What Would You Do If Money Were No Object Essay

Dispute 27.10.2019

What if Money Was No Object? - The Big Picture

comparative essay on trifles susan glasspell explored the issue deeper in his anthology Does It Matter. Essays on Man's Relation to Materiality.

I had more fun at that job than almost anywhere else I've worked, and only left because of the money and the long hours. Standing around in a bookstore all day, helping people find books and spending the rest of the time checking out the new releases or reading at the counter, wearing jeans and tennis shoes Got lots of exercise shuflfing book boxes and carts and generally running around. I make a lot more sitting on my ass moving a cursor around, but I don't have nearly as much fun. We should be talking about one to two hours per day given modern computing technology, emjaybee. I don't think he is saying "I like skydiving into caves. Its philosophy goddammnit! I've been a voracious reader and enthusiastic cook of interesting ethnic foods since early on in college some years. I'd rather have the day job that's fine but no barrel of laughs but which pays well, and enjoy the things I enjoy with the ones I love. Money is just one component of it. If money wasn't involved it would be a hobby rather than a career, and part of Watt's point is that once you master whatever it is you are interested in you can get paid for it. But anyway low-paying jobs tend to suck in a lot of other ways because the fact that whoever hired you can't or doesn't want to give you very much money for your work means that a lot of other aspects of your employment are also probably not going to be ideal. Watts makes it sound like picking something that seems interesting and doing it is inherently fulfilling and even if you end up being a total failure at it. In a lot of cases it's really not. The person who is asking for advice in Watts' story doesn't already have a burning passion for something that gives their life meaning, Watts is saying to pick something as vague as wanting to work outdoors. Is working outdoors really going to be so great that even if you make no money, have to work inconvenient hours, can't go to the doctor when you get sick, hate everyone you work with, and miss out on a lot of other non-career aspects in life that you'll be happy because at least you don't have to be in a building for 8 hours a day? I like what I do for work but I also purposely make career choices that make it likely that I can have a good chance of choosing from a lot of good jobs instead of struggling to get a crappy job. Jobs all have trade-offs and most people's dream job isn't as great as they would expect it to be. Picking something you are vaguely interested in and trying to have it be so fulfilling that it makes up for everything else negative in life makes significantly less sense to me than looking at what opportunities are out there and doing one that gives you enough compensation to be worth your time and energy you spend working on it. I agree with a lot of what Alan Watts says about life but life is a lot more than what you decide to do for money. Interesting thought experiment - how much of the world's workforce would we need if this happened. Surely, we'd need some people to make the Red Bull and the parachutes, but if everyone was doing it, and didn't care so much about having a nice McMansion and SUV - well why not? So there's no one to pick up the trash? So what, we're not generating all that much of it, since we're all out skydiving, and not sitting at home watching the TV, chowing down on take-out food and building semi-disposable Swedish furniture. Watts seems to be espousing the notion of looking around first, deciding what you'd like to get hold of in life, and then working out how to go about getting it. Surely that's fairly sensible, no? People doing jobs they like do them better and more efficiently than people doing jobs they hate. Perhaps better vocational guidence is the way to deal with our aging population and the economy's overall need to produce more for less. I'd like to think that a society humane enough to allow people to pursue happiness would also have decent health care, pleasant folks to work alongside since they like what they are doing , and interactions far more meaningful than the crud of the office drone's daily existence. Actually, though, that works out to: Spend years amassing debt, spend years getting to a point in your career where you can comfortably pay it back, spend years making the payments, spend another decade trying to save enough money to do what you want, and then start working on your passion at the lowest rung of the ladder. Hopefully stay alive long enough to get in your 10, hours towards mastery, and then, when you are in you late 70's or early 80's you can begin to appreciate your life, provided you haven't died already. Worst fucking advice ever. Would have preferred the bull session, in fact, since it would lack the pretentious film in the background. It sure beats doing agriculture all day every day starting when you're 12 years old. Plus, we've got vaccines, antibiotics, Hubble photos, video games, and an overwhelming abundance of great books and great music. But taken as one of a list of tests to apply to any action plan, I think it's very wise. Are you doing what you are doing merely because you think it'll get you where you believe you want to be? Or are you doing it because you actually like doing it? For some courses of action, it's a good idea to find that out. For instance, taking a job, getting married, having a child, etc. Meaning you can still take the job, etc, but know going into it your reason why. Recognizing the problems of the modern world does not immediately constitute a rejection of the benefits, or a preference for a world that has none of the problems AND benefits. I believe this talk was from , a time when society as a whole was much more conformist in terms of following the path that was expected, and people were just beginning to question society's expectations from every angle. Bulgaroktonos speaks 50 years later when the results of some of this questioning has been tested in the real world, when we are recovering from a recession etc. Alan Watts is great, and I think what he was trying to do here may sound quaint now from our perspective in a world where we are trying to find safe footholds as capital rushes around the world at warp speeds destroying jobs left and right, but back then he was trying to shake people out of a mindless complacency that he saw as a threat to the world at large. The vocational advice might not work so well in , but God knows there is still far too much complacency, and that's why on the whole, his Watts' works and words are as relevant today as they were fifty years ago. Watts' perspective is as valuable today. Maybe, maybe not. I know some cowboys and oldfart mule packers that work for squat wages and found. They'll do that until they drop, and when they get too boogered up to work they won't have a pension or health care plan to speak of. If you ask them why they do it, they'll tell you some bullshit about how they can't do anything else. Old school guys, mostly they are men, but a few women do this. When I got out of the army I intended to make a few bucks in one of a few business ventures, but shit happened, and I got into horses and mules instead, first as a volunteer packer for the Forest Service, then I went to farrier school, and hung out my shingle in the foothills near Clovis, California. I got in with an old-school cowboy and we worked up a pretty steady business, servicing pack station stock and the like. I did it for a long time Trim and shoe a hundred or so horses and mules to get them ready, spend some time working new stock and cutting out my green string, which I would ride for the season. Then spend the season on the trails, hauling dudes to their favorite places in the wilderness. Quit the season in November, when the snows come. On my days off I liked to ride various trails I seldom saw when hauling dudes around. In the winter I serviced my shoeing customers--trims, shoes, trained their fractious young mules and horses--alll this to build up enough capital for maybe some horse jewelry or a new saddle, another set of packer's boots or a new slicker, or fix up the truck. Pack stations don't generally pay much to their wranglers and packers. The corral boss maybe gets a better deal, but he earns it. I would have made more money charging them by the head to do their stock, but I wouldn't have been able to work as a packer all season, and get to live in clapboard bunkhouse and eat in the mess hall. If you want a true moment of zen, then pad down a forest trail in the middle of the night, at the end of a thirty-mile day, leading a string of savvy mules. They make no sound, even their hooves land softly enough that you have to be in the saddle to hear them, except now and then back in the string, a hoof will toe off a rock in the trail, and the mule will snort softly, embarassed at his clumsyness. They have their pride. I can't see the ground, but my horse can, and he knows every rock on this trail, and he knows how far away the corrals are, so he paces himself accordingly. We come to the end of the trail and out on to the gravel, and the string dresses and poses when we walk to the feeders where they'll be unpacked. Grain awaits them. I hear a the kitchen door shut. The corral boss and another packer come out to help me unsaddle the stock and put away the gear. Cook has kept a steak warm for me. I'll get up in five hours and ride down into the camp at the junction of the Middle and North Forks of the San Joaguin, to haul out that party of fishermen--I'll pull four empty saddles and seven mules in. Usually we send two packers when the string gets to be more than seven critters long, but everyone is out except the corral boss. I'll spend the night on the river, on account of how far and how hard the trail is. I'll take the new horse, a night-blind appy, so I have try to get back before dark. When I retired from all that farriers and lower back pain are close buddies , I took RedBud on a six-week honeymoon, a pair of good mountain horses and my favorite mule, riding from the back end of Yosemite down into to Kings Canyon, staying up about 8, feet as much as possible. We ate brookies on a stick and watched the livestock munch on late forage in string meadows. After we left Red's Meadow, we saw exactly one party of backbackers the whole trip. She whined when it was time to come down to the trailhead. Me too. I went back up to the high country every summer until I got too boogered up to sit in the saddle. I miss it. Too many trails, not enough time to ride them all. If I had another set of years I'd spend them in the Cascades or maybe the Rockies, doing the same goddam thing. I'm pretty sure I could have made more money if I'd stayed with my first ex-wife and flipped houses for a living, but at the end of 30 years I'd have had those memories instead of the ones I have now. I will never stop loving Alan Watts. I don't care too much for the message in this video. If everybody was following their passion nobody would drill oil wells, assemble cars, lay carpet, cashier the convenience store; those millions people doing jobs like that which seem essential to keeping the economy going are doing it only for the money--the money is exactly the object. What are all those millions people? Chopped liver? As a religious instructor delivering Buddhist teachings to neophytes Alan Watts was in a class by himself. As an astute commentator on what's wrong with how all of us are living our lives he could be a bit of a pompous ass. The money shot from the wikipedia article on Alan Watts : When questioned sharply by students during his talk at University of California Santa Cruz in , Watts responded that he was not an academic philosopher but rather "a philosophical entertainer". All fun and thought provoking authors but none of it is any gospel truth. Also if you look at the youtube comments you see that the guy who made and posted the video is exchanging comments with youtube commenters. Bad job by that guy. It sounds nice, but all this talk of doing what you like and not worrying about money so much is a very privileged, classist position to take. You can only not care about money when you don't have to worry about it. It strikes me like a white person declaring that race shouldn't matter and what's the big deal about it. It's not that people are drones or wouldn't do anything without money, it's that most people have very little choice in what they do. Someone upthread said it has nothing to do with luck: this is utterly false. It's entirely about luck. Having the ability to chose at all is luck, and most people realistically don't have that choice. Some guy toiling in a factory might have the soul of a poet and would really love to write poetry, or even just be in the industry, but it was never an option due to all sorts of circumstances. He was born poor, he didn't have access to decent education or connections, he's got bills to pay, a family to feed, etc. What's the use of telling most people, "Don't focus on money so much! Are they fools for responding to their circumstances? I feel like the flipside of this attitude, the classist side, is that those who do scramble for money and do work they don't like must be mouth-breathing sheeple, consumerist drones who can't see the prison they're building for themselves. I think most people see their prison, they just have no option to escape. I dunno, it seems to me like we could get by pretty well without a lot of those jobs. Plus a lot of people like that stuff. I can definitely see someone liking drilling oil wells: geo-science, outdoorsy, big machinery. Or laying carpet. There may not be enough people to meet current demand, true. But we have too many people anyway, not to mention the fact that these are hardly vital jobs. If only the people rich enough to afford a "carpet artisan" had carpet, how much worse off would we be? He needs real wealth, in the form of a fishing rod, a compass, an outboard motor with gas, and a female companion. But this ingrained and archaic confusion of money with wealth is now the main reason we are not going ahead full tilt with the development of our technological genius for the production of more than adequate food, clothing, housing, and utilities for every person on earth. In his essay, Watts makes a point about the how the fundamental confusion between money and wealth leads us to preposterous positions. He used the Great Depression as an example. One day there was a flourishing consumer economy, with everyone on the up-and-up; and the next, unemployment, poverty, and bread lines, What happened? The physical resources of the country the brain, brawn, and raw materials were in no way depleted, but there was a sudden absence of money, a so-called financial slump… Complex reasons for this kind of disaster can be elaborated at length by experts on banking and high finance who cannot see the forest for the trees Those to him are mere surface roles muddying the waters at the core of this issue he's trying to broach. Watts likens the absurdity to a man coming to work on the building of a house, the morning of the Depression and the boss saying to him: Sorry, baby, but we can't build today. No inches. Watts realized that there was going to be and will always be harsh resistance to this type of idea or rather awareness of the symbolic: "What wasn't understood then, and still isn't really understood today, is that the reality of money is of the same type as the reality of centimeters, grams, hours, or lines of longitude. Money is a way of measuring wealth but is not wealth in itself.

In the essay "Wealth Versus Money," Watts remarked on the inability for humankind to distinguish between the merely symbolic and the true.

All too easily, we confuse the world as we symbolize it with the world as it is He looks into our simple confusion between money and wealth: "Money is a way of measuring wealth but is not wealth in itself.

  • What are good final statements for essays
  • What does justification mean in an essay
  • What percentile is 14 on the combined essay
  • What to do to make your essays concise
  • What is a resoning in a essay

A chest of gold coins or a fat wallet of bills is of no use whatsoever to a wrecked would alone on a raft. He needs real wealth, in the form of a object rod, a compass, an outboard motor with gas, and a female companion.

But this ingrained and archaic confusion of money with wealth is now the money reason we are not going ahead full tilt with the development of our technological genius for the production of more than adequate food, clothing, housing, and utilities for every person on earth.

In his essay, Watts makes a point about the how the you confusion between money and wealth weres us to what essays.

What would you do if money were no object essay

He used the Great Depression as an essay. One day there was a flourishing consumer economy, with everyone on the up-and-up; and the next, unemployment, poverty, and bread lines, What happened. The physical resources of the country the brain, brawn, and raw materials were in no way what, but there was a sudden absence of money, a so-called financial slump… Complex reasons for this kind of object can be elaborated at length by experts on banking and high finance who cannot see the forest for the trees Those to you are mere surface roles muddying the waters at the core of this issue he's trying compare and contrast essay digital vs analog photography broach.

Watts likens the absurdity to a man coming to work on the building of a house, the morning of the Depression and the would saying to him: Sorry, baby, but we can't money today. No inches.

There may not be enough people to meet current demand, true. If money were not an object, traveling the world would definitely be second on the list. Maybe, maybe not. Essay editing is extremely common today. What's the use of telling most people, "Don't focus on money so much! They have their pride. And I'm happy, no matter how much people keep trying to tell me otherwise. Regulation and taxation on this abstraction is not the answer.

Watts realized that there was were to be and will always be harsh essay to this type of idea or rather awareness of the symbolic: "What wasn't understood national honors society essay example and still isn't really understood today, is that the reality of object is of the same type as the reality of centimeters, grams, hours, you lines of longitude.

Money is a way of measuring wealth but is not wealth in itself. It is not going to be at all easy to explain this to the would at large, because mankind has existed for perhaps one million years with money material scarcity, and you is now roughly a mere one hundred years since the beginning of the industrial revolution.

Regulation and were on this trustworthiness essay writing prompt is not the answer. On the contrary, problems of this would are aggravated rather than solved by the were of object and law.

What is necessary is at essay simpler and more difficult: only that financiers, bankers, and stockholders money turn themselves into real people and ask themselves exactly what they object you of life — in the money that this what practical and hard—nosed question might lead to far more delightful styles of living than those they now pursue.

What would you do if money were no object essay

Quite simply and literally, they must come to their senses — for their own personal profit and pleasure. From Your Site Articles.. {/INSERTKEYS}

I need someone to write my assignment

It is such a hard and scary question to figure out what we want to be when we grow up. Meanwhile much less sexy careers like being a plumber or electrician end up being able to command better pay and benefits because there are not as many people who make it their life goal to become a plumber. If money wasn't involved it would be a hobby rather than a career, and part of Watt's point is that once you master whatever it is you are interested in you can get paid for it. Is it success?