In Search of Riches

Money isn’t everything but without it there is almost nothing. People are generally content with the amount of money that they have only when they have given up on believing in the possibility of being able to accumulate more. Acceptance brings peace even in times of discontent.

The notion that riches will bring eternal happiness is a huge oversight no less complicated than the oversights made as an adolescent. Everything can be exciting until you’ve experienced it. But until you have experienced it enough you will likely fantasize and watch others on TV showoff the life that you shamefully try to imitate. Happiness is just having something that most people don’t have but want.

It’s fairly achievable to become average in a short amount of time. Living averagely for an extended amount of time feels sub-par. When feeling discontent we look for a way out. Since we live in a world that seems to cater well to those with money the thought of more money brings thoughts of liberation. If you get desperate enough the brain starts exploring ideas like slowly poisoning your spouse with anti-freeze to cash in on a life insurance policy.

With the anchor of a spouse out of the way, $1 million dollars and a one way ticket to the Caribbean, you’re on your way to the good life. Unfortunately, the purpose of humans is to become discontent so that we go out and search for the next possible land to conquer to fulfill our evolutionary destiny.

This is a bullshit post. The reason why people aren’t happy is because they can’t afford it. If money isn’t making you happy it’s because you don’t have enough.


Daily Prompt: Oversight


2 comments on “In Search of Riches

  1. cctyker says:

    “Money isn’t everything but without it there is almost nothing.” I suppose that is the general attitude of many.
    Read Henry David Thoreau if you please. He’s the guy who wrote “Walden – Life in the Woods” and a long journal of his non-income producing activities. He lived in a 6X10 cabin he built on Ralph Waldo Emerson’s property on Walden Pond just outside of Concord MA back in 1845-1847.
    He earned some income helping his father make pencils. But mostly he lived with and off of Emerson, who was also a literary fellow – the hell with being monetarily rich.
    Your definition of a “good life” is dipole to Thoreau’s.
    And each to his own.
    These days Thoreau might be called a welfare recipient. And I would disagree. Welfare people do not live off their friends and/or relatives. They take their money from government.
    But Emerson thought highly of Thoreau and his writings, and supported him so he could write.
    Toodle do.

    Liked by 1 person

    • MrJohnson says:

      Some people with no money might live in the woods…others might live in a 2′ by 3′ foot doorway and be labelled homeless. Having a lot of money might equal temporary happiness but it’s more of a distraction than anything. If you have a passion in life then money is not as important. I don’t think most people really have a passion. They have hobbies and activities that need to be supported by money.

      I don’t know if I’ll ever get around to reading Thoreau’s works. I’ve come across his quotes which I like. Reading his Wikipedia page brought me back to admiring the simple life.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s