What do you think?
Rate this book
Why It's OK: The Ethics and Aesthetics of How We Live
É Ok Querer Ser Rico
Moralizadores de dedo em riste dizem que o amor ao dinheiro é a raiz de todos os males. Presumem que ganhar muito dinheiro implica explorar outras pessoas e que a melhor maneira de quem ganha muito salvar a face é doar grandes somas. Em É OK Querer Ser Rico, Jason Brennan mostra que esses moralizadores fazem uma leitura ao contrário. Argumenta que, em geral, quanto mais dinheiro se ganha, mais se faz pelos outros, e que até um assalariado médio está a retribuir produtivamente à sociedade simplesmente por fazer o seu trabalho. Além disso, a riqueza liberta‑nos para termos a melhor oportunidade de levar uma vida autenticamente nossa.
Brennan também procura demonstrar de que modo as sociedades baseadas no dinheiro criam melhores cidadãos, mais confiáveis e mais cooperativos. Com base nos novos historiadores do capitalismo, argumenta que as nações ricas se tornaram ricas devido às suas instituições saudáveis e não às suas horríveis histórias de escravidão ou colonialismo. Ao mesmo tempo que defende que quanto mais dinheiro se tem mais se deve ajudar os outros, Brennan também observa que não nascemos com uma dívida perpétua para com a sociedade. Não só é ok tornar‑se rico, como o é gostar de ser rico.
Brennan também procura demonstrar de que modo as sociedades baseadas no dinheiro criam melhores cidadãos, mais confiáveis e mais cooperativos. Com base nos novos historiadores do capitalismo, argumenta que as nações ricas se tornaram ricas devido às suas instituições saudáveis e não às suas horríveis histórias de escravidão ou colonialismo. Ao mesmo tempo que defende que quanto mais dinheiro se tem mais se deve ajudar os outros, Brennan também observa que não nascemos com uma dívida perpétua para com a sociedade. Não só é ok tornar‑se rico, como o é gostar de ser rico.
264 pages, Paperback
Published January 1, 2021
7 people are currently reading
100 people want to read
About the author
Jason Brennan
35 books139 followersJason Brennan is the Robert J. and Elizabeth Flanagan Family Professor of Strategy, Economics, Ethics, and Public Policy at Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business. His books include Against Democracy and The Ethics of Voting.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
February 27, 2021
If the title of the book cringes you out, you should probably read it.
Naval Ravikant has written: "Understand, that ethical wealth creation is possible. If you secretly despise wealth, it will elude you."
I picked up this book because of that quote.
If the title makes you cringe (like it did me), you'd likely benefit the most from the book. A well-referenced and researched look by the prof. of economics in Georgetown University into why healthy economies promote wealth generation and how at the end of the day, the profit motive makes everyone in the society better off.
The central premise is that in a free economy, we only pay money for the goods and services that we value more than the money we paid for them. Hence, it is ok - even Necessary - to generate wealth through providing value to other members of the society - and if you can scale it, thereby helping more people, even better. Since economies are Not a zero-sum game, contrary to what many believe, providing and selling value makes everyone better off.
This book helped me overcome a long-rooted sense of shame over wealth. Excellent read, recommended 10/10. Especially to those who find the title and topic repugnant.
Naval Ravikant has written: "Understand, that ethical wealth creation is possible. If you secretly despise wealth, it will elude you."
I picked up this book because of that quote.
If the title makes you cringe (like it did me), you'd likely benefit the most from the book. A well-referenced and researched look by the prof. of economics in Georgetown University into why healthy economies promote wealth generation and how at the end of the day, the profit motive makes everyone in the society better off.
The central premise is that in a free economy, we only pay money for the goods and services that we value more than the money we paid for them. Hence, it is ok - even Necessary - to generate wealth through providing value to other members of the society - and if you can scale it, thereby helping more people, even better. Since economies are Not a zero-sum game, contrary to what many believe, providing and selling value makes everyone better off.
This book helped me overcome a long-rooted sense of shame over wealth. Excellent read, recommended 10/10. Especially to those who find the title and topic repugnant.
September 20, 2023
One of the best books about wealth I have read. Some points get lingered on for too long, especially in the final chapters. He brought up the legend of Zelda, which is an easy win in my book.
April 21, 2021
This is a good book on the split personality we Americans have when it comes to money and prosperity: we want to be wealthier and we are somewhat ashamed of that desire. Brennan takes down three myths: It’s bad to want money; it’s bad to make money; and it’s bad to keep money. It’s a wide-ranging argument on behalf of wealth creation. I appreciated the take down of many myths, such as cotton being so critical to the Industrial Revolution, or colonialism, or slavery, among many others. There’s also a very interesting discussion of Peter Singer’s argument that we should give away nearly all of our extra income and wealth to various charities, along with his famous thought experiment of the drowning child. But what about many drowning children? Brennan writes:
"Readers agree that they are obligated to save one drowning child. Singer then tries to show readers that distance doesn’t matter, so they should agree that they must save at least one dying child they don’t encounter. But then he tries to argue, again on pain of inconsistency, that if they admit they must save one life, they are committed to saving lives up until the point of serious self-sacrifice. This last step, however, doesn’t quite work. ...How did the people in these recently poor countries go from being the kinds of people Singer thinks ought to be helped to the kinds of people Singer thinks ought to give help?"
It's a good question, since wealth is the only known antidote to poverty. This is an excellent defense of wealth creation and the desire to be rich.
Notable
Seneca: “It is the sign of an unstable mind not to be able to endure riches.”
[T]he gross national product does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education or the joy of their play. It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages, the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials. It measures neither our wit nor our courage, neither our wisdom nor our learning, neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country, it measures everything in short, except that which makes life worthwhile —Robert Kennedy, 19681
Philosophers often wonder whether egalitarian philosophy is merely about lionizing envy.
Hayek argues, “Our rapid economic advancement is in large part a result of inequality and is impossible without it. Progress at a fast rate cannot proceed on a uniform front, but must take place in an echelon fashion…”
The rich pay for experimentation and innovation and fund entrepreneurs in finding ways to market to the poor, though this is not the intention of the rich.
"Readers agree that they are obligated to save one drowning child. Singer then tries to show readers that distance doesn’t matter, so they should agree that they must save at least one dying child they don’t encounter. But then he tries to argue, again on pain of inconsistency, that if they admit they must save one life, they are committed to saving lives up until the point of serious self-sacrifice. This last step, however, doesn’t quite work. ...How did the people in these recently poor countries go from being the kinds of people Singer thinks ought to be helped to the kinds of people Singer thinks ought to give help?"
It's a good question, since wealth is the only known antidote to poverty. This is an excellent defense of wealth creation and the desire to be rich.
Notable
Seneca: “It is the sign of an unstable mind not to be able to endure riches.”
[T]he gross national product does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education or the joy of their play. It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages, the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials. It measures neither our wit nor our courage, neither our wisdom nor our learning, neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country, it measures everything in short, except that which makes life worthwhile —Robert Kennedy, 19681
Philosophers often wonder whether egalitarian philosophy is merely about lionizing envy.
Hayek argues, “Our rapid economic advancement is in large part a result of inequality and is impossible without it. Progress at a fast rate cannot proceed on a uniform front, but must take place in an echelon fashion…”
The rich pay for experimentation and innovation and fund entrepreneurs in finding ways to market to the poor, though this is not the intention of the rich.
February 8, 2022
I just finished reading a book by Jason Brennan Why it's OK to Want to Be Rich on the Perlego app. Even though this has political implications in the minds of some I would like to point out that it is not partisian. The whole book is fair minded discussion of why a lot of the standard views of most americans about wealth are incorrect. I already knew some of this material due to the fact that I was a Bernie Bro about 8 years ago but trying to defend his moral intutions until I found out that being pro capitalist would best achieve his stated economic goals. I would add that 70% of all economists in the US are democrats (see the article linked here: https://www.forbes.com/.../surprise-7...... That being said I found the book had some new material that I was unfamiliar with and the whole of the book is written at a digestable reading level. I had one difference with the author when he makes the claim that status seeking is morally repungnant. I happen to be reading Virtue Signaling: Essays on Darwinian politics and free speech by Geoffrey Miller which despite the subtitle not about politics for the most part. His eye opening essays argue quite plausibly to my mind that their is a positive aspect to virtue signaling which is just part of sexual selection. For example most people would not date much less marry someone who they find morally repungnant and this is important because in sexually dimorphic species such as ours the choosing sex happens to be female who choose mates based on moral qualities in which he lumps intelligence. No one in their right mind will choose someone they deem as stupid and/or immoral. I realize there are same sex relationships which I admitted don't know much about but I suspect the same dynamic applies to them as well. Perhaps Miller will discuss same sex relationships in the remainder of the book but regardless I will post my review of that book once I have finished it.
June 23, 2022
Why It’s OK to Want to Be Rich (2020) by Jason Brennan is a curious book that gives a serious philosophical justification as to why it’s OK to be rich. Brennan is an academic at Georgetown University’s Business School.
Many of us would quite like to be rich. But many of us are perhaps somewhat ashamed of this fact. The book makes the case that it really is OK to be rich. Provided the money is obtained in a normal job and not by theft or deception.
First Brennan describes how money has been described by religions as evil and he also points out that if you’re reading this book you’re probably rich by historic standards and within the world today already. Then Brennan describes what we can do with money and that more money does, according to surveys, make people happier. Although it’s important to note that the effect is logarithmic.
Then the idea that money makes us selfish is described. Brennan points out that people in market economies actually seem to trust more than in non-market economies. Brennan then looks at how our moral sense comes from thinking about smaller groups than today we interact with. The example of ‘I pencil’ is described. Brennan also describes how our work for money is valued by others which they demonstrate by paying us.
There is then a digression to look at wealth between countries and how wealth is not a zero sum game, nor is the evidence that modern wealth came from slavery. Brennan also discusses Peter Singer’s ideas about how it is required morally to give most of money away to poorer people in the world. Finally Brennan writes about how luxury goods fit and that buying them is not always immoral.
It’s OK to Want to Be Rich is a well written, well argued book that uses an academics skill to defend intellectually a position that many of us quietly hold. It’s well worth a read. It’s quite thought provoking.
Many of us would quite like to be rich. But many of us are perhaps somewhat ashamed of this fact. The book makes the case that it really is OK to be rich. Provided the money is obtained in a normal job and not by theft or deception.
First Brennan describes how money has been described by religions as evil and he also points out that if you’re reading this book you’re probably rich by historic standards and within the world today already. Then Brennan describes what we can do with money and that more money does, according to surveys, make people happier. Although it’s important to note that the effect is logarithmic.
Then the idea that money makes us selfish is described. Brennan points out that people in market economies actually seem to trust more than in non-market economies. Brennan then looks at how our moral sense comes from thinking about smaller groups than today we interact with. The example of ‘I pencil’ is described. Brennan also describes how our work for money is valued by others which they demonstrate by paying us.
There is then a digression to look at wealth between countries and how wealth is not a zero sum game, nor is the evidence that modern wealth came from slavery. Brennan also discusses Peter Singer’s ideas about how it is required morally to give most of money away to poorer people in the world. Finally Brennan writes about how luxury goods fit and that buying them is not always immoral.
It’s OK to Want to Be Rich is a well written, well argued book that uses an academics skill to defend intellectually a position that many of us quietly hold. It’s well worth a read. It’s quite thought provoking.
January 3, 2026
Great short book for folks who are socialists looking for a brief compact case for markets.
Not a great book for folks who are already persuaded of the great good markets do, it's going to just summarize things you've heard a million times elsewhere.
I was expecting it to be something totally different, not just a boilerplate 'markets are good and they channel selfishness productively.'
I was expecting it to be what it says on the tin: a defense of greed or selfishness, by someone a bit more sophisticated than rand. I didn't really get what I was looking for till the second to the last chapter, when he takes on singer (in a somewhat unconvincing way, though I do plan on looking in the bibliography for a more robust defense of his view). Even at that point, the argument is (perhaps blessedly) robust in lauding charity.
I wasn't expecting to be super challenged by this book, it is for a lay audience. It probably is good that it just sort of defends a common sense, not crazy, view. But I was left annoyed that I didn't get something stranger and more focused on ethics about our motivations and will, and not just warmed over McCloskey and Mokyr and Acemoğlua and Hayek and well really a lot of greats.
good book. glad it exists. annoyed by misleading title.
Not a great book for folks who are already persuaded of the great good markets do, it's going to just summarize things you've heard a million times elsewhere.
I was expecting it to be something totally different, not just a boilerplate 'markets are good and they channel selfishness productively.'
I was expecting it to be what it says on the tin: a defense of greed or selfishness, by someone a bit more sophisticated than rand. I didn't really get what I was looking for till the second to the last chapter, when he takes on singer (in a somewhat unconvincing way, though I do plan on looking in the bibliography for a more robust defense of his view). Even at that point, the argument is (perhaps blessedly) robust in lauding charity.
I wasn't expecting to be super challenged by this book, it is for a lay audience. It probably is good that it just sort of defends a common sense, not crazy, view. But I was left annoyed that I didn't get something stranger and more focused on ethics about our motivations and will, and not just warmed over McCloskey and Mokyr and Acemoğlua and Hayek and well really a lot of greats.
good book. glad it exists. annoyed by misleading title.
January 30, 2024
This is a very typical Jason Breenan book. He especially excels in the area on the History of Capitalism, the importance of markets for global prosperity (as excepted from an economics and business professor), and giving philosophical insights to what money is. He also gives intriguing critiques of modern conceptions of money, socialist and Marxist thought, and a semi-compelling philosophical response to Peter Singer’s drowning baby hypothetical and new arguments for effective altruism.
Even if you aren’t persuaded by every argument or point in this book it definitely will make you think deeper about these issues. He’s helped me conceptually analyze and deconstruct the often unhelpful advice (given wrong presuppositions about the nature of money) you hear day-to-day from so many people. I came in skeptical but Jason has convinced me the love and pursuit of money is not an vain or empty pursuit. If your interested in reading more of his work I highly suggest his books “Good work if you can get it” and “Injustice for All”
Even if you aren’t persuaded by every argument or point in this book it definitely will make you think deeper about these issues. He’s helped me conceptually analyze and deconstruct the often unhelpful advice (given wrong presuppositions about the nature of money) you hear day-to-day from so many people. I came in skeptical but Jason has convinced me the love and pursuit of money is not an vain or empty pursuit. If your interested in reading more of his work I highly suggest his books “Good work if you can get it” and “Injustice for All”
October 17, 2021
Not much new here
September 18, 2023
disclaimer: this book didn't represent the reality of society in a big scope
December 12, 2024
Great read. Interesting perspective on wealth.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews