Money Can Buy Happiness

Money Can Buy Happiness

Some thinkers believe that money does not make one happy; others consider that money can be used to purchase almost everything even happiness. While many people disagree with the former, in the current economic-driven society, money can bring happiness to people because it satisfies human beings’ needs, solves most of people’s problems, protects one’s life, and even helps one aid another with itself.

Everyone needs money to satisfy their necessity. Foods, clothing, accommodation are among human’s basic needs that people hardly afford them without money. People spend a large proportion of their money on eating and drinking, clothing, and housing. Besides material needs, men and women need money to satisfy their mental needs such as knowledge learning, recreation, and entertainment. Based on the data of the Bureau of Labor Statistics in 2014, it is shown that an American spent an average of about 4 thousands US dollars for education, entertainment, and recreation (cnbc.com). From material to mental needs, money plays a significant role in helping consumers acquire them.

Money maybe is not an almighty thing, but it is an effective solution for most of humankind’s troubles and issues. Nowadays, many groups and companies use the incentive money to encourage their employees to work harder; the more employees work enthusiastically, the more profit the companies make. What’s more, money is also used to promote health care and improve living standards. 6.5 trillion USD was spent on health care worldwide according to WHO, based the 2010 data. In the last 20 years, the living conditions of people in the world have been improved positively: the extremely poor population has been reduced to a half; a half of child death under the age of five has been cut off; life expectancy has increased 5.2 years around the world estimated in 2014; more children, especially girls have had the chance to go to school (unfpa.org). Without or less money, those achievements are barely to succeed. By utilizing money reasonably, human beings may solve their problems quickly and effectively.

Having strong financial support shall guarantee ones’ life and keep them safe from external and sudden impacts. Life is unpredictable that one never knows what will happen; it is the reason why people coming up with the precautions against the worst situation which can occur anytime. In fact, the life insurance program is invented with the money that people save in case of an emergency relating to health or even life and death. According to the Swiss Re Institution’s research, people paid USD 4892 billion for the life insurance premium worldwide (swissre.com). Furthermore, possessing enough money makes ones do not worry about it. Indeed, the awareness of the money gives a person the assurance and the feeling of safety not only for himself or herself but also toward their loved ones. As a result, they shall be content and felicitous.

Giving away makes people happy. The feeling of aiding the disadvantaged ones satisfies the givers’ conscience and moral. Morally speaking, providing financial support is the obligatory act of human beings. Many philanthropists such as Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Jack Ma has been donating part of their wealth to help people in need because they are aware of the responsibility of redistribution. In addition, the joy of giving away money tends to be more powerful than spending it for personal purposes. Liz Dunn, a social psychologist, and her partners had conducted a survey involved over 600 Americans and had found out that people were apt to feel happier when they gave away their money to the others than spending for themselves (psychologytoday.com). The main point here, generally speaking, is how humankind cultivates and nurtures happiness through money’s values.

In conclusion, money can create or “buy” such an abstract thing as happiness. It ensures a comfortable life for human beings, fixes problems, keeps people safe from unexpected harms, and can be used to help the ones in need. It is irreplaceable.   

Work Cited

Kathleen Elkins, “Here’s how much Americans are spending on housing, food, and alcohol every year.” cnbc.com. May 31, 2017.

Rebecca Zerzan, “How Has the World Changed in the Last 20 years?” unfpa.org. 7 April 2014.

Swiss Re Institute. Sigma No 3/2018 “the global insurance sector.” Swissre.com.

Allen R McConnell Ph.D. “Giving really is better than receiving.” Psychologytoday.com. Dec 25, 1010

The Summary and Response to "Third Culture Kids," Revision.

Third Culture Kids Are Not Ideal Citizens

Bilal Ahmed says in his article “Third Culture Kids” that third culture kids (TCKs) including himself are different from immigrants and cross-culturally-experienced persons in terms of social status and the market-drive-economic world where we are living. As a matter of fact, he claims that TCKs come from prestigious and wealthy families which distinctively make them different from the immigrants and others. Although I agree with his points to some degrees, I doubt that all TCKs are wealthier than the immigrants, and I believe that there are also prestigious and well-educated immigrants. What’s more, I disagree with the author’s claim that TCKs are the ideal citizens in the world.

The author begins his publication by mentioning two definitions of “Third Culture Kids” defined by anthropologist Ruth Hill Useem and sociologist David C. Pollock respectively. Then, he introduces himself as a TCK who has been nurtured under the influences of many cultures such as the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Canada, the United States, and Britain. Next, Bilal Ahmed starts to address and explain the differences between TCKs and immigrants. He lists several factors such as social backgrounds, financial support, and adaptability. Furthermore, the TCK-author emphasizes how important they are to the modern world given the current situation of globalization. Also, Bilal Ahmed argues that TCKs have difficulties to resolve and challenges to overcome. He says that TCKs deeply depend on their families and that they tend to lose themselves or misbehave without families’ support and guidance. In the end, the author concludes that only accept their special identities do they find happiness.

In response to the author’s ideas, there are several points which I would like to address. First, Bilal Ahmed says that TCKs don’t have a financial dilemma compared with the immigrants. Personally, I don’t think so. TCKs are those who live and grow up in foreign countries such as foreign-service and expatriate children, those who I assume that they have strong financial support from their families. However, TCKs also include military brats and missionary kids that I find hard to agree that all of them are rich kids. Second, Bilal Ahmed implies that TCKs come from a higher social background than the immigrants and refugees do. I think this is his weak argument because there are no statistical figures or evidence to prove his claim. Indeed, there are thousands of immigrants and refugees who are well-educated coming from middle social class or even higher. According to pewresearch.org, research in 2016 shows that 44 million immigrants coming from Asia, South America, Europe, Africa, are very well educated before they move to the United States.

Thanks to two advantages being mentioning above, the TCK-author claims that TCKs are the best citizens in the world.  From my own perspective, he has a point for TCKs who are likely to possess almost what this globalizing modern world needs. They have multicultural backgrounds, come from prestigious families, and they have no financial worries, even if not all of them are wealthy. They are good at adaption, prefer flexibility to predictability, and are fans of shifting. All of these advantages and features help them fit in and survive in any situation, and offer them more professional opportunities than the others. Still, TCKs are not the ideal citizens in the world, because I think that there is no such “ideal citizen” conception at all. I believe that people have their own advantages and weaknesses. Besides, this is just the subjective, one-sided opinion of Bilal Ahmed, a TCK. From the TCKs’ point of view, he observes things around him according to their own conditions and standards. Therefore, his arguments are not concrete enough to convince me.

Bilal Ahmed asserts that TCKs are the most-desired citizens in the world because of their multicultural backgrounds and financial support matching with globalization. In contrast, I don’t believe that. Ideal citizens belong to an ideal and perfect world, but our world is not.

The Summary and Response to "Third Culture Kids."

Third Culture Kids Are Not Ideal Citizens

Bilal Ahmed says in his article “Third Culture Kids” that third culture kids (TCKs) including himself are different with immigrants and cross-culturally-experienced persons in term of social status and the market-drive-economic world where we are living. As a matter of fact, he claims that TCKs come from prestige and wealthy families which distinctively differs them from the immigrants and others. Although I agree with his points to some degrees, I doubt that all TCKs are wealthier than the immigrants, and I believe that there are also prestige and well-educated immigrants. What’s more, I disagree with the author’s claim that TCKs are the ideal citizens in the world.

The author begins his publication by mentioning two definitions of “Third Culture Kids” defining by anthropologist Ruth Hill Useem and sociologist David C. Pollock respectively. Then, he introduces himself as a TCK who has been nurtured in the influences of many cultures such as the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Canada, the United States, and Britain. Next, Bilal Ahmed starts to address and explain the differences between TCKs and the immigrants. He lists several factors such as social backgrounds, financial support, adaptability. Furthermore, the TCK-author emphasizes how important they are to the modern world given the current situation of globalization. Also, Bilal Ahmed argues that TCKs have difficulties to resolve and challenges to overcome, too. He says that TCKs deeply depend on their families and that they tend to lose themselves or misbehave without families’ support and guidance. In the end, the author concludes that only accept their special identities do they find happiness.

In response to the author’s ideas, there are several points which I would like to address. First, Bilal Ahmed says that TCKs don’t have financial dilemma comparing with the immigrants. Personally, I don’t think so. TCKs are those who live and grow up in foreign countries such as foreign-service and expatriate children, those who I assume that they have strong financial support from their families. However, TCKs also include military brats and missionary kids that I find hard to agree that all of them are rich kids. Second, Bilal Ahmed implies that TCKs come from a higher social background than the immigrants and refugees do. I think this is his weak argument because there are no statistical figures or evidence to prove his claim. Indeed, there are thousands of immigrants and refugees who are well educated coming from middle social class or even higher. According to pewresearch.org, research in 2016 shows that 44 million immigrants coming from Asia, South America, Europe, Africa, are very well educated before they emigrate into the United States.

Thanks to two advantages being mentioning above, the TCK-author claims that TCKs are the best-suited citizens for the world.  From my own perspective, he has a point for TCKs likely possess almost what this globalizing modern world needs. They have multicultural backgrounds, come from prestige families, and they have no financial worries, even if not all of them are wealthy. They are good at adaption, prefer the flexibility to predictability, are fans of shifting, or at least Bilal Ahmed says so. All of these advantages and features help them fit in and survive in any situation, and offer them more professional opportunities than the others. Still, TCKs are not the ideal citizens in the world, because I think that there is no such “ideal citizen” conception at all. I believe that people have their own advantages and weaknesses which imperfect them. Besides, this is just the subjective, one-sided opinion of Bilal Ahmed, a TCK. Standing from the TCKs’ point of view, he observes things around him according to their own conditions and standards. Therefore, his arguments are not concrete enough to convince me.

Bilal Ahmed asserts that TCKs are the most-desired citizens in the world because of their multicultural backgrounds, financial supports matching with globalization. In contrast, I don’t believe in that. Ideal citizens belong to an ideal and perfect world, but our world is not.