Are you conflicted about money?

Seth Godin is famous marketing guru and author of numerous successful books (which I can highly recommend) who writes one of the most followed blogs on the web. Seth is probably one of the few bloggers who I have followed assidiously for a number of years. I particularly like Seth Godin not just for his intelligent, common sense approach to marketing but also for his intelligent, common sense approach to life in general.  Many of Seth’s blog posts are not just about marketing but are nevertheless worth reading in their own right.  The blog post below (published on Seth Godin’s blog on 30th June) about our often conflicted attitudes to money is a case in point and definitely worth a read:

 

Thinking about money

Many marketers work overtime to confuse us about money. They take advantage of our misunderstanding of the time value of money, of our aversion to reading the fine print, of our childish need for instant gratification and most of all, our conflicted emotional connection to money.

Confusing customers about money can be quite profitable if that’s the sort of work you’re willing to do.

A few things to keep in mind:

  1. The amount of money you have has nothing to do with whether or not you’re a good person. Being good with money is a little like being good with cards. People who are good at playing cards aren’t better or worse than anyone else, they’re just better at playing crazy eights.
  2. Money spent on one thing is still the same as money spent on something else. A $500 needless fee on a million-dollar mortgage closing is just as much money as a $500 tip at McDonalds.
  3. If you borrow money to make money, you’ve done something magical. On the other hand, if you go into debt to pay your bills or buy something you want but don’t need, you’ve done something stupid. Stupid and short-sighted and ultimately life-changing for the worse.
  4. To go along with #3: getting out of debt as fast as you possibly can is the smartest thing you can do with your money. If you need proof to confirm this, ask anyone with money to show you the math. Hint: credit card companies make more profit than just about any other companies in the world.
  5. There’s no difference (in terms of the money you have) between spending money and not earning money, no difference between not-spending money and getting a raise (actually, because of taxes, you’re even better off not-spending). If you’ve got cable TV and a cell phone, you’re spending $4,000 a year. $6,000 before taxes.
  6. If money is an emotional issue for you, you’ve just put your finger on a big part of the problem. No one who is good at building houses has an emotional problem with hammers. Place your emotional problems where they belong, and focus on seeing money as a tool.
  7. Like many important, professional endeavors, money has its own vocabulary. It won’t take you long to learn what opportunity cost, investment, debt, leverage, basis points and sunk costs mean, but it’ll be worth your time.
  8. Never sign a contract or make an investment that you don’t understand at least as well as the person on the other side of the transaction.
  9. If you’ve got a job, a steady day job, now’s the time to figure out a way to earn extra income in your spare time. Freelancing, selling items on Etsy, building a side business–two hundred extra dollars every week for the next twenty years can create peace of mind for a lifetime.
  10. The chances that a small-time investor will get lucky by timing the stock market or with other opaque investments are slim, fat and none.
  11. The way you feel about giving money to good causes has a lot to do with the way you feel about money.
  12. Don’t get caught confusing money with security. There are lots of ways to build a life that’s more secure, starting with the stories you tell yourself, the people you surround yourself with and the cost of living you embrace. Money is one way to feel more secure, but money alone won’t deliver this.
  13. Rich guys busted for insider trading weren’t risking everything to make more money for the security that money can bring. In fact, the very opposite is starkly shown here. The insatiable need for more money is directly (and ironically) related to not being clear about what will ultimately bring security. Like many on this path, now they have neither money nor security.
  14. In our culture, making more money feels like winning, and winning feels like the point.
  15. Within very wide bands, more money doesn’t make people happier. Learning how to think about money, though, usually does.
  16. In the long run, doing work that’s important leads to more happiness than doing work that’s merely profitable.

 

Posted by Shona Lockhart on 1st July 2013

What can Bohemians teach us about happiness?: Status Anxiety – Part 10

In Part 10 of Status Anxiety, Alain de Botton looks at the history of Bohemia and what it can teach us about how best to live our lives.

From the start of the 19th century onwards, a new group of people began to be noticed in the West. They often dressed simply, they didn’t much care about money or convention and they came to be described as Bohemian. There have been all kinds of Bohemian movements over the last 200 years: the Romantics, the Surrealists, Dadaists, the Hippies the Punks and the Naturists. These disparate groups were united by one thread which is the decision to stand outside the Bourgeois mainstream and to live for a different set of values.  Bohemians pose an important question for all of us: who are we going to get to judge us?  Whose opinions should we give weight to?  We can learn from the Bohemians that status is available from a variety of sources, above all from our friends. Our choice of audience can be our own.

The Bloomsbury Group started an experiment in living in the 1920s and 30s whose affects we are all still feeling today.  Being a Bohemian isn’t about having a certain job, income or house, it is about a  way of looking at the world.  In the words of the childrens’ writer Arthur Ransome “Bohemia isn’t a place, it is a state of mind”. What that state of mind boils down to is a spirit of independence and freedom and the commitment to live your life by your own values.  The Bloomsbury Group gave themselves a sense of validation by breaking the rules of their time.  Many of the freedoms which we now take for granted (to talk to whom we like, to have relationships with whom we like) were established by “Bohemia”.  The disadvantage of Bohemia, de Botton argues is that it can spiral off in to wilful eccentricity.  Take a look at the video to see him taking a lobster for a walk!

Posted by Shona Lockhart on 28th June 2012

 

Happiness lessons from Karl Marx and John Ruskin: Status Anxiety – Part 9

In Part 9 of Status Anxiety, Alain de Botton looks at how great thinkers and activists have been able to alter our values in society and to change our perception of status.

Who has high status today?  Who do we all look up to?  Who do the newspapers favour with respectable profiles? Rich people.  People who, through their own efforts and merit, have been successful in business, entertainment and the arts. People who make no secret of their achievements. This can seem shallow and unfair, de Botton argues, but it is made all the worse because we often assume that nothing can be done to alter the ideals of our society.  We tend to think that it is natural that certain groups have high status while others are marginalised. In fact it is not inevitable at all, it is possible to imagine a world in which their has been a radical redistribution of respect.

Karl Marx

The newspapers we buy contain a miriad of subtle and insidious messages about who in the world matters and who doesn’t. Karl Marx first brilliantly analysed the way that our values are being shaped without us realising it and he coined the word to describe this process as “ideology”.  He defined an “ideological” statement as one that sells itself as being naturally true when in fact it is made up to uphold vested interests. Marx thought we are bombarded by such statements all of the time. Acording to Marx, the ruling ideas of every age are always the ideas of the ruling class.

The sociologist Max Weber has said that the ritual of buying the Sunday newspapers has now replaced going to church. He contests that it is now the media which is the main source of ideology rather than priests in pulpits who used to be the main source of ideology.  De Botton argues that reading the papers can leave us feeling dispirited as we are being subtly rebuked for all the ways in which our lives do not conform to the dominant status ideals, all the ways our careers aren’t as stellar, our house aren’t as fashionable and our social diaries aren’t as packed as they might be. We may end up feeling as guilty about our failings as if we had spent the morning being berated by a priest.  Marx argued that ideological ideas are phantoms formed in the human brain which keep prisoners in their cells without the need for bars.

Alain de Botton evaluates the teachings of John Ruskin who fought a passionate campaign to raise the status and conditions of the British working class. He hated the values of his Victorian contemporaries and their obsession with wealth.  He described them as the most wealth obsessed people who have ever existed on this earth. He argued that the ruling goddess of the age was the goddess of “getting on”.  Ruskin demanded free education, decent housing and access to green spaces for everyone.  He challenged the central idea of his age that there was something admirable about being rich. Ruskin too was desperate to be wealthy but he had a very different idea of wealth in mind.  What he wanted was not money, he wanted kindness, intelligence, sensitivity, godliness – a set of virtues which he referred to simply as “life” There is no true wealth but life he wrote.  ”That country is wealthiest” he argues, “which nourishes the greatest number of happy and noble human beings.  Most of the people commonly considered as wealthy are in truth no wealthier than the locks on their strong boxes”  Ruskin made a difference by setting in trend many of the arguments which were to lead to the creation of the Welfare State. He remains an inspiring example of how by making a lot of noise and by acting politically someone can change the values of his world.  Gandhi said that John Ruskin had been the single greatest influence in his life.

Alain de Botton goes on to look at how changes in society’s values have allowed progress for people to whom this would have been previously been denied.

The political response to status, he argues, has been to insist that our contemporary status ideals are not inevitable but are man-made and so they can be changed.  He looks at people who have chosen to live by different ideals.  Watch the video and see what conclusion he comes to.

 

Posted by Shona Lockhart on 28th June 2012

Status Anxiety – Part 8

In Part 8 of Status Society Alain de Botton argues that the benefits of a meritocratic system have been extraordinary.  People who for generations were held down in a caste like hierarchy have finally been allowed to fulfill themselves in whatever ways their talents allow. Race, class, gender and age have all stopped being obstacles to advancement. An element of justice has been introduced into the distribution of rewards. Alongside meritocratic educational reform has come efforts to promote equal opportunities in the workplace. We are repeatedly told that through effort and diligence we can make it to the top.

There is a pride in the way many people speak about how they got to the top, a pride that would have been impossible in the days before meritocracy when you only got places because of who your parents were.  Earning good money and having an important job title say more positive things about you than they ever used to. Unfortunately in a meritocracy having no money or no impressive job title say many more negative things about you than they used to. There’s a darker side to meritocracy: if the successful merit their success it  then logically follows that the unsuccessful merit their failure. In a meritocratic age an element of justice seems to enter into the distribution of success as well as failure. Financial failure becomes associated with a sense of shame that the unsuccessful of old were fortunately spared. Now the question of why, if you are in any way clever or talented, you are still unsuccessful, becomes a more difficult a question to answer. The rich come to seem as though they are deserving of what is going right for them.  Watch the video to see what conclusion Alain de Botton comes to about those for whom meritocracy has not delivered the status they desired. He claims that we have ended up with a curious paradox that our wealthy, opportunity-filled societies have had the odd effect of raising our levels of status anxiety.

 

Posted by Shona Lockhart, 27th June 2012

 

Status Anxiety – Part 7

In part 7 of Status Anxiety Alain de Botton looks at how living standards in the West have hugely improved in the last 200 years with major increases in life expectancy, economic opportunity and wealth generally. Despite these improvements it can be argued that we are much more status conscious and status anxious than we every were in the days of horse drawn carriages. Older societies despite all their disadvantages had one big advantage when it came to status.  Before the mid 18th century, status was handed out in very particular ways: it did not matter what you did but who you were, who your parents were, what kind of background you had.  People at the top of society had been handed their priveleges on a plate, secondly there was very little social mobility and thirdly people had very low expectations of the kind of life they could have. Under the old feudal system only a very few could aspire to wealth and fulfillment.

Alain de Botton claims that religion taught many people to accept their unequal treatment as part of a natural and unchangeable order. The English Christian medeival author John of Salisbury, who  in 1159 published Policraticus, compared society to a body and used this analogy to justify a system of natural inequality. The ruler was like a head, the parliament like the lungs, the treasury like a stomach, the army like the hands, the working classes like the feet and the peasantry the toes. Behind this rather insulting metaphor lay the idea that everyone in society had been accorded an unalterable role.

Gradually in the middle of the 18th century a way of distributing status emerged, a way that gave hope to millions of people and dramatically changed their lives but which at the same time also brought new levels of anxiety. This new system was called meritocracy. Alain de Botton travels to America to see how the creation of the United States in 1776 fundamentally changed the way status was distributed. The constitution of this new country was based on an idea which was to affect almost every aspect of life right across the Western world – the idea of meritocracy.

Thomas Jefferson drafted these words in June 1776:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit if happiness” 

Part 7 of this series continues to look at how this Declaration of Independence and the ideals of meritocracy led to the belief in the American Dream – that anyone with enough talent is capable of achieving anything.  An aristocracy of talent rather than birth right emerged.

 

Posted by Shona Lockhart, 20th June 2012.

Status Anxiety – Part 6

Alain de Botton postulates that the search for status is linked to something which is as essential to us as light, food and water. Once we work out how central the need for love is a lot of things become clearer, from why we go shopping to why we sometimes kill one another.  Much of the reason why we go shopping is unconnected to any urgent material need. We often shop in order to persuade the world we are worthwhile, interesting people. We often shop for emotional rather than practical reasons.  A lot of consumption is about acquiring status symbols, material objects whose primary use is psychological and which signal to the world that we are worthy of dignity and respect.

Why do we shop?

Thorstein Veblen, an American sociologist and the man responsible for the term status symbols wrote a witty book The Theory of the Leisure Class in 1899. Having observed the rich at leisure he became fascinated by how people acquire certain luxury goods to symbolise their high status. Many clothes were deliberately designed to show that people didn’t need to work and in fact couldn’t do so in clothes which were highly impractical.

Alain de Botton looks at why we are interested in acquiring luxury cars and what these cars say about us. He argues that perhaps it is those who strive the hardest to be successful who are most haunted by feelings of failure. Scratch the surface of almost anyone who has made it to the top of their chosen field and you will find an unusually viscous fear of being a loser. What need would there be to be so impressive if their wasn’t a fear of being the opposite? There is a sad emotionaly deprived side to the purchase of luxury cars sales he claims. People are attracted to status symbols because they want to feel valued. Rather than a tale of greed, the history of luxury goods could more accurately be read as a record of emotional trauma. It is the legacy of people who felt pressured by the insensitivity of others to impress them with material objects. The amount of love you receive from the world is dependent on the amount of status symbols you can wield.

Part 6 of this series goes to demonstrate how our extreme touchiness about our status can lead to duelling and tragically even death.

 

 

Posted by Shona Lockhart on 18th June 2012

Status Anxiety – Part 5

 

Part 5 of the series Status Anxiety looks at the rewards we seek in society.  We look for rewards in terms of promotion, money and buying a nicer house. For most of us the reward we really want is attention.

Alain de Botton investigates how our anxieties about status affect every aspect of our every day lives. We worry about being made redundant and how it will affect the way others see us, we worry about passed over for promotion,  we worry about being kept waiting, we worry about our colleagues and even our close friends doing better than us.

However what gives us status in a given society keeps changing throughout history in the 21st century our status comes from fashion, business, sport or all three.  Although the ways we attain high status have varied throughout history the consequences of high status  are familiar accross time and it comes down to being treated well, being treated with respect and with a kind of love.

It is common to assume that the worst thing about low paid work is the money just as the money is the best thing about highly paid work.  There is another way of looking at this isue which puts status at the heart of the subject.  It could be argued that what make low paid work really distasteful comes down to how one is treated and it isn’t about the money per se, it is about the lack of status involved.  Many low paid jobs leave us feeling as though we don’t properly exist. No cares who we are and what we think. Conversely part of what keeps people working even after they have made a lot of money is the respect they receive  from others, they are looked up to, held in high esteem and even photographed on the way to the shops.

The philosopher Adam Smith questioned the point of the rat race in his famous book “The Wealth of Nations”.

“What is all the toil and bustle for? What are people aiming at with their ambitions and their frenzied pursuits of wealth, power and pre-eminence? Are they looking to supply their basic needs? No. The wages of the poorest labourer can supply those. What then are they after?  They want to be treated well, they want to be attended to, to be taken notice of with sympathy, kindness and approval.”

It is agonising to compare ourselves with people we consider our equals i.e. returning to a school reunion can trigger huge amounts of anxiety. “Every time a friend of mine succeeds, a small part of me dies” Gore Vidal famously said.

Watch this short video to see what further conclusions Alain de Botton comes to about our   need for love and status.

 

 

Posted by Shona Lockhart on 18th June 2012

Status anxiety – Part 4

In part 4 of this series Alain de Botton argues that if you met someone very “successful” who had lots of fame, money and respect and asked them why they were successful and they said it was just luck you would think they were being unduly modest.  On the other hand if you met someone who was a “failure” and asked them why they had not succeeded and they said it was just bad luck you would think they were trying to hide something.  Essentially luck has disappeared as a plausible explanation for what has happened in our lives. Winners make their own luck is the punishing modern mantra.

In traditional societies high status and the respect it brings may have been inordinately hard to achieve but it was also pleasantly hard to lose de Botton argues. Modern society makes status dependent on achievement, primarily financial achievement. The nature of the economy which society has created is making that achievement ever more precarious.

For most of us our work is the chief determinant of the amount of respect and care we will be granted but the globalised economy is making that work more unstable, opening up an anxiety-inducing gap between what we need and what the world will give us.

We seem determined to remove any excuse which we might point to for our failure at a time when more and more of us are less secure in our jobs than ever.  What consolations are available to the unsuccessful when the world doesn’t give them the respect they need?

This part of the the programme looks at whether religion is a consolation to those who are not successful in terms of fame and money.  Take a look at this short video clip and decide if you agree with the conclusions.

 

Posted by Shona Lockhart, 16th June 2012

Status Anxiety – Part 3

 

 

Part 3 of this documentary series by Alain de Botton on “Status Anxiety” looks at the theory of meritocracy.  Is meritocracy the route to happiness? De Botton investigates the “American Dream” and asks if such a thing is achievable. The programme cites William James, an American psychologist, who looked at the problems which societies create for themselves when they start raising huge expectations in their citizens. The formula James came up with is that Self esteem = Success/Expectation. 

In order to have the healthy level of self esteem which we are all looking for we can do two things: we can either become more successful or lower the number of things we expect to be successful at. The problem is that modern societies place us under huge pressure to succeed and make self esteem very elusive.  Every rise in our levels of expectation entails a rise in the risk of humiliation.

According to Alain de Botton it became possible to argue for the first time that the rung of the ladder which a person stood on accurately reflected their true qualities and conveniently for the successful this reduced the need for welfare, redistribution of wealth or even sympathy.

Take a look at the arguments made Alain de Botton in the third part of this fascinating series and decide whether you agree with his analysis. If you want to learn more you can purchase Alain de Botton’s book Status Anxiety from Amazon.

 

 

Posted by Shona Lockhart, 14th June 2012

 

 

Status Anxiety – Part 2

 

This is the second part of the short documentary series by Alain de Botton which looks at our theme of how our obsession with money and status can be a huge obstruction to our happiness. Part 2 looks at why we torment ourselves with comparisons between our lives and those just a few rungs up the ladder. It does not make us any happier so why are we so incapable of curtailing our painful aspirations? It is not just comparisons with others which make us feel discontent it is also what we demand of ourselves.  We are all now expected to succeed.  We ask ourselves: Should I be more than I am?

Should we follow the advice of philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau who argued the case for the “noble savage”. Being wealthy is not just a question of having a lot of money, it is having what we want.  Wealth is not an absolute, it is relative to desire. Every time we seek something which we can’t afford, we can be considered poor, however much money we actually have. Every time we are satisfied with what we have we can be considered rich however little we may actually possess. Rousseau argued that there are two ways to make make people richer, one is to give them more money and the other is to restrain their desires.

Take a look at the arguments made in the second part of this fascinating series and if you want to learn more you can purchase Alain de Botton’s book Status Anxiety from Amazon.

 

 

Posted by Shona Lockhart, 13th June 2012