I think a lot about happiness — about my own happiness and about the happiness of those around me. Knowing my interest in the subject, Kris forwarded a recent column from David Brooks of The New York Times about what he terms “the Sandra Bullock trade”:
Two things happened to Sandra Bullock [in March]. First, she won an Academy Award for best actress. Then came the news reports claiming that her husband is an adulterous jerk. So the philosophic question of the day is: Would you take that as a deal? Would you exchange a tremendous professional triumph for a severe personal blow?
Brooks uses this question as a jumping-off point to discuss research into happiness. He notes that you’d be crazy to make the trade. “If you have a successful marriage,” he writes, “it doesn’t matter how many professional setbacks you endure, you will be reasonably happy.”
Brooks says that the research into money and happiness is complicated. (Although from my own experience, it isn’t really — the research seems pretty clear.) As I’ve mentioned before, money does make people happier, but its effects are much more pronounced on the poor than on the rich. If you earn $20,000 a year and experience a $5,000 windfall, that’s going to bring more joy to your life than if you earn $200,000 and get the same $5,000 windfall. Brooks also mentions that lottery winners don’t experience lasting happiness, either.
The New York Times piece continues by noting that although money doesn’t always bring a lot of happiness, personal relationships do. Brooks writes:
The daily activities most associated with happiness are sex, socializing after work and having dinner with others. The daily activity most injurious to happiness is commuting. According to one study, joining a group that meets even just once a month produces the same happiness gain as doubling your income. According to another, being married produces a psychic gain equivalent to more than $100,000 a year.
So, what do you think of Brooks’ question? Would you exchange a professional triumph for a severe personal blow? Or, perhaps a better question is what sorts of trades are you willing to make for money or happiness? What trades have you made in the past? Which have been worth it? Which do you regret?
Note: A couple of commenters have noted — correctly — that Brooks sets up a false trade. That is, Bullock didn’t actually trade one of these for the other; they just happened. Still, I think it’s an interesting hypothetical question with real-life applications. We do make these trades all the time. I traded four months of my life and gained 20 pounds in order to write a book. I’m not sure I got the better end of that bargain.
[The New York Times: The Sandra Bullock trade]
This article is about News, Psychology, Relationships
SEARCH FOR RECENT ARTICLES
There is no right answer. It’s all about what you personally value.
Some people are driven by their careers and their professional endeavors and accomplishments. Others are driven by their personal lives.
For me, I’d never make that trade. My professional choices are led by what I value most – my family.
loading....
I would never trade my happiness for a professional accomplishment, and the question actually seems strange when it’s posed that way. In the example given, I would hope that no one would choose an Oscar over their marriage…although that wasn’t actually a choice for Sandra Bullock.
I think it helps to step back and really determine what brings us happiness in our lives. For me, it’s certainly my wife and family, and I totally buy the idea that “being married produces a psychic gain equivalent to more than $100,000 a year.” I can really *feel* that effect on my own happiness, even though it’s tough to quantify.
I also find a lot of happiness by helping others be happy. Whether that’s solving a problem in my day job as an engineer or helping other young couples get that “$100,000 dollar feeling” in their marriage through my work at Engaged Marriage, I have been surprised by the joy that my “jobs” have provided me.
loading....
I understand where Brooks is headed, but to even associate the two is crazy. Sandra Bullock didn’t trade anything. Her triumph was not a result of adultery or vise versa.
*Steps off of soapbox*
loading....
I just read your beautiful tribute to your friend. Now I’m crying a bit at work. I’m so glad you were able to have such a great friend and spend the time with him that you did spend.
I don’t really like those hypothetical trades. They’re not really connected (in the example, Bullock’s professional success did not cause her husband’s cheating). Or if they are connected, balance is really what maximizes things. If you don’t kill yourself with work to make money and thus have time to spend, or don’t spend all your time socializing so you have no money… there’s a nice balance that will make you happier than trading all of one for another. (I want to say that you want marginal product of each thing you’re maximizing over to be equal… but that’s jargon that now a whole lot of people will understand.) And of course, if you save more money and get more passive income (and less debt), you’ll have more time. (So wealth and time can go together.)
It’s important to value what you have and keep aiming for what you want to achieve in all areas of your life.
And Sandra Bullock deserves both an academy award and to find love with someone stable who doesn’t cheat. An Oscar is not some kind of cursed diamond that causes distress to people who get it. Women really can both reach the top of their fields professionally and have personal success. I think that is what really bothered me about that article when it came out the other week… it somehow implied that women who want to have it all are shooting themselves in the foot or bringing disaster on themselves with their success like in A Star is Born. We can have it all without being cheated on, thank you very much. Maybe if she’d had a better husband she would have two Oscars by now.
That’s a bit scattered (I cried, I lectured, I got angry)… luckily I’m not writing a blog.
loading....
Nicole wrote: Sandra Bullock deserves both an academy award and to find love with someone stable who doesn’t cheat.
Great point. You and Chad both point out that the Bullock example that Brooks started with isn’t really a good one, even if it does set up the hypotheticals that he’s talking about. I agree. I’ve added an addendum to the post…
loading....
Just like Trent Hamm (comment #1) said, I know that what people value is subjective; chocolate vs. vanilla, apples vs. oranges, etc. But knowing what, on average, makes people happy is very good to know.
For example, knowing in advance that commuting makes most people unhappy can help someone decide whether it’s worthwhile to pay an extra $100 a month to cut 20 minutes off the commute. (And in my case, I found out that I’m one of the “average” folks who hate the commute. When my office moved and my commute changed from 35 minutes to 7 minutes, it felt much better than getting a raise.)
loading....
Hm… I still disagree with the addendum. It isn’t a swap– two separate things happened that just coincidentally happened the same month causing a spurious connection by a NYTimes writer. (And probably a lot of emotional ups and downs for Bullock.) Calling it a swap keeps that connection. (Sorry that’s picky, but I’m still annoyed by the implicit sexism of the implied trade on Brooks’ part. I would be less annoyed if we were talking about say, Guy Richie getting an award and Madonna leaving him or something, because there isn’t that cultural history of successful men being blamed for women leaving them.)
loading....
@Nicole,
Stellar professional success and personal failure shouldn’t go hand in hand, but they often do. There are many successful people with solid marriages, but the fact is that it takes a lot of energy and time to be successful in many fields, and that energy and time is leeched off personal relationships. Sometimes this is done as a team: a spouse agrees to do more than his/her share while the other works for advancement. Sometimes it isn’t and a family falls apart. But in a world of limited resources everything is a trade. You CAN’T do everything/have it all. You can only do some things and hopefully have enough.
So in a way it IS a trade, maybe not a conscious one, but a trade none the less. Perhaps Sandra’s husband was one of those 80% people. He can be trusted 80% of the time and 20% she needed to keep her eye on him to keep him from temptation, and she spent that 20% on another movie instead of her marriage. Maybe he was just a sleeze and would have cheated anyway. But people are dynamic. People are responsible for their actions, but someone isn’t born a cheater. It is a decision that is made based on a situation.
loading....
Re-phrased the addendum again.
loading....
Short term — sure I’d trade off say a longer commute for more money, but for maybe 6 months. I am firmly in the happiness camp. I would not trade my marriage for any amount of money.
loading....
@ Nicole (again),
I understand your pique, but the fact of the matter is that the woman is typically the one putting more emotional energy and time into a marriage. I think that’s not just cultural but also how we are built. Not that that makes it right, but that makes it what it is.
And I disagree about successful men not being blamed for women leaving them. The typical first thought seems to be, “He got too big for his britches, he must have cheated and driven her away.”
It seems to me that the man ‘drove the woman away’ or the woman ‘couldn’t hold onto him’, the premise comes down to my original point, it is assumed that emotionally it is the woman that will hold things together.
loading....
The Bullock example aside, no, I absolutely would never trade.
But then, I don’t care one bit about cars or big houses or huge salaries. In fact, I hope every year of my life is more simple than the one before it, with less Stuff and more time for family and loved ones.
loading....
When I think of Professional Success, I don’t necessarily think of money. I think of it as something you work tirelessly at and earn appropriate recognition for that hard work. So, to me, professional success would be equal to a great relationship. I wouldn’t trade either one for “just money”.
Maybe lottery winners are so unhappy because they didn’t earn the money and everyone knows that, so they want a piece of it too.
loading....
@9 Thanks for that.
@ Shara. I think we have very different views of marriage. It’s ok for you to value a more traditional marriage where the woman puts in more effort, but that is not my choice, nor do I think it should be a forced choice for anybody.
And no, I don’t think that the majority of people do think that Madonna leaving was Guy Richie’s fault. (Blame CNN for linking to People magazine… otherwise I would not be half so up on celebrity happenings.)
loading....
I would not give up my wife for any job opportunity. I would not give up my fitness for a raise (Sure, I’d trade at $1000/lb of weight gain, but *not* if I wasn’t allowed to lose it all right away again). I would not give up my surfing/sailing for overtime pay.
Doing any of these things is putting the cart before the horse. We work to build the life we want to live (or we should). Your priorities are completely backwards if you’re giving up the life you want to live for more work (even lucrative work).
If the end goal of money is to buy (or use it to build) happiness, and you’ve already got happiness, giving it up for money is a risky gamble that buys you nothing except a chance at getting back what you already had, and there are a million ways it could go wrong in the meantime.
So yes, trading happiness for money is a bad bargain.
loading....
Nope, I wouldn’t trade happiness for money since the only thing my money is used for is to survive and be happy. I choose to trade money for happiness every time we take a few hundred dollars out for a weekend trip and plan for annual vacations.
When my husband and I are happy with our relationship, I feel very well off (luckily, that’s the majority of the time). If we have a fight, I feel like crap. Even if I had a million dollars, I’d still feel like crap. Same with close friends and family. Obviously, my priorities are my personal relationships.
loading....
Tyler K– I wouldn’t give up MY husband, but I sure as heck would give up Sandra Bullock’s!
loading....
Who wants to trade with Tiger? Any takers?
Although it’s not a direct trade – the money for the problems – I do wonder sometimes if it is a case of over-consumption. Money, girls, fame, fortune, while fun for a while I’m sure, it becomes a real disaster.
loading....
I don’t think it is that cut-and-dried. Would I choose my husband over my job? Of course! But I still trade 40(ish) hours a week of time I could be spending with him to go to work. So, what does that say? I could live under a bridge and scrounge food from garbage cans and we could spend every minute together. Should I do that? If not, that means I am choosing material comforts over spending time with family. Is there a reason 40 hours a week is reasonable, but 50 or 60 is not? Isn’t it just because that’s “what everyone else does”? I get the concept abstractly, but from a practical perspective I don’t see the application. Most jobs are 40 hours a week or nothing.
loading....
I’ve had money and I’ve had happy relationships (and I’ve been poor and I’ve been single or in unhappy relationships). Poor and happy trumps rich and unhappy without question (tho rich and happy has its merits
)
Some of my mom’s fondest memories conclude “we were so poor then. But we were happy.” Maybe we appreciate our happiness more when we’re poor – fewer distractions.
loading....
Just read a similar post (but with a slightly different focus)over on pop economics a day or 2 ago – seems to be a common topic on a lot of blogs (and with good reason)… I think you’ll like it if you haven’t seen it yet : http://www.popeconomics.com/2010/04/10/why-do-we-work-so-much/
loading....
I’m with Nicole in thinking David Brooks was pretty much of a schmuck for using Ms. Bullock’s situation to create a tag for his article. That’s so cheap and heartless, I’m not even going to READ the article (which sounds like an uncredited rehash of Gretchen Rubin’s Happiness Project, anyway).
I can think of plenty of ways to write the same article without trading on someone else’s unhappiness, which, as far as ANYONE on the outside knows, is completely undeserved.
I’m so irritated I’m only going to add one thing to the discussion, and that’s to note that I stayed in a crappy job for four years longer than I should have just because I could walk to work. Commutes suck. Like Jenna at #6, I think a short commute is better than a raise.
loading....
There’s a weird assumption here (amiright?) that her winning the Oscar was a professional gain, and her husband cheating on her was a personal blow, and additionally that professional = money and personal = happiness. What about people who actually do the things they love? What if she really loves her work, and getting the Oscar was absolutely worth any “personal blow” she might receive because it’s what really makes her happy? (Especially because, and I’m going to be really judgmental here, sometimes personal relationships really *aren’t* worth making professional sacrifices for! People can be untrustworthy, unreliable douches!)
I guess I think that personal happiness comes from a whole lot of things, one of which is professional satisfaction and success. I absolutely think it’s important to give a lot to your marriage/partnership, but each person is better if she pursues her own interests as well. I think so much of our culture encourages co-dependency, and I think people can find real happiness in finding completeness *without* needing it to be another person.
So, yeah, I absolutely would make that “swap.” If I felt like I was making huge personal/professional sacrifices for my spouse, I would worry that those would start to add up to resentment. And, potentially, regret. Maybe my opinion is colored by the fact that my parents, after 30 years, are now getting divorced — something I never saw coming. They both just got tired of not doing everything they wanted to do, and were blaming each other for it.
loading....
The post asks “would you trade a personal triumph for a personal blow”? Money and happiness are too inextricably linked (one usually causing the other in some way).
Another way to look at it would be: “is a personal blow worthwhile to achieve a personal triumph”? Or, in other words, is it worthwhile to risk something very bad happening in order to potentially achieve something really great?
Would you risk your financial security on an entrepreneurial venture? Would you risk a great marriage by pulling up ties and living in the Australian outback for a year? (Like Baker from Man vs. Debt did).
The answer depends on the person, and it’s different for everyone. I am personally risk-averse and wouldn’t choose it. But many would risk something bad happening in order to achieve something truly great.
loading....
Another thing to consider is that personal happiness isn’t everything. I would never trade my marriage for winning an academy award, but that could be because I don’t really care about winning an academy award. But what if I was a medical researcher and really close to a big break through like curing cancer or AIDS? What if I was a scientist about to come up with a good solution to a huge environmental problem? What if I was working non-stop to prevent kids from dying of hunger in famine-stricken countries? I might sacrifice my marriage and/or time with my kids then, making the calculation that the greater good of what I was doing outweighs any unhappiness I suffer (or cause others) because of my choice.
loading....
@Nicole
I wasn’t talking about traditional marriage roles. I was talking about innate differences between men and women. We have the same value, but we aren’t the same. Women will continue to bear the children while men tell jokes about weepy pregnant wives. Some differences will always be there and that includes how we will relate in man/woman relationships.
Am I the only one who thinks the original premise is silly? I don’t know anyone who would say “I always admired Ebineezer Scrooge…” or “I would trade my husband for a handful of magic beans and a goose that lays golden eggs.” If only because of peer pressure no one would admit it. But it’s a question that’s phrased in such a way that no one would ever pick Door A.
As others pointed out, at the very least the question should be about what we are willing to risk for various desired outcomes. She didn’t make any decision the week of the Oscars. Any decisions that effected the outcome were made months if not years ago when potential outcomes were vague and everything was simply a measure of risk. If we knew the outcomes of our decisions beforehand I think we would all have made some different decisions in our lives.
loading....
This post is kind of silly. More happiness is a result of more money.
Yes culturally we talk a lot of horse hockey about how money won’t make you happy etc. etc. and while I agree you shouldn’t love money for its own sake, such piffle as “feelings” and whatnot is what we come up with to cope with the life we have because we don’t have the resources to carve out a better life.
loading....
Shara– Individual differences almost always trump group differences between genders. Besides, if you’re going all innate, I got me one of those guys that innately doesn’t stray, if you believe that NPR story about the genetic propensity for straying being innate, which was based on animal research so who knows. He also has no innate tendency to make jokes about pregnant women, which I didn’t realize there was research on. Also, according to the linguistics class I took in college I’m a guy because I am from Mars in the way I talk, listen, and approach problems, despite my proven ability to bear and birth a child. Much of evolutionary psychology is complete BS (no offense to any evolutionary psychologists reading, I’m sure *your* contribution to the field is solid).
Even if there are large group differences, there is plenty of room for differentiation and selection. Statements about individuals should not be made based on small differences between groups.
@23 Eva– great post! (I’ve been kind of thinking that maybe one of these days she’ll look back and take this as two good things happening in the same month of the same year– winning an Oscar and getting rid of a jerk, but all I know is what’s written in People magazine. One of my college professors’ husband left her in a similar situation and the next time I saw her years later she looked 10 years younger and had hit new professional peaks. She was happy instead of tired.)
loading....
I’ve made $9/hour and I’ve made more than three times that. I’ve twice uprooted my life to move, alone, to a completely new place. I’ve been laid off twice, and I’ve started new jobs at 50% pay cuts from previous ones. I’ve been super engaged (to the point of being obsessed) with my jobs, and I’ve had jobs that were really not so great. I’ve had weeks where I’m socially busy every day, and I’ve had weeks where I just stare at the ceiling after work.
But really, my life has a feeling of constancy to it, because I always have myself along for the ride. I’ve learned how to be happy, and how to be good company. Yes, there are days when I cannot stand to be stuck in my skin with me, but for the most part I’ve learned that the externals really don’t matter (yes, absolutely within reason), so long as we know how to be happy in our lives.
I’ve determined that for me, balance and variety is way more important than money.
loading....
From a monetary perspective I’d think the book deal would be worth some extra poundage and 4 months. As a residual income source, books are the gift that keeps on giving for a successful author, no? That could free up some additional time to lose that extra weight…and would likely continue to earn after the 20lbs is gone. As for the four months well…it’s too late now to get it back!
loading....
Biologically the men women choose are the steady dull earner types because they know it will be a good atmosphere to raise children. But they want the “Bad Boy” types as lovers. Since Ms. B has plenty of money she chose the bad boy type. There are plenty of studies on this and books galore. I am the former type man and see plenty of knockout women with dull plain men. I even remark to myself that what does that guy have to rate such a knockout? Success at work does not equal tragedy at home. It sure sells newspapers though.
loading....
Unfortunately, I think a lot of women make similar trades all the time.
Perhaps not exactly the kind that the NY Times author was suggesting…more along the lines of staying in a bad marriage because they can’t afford to support their kids on their salary.
Statistically, women with children don’t do particularly well financially when they divorce.
While I don’t think that money brings happiness, it’s pretty stressful if you have to wonder how you’ll feed your kids.
In a way, perhaps Sandra Bullock is one of the lucky ones, since she has the means to support herself, and can afford to kick that SOB to the curb.
loading....
This post comes at a good time. My husband is being accused of lying and theft at work and they’re trying to fire him without him being able to prove himself innocent. And I can’t find a job (I work now, just not in my field and it’s driving me insane). But you know what, that’s better than losing my marriage, and I would say it’s better than miscarriage, then losing my health. I need to remember to count my blessings
loading....
Values and priorities help make those tough decisions in life. For me, I think about what I want to remember most of – my family and things we have done together. Some decisions favor the job and some favor the family. Hopefully, if I balance it right, the decisions that favor the job will pay off dividends of family time. It’s all about balancing my values.
loading....
Here’s my particular warped take on it.
I might trade massive long-last professional success for family happiness because professional success most likely will make getting a family much easier.
Here’s why:
Let’s say that wanted to be a world famous NFL quaterback for the ages. There are what a couple of dozen football teams every year. 1 starting quarterback each, maybe 5 or 6 top-of-the-world quarterbacks.
Now..let’s do some math, very loose and unscientific, but might have some value.
http://www.tinyurl.com/clesp
6.5 billion people on the planet..
almost 50% women (3 or so billion)
Let’s just move it to the US (which greatly restricts it but why not?)
96 million eligible people – 54% women – 51.1 million women
14.5 mil over 65 = 36 million left.
Let’s say 2/3rds of them don’t really work out (which I think is stretching it): 9 million
So, 9 million..Realistically I would say the number of great matches of finding someone, THOUSANDS of potential mates. Hell, even hundreds is still massive.
and about success? 2-3 possible spots in the world, with massive luck, etc, of being one of the best NFL quarterbacks for a couple of seasons and be remembered forever?
That’s an easy call.
and, this doesn’t even include how much insane cache you will become as a potential mate when you are that successful. Yeah, I hear he grousing, “I wouldn’t be that kind of person”. To date someone like Paul MacCartney back in the day? Joe Montana? Picasso? Brad Pitt? Sure you wouldn’t..
loading....
#35 I would NEVER break up Paul and Linda. To even suggest such a thing! How horrible. Joe Montana is nice, but not my type. Picasso was NUTS and a horrible husband. Brad Pitt… not interested in a cheater.
I might go for a young Issac Asimov though, between his first and second wife, maybe.
Not sure about the facial hair though. But I think I’ll stick with my quiet engineer–16 years together and he’s still more handsome than any celebrity.
loading....
I strongly disagree that Sandra Bullock didn’t choose to make this trade. In a way, she may have.
When we were dating & first married, MrP worked as a travelling consultant for several prestigious firms. He had a very healthy salary, a fat expense account, a glamorous job which took him all over the world, and he was on track to earn a small fortune. He was on the road 40-50 weeks a year. 85% of the men (and they were nearly all men) he worked with who’d made careers in this field were either divorced or cheating on their wives.
Thankfully MrP chose our family over his ambition. He has a more modest job, rarely travels, works 40 hours a week and has plenty of time to spend with the family. Our marriage was worth the $100,000 more he wo uld have earned each year if he’d stayed in that field.
So yes, it is entirely possible that if Sandra Bullock hadn’t been so driven, she might have invested more time in personal relationships and be a happily-married non-Oscar winner.
loading....
JLA, that tactic might work for a man. Younger women date older, wealthier men all the time. It doesn’t work the same way for most women. We have a limited amount of time to reproduce, and many men will not consider dating much-older women.
But I have to say, that there are very few people I know who married for the first time as an older person. It has been my observation that older folks get more set in their ways, and are often less open to compromise if they haven’t been in a situation before where they’d have to make those compromises. And compromises are the key to a happy marriage.
loading....
HollyP– Sandra B. isn’t the one who was caught cheating. The analogy doesn’t hold.
I’m beginning to think my feminist psych friend is right about the pervasiveness of the patriarchy. Yes, blame the victim for her success. I shake my tiny fist at the patriarchy.
loading....
A quick thing I noticed before I run to school, that $5,000 windfall example doesn’t hold because it didn’t take into effect scale.
For someone earning $200,000/year, the equivalent in this example is $50,000. Somehow, I think that might make them just as happy – or at least close to the person who got $5k. 25% of your income is a beast of a windfall no matter how much you earn.
loading....
Justin,
I agree that scale is important, but I still think the analogy holds.
$50,000 to someone who makes $200,000 is probably going to buy a boat or nice car or simply be invested/saved.
$5,000 to someone who makes $20,000 might allow them to go back to school or keep them from being foreclosed on.
The latter is going to be way more happy with what their money gets them than the $200,000 individual is going to be with a BMW.
loading....
@ HollyP: The example you mentioned put men (the career-driven party) as the cheaters, not the wives. Here, Sandra is the one with successful career, but NOT the cheater. What does that tell us?
I agree with Nicole. Sandra has not traded her happiness to a successful career. The husband has been an adulterous jerk for who knows how long. There’s nothing she can do to change this. If anything, she actually gains double happiness by getting rid of this douchebag (again, it depends on how you see this situation).
And please, if money doesn’t bring us happiness, what’s the point of this website? Let’s not dismiss money altogether. We all know what money can do will bring us happiness so why do we live in denial? Why do we have to choose between money vs. happiness? And why do most people assume that people with a lot of money are not happy? No wonder most of us are either broke or average. This duality way of thinking restricts us from reaching our best.
loading....
It’s an interesting question, but (as is generally the case) Brooks’s column with his unnamed ‘studies’ are ridiculous.
The question also presupposes a permanent negative vs. a permanent gain. If your spouse leaves you because you’re successful, is the problem really that you took a personal blow for professional success? Or is the real problem that you married somebody who is threatened by you if you’re successful?
loading....
For me personally, I watched when they announced her as a nominee seconds before she won, and accidentally was watching her as she realized.
Her husband, she had to actually shush from talking to her during the vid of her as a nominee and it seemed then, there was little warmth there between them, and also after she won. So… I say, I agree with everyone else here, but I challenge the question as it seemed pretty obvious then, knowing nothing else about who he was or that he was her husband, that he was insensitive and she was irritated, so… adultery came first, and she ended up a bit better off due to the win.
loading....
We recently traded money for happiness… we took a combined ~60% pay cut to relocate to another city for vastly improved quality of life… and yes, the commute was a large factor. Now that I’m no longer traveling on I-10, I’ve literally gained 2 hours each day.
loading....
I delayed paying off my debts and spent $35,000 making a record, which is something I dreamed about doing my entire life. I would do it again in a heartbeat. When faced with the decision to pay off my debts or make a record (I flipped a condo in 2007) I asked myself: “If I had 6 months to live, how would I feel about not having something of lasting artistic value to leave behind.” Then it became an easy decision to move to Austin, TX and record an album. I have the rest of my life to pay down debt……which is where I’m at now: conquering the debt monster so I can go tour and promote my record! I can say to a large degree, making that record brought me a ton of happiness and satisfaction. Every time I listen to it I recall the fantastic experiences I had with the musicians and the people I met during that period. It’s a delicate balance between living in the moment and being responsible with your money, and ultimately your future.
loading....
Sorry I’ve only scanned the posts here, so please forgive me if this has been covered. This first part has nothing to do with the points being made, but since y’all brought it up: Is it just me or has anybody noticed that JJ had a huge bad boy reputation when they married? Wasn’t this the old good girl/bad boy meet, fall in love, get married and live happily ever after fairy tale? Why is anyone surprised that the leopard’s spots hadn’t changed? Don’t get me wrong, I’m a big SB fan and don’t have any opinion of JJ at all, the scumbag, but is any one really surprised by his behavior given his past?
Oh yeah, it also stinks as an example of a trade-off and feels completely inappropriate, voyeuristic and opportunistic. Shame on the NYT for allowing such a cheap grab. Not too happy with the rest of the folks in blogland who jumped on it, either. Hint, hint.
loading....
I traded four months of my life and gained 20 pounds in order to write a book. I’m not sure I got the better end of that bargain.
I think you did.
My view is that happiness doesn’t come to those who spend too much time looking for it. Happiness is a by-product of a life lived in balance. I would never directly sacrifice my family for a professional triumph. But I would put in long hours to achieve a professional triumph knowing that it put some stress on my family.
You cannot just sit around being happy. You’d be miserable. You have to get out into the big, bad world and fight for things. And, yes, sometimes that means putting on 20 pounds or missing out on baseball games with your kids or whatever. You’ve got to make those trade-offs to lead a life of meaning and purpose. But you also need to be careful not to get too carried away and make so many sacrifices that balance is lost.
Rob
loading....
I have had to make a real-life trade off. I work at a job I absolutely hate, with people that I hate. Why? Because I can earn great money and it allows me to be out the door at precisely 4:00 p.m. every day. and I can spend the rest of my day with my family, who I adore. I cannot find another job that offers the same time/money benefits.
For me, this trade-off is worth it.
loading....
Ahhh, this triggers emotions
My husband decided he wasn’t happy enough and threw away our marriage to screw a certifiable bunny-boiler for a few months. As a result, we’re now separated, and I’m trying to deal with having my income reduced rather significantly since he makes twice what I do. He says now that it wasn’t worth it, but he didn’t stop to think about it at the time. People making that kind of choice usually don’t really THINK about what they’re doing or rationally consider the trade-offs. There is nothing particularly rational about affairs.
Would I trade my marriage for more money? Absolutely!
loading....