There, I said it. Now some of you might think I’m a filthy materialistic prick.. And for those I say, congratulations, you’re right. But let me explain why I don’t think it’s a bad thing. Linking money with success at least, not being a prick.

Walking away from the “money doesn’t buy happiness” argument, this blog post is more oriented towards explaining my concept of how money is, with no shame, the unit of success. Yes. Money is to success what meters are to distance (unless you’re american, then it’s inches.. thanks for ruining everything). The best schools, hospitals, and companies also happen to be the most expensive ones. The most skilled developers, engineers, and project managers are surprisingly the ones who get paid highest. The best quality products in any industry are the highest priced.

No matter what you do, the better you are, the higher the monetary value your work will have. If you’re a good author, your book could become a best seller, generating you millions of dollars. If you’re a smart lawyer, your hourly rate might be in 4-digits. Even if you’re an artist who doesn’t give a crap about anything monetary in this materialistic sick world, your paintings might be worth millions of dollars depending on how successful/skilled you are, sometimes only after your death.

This is why I like money. It’s not the goal, it’s not the question, it’s not the purpose. Money is the unit that measures it all. If you’re a musician, crazy about the beats, in love with the vibes and art, your goal is not the money. But when you make it, then money will come. In other words, when you succeed and your numbers hit the charts, so will your bank account statement.

A lot of people might oppose this idea. For example, professors who have “devoted” their whole lives for science and technology, doing research to develop solutions that will enhance the human life over the years and leave a better future to our children. Those will say that I’m a materialistic piece of shit. Why? Because this logic moves them out of their comfort zones. It says that they have not achieved enough, or aren’t bright enough, as they clearly see that there are people who make more money than them. But that’s not what I’m trying to say. I believe everyone should do what makes them happy. You might find your calling being teaching school or university students, and you want to settle there forever. However, once you know you’re in the right field, then you can envision what’s at the top of that mountain. The money unit logic still applies though. It matters when you’re a professor in a nice cozy community college versus an outspoken professor in Harvard with many publications on the field you teach. The crave for money might be exactly the same in both cases, but the income statement surely will not be.

Again, money is not the goal; it’s the unit. You cannot compare a car to a phone. You cannot compare a university professor to a financial investor. They’re 2 different things.  Same goes with 2 doctors, one settles to being a general doctor in his local clinic until the day he retires, and the other works his butt off to research a specific disease and study everything about it, until he comes up with a cure to it, or finds a better way to treat it.

Damn it, even in religion, and I don’t like talking about that much. Look at the highest ranked, most influential, or oldest religious figures in any religion. Regardless of how much money they make (and they make a lot of it), they usually have high ranks in society, meaning that they require more security around them. Bullet proof SUVs, personal body guards, the whole story. That costs money. Not to mention the donations, government salaries, etc…

What about the selfless charity donors? People who have devoted their lives to help others? Well, you can hear people talking about those as in “she built a hundred hospitals!”, or “he fed millions of poor kids and families..”. That value, as much humanitarian as it sounds, could also be monetized. Not in the sense of how much these people made, but rather how much they donated. I know such people usually wouldn’t do it for such purposes, and I know the amazing feeling of happiness when you help someone, but I cannot deny the fact; the more success they had in that field, the more monetary value it had (even if it was time contribution).

Yet, of course, there are some social cases that don’t apply to this unit. Best daddy in the world? No, that won’t be the one who buys his 17 year old a Ferrari. But then again, most of these are social roles, so they really don’t apply to the success of an individual.

So, what are you trying to say here, Ahmed?

Well, Ahmed thinks that money is the unit of success. In each field, the most successful people are those who amount for the biggest values of that unit. When you Google most successful artists/painters, you get Leonardo Da Vinci as number 1. When you Google highest valued painting, you get Da Vinci’s famous Mona Lisa valued at more than $780M. Ahmed also thinks that this unit, maybe, just maybe.. should be a universal unit. Ahmed sometimes meets people who think he’s successful, and that makes him laugh his butt off silently. The bar is way too high in my field than where I currently am. In other words, there are people who make way more money. Hence, if everyone has that universal measurement unit, everyone will know that Ahmed is only at 0.01% of progress to reach the top of his field’s success pyramid.

P.s. this is merely my point of view. This is what the whole blog will be about. Don’t be offended or annoyed. If you don’t agree, leave a comment saying why. Ahmed thinks what others think is important 🙂