<div class="text-justify">

Over the last almost twenty years in Finland, I have done several jobs, but all of them have been working with a range of professionals in their field. For the first decade, I was teaching business English, which due to age, was also often upper management and owners. This was very useful for me, as while they improved their English, I was given insight into their lives and processes, as I tended to end up more as a consultant, than a language trainer - which led to me starting my own consultancy later.

![image.png](https://files.peakd.com/file/peakd-hive/tarazkp/2458fGREH3KT8VrFy6daikgB5Ky1cjUBugiZsawUU1wJ62dtQsqqSX33WjPro9xusd6S6.png)

What was interesting to note was that there was quite a difference in average approach when it came to the different "price points" of salaries and income, where at least through the conversations I had, those who were earning more were also *working more.* But, it wasn't just this, as while they were working more, they complained less about the amount they were doing and their disposition was generally happier. 

>Was it the additional money?

It is hard to say, but I would say at least partly, *yes.* The reason is that *not having to worry* about personal finances daily is a large weight off the mind and heart, reducing stress. Quite often, people equate "a lot of work and deadlines" to stress producing, but I suspect that it is dependent on what the expected outcome is going to be. When a person is under the gun to meet deadlines and they are struggling to make ends meet, they are going to have stress coming from their work, as well as their personal lives. When they are only stressed by their work (for the most part), that work becomes somewhat liberating and motivating, like playing a sport.

This attitude seemed to be present in *nearly all* of the people I trained and while they would be considered "rich" by Finnish standards, it wasn't like they were driving Ferraris and on Personal jets, they were just, *more than comfortable.* And I think this supports the idea of what is enough before the stress of maintaining it becomes a problem.

But, one of my students would have been considered rich by any standard, yet if you met him ,down the street, you wouldn't realize how rich, because he lived his life as the average well-off person, not the average 0.1 percenter. And, the other thing that might have thrown people off is his open smile and willingness to talk with everyone and help anyone. 

>Yet, he worked longer hours than any of his employees.

And, he had been doing it his entire life, starting his construction firm on the back of loans at the age of twenty six, working his ass off with small children in tow, seven days a week for *years* before he could afford to step back from the day to day slightly, and start to relinquish some management control to others, while he focused more on the growth of the business. The business employees hundreds directly now and indirectly, several thousand across Finland, yet people tend to forget (or never know) what went into his success. 

Money doesn't make a successful person. However, what I found through a lot of these people is that they were also spending time mentoring others in their businesses, passing on what they have learned works and *the many mistakes they have made* to those who were looking. 

And, there was also another thing that was quite interesting to note, as there is the common *misconception* that people who are working a lot, are therefore not spending time with their families, but I found the opposite to be true. Why I think this is that while they spent more hours than most working, they also had the "luxury" of being able to spend focused time with their children and partners. But more than this, they were also far more resource aware and saw time as value to be spent, using it effectively and not wasting it on *too much* frivolous activity. 

>I never heard one of them mention what happened on a reality show.

And, I think this is an interesting point to focus on, as while people think that entertainment is a necessity for life enjoyment, they still enjoyed life without what is typically considered entertainment, by making the jobs they do, *entertaining.* Business is a gamification model after all, a real-life board game of rules, processes and decisions in order to "win". While people spend their time playing Monopoly or collecting points on Farmville, they are doing it in real life with financial skin in the game. 

> And just like gaming, it is addictive.

But, just like gamers who sit there for 16 hours a day at a screen, there is the risk to overvalue the game at the expense of other parts of life. However, out of all the people I spoke to and got to know, I don't think *any of them* had crossed over that line, whilst I knew many low- or no-paid people who were consistently spending their time entertaining themselves in front of a screen, ignoring other facets of their life, *like their families.*

>Interesting, eh?

It is like when people say that working too much makes you sick, which is true. But have a look around at the people *who don't work enough* and recognize that they aren't generally the "picture of health" either and on top of that, they are also worrying about their financial wellbeing too. 

> Which is better?

No idea for you or others, but for me, I would far rather be working too much under the stress of the job, than where I was earlier, with a lot of time on my hands, struggling to make ends meet. The stress that I experienced at the poorest points in my life (and these have been frequent and extended), were the most stressful I have had, because unfortunately, life doesn't stop and for most opportunity, some level of income or means is required. 

Perhaps my family don't see me enough, but I would far rather them see me at my best and in those times when I can focus on them one hundred percent, than when I have lots of free time to spend with them, but  I am stressed about how I am going to provide food and a roof over their head. I grew up in a home where money was a constant issue and it wasn't a healthy environment for anyone, putting pressures on the children that they probably shouldn't have been dealing with at those ages.

>Attitude and mindset.

Over the years, I have been told how my approach is bad for my health, yet it is an interesting conflict, because I am far happier and the people in my life have a better experience with me because of how I have changed to *work more.* So, who actually has the problem, me or the people who make the judgement? Is it that they are concerned about my wellbeing, or is it that they are concerned about their own and potentially their unwillingness to make a change?

Often I think, we make excuses for ourselves as to why we can't do something or why it is impossible to change our conditions. And then when other people do and improve theirs, we devalue it and make more excuses as to why they could, or tell ourselves a story that in actual fact, they are worse off than us for it. This might make us feel more comfortable with our lives as is, but it isn't useful to help us *improve our lives.*

I feel that with all the economic problems in the world and the ability to avoid having to deal with them by delving into the many channels of entertainment, we are reducing our ability to improve our wellbeing, by becoming comfortable with our misery. Misery might be a strong word in this case, but everyone is on a spectrum of negativity at some point and I get the sense that the average is sliding further down, as more people spend their time on value-sucking activities, in the belief they bring value to their lives.

But, at the end of the day, we each live our own experience and have to make do with what we have the best we can. While my path is different to yours, I think that the value of our own lives comes down to the meaning we apply to what might otherwise be a meaningless existence. Whilst I apply meaning in one area, others apply it as they choose also and at the end of the day, he who dies with the most toys, still dies. But, this applies to everything. He who consumes the most YouTube material still dies. He who knows all the lore of Game of Thrones still dies. He who sleeps the most, eats the least, has the best body, the prettiest face, lives under a bridge or has a life of abject misery - still dies.

>He who has the best relationships, still dies.
As does he who has the worst.

And this is the point everyone should come to terms with, death is the great equalizer - it is also the great forgiver. No matter what we do in this life, it all leads to the same end, we are all "forgiven", none of us are saved. However, what we do in our lives can have affects on the lives of others and at least in my opinion, being able to improve the lives of others brings meaning to my own life, but there is not much I can do for others, unless I work for it. 

Avoidance through entertainment might make me feel better, but it is just delaying the inevitable end we all face, whilst doing nothing of consequence while here and alive. Changing the common definition of what entertainment is, can mean it can be derived from value-adding activity too, including the quality of time spent with loved ones.

For now at least, my daughter can sleep in peace at night, dream about dragons and marshmallows, not having to worry about whether her parents can afford the shoes she needs for preschool, or her dance class. This is a luxury I didn't have as a child and it had an effect on my life for years to come.

Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]



</div>

Posted Using [LeoFinance <sup>Beta</sup>](https://leofinance.io/@tarazkp/the-chance-to-sleep-easy)