TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Don’t Indulge. Be Happy.

90 点作者 mjfern将近 13 年前

14 条评论

greggman将近 13 年前
My perspective is $75k a year (or whatever your number is) is all fine and dandy until something bad happens.<p>I'm sure there are far far worse stories than this but for example, my father, an eletrical engineer, left a job at a big company for a small start up at 50. The company went bankrupt 10 years later. His gamble to make it big failed. At 60 no one would hire him. (a) they expected him to retire at 65. (b) health insurance premiums are like 6x to 10x for the company for him vs someone 20-35 years younger.<p>So, he now drives a delivery van at 67. No retirement for him. Let's hope he has no serious medical bills.<p>My point is of course that $75k or whatever is fine day to day but you need a lot more to survive retirement.<p><a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/retirement/" rel="nofollow">http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/retirement/</a><p>At 47 myself I find it a much harder choice to choose a job with less pay knowing that I risk the same fate as my father. I'm not saying I won't take that risk. I might. But it's not as easy as choosing happiness today for less money. Today effects tomorrow. It might be better to try to find happiness in the higher paying job so that you can be happy for longer than to trade short term happiness now and possible suffering later.<p>Yea, there's no guarantee either way. YMMV etc. Again, all I'm saying is it's over simplifying to say the only thing to consider is "will this life style make me happy today even though I'd be making less money"
评论 #4217297 未加载
评论 #4221739 未加载
评论 #4218060 未加载
aggronn将近 13 年前
Lets forget the standard problems with measuring happiness and comparing it between different populations. There are issues there, but lets pretend like thats an accepted, valid practice that distills real truth. We're also going to pretend that people are completely honest when they fill these surveys out. What about some of these examples they use?<p>The chocolate example: The conclusion completely ignores the utility of having had chocolate on each day before the end of the week. If the result, that the marginal utility of a piece of chocolate a week later was less for people who had a lot of chocolate in between, surprised you, you've forgotten what marginal utility is. Do I need to really mention what's wrong with this comparison? Do people only enjoy chocolate on the weekend?<p>The children with goldfish: Imagine you earned a salary in NY strip steak as part of an experiment. Would you consider that experiment useful in drawing conclusions about money and utility or happiness?<p>The money in an envelope example: I'm not going to say anything about this, because I said in my intro that I'm going to ignore self-reporting bias caused by confronting someone about whether they acted ethically or not. (hint: if someone trusts you to do something and you don't do it, you may be less happy than someone who did do it--especially it is consistent with social expectations).<p>I don't mean to dispute the point the article is making, but honestly, after seeing the substance, I'm less inclined to believe it than I was beforehand.
评论 #4216508 未加载
评论 #4217573 未加载
doktrin将近 13 年前
Since the NYT does throw in the "$75,000 for happyness" study results, I feel obligated to mention the WSJ's adjustment for cost-of-living.<p>No surprise, of course, that New York itself stands out as being a particularly difficult place in which to be happy :<p><a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/09/07/what-salary-buys-happiness-in-your-city/" rel="nofollow">http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/09/07/what-salary-buys-h...</a><p>Note that this is not directly related to the central tenet of the article, which I actually found quite interesting.
评论 #4217635 未加载
评论 #4217431 未加载
anothermachine将近 13 年前
Cost of living varies by a factor of 3x or more across the USA. This fact is ignored every time the meaningless "$75,000" figure is trotted around.
评论 #4217558 未加载
apaitch将近 13 年前
Most people want to get the promotions and the money, but I think it's not only to buy the materialistic stuff they want. For many white-collar workers it's about the prestige, the status, the self-validation, and the respect these things tend to bring about. I think the thesis of this article applies to these "emotional" indulgences as well. I'd say if you respect yourself and have a sense of inner peace AND you acknowledge that you don't NEED to go from $75,000 to $175,000 (though of course it'd be nice) it gives you a kind of freedom from the shackles of what goes on at many a workplace. You can develop your skills because you enjoy getting better, do good work because you like what you do, and often get a promotion and more money as a byproduct without having to focus on it. That's one of the good things about the programming field :)<p>With regard to the "giving", I wonder what theories there are about why many people feel good when giving things up to benefit others. Is it just a societal/cultural thing, influenced by religions?
评论 #4216289 未加载
评论 #4216229 未加载
stevenwei将近 13 年前
Unfortunately this article doesn't really differentiate between income versus savings, which I think is relevant to the discussion.<p>It makes sense to me that once you reach a reasonable salary level (such as the $75,000 threshold mentioned), that any additional increase in salary doesn't really affect happiness all that much, because at the end of the day it's still <i>tied to your job</i>. If you don't come to work every day, you don't get paid. And if you have a family to support, you can't really arbitrarily take a one (or many) years off to pursue other interests you may have in life. So while doubling your income level to $150,000 might marginally improve your happiness, the effect is limited because you're still (more or less) having to work the same amount.<p>I suspect that the next threshold has less to do with salary, and more to do with having enough of a savings such that you no longer have to go to work every day. Now, a lot more options are open to you. You can choose to continue working if you want, but you can also choose to stop, and instead spend time with your family, travel the world, write a book, or whatever else you might want. At that level, you also don't have to worry about serious medical bills or other unforeseen emergencies destroying your savings.
ZanderEarth32将近 13 年前
I am currently fine with the amount I make, even though it's pretty low for my field. I've designed my lifestyle around what I can support financially, not the other way around.<p>Money rarely makes people happy. Stuff that money can buy is where they find happiness.<p>To me, more money equals security for the future. I often struggle to buy new things, constantly rationalizing why I should save rather than spend. These types of transactions don't make me happy.<p>I do find happiness spending money on trips or events though, as the article indicates.
评论 #4216818 未加载
zdw将近 13 年前
Giving up stuff intentionally is not a new concept - whether it be the fasting traditions of western religion, the periodic avoidance of pleasure of stoic philosophers, or recognition of desire as a distraction of the buddhists (probably the most extreme of the examples) - it's been tried and found to be quite positive before.
nhangen将近 13 年前
Meh, I don't know if I agree at all.<p>I'm in the ballpark of the given number, and yes, I'm relatively happy with how much I make and what I can do with it, but I'm not going to stop trying to make more.<p>I want to make things, and money is a sign that the things I'm making are valuable to people. Money is a signal that tells me I'm on the right path.<p>Additionally, I'd love to take a few years off and spend more time with my family. Being tethered to a job, regardless of how much it pays, will not allow me to do that. Making a shitload of cash will.<p>Money may not buy happiness, but I find happiness much more attainable when I'm not living paycheck to paycheck and/or not knowing how I'm going to pay for dinner.
评论 #4217700 未加载
评论 #4217426 未加载
lylemckeany将近 13 年前
I don't think that most people wish to make more money only so they can buy more things. This may have been true for the baby boomer generation, but peoples' attitudes towards money has changed quite a bit recently. When the realization that owning a home wasn't the ATM machine people always thought it would be, that changed most everyone's perspective on money.<p>I would argue that people wish to make at least enough money where they aren't struggling from paycheck to paycheck. That way they can easily afford to put food on the table, put clothes on their kids' backs, pay for their kids to go to college, and go on a family trip every once in awhile.
StacyC将近 13 年前
All other things being equal, I suppose more money is better than less. But ultimately, happiness is a decision we make every day—or not.<p>For me, a mindfulness meditation practice has made this daily decision much easier. I need so little to be happy, and find so much everywhere to be happy about.<p>We get what we expect, so expect the good.
评论 #4217254 未加载
mjleino将近 13 年前
Interesting paper on the subject: Dunn et al. - If money doesn't make you happy, then you probably aren't spending it right <a href="http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~dtg/DUNN%20GILBERT%20&#38;%20WILSON%20(2011).pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~dtg/DUNN%20GILBERT%20&#38;%20WIL...</a>
评论 #4218210 未加载
big_data将近 13 年前
For those people facing financial ruin, having more money eliminates the immediate fear caused by not having enough. Once life's necessities are taken care of though, what else can money really buy? Wouldn't happiness plateau at some point?
评论 #4216471 未加载
equilibrium将近 13 年前
Diminishing marginal utility