Gyroscopic Investing

http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~dtg/DUNN%20 ... (2011).pdf

The relationship between money and happiness is surprisingly weak, which may stem in part from the way people spend it. Drawing on empirical research, we propose eight principles designed to help consumers get more happiness for their money. Specifically, we suggest that consumers should (1) buy more experiences and fewer material goods; (2) use their money to benefit others rather than themselves; (3) buy many small pleasures rather than fewer large ones; (4) eschew extended warranties and other forms of overpriced insurance; (5) delay consumption; (6) consider how peripheral features of their purchases may affect their day-to-day lives; (7) beware of comparison shopping; and (8) pay close attention to the happiness of others.

A lot of these principals could probably be related to the HBPP rules, in some way or another.

Similarly (but in a more concise form), here's a good summary of hedonic adaptation.

http://unclutterer.com/2010/08/09/hedon ... you-happy/

I definitely think there's something to that.

Interesting study although I didn't have time to read all 125 pages.

One of my own theories of why money doesn't correlate to happiness is that having money frees up more time to spend thinking about how miserable you are.

I must confess, I didn't read all 125 pages either, but the first part of the paper neatly summarizes the scientific research.  It's very interesting to me how they did actual research on this by giving people money and asking them to either spend it on consumer goods or experiences, and recorded their happiness levels throughout the studies.

I also found it interesting how spending money on experiential rewards tends to create memories that are longer lasting than those created by consumer goods.

The questions this research brings up in my mind are mainly around the blending of the two:

If I spend my money on goods that are designed for creating experiences, like camping gear, for example, or a musical instrument, would that make me happy?  My guess is that money spent on goods designed to create experiences is generally better than just buying something like a nice watch or a sports car.  I also believe there is probably a limit to this - for example, you don't need $30,000 worth of camping gear to enjoy the outdoors - unless you're climbing mount Everest.  A simple tent, sleeping bag, and some cooking supplies is pretty much all you need to enjoy yourself.

Personally, I don't spend a lot on consumer goods that are non-experiential in nature.  For example, I love playing music, so I spend a few hundred bucks on a microphone and some software on my computer to make music with.  I enjoy playing computer games, so I spent $1500 on a nice gaming computer, which has given me hundreds of hours of fun experiences.  I guess the lines get fuzzy when you start comparing experiential goods vs. pure consumption items.

I once read the something along the lines of the following:

"Work ends in pleasure, while pleasure ends in regret."

I have always thought that the optimal experience would be one in which you were nominally working, but you were also having an amazing experience as well.

Imagine how Neil Armstrong must have felt walking on the Moon.  That's the kind of job that would be cool to have.

MediumTex wrote: I once read the something along the lines of the following:

"Work ends in pleasure, while pleasure ends in regret."

That is a great quote.  Who said it? 

AdamA wrote:

MediumTex wrote: I once read the something along the lines of the following:

"Work ends in pleasure, while pleasure ends in regret."

That is a great quote.  Who said it? 

I think it was the English translation of Balthasar Gracian's classic "The Art of Worldly Wisdom".  This small book with the ambitious title is very good.