Oh 100% it’s easier to act on your values when you have more money. As someone who went through a drastic collapse of earnings and then explosion of earning in two years (hello surprise pregnancy and 4 month NICU stay!), it’s so much easier to act on values when you have more money. Like the New Yorker article says, I’ll still have a decent life if everything falls, so I can look at purchase options through a lens of values instead of pure price.
I do think the mistake is thinking it’s merely the money that gives you the ability to act on values, when money amplifies whatever values you currently hold. And if you’ve never sat down and defined those before, you can immediately get inundated with lifestyle inflation, too-generic money advice, and keeping-up-with-the-Joneses noise that can crowd out those values when suddenly you have more money than you spend on necessities. It’s easier to define your values when you don’t have as many things vying for your money all at once.
no notes. this is exactly it! i think the problem is many people do not pay attention or get to know themselves well enough to actually understand what THEY truly value and want vs societies expectations.
we increased our household income by $50K within a month when me and my husband both got new jobs around the same time almost 4 years ago. the financial stability and future planning that allowed us to achieve while still enjoying life allowed us to ask questions beyond what survival mode allowed. for example, what am i actually willing to sacrifice just for the sake of more money at this point? which most of the time the answer was nothing because we already knew what we valued and didn’t mindlessly inflate our lifestyle along the way, so we knew more for the sake of more wouldn’t make us happy.
unfortunately most people don’t know when enough is enough. and most people don’t know what they truly value outside of the noise of consumerism and capitalism. if you’re rich and miserable, it’s because you don’t know yourself well enough to live in alignment with your true values and you likely self-betrayed too much along the way. it can be corrected but takes pausing, slowing down, and doing the inner work.
I wonder about the burn-out memoirs. It's one more variation of "the workplace is broken" theme, along with some of the tradwife content. I'm all for the idea that we need to have lives that are not dedicated to work, and I absolutely know that the workplace will not love you back. But someone needs to stay! We still need to fix the work and the workplace and not just leave (which is impossible for most people anyway) or even just quiet quit.
I want to know who is defining “ambition” in this case? Are most of these burn-out memoirs written by extroverts who want to leave corporate desk jobs to become entrepreneurs, content creators, and influencers? Women who want to make as much money in as short a time as possible? Women who want to be SAHM’s (I consider Tradwives to be content creators in the first category, not SAHM’s) but can’t afford to do so in a single-income household? Because I know plenty of ambitious people irl who have been quietly meeting and exceeding their corporate career goals for the past 20 years and they just don’t feel the need to call attention to it. In the words of Blink 182 in 1999: “work sucks, I know”. Is anti-ambition a real trend or is it just another online content generator?
Totally agree with you here. The explosion of “reset your nervous system” content and coaches is telling. Of course regulating your nervous system is very important, but sometimes it feels like the cultural response to anti-ambition is just… “make money while you sleep” blueprints for $47. There's nothing wrong with that, but it really depends on your end goal. Passive income sounds great on paper as does autonomy. But the way it’s being packaged can feel like a quick-fix economy and that’s where it starts to feel off. Everyone has different definitions of success, but just because the system hasn’t historically rewarded female ambition fairly doesn’t mean the answer is collective retreat. I think it’s more about resetting on our own terms and getting honest about what we actually want and for many of us, that still may be building something (or being a part of something) long-term we’re deeply proud of.
I'm not a fan of the 2010s "Lean In" career guides either, but I think this new genre of anti-ambition is so much more hypocritical and seems...gender-traitor-y? (akin to being a class/race traitor). Sure, Sheryl Sandberg had a lot of help and her success can't really be solely attributed to her "leaning in", and plenty of ambitious women who are inspired to "lean in" won't get the same results. But it feels so much more insidious to personally profit and get clout for writing a book - which yeah, is an incredibly ambitious endeavor, lol - peddling the virtues of "chilling out". Your influence might actually persuade more women to sacrifice financial independence and presence in the public sphere while you build more capital.
My other observation of the anti-ambition trend is the extent to which it is distinctly gendered. These books are written by and for women, same with social media trends like the #lazygirl #feminineenergy and #tradwife promising to unlock new layers of leisure, satisfaction and meaning by limiting women’s ambitions to a smaller and smaller window. As I write in the book: "Anti-ambition has effectively adopted the language of wellness and self-care to claim that true “empowerment” isn’t achieved through a more expansive vision of what women can and should have access to, but through the framework of constraint. Where freedom, rest, and liberation are no longer enabled by women’s claims to their public and professional ambitions, but in letting go of them— either a little bit, or altogether, depending how far down the #softlife to #tradwife pipeline their algorithm has gone."
Having more money definitely makes it easier to make smaller decisions that align with my values. For example, I pay for a composting service that’s optional in my city and I love it. Though I’d agree with the sentiment that money enables more than it inspires. I dream of all the things I could do to live my values every day, but sometimes it’s just not possible. When it is though, I already have a shortlist of the things I want to do. But if you’ve never thought about your values and how to fulfill them, it’s easy to fall into the trap of self-soothing.
It is absolutely easier to act on your values as you earn more money. I was a federal employee last year and this year I am in the private sector making 40% less. That major hit to our household income and my job stability means I am now incredibly hesitant to do or say things that might go against the grain in our rural, conservative area. In fact my outspokenness cost me a job opportunity late last year and learning that stung a lot.
I know I don’t know you or the context, but my gut reaction was “you probably would’ve hated working there/with them.” I hope you will continue to speak your mind ❤️🩹
I feel we are in an FDR type of moment. Heck maybe FDR and the civil war. The packing looks very different, but the insides are very alike. Can we start some conversations around New Deal, safety nets, human capital, etc…. Pardon, my brain caught fire last night thanks to the SOTU. Thank you Katie for your work! 🧠🔥
Temu American Psycho got me. I really would love a deeper dive into why 200K+ people "cheat" on Venmo more than 100K people. Maybe 100K people are struggling too much to Venmo their friends for their share of the pizza? Maybe 200K people are hobnobbing with 500K+ earners and this is their way of sticking it to them?
I don't think there's a linear correlation between "acting on your values" versus "wealth." Perhaps it's a bell curve. You will Jean Valjean your ass too if you are hungry and steal bread for your children. If you're too wealthy the worse devils of your nature might erupt and you might go a bit Epstein on us. I think it's the balance of having your Malthusian foundational values met while having enough direction and foundation in your life to actually have some moral ambition...wait you didn't actually if your values were GOOD values, nvm.
I find it easier to stick to my values in “belt-tightening” mode because I have to be way more disciplined and intentional with my money.
The hardest periods to put my money where my values are have been during times of big change (like a big move or a new job). I consume to self-soothe, and delay budgeting to later. I think this makes sense because periods of change are also when we are most vulnerable to scams and frauds.
Also I’m feeling called out by the “anti ambition” framing - and weirdly excited to explore this burnout memoir trend…as someone who burned out and quit my high earning corporate career and sometimes writes about my next chapter, I wonder how much of this is actually a spin on the early retirement / FIRE movement? I mean, if some women made enough money and decided to quit their soulless jobs and write books instead…good for them right? Right???
Of course it’s easier to act on certain values with more disposable income - but earning more money doesn’t create said values. My rich friends who don’t value sustainability didn’t start buying higher quality stuff as their incomes rose - they just spend thousands more a year on cheap online crap than they used to. Some of them still eat non-organic ultra processed food out of plastic. I’m talking millionaires with mid 6 figure incomes.
Money may even erode some values…isn’t there research showing power / money tends to corrupt? I recall studies where “wealthier” players in games and contrived situations began cheating, running stop signs, and the like. I’m thinking of Bezos here and what he did to the Washington Post…
The majority of Amazon's ownership comes from institutional investors (e.g. Vanguard ... i.e. retirement accounts and investors). Though a portion of Bezos' estimated 9-10ish% percent ($200 billion) would provide a mighty nice nest egg for Amazon's staff.
I believe you have written or spoken about this before, but this illustrates the Faustian bargain everyday American workers have made for the past 50+ years. We have sacrificed job security, dignity, and even pay so that The Company can achieve growth and shareholder value. In exchange, workers are a.) encouraged to invest in the company (or companies) ourselves via our retirement accounts so that we can reach the mythical land of Worry-Free Retirement, and b.) get to take advantage of the lower prices generated by The Company saving money by underpaying labor.
The proverbial chickens are coming home to roost because a young family is forced to rob their future to buy a house, or flat-out can't fund a retirement account period because their income has to be spread thin due to the rising cost of living. This is why inflation is so devastating, and the potential of AI so terrifying.
Basically, we turned ourselves into good little productivity machines in the hope of lower prices and a safe retirement, and now we're being replaced by even better little productivity machines. P.S. would love to hear your thoughts on Sam Altman's remark about people being energy users.
I hard disagree that money makes you a worse person. I think that money gives you the privilege of being your truest self, whatever kind of person your true self is.
(i speak from my personal experience and observations)
Definitely easier to act on your values with money- but I think social cues (like the FI-lanthropy pledge) help a lot. I would also add that this applies to time. When I was making $60,000 two years ago, the idea of supporting others (or even increasing my 401K contribution) felt absurd. Now at 6 figures, I have both the mental space and finances to pay it forward.
On the topic of Boomers running the US economy, and what I think would be an incredible DL topic, I’d recommend the book “A Generation of Sociopaths” by Bruce Cannon Gibney.
Oh 100% it’s easier to act on your values when you have more money. As someone who went through a drastic collapse of earnings and then explosion of earning in two years (hello surprise pregnancy and 4 month NICU stay!), it’s so much easier to act on values when you have more money. Like the New Yorker article says, I’ll still have a decent life if everything falls, so I can look at purchase options through a lens of values instead of pure price.
I do think the mistake is thinking it’s merely the money that gives you the ability to act on values, when money amplifies whatever values you currently hold. And if you’ve never sat down and defined those before, you can immediately get inundated with lifestyle inflation, too-generic money advice, and keeping-up-with-the-Joneses noise that can crowd out those values when suddenly you have more money than you spend on necessities. It’s easier to define your values when you don’t have as many things vying for your money all at once.
no notes. this is exactly it! i think the problem is many people do not pay attention or get to know themselves well enough to actually understand what THEY truly value and want vs societies expectations.
we increased our household income by $50K within a month when me and my husband both got new jobs around the same time almost 4 years ago. the financial stability and future planning that allowed us to achieve while still enjoying life allowed us to ask questions beyond what survival mode allowed. for example, what am i actually willing to sacrifice just for the sake of more money at this point? which most of the time the answer was nothing because we already knew what we valued and didn’t mindlessly inflate our lifestyle along the way, so we knew more for the sake of more wouldn’t make us happy.
unfortunately most people don’t know when enough is enough. and most people don’t know what they truly value outside of the noise of consumerism and capitalism. if you’re rich and miserable, it’s because you don’t know yourself well enough to live in alignment with your true values and you likely self-betrayed too much along the way. it can be corrected but takes pausing, slowing down, and doing the inner work.
I wonder about the burn-out memoirs. It's one more variation of "the workplace is broken" theme, along with some of the tradwife content. I'm all for the idea that we need to have lives that are not dedicated to work, and I absolutely know that the workplace will not love you back. But someone needs to stay! We still need to fix the work and the workplace and not just leave (which is impossible for most people anyway) or even just quiet quit.
I want to know who is defining “ambition” in this case? Are most of these burn-out memoirs written by extroverts who want to leave corporate desk jobs to become entrepreneurs, content creators, and influencers? Women who want to make as much money in as short a time as possible? Women who want to be SAHM’s (I consider Tradwives to be content creators in the first category, not SAHM’s) but can’t afford to do so in a single-income household? Because I know plenty of ambitious people irl who have been quietly meeting and exceeding their corporate career goals for the past 20 years and they just don’t feel the need to call attention to it. In the words of Blink 182 in 1999: “work sucks, I know”. Is anti-ambition a real trend or is it just another online content generator?
Totally agree with you here. The explosion of “reset your nervous system” content and coaches is telling. Of course regulating your nervous system is very important, but sometimes it feels like the cultural response to anti-ambition is just… “make money while you sleep” blueprints for $47. There's nothing wrong with that, but it really depends on your end goal. Passive income sounds great on paper as does autonomy. But the way it’s being packaged can feel like a quick-fix economy and that’s where it starts to feel off. Everyone has different definitions of success, but just because the system hasn’t historically rewarded female ambition fairly doesn’t mean the answer is collective retreat. I think it’s more about resetting on our own terms and getting honest about what we actually want and for many of us, that still may be building something (or being a part of something) long-term we’re deeply proud of.
Love this take!
I'm not a fan of the 2010s "Lean In" career guides either, but I think this new genre of anti-ambition is so much more hypocritical and seems...gender-traitor-y? (akin to being a class/race traitor). Sure, Sheryl Sandberg had a lot of help and her success can't really be solely attributed to her "leaning in", and plenty of ambitious women who are inspired to "lean in" won't get the same results. But it feels so much more insidious to personally profit and get clout for writing a book - which yeah, is an incredibly ambitious endeavor, lol - peddling the virtues of "chilling out". Your influence might actually persuade more women to sacrifice financial independence and presence in the public sphere while you build more capital.
My other observation of the anti-ambition trend is the extent to which it is distinctly gendered. These books are written by and for women, same with social media trends like the #lazygirl #feminineenergy and #tradwife promising to unlock new layers of leisure, satisfaction and meaning by limiting women’s ambitions to a smaller and smaller window. As I write in the book: "Anti-ambition has effectively adopted the language of wellness and self-care to claim that true “empowerment” isn’t achieved through a more expansive vision of what women can and should have access to, but through the framework of constraint. Where freedom, rest, and liberation are no longer enabled by women’s claims to their public and professional ambitions, but in letting go of them— either a little bit, or altogether, depending how far down the #softlife to #tradwife pipeline their algorithm has gone."
Having more money definitely makes it easier to make smaller decisions that align with my values. For example, I pay for a composting service that’s optional in my city and I love it. Though I’d agree with the sentiment that money enables more than it inspires. I dream of all the things I could do to live my values every day, but sometimes it’s just not possible. When it is though, I already have a shortlist of the things I want to do. But if you’ve never thought about your values and how to fulfill them, it’s easy to fall into the trap of self-soothing.
It is absolutely easier to act on your values as you earn more money. I was a federal employee last year and this year I am in the private sector making 40% less. That major hit to our household income and my job stability means I am now incredibly hesitant to do or say things that might go against the grain in our rural, conservative area. In fact my outspokenness cost me a job opportunity late last year and learning that stung a lot.
I know I don’t know you or the context, but my gut reaction was “you probably would’ve hated working there/with them.” I hope you will continue to speak your mind ❤️🩹
I feel we are in an FDR type of moment. Heck maybe FDR and the civil war. The packing looks very different, but the insides are very alike. Can we start some conversations around New Deal, safety nets, human capital, etc…. Pardon, my brain caught fire last night thanks to the SOTU. Thank you Katie for your work! 🧠🔥
Temu American Psycho got me. I really would love a deeper dive into why 200K+ people "cheat" on Venmo more than 100K people. Maybe 100K people are struggling too much to Venmo their friends for their share of the pizza? Maybe 200K people are hobnobbing with 500K+ earners and this is their way of sticking it to them?
I don't think there's a linear correlation between "acting on your values" versus "wealth." Perhaps it's a bell curve. You will Jean Valjean your ass too if you are hungry and steal bread for your children. If you're too wealthy the worse devils of your nature might erupt and you might go a bit Epstein on us. I think it's the balance of having your Malthusian foundational values met while having enough direction and foundation in your life to actually have some moral ambition...wait you didn't actually if your values were GOOD values, nvm.
I find it easier to stick to my values in “belt-tightening” mode because I have to be way more disciplined and intentional with my money.
The hardest periods to put my money where my values are have been during times of big change (like a big move or a new job). I consume to self-soothe, and delay budgeting to later. I think this makes sense because periods of change are also when we are most vulnerable to scams and frauds.
Also I’m feeling called out by the “anti ambition” framing - and weirdly excited to explore this burnout memoir trend…as someone who burned out and quit my high earning corporate career and sometimes writes about my next chapter, I wonder how much of this is actually a spin on the early retirement / FIRE movement? I mean, if some women made enough money and decided to quit their soulless jobs and write books instead…good for them right? Right???
Of course it’s easier to act on certain values with more disposable income - but earning more money doesn’t create said values. My rich friends who don’t value sustainability didn’t start buying higher quality stuff as their incomes rose - they just spend thousands more a year on cheap online crap than they used to. Some of them still eat non-organic ultra processed food out of plastic. I’m talking millionaires with mid 6 figure incomes.
Money may even erode some values…isn’t there research showing power / money tends to corrupt? I recall studies where “wealthier” players in games and contrived situations began cheating, running stop signs, and the like. I’m thinking of Bezos here and what he did to the Washington Post…
Re: Sears vs. Amazon:
The majority of Amazon's ownership comes from institutional investors (e.g. Vanguard ... i.e. retirement accounts and investors). Though a portion of Bezos' estimated 9-10ish% percent ($200 billion) would provide a mighty nice nest egg for Amazon's staff.
I believe you have written or spoken about this before, but this illustrates the Faustian bargain everyday American workers have made for the past 50+ years. We have sacrificed job security, dignity, and even pay so that The Company can achieve growth and shareholder value. In exchange, workers are a.) encouraged to invest in the company (or companies) ourselves via our retirement accounts so that we can reach the mythical land of Worry-Free Retirement, and b.) get to take advantage of the lower prices generated by The Company saving money by underpaying labor.
The proverbial chickens are coming home to roost because a young family is forced to rob their future to buy a house, or flat-out can't fund a retirement account period because their income has to be spread thin due to the rising cost of living. This is why inflation is so devastating, and the potential of AI so terrifying.
Basically, we turned ourselves into good little productivity machines in the hope of lower prices and a safe retirement, and now we're being replaced by even better little productivity machines. P.S. would love to hear your thoughts on Sam Altman's remark about people being energy users.
I hard disagree that money makes you a worse person. I think that money gives you the privilege of being your truest self, whatever kind of person your true self is.
(i speak from my personal experience and observations)
Definitely easier to act on your values with money- but I think social cues (like the FI-lanthropy pledge) help a lot. I would also add that this applies to time. When I was making $60,000 two years ago, the idea of supporting others (or even increasing my 401K contribution) felt absurd. Now at 6 figures, I have both the mental space and finances to pay it forward.
The memoir trend is giving Death of a Salesman for the girlboss generation.
On the topic of Boomers running the US economy, and what I think would be an incredible DL topic, I’d recommend the book “A Generation of Sociopaths” by Bruce Cannon Gibney.
Also, where can I pick up that piece of art? It is a steal for $75. Hmmm… wonder where it’s at