We, the Cosmic Clan, live a fairly typical middle-class American life. The main non-mainstream thing about our life is that we live in a small mountain town with a fairly large lot that is mostly wild and has lots and lots of pine, fir and aspen trees. But that’s not a major distinction for the purposes of this post.
We “own” our house. In our case that means we’ve paid about half of the value of the house on a variety of refinanced mortgages, but in the “seek the American dream” sense, We are “home owners”.
We own three working cars of varying vintage, but all in servicable shape capable, if necessary, of taking us anywhere in the country on a moment’s notice.
We have closets, bags, boxes and a garage full of clothes. We have enough clothes to clothe a literal army, if the army was made of mostly children of varying sizes. But we have plenty of adult clothes too. In fact one of our frequent struggles is how to decide what to keep and what to throw out, donate to charity or sell at a garage sale.
We’ve got five TVs. Two of them are large hi-def LCD models (although admittedly one is out for repairs at the moment). We have a live satellite connection to receive literally hundreds of available programs ranging from 24 hour comedy channels to live feeds from our government’s active legislative chambers.
We’ve got over a dozen radios, four of which are dedicated to the prospect of waking each individual member of the house according to their needs or whims. All of them have “snooze” buttons if we really would rather lie in bed another ten or fifteen minutes than get up when we thought we wanted to the night before.
Every member of the house has private space to retire to when needed, although Mr. and Mrs. Cosmic do technically share bedroom and office, Mr. Cosmic tends to retire to the home office, while Mrs. Cosmic tends to retire to the bedroom for privacy.
We have toys of every shape, size and cost. Toys include such universally unnecessary things as ice cream makers, musical instruments, games, sports equipment, camping gear… Mr. Cosmic no doubt has the most expensive toys, and Mrs. Cosmic probably has the fewest, while the Cosmic “children” have by far the most extensive collections of toys. In fact our toys are overrunning the house and have flooded into the garage where we are struggling to categorize and properly dispose of no longer used toys.
We have leisure time. We probably should have less leisure time than we do have, but that’s mostly a reflection on our tendency to “boom and bust” house maintenance. That’s a lifestlye choice, not an economic one.
We go out. Not every week, but probably about once per week on average. We watch movies, eat at restaurants, go to shows, on occasion we take in professional sporting contests in fancy stadiums watching players compete on lavishly maintained and exquisitely manicured playing fields.
We shop. On a typical week we visit over a dozen individual retail establishments, not counting restaurants. It’s a rare week that we aren’t in the local grocery store, three or four “big box” retail stores, specialized clothing stores, or wandering around a local mall where we can sample dozens of individual shops on a whim. All of these retail establishments are virtually overflowing with goods, whether it’s basic food items or high-end fashionable clothes or electronics.
We have open access to the world’s largest and most powerful communications environment. Our family includes among its friends and acquaintances people living on four continents. Geographical limitations are almost inconsequential due to the wonders of modern electronic communication. And other than a small monthly access charge, this communication is free.
If an event or destination is too far to conveniently drive one of the three Cosmic Cars, then a quick trip to a local airport provides us with the ability to literally fly to any destination within reason within hours of boarding the airplane. If desired we could plan a trip where we fly a thousand miles, then board a luxurious ocean liner and “sail” for days or weeks to exotic foreign ports.
My job requires virtually no physical labor. I am allowed to work from home on virtually any pretext. If I am having a new TV delivered and need to be there for the UPS truck, that is not a problem. If I am not feeling like driving in due to weather or just feeling a bit under the weather, that is also no problem. My company has specific rules protecting me from harassment of any sort. They go out of their way to publish hot lines and web pages that provide resources to report and correct any unprofessional behavior.
In fact in every meaningful way, we live a life that would have struck our ancestors of just a few generations ago as being unimaginably rich and fruitful.
And we are about average for a typical American suburban lifestyle in just about every meaningful way. Except that we don’t have air conditioning.
And yet survey after survey indicates that Americans are far from content with their lives.
Is it possible that human beings are simply incapable of being content? What else could a human family possibly hope for, in terms of material goods, freedom to roam, ability to participate in events…. etc?
A thousand years ago lives like ours were considered to be the lifestyles of literal gods. The Olympians themselves had less wealth and luxury at their disposal than the average American suburban family.
What sort of ingrates are we?
28 users commented in " Wealth and discontent "
Follow-up comment rss or Leave a TrackbackSadly, for many people it seems to be not so much, how much you have, but how much you have compared to those around you.
From that perspective, perhaps some of the obsession many have on the left about the gulf between the rich and the poor makes sense.
I’ve never cared much about that distance, because while it is true that the rich are getting richer, the poor are also getting richer. They are getting further behind the rich, but still ahead of where they were.
To me that was the point, but perhaps for others that isn’t. Would people be happier if they had less, but if that less was just as much as anyone else?
I’d like to think that wasn’t the case, but sometimes I’m not sure.
In my opinion it is one of the great myths of modern America that the gulf between “rich” and poor” is “widening.” Studies which puurport to show that rely on stastical maneuvering that would embarrass a used car salesman. The chief statistical technique is to use a steadily increasing definition of “poverty” which used to mean actual povery but which now includes families who own multiple cars, have refrigerators and air conditioning, and who seem to be able to eat at McDonalds or Burger King more often than I do.
In fact I would say that most of what I described above applies in lesser degree, but still applies, even to many families officially listed as “poor”.
It is all about the comparision to others, not what people in general have, but what the wealthy have compared to the other classifications.
Its also the state of mind we are in and where we find contentment. Unfortunately far too many allow others to define what being content should mean over what we ourselves believe.
Homo sapiens: a bipedal species that wants whatever it can’t have.
Unfortunately, Old Goat is correct. “Rich” and “poor” are relative terms.
“Destitute” is not. We have very few actual destitute people in the U.S. against their will.
As to the underlying “why?”
Expectations. Always expectations.
Where’s my damn flying car!
I wonder sometimes if I am just strange. I own three cars. They are decent cars, and one of them, the Audi, qualifies as an upper middle class icon. But I generally drive the Yaris, a low-end non-status symbol. I owned and was quite happy with ny Gremlin. I once knew a person who owned a Porsche Carrerra, and I was a passenger in it more than once. I felt no envy. If anything my reaction was “why on earth would you pay three times as much as I did for a car that is perhaps 5% “better” in any rational comparison.
When I went looking for a “good guitar” I ended up buying a used Martin 000-M which had a repaired top. I checked with a trusted luthier and he said the repair was essentially as good as new. So I bought it. Because of the repair the guitar is worth less than half what a “real” Martin is worth. I consider this a good thing. I got a great sounding guitar on the cheap. But most people wouldn’t touch it.
I have a telescope I made that has been called the “clothes hamper” telescope due to its resembance to same. I don’t care. It works great.
I just don’t get why someone who owns a Toyota would envy a Mercedes. What possible difference in lifestyle would that bring? Based on my experience with the vaunte Audi A4, the only difference they are likely to see is higher maintenance and repair bills.
You’re about utility. Others are about status.
I bought a new car once. Never again will I spend so much for so little. I could have bought 10 good-running used cars for what I paid, and, in the end, I would have — a used car.
Sigh.
At least it only took me once to learn that lesson.
Well, I’ve bought two new cars, and have been happy with both. My first was a Jeep Cherokee and I ended up putting 200,000 miles on it. My second is the Yaris, and that has been a stellar car. In both cases I did my best to maintain it and in both cases they have performed wonderfully. The used Audi is by far the car I have regretted buying the most.
There’s a word for becoming accustomed to what you have and making it the new baseline for what you think you “should” have.
I think that drives a lot of envy and consumption. It is good to remind yourself often that compared to most of the people who have ever lived, and quite a lot of people alive now … we live like gods.
See, I just don’t get that. How does what someone else has make any difference in what you enjoy? I can see how someone with a bicycle could envy someone with a car, or someone with a car could envy someone with an airplane, but if I’m in my Yaris and someone pulls alongside in a Maserati, why should I care? Where can he go that I can’t? In fact id rather have a used jeep, because then I actually could go places he couldn’t.
I guess Drax is right. I just don’t get the status angle. It literally doesn’t matter to me.
I went skiing one year and the warmest clothes I had were some orange work overalls, so that’s what I wore. People were actually pointing and laughing at me. WTF? They’re overalls, and they were warm. What else was needed?
Cosmic,
I’d be interested to see information that the gulf between the rich and the poor isn’t widening, but I suspect from the rest of your comment that we mean slightly different things.
From what I understand, the gulf is ever widening in the sense that the amount of money earned by the “rich” is growing faster than the amount of money earned by the “poor”.
My dispute with such a measure (and I suspect yours) is that it doesn’t have much real meaning to quality of life. My argument is that while the disparity between the two might be higher in dollar terms, it is not as meaningful in real world value.
As you have discussed with cars. Sure, the rich can now afford to buy a Bugatti Veyron for $1.7 million and the poor have to settle for paying around $10k for something like a used Toyota Camry. Can anyone really say that owning a Veyron is a $1.69 million increase in quality of life? Surely not.
At the same time, it adds to my wealth that there are people who buy such cars. Look at the features which were once only available to the most elite cars which are now on nearly every car sold. I’m sure many of the things that Volkswagen learned making the Veyron will eventually make the Golf a better car. Things that might not have been learned for years if there were people out there willing to spend that kind of money.
So while I will certainly never be one of them. I’m glad there are people like that out there.
The fact that there are literally billions of dollars spent every year on ubiquitous advertising designed to convince us that what we currently have is simply not good enough enhances feelings of discontentment in American society.
I live in a very affluent community in which the high school kids (my kids excepted)drive nicer cars than I do and only on my worst days does it bother me.
I certainly agree with you on all points, however I would argue that in certain things, a person would seek a higher-end object because of profession or hobby. I’m sure you’re satisfied with your telescope, but not everyone has the technical acumen to pull that off. In the vein of cars, I get considerable enjoyment out of driving. I am by no means a professional, but I like cars. I’m not going to chase down a Porsche or Bentley, but there are certain cars I’d like to own because their fun to drive. It’s not a status issue to me. In fact, while I love the way Mustangs look and drive, I would never own one because they are simply too impractical (and uncomfortable). However, the Dodge Challenger and Charger and some awfully nice and functional autos.
To use another analogy, my brother and I are both computer geeks. We both keep up with new technology and trends. We both build and/or modify our computers. However, he desires higher-end processors and components because he’s a gamer. I am not and buy the cheapest computer I can that has the features I want.
But I’m awfully envious of my neighbor’s riding lawn mower
“See, I just don’t get that. How does what someone else has make any difference in what you enjoy?”
Me neither, Cosmic. When I see someone with better junk than mine it never crosses my mind. In fact, I’m happy for people that have the resources to buy, or do whatever they want.
I know that it doesn’t truly fulfill anything. But, I don’t get the envy. Good piece. Good grass for chewing.
I do own a high end apochromatic refractor. In fact it could easily be described as a Maserati of telescopes. It is an Astro-Physics 92mm Stowaway model and it is acknowledged as one of, if not the, best small refractor ever made. I know for a fact that it is an object of envy for many small refractor users. But I didn’t buy it for status, I bought it because it provides awesome performance in a tiny package. It is, however, the closest thing to a “status symbol” that I’ve ever owned. To understand why I bought it you would have to understand a good bit about telescopes, particularly about apochromatic refractors.
But that is an anomaly anyway. Typically my approach to buying things is based on the item passing some quality or functionality threshold, and once past that threshold I simply don’t care that much about the “top of the line” vs midrange. It just happens that for small refractor telescopes that threshold is pretty high.
Good God. Their = they’re
Guess I need to spend a little more time copy editing when I post in the morning before work.
I’m totally with you on the status symbol thing, and your statement about quality/functionality threshold is bang-on with me.
But I must confess that if money were no object I would amass a huge collection of ridiculously expensive guitars. I just love the damn things.
Cullen, if I had that sort of money I would almost certainly hire luthiers to build guitars of my own design. I’ve had a particular floating bridge, strings-not-anchore-to-the-top, symmetric sound-hole, partial cutaway guitar design in my head for about a decade now, and I would love find out once and for all if it would actually outperform standard designs.
With that much cash I’d probably do the same thing with lots of things. I have an off-axis mirror telescope design that I tried to prototype but the tolerances of the tools and components I have are not up to the task of the precise positioning required to make that design work. Theoretically such a design would outperform any other telescope of its size, except for an apochromatic refractor, but it would cost much less than an apo would to make since mirrors are dirt cheap compared to apo lenses.
I would design my own boat, car and airplane…
If I had the money…
This may be a little random, but I think the issue has to do with material goods versus emotional needs. At least in the woman’s world there is something called shop therapy. Americans in general want emotional comfort from material goods. Also they feel the need to be productive and set high standards or goals which relate to their material status. The discontent comes from the expectation a person has. (Warning: I have been reading too many Psychology/ Literarture books for my textbooks. This includes a few self help books.)
What sort of ingrates are we?
I don’t know. I’ve never understood the relative wealth envy thing very much myself.
For a long time in our ancestral environment, wealth was also a positional good. It could be used to signal for social status, as well as being something necessary for survival.
As you pointed out in your article, the efficiency of our ability to produce goods has met just about every one of our physical needs.
There is a different sort of wealth that people chase now, primarily to serve as a social signalling mechanism. Why does a luxury car cost ten times more than an average truck? It’s not because of how difficult it is to make – the Mitsubishi robot doesn’t care if it is bending “luxury” steel. It’s because certain people are driven to want $100k cars to signal higher social status.
A lot of the existential hand-wringing of the trendy environmentalists about “consumerism” also comes from this same impulse. If just anyone can get any physical good they want with some trivial portion of their life’s income, then something must be deeply wrong with society! After all, how will we signal our place relative to those peasants?! Ubiquitous wealth is wrong – the common man should keep to his station, and stop moving so freely about the countryside! (to paraphrase another aristocrat)
An example – one of my friends was at some ruling-class job in Washington – a job where people simply wouldn’t talk to you unless you were wearing a $5000 designer suit with some easily identifiable logo that let them know it was a $5000 designer suit. Not just any suit that made you look appropriate – any unimportant peasant could get one of those, and associating with them threatens your own position in the social heirarchy.
The fact that this was seen as a perfectly legitimate concern, and not some elementary school level social antic, by several people I talked to shocked me a bit. They all naturally accepted it as insulting to these people to associate with them not wearing clothes “on their level”.
ASEI, that’s an interesting take. Especially as technology continues to drive the cost of basic goods and services down, as it also continues to expand the definition of “basic goods and services.”
It is quite possible that within 50 years technology will usher in an age of casual wealth on this planet. When that happens it may well turn out that the ONLY purpose of wealth will be to stratify societal class structures.
PS, if we ever do get something like the Star Trek replicator, or merely arbitrary energy and other tools that remove any limits on what can be created from a given design, then I expect those obsessed with status will go apoplectic.
Expect their to be something like medeival luxury regulations attempted regularly, where certain people cannot be allowed to have certain things. Or for that matter, ever more hysterical doomsday prophecies springing up around the ubiquity of wealth.
Oops – you replied as I was typing. Yeah, that’s about what I think will happen.
Haughty, egomaniacal human beings will ALWAYS find away to set themselves above those they consider inferior. If it’s not ‘wealth’ it will be something else…
I’ve blogged about this before. The likely end result will be a deliberate human-created economy where the “rich” own items made by other human beings. Paintings, crafts, whatever. The argument will be that the ubiquitous high-quality items made by machine lack “soul” and that the use of, for example, a manufactured guitar, will be the symbol for being of the non-elite class.
Having just watched the HMS Pinafore after commenting on wealth and social class, this post seems more poignant.
Perhaps the funniest thing about that opera was that it was an opera.
Who knows, the ‘elite’ might one day be content to simply have a star upon thars…
Leave A Reply