Summary
Today I will be focusing on two different sources which is "The Paradox of Choice" by Barry Schwartz /TEDTalk and CNBC article titled “From the ‘perfect’ salary to keeping up with the Joneses, here’s how money really affects your happiness” by Cory Stieg. In this source, starting with "The Paradox of Choice" by Barry Schwartz /TEDTalk the premise would be that having too many choices can tend to make us nervous and overwhelmed, which makes decision-making harder. Our conclusion for this topic is, excessive choice might make us feel very immobilized and unhappy rather than relieve us. In my other source which is an CNBC article titled “From the ‘perfect’ salary to keeping up with the Joneses, here’s how money really affects your happiness” by Cory Stieg the premise would be that experts emphasize that there is no clear relationship between happiness and money when essential requirements are satisfied and the conclusion for this topic would be that fulfilling the basic necessities without going beyond in terms of stress may have a greater positive impact on happiness than pursuing the unattainable "ideal" wage. My argument about this topic would probably be about that money doesn't guarantee happiness. I would like to state that from the TEDTALK I watched on Barry Schwartz agrees on this argument as he states "if we are interested in maximizing the welfare of our citizens, the way to do that is to maximize individual freedom. The reason for this is both that freedom is, in and of itself, good, valuable, worthwhile essential to being human, and because if people have freedom, then each of us can act on our own to do the things that will maximize our welfare, and no one has to decide on our behalf. The way to maximize freedom is to maximize choice. The more choice people have, the more freedom they have, and the more freedom they have, the more welfare they have." This clearly points out that Barry Schwartz believes that more choices lead to greater well-being. As according to Schwartz, maximizing freedom involved maximizing choice. Basically, the point is that when people get confronted by a wide array of choices, they tend to experience this greater freedom to shape their lives. Also, Schwartz himself acknowledges that freedom and choice are essential aspects of human existence as he finds him believing that individual freedom is valuable because it allows people to act independently, making decisions that align with their happiness. I also agree with this because money is something that comes and goes and although it covers your basic needs it doesn't fulfill your psychological needs. In the CNBC article titled “From the ‘perfect’ salary to keeping up with the Joneses, here’s how money really affects your happiness” by Cory Stieg the author states about Vaynerchuk, "I have an uncomfortable [number] of friends who make $12 million a year and are unhappy," he says." Another quote states that, "But more recently, a 2018 study from Purdue University used much wide data from the Gallup World Poll and found that the ideal income point for individuals is $95,000 for life satisfaction and $60,000 to $75,000 for emotional well-being. When people earned more than $105,000, their happiness levels decreased." In other words, this means that money is indeed essential for meeting basic needs, but it doesn't guarantee happiness beyond a certain point as relationships, personal fulfillment and other factors play a significant role in our overall well-being.
