Being Useful is More Attractive Than Being Rich

I recently saw this Reddit post about a man who retired early (FIRE) only to be called a “loser” by his wife go viral. In the man’s own words:

41m, $2mm liquid, $650k retirement and I get a $75k/yr royalty from a business I sold. Recently retired. Wife is a school teacher, good for healthcare. I make $125k/yr in income off my liquid assets.

Since November began, it’s cold and dark early so a lot of what I do M-F when she’s at work is I play GTA (video game) on thc edibles bc nothing else to do where I live this time of year.

Wife came home early today and I’m stoned in the middle of a conversation w/ my GTA online friends. She told me I’m becoming a “Loser” but this is me during the day when she works. I admit it’s immature but we dont have kids and I just want to chill after working a stressful job for 15 years

I make dinner, clean the house, paid for our nice house and make 2x what she makes as a school teacher from my assets and royalty income. If I want to get high and play video games when she is working what is the problem? We take nice trips across the world in the summer when she’s off.

She said I’m too old for this but there’s not much else to do in the winter. I just want to chill but I can tell she doesn’t like it. Early retirement does not fit well in this society.

I get his confusion. He provides for his wife, takes care of their home, and isn’t lazy. After all, if he was lazy, how did he acquire $2M in liquid assets by age 41?

At the same time, his wife is probably doing a different calculus. She’s not just thinking about the man who acquired their resources, but the man who she’s going to spend the rest of her life with. She’s probably thinking about kids. Is $2M liquid and $650k retirement enough to raise multiple children while also supporting a stoned gamer? Would she be better off divorcing him, taking half of their assets, and starting over with someone new?

I’m obviously speculating here, but you can see how both parties can feel like they are correct. The husband feels like he did his job (he provided financial security), but the wife may feel like the job’s not done. Who’s right? With the limited information provided, I can’t say.

Either way, this story is a great example of how resources by themselves don’t command respect—how you got them and what you do with them does.

Imagine you meet a self-made millionaire and a lottery winner. Which has higher status? It’s obvious. One of them built their fortune while the other just got lucky.

In the above scenario the man did build his fortune (as far as I can tell). However, his decision to get blazed and play Grand Theft Auto (GTA) every day was more of a turn-off than he realized. His wife likely saw a side of him that she hadn’t seen before. This new person didn’t match who she thought she married.

Think about it. When they first met he was likely hard working and driven (given his stressful job). Now he’s a full-time couch potato. That doesn’t sound like what she signed up for. Such a change in behavior was likely too jarring for her.

Her reaction is a good thing though. Because it suggests that money is less of a factor in attraction than people think. What matters more is your ambition.

The academic literature on evolutionary biology supports this as well. In a study across 37 cultures, evolutionary psychologist David Buss found that, on average, both men and women valued “ambition and industriousness” more than “good financial prospects” when choosing a mate.

In evolutionary terms, this is known as Resource Holding Potential (RHP), or your ability to acquire resources in the future. The husband signaled high RHP while working, but now signals low RHP given his choices in early retirement. Though he has the results (money), he lost the trait (ambition) that made him attractive in the first place. Why is ambition more attractive than the money?

Because money says, “I was useful,” while ambition says, “I am useful.”

And, naturally, people care about the future. People care about the genes they pass on to their offspring. And they want to pass on traits like industriousness because those traits will help their children acquire future resources, and so on.

Don’t get me wrong, having money makes you more attractive. But it’s not the money that’s actually appealing, only how you acquired it. The potential to collect more resources is the draw for both men and women.

Does this mean that you have to keep working forever to be attractive? No, but indulging in endless consumption isn’t the right path either.

The point of financial independence isn’t to never work again. The point is to find something you enjoy working on (whether you are paid for it or not) and do it with enthusiasm. That’s the ambition that people are attracted to, even if it doesn’t lead to the largest financial rewards.

But don’t just become ambitious for other people. Do it for yourself. In Drive, Daniel H. Pink discusses how Autonomy (being self directed), Mastery (improving your skills), and Purpose (connecting to something bigger than yourself) are the key components to human motivation and satisfaction.

This is where proponents of FIRE often get it wrong—they overly focus on Autonomy at the expense of Mastery and Purpose. This was the husband’s undoing. He had maximal freedom, but no vision for his future. And that’s a tough way to go through life.

Being rich is nice, but being useful is better.

Thank you for reading.

Article Link: https://ofdollarsanddata.com/being-useful-is-more-attractive-than-being-rich/