The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Money leads to happiness

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/19/2016 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 5 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 317 times Debate No: 89922
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)




Whilst many find the idea of green paper influencing our overall happiness a ludicrous one, money does lead to happiness in society within our 21st century world.

Aristotle famously once said, "Happiness is the meaning and purpose of life, the whole aim and end of human existence."

Through-out time, this definition of happiness has differed. Reasons for this seem to revolve around the exchange of money and the difference between the classes of even first-world countries. Whether we like it or not, money is considered today as a key factor in happiness today.

At the University of Canberra, NATSEM performed a survey titled "The Pursuit of Happiness". It showed some interesting results which I have included below.

1. Those who are happiest: people most satisfied with their lives were employed in a full- or part-time capacity, and earned more than their peers. It was likely they also lived outside the capital cities and had children.

2. Those who are least happy: people least satisfied with their lives were unemployed, often involuntarily, and/or earning less than their peers. They also lived without a partner

These results inexplicably show the relationships between happiness and money. Yes, it is possible for a rich person to feel depressed and a homeless person to enjoy life but in general, having more money equals less stress and an easier lifestyle. There are definitely links between wealth and happiness. This wealth surrounds not just income, but also the quality of a person"s family home, superannuation fund and money in the bank.

In our society, money equals freedom to spend. If you have surplus money you needn't worry when you need to buy something new. Having wealth opens up a world of romantic spending and financial foundations.

Money also equals freedom to explore. Stress is a huge part of many Australians' lives.
In fact, the Australian Psychological Society"s 2013 wellbeing report showed that one in five Australians report moderate to severe stress. Travelling abroad, flying domestically or just going on a small road trip are all activities that can relieve stress but are difficult to organise without the help of cash.

Freedom to upgrade also comes from the ownership of money. Without our homes there is always room to upgrade, repair and replace. Without enough income however, renovations seem daunting and unachievable. Living in a house not suited to your liking will not improve your happiness.

Back to the NATSEM study... the happiest people they surveyed were those who spent intelligently. Spending intelligently equals further wealth and if leads to happiness than it is irrefutable that money leads to happiness.



I won't be quoting any magazine or a speech by some great person, because I believe that an honest opinion should not be supported by any external proofs, as long as it's totally honest.
It's true that money is necessary for a descent living and a secure future. But where does all the importance of money go when the future itself is uncertain? The sole most important purpose of money to me seems it's stock for the future, which gets defeated by the absolute uncertainty of one's future.

With money comes responsibility, and a person under responsibilities cannot be truly happy ever in his life.
He would be under constant pressure of containing his money and under constant fear of losing it. However, somebody with lesser money would have lesser responsibility, and inversely, more happiness.

Money can buy you luxury, which accelerates happiness, but with luxury comes the fear- the fear of it getting damaged.
Imagine yourself buying a new Rolls Royce, a man who has bought it with his hard earned money, would know how it feels to drive it on the roads for the first time, under constant fear of getting even a scratch on his brand new vehicle. How could fear equal happiness?

Love equals seamless happiness. Money can't buy you love. It can only buy you a human being who claims to love you, and the day your money leaves you, the specific human being detaches itself from you too. Therefore, no love now equals no happiness.

Money can buy you clothes, but come on, clothes have no relation with happiness, except for little girls who like wearing pink.

Money can buy you a house, but where did those houses in Ecuador go when an earthquake stuck the country on 17th April 2016.

Money can buy you anything, except Happiness.
Debate Round No. 1


The negative has stated that happiness from wealth is somewhat temporary and that the uncertainty of one's future removes the ability for money to lead to happiness. These are interesting statements and can easily be refuted.

I agree that happiness from wealth is temporary. Frankly, any happiness is temporary. The negative introduced a few examples of temporary wealth happiness (Rolls Royce; love; clothes; houses). They then continued to state that the happiness from these commodities is not possible as the future is uncertain. However, happiness from all sources is temporary.

If a person is celebrating their birthday, there is always the looming sadness that the day will eventually end. In a friendship acquired aside from wealth, their is always the fear that the friendship may break apart.

The negative seems to believe that money cannot lead to happiness because the happiness it originally creates is laced with a fear for the future. This is incorrect as all happiness is laced with this fear. However, as the affirmative, I believe that this fear for the future can be depressed by the use of money.

In the negatives example of the Rolls Royce, buying insurance can save you stressing over scratching the car. In the clothes example, wearing clothes that you feel comfortable in will greatly increase your overall happiness. With money, you can afford these clothes.

Whilst the negative refers to money as a mainly selfish commodity, this is not always so. By using money to donate to Ecuador earthquake appeals, we are helping raise the happiness of devastated populations and creating good feelings within ourselves in addition. In this circumstance, money has created reciprocal happiness across the world.

(opponent) "It's true that money is necessary for a descent living and a secure future."

In my first case I clarified and cited the reasons why happiness is less probable without a descent living and a secure future. I included evidence from a NATSEM study.

Money can buy happiness and hence leads towards it. Whilst this is not an absolute guarantee, money inevitably opens up opportunities to enhance your lifestyle that the dollar-deficient simply do not have access to.


jessicapruthi forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2


finn.b14 forfeited this round.


jessicapruthi forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3


Whilst money cannot buy happiness itself, it is a main influence in the adoption of happiness within one's personality.


jessicapruthi forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by its.chandler 5 months ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: cause this is a good debate and idk whos is better