Affluent But No Better Off

Affluenza
By Clive Hamilton and Richard Dennis

Affluenza is not a new concept, we just have a new word for it. The bible says, “For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils” (1 Tim 6:10). Also, “He who loves money will not be satisfied with money, nor he who loves wealth with his income; this also is vanity” (Ecc 5:10). It’s been happening forever. “Affluenza” puts multiple bits of research together in order to make the point that being affluent is not the answer to problems but the cause of other, sometimes bigger problems.

It’s about the difference between needs and wants. But these two areas have become very muddled in peoples heads. Needs are food, clothing and shelter. Wants are everything else superfluous to our basic needs. Anyone who did High School economics should know that. Unfortunately to an increasing number of Australians the basic need for food means top restaurants, clothing means overpriced brand labels and shelter means the big house with a pool in a fancy suburb.

What is sad is that we appear no happier despite being as affluent as we ever have been. Maybe that’s because the secret to happiness is being content with what we have and living within your means while making the most of it. Being content with what God has given us to use in our earthly life.

While Hamilton makes a lot of good points about the sickness of afflenza he does get political near the end. It left a sour taste in my mouth. It would depend on your political ideology.

The last chapter takes the good points and gives forth a left wing socialist solution. As in having government intervene in more facets of life. At the same time he gives a false view of what it means to be an economic liberalist. So be discerning and don’t take it as political gospel.

The author states that people are looking for meaning in life yet largely ignores Christianity’s (or any other religion for that matter) contribution to attaining meaning. He does mention Christianity briefly but soon after insulted religious notions as “outdated”.

Largely a good read but requires discernment on the finer political points.