The Medium Chill - Is Our Generation Less Ambitious? And is that good?

[KCMax]

I read this article a few days ago and I've been thinking about it ever since.

The medium chill

The medium chill involves what economists call satisficing: abandoning the quest for the ideal in favor of the good-enough. It means stepping off the aspirational treadmill, foregoing some material opportunities and accepting some material constraints in exchange for more time to spend on relationships and experiences.

It turns out, though, that satisficing doesn't come easy to us human beings. We have an extremely hard time saying, "okay, this is good enough." Why?

Part of the reason is that we hate closing off opportunities, and that's what satisficing feels like. We like to keep our options open in case something better comes along.

But will a better thing make us happier? We're inclined to think, "of course it would!" But that's because, as social psychologists have come to understand quite well, we're not very good at predicting what will make us happy. In fact, we suck at it.

It is well-documented that employees are working longer hours for less pay, but some employees are being compensated by being allowed more flex time, working from home, and even four day work weeks. And for many in our generation, this may be well worth the trade off.

It makes sense in a lot of ways. Many in our generation grew up in relative affluence compared to past generations, so we have never had to worry about food on the table or clothes on our backs. What we perhaps lacked was having two parents around all the time. So are we reversing the trend? Spending more time with friends and family and less time at the office because we make "just enough"? Or is it just a way to rationalize away laziness or a lack of ambition? And is this bad for our economy if our citizens are not driven to achieve? Will we still have innovation and growth? Just curious about your own experiences, if you are really career-driven, or you find yourself content with "just enough" and seek fulfillment through other means. I don't really think there's a right answer and its nice that we even are fortunate to have the option (for those of us that do.)

[chrizow]

very interesting article, with a lot to think about.  here are some random thoughts:

* my first reaction is that relatively few folks, even in this country, have the time or feel the need to contemplate this.  i think, like many "trends" reported in the media, this is pretty much exclusively the province of middle to upper middle class, educated (one way or another) folks who have the relative luxury to decide whether to go balls-out and make a zillion bucks, or just to merely live like the vast majority of the nation.

* the deeper issue here is the concept of dissatisfaction generally, and what it takes for someone to be "happy."  the buddhist view, which i subscribe to, is that the general human condition is suffering, but that most of the time that suffering is caused by one's own mind.  in america, and increasingly elsewhere, is it very common to constantly yearn for the next consumer product or lifestyle choice - better house, better car, better TV, better job, etc. and it's common everywhere for people to want better relationships, better health, whatever.  once one can release themselves from this constant striving and live in the moment with what they have and foster and deepen relationships with others, they are happier - whether poor or rich.  there is zero doubt in my mind that striving to attain economic success is not the path to happiness, so i applaud folks who can detach from the rat race as much as they can.

* i don't know if this is truly a trend or not, but if it is, i applaud it.  endless ambition, economic striving, etc. for its own sake is (imo) a cultural disease.  if you're a workaholic by nature and that makes you happy, great, but i personally do not like this aspect of the american culture.  i do no care whatsoever what impact it has on "the economy" - the human condition is a much larger and more important issue than the economy.

* this does not represent laziness or a lack of ambition to me anyway.  i think it's just a shift of priorities, and i think it takes as much "ambition" to nurture positive relationships with your friends and family, find ways to experience new things, etc.  if anything, it takes more courage or ambition to "unplug" to any extent from the endless pursuit of economic/career status and i support it entirely.  

* i winced at the statement in the article that economists use wealth as a proxy for "well-being" and derive from that premise all sorts of conclusions about "economic actors" (i.e. human beings) needing an array of choices in the marketplace to be happy, etc.  this entire framework of thought makes me physically ill and is the direct and indirect cause of a massive amount of suffering on our planet.

* just anecdotally, right now i make about 3x as much money as i did in my first year out of college.  i bought a better car and a nice (imo) house.  my wife and i eat well, have good wine around, travel when we can, etc.  i can tell you that my economic status has not made me any more happy now than i was five years ago.  (i am, of course, much more happy personally due to my amazing wife).  but the fact i have a vastly increased array of "choices" of shit to buy has not made me happier at all - and, indeed, the increased work stress and responsibilities is no doubt impairing my ability to connect with my wife, friends and family, do things i want to do, etc.  it's my choice of course, and maybe i'll "unplug" a bit one of these days, but there is no doubt that economic striving doesn't really equate to happiness or contentedness.

[KCMax]

Yes, it definitely feels like a "white person problem" (upper middle class problem).

* i winced at the statement in the article that economists use wealth as a proxy for "well-being" and derive from that premise all sorts of conclusions about "economic actors" (i.e. human beings) needing an array of choices in the marketplace to be happy, etc.  this entire framework of thought makes me physically ill and is the direct and indirect cause of a massive amount of suffering on our planet.

There is an emerging, albeit very small school of economists using "units of happiness" as a basis for measurement. I think I even read some socialist Scandinavian country is even using it as a factor now in their policy decisions.

As for me and my wife, we easily have the smallest house out of all my friends, even though I would guess we make a pretty commensurate income, but my wife is EXTREMELY debt-averse and wanted to make sure we could put down as much money as we could. She only works two days a week (all night shifts as a nurse) and I work from home so we're home with the kids a ton. My job is pretty mundane and I can't go any higher than I've gone, and there is little to no creativity or problem-solving and I'm underpaid for my degree. On the other hand, the pay is more than enough for me to live comfortably, the job has pretty much no stress, allows me enough free time to make 16,000 posts on here, and allows me to be off work by 4 and in the pool with my son. 

I've always been a very un-ambitious person - some might say lazy - and in the back of my mind I think I'm rationalizing this away by saying I'm merely content. But if I'm happy, so what?

[chrizow]

We easily have the smallest house out of all my friends, even though I would guess we make a pretty commensurate income, but my wife is EXTREMELY debt-averse and wanted to make sure we could put down as much money as we could. She only works two days a week (all night shifts as a nurse) and I work from home so we're home with the kids a ton. My job is pretty mundane and I can't go any higher than I've gone, and there is little to no creativity or problem-solving and I'm underpaid for my degree. On the other hand, the pay is more than enough for me to live comfortably, the job has pretty much no stress, allows me enough free time to make 16,000 posts on here, and allows me to be off work by 4 and in the pool with my son.

I've always been a very un-ambitious person - some might say lazy - and in the back of my mind I think I'm rationalizing this away by saying I'm merely content. But if I'm happy, so what?

sounds ideal to me, and i think you should be thrilled that you've positioned youself so nicely to spend time with your family and still make ends meet.  i for one am envious and am only now trying to ratchet down my "consumer choices" to a level that i do not have to necessarily make a zillion dollars and bill 4,000 hours a year just to make sure my kids that i never see are able to drive a bmw to high school. 

[mean]

And is this bad for our economy if our citizens are not driven to achieve? Will we still have innovation and growth? Just curious about your own experiences, if you are really career-driven, or you find yourself content with "just enough" and seek fulfillment through other means. I don't really think there's a right answer and its nice that we even are fortunate to have the option (for those of us that do.)

The time I spend out of the office is the time I spend doing all the things I would rather be doing for a living: brewing beer, writing / recording / performing music, game design, etc. However, I wouldn't say I'm driven to achieve anything. I am starting to wonder if this is a problem.

[loftguy]

Interesting read, I agree.  

I long ago made a conscious decision to pursue work that brought me the greatest "satisfaction", rather than the highest return in dollars for a days labor.  Believe me, in lean times I've wrestled with this decision.

I also recognize that I'm not so highly developed that I can claim to possess an "ideal" lifestyle. I have had friends from other countries point out often how obsessed Americans seem to be with work, and moreso that we are appear ill in our inability to take what they percieve as "healthy and normal" time for ourselves.

A today example:  a group of 10 or so business friends with whom I worked closely for years, asked me to meet them for happy hour at 4 today.  I'm usually at it until 5:30.
I'm likely to join them at 4:30, and even making it a half hour later I sense a bit of what must be guilt at what amounts to slacking off?

Now, that ain't right.

[brewcrew1000]

A rich man is not the one who has the most but the one who needs the least. 

[IraGlacialis]

Yes, it definitely feels like a "white person problem" (upper middle class problem).

If you are meaning a concern about ambition, I would strongly disagree with that assertion. Every strata (from the farmer to the stockbroker) of E and SE Asian culture is obsessed about winning the rat race (each economic group in it's own way for obvious reasons) to the point of literal unhealthiness of the people themselves (YMMV if it is the opposite for the countries and communities). Hell, they don't even bother bother with the wealth=happiness excuse; reputation is the only concern, individual happiness be damned.

In the whole scheme of things, I am not too concerned about people being "less ambitious" in this country. I believe that people should go for what they are good at, and in practical terms, it prevents career over-saturation (there are some people who should just not be in college).

However, what should be focused on, rather than individual monetary ambitiousness, is collective ambitiousness in the realm of the sciences, culture, and industry for the betterment of this nation.

[taxi]

I think it's natural for each generation to veer from the ways and paths of their parents, if not necessarily the rule. I think about this a lot and identify with the so-called trend and often feel that my father is spinning like the Bamboozler in his grave.
He used to tell me that you're not supposed to like your job and, if you did, you'd say, "I'm going to play" instead of "I'm going to work." I have never subscribed to that philosophy.
He would also say, "'Good enough' will land you dead or in prison", but good enough is good enough for me (and Bobby McGee).
I know not all upper middle class white men of his generation were the same, but many had a similar mindset. And I don't feel that I've chosen a different path to spite him, it's just what seems to work best for me. Of course, I've got it easier than he and his parents did, so that probably has a lot to do with it.

[aknowledgeableperson]

Two older movies come to mind.  It's a Wonderful Life.  The Man in the Grey Flannel Suit.
I know the first is considered a Christmas movie but look at his life and what he gives up to have it,  and what he does with the offer that Mr Potter gives him.

In the second there are a few topics going through it but in the end he finds out what he wants out of life.

Is the younger generation less ambitious?  I don't think so.  My son is 35 so I don't know if that fits into the "our generation" but he is set to leave a very secure job (hard work but good pay) to go into business for himself and his wife.  Why?  The job is no longer what he wants to do, he has accomplished what he set out to do with it, and he wants the new challenge.  I had people close to his age working for me parttime that had other parttime jobs as well as a fulltime job all at the same time.

Just look at the competition to get into the top colleges and what a student does and gives up to participate in that competition.  Look at the hours a young lawyer works at a top law firm or an accountant at a CPA firm.

Maybe what may show as less ambition is the increasing unwillingness to move a family every year or two to move up the corporate ladder.  Or the acceptance that there is more to life than killing yourself at the job (but then look at the hippies and the beatniks in the past).  The effect on the economy?  I doubt much, and it might be beneficial.  Instead of 2 people working 60 hour weeks a company now has 3 people working 40 hour weeks.  Yes, that extra employee may cost the company more but that might be better for all.

[KCMax]

If you are meaning a concern about ambition, I would strongly disagree with that assertion. Every strata (from the farmer to the stockbroker) of E and SE Asian culture is obsessed about winning the rat race (each economic group in it's own way for obvious reasons) to the point of literal unhealthiness of the people themselves (YMMV if it is the opposite for the countries and communities). Hell, they don't even bother bother with the wealth=happiness excuse; reputation is the only concern, individual happiness be damned.

I don't mean ambition is an upper middle class problem. The existential issues of whether or not your career is fulfilling you and whether something else can fulfill you is an upper middle class problem. I could be wrong. But I would guess middle and working class people are too concerned with trying to make ends meet to worry about whether or not their job is "satisficing' them. I definitely think there are a lot of working class people in lots of other cultures that are much more ambitious than I and many other middle class Americans.

The time I spend out of the office is the time I spend doing all the things I would rather be doing for a living: brewing beer, writing / recording / performing music, game design, etc. However, I wouldn't say I'm driven to achieve anything. I am starting to wonder if this is a problem.

Yea, I think this is what I've come to terms with over the last year. My career isn't really what I wanted it to be. But my hobbies are what I wanted my career to be. And because of my job, I actually get to spend a lot of time on my hobbies. And you never know, maybe one of those hobbies actually gets to turn into a career - seems how that's how a lot of entrepreneurs get started.

[KC0KEK]

I definitely think there are a lot of working class people in lots of other cultures that are much more ambitious than I and many other middle class Americans.

Agreed. In fact, despite all of the whining about the rich-poor gap, decreasing upward mobility, the jackboot of The Man, etc., millions of people move to America each year -- legally and illegally -- because they're convinced that it's still the land of opportunity. And many of them achieve their dream.

And you never know, maybe one of those hobbies actually gets to turn into a career - seems how that's how a lot of entrepreneurs get started.

Yes. That's what I did.

[hurricane]

I am actually from the older generation, so I will give you my viewpoint on the subject. I realized early in my career that even though I was much more successful than my parents, I couldn't afford to buy a house, whereas during the 40's and 50's, pretty much anyone with a steady job could afford to buy a house with one income. In those days, you could be a milkman or some other relatively unskilled worker and make enough to achieve the American dream of a house in the suburbs. In a lot of ways, my realization made me want to quit the rat race and do something I would enjoy more than my career, but I didn't because I didn't really want to give up the money. Eventually when I got married, my husband and I discovered an unconventional way to achieve the American dream. We took jobs overseas for American companies, but all our expenses were paid and we didn't have to pay any taxes, so we were able to save enough to come back to the states and start our own business and get the house, etc. But what I am saying is that most people in my generation faced the frustration that even though we were successful, our parents had achieved a better lifestyle with far less effort.
When your generation was growing up, the buzzword in raising kids was "self-esteem". All the educators were determined to give everyone a high sense of self-esteem. This has caused two things: 1. people who really think they can do anything like those American Idol contestants who don't believe the judges when they are told they can't sing, or
2. people who get disillusioned once they realize that they aren't the best, that their college degree won't guarantee them a job, and it is much harder for them to be optimistic than if they were brought up with more realistic expectations. It is this second group that has lost ambition. The first group refuses to face facts.
One thing you should consider, the hippies dropped out of the rat race - there wasn't a group with less ambition than them - yet eventually most of them joined the establishment, and if you find them today, you will see that most of them achieved the American dream.

[KCMax]

One thing you should consider, the hippies dropped out of the rat race - there wasn't a group with less ambition than them - yet eventually most of them joined the establishment, and if you find them today, you will see that most of them achieved the American dream.

Really interesting point. I'm going to think about that for a bit.

[warwickland]

One thing you should consider, the hippies dropped out of the rat race - there wasn't a group with less ambition than them - yet eventually most of them joined the establishment, and if you find them today, you will see that most of them achieved the American dream.

They also - economically - were lucky, in that the American economy was, with exception, in a massive expansion, and they were able to ride the wave. Beatniks and bohemians from other eras and places have historically not always been so lucky...

I think one needs an old fashioned plan of some kind in whatever they do, even if it is to "chill down." I think the exception was the 2nd half of the 20th century; it was a very special time, I could be wrong. I can't help but notice so many of my generation from the middle class and even upper middle class ending up in the lower classes, even having put more effort into post secondary education than their parents.

A little off topic and nothing anyone has said has prompted this, but I tire of people who have worked their whole lives in a stable career with a high school degree or a little more criticize "this generation" as "lazy." There almost is no such opportunity anymore, they confuse their hard work with hard work-or at least being able to show up for work everyday and being lucky.

[KCMax]

David Brooks: The Haimish Line

I can’t resist concluding this column with some kernels of consumption advice accumulated by the prominent scholars Elizabeth W. Dunn, Daniel T. Gilbert and Timothy D. Wilson. Surveying the vast literature of happiness research, they suggest: Buy experiences instead of things; buy many small pleasures instead of a few big ones; pay now for things you can look forward to and enjoy later.