Aggressive Paranoia: The Joseph™

Aggressive Paranoia: The Joseph™

Everything in moderation; nothing in excess

Bubbe Schwartz

          Not.

Standing in the middle of the road is very dangerous;

you get knocked down by the traffic from both sides

Margaret Thatcher

People who stand in ‘the middle of the road’ get run over

Rush Limbaugh

          No – this is not about politics – but about – ENOUGH – and strategic thoughts in the age of Capitalism without Capital – protecting ENOUGH.

          Security Analysis and security analysts (putting aside the fiction of the Chinese Wall between analysts and investment bankers in the same firm) are in denial. Shaking the foundations – forget mere shaking – destroying, devastating the basis’ of security analysis is disruption – not mere change – fundamental disruption. Result: ‘black & blue Swans in the red’ to underlying assumptions and models in securities analysis (which of course the reaction to is ignoring, then ridicule and finally taking credit for that which it initially discredited).

          How so?

          One study featured in Best’s Review (the foremost insurance industry monthly periodical) stated that 80% of the value of the S&P 500 was in ‘intangible assets’ – trademarks, patents, trade secrets etc etc. Even if half correct – the whole compass of analysis changes – and as yet, there is a lot of blowharding but not generally accepted principles on this other than Groucho Marx principles (to paraphrase) ‘I got principles (that sound good on CNBC) but you don’t like those principles, I got other principles.’

          There now is even a book ‘Capitalism without Capital.’

          Therefore, what is the implication for ENOUGH?

          A step back before to reinforce the questionable value of security analysis – given its conflicts of interest – even before this tsunami – which granted shows my bias (I was trained in security analysis in college as well. )

          Typically, in general, 70% of a movement of a stock is the market itself, 20% the industry, and 10% the company itself unless there is news etc particular to the stock. Secondly, there is a difference between the business of a company and the stock of the company – which most analysts in their offices don’t understand let alone have dirt under their fingernails (though they may have corporal tunnel as an occupational hazard – with secondary sprained thumbs from texting.) At best, an analyst can really know maybe 1 or 2 industries only a handful of stocks and their particularities within those industries. (Believe me, asset manager/analysts masquerading as ‘personal financial planners’ especially compensated per the asset under managment are even worse except in glad handing.)

          Thus, an approach I employed, subject to ENOUGH (per amount after tax, duration, after inflation and risk adjusted ((return on beta etc)) was focused diversification.

          Focused diversification? How’s that for cognitive dissonance and a pattern interrupt?

          What was specific manifestation of focused diversification again qualified by ENOUGH per objective (and recalling don’t sacrifice what you need for what you don’t need)?

          The purchase of 3 or 4 focused value mutual funds – which typically would have 70% of more of the fund’s assets in 10 or less stocks – and 10%++ in cash. Critical is 3 or 4 funds – not one. Why? While each is focused with the best thoughts of their analysts (which can’t know each more than 1 or 2 industries) – by 3 or 4 – one gets the diversification.

          And it worked for 30+ years – of course stipulating withIN the confines of the objective – remembering more, better, now has a habit of becoming worse, less, later – thus manage the goal not the assets.

          But no longer.

          Adding to the disruption headwind is demographics. With the aging of America – more money will be pulled out of the markets – regardless of earnings growth – than invested. The hopeium, since the legacy costs politically prevents cutting government deficits – is growth (i.e. the Trump tax cuts) which is most likely not enough without cutting deficits – especially as interest rates rise crowding out equity investment.

          The answer – sorry – unlike Cramer CNBC etc etc – I don’t have one – except ‘The Joseph™’ to minimize the paranoia of one getting whipsawed endangering goals on the inevitable downs in the markets. (The whipsaw: how many – no one is looking – got the Heebie Jeebies when the market went down nominally 1000 points and called their planner etc? How many called back after several days when the market recovered 1000+ plus some more? Out of practice now 20 years – I had calls after than 1000 point drop BUT not a damn one to thank me or at least acknowledge my calming them with in market declines they are two even three times faster than the recovery.

          Ok, what’s The Joseph™?

          Hint not related to an orange flavored aspirin for children

          First a little Torah to introduce The Joseph™

And, behold, seven other cows came up after them out of the River,

ugly and lean of flesh, & stood by the other cows upon the bank of the River. 

The ugly and lean cows ate up the seven handsome and fat cows.

Joseph’s Interpretation of Pharaoh’s Dream Genesis 41:1-4

          The seven emaciated cows gained no weight eating even fatted cows. Thus, this event historically the first application of the Adkins Diet™

          Joseph counseled the Pharaoh that there would be 7 prosperous years and 7 years of famine. Thus, put away grain etc during the prosperous 7 years to endure and thrive the 7 years of famine (downturn).

Other than eliminating debt, a minimum of 2 years standard of living (at the gotta & level of annual expenses – NOT nicetas) in cash (money markets), near cash (bonds A+++ with less than 2 years average duration) or even more years – subject to the confines of the goals. And if necessary, reduction of the amount of each goal.

          Yes, this will reduce the overall rate of return (see aforementioned reduction of goal) though maybe less than one thinks – considering the 2+ years allows one to have higher deductibles or wait periods on one’s home, auto, disability and long term care policies reducing annual premiums – the savings from which is in effect a partial offset in the overall rate of return per goal.

          As for investment –  the rate of return of the market given the headwinds of demographic shifts, the deficit time bomb of legacy costs and increasing interest rates overall should be less (caveat maybe the impact of 3D will offset this anticipated lower rate of return for the market.) Now think of the impact of investment fees in light of this assumption way: a 1% management fee on 10% rate of return is 10% of the take. But if the rate of return is 5%, the 1% management fee is 20% - not including the up to 1% ‘personal financial planning assets under management fee.’ Reduction to .30 management fee increases the net on 10% and 5% gross rate of return from 10% of the take netting 9% pretax to 9.7% or an 7.77% increase and on the 5% rate of return otherwise 4% gross rate of return to 4.7% or 14.8% -- better protecting the downside in paranoia.

          For the upside – since there is little tried and true – in the disruption – one may consider aggressive funds etf’s in terms of those investing in disruptors again subject to the confines of the goals. But the concept of ‘moderation’ while there is fundamental disruption (akin to buying more yellow cabs medallions with Uber around the corner – or taking a large position in Sears – forgetting the ghost of Montgomery Wards) – has a high probability of road kill – run over in the middle of the road.’

Thus, aggressive paranoia –to increase (in Taleb’s term) antifragility) minimizing the black and blue of the Swan (the cash –near cash for example cushion) at the same time being more aggressive – to deal with the stressors rather than seek the comfort (and the fragile) of the tried and true ‘moderation’ of my Bubbe Schwartz (exception her hand rolled pineapple with powdered sugar turnovers from my obnoxious petulant childhood).

          But of course there will those who say, ‘I can beat the market.’ Given the tectonic shift in valuation and headwinds – until new generally accepted security analysis principles come about (and that is questionable given the inherent conflicts of interest) – think about ‘The Joseph™ relative to your ENOUGH goals while having an Adkins’ Protein Bar & Shake™.

The UN-Balanced Sheet: Net Worth/Self Worth & Enough

The UN-Balanced Sheet:

Net Worth/Self Worth & Enough

Who is rich? One who is satisfied(*) with his lot.

Who is strong? One who overpowers his inclinations

Ethics of the Fathers 4:1

Worth – significance, importance, merit

Worthy – commendable, laudable, valuable, praiseworthy

Provide for the worst;

the best can take care of itself

Yiddish saying

Net Worth, in accounting, net worth is defined as assets minus liabilities. Essentially, it is a measure of what an entity is worth. Personally, for many an individual, it represents the properties owned, less any debt the person has. It has also become a measure of what an individual is worth. Thus, net worth connotes ‘net’ significance, importance, meritorious

Self Worth(y) Having a sense of self value as worthy. ... Self-worth is defined by Merriam-Webster as: “a feeling that you are a good person who deserves to be treated with respect’ and deserves good things. (Thus – commendable, valuable, laudable.)

          The conflation of net worth & self worth within the acculturated MORE, Better, Now matrix (sans Keanu Reeves) becomes tautologically reinforcing of both the pursuit (MORE) and for validation Self Worth by Net Worth – Fort Worth residency not required.

Most provide for the best and

hope the worse will take care of itself

Nassim Taleb, Antifragile, p334

          And thus, More, Better, Now has a habit of becoming ‘unworthy’ as Worse, Less, Later

(*) satisfied is derived from the Latin satis meaning…ENOUGH.

What Is Wealth?

Wealth

Man plan; God laughs

Judaic thought

            A story.

            A wealthy former Fortune 500 CEO friend (not client) was concerned all ‘was going to hell.’ His plan:  he bought a get away farm in Australia that, in time, would be self sufficient ‘for when all goes to hell.’ He had his farm hands plan, plow – have everything necessary – including water – even pistachios amongst the crops – for when the ‘inevitable’ arrived. Finally, after 15+ years the farm was fully operational – with plants, water, pistachios etc . And what happened? The parrots ate all the crops.

            Man plans; God laughs, dogs pee, and parrots eat the pistachios.

            While in fee only personal financial practice and doing workshops, it was also inevitable – regardless how ‘wealthy’ a participant was – having ‘enough’ – having a cushion to enough ‘just in case,’ even having way more than enough – there would be a client, a participant – who would have the ‘always another buts’ – inventing low low low probability risks with high high high seriousness. And even if that ‘but’ was satisfied and planned for – ‘but’ number one being solved, ‘but’ number 2 was promoted’ regardless of the wealth of ‘the butt head.’

            Enough Jewish Personal Financial Life Planning – healing personal financial anxiety, puttin’ money in its place to elevate, transcend, align, and connect to one’s significance/assignment – what one is meant to be, meant to do – enough to live for, enough to live on© - despite cognitive acceptance, regardless of FUability© (to not be beholden, to not take sh*t) is typically not enough as enough is not by itself Wealth.

Stipulation: (‘this land is Mine, you are but wayfarers” – Leviticus) All is derived & leased on loan from Hashem aka ‘The Currency,’ and we, at best, can be good guardians owning UP to the assets under our caretaking ‘more or less.’

One thing money doesn’t buy – poverty

My Father, Ellis Schwartz

Dad’s admonition aside, current currencies come and go – remember the wheelbarrows of German Deutsch during World War I. So enduring wealth isn’t ‘money.’

Then what is Wealth?

            Our adaptability and resourcefulness!

Andy yet, to our own adaptability & resourcefulness we give little or no value to nor do banks. Proof: where on a personal balance sheet is there an asset category – let alone a valuation for – our adaptability and resourcefulness – which (other than inheritance and theft) was due one’s efforts and Hashem’s beneficence of abilities one developed?

            Where?

            Ironically, per one recent study (featured first in the insurance industry’s Best’s Review and later in the Wall Street Journal), 80% of the value of the S&P 500 companies value is in intangible assets – patents, trademarks, trade secrets etc. not tangibles i.e. bricks & mortar, receivables, etc as in past decades. This revelation even if half right is a game changer – to securities analysis as it has been known. And what are patents, trademarks, trade secrets, etc other than creative adaptability and resourcefulness? Yet, the same individual who was the inventor of a patent for one of these patents, trademarks, trade secrets for his or her company is given no credit for his or her creative adaptability and resourcefulness on his or her personal balance sheet! Note: some financial planners love to blow smoke up some of their clients’ tushies flattering them with trying to monetize the clients’ ‘human capital’ even though this ‘human capital’ isn’t recognized by the banks (unless with collateral if that).

            Given increased specialization’s manifest requirement to know more and more - at the extreme like the definition of a phd – one knows more and more about less until he or she knows everything about nothing – we have become less adaptable and resourceful – even if we have a self sufficient farm in Australia and paid off the parrots.

            For example, this essayist knows about  to differing degrees  maybe 4 things: a bit about Judaism, something about dogs, relatively a good amount about personal financial planning (relatively given the beauty contest of contest of uglies in the business) and the most about professional wrestling which is life and politics unmasked. Otherwise,  mechanically, for example, I am idiot (1)

Still, if the value of the current currency vamooses along with bit -the dusk- coins, how will I fix the toilet, the leaking this or that? You think Mike Rowe of Dirty Jobs will help accept the barter of my pleasing personality? Reciprocity (shalom) endures & completes; sans reciprocity – how about those Broncos?.

Trees that have been trimmed throw off countless branches

Seneca

Some suggest inoculation in the form of goads to prod & build up anti fragility to use Nassim Nicholas Taleb’s term. Per inoculation there is ‘gain from harm’ stipulating ‘harm is dose dependent.’ Anti-fragility is not robustness nor to be confused with resilience per Taleb (aka adaptability as I interpret it) while goads are like inoculation –stimulating immunity by enduring a small dose of the harm to combat the potential larger danger (fragility). Thus, the system becomes anti-fragile..

Paradoxically, thus whereas fragility ‘does not like volatility, nor randomness, uncertainty, disorder, errors, stressors etc’ per Taleb. Antifragility likes volatility (accepting uncertainty, impermanence, and lack of continuity) and as a result the system becomes more resistant due to adaptability & resourcefulness allowing one to arise from like Phoenix in ‘post traumatic growth’ (David Halpern) regardless of current currency – dose dependent for Wealth. (Note one can extrapolate the following: there are no heroes without villains, adversaries, opposition.)

Still resilience, adaptability, or even anti-fragility is no guarantee of sustainable ‘forever’ Wealth given as Rabbi Spitz’s mom once told him, ‘we are only here for a short visit.’ (2)

In the end, all is derivative from Hashem. He creates and derivatively we make/build it (not you Obama & Pocohauntus). Currencies come and go. We may have enough – which for most is never enough.

This transitory ‘wealth’ derived from adaptability & resourcefulness to deal with the fragility and possibly increase anti-fragility still is prone to Black Swans & parrots regardless inoculation, goads, resilience, and tree trimming.

Herein lies the question of faith – the leap of faith – believing in Hashem or as one former client said, ‘believe, trust in God, but row away from the rocks’ and believe, trust in God, but cut the deck twice.’

          Wealth: my two ‘sense’- right on the money

Chanukah, Joseph & Ketogenics

Reprise & Update: Miketz: Joseph, The Financial Crisis & Hanukkah

Cowabunga, Buffalo Bob

Howdy Doody Show

In the Torah portion, Mi-ketz, per the Pharaoh’s dream and David’s inspired interpretation, the 7 emaciated cows (representing 7 years of famine) ate the seven fatted cows (symbolizing for 7 years of prosperity) without gaining any weight – establishing germination of the Atkins weight loss diet plan(Schwartz).

2018 update: actually it was also the first Ketogenic Diet.

Holy cow!

Cubs Broadcaster Harry Carey

The Judaic Koan (not Cohen) is all is foreseen yet one has free will.

The 7 prosper years followed by the 7 years of famine was foreseen. Some would say preordained. Yet, Joseph’s faithful actions of storing grain for the 7 lean years is evidence of free choice within the predetermined.

Joseph could have:

·         Done nothing

·         Suggested hedonism

·         Interpreted the dream differently

Of course, there will be hard core determinists who state even Joseph’s recommendation was predetermined. (If so, then determinists why incarcerate criminals as their actions are predetermined per your argument against compatabilism?)

          The present financial crisis (2007) was not without dreams of 7 fatted and 7 gaunt cows. The difference was the actions chosen taken before and since this current challenge.

The ‘Genesis’ of the present financial meltdown was the matchstick of ‘no half sheckel’ – no skin in the game. (2018 Update as well and more importantly NO SOUL IN THE GAME.) The domino effect aside, without ‘skin in the game’ (nor soul in the game!)– ‘a half sheckel’ - foreclosure is an easy option for this type of ‘owner.’

 If the ‘owner’ had 20% of his or her hard earned money/sheckels – skin in the game (instead of 0% or near 0%)– as an original down payment, the house worth less than paid for originally or not, subprime or reset loan being loan modified or not, would the ‘owner’ so easily take a foreclosure or more prone to OWN UP to his or her responsibility??? (1)

No grain was stored during prosperity for the lean years in housing. (Retropective Update: Storing went – against the grain – of immediate gratification) -

Via the Almighty’s inspiration, Joseph foresaw the 7 lean years (famine) following the 7 years of prosperity per the interpretations of both the cow and corn stalk dreams. Making a free (without restraint as Viceroy) willed choice (choosing the desire of enduring tomorrow at the sacrifice of today), Joseph, understanding Enough in contrast to More (2) made provision to endure the downturn storing grain. Rather than managing assets for (More) today and tomorrow– he managed the goal (Enough)– to survive, thrive and even prosper (enriching the Pharaoh further ironically) during the projected lean (unbearable) years.

In financial planning, despite client’s protests of ‘lazy assets with low returns,’ I have suggested, in the past, a minimum of 2 years of living expenses in money markets as well as paying off their house regardless of the Dow making all time records. Herein was the ‘lean cow reasoning’:  to be able to endure the inevitable downturns without having to sacrifice at fire sale and emotional craziness otherwise valuable assets and more importantly their goals. Afterall, why ‘sacrifice’ what you need (Enough) for what you don’t need (More).

Most listened begrudgingly (given the acculturation of a culture of Acquisition r Us – my dog’s bigger than your dog Moreonic thinking). Inoculating with continual ‘drive by naggings’ about Enough (2), most despite their repeated rebuttal objections of “mortgage interest is deductible, and I can get a higher return on my assets” acceded to avoid continual naggings and the dreaded Schwartz, ‘I told you so’ (3) moreso than due to the wisdom of Enough.

Those who didn’t (More-ons) are now, unfortunately, getting a hard Less-on. (4) (It is surprising to me, though out of practice 12 years, that I haven’t been blamed with the More-on complaint of ‘yes, you warned, but it’s your fault – you were not persuasive ‘enough’ yet.)

And now, like the majority of overleveraged Americans, a few have their ass-ets in a crack – their goals jeopardized and failed, scapegoating all except themselves.

Enough to live on; Enough to live for.

ENOUGH, Schwartz

Acquisition may palliate for a while, but it can’t eliminate bodily extinction and the fear thereof. Acquisition of More through it attempts to elongate the anesthesia with ever increasing (More) dosages to get the same palliation and avoidance fails despite more toys, bigger toys to avoid toying with the under lying fear of bodily extinction which is identified as ‘oneself’- ‘my sense of self.’ (I am I because I have……). Having does not endure being – except character.

Assuming faith, there is one thing, a person can take with himself – character – completed, refined, tested.…

Not MORE toys, acquisitions– but character.

Not ‘MORE than’ compared to another – but character derived from the tests (nes) of moral free willed choices(5)

After the leaves have fallen, we return

To a plain sense of things…

The great structure has become a minor house

Wallace Stevens, The Plain Sense of Things

Thus, when the game is over, the king and the pawn both go back into the same box.

So now, the emaciated, withered, wasted cows have come home to moo, Reverend Wrong – and many MORE-ONS are ‘eating the moo,’ as we use to say in Philly -

Having a cow! – per Bart Simpson

Cowabunga! – per Chief Thunderthud on Howdy Doo-dy.

More for more’s sake – a Howdy Doo-dy Don’t

Enough – a Howdy Doody Do

Tonight is Erev Hanukkah – celebrating the festival of light. Having but 1 days portion of oil for light – the light lasted 8 days as the Maccabees defeated the enemy. The miracle of lights?: Enlightening – as less can become Enough.

Miketz, Enough, Hanukkah: –  questions and tests of character.

(1)  - the unholy public policy of enabling liberal democrat pandering criminals who lit the matchstick. As the saying goes, you don’t give a kid a firecracker and not expect him to light it – nor a subprime mortgage.

(2)  – here is the one case where ‘over’ vaccination was necessary given the continual, recurrent, overwhelming backdrop of More Influenza

(3)  – as my father would say, ‘a big person wouldn’t run it saying I told you so.’ I’m short.

(4)  – More, Better, Now, in time, becomes Less, Worse, Later © Jim Schwartz

If All You Know Is A Hammer, Everything Looks Like A Nail

Process vs Content

If all you know is a hammer, everything will look like a nail

Maslow

Stipulating:

Process Consulting: the better understood and diagnosed processes are, the greater the probability for finding solutions whether technical or not (if nothing more spinning of wheels are minimized by process of elimination as well as hammers looking for nails regardless the situation. Note in process consulting the client/patient/congregant – owns the problems.

Content or Expert Consulting: assumes the purchaser/client – congregant knows what kind of product or service he is she is looking for from the ‘expert’ consultant (which further assumes the problem / objective was properly diagnosed (problem) or correctly created (objective) to begin with. Note in content expert consulting, the client – patient – congregant – student outsources the problem on the basis of ‘substitute reliance.

Problem is defined as: a deviation from a standard

          There is failure of success – as behavior (and continued behavior is a function of its consequences).

          Other than Intel, how many companies have cannibalized themselves, regardless their past successes knowing if they continued ‘as is as in the past – they would fail?

          Few.

          The failure of success is not limited to companies but an epidemic in professions, a pandemic amongst the Scholar Barons in academia and regrettably many in the professional edifice complex clergy (‘sages on the stage rather than guides by the side.’)

          Relying on prior experience, knowledge, habit, kiss and make it better even wisdom being the sage brush on the stage (‘happy tails to you?)- “he ‘content’ of expert’s success - process is often ignored (or just winked at aka personal financial planning). Result: misdiagnosis, doing the wrong thing very well/expertly, being ineffective – puzzled with ‘this always worked in the past.’

          Some say they follow ‘a method.’ For example:

• the scientific method (though less than 39% in one study of medical studies could be replicated)
• personal financial planners – regardless of compensation method – just give a wink, and nod to ‘process’ – practice from content approach (i.e. which one ((stock, bond, etf, etc)) what kind and comparison (how one did relative to the Dow or S&P)

Hhabit, experience, content knowledge & expertise (plus sounding good with confidence one’s voice that even the professional believes) supersede process – and clients get nailed and the planner eventually crucified.

          (Note: did this essayist eat his own cookin’? See attached of a fully developed as well as simplified process chart  of the Enough personal financial planning process contrast even today the typical ‘more content/expert’  ‘you really ought to do this, right’ so called process. In the Enough processclient ‘owns the problem/objectives’ in a collaboratively process rather than ‘trust me, here’s what you do’ more/content/expert approach masquerading as a process.

Kepner Tregoe Problem Analysis Process

One of two or three process business techniques I value most and used the most is from Kepner Tregoe's Problem analysis in their book The Rational Manager (from the '70's)

First to stipulate per Kepner Tregoe a definition: a problem is a deviation from a standard

That said the criteria around defining the problem is per the following

                                  IS                                        IS NOT

What

Who

Where

When

Why

How

Without defining the IS NOT of the problem - one gets SNOT - a Schwartz original – but that’s a sniffle for another discussion.

There is then potential problem analysis (a topic for another discussion.

          Bottom Line: just as capacity (form restricts) function; process can narrow causes of problems and refine objectives offsetting the failure of success of content/expert’s confining tunnel vision resulting in ‘if all one knows is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.’

Torah Portions Confirming God as Shaddai (Enough)

Torah Portions Confirming

God as Shaddai (Enough)

          Per Exodus 16, a manna portion was provided to each Hebrew  daily, twice on Friday – as no manna would provided on Shabbat. Further’more,’ if a Hebrew gathered more than needed (‘for a rainy day’ just in case in reserve?) – the extra would rot with maggots. (1) There is Midrash (Rabbinical JEWbonics – to fill in the blanks) that individually the manna tasted to each Hebrew as desired (i.e. Roast Beef au Jews, Arby’s, Domino’s, and of course A Whopper™ from Burger King Judaism franchise).

          Thus, the manna represents that it is Hashem that provides – and provides what is required. More than what is required becomes adulterated – maggot infested of trying to have more than what Hashem provided and is a test for the Hebrew’s faith that Hashem is ‘enough.’

          After avoiding, praying, even getting ready to fight – splitting the family’s ranks – should Esau attack, Jacob/Israel prevails in giving a huge gift (tribute/bribe/reparation depending on JEWbonics) to Esau. Initially Esau  demurred accepting stating ‘I have plenty’ to which Jacob as Israel replied ‘I have all.’

          All is Shaddai – Shaddai is Enough - in this Torah portion context.

          At the Passover Seder, there are several customs and rituals which are unique i.e: “matzah (the eating of unleavened bread); maror (the eating of bitter herbs); chametz (abstention from eating leaven); b’iur chametz (removal of leaven from the home); and haggadah (participation in the seder meal and telling the story).” There is a  6^{th &} 7^th custom family bickering as well as the singing of the song Dayenu.

Each lyric of the song Dayenu begins with the word dayenu. And dayenu – means and invokes ‘it was enough, it was enough!’ in the context of it was enough that God did – what God did – what Shaddai provided….

          The MOREal of the juxtaposition of these three stories from Torah : Hashem in providing daily manna, Hashem in destroying storage of the manna for a rainy day of manna, Hashem as ‘all,’ and Hashem as Dayenu - demonstrates that Hashem is Shaddai – is ‘God, God Almighty, God All Sufficient, ENOUGH.’

          It only took 43 years of practicing, writing, philosophizing about Enough to come to this insight  – which is 3 years beyond what the Hebrews endured in the desert.

(1)- The two loaves of Challah on Shabbat is a custom derived from the double portion of manna allowed for the day before and day of shabbat

Money, Happiness, Subjective Well Being & Sloppiness at The NY Times’

Money, Happiness, Subjective Well Being & Sloppiness at The NY Times’

One thing money doesn’t buy – poverty

Ellis Schwartz, my dad

Stipulating:

Money (the current currency) = goods and services, a store of value for eventual exchange for goods and services

Satis = etymologically is from the Latin ‘satis’ meaning ‘enough’

Happiness = etymologically from ‘happenstance’ meaning ‘by chance’

Well-being = etymologically well = “in a satisfactory manner, Old English wel “ abundantly, very, very much; indeed, to be sure; with good reason – while being = c. 1300, "existence,” “condition, state, circumstances; presence, fact of existing

New research suggests that more money really does lead to a more satisfying life

‘Money Really Does Lead to a More Satisfying Life’

by Justin Wolfers, NY Times

Columnist Wolfers fails to define money & satisfying let alone happiness accepting subjective well being as  assumptive metric basis’s for his conclusion even when citing studies.

Thus, is the metric of subjective well being a measure of palliation? Is one person’s degree of subjective well being – another person’s crying towel – akin to one man’s floor is another woman’s glass ceiling? Even taken in the aggregate of the measure of subjective well being - what does this measure other than subjective well being - not well being?

What is satisfaction per these studies?

How is happiness defined per these studies?

Once again, more and its more-on prophets for profit (a division of self esteem, happiness and participation trophies inc) put the pedal to the medal without any mettle.

Guess the fake news influenza at the Times has infected the Business and Personal Finance section first with just plain sloppiness.

Yes, money doesn’t buy poverty but does it buy undefined happiness, well being, satisfaction or depending on the level of wealth and income just more altered states requiring greater and greater dosages for palliation?

It’s a question of definition which Wolfers conveniently avoids especially given well being is ‘satisfactory existence’ per etymology (as satis is enough) his headline is More Satisfying Life – a contradiction in underlying terms (more vs enough).

Of course, legend has it when Rockefeller was asked what was ‘enough’ he said, ‘a little more.’

Maybe Wolfers is an ancestor.