money and being happy

[Inkstain82]

I find those days when I am not glued to the television and/or computer are the happiest days I spend.

All I have is a computer, and the days when I tear myself away from it and actually *do* something, even something as simple as a little baking, I am a lot happier. But it's just so tempting and easy to sit on the couch on the laptop all day.

Back when I had a TV, video game systems *and* a computer, I didn't even give myself a chance to have real fun.

[Fizgig]

My 91 year old grandmother taught me that it takes 5 things to be happy.

1. Good health
2. Financial security (needs met and some wants)
3. Something to love (mate, friends, pet)
4. Something to do
5. Something to look forward to

[am_vanquish]

My 91 year old grandmother taught me that it takes 5 things to be happy.

1. Good health
2. Financial security (needs met and some wants)
3. Something to love (mate, friends, pet)
4. Something to do
5. Something to look forward to

The last two seem intricately related to financial resources. Yes, it's possible to be content solely with your everyday tasks, but using money (hobbies, traveling, etc.) to accomplish the final 2 seems like it would give you the "most" happiness.

This is a topic DW and I have been discussing a lot lately ... we've been saving like crazy and we feel ourselves falling into the trap of saving money simply to save money. We're trying to really focus the PURPOSE for our money and identify how we can use it to maximize our satisfaction with life. The most satisfying "spending" we've found so far is traveling.

[jasonnoguchi]

ok, here's my list of things needed to be happy:

1. Good health
2. Good family relations
3. Healthy family members
4. Never have to think about bills or debt
5. Fully paid off house and car as a family foundation
6. Ability to fulfill the dreams of our kids and family
7. still have enough resources in time and money to help others in need occassionally.

[Fizgig]

The last two seem intricately related to financial resources. Yes, it's possible to be content solely with your everyday tasks, but using money (hobbies, traveling, etc.) to accomplish the final 2 seems like it would give you the "most" happiness.

This is a topic DW and I have been discussing a lot lately ... we've been saving like crazy and we feel ourselves falling into the trap of saving money simply to save money. We're trying to really focus the PURPOSE for our money and identify how we can use it to maximize our satisfaction with life. The most satisfying "spending" we've found so far is traveling.

Disposable money CAN help with the last two things, but I don't think it's necessary at all.

When I think about "something to do," I consider what activities I enjoy and add value or calm to my life. Most of those cost little or nothing - cooking a new recipe, doing an hour of yoga, helping out at the local nature preserve, taking the dog for a run, etc.

"Something to look forward to" is VERY important and one of the trickiest, I think. I'll admit that I usually fall back on money for this one - I love concerts, comedy shows, opera, etc, and I like to buy tickets for something months in advance and then get excited about the show. I've been trying to become more creative with this one and link it to goals - I look forward to paying off the second mortgage, for one. I try to have fun events planned with my friends and on the calendar.

[Scanner]

Well, "having to look forward to something" doesn't always have to involve money.

As a guy, I can think of a couple things I look forward to with a fine woman that doesn't involve money. In fact, the illustruous Dr. Oz notes that this kind of free fun should ideally happen 2-3x/week

http://static.oprah.com/download/pdfs/health/oz/oz_antiaging_checklist.pdf

(Of course, sometimes this "free fun" translates into a lifetime cost of $250,000 that couples often refer to as a "surprise" )

[Saving_spree]

As long as you know how to maintain a balance, it is all fine.

[lovcom]

My parents in law had businesses, worked hard, made much money and spent very little and do not want or covet much material goods or services. They are not very happy people though. They are negative, calculating and very nervous people.

I think the point is that money period (spent or saved) is not a valid way to gain "more happiness". People think so. They are wrong. They are confusing status and ego for happiness.

More money is not bad for happiness, what it is is neutral to slightly positive.

Human values and genetic predisposition are much more important contributors to happiness levels.

Your inlaw's unhappiness must not be tied to their making and saving lots of money. Their problems lie elsewhere, and there is no correlation between their bitterness and their mountain of cash....they are just unhappy folks for reason other then financial.

If you take a normal person of sound mind and body, they can be happier as their savings account grows, provided they don't let their life style increase at the same rate as their savings.

The more money one has, the more options one has, and more options can mean more happiness. Those that are unhappy and rich have other causes of their unhappiness having nothing to do with money, so one should never ues this as 'proof" that more money means less happiness. Another reason some rich people are unhappy is because they lack the imagination to use their money in ways that can make them happy; they fail to see their mountain of gold as a way to options in their life.

[cschin4]

And in the USA, $50,000 is chump changes even for a single person not having the burden of a family, nor mortgage.

I think for a family of 4, life does not provide interesting options until around $150,000.

Then, there must be a lot of unhappy people and families as that is nowhere near the median income for a household of 4.

[lovcom]

And in the USA, $50,000 is chump changes even for a single person not having the burden of a family, nor mortgage.

I think for a family of 4, life does not provide interesting options until around $150,000.

Then, there must be a lot of unhappy people and families as that is nowhere near the median income for a household of 4.

Yes, you are correct...there a hell of a lot of unhappy families subsisting on a lousy $50k per annum...they crank out the babies but can't afford them. Then they let strangers raise the kiddies because they both have to work so that they can pay the $24,000 car payment, which they perceive as a "necessity"....materialism, to be sure.

[Joan.of.the.Arch]

To some extent, being happy is a skill. My family was perfectly able to be happy on $50,000 and also on far, far less. And I certainly think we have found interesting options. Take an interest in the world and many opportunities for special things can come about. I agree that more money makes more things possible, but there are still amazing things to do places to visit and people to meet with very little money. One thing we have always had that sometimes people with more money do not have is time. All the money in the world isn't going to buy you a float trip through the Amazon basin if you don't have a few consecutive weeks to paddle your canoe. But my family can do it on $50k and a few free weeks.

I must say I do not care for having an average family income referred to as chump change. That implies that average earners are chumps (losers, gullible stupid people.)

[cschin4]

.there a hell of a lot of unhappy families subsisting on a lousy $50k per annum...they crank out the babies but can't afford them. Then they let strangers raise the kiddies because they both have to work so that they can pay the $24,000 car payment, which they perceive as a "necessity"....materialism, to be sure.


Uh, OK. Why so much hostility?

[lovcom]

.there a hell of a lot of unhappy families subsisting on a lousy $50k per annum...they crank out the babies but can't afford them. Then they let strangers raise the kiddies because they both have to work so that they can pay the $24,000 car payment, which they perceive as a "necessity"....materialism, to be sure.


Uh, OK. Why so much hostility?

Hostility? Where? I've none of that...I'm a lover, not a fighter....

The truth is the truth...don't get mad at me, I'm just a messenger....

[lovcom]

To some extent, being happy is a skill. My family was perfectly able to be happy on $50,000 and also on far, far less. And I certainly think we have found interesting options. Take an interest in the world and many opportunities for special things can come about. I agree that more money makes more things possible, but there are still amazing things to do places to visit and people to meet with very little money. One thing we have always had that sometimes people with more money do not have is time. All the money in the world isn't going to buy you a float trip through the Amazon basin if you don't have a few consecutive weeks to paddle your canoe. But my family can do it on $50k and a few free weeks.

I must say I do not care for having an average family income referred to as chump change. That implies that average earners are chumps (losers, gullible stupid people.)

Some people want more out of life then average. Life is too short to live a mediocre life. Life should be full of travel, time, experiences, and lots and lots of options; and the very inconvenient truth about this is that it takes money to make this happen.

Life is too short to be average. In the United States there is little excuse for a family to make less then a combined $100,000 per annum.