“It’s Sooo Satisfying!”* NOT!!

“It’s Sooo Satisfying!”* NOT!!

 Question:

 Is Insatiability (more, more, more – never enough -aka The Yatzer More©) Instinctual & Hardwired or Really an Inclination To Be Counterbalanced by Enough?

Hypothesis #1: By nature, man (and woman) are insatiable (there is never enough)

Hypothesis #2: Man (and woman) have a ‘more’ inherent inclination (due to the identification with the body & the resulting fear of extinction with that of the body as the elimination of themselves’) but neither man nor woman is sentenced to insatiability.

 Stipulating:

Original Incompletion – (in contrast to the Originals ((sin, dreck, defectiveness, innocence))) is the task of continuing to complete the incompletions of one’s soul (“the hole(s) in the soul) INside out

Creation Is Not Finished – per the 7 days of creation – 5 days were labeled ‘good,’ one day deemed ‘very good,’ and on the 7^th and last day – Hashem rested but none of the days were labeled ‘excellent, finished, or complete.’

Insatiable– not satisfied (satis in Latin means enough – thus insatiable = never satisfied, never enough) Per Proverbs 27:20 The grave and Gehinnom will not be sated, and the eyes of man will not be sated or another translation: Death and Destruction are never satisfied, and neither are human eyes

 The more flesh the more worms; the more possessions, the more worry; the more wives, the more witchcraft; the more maid servants the more lewdness, the more slaves the more thievery…..Who is rich? One who is satisfied with his lot. 

Ethics of the Fathers

         Hypothesis #1 accepts that man, being inherently insatiable, as a consequence seeks more, more, more as there is never enough. As such, as birds gotta fly, fish gotta swim, there is no end to man’s  seeking more, more, more – as it is instinctual. This ‘insatiable nature’ (especially in the realm of sex and commerce) is to be recognized, accepted and governed by values & necessary sanctions. Thus, for example, in business and personal finance this hardwired inherent drive of insatiability is driven toward more, more, more even though more, better, now has the not unusual habit of becoming  less, worse, later.’ And ‘more, more, more – what are we all morticians – per e.e. cummings) is further reinforced by acculturation of ‘dissatisfaction’ – not enoughness -  being ‘less than’ – and with apologies to  Mars Candy commercial it ain’t so satisfying – without Snicker™ing

      Hypothesis #2 allows man the potential to override – the default being inclination (rather than instinctual) to more, more, more (the Yatzer More™) by the recognition and acceptance that Shaddai is enough. Whereas more, more, more – ‘the yatzer more’ is externally comparative, enough is an INside out perspective. (i.e. in personal financial planning, thus, one manages goals rather than assets©) Still, with a 40,000++++ barrage of messages of not enough/dissatisfaction per year or more on TV, radio, the web, etc etc, enough’s voice is but a whimper – not even a still small voice. And when one gets to enough it becomes ‘a little more – just in case – a cushion’ or as the old comedian Sam Levinson said ‘I finally got the means to the ends and they moved the ends apart.’ Enough in a dialectic of tension with more has less of a chance than the Washington Generals beating the Harlem Globetrotters.

           “A” stake to ground assuage ‘enough’ from the winds of more is meaning. “The” stake ‘grounding, underpinning’ the foundation to fortify the battleground from the battering & onslaught of the yatzer more & life in general is Hashem – Shaddai.  And holding this ‘battleground state’ of enough is aligning & linking means with meaning despite being challenged: first by those that ignore, next by ridicule, and finally by the same individuals who ignored and ridiculed and then appropriate authorship to themselves as they contort original intent.

 Without meaning (defined by: 1) what it is and 2) what it is not (otherwise you get snot)) is a difficult almost Sisyphusian task in 1) aligning means to and with meaning and 2) to realize ‘enough’ let alone use JEWdo on the yatzer more (and more-on) inclination.

 Herein lies TRUST – CONFIDENCE  in—Shaddai as enough– as the guide by one’s side for ‘despite, although, anyway, even if’ that Hashem is ‘the meaning of all meanings is God’ (Rabbi Abraham Heschel) and recalling, ‘without God anything goes’ per Dostoevsky.

           Thus insatiability (more, more, more, in never enough) is a choice not a sentence as Hashem –as  Shaddai – as enough.

“I can’t believe I ate the whole thing” 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFKifpMtlNs 1972 commercial

• It’s so satisfying – ironically a Snickers Commercial
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Mm6H2XJDbQ

The Happiness Industry - The Hoax?

The Happiness Industry - The Hoax?

Etymologically happiness is by chance - happenstance - outside in.  In Judaism - it is a stretch to say there is even a word for happiness. The word - simcha - means - joy - INside out. And attempts to re-translate the hebrew meaning glad and rejoice into a word for happiness is really revisionism.

The point - trying to nail down the happiness industry - starts with a definition - that one can infer - or see, feel, touch or smell - and they avoid it....

When 'happiness is outside in' - it is usually a sensation - that typically requires higher and higher dosages to palliate for 'an altered' state - rather than an 'altared' state.

The closest is 'flow' which is confused with happiness. Flow per Csikszentmihalyl by example is where stimulation meets skill and one looks up and it is 3 hours later and where did the time go

Thus, simcha - and while I have great respect for the works of Dennis Prager - is not happiness nor is the Hebrew word for glad and rejoice meant to mean happiness-and neither is Simcha meant to mean happiness. The Hebrew for glad and or rejoice are  INside out states not a function of outside in

In ENOUGH Jewish Personal Financial Planning which I did from 1977 for 20 years as a fee only planner and now as an author (over 40 years) --- is "healing personal financial anxiety, puttin' money in its place, to transcend- elevate to one's assignment - significance - what one is meant to do - meant to be --- "aligning means with meaning"" And that's an INside out job - that may - I say may - create a state of simcha that's less prone to the slings and arrows of life outside in.

Note most of the happiness industry is just a repackaging of the self esteem business (again having lost steam and probably they stocked out of participation trophies)

Assumptions make an ass out of you and me - as the saying goes. Nail down the definition of happiness - and typically one gets the academic or sage on the stage (but not guide by the side) two step.

Finally per Mussar teaching in Judaism for example - there is the concept of equanimity - meaning 'rising above the good and the bad' - rather than happiness as an ideal trait.

All the aforementioned said and sans The Disney Sisyphusian 'happily ever after' - comes from one who only plays a rabbi on tv (I couldn't get the Cigna gig).

PS I named one of my K9 Chavers (friends) of the Soul - Simcha - for 19th century Rabbi Simcha Bunim who said that 'you are a speck of dust, and yet the world was created for you.' And this Simcha, a black male standard poodle, had 29 gran mal seizures in 13 months - 4 on Rosh Hashanah in 45 minutes when I let him proceed to Olam Haba - taught me 'when you must, you can; when you can you must.'

To which--- It is said that a man complained to a Rabbi about how harsh difficult terrible this world is. The Rabbi said, yes, but there will plenty of tranquility in the world to come (olam haba). Not satisfied, the man called on Hashem (God) with the same complaint - how terrible, tough, challenging etc this world was asking God -- can't you send someone to fix this world?

To which Hashem responded, 'I did. I sent you.'

When you must you can - when you can you must - ..... align means with meaning - INside out – and therein is a modicum of simcha.

Maximizer to Satisficer When ‘More’ Actually Leads to Good Enough:

Maximizer to Satisficer When ‘More’ Actually Leads to Good Enough:

A satisficer is a pragmatic individual who makes decisions based on meeting requirements in a timely manner, finding the “good enough” solution and moving on. The word is a portmanteau of the words satisfy and suffice. Satisficing contrasts with maximizing.

          When does ‘More’ lead to Good Enough (other than temporarily after the 1987, 2008 and 2020 market severe declines)?

          In choosing something anew (for example not bought before) that of value takes time, research and analysis.

          Initially, we analyze looking for what we perceive is the best offers ‘more’ for the money – than the other choices – comparatively.

          But then after comfortable with the ‘more, better, comparatively’ choice – especially if we have ‘bought it’ more than once even when something just a bit or even somewhat of better comes along – the tendency is to stay – continue  purchasing or with the original choice – because it is good enough even if switching costs are minimized.

          Change for ‘more’ isn’t ‘worth’ it at this point of ‘good enough.’ Thus, the resistance roadblock to change – even for ‘more.’

          Thus, we go from maximizer (more) to satisficer (good enough) reinforced by either identification with the purchase and or not being wrong or just plain the alternative isn’t demonstrably better to take the time to change.

The major exception is seeking more financially (more, better, now) as a derivative tactic of acquisition thinking it will quell our belief in we Lack (Lacktose intolerance) which stems from fear of physical extinction (which one identifies as himself ). More offers palliation and or the delusion of IM-More-tality. Thus, per aforementioned sequence/ heuristic, financially,  more is never enough or enough is just ‘a little more’ to be maximized even though, financially, more better now has a habit of becoming less worse later.

(The above more (maximizer) becomes enough (satisficer) is in contrast to The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less (2015). by Barry Schwartz who stipulated ‘good enough’ (satisficer) was a result of ‘choice overload.’ The above more (maximizer) becomes enough (satisficer) is a factor ‘of habit, and settling reinforcing good enough (satisficing). Note: the first edition of ENOUGH was 1992, the second 1995 based on this author’s writings going back to 1975.)

‘Net Worth, Worthy, & The Worthwhile’ (Adaptability II)

‘Net Worth, Worthy, & The Worthwhile’

I’m not worthy; I’m not worthy

Alice Cooper

Worth- (of) value, merit, significance, meaning, appeal

Worthy – commendable, admirable, creditable, laudable, praiseworthy

Net worth:  a key measure of how much an entity is worth. A consistent increase in net worth indicates good financial health; conversely, net worth may be depleted by a decrease in asset values relative to liabilities.

On financial balance sheets, the net of physical and intangible assets less liabilities is classified as ‘net worth.’ And even in personal financial planning, net worth (adjusted to assets less objectives cost and liabilities) does not reflect let alone  acknowledge the following assets (increasing ‘worth’ of)

Adaptability and resourcefulness that created the assets

But what I do have are a very particular set of skills

Liam Neeson ‘Taken’

          Each of us has a portion (chalek). This portion/trait may be developed and manifested as a particular set of skills or remain unmanifested. But most have incurred in their life – at one point or another – challenges, difficulties, and in particular financial obstacles – which they have overcome and not unusually due to their ‘particular set of skills.’

          I would often ask clients or participants at my workshops:

·         Have you incurred difficulties and especially challenges at one time or another in your life.?

·         Did you have overcome those difficult situations?

Invariably every client assented and attendees raised their hands.

Yet, where on the balance sheet – the net worth statement – is this adaptability and resourcefulness – recognized let alone monetized?

Currencies come and go – get devalued – ravaged by inflation etc.

And yet, that which we possess – the adaptability and resourcefulness – which assists us in navigating these potential challenges is assigned no value other than a nod to ‘human capital’ by yackety yak’ “I want to be your best friend so I can maintain my 1% asset under management compensation even though robo advisers are now charging 35 basis points or less” financial planners.

And on a spiritual level, especially addressing those who are not only concerned with ‘outliving their money’ but as much now or moreso – seeking meaning IN their life – ‘enough to live on, enough to live for:

·         Our soul curriculum assets –  incompletions of the soul that have been completed or made the progress made toward completing

·         The good done & reflected (inside out) - guilt money, fruit of a poison tree) or for vanity (commemorations, business development and plaques – (and I ain’t talking cholesterol plaque)

And so, net worth – net worthiness is related to tangible and intangible financial assets and or assets which otherwise can be ‘monetized’ shortchanging adaptability, resourcefulness, soul curriculum assets, and the good done – only increasing dependency of on current currencies (as if there is never ‘enough’ which can come and go.

The Yips, Yipes! or Yippee?

 Yips, Yipes! or Yippee?

          There’s always a bust

There will be bear markets.

There will be spikes.

          The market was down in the following period/years:

·         1973-1974 = 43%

·         1987  = 20% down in one day!

·         2008 = 33.8%

Bear markets are typically 18 months and are characterized by a drip drip drip down. That said, however, bulls (up markets) take the stairs up while bears (down markets) take the elevator down. Thus, bear markets go down faster than bull markets go up. (Note psychological studies show it takes 4 positives to negate 1 negative).

Nominal number of spikes/declines in the stock market averages  are confused with percentage declines (especially by the parasite personal financial media pornographers).  A 400 point decline on the Dow Jones’ at 24,000 is but 1.67% - but  looks big – huge – and  the cause of investors to get the yips (heartburn optional) but a 16.7 drop (the same 1.67% decline) on a Dow Jones’ 1000 would go hardly noticed – and not require Maalox.)

The yips are an expression of ‘oh no!’, and alarm, while yipes! (holy sh*t) is an expression of fear. Yippee is a verbal manifestation of exuberance, delight or triumph

Yips escalating to Yipes! and yippee are two sides of the same ‘outside in’ coin of the realm & reign.

Outside In Tool #1 Adaptability & Resourcefulness

With money in your pocket, you are wise

and you are handsome and you sing well, too

Yiddish saying

Our balance sheets (defining ‘net worth’ as the difference between our assets and liabilities) has an asset missing (*). The asset? Our adaptability and resourcefulness that not only created & accumulated the ‘net worth,’ but, despite difficult times, overcame financial & personal  challenges  to allow the replenishing and or it’s net worth increase (to make one’s personal financial goals).

And yet, we and banks etc give no value to our adaptability and resourcefulness on the balance sheet aka ‘net worth’ – instead valuing only the effects not the cause – oneself.

Thus, this is a valuation perspective  of Outside In rather than INside Out.

And so, when the market has its inevitable spikes and bear markets – the yips and yipes! (sans Handy Wipes) take over & occupy – even spiriling into panic (escalated by the hyperbole of the personal financial pornography media). Worse, as a result, this dread may require Baby Wipes per the part of the body ‘expressing’ itself.

An exercise to possibly lower the temperature of the yips, yipes and the necessity for Baby Wipes:

Recall one’s difficult periods life, answer and fill in chronologically the following:

Difficulty                       How resolved                 How stronger for it

1.-

2.-

3.-

4.-

5.-

Did you not endure these periods? Did you not come back from them? Did these periods, in fact, make you, in some respects,  even stronger? Did the descent (difficulty) lead to ascent?

Did money really get you through these periods or did your own adaptability and resourcefulness  ability allow you to figure it out?

And, in the future, should, for example, a devaluation occur, will it not be your adaptability and resourcefulness that will see you through to secure the "currency of the realm" to accommodate to the situation?

We confuse money (the current currency) with our wealth - our resourcefulness and adaptability to ‘figure it out.’

Outside In Tool #2  Ignored due to the pursuit of More for perceived LACK):

18 months preferably for cash near cash to weather the inevitable bear markets minimizing the yips, & yipes! From the  emotional reactions jeopardizing one’s personal financial planning – co  one can ‘all weather it out’ the storm

          Stipulating when I was in a fee only personal financial planner one  cardinal rule of my ENOUGH practice, writings, and workshops:

One manages goals not assets

A tactic of the above rule was to have 6 months in cash, money markets – and preferably 18 months (the typical bear market so one doesn’t make an emotional whipsaw mistake) subject the financial goals and tradeoffs thereof.

Forget 18 months – 6 months was tough enough – as there would be complaints ‘it lowers our rate of return relative to the Dow Jones, S&P.’ Again see ‘the cardinal rule.’  (Note: actually a 12 month even 6 months allowed lower deductibles for home and auto insurance coverage not to mention the savings from lowered premiums in disability coverage due to taking a longer wait period to coverage – which actually is a ‘rate of return.’)

Still even with the 18 months – most still got the yips & yipes! despite constant reminders of the 18 months will typically weather the storm. Jogging the memory relative to their adaptability and resourcefulness would often get the retort ‘this is different, I’m not young anymore, etc etc.’ Belief in the prospect of LACK rules with its LACKtose intolerance – and result: spontaneous recovery to the yips & yipes!.

          INside Out Tool #1 ENOUGH

          ENOUGH – is healing personal financial anxiety, puttin’ money in its place to align & connect again to one’s significance/assignment – what one is meant to do, meant to be- enough to live on, enough to live for – linking means with meaning.

          More is never enough. For more – enough is a little more. More is lack (fear) driven. And yet, ironically, too often, more, better, now becomes less worse later.

          More is relative– driven by external comparisons – i.e. the Dow Jones, the S&P 500 Index, etc etc – (outside in) rather than by one’s prioritized goals aligning means with meaning. More is about ‘which stock, which mutual fund, which etf etc – ENOUGH concerns itself managing the goals.

          INside Out (We’re A) Tool #2 Shaddai (as ‘enough’)

This land is Mine. You are but wayfarers on it.  Visitors to me.

Leviticus

Confidence = con(with) fidelis (faith)

Shaddai = God, God Almighty, God All Sufficient, Enough

          Despite all the aforementioned, is it not unusual to have the yips & yipes! – or at least intermittent visitation by the yips. Given man’s fear of extinction (he identifies as the physical body) he seeks permanence, continuity, and certainty through acquisition. (Note: acquisition in Hebrew is Cain as, yes, Cain and Abel). The derivative of acquisition is more (not enough) (more, more, more). Buttressed by the cultural reinforcement that more is better – the yips & yipes! have fertile ground from which to spring – regardless of enough, 18 months, adaptability and resourcefulness.

          Accepting Enough is hard enough, but acknowledging that we don’t own assets but rather lease them ‘as this land is mine’ and our role is caretaker to own UP to the assets (as a result of talents on loan from God) – is beyond difficult. After all, ‘I earned and therefore I can do what I want, when I want, with the assets’ within the law’

          This identification with the asset as ‘mine forever’ compounds the yips & dismayed yipes! during these spikes.

          Yes, we ‘earned it’ but it was God given capacities that we developed into capabilities that yielded the assets to be in our caretaking and to own UP to. i.e. Lou Ferrigno, the original Incredible Hulk, was given a large frame and body (capacity). But it was years of training, lifting etc that developed that body into the incredible Hulk. Now this writer at 140lb might have the desire to be The Incredible Hulk – but not the God given capacity to make the body into the capability of being the Incredible Hulk. (I’ll have to settle for The Merchant of Venom).

          Hashem creates – we fabricate, refine and curate.

          So where does our confidence (with faith) rest? Outside in the current currency that can be devalued (think Widmar Republic WWI and wheel barrows). Or is our confidence better placed in Hashem and our exhibited and developed adaptability and resourcefulness to lower the yips, yipes! and need for baby wipes?

          We don’t get rid of yips & yipes! but we can put them in context. And while that’s no Yippity Do Da, the yips and yipes! can be restrained to lower the frequency and temperature of the yipes and the need for baby wipes.

Yipes! Ki Yay, Bruce Willis