Money is Not Always a Guarantee for Happiness

Money Isn’t Always a Guarantee of Happiness

Personal Reflections on Wealth, Purpose, and Four Generations of Blessings

Reading the Wall Street Journal article by Juliet Chung about the record number of billionaires in the world reminded me of a simple truth I have learned over 91 years: money alone is never a guarantee of happiness.

According to the report, there are now nearly 2,900 billionaires with a combined wealth of almost $16 trillion. Some earned their fortunes, others inherited them, and many spend their lives chasing even more. But I’ve lived long enough to see that the size of one’s bank account does not always reflect the size of one’s joy.

For me, happiness has always been something quieter, simpler, and far more personal.

Comfort, Not Excess

I have never wished to be a billionaire. What I wished for and still cherish is enough.

Enough to live comfortably. Enough to provide for my family. Enough to enjoy simple pleasures like travel, hobbies, writing my blogs, and in earlier years, singing in choirs with Macrine (RIP) and doing our medical mission work free of financial worries.

Money has its place. It gives security and stability. But beyond a certain point, the rest is just numbers on paper. The richest people I have known were not always the happiest. Some lived with stress, loneliness, or constant fear of losing what they had.

As I look back, the true wealth of my life came from something money could never buy.

The Accomplishments That Matter

My happiest moments were never tied to material possessions, but to accomplishment and purpose:

• A long and meaningful career with the FDA.

• My involvement with the 9/11 response.

• The medical missions my wife and I supported in the Philippines.

• And of course, my 15+ years of blogging, sharing memories, reflections, and life lessons with readers around the world.

These achievements gave my life meaning. They kept me engaged, curious, and grateful. No billionaire could purchase that feeling of fulfillment.

Four Generations of Joy

If money were the measure of happiness, then the richest would be the happiest. But the greatest treasure of my life came this year with the arrival of two great-grandsons.

Seeing four generations grow, thrive, and flourish has been my true legacy. This is the kind of wealth that deepens with time, not with interest.

Every milestone of my children, grandchildren, and now great-grandchildren tells me I have lived a life of purpose. You cannot buy that type of joy, not even with a billion dollars.

Health and Relationships: The Real Foundations of Happiness

As I approach 91, I am reminded daily that good health is priceless. It is the foundation on which all happiness is built.

Equally important are relationships, the people who stand by you, the communities you belong to, the love you give and receive. Whether at church, in my neighborhood, or here at THD, these connections enrich my days.

Even now, living with Stage 4 Kidney Disease, I find happiness in the kindness of others, the support of family, and the peaceful acceptance of life’s final chapters. No amount of wealth could substitute for these bonds.

Final Thoughts

When I read about billionaires multiplying every year, I do not envy them. I do not wish for their fortunes. I only wish that each of them finds the happiness that money alone cannot provide.

Because at the end of a long life, you learn that:

Happiness is enough, not excess.
Happiness is purpose, not possessions.
Happiness is love, not luxury.
Happiness is health, gratitude, and the family that carries your legacy into the future.

By these measures, I am wealthier than any billionaire in this Planet Earth.

Meanwhile, here's the AI Overview on the Above Topic

That's a widely accepted truth: 

money helps by reducing financial stress and meeting basic needs, increasing life satisfaction up to a point, but it doesn't guarantee happiness, which also relies heavily on strong relationships, purpose, health, and gratitude, with diminishing returns for more money beyond a certain income level. While wealth can provide comfort and security, true fulfillment comes from deeper sources, making the phrase "money isn't always a guarantee of happiness" accurate, as it's a tool, not the end goal. 

How money helps happiness

• Reduces stress: Financial security removes the anxiety of not meeting basic needs, which significantly boosts well-being.
• Increases life satisfaction: More money correlates with higher overall life satisfaction, even if it doesn't always boost daily joy, according to some studies.
• Provides options: Money buys freedom from worry and the ability to invest in experiences and support loved ones. 

Where money falls short

• Diminishing returns: Beyond a certain income (which varies but is often cited around $75k-$100k+), more money doesn't proportionally increase happiness.
• Doesn't replace core needs: Strong relationships, a sense of purpose, social support, and good health are crucial and aren't bought by wealth.
• Can create new problems: Excessive focus on money can lead to materialism or unhealthy financial behaviors, as noted in YouTube. 

Key takeaways

• It's a means, not an end: Money is a tool to achieve well-being, not happiness itself, like a printing press for a newspaper.
• It's about perspective: How you use money and your mindset towards it (gratitude, comparison) matters more than the sheer amount.
• Balance is key: Financial stability is important, but prioritizing relationships, purpose, and health alongside it leads to genuine happiness. 
• Lastly, here are some of my Favorite Quotes on Happiness
• 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Last but not Least,  I asked Chat GPT this Query: What does it mean to be Wealthy in the US this year? How much Money is Needed to be considered wealthy in the US today?

  
  

  ChatGPT said: Good question,  “wealthy” in the U.S. is a bit slippery, because it depends a lot on how you measure it (income vs net worth vs ability to live how you want), where you live, and what lifestyle you’re used to. But there are some recent data-driven benchmarks and widely used definitions that give us a sense of what “wealthy” tends to mean for many Americans in 2025.

  Key benchmarks for “wealthy” in the U.S. (2025)

  Net worth (assets minus debts)

  • According to a 2025 survey by Charles Schwab, the average American now says you need about US$ 2.3 million in net worth to be considered “wealthy.” Fortune+2Charles Schwab Press Room+2

  • By contrast, the same survey found that many consider ≈ US$ 839,000 sufficient to be “financially comfortable.” Charles Schwab Press Room+1

  • Other sources place being in the top 10% of American households (by net worth) around US$ 1.6 million, with the 95th-percentile (top ~5%) around US$ 3.8–4 million. Harness+2MarketWatch+2

  • To be among the top 2% of households by net worth, estimates often point to around US$ 5.5 million. Yahoo Finance+1

  So depending on how “wealthy” is defined (top 10%, top 5%, top 2%, or simply “wealthy enough” per survey), the net-worth threshold ranges from roughly $1.6 M to $5.5 M+,with the “average American perception” hovering near $2.3 M.

  Income (annual household or personal income)

  Because wealth isn’t just what you own but what you earn, income thresholds also matter:

  • According to Pew Research Center, a three-person household with an annual income above ≈ US$ 169,800 is considered “upper-income”, that is, comfortably above the median. Pew Research Center+1

  • For those aiming to be in the top 1% of earners nationally, some estimates place the required annual household income around US$ 731,000+. SmartAsset+1

  • But as experts note, “high income” doesn’t automatically equal “wealthy”,  especially in expensive areas. Money Talks News+1

  Why “wealthy” is more than just a number

  • Cost of living and location matter a lot. What looks “wealthy” in a low-cost rural area might be just “upper-middle class” in a high-cost metro region (e.g. near big cities, coastal areas). Yahoo Finance+2MarketWatch+2

  • Assets vs. liquid assets. Net worth includes everything, real estate, investments, savings, debts. Someone may have a high net worth tied up in real estate but little in liquid assets (cash, stocks), which affects flexibility and “wealth feel.”

  • Lifestyle, obligations, and family structure. Costs like mortgages, children’s schooling or college, healthcare, and retirement goals dramatically shift what “wealthy enough” means for different people.

  • Subjective perception matters. Surveys show many people think ~$2.3 M net worth or ~$200,000+ a year income qualify as wealthy today, but that might reflect aspirations, not actual long-term financial security. Fortune+2Investopedia+2

  What “wealthy” means for a place like Walnut Creek / Bay Area (High Cost of Living)

  Given your location in Walnut Creek (within the broader Bay Area), the thresholds for “wealthy” are likely higher than national median or “comfortable.” In high-cost regions:

  • Even a household net worth of ~$2–3 M might not feel “wealthy” long-term if property values, taxes, housing costs, and desired lifestyle are high.

  • Household income that puts you in the “upper-income” bracket nationally (say $170K–$200K) may not afford a “rich lifestyle” in the Bay Area without savings, investments, or home equity.

  • To have true financial flexibility and long-term security,  including homeownership, retirement savings, kids or other obligations, aiming for the top 5–10% nationally (net worth of ~$3–5 M+ and/or significant investable assets) might feel more like “wealthy.”

   Wealth vs. “Financial Security” vs. “Rich Lifestyle”

  It helps to think of “wealthy” not as one single category, but as a spectrum and to distinguish between:

  • Financial security / comfort- being able to meet needs, have savings, not worry about basic stability.

  • Affluence / upper-middle class -having more discretionary income, nicer home/car, vacations, some luxuries.

  • True “wealthy” or financially independent- having enough net worth and income to sustain lifestyle without worrying about employment, emergencies, retirement, or large expenses.

  Finally, what qualifies as “wealthy” shifts based on expectations: are you thinking of being comfortable in retirement? Providing for a family in an expensive area? Having freedom to travel or pursue passions?

Is there a Trump New World Order?

Has U.S. Foreign Policy Shifted Toward Open Imperialism?

In early January 2026, the Trump administration carried out a dramatic military operation in Venezuela that shocked the world: U.S. forces bombed targets on Venezuelan soil, seized President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, and brought them to the United States to face federal indictments. WOLA

This unprecedented action, a direct military strike against a sovereign nation’s capital, has revived fierce debate about the nature and direction of American global power, with critics warning that it marks a return to old-school imperialism rather than post-Cold War diplomacy. Axios

Supporters’ View: A Law-and-Order Internationalism

Supporters of the operation argue that the Maduro government’s long record of corruption, human rights abuses and narco-trafficking justified extraordinary measures. Trump officials framed the raid as the enforcement of longstanding U.S. law enforcement warrants against Maduro’s alleged crimes, rather than mere conquest. The American Council

To many in the U.S. and some right-leaning governments, this isn’t empire, it’s accountability for global criminals. They point out that historical U.S. interventions in the hemisphere have sometimes been welcomed by local regimes opposed to authoritarian rule. Vox

Critics’ View: A New Era of Gunboat Diplomacy

But the broader global reaction has been overwhelmingly critical. Leaders from Brazil, Mexico, China, France and others have condemned the use of force without United Nations authorization as a violation of international law and sovereignty, warning it sets a dangerous precedent. TIME

Many analysts describe this episode as a return to the era of “gunboat diplomacy,” where military might dictates political outcomes, a stark contrast to the post-World War II emphasis on multilateralism and norms. ABC News

Some see Trump’s rhetoric, including suggestions that similar actions could be taken against other countries such as Colombia, Cuba, Mexico and even Greenland, as reminiscent of historical imperial behavior and the old Monroe Doctrine’s logic of hemispheric dominance. Straight Arrow News+1

The “Donroe Doctrine” and Great Power Competition

Commentators have even coined terms like the “Donroe Doctrine”, a Trump-era twist on the 19th-century Monroe Doctrine that asserts U.S. dominance in the Western Hemisphere  to describe this approach. TIME

Some experts argue it isn’t just about Latin America: the dramatic intervention signals a shift back toward great-power politics where control over resources (like Venezuela’s massive oil reserves) and strategic influence matter more than international law. The Guardian

This has prompted worries that similar logic could justify future U.S. military or political acts beyond the hemisphere, potentially reshaping global order along lines defined by the willingness to project force. The Times

What This Means for the World Order

1. Erosion of Established Norms
The U.S. action in Venezuela, unilateral, seemingly without clear legal backing from the United Nations or Congress has raised alarm about the weakening of international norms created after WWII to prevent exactly this sort of unilateral use of force. TIME

2. Polarized Global Reactions
While some U.S. allies and regional governments express hesitation or outright opposition, others see Maduro’s removal as a blow to an oppressive regime. This division highlights how differently countries view sovereignty, intervention, and regional stability. Axios

3. A New Geopolitical Framework?
If recent rhetoric is a guide, future Trump foreign policy may emphasize hard power and strategic dominance, not just sanctions and diplomacy, potentially reshaping U.S. engagement worldwide. TIME

Conclusion: Imperialism Revisited?

So, is there a “New Trump World Order”?
The answer at least for now is contested. If by imperialism you mean the projection of state power to control the political and economic outcomes of other nations, then many observers argue that the U.S. has crossed a new threshold with its Venezuela operation and ensuing threats. atlanticinsider.com

However, supporters insist this is about law enforcement and strategic necessity, not empire  underscoring, a deep divide over how American power is defined and justified in the 21st century. The American Council

Meanwhile, here's the AI Overview on the Above Topic 

America First nationalism, reduced international intervention, focus on bilateral deals, challenged alliances (like NATO), and reconfigured relationships with China and Russia, signaling a move away from traditional globalism towards transactional, relationship-based international dealings. 

Key Themes of This Concept:

• "America First": Prioritizing U.S. national interests over multilateral agreements and global institutions.
• Transactional Diplomacy: Emphasizing personal relationships and deals over established alliances.
• Reduced Interventionism: Pulling back from foreign conflicts and nation-building.
• Challenging Alliances: Questioning commitments to NATO and other long-standing partnerships.
• Trade Wars & Tariffs: Using economic leverage to reshape trade relationships, particularly with China. 

Origin & Usage:

• The term gained traction during and after his first presidency (2017-2021) and re-emerged with discussions around a potential second term.
• Journalists and commentators use it to describe the disruptive impact of Trump's "America First" approach on the existing world order. 

In essence, it's a label for a potential reshaping of global politics away from post-World War II liberal internationalism towards a more nationalistic, transactional, and unpredictable landscape. 

Finally, My Quote of the Day: 

“Far from making us more powerful, the pursuit of American dominance will make us weaker, eventually leaving us with no sphere, and no influence, at all,” Anne Applebaum argues: https://theatln.tc/sZC7K0uQ

Here are the top five news of the Day

Rising Geopolitical Tensions and U.S.–Europe Relations — French President Emmanuel Macron publicly criticized U.S. foreign policy under President Trump, saying the U.S. is distancing itself from traditional allies and undermining multilateral norms, as global strategic friction intensifies. The Guardian

Trump to Attend World Economic Forum in Davos — U.S. President Donald Trump confirmed he will personally attend the 2026 World Economic Forum in Davos with key administration officials, focusing on housing and economic initiatives in his address. Reuters

Post-Ceasefire Violence in Gaza — An 11-year-old girl was killed by gunfire in Gaza despite a ceasefire nearly three months after it took effect, underscoring continued insecurity and civilian harm. KPRC

Supreme Court Faces Huge Tariff Refund Case — Importers are preparing for a major legal battle over a potential $150 billion tariff refund fight if the U.S. Supreme Court rules against the legality of broad Trump-era global tariffs. Reuters

ICE Shooting and Broader National Issues — A controversial ICE shooting incident in Minneapolis, broader debates over immigration enforcement, and other political and social policy issues were highlighted in key national briefing summaries.