be beneficial as it really does lessen some stress but it does seem as though there is no direct correlation between money and ones happiness from it. Another thing the article states is how wants become “needs” which “beings less emotional well-being than satisfying wants.” This is something we can all relate to like myself however its just human nature to want things thus we will always feel satisfied when buying new things. Lastly, the article mentioned how people should focus less on economic growth and concentrate on policies that promote various things such as governance and democracy. However, it does neglect to mention that such activities do not happen over night. As the saying goes, "time is money" and that is partly true as some people count on the money to support their families. All in all, the article makes very valid points but there are some other factors that tie into ones happiness. While having more money does not exactly mean you will be happier, it really does help you live more of a carefree and less stressful life. One example is paying for college as these days, some private schools can seem to cost a fortune. For me personally, the cost of the school is definitely going to be a factor in my college decision. It is the harsh reality that education costs a lot of money.
The conventional view on the correlation between money and happiness is quite clear. In general, most people believe that more money equals more happiness, for one can purchase more things which in the end will make them a happier person. I have experienced this view a lot in my life time, and I have even thought this way myself. I sometimes find myself hoping that my parents could win the lottery so that we could get a fancy sports car or a huge yacht. It is easy to think this way. However, writer Sharon Begley believes something totally different, that money certainly does not buy happiness. She supports this thesis by making various points which show how an increase in money only creates a desire to purchase more of one's wants. In the end, we think we are buying happiness, but we are truly making no difference. These goods provide nearly no satisfaction, especially when compared to the satisfaction that one gets when providing their basic needs. We are fooling ourselves, according to Begley. Think of this way, people only get satisfaction from providing what they truly need in life. A salary of $50,000 and a salary of $100,000 can do that equally. What is left over is what we judge as spending money, and this often time judges happiness. However, if we are fooling ourselves by purchasing these wants, then we are becoming no happier than the man with less spending money. There is an income threshold. Once you reach a certain salary, which can provide all basic needs, your happiness can only go up very slightly based on money from there. This is one of Begley's main points, and it supports her thesis very well.
I really like Begley's way of thinking. She makes a great point, and that is that a huge amount of money cannot buy one's satisfaction. However, to say that money does not buy happiness at all, is flat out wrong. Money is needed to purchase the basic needs of life, which in the end provides satisfaction and happiness. I agree with her statement partially, for she forgets that key part. Overall however, I would say that most people, including my family, do not agree with this view. My family, and many others, puts a huge value on money and being able to not only provide for each other, but also "luxury items. It is hard not to live this way, for in an age filled with technology, everyone wants to fit in and enjoy an easier life style. Also, most people associate more money with a decrease in stress and anxiety, which is a key component of living a happy life. At the end of the say, money has played a huge role in my life. It has motivated me to do well is school, so that I can get into a good college which in the end, could provide me with a high paying job. It has also motivated me to look forward to a job in finance, which is a high paying area. I would like to be able to provide for the needs and wants of my future family. At the end of the day, money can do that for me.
The conventional view on the correlation between money and happiness is quite clear. In general, most people believe that more money equals more happiness, for one can purchase more things which in the end will make them a happier person. I have experienced this view a lot in my life time, and I have even thought this way myself. I sometimes find myself hoping that my parents could win the lottery so that we could get a fancy sports car or a huge yacht. It is easy to think this way. However, writer Sharon Begley believes something totally different, that money certainly does not buy happiness. She supports this thesis by making various points which show how an increase in money only creates a desire to purchase more of one's wants. In the end, we think we are buying happiness, but we are truly making no difference. These goods provide nearly no satisfaction, especially when compared to the satisfaction that one gets when providing their basic needs. We are fooling ourselves, according to Begley. Think of this way, people only get satisfaction from providing what they truly need in life. A salary of $50,000 and a salary of $100,000 can do that equally. What is left over is what we judge as spending money, and this often time judges happiness. However, if we are fooling ourselves by purchasing these wants, then we are becoming no happier than the man with less spending money. There is an income threshold. Once you reach a certain salary, which can provide all basic needs, your happiness can only go up very slightly based on money from there. This is one of Begley's main points, and it supports her thesis very well.
I really like Begley's way of thinking. She makes a great point, and that is that a huge amount of money cannot buy one's satisfaction. However, to say that money does not buy happiness at all, is flat out wrong. Money is needed to purchase the basic needs of life, which in the end provides satisfaction and happiness. I agree with her statement partially, for she forgets that key part. Overall however, I would say that most people, including my family, do not agree with this view. My family, and many others, puts a huge value on money and being able to not only provide for each other, but also "luxury items. It is hard not to live this way, for in an age filled with technology, everyone wants to fit in and enjoy an easier life style. Also, most people associate more money with a decrease in stress and anxiety, which is a key component of living a happy life. At the end of the say, money has played a huge role in my life. It has motivated me to do well is school, so that I can get into a good college which in the end, could provide me with a high paying job. It has also motivated me to look forward to a job in finance, which is a high paying area. I would like to be able to provide for the needs and wants of my future family. At the end of the day, money can do that for me.
The conventional wisdom, or the generally accepted belief, in respect to money and happiness is that the more wealthy becomes, the happier that they will be. I think most people have experienced this to a degree, especially when they receive birthday money or their first big pay check. The author believes that while money can make us happier, it is only significant when it is in the case of those in poverty, in which the money can go towards acquiring the basic needs of a person. The "income threshold" basically means that as a person becomes wealthier, after they have passed the poverty line, the correlation of money to happiness declines greatly. When we have more money, we can afford to buy more, and while we may think this will make us happier, what it really does is put more products (that we knew we couldn't afford before) just out of our price range and makes us long for these new pricey products as well.
I think that the author is spot-on with her thesis, being that after overcoming poverty, money has little affect on one's overall happiness. However, I also agree with her closing ideas being that it is important for the general public to still believe that money buys happiness, as this is what drives the economy and allows for it to grow and keep expanding. If people felt that they were financially content and didn't need to make more money, the economy would grow stagnant and would never progress. It's funny how things work, because even though we just read this article and may agree with everything the author just stated, most of us will still most likely strive to make the most money that we can in life, even if it means following a profession that may not make you happy. I know that for me, being in upper-middle class is where I think I will find the most happiness and I will strive to get there and stay there. Even though you may think logically about the subject, society has inscribed the belief of money equals happiness and given the opportunity, I don't think I know one person who wouldn't choose to make more money.
The conventional wisdom associated with the relationship between money and happiness is that having an increase in wealth will lead to rise in happiness too. As a kid in an upper class neighborhood, it's hard for me understand this concept quite yet, but from what I've seen from others around me, wealth does inspire forms of not only happiness but comfort and ease of mind, both big components of happiness. Begley's thesis states that the transition from poor to middle class creates a much bigger happiness increase than that of somewhat rich (upper middle class) to super rich, and I think that this could definitely be true in many respects. Money owns our own lives, so it would be convenient to believe that it also controls our happiness. Yet, I tend to think that if a family is stable enough and earns enough to live, then money no longer has much of an effect anymore on that happiness and a shift in focus occurs onto other subjects that certain people deem important. Some become disillusioned by the money they try to gain and, in the end, it does not actually help them become happier people despite their efforts to make it happen.
It's funny, though, how TV and advertising and all of these pop culture outlets usually preach about the importance of staying up to date with product, yet our parents tend to tell us that things like friends and family and being a good person are the things that will make you happy. Maybe our parents have something to teach us from their own experiences in gaining wealth and could testify to the findings made in this article. It's hard to say because there are many different, well-informed opinions on this matter and I think it's up to us perhaps to answer this question by ourselves by experiencing it ourselves.
The conventional wisdom associated with the relationship between money and happiness is that having an increase in wealth will lead to rise in happiness too. As a kid in an upper class neighborhood, it's hard for me understand this concept quite yet, but from what I've seen from others around me, wealth does inspire forms of not only happiness but comfort and ease of mind, both big components of happiness. Begley's thesis states that the transition from poor to middle class creates a much bigger happiness increase than that of somewhat rich (upper middle class) to super rich, and I think that this could definitely be true in many respects. Money owns our own lives, so it would be convenient to believe that it also controls our happiness. Yet, I tend to think that if a family is stable enough and earns enough to live, then money no longer has much of an effect anymore on that happiness and a shift in focus occurs onto other subjects that certain people deem important. Some become disillusioned by the money they try to gain and, in the end, it does not actually help them become happier people despite their efforts to make it happen.
It's funny, though, how TV and advertising and all of these pop culture outlets usually preach about the importance of staying up to date with product, yet our parents tend to tell us that things like friends and family and being a good person are the things that will make you happy. Maybe our parents have something to teach us from their own experiences in gaining wealth and could testify to the findings made in this article. It's hard to say because there are many different, well-informed opinions on this matter and I think it's up to us perhaps to answer this question by ourselves by experiencing it ourselves.
The conventional wisdom associated with the relationship between money and happiness is that having an increase in wealth will lead to rise in happiness too. As a kid in an upper class neighborhood, it's hard for me understand this concept quite yet, but from what I've seen from others around me, wealth does inspire forms of not only happiness but comfort and ease of mind, both big components of happiness. Begley's thesis states that the transition from poor to middle class creates a much bigger happiness increase than that of somewhat rich (upper middle class) to super rich, and I think that this could definitely be true in many respects. Money owns our own lives, so it would be convenient to believe that it also controls our happiness. Yet, I tend to think that if a family is stable enough and earns enough to live, then money no longer has much of an effect anymore on that happiness and a shift in focus occurs onto other subjects that certain people deem important. Some become disillusioned by the money they try to gain and, in the end, it does not actually help them become happier people despite their efforts to make it happen.
It's funny, though, how TV and advertising and all of these pop culture outlets usually preach about the importance of staying up to date with product, yet our parents tend to tell us that things like friends and family and being a good person are the things that will make you happy. Maybe our parents have something to teach us from their own experiences in gaining wealth and could testify to the findings made in this article. It's hard to say because there are many different, well-informed opinions on this matter and I think it's up to us perhaps to answer this question by ourselves by experiencing it ourselves.
The article touches on conventional wisdom, which suggests that money, more often than not, fails to buy one’s happiness. The author, Sharon Begley agrees with the notion as she voices her opinion that a person really only needs enough money to afford necessities or essentials in life. I agree with her claim as food, water, shelter and a healthy family are the most important things in the world. If one has a combination of this, he or she has a high chance of finding extreme pleasure. Also, I found it fascinating how studies show that a family that excels from the poor or lower class to the middle class has a larger increase in contentment than a family that advances from a life of limited necessities to a life of luxury. It logically makes sense as the wealthy become obsessed with the hottest and newest products on the market. In other words, a life of materialism causes you to take things for granted and misery for everyone else.
The author’s closing statement demonstrates her astute point of view. She explains how the economy flourishes when people solely rely on the idea that production of wealth will ultimately culminate in happiness. Although I totally agree with Begley, I sometimes fall into the thinking that more money will result in a better life for me in the future. For example, although I’m undecided, I’m looking to study a major in college that will allow me the potential of a respectable income with numerous job opportunities. It’s important that I ask myself whether what major I end up choosing is my true passion and interest. Lastly, it’s hard sometimes to realize that money doesn't necessarily spark happiness.
Ironically, the wisdom here is that money actually does buy happiness. I can't agree with that, but I do understand the idea. If you're "dangerously" in poverty, and as a result can hardly survive as a human, then will buy you food and shelter, thus making you happy. This is the example that Daniel Gilbert insists in the article: that money will buy you happiness when it raises you out of poverty. In my opinion, I don't believe that it creates happiness, so to speak, but rather really a stable emotional/physical state that a person can elevate themselves from and succeed. Similarly, I take keen interest in how the "cattle-herding Masai" and the Inuit rated their happiness 5.8 out of 7. They're saying their life is almost perfect, and yet, they're not of prominent economic standing. So I wouldn't discredit the author entirely on her thesis, but she does have convincing evidence that money does not buy happiness.
But of course, "money is everything," and being that I have dreams and goals, I do need to spend money to achieve them. If I had "infinite" income, I'd still pursue the field of environmental sciences. It doesn't matter to me what the financial reward of it (or any job) is, I just know I'll enjoy my profession regardless of salary. Likewise, the author's view is in alignment with my family's belief that money just isn't all it's made out to be. And while I can't truly attest to that idea like an adult could, I know I'll be much happier going to the job I love more than getting a paycheck from a job I hate.
Ironically, the wisdom here is that money actually does buy happiness. I can't agree with that, but I do understand the idea. If you're "dangerously" in poverty, and as a result can hardly survive as a human, then will buy you food and shelter, thus making you happy. This is the example that Daniel Gilbert insists in the article: that money will buy you happiness when it raises you out of poverty. In my opinion, I don't believe that it creates happiness, so to speak, but rather really a stable emotional/physical state that a person can elevate themselves from and succeed. Similarly, I take keen interest in how the "cattle-herding Masai" and the Inuit rated their happiness 5.8 out of 7. They're saying their life is almost perfect, and yet, they're not of prominent economic standing. So I wouldn't discredit the author entirely on her thesis, but she does have convincing evidence that money does not buy happiness.
But of course, "money is everything," and being that I have dreams and goals, I do need to spend money to achieve them. If I had "infinite" income, I'd still pursue the field of environmental sciences. It doesn't matter to me what the financial reward of it (or any job) is, I just know I'll enjoy my profession regardless of salary. Likewise, the author's view is in alignment with my family's belief that money just isn't all it's made out to be. And while I can't truly attest to that idea like an adult could, I know I'll be much happier going to the job I love more than getting a paycheck from a job I hate.
When most Americans are asked to define the American Dream the vast majority would associate it with a house, land, and money, failing to recognize happiness as a top priority. Before reading this article I was confident that money and happiness are in no way correlated, but now I realize wealth does impact specific people in some circumstances. According to Daniel Gilbert, wealth makes people happy when it lifts them out of "abject poverty", but has little impact on "happiness thereafter". This theory is proven through the global content surveys when "one economic rung above the homeless- rate themselves 4.6", compared to the homeless people who rate themselves 2.9. As evident in J. Paul Getty's miserable yet financially successful life, after a person has enough money to fulfill basic needs, money and happiness are no longer positively correlated. In fact, the constant desire for more money and lack of satisfaction can be detrimental to a person's well-being, causing unhappiness.
The common view about this topic is that money does indeed lead to happiness. Sharon Begley questions this view and concludes that money doesn't necessarily buy happiness. She backs this up with how people of different incomes and lifestyles don't really differ in happiness. She notes how the the Inuit of Greenland have the same happiness score as american multimillionaires. She also mentions how the gross domestic product per capita has tripled, yet people still feel the same way.
I agree with this theory of her's to a degree. While it seems that money does actually not buy happiness through her data, I still feel that this does not represent everyone. I think that the relationship of money and happiness varies from person to person.
The common view about this topic is that money does indeed lead to happiness. Sharon Begley questions this view and concludes that money doesn't necessarily buy happiness. She backs this up with how people of different incomes and lifestyles don't really differ in happiness. She notes how the the Inuit of Greenland have the same happiness score as american multimillionaires. She also mentions how the gross domestic product per capita has tripled, yet people still feel the same way.
I agree with this theory of her's to a degree. While it seems that money does actually not buy happiness through her data, I still feel that this does not represent everyone. I think that the relationship of money and happiness varies from person to person.
The conventional wisdom with respect to money and happiness is that money does not buy happiness. In "Why Money Doesn't Buy Happiness" Bedgley argues the opposite: that money does not, in fact buy happiness (in most cases). She notes that there is a "critical income threshold" which separates people whose happiness can be bought by money and people whose can't. This separation is quite simple: people for whom extra money means leaving poverty behind for a stable income tend to be happier the more money they have, whereas a person who makes $5 million dollars a year doesn't tend to be much happier than someone who makes $100,000 a year. This is because those who make a substantial amount of money make enough to fulfill their basic needs, thus the extra money they have goes to fulfilling their wants, unlike those who need to be lifted out of poverty. I agree fully with the authors claim that the conventional knowledge of money buying happiness is all a hoax to encourage citizens to engage in the economy. But I don't think that any middle or upper class citizen would give up their materialistic lifestyle knowing that their extra money doesn't buy them happiness, because now a days when basic needs are met so easily, ones happiness is measured by ones money.
I've always been told that money doesn't buy happiness. This article has truly reinforced that view for me but it has also opened up a new way of looking at the way I measure my own happiness, because sometimes it it true that we all measure how happy we are based on our material things, rather than our health or friends.
If you had a choice most people would choose to be rich rather than poor, however the amount of wealth you have doesn't guarantee your happiness. People with a lot of money and generally just as happy or not as happy as someone in the middle class. This is because after we achieve basic needs, only then do our wants become relevant. Someone with more money is overwhelmed by the amount of items he or she may want, while a middle class person must save the money rather than buy a lot of useless junk. Despite the fact that the rich are just as happy as the middle class, the majority of us still seeks out that big income. In an economists point of view this is a great thing because when we all work hard to achieve more the economy benefits from it all, which is why the passage ends by telling the reader to forget everything about money not buying happiness
The conventional wisdom regarding money has always been that more money equates to happiness. Sharon Begley disagrees to this in her article from October, 2007. The thesis of the article is that money can buy happiness, but not beyond the point of necessity. "Americans who earn $50,000 a year are much happier than those who make $10,000 per year, but those who make $5 million per year are not much happier than those who make $100,000. This belief is valid because a person making $50,000 will have all their basic necessities and happiness as opposed to he who makes 10,000 who won't have everything the need, such as a washing machine. But the multi-millionaire are the person who makes $100,000 are equally happy. All that extra money, more cars, and a more luxurious lifestyle does not equate to happiness.
In my own home, money is rarely discussed. We are certainly financially stable, but we certainly won't be getting a Mercedes anytime soon. My father has said that he plans to retire once all of us kids have graduated college, so that seems to be his main concern regarding money. Money will certainly be a factor when selecting my career, as I plan to have kids to send to college as well. If money wasn't an issue, I would certainly pursue a career I am much more passionate about, such as a career in athletics, but I fear I would be financially limited, so that isn't a realistic option.
The conventional wisdom is that money should be able to buy ones happiness. Many people believe this is true, they constantly hoard money, buy their wants and assume this get them satisfied and happy. I personally believe this is untrue. I agree with the article when it says that money only goes so far. The article states that after money gets you out of the state of poverty then the amount of wealth you have doesn't really matter. So it does create happiness when bringing you out of poverty. But the author refutes the statement that money brings you happiness by saying that after you are in the middle class then the bar of happiness doesn't fluctuate much. I 100% agree with the statement that she made.
The money in my household has changed over the course of the years. When my parents went into retirement the income in our household halted. Has the happiness changed? Not a single bit. Everyone in my house is extremely happy despite not having as much money as we used to. Money has certainly affected my college decisions. I chose to go to an instate college because it is cheaper, I also am not going to an Ivy League school because of the cost. But it doesn't really matter to me because as long as I get into and go to a good college and receive an education I will be happy.
Its easy to say that money buys happiness because if your wealthy there's a lot of less stress and things you need to worry about. Time and time again you here about people with financial issues that cause things like suicide and depression and cause couples to fight and potentially get a divorce. While it gives you one less thing to worry about it could be the only thing you have in your life and it leaves you empty. I like to believe that it ultimately depends on how you were raised if you are brought up with no money you have the knowledge to know how to be happy with out it. If you were brought with a lot of money you know how to live a happy life with it but feel lost without it.
Money, apparently, does not buy happiness. I was slightly surprised when I read this article. I always kind of figured that money DOES buy happiness. I mean, who wouldn't be happy with the newest iPhone, the best clothes, and no debt? It's not that money doesnt buy happiness in all cases, according to this article, if someone moves from poverty to middle class, money will essentially buy that person happiness.
However, if someone is already in the middle class and then becomes a millionaire, their level of happiness will not change. This was interesting to me. How could someone who makes $500,000 a year be as happy as someone who makes $6.7 million a year? The article states that it's because there is always something "cooler" to get. They basically won't feel satisfied, ever. I agree with the author in that money does buy happiness to an extent, but I also feel like no matter how wealthy someone is, money always makes life easier.
In the article , it says that based on conventional wisdom money can buy happines. I believe that money can buy happiness to some extant. If someone is very poor and cannot afford to buy the necessities required to live, it will be very hard for them to live a happy life. However this doesn't mean that just because you have a lot of money you will be happy. There are plenty of rich people, like presidents and CEOs of companies that have a lot of money but are not happy. These people take their work too seriously and are so stressed out that they do not have time for the family and friends.
However, if many people believe that money can buy happines, this will boost the economy. This is because people will keep working to get a better job so they can get more money and eventually be happy. So if people keeping trying to get better jobs, they will have a greater income and have more money to be able to spend in the economy.
The conventional wisdom about money and happiness is that the more money you have the happier you are and if you do not have a lot of money you will live an unhappy life. In some cases this may be true such as people who cannot afford to buy food, water and shelter for themselves or are living in slums and when people buy electronics or flat screen tvs it may make them happy in the short term. These people will be unhappy. This is not always true though. There are many people in the world who are extremely wealthy and are very unhappy with their lives and on the other end there are many people who struggle financially and still are able to live an extremely happy life.
Money has definitely affected my college searches. I did not look at many colleges simply because they were way too expensive for my family to afford. If money was no problem while looking for colleges it may have changed the colleges that I am currently looking at. Also, when looking into majors it is always important to see how the job pays. Obviously it is important to enjoy what you are doing but if this enjoyment pays very little what use is that. People always look for well paying jobs so that they can be affluent and support themselves and their families.
4. Evaluate the author's thesis. Is she correct? To what extent? What flaws, if any, are present in your view?
I believe that the author is correct in her thesis that nothing especially money can buy happiness. While this statement is not completely accurate because while many people who say they would be happier with
More money the facts dispute this. While a person living in poverty want to be rich and rich person will probably not want to live in poverty there are numerous reasons why. The reasons why though are becuase material goods do not buy permant satisfaction or good memories or especially happiness. good health, friends, and achieving goals causes happiness, which can all not be bought. "Americans who earn 5million a year are not much happier than those who 100000 a year because after you meet the basic necessities for surival what you do is up to, to make yourself happy. Finally "Grandma was right when she told you to value health and friends over money and stuff."
6. To what extent has money/income affected your college and career choice? If salary was not an issue, would you pursue a different major? Is this a valid criterion in the decision?
The way salary has effected my income is probably similar to my peers but also very different. The discussion started very early that it is important to save for college. To help I got a job at a local small business. I balanced what I wanted to do for a carrer with the amount of money I wanted to live with. A unique situation I have is that I have planned on joining the military and joining a ROTC program and hopefully having a career military life. I realized that not matter the cost, salary, or benefits, this is what I wanted to do with my life.
The author's thesis seems to be that as money pulls people out of poverty, people's outlooks on life become better. People who earn an annual income of around $100,000 are much happier than those who earn around $50,000 a year. However, those who earn $5 million are not much happier than the $500,000 earners. This belief correlates with the title of the article, "Why Money Doesn't Buy Happiness". If money was not an issue, I would prefer to join a doctors without borders program, rather than major in a field of medicine with the most return on my investment in my education. It is a tricky decision to deal with, but money does rule our economy today, and undoubtedly decides how comfortably we live.
Post a Comment