Hacker News Reader

Comment by edw519 | Hacker News Reader

Every time I read an article like this, I think of all the people I know who are well off, yet appear to be miserable. Then I want to share with them this old wisdom from "The Ethics of the Fathers":

"Who is wise? One who learns from every man."

"Who is strong? One who overpowers his inclinations."

"Who is honorable? One who honors his fellows."

"Who is rich? One who is satisfied with his lot."

View on HN

This reminds me of an HN comment from a few months ago. It was something like... "Need more money can usually be replaced with need less stuff"

Edit: I found the comment: 'I bet that 9 times out of 10, "I need more money" should really be rephrased as "I need less stuff"'. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2025234

Or rather, "I need to need less stuff".

I definitely get this viewpoint- but I would like to add that per gp comment, you should be satisfied with your lot. Which for some people may mean spending money on some things. I've noticed on HN and other sites a fascination with acquiring wealth. I understand why, but in the end you acquire wealth for the utility you can gain from using it.

Obviously, this doesn't need to mean spending 5k on the biggest TV, and doesn't mean outstretching yourself on a huge mortgage for a McMansion. But, if you save a little less and tactically spend on things that will make you happier I think that is definitely worth it. This isn't a huge defense of "stuff," but I think it's also okay to lose some wealth to gain happiness. I personally like spending money on travel/experiences. There was a lifehacker article about that yielding increased happiness.

Link: http://lifehacker.com/5608980/spend-on-experiences-instead-o...

It's also nice for your kids not to need to take out college loans.

It's also nice for them not to have to build a down payment for a house. Where does this logic end?

I don't understand what you're trying to imply. My point is just that money is useful and it can make your life and the lives of your family easier, and that there are reasons for wanting it other than not being Buddhist enough.

I'm saying you can justify a near arbitrary amount of acquisitiveness in the name of your kids lifestyles.

Generally I think acquisitiveness is fine as long as it doesn't come at society's expense. But, I also think a lot of benign-seeming acts by acquisitive people come at a subtle significant cost to society; e.g., supporting the repeal of the estate tax.

By "society" should I assume you mean "other people who want my stuff"?

I see nothing unjust about an arbitrary amount of acquisitiveness. I don't think success, or its material reward, are inherently sinful. I do think it's unhealthy to be obsessed with acquisition for its own sake, as opposed to when one has healthy intentions for that which is being acquired; but in any case, that's nothing to do with the collective good to which you refer.

Agreed. It's all relative.

Happiness = Success / Expectations

Success - Expectations, usually. Success / Expectations would imply that if you have negative expectations and positive success, you'd still have negative happiness, which doesn't seem true.

Actually, if you have such negative expectations, you might be pessimistic enough that even success wouldn't make you happy.

But for other people, yeah, things coming out that much better than expected would be a good thing.

Imaginary happiness = sqrt(negative expectations)

"The secret of happiness, you see, is not found in seeking more, but in developing the capacity to enjoy less." - Socrates

Do you know what dialog this came from?

I don't remember reading it any dialogue, just stumbled upon it on the web. Quite frankly I'm not 100% sure it's a genuine quote, but it's a good one nonetheless ;)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com