American Multimillionaire Sociology

Leading a life without much money does not entail that one has very little happiness. Happiness itself is a very broad and abstract term that is influenced by various aspects of life. Begley’s statistical data from the global survey provided evidence to the fact that there is more to happiness then just money. She established a comparison between American multimillionaires and people from the rural areas of Kenya and Greenland. Shockingly both groups from the opposite spectrum of the “money train” responded to the survey with the same average score of happiness. A third and more striking part of this survey was that homeless people of Calcutta reported a low happiness level score. We can understand why multimillionaires may be happy and satisfied

with their lives because all their basic needs are beyond met. But, this leads to the further question: what caused such unexpected results amongst these different economic groups?
Digging deeper into the cause of such results from the global survey we can see that the relationship between happiness and money is influenced by a third psychological factor.

If we analyze the data Begley presented we can see that people from major cities such as Calcutta and those in America have built a very solid connection with money and happiness inside their heads. This is because society and media has strongly persuaded them into believing these two are linked. Everyone is always concerned about making money in the fast-paced modern world because they are fooled into thinking they need large amounts of money to be happy This ideology is beyond the fact if they actually need it or not. People are so obsessed with money in these areas that they feel powerless without it. They have become utter fools and have fallen prey to the trap society has set. Namely this trap is to make them think they cannot survive without a lot of money, so they should do anything and everything they can to make as much of it as possible. Hence, in cases when people do not make much money and are from areas that have been industrialized and modernized, like the homeless from Calcutta, they are evidently leading a less satisfied life. The point is that these people are deluded into believing that there is nothing more to happiness then money. Therefore, people from major cities are always in a constant battle to make more money so that they can be “happier”, or so they

think.
On the other hand, a very different picture has been painted if we look at rural areas that are not exposed to the illusion of happiness based on monetary success.

These people are sheltered from the previously mentioned dangerous ideology and have far more reasons to be happy then one can imagine. The very existence of such people prove Begley’s point that there is more to happiness then money and that the connection between the two is just a deluded fantasy. These Masai of Kenya and Inuits of northern Greenland lead a modest life with little or no luxury. However, their definition of luxury is completely different because they are not involved in rapid economic or industrial growth. Even though these people barely have electricity or even running water, because they are not exposed to the extravagance of the urban world, they still exhibit the same amount of happiness as the rich folk from modern, high end civilizations. These people are not the fools and to them the word luxury has a much deeper meaning than just money. To them luxury does not necessarily mean an abundance of material possessions gained by money. Their mediocre lives are laden with happiness and contentment as they psychologically relate these two with things that are beyond money. Such things vary like having a loving family, your closeness to nature or animals, personal attitude towards life, or even joy found in everyday

tasks.
We’ve already discussed and understand why the poor from rural areas and the rich from urban areas had similar results. And if we compare the results of the poor from urban and those from rural areas, we can observe that these results differ based on the same psychological reasons. The Masai and Inuits are protected from the wonders of economic growth but those from urban areas have been poisoned by the desire for money. Thus, they are generally unhappy because they feel their basic needs are not being met, even at times when they are, and so believe they can never be happy unless they figure out a way to gain more money and luxury with it. Decisively, the roots to this poisonous thought process lies in the desire to have a “better life”. This so called better life is yet another fantasized image formed from witnessing the life of those that are well off, societal construct, media selling the posh lifestyle and the people being constantly swarmed by the idea that your desires will only be met if you have money.
In conclusion, I think Begley’s comparison from the survey, illustrating how money and happiness are only related if people are fooled into believing so, was spot on. Not only did it disprove the theory that money can buy happiness but it also explained the real reason behind why it is thought to be true. If we broaden our perspectives and study the psychological approach to happiness, we might find a spectrum of results that are not even close to “money”. Think of it this way. If we change the question for the survey “does money buy happiness?” to “What is the meaning of happiness and how can you attain it?”, most people will respond with an answer that holds a far more deeper meaning then materialistic responses like money.