|
The title of the old American movie 'Poor little rich girl' answers the question. It is true
that at weddings we often hear the newly-weds toasted in the words Health, Wealth
and Happiness, but the epithet itself distinguishes between the three objectives. The
fact is that you can be both happy and healthy and poor, by normal standards, at the
same time. Yet, if you are unhappy, money can only cure your misery in some
circumstances. And if you have an incurable illness no amount of money can buy the
treatment to reverse that condition.
Most people would accept that the human being is a composite of body, mind and
spirit. Each of those parts has separate needs which must be fulfilled if happiness is
to result. This fulfillment is most often, though not always, achieved through the love
and companionship found in a good marriage. The newly-weds referred to above may
start out together with few possessions and little money and still be blissfully happy.
Body, mind and spirit are fulfilled. Yet, marital happiness is not a static thing. As the
couple grow older they change, and happiness has to be constantly worked for if it
is to mature into lifelong love and friendship. Sadly enough the divorce rate in the west
shows that many couples lack that incentive, and are not prepared to show the
unselfishness and willingness to put the needs of each other first, necessary if
happiness is to last. Very often, this process of alienation goes on at the very time
when the couple are getting past their money problems, when the pennies no longer
have to be counted.
This situation is highlighted when money never has been a problem, as in the case of
some of the British royal family. Differences in outlook, i.e. in mind and spirit,
sever
relationships most effectively. Whereas one royal, for instance, was interested only in
farming and country pursuits, the wife, some years ago, decided to devote her life to
'Save the Children'. Money never entered the equation. They are permanently
separated. Mind and spirit had grown apart.
If old money can be irrelevant, new money can be a positive menace. Every week
in England somebody becomes a sterling millionaire having entered a winning football
pool forecast. More often than not, the winner's cry is 'spend, spend, spend!' , and the
money soon goes. In the process, homes shatter, bad relationships are formed, drugs
and alcohol are abused, and often the winner ends up with nothing.
So at least this can be said. Money itself is neutral. The ideal is wise
stewardship, i.e.
its proper use, which generally means making one's existing lifestyle more
comfortable, but using excess income for charitable purposes. Money should not be
seen as the key to luxury and self-indulgence. Money is not the root of all evil, but the
correct version is true enough; the love of money is the root of all evil
. The love of money is a cold, alienating obsession. Was Howard Hughes
a happy man?
What can also be said is that whereas money cannot buy happiness, the lack of it can
bring misery. Few things are worse than debt, as the family of Charles Dickens' Mr
Micawber knew full well. It is the duty of men, and in many cases today of women, to
provide enough money for the family to live in reasonable comfort. It is not their duty
to provide that comfort by going into debt. The modern way of doing so is through the
credit card which, if abused, is the sure road to unhappiness. As Dickens said, annual
income £1 annual expenditure 19s 6d, the result, happiness. Annual income £1 annual
expenditure £1 6d, the result, misery.
There is, perhaps, one sense in which money can buy happiness, and that is among
the poorest of the poor in the third world. Happiness for them would be a safe home,
enough food, medical care, and a school for their children. One day, the conscience
of the world will ensure that they are given these things. |
