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

"Richer & Happier is not who have more but who need less"

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: 2/4/2014 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,107 times Debate No: 45174
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)




Well, the title says everything. This is self-explanatory.
But simply to try poking you beyond sanity, I will tell you the following: with that sketchy selection box thingy on the profile, didn't allow me put my real & true Ideology, Relationship, Ethnicity, Occupation nor Religion. So I had no choice but choose Other. ;)
To be fair with everybody, I must also warn you and show you what I bring into the pockets... Ready?
1.- Yep, I'm not from this planet.
2.- I lie with overwhelming truth.
3.- I'm Gloomy by results.
4.- I'm Ironical by conviction.
5.- I'm Sarcastic as a duty
6.- I'm Cynical by default.
And if all of this were not enough, I also use to wear a jumbo medal hanging on my neck with this engraving text: "The important thing is not to win. What matters is compete without losing or tie"
So, Enjoy!!! and lets things rolling.

ps. For your own good & health, better get used to my twisted sense of humor. ;)


For the sake of this debate, let's define the following:

Wealth: an abundance of valuable possessions or money.

Under this, it would appear to be only right to say that those with more money, on balance, do tend to be happier. They want it all and they can have it all at just the simple swipe of a card or signing of a check.

According to an article by Forbes Magazine in May of 2013, money can , indeed buy happiness.

"Relying on worldwide data from Gallup and other sources, [Betsey] Stevenson and [Justin] Wolfers determine that the wealthier people are, the more satisfied they are with their lives, at least when you look at nationwide figures. They also find, contrary to what many economists believe, that there is not a point of wealth satiation beyond which happiness levels off."

To say that those that need less in terms of wealth to be happy, according to this article, that's not entirely true. Wealth and success are a staple to happiness as peanuts are a staple to peanut butter.
Debate Round No. 1


Greetings CodeMeister13

I couldn't help noticing you are a pretty young chap and same as me, also a newcomer here on
So, I'm wondering if 'The Contender' status you've just got by simply being the first one replying here was on purpose or simply an accident to earn that insignia. No pun intended.

In any case, I highly appreciate your intervention and I'm grateful that the topic has called your attention to devote some time writing your reply. :)

Ok, here we go...

Definition: "Wealth: an abundance of valuable possessions or money"

Uhmm, well placed and interesting sentence fluently filled with a logical sequence of relevant phrases from a strictly "Material" perspective, but by other hand, phrases highly paradoxical in the context of happiness, satisfaction, value, success and sense of fullness.
That's exactly the issue that I wanted to highlight throughout this debate.

"They want it all and they can have it all at just the simple swipe of a card or signing of a check"
For just a second, lets go back to the first sentence; Possessions/Money... yep, they can sound, tinkle and.. break in pieces if you just drop these from the heights of your ephemeral illusion quite quickly. Again, material point of view.

"Wealth and success are a staple to happiness as peanuts are a staple to peanut butter"
Exactly, that's right. Obviously, from a material earthly point of view.

Then, what about those who even standing with their own feet on the same earth, which have not access to such 'physical' abundance of valuable possessions, money, checks or cards, materialistically speaking, should go looking for the wealthy path to happiness?

I feel CodeMeister13, we both are on the same page here nevertheless. The bit that you could go unnoticed is that one related to neither happiness, satisfaction, welfare or sense of fulness on this life is at the reach of your physical fingertips. These only resides in your own mind.

"Is really having "it all" enough to get you closer to "touch" a restful, peaceful, relaxed, unconcerned, plentiful, free, happy and satisfactory life?
You'll be always moving and debating between two worlds, the outsides & insides of your own self & essence. That's just the irreconcilable paradox right now like it always has been.

I guess this is just a matter of setting and adjusting rational thresholds in your life. If you can fit your needs coherently to those logical attainable thresholds you are done. Therefore, you'll need less to succeed on the quest of richness & happiness, being able of walk away from that mirage of 'They want it all' wrong bit.

At last but not least, I'm gonna illustrate further my point with a triplet of quotes:

"My life has no purpose, no direction, no aim, no meaning, and yet I'm happy. I can't figure it out. What am I doing right?" -- Charles Schulz

"Longing for something long enough, and suddenly no longer want" -- Chinese Proverb

"Once exceeded a minimum threshold is richest who needs the least" -- Anonymous

You can garnish these with an olive, a lemon slice a cherry or a whole watermelon. I would simply be curious to see the order, priority and place you'd assign to those quotes among a materialistic and spiritual point of view.


The dictionary definition does, indeed, tend to be of a material matter because that is what wealth is. Wealth is a material thing. That's what this debate really comes down to though. By maintaining wealth as a material thing, we must stand and recognize that having this want for more and being able to buy more with the currency of whichever nation you may reside in means you are truly wealthy.

You may consider yourself wealthy in trust or emotional support or any of that but at the end of the day, that won't pay the bills. Wealth is not acknowledged by the banks as a spiritual thing nor can you pay somebody for a good/service in karma points. If you wish to make it in this world and you wish to be considered wealthy by your peers and the general population, one must make a great amount of cash.

When one has this great wealth, they are able to find any contentment that they want. Any triviality that one person may see as a useful tool or something to pass the time, they may have it simply because they want it.

Just because one may not need something does not necessarily put them in a position of happiness. If we wish to pursue what humans need, all that is truly needed is food, water, and shelter. The simple fact is, these three things alone won't always lead to happiness. It is a human going above their basic needs and wanting more that leads down the path to success. It is the human wanting more that leads them down the path to success. Even those that may be spiritually off balance want more so that they can attain this balance. One cannot truly achieve happiness without going beyond the basic needs and wanting more.

Alas, coming away from my arguments, if I may make a point as to one of your sources, this is hardly the time to be quoting from Anonymous sources. That is far from a reliable source and I believe it should be heartily discounted from this debate.
Debate Round No. 2


It is pretty evident you've focused the core of your statements & arguments mainly on the Wealth bit, obviously, the 'Material' & 'Physical' side of things on this debate. So ok, let me try a short walk through that tightrope for a minute.

But, read again the whole sentence first: "Richer & Happier is not who have more but who need less"

"Are really Wealth/Opulence & Happiness mutually exclusive?
Or by the contrary..
"Are really Poverty/Scarcity & Happiness mutually exclusive?

Like I've said before, all these 'concepts' actually just resides in your mind, inside the entrails of your own brain perception. Therefore, you could 'have it all' materialistically speaking, and yet, feel and be deeply unhappy because your non-stop greedy, pauper & true scarcity mindset easily would impede get any satisfaction at all, despite you already might have it all. "Right?
By other hand, Material Wealth could also produce an extraordinary stress and feeling of insecurity or threat of losing at any moment what you've already got. So IMHO, far beyond the opposite of happiness. "Doesn't it?

Ok, let's try a pole vaulting peripetia now.

N-E-E-D-S. again.. "NEEDS!
Don't you think that while least, lowest & minimal these needs may be, it's simply common sense and logical you could loosen up the most, freely, peacefully, satisfactorily, successfully getting closer to that eventual, promised, ethereal happiness nirvana?

Yeah, that's exactly the point. Happiness is a highly individual & subjective concept too and in no way associated with 'material wealth', 'physical possessions', 'money' or whatevah you can grab with your greedy claws.

So, to not repeat myself again, let's carve in stone these keyword:
"Once exceeded a minimum threshold is richest who needs the least"

In this context, I guess it wont be necessary to clarify either that 'Richer', 'Richness', etc. in the original sentence is also equally a highly individual & subjective concept nevertheless. A simple adjective to describe an 'excess' of 'positive' abundance whether it be spiritual or material, tangible or intangible, physical or mental, palpable or recreated and so on.

For the next round, I suggest, for just a second you focus on these words: "Need/Needs". Forget a lil bit about Wealth, perhaps allowed Richer, Rich, Richness.. which as I've already explained above, nothing to do with wealth, at least not exclusively. And of course Happiness which is the Gordian Knot of the matter.

If you do, if you simply dare to watch this scene from the other side of the fence for an instant, I promise you, you'll see right away new colors and forms you've never seen before, Including those where you'd have no bills to pay anymore, no need to deal with banks who acknowledge anything and forget about money in order to get food, water and shelter. And even so, truly obtain a very particular sense of happiness & fullness.

Right On Mate, thank you for your appreciated participation. :)


I'd like to start this concluding argument by saying, I have touched upon the needs of people. I stated quite clearly in my rebuttal that we can't simply look at the basic needs of humans. To say that needing less means automatic happiness is silly, in my opinion. As I stated, the basic human needs are food, water, and shelter. Granted, there could very well be people that are happy with just those bare necessities of life but many, many people strive for a greater happiness with material and physical possessions. There are a multitude of people who strive to achieve the material and physical so that they may find peace with their spiritual side.

"Like I've said before, all these 'concepts' actually just resides in your mind, inside the entrails of your own brain perception. Therefore, you could 'have it all' materialistically speaking, and yet, feel and be deeply unhappy because your non-stop greedy, pauper & true scarcity mindset easily would impede get any satisfaction at all, despite you already might have it all."

Yes, and you could feel completely at peace spiritually and still have a want for more. There are people out there that have found a religious/spiritual side but, again, this doesn't mean they're happy. A spiritual side isn't something that people need. In fact, there are people, such as myself, that don't have a religious backing or they don't look for spiritual support.

"By other hand, Material Wealth could also produce an extraordinary stress and feeling of insecurity or threat of losing at any moment what you've already got. So IMHO, far beyond the opposite of happiness."

I know this isn't typically well-regarded but I'm going to use myself as an example of sorts here. I have a roof over my head. I'm fed three meals on a daily basis and I find myself rather regularly snacking if I get peckish. I have access to clean drinking water. You know what though? That doesn't make me happy. I'm standing here before you as a man who doesn't need any more but I'm not a happy person. I've looked to spiritual places and I've not found happiness. Where do I find happiness? I find my happiness in my material possessions. The things that distract me from my current spiritual and physical position. I'm looking for happiness. I'm going forth trying to better myself and you know what? I want it all. I want the college education, I want to become a politician, I want to have a happy family, etc., etc., etc. I want. I don't need any of these things. I want them. I want them because I know they'll make me happy.

It was a pleasure debating you, sir. Best of luck in voting and may the best arguments win. This was great fun for my first debate on the site. Hopefully, I'll get the chance to debate you again, perhaps.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by KeepBelieving 3 years ago
Ooopss, seems like my extensive babbling surpassed the space allowed in the comments area, so to round up and finish the whole idea, here we go:

As a last loving advice from a truly 'old fart' like me, I'll gift you an ending quote:
"Those who lives their life constantly longing, wishing and wanting everything without limits in a persistent insatiable desire, most probably have already bought all the raffle ballots to die embittered, unhappy and full of disappointments no matter how wealthy they can be"

And of course my dear friend, you can count with me for any further or newer debate. It simply will be of a great value to me. Just assume that I'll keep an eye on any of those you could start soon.

Cheers, Enjoy and Be Happy!!!
Posted by KeepBelieving 3 years ago
A great pleasure for me too debating you CodeMeister.
In fact, luck in voting is not as important to me as it actually is spreading the message across about this issue, in an attempt to sow some awareness around, straight from our supposedly different and seemingly opposite points of view. ;)

I have to admit that maybe three rounds were too few and short to try to expose, extract and squeeze all the potential help and usefulness of this debate. I suspect it simply has been as a result of my newbie status here in DOD which has prevented me anticipate it properly and I should have set up a few more rounds from the beginning.

But well, all is done now. So, as kinda conclusions on my part, just a few latest thoughts...

1.- There's not exist and never has been such thing like 'Automatic Happiness' in any position (poverty/wealth) whatsoever, nor neither do I have professed or said so at any moment.

2.- I don't have a religious backing nor I look for any external spiritual support either. Hehehe, actually I'm very far from that since long long time ago. ;)
When I've mentioned 'spiritual' throughout this debate I only meant it more like a "Zen State" where all your 'earthly' wishes and needs are markedly placated.
Which brings us to my last point. The point number three.

3.- This has to do with the entire content of your last paragraph. From which as a sample, I will highlight this little bit only: "I want them. I want them because I 'KNOW' they'll make me happy"
I recognize that you are still a very young person and it is quite logical you think in the way you do right now. I also did the same at the time. But believe me, once reached those ephemeral short-term goals and you gain some experience.. they'll mean nothing, actually nothing in the sense of enjoy happiness. As for "KNOWING" they'll make you happy, well.. "There is anything we could KNOW for sure on this planet! :)
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Krazzy_Player 3 years 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: Both side did a good job in "Arguments","Refutation" and "Reasoning" calling it a complete tie.