Affluence - A Mixed Blessing?

Or, put another way - do you want to live forever?

True satisfaction and happiness are not derived from ownership of things. No matter how much we have we will always look over the fence and compare our situation to those who have more. " Status Anxiety " by Alain de Botton is am amusing enough read on the matter.

I deal with the richest people on the planet (or rather I deal with the people of the people of the richest people...). They don't seem to be particularly happy to me (and they're on holiday when I hear about their antics/demands/treatment of others and demeanour).

Having said that, Roman Abramovich is apparently quite a chilled out guy who 'realises'. But then his football team (how is your life complete without owning one?) is doing pretty well, and he has just taken delivery of the largest private yacht ever built. But it's late, and he wasn't too chuffed about that.

Seems as though you never stop wanting more stuff and the best life-plan is to find contentment in what you do have. Provided it's enough to eat and somewhere to live, and to look after those you around you that you care about, then happiness is possible, and no more or less likely, than when you fulfil your 'need' for the latest island/aeroplane/bugatti.

I find not much better feeling than going shopping and not finding anything at all to buy or even want.

I know what you mean George, but perhaps we should just reflect that huge chunks of the world are not just 'a bit short' but live in poverty, squalor and bad health. Many of them often aspire to some degree of material affluence-and who knows if that might improve their happiness?

As for myself, I do recall the excitement of scrimping and saving as a youngster to buy something that I then cherished (and maintained) carefully. Such purchases do indeed have more 'value' than those with an easy flick of the credfit card. Perhaps it is only me but I have lost some of the excitement of music buying when I buy a download with a click of a button. Going to the shop, or having a packet delivered, is still more fun.

My wife and I are now 'affluent' so the least we can do are two things. Firstly we try not to be wasteful and try to respect the things we buy; not making flippant purchases and repairing and maintaining things as much as possible. Ultimately this means recycling them if it can be done. I do find it satisfying to actually wear out a component on my bike rather than upgrade it on a whim.

Secondly, and this may seem arrogant, I do feel we can justify some of our lifestyle. We study hard, work hard and take considerable responsibility in our careers. Professional stresses have a 'cost' on us. I think we give good value and we have earned a degree of reward (some of which are material). Essentially this means that if we do buy something special, or take a good trip, not only do we try to appreciate it but we also have a degree of pleasure from feeling we have earned it.

Great wealth such as a lottery win would not only devalue the excitement of a purchase for me because it would be so easy but I'd lose any sense of having actually done something to deserve the riches.

Bruce

Affluence may be a precursor to affluenza, which can be debilitating but rarely ever fatal. In most cases frequent trips to the "real world" can lessen the effects of affluenza.

"Being wealthy doesn't make you happy but at least you can be miserable in comfort" - Spike Milligan.

If i came into a lot of wealth it would raise my quality of life considerably...

Not for what I could buy with it, but for what I would no longer need to do...

The sodding night-shift job!

just off to get into my coffin now the sun's up! : (

Debs

Happiness is not having what you want, but wanting what you have.

i started of 40 years ago with no money now i have a lot of money but i wouldnt say i was any happier.

The difference between heaven and hell can be the difference between having $100 a month more than you need, and having $100 less than you need each month.

Mr Micawber seems to echo your thoughts.

quote:

Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen pounds nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery.

This is a very complex and difficult subject. George, you are extremely affluent by world standards (please accept there is no element whatsoever of criticism in there I'm just trying to be objective - by world standards, not the standards of people on here), with hundreds of millions living on a couple of dollars a day! You only appear not to be affluent by comparison with the people around you

I have spoken with people who have visited / worked in Africa, where they met with people who had almost nothing, but who were cheerful, hospitable and who had close networks of friends and family - and say that it is us in the West who are poor - putting material gain ahead of relationships

We have been able to build up the assets we have (very little of which we actually need) by virtue of where we were born, and the immense opportunities available to us in this country. I agree with much of what Bruce says, trying to avoid flippant purchases and using things up rather than changing before they are worn out etc.

I have a theory that money and possessions have a kind of "gravity" about them - in that, the more you have, the more you want to get more. I have seen stats in a Government publication (might have been "A Generous Society" but it's a few years ago) that say that, on average, as income increases, the proportion of income given away actually decreases

I also had a recent experience of getting a significant sum of money out of my business (the first time I have ever had so substantial an earned sum available) - and found that plans I had made for giving a certain amount away suddenly became much harder to put into practice

Hmmm - I realise I have not actually discussed what George suggested! I keep feeling that I am incapable of expressing myself sufficiently well to contribute to any discussions of this nature

quote:

Does having enough money to actually indulge all possible dreams actually devalue these dreams?

Yes, it must, I believe. And I agree with respect to your comment on the simple pleasures. A friend of one of my daughters is always in the pre- and post-school club because both her parents work full time. So she doesn't spend all that much time with them. In contrast, my wife and I have tried to make choices that kept down our working hours (my wife works part time, and I have left a couple of jobs which resulted in long hours commuting, working and travelling for work - now I am self-employed) so that we can spend more time with our children. We are both incredibly fortunate that we have jobs which are well-paid per hour (she's a GP, I'm a pretty specialised accountant)

But there is also something about different individuals' makeup, I believe, which dictates to some extent their attitude to money - with some being far more "driven" to achieve material success. My brother is far more driven than me (although he gives a large chunk of his income to support various charities) - I am not that bothered about earning vast amounts. I'd rather have plenty of time to walk the dog, see my children, play the bass, listen to music, do things that help other people. I can only drive one car at a time, listen to one stereo at a time etc

Hope that is interesting for you!

"Imagine a backpack.."

Although I do not have alot to say on this forum, I agree with 'living in lancs' and 'bruce' about affluence.
Me and wifey both work in the NHS in relatively well paid jobs, both dealing directly with patients.
We cannot complain about our income.
We live well within our means, possibly due to the influence to our low to moderate income parents who only bought what they could afford.
Our clothes, well mine anyway, tend to wear out before replacing and I do not like to replace items just on a whim as this as I do not feel it is right and think about what happens to what we discard/recycle.This is probably just my problem.
However I am not perfect having just replaced a 4 year old car which was running perfectly with an almost new one.

I may be slightly inarticulate in expressing myself (hence my relative silence on this forum) but generally agree with 'living in lancs' and Bruces sentiment.

Am I waffling?

I always understood that:

Wealth is having more than you need

Poverty is having less than you NEED

I ahve sufficient for my needs but that Porsche 911 GT3 still eludes me.

So am i rich or poor.

ps i have 6 complete hifi systems bought with care and prudence some new some secondhand some home built. So is that rich poor or adequate.

4 years ago i left UK had a nice home reasonable job and moved to Aus as part of my mid life crisis.

So why am i now returning to UK?

Things do not make you happy but alleviate ones misery.

I believe uk is a richer country, not financially, than Aus. Aus is money obsessed and that is not me. UK still has many values which are based upon the person not wealth.

So home it is then in July.

David

quote:

Originally posted by DAVOhorn:

I believe UK is a richer country, not financially, than Aus.

David

I left Oz 6 years ago and have not regretted it for a second. I was in the UK for three years and loved every minute of it. The only bit that annoyed me greatly was to hear expat Aussies complain about the UK incessantly and bang on about how much "better" Oz was. I doubt I'll ever return to Oz, other than to visit.

That GT3 still eludes me, too.

So Winky, what do you think about Canada ?

I always thought that the UK was wealth and status obsessed.

In Canada, I've found engineers socializing with factory workers and farmers. In my work environments people go talk to whomever they need to get the job done. None of this 'going through channels or else' attitude I saw in the UK.

As for wealth, I have too much debt, both my systems are pre-loved.

I also have a very wealthy relative who is the cheapest S.O.B. I've ever met.

Dear George,

Your post reminds me of my school's sixth form RS essay prize*: 'Is the quality of life related to the standard of living? Discuss'. It seems as pertinent today as it was in 1979.

Best, Chris


* Called the Arthur Darby Nock Memorial Prize, I think!

I told a friend of mine recently that I was thinking about buying a silver Boxster S. I wondered what impression that might give ...

.... he said that it would just show that I could not afford a 911.

quote:

Originally posted by shoot6x7:
So Winky, what do you think about Canada ?

I always thought that the UK was wealth and status obsessed.

In Canada, I've found engineers socializing with factory workers and farmers. In my work environments people go talk to whomever they need to get the job done. None of this 'going through channels or else' attitude I saw in the UK.

I love Canada and am here for good. I agree with your observations of pragmatism and little, if any notion of status. Yes the UK can be a bit class conscious, but the positives outweighed the negatives by a wide margin. I find both the UK and Canada to be beautiful, and that means a lot to me.

More things I don't like about Oz...

It is depressing watching Australia turn into a desert. Sydney's obsession with itself is tragic and laughable at the same time. Football tribalism is rampant. Drunkeness is endemic and actually revered. The worst and most aggressive drivers I've ever tried to share the road with. The Lucky Country indeed.

In my late twenties I decided to leave England, I'd visited Australia and Canada and decided Canada was a better place for me.

Canada just seemed to be more open minded ... and the big skies !!