You’re welcome, Mary. I do suggest that you drop the word “happy” and switch to”satisfied”. “Happy” is a market hot button that actually detracts from a person’s deep satisfaction with themselves. I think that true satisfaction is instinctive, and comes from knowing oneself is either useful to their own future or at least in some way involved in the stability of meeting their own needs or both. In other words, we have an instinct to hoard resources and gather things that has to be met some way so that we can move on to contributing something beyond basic needs. Nassim Taleb would go into the ability to take advantage of ‘increase' opportunities that come up, or anti-fragility as opportunism. I call it Net Future Usefulness. There’s always an accident or risk (black swan) that we can’t predict, so we have to be and do more than basic needs, gather extra berries, plant extra flowers for the bees, etc. Too much of “liberalism” is a weak compromise with exploitation of people. I have mixed feelings about the Clintons, but strong feelings that Americans haven’t begun to make civilization work yet. It’s always “the least we can do” for the future, after “business” gets to dictate the terms of decisions. People don’t need jobs: they need to be useful. The future world doesn’t need money, but it does thrive on usefulness. Money is a useful tool, but as with any tool: safety first, and put it away when you’re done or the cord might hang someone.