An interesting alternative view from Gavin Kennedy's blog on Adam Smith,

http://adamsmithslostlegacy.com/2008/10/adam-smith-on-what-kept-industry...

"A man with a watch that happens to run two minutes slow, so he ‘sells it for a couple guineas’ and ‘purchases another at fifty, which will not lose above a minute in a fortnight’. What interests the man with a watch is not its timekeeping per se (remember, time the 18th century was less of a burning issue than it has become today), but the ‘perfection of the machine which serves to attain it.’ Leading Smith to ask: ‘How many people ruin themselves by laying out money on trinkets of frivolous utility’ (TMS IV.1.6: p 180).

After the parable of the ‘poor man’s son, whom heaven in its anger has visited with ambition’ he concludes:

“And it is well that nature imposes upon us in this manner. It is this deception which rouses and keeps in continual motion the industry of mankind. It is this which first prompted them to cultivate the ground, to build houses, to found cities and commonwealths, and to invent and improve all the sciences and arts, which ennoble and embellish human life; which have entirely changed the whole face of the globe, have turned the rude forests of nature into agreeable and fertile plains, and made the trackless and barren ocean a new fund of subsistence, and the great high road of communication to the different nations of the earth. The earth by these labours of mankind has been obliged to redouble her natural fertility, and to maintain a greater multitude of inhabitants.” (TMS IV.1.10: p 181)"

If you are intrigued by this story, you ought to read Writing Frontier's "The Europeanization of America" at

http://writingfrontier.com/2008/07/27/the-europeanization-of-america/

i strongly agree
i think it has a lot to do with the ego than with the money itself, people may not need the extra money but the need recognition through financial success

It's not just this one article- they all seem to focus who have lost on investments, i.e. people who, in this economic climate will have to scrimp more in order to add back to their savings, etc. But what about people who are losing their jobs? (and being forced to resign, etc so that they can't claim unemployment?) We will have nothing. I would suspect this will hit younger people the most, who haven't had a chance to save yet (since every penny seems to go into student loan payments and we get paid much less than older people). For us, we can't "downsize"-there's nothing to downsize too. If you live in a one bedroom apartment, never drive, and don't even turn on the heat, there's really nowhere to go when you lose your job. I am assuming that in the next few weeks when I lose my job, my "downsizing" will be paying a few hundred dollars a month to put my bit of furniture in storage and sleep on people's couches (and I am in my 30s, have 2 degrees, and have always had "good" jobs).

Could I explain that your words of “to make ends meet or who have suddenly lost the resources to satisfy basic needs for food, medical care, safety, and shelter” as the “optimal point” of human life as that I said in my essays?

Could I say to go beyond the optimal point actually will cause civilization diseases and offspring education problems. In that case the happiness is what I called “ineffective happiness”. Right?

It is absolutely right that you say, “… burst of happiness doesn’t last long. Or, to be more accurate, those new monies and possessions don’t make us as happy or for as long as we think they will. ”

According to my own definition of happiness), it never lasts long. Otherwise, our mankind can not survive.

(Happiness (including love, sense of beauty…) is the feeling of things being better for our propagation and encouraging us to go further. Except ineffective happiness, as smoking …
at
http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4bcbe5d10100092c.html)

I agree with you that “…only caution that such pursuit is not actually so individual or private when it has ramifications for our neighbors, environment, economy, and society at large. ”

Considerable part of the happiness of people with wealth above optimal point is ineffective, which is harmful to the individuals as well as to mankind on the planet. (http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4bcbe5d1010007p7.html)

"Happy" is a feeling and like all feelings comes and goes according to what is going on within and around us. We can increase our control over how often and how much we feel happy by changing our thinking and perceptions. If an individual places a high value on being wealthy and owning lots of things, it may be more difficult for that person to loose those things than for the person whose valuse system involves free or low cost experiences and items. Those who might "need recognition through financial success" may suffer from low self esteem or from being brainwashed by the extremely capitalistic society we have become. It is the rampant capitalistic thinking and value system that has led to the financial crisis. We need to recover from that type of thinking and recognize the successes and happy moments we have that do not involve money.
With that recognition we can begin to increase the happy moments we have that are the result of free or low cost experiences.

It is always important to remember that the fundamentals that make for a full life as Martin Seligman puts it, persist. More isn't necessarily better as Daniel Gilbert's research has shown. The difficulty that I and probably many of us struggle with is to find the right combination of what to do when and for how long.
Research aside, my experience is that no matter on what continent or country I have lived, the overall joys and struggles of life have remained the same for me. A lot of change, beyond the basic necessities of life, is neither good or bad but simply different. The times when I welcomed change or actively went beyond my comfort zone have been some of the most rewarding.

In my conversations about money midlife challenges with business contacts and friends I often refer to Joe Dominguez and Vicki Robin’s "Your Money or Your Life: Transforming your relationship with money and achieving financial independence." I like their notion of “The Fulfillment Curve.” It’s a simple graph that shows the relationship between the experience of fulfillment and the amount of money you spend. The authors describe four different levels of fulfillment: survival, comforts, luxuries and over-consumption. The horizontal line at the bottom of the graph represents money spent and the vertical line fulfillment. As you spend more money you go from just surviving, to attaining comforts and then having luxuries. The authors argue that you reach your peak fulfillment level when you have just “enough.” After that point you overspend, clutter your life and reduce your level of fulfillment. They preach the unpopular notion that bigger or more is not better, but rather less is more. For more on happiness and money see happiness-after-midlife.com and type “money” in the search box on the home page.

The silver lining in a really tough economy. It gives us time to slow down financial, and appreciate the power of small things in life- appreciate what we have instead of spending all of our time pining for the next new thing. Keeping a list of daily accomplishments is a great way to stop yourself from getting upset over all the things that should have been. If you put it on paper it's a lot easier to enjoy life as you have it now.