<div class="text-justify">


>Would you choose financial *Comfort* or *Riches*?

It seems a pretty easy question to answer, doesn't it? If you have a choice between having financial comfort or being wealthy, it is obvious to take the wealth. But, let's put a little bit of a wrinkle into the question for this poll today by adding some conditions to the choices.

![image.png](https://files.peakd.com/file/peakd-hive/tarazkp/23tbppLGCrbq3WT6oUmxvMbcXhTDoDcJvDXTvZFQTtDWacMWNJGigVPTr8ygamA9P81tZ.jpg)

> 1. Financial comfort is guaranteed for a somewhat better than average lifestyle, but it is impossible to ever become more than comfortable. You will always be tied to the average. 
> 2. Wealth is not guaranteed, but there is a higher than average chance of becoming wealthy, and there is no limit on how wealthy. 

I think that the answer is going to depend a lot on current position and potential. For example, would someone who is already at an above average wealth level be willing to take a reduction in wealth in order to guarantee their comfort? If someone was comfortable now, would they be satisfied to stay there for the rest of their life? If someone was below average and struggling, would they be content to take the guarantee, even if it means they can never have more? Does age factor into the decision? Culture? Nationality? Political situation faced? 

This decision is hard for me to make I think, because while the thought of eternal financial comfort is super appealing right now due to my employment situation and the view of the future, it also burns my crypto lottery ticket, which *might* be worth more in the future. However, there is a lot of risk in holding crypto, and then even after winning, there is a lot of risk of losing wealth in various ways too. 

Then there is the global future view to consider, as it seems likely that the "average" life is going to decrease, while the very top increases its wealth exponentially. This means if tethered to the average lifestyle, it is still going to degrade, and there is nothing that can be done about it. If the average lifestyle was getting better, then it would make tethering far more attractive, as it would mean continually being slightly ahead of the curve. Being wealthy means being able to increase the gap to maintain or improve lifestyle/ wellbeing even in a degrading economy. 

> Which would you choose and why?

I would like to hear from people and get some of the though behind this hypothetical decision, because I think it is worth considering. Not because there are guarantees in life on anything, but it can also highlight where we are right now, as well as what we might consider the ultimate goal. I think it is easy to get trapped in the numbers while losing the sense of what the numbers relate to. I think it is the same trap that the entire economy is in and how governments drive legislation, where they see "money" as equivalent to "quality of life" - which is not true at all. It is also likely that we would increase the total wellbeing, if we were content with less and didn't have extremes in wealth. 

So?

Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]

---

*The poll is available below and will work in most of the main interfaces. If you can't see it, try viewing through Peakd. You should see the results only after you vote.* 

---


</div>