To think that if you’re in a position of choice, you should always choose affluence?

There are many ways to give back.

Take the best paid job, you might help a lot less people, not make a difference, but give to local causes - and for those you will make a difference, you can volunteer, give time, help. The other job will recruit someone else and make the same difference anyway?

Family comes first, then you do what you can, it doesn't have to mean you put yourself last.

There's an element of selfishness in taking the best paid positions, that you work for anyway!, but it doesn't mean your life has to be selfish.

Can you describe to me when people have this choice? I’m lost.

What's the definition of affluence, and what's the counterfactual? Unless you can define these more clearly this is gibberish.

For example:

Is it sensible to choose a paid job over a life on welfare? Yes obviously.

Is it sensible to choose a marriage to a fantastically wealthy but unkind and controlling man over working to support your children yourself? Probably not.

You have to provide more clarity on what the actual choices are.

Depends on the scenario.

I left a stressful, high paying job for a less stressful, lower paying job. I have to budget better, but I'm not grumpy all the time anymore so on balance my quality of life has improved.

I wouldn't accept a job that was morally dubious e.g. working for a tobacco or gambling company as it wouldn't align with my values, even if the pay was better.

I can think of loads more scenarios where choosing 'wealth' doesn't make more sense.

I'm mulling this over at the moment as I have 2 job offers on the table. One for a £100k job with scope to earn double in time. With with a £60k job and realistically progression only up to £80k

The £60k job could see me making a genuine difference to others though. The £100k+ one will just make me rich (and make other people richer)

I guess £60k doesn't mean struggle but it will mean making difficult budgeting choices at times and it will be difficult to help my children with university and a deposit.

The lower paid job also comes with better working conditions and much better sick pay. So realistically is more sustainable.

Where's the tipping point between comfort and selfishness ?
If everyone chose wealth over other values the world would be a much darker place

In your first example, presumably they feel that the work is less worthwhile than what they're doing. You don't agree with them, but that doesn't mean they're choosing to have less money. It's more complicated than that.

In your second example, they're either avoiding the strings that come with that or feeling guilty about not pulling their weight or not being fair.

In both cases the choice is not as straightforward as you are suggesting. A straightforward choice would be if I was offered more money to do my same job in the same place with the same employer and I turned it down. No one does that.

I am not sure that would qualify as "struggling" though

Like all these type of questions there’s no yes or no answer - it depends on the circumstances

Apart from the Buddha✌

My mother always said, it's better to be poor and happy than rich and miserable, but if you are going to be miserable, better rich and miserable than poor and miserable!

I honestly don't think there are many concrete real life examples of what you are describing. Usually more money comes with more strings, risk, responsibility, exploitation of others, genuine causes for someone's peace to be disturbed

The only people i can think of that might be in that catergory are nuns and monks. Or the Buddha?

I'll eat my hat

I walked away from a stupidly high paying financial sector job to go to university in
My 30s, and then worked in the public/charity sectors for a lot less money, and a lot more balanced life and job satisfaction.

My husband left an obscenely well-paid role in private healthcare in the US to work in the NHS for (in comparison) peanuts, because he believes in universal healthcare

I guess we’re both daft.

This. There are always strings.

I can't imagine anyone wants to struggle. All normal people would prefer comfort

Rejecting financial help or support is a totally different scenario, it's (generally) about freedom and independence. Not the same thing at all. Financial help rarely comes without strings

Your attitude is very simplistic. And could be seen as judgmental.

I don't believe they genuinely romanticise it, they just have a painful case of imposter syndrome, or they are scared (of work, responsibility) and they pretend to be morally superior, instead of admitting - even to themselves - that they are cowards. Or lazy.

Unless the huge income would come directly from obvious child slavery and torture, but realistically, that won't be that.

Example
though?

I gave an example. My dad (and mum) chose to work extremely hard, rather than become affluent through doing a job that was contrary to their ethics.

Admittedly, we weren’t living in poverty, but money was very tight and sacrifices had to be made.

I think we all have a responsibility to be self sufficient for as long as we are capable of it.