|
Those of us in the developed world are increasingly prosperous and enjoy a level of affluence unknown to previous generations. Our fast-paced, ever-changing society presents us with more and more choices for spending our money. But do abundant choices and material goods make us any happier?
Avner Offer, professor of economic history at Oxford University, presented his conclusions in a public lecture at the London School of Economics on May 22, 2007. Offer concluded that the “paradox of affluence” is that “richer is not (much) better.”
Data on a plethora of subjective and objective demographic indicators of well-being show that when a society first begins to develop, the well-being of its citizens increases as basic needs are met. But after one’s needs are met, well-being plateaus despite further increases in income.
Offer explored why this occurs, suggesting that “the pace of innovation is the challenge of affluence.” Today’s rapid pace of innovation includes developments in technology, the widening range of available consumer goods, and the powerful effect of media, advertising and the Internet—all contributing to the pressure on each of us to make choices. These choices can be good or bad.
SIGNS OF THE AFFLUENT TIMES
Offer examined some of the bad choices that individuals in affluent societies tend to make, pointing out that what makes them bad is that they reduce personal well-being.
He began by noting that levels of personal savings have declined in developed countries around the world. The restraint of earlier generations who were willing to save for the things they wanted has disappeared under a blizzard of easy credit. Why wait for the future if you can buy now on credit? The result is that mountains of personal debt build up as people rush to satisfy their all-consuming urges.
And there are so many attractive things to spend money on. Affluent societies continually produce more goods to satisfy the demands of a growing market. Further, thanks to developing countries manufacturing goods more cheaply, the things we want invariably become available for less. It is therefore perhaps understandable that most people, especially the young, give in to the pressure to possess all the latest fashionable gadgets and consumer goods.
Affluence has also had a profound effect on the environment. Fossil fuels have supplied most of the energy to power industry, transportation, and the comfortable lifestyles of today’s prosperity. But experts now tell us we need to drastically reduce our individual carbon footprints in an attempt to counter the effects of global warming and reduce pollution. Targets that are being set to reduce carbon emissions will require individual sacrifice and change. Will people be willing to make the necessary sacrifices quickly enough to ensure a better global future for all?
The professor identified one more concerning trend. The more sedentary lifestyles brought on by modern prosperity, combined with the introduction of cheap and rich convenience foods, has fostered an epidemic of obesity. Studies show that people don’t want to be obese, yet they continue to eat more—and to eat more of what is unhealthful. Restaurants and supermarkets cater to rushed lifestyles and people’s desire to have more than they need: fast-food portions have continued to increase, and the abundance of choices has provided greater opportunity to indulge our unhealthy cravings.
THE PARADOX—AND THE ANSWER
Since the 1960s, according to Offer, the virtues of thrift, abstinence, chastity and religion have been overtaken by self-absorption, living for now, and hedonism. These selfish and short-sighted tendencies aren’t new, however. He quoted 18th-century philosopher David Hume’s Treatise of Human Nature: “There is no quality in human nature, which causes more fatal errors in our conduct, than that which leads us to prefer whatever is present to the distant and remote.” The average person often prefers a small reward sooner than a large reward later. While we may desire a long-term goal of greater value, we will often choose to forgo that goal for an object of lesser value now. This represents a “commitment problem,” a preference for instant gratification over delayed gratification.
In explaining why this has recently become such a significant problem, Offer remarked that innovation is undermining commitment. The novelty of the latest thing we must have induces a short-term bias for the now. The resulting overconsumption leads to saturation, which actually reduces our ability to enjoy the very things we desire. In other words, the more we have of something, the less we enjoy it. The paradox of affluence is that a rise in income (after basic needs are met) does not improve well-being.
Offer suggests that the solution isn’t to maximize consumption, as we’re daily encouraged to do, but to slow down and pace our consumption. What he’s talking about is a change of lifestyle based on self-control. But he doesn’t believe that humans can exercise the degree of restraint necessary, as personal strategies of self-discipline and restraining rules have statistically proven ineffective. He instead advocates social commitment devices as a solution: taxation to impose personal sacrifice; forced savings schemes like Social Security and National Insurance; goods in kind, such as housing benefit, food stamps and free education. Offer believes that government and educational institutions need to help people make effective choices by creating more laws and educational norms.
Such externally applied measures certainly have their place, but they should not be confused with self-control. Offer is right to note that we humans struggle (and often fail) to control all our natural tendencies and impulses. How can we achieve what is unarguably a vital character trait?
Our readers will know that Vision’s approach is to look to the Bible for answers. There we find principles that shed light on issues such as these. Happiness and well-being, the Bible says, are not rooted in material consumption. At their core these characteristics are spiritual in nature. Belief in God and His way of life is central to our lasting well-being.
The Bible also warns of the perils of unbridled desire. Lasting happiness, fulfillment and well-being are not, after all, based on the abundance of material possessions (Luke 12:15). It goes on to caution against the hedonistic approach to life that is increasingly common today. Instead, it encourages a life that is more spiritually focused on the things of God (verses 16–21). Could this provide the well-spring of individual and collective well-being?
The greatest challenge of affluence is to remember that it is God—rather than ourselves—who gives us the power to gain wealth (Deuteronomy 8:10–18).
Along with such a change in lifestyle, priorities, and worldview will come the very characteristics that are otherwise so elusive. Self-control and self-restraint will become core values. These in turn will drive a greater respect for our environment. We will consume without overconsuming and live within our means. We will value relationships more than material things or self-centered desires. In addition, we will have due regard for future needs and exercise a healthy and sustainable lifestyle.
The issues facing modern civilization are becoming increasingly severe. The future promises a rough ride indeed unless we can rise to the challenge of affluence and make the profound spiritual changes that are needed.
JOHN MEAKIN and MICHELLE STEEL
Return to top of page
|