It’s often the case that we confuse reality with *that which we would like to be true*. I’ve noticed this several times lately – I feel that politicians are particularly prone.
Currently, in the UK there’s a big furore over the recommendation of the independent advisory panel that ecstasy should be reclassified as a drug – it currently stands in the same group as heroin and crystal meth, and the advisory group have, upon looking at the evidence, suggested that it is not quite as dangerous as that. Now, in this circumstance the decision is entirely political. Ecstasy is nowhere near as addictive or as dangerous as most other class A drugs, but the chances of the moral majority believing that are remote to non-existent.
In a very different, but similar vein, there’s a lot of stress on banks in the UK not to pay out bonuses to their staff. Now, my company has a pay freeze and I do in many ways blame bankers for being the catalyst for our current problems, but some people who work for banks have contractual guaranteed bonuses. This means that if they are not paid, they are more than entitled take the banks (their employers) to court with, as far as I can tell, a reasonable chance that the bank workers will win. Wishing that the contracts were not written in this way, will not make it true.
It’s very hard to challenge our assumptions and beliefs, but it’s essential to do if we want to remain grounded in reality, if we aren’t grounded in reality it will almost certainly come back to bite us. i would very much like it to be true that I have a higher income, but that’s not the case. I can work to get a higher income, but really I should challenge the idea that having more money coming in would make me either happier, or richer, because in reality by itself more money isn’t enough.
- living on one income – the single life
- all about mortgages: how much can you borrow
- striking for a better deal prolongs the inevitable