We live in a shallow world where one's physical appearance and material possessions can be the deciding factor in whether you get the job or the girl. In my estimation, intelligence -- and that includes deep intellectual curiosity -- isn't assigned enough weight by most people.  The stereotype against "nerds" and "geeks" is one we are well familiar with. We might have been labeled as such in our youth if we always got good grades, or had a bespectacled overachieving friend whose work everyone looked to copy. What I don't understand is this: Why can't being smart for its own sake be an it-thing?  While money can be lost and material stuff can rust, no one can take your intellectual prowess away from you. (Notice I said "no one" and not "nothing." I know there are terrible accidents and health conditions, like Alzheimers, that can rob you of your mental faculties. Some may argue, however, that you can deal self-inflicted wounds by t...

Many of us would admit to drawing comparisons between ourselves and celebrities who have achieved great fame and wealth. Maybe you've compared your physique to that of Dwayne Johnson, your hair to that of Scarlett Johansson, or your zany sense of humor to that of Chris Rock. As long as you're not trying to be these people -- recognizing that while you can get inspiration from them, you're your own person -- I see no problem with it. After all, we can respect and admire the Hollywood elite without necessarily aping their mannerisms, buying all the products they endorse, and longing to be in their very shoes. However, when it comes to a relationship, you're dealing with someone you presumably love and trust, and who loves and trusts you. Someone who values you for who you are. These are the kinds of comparisons that will not only land you in water, but possibly put the relationship in serious jeopardy: 1. Comparing your partner to your ex, or someone you fee...

Studies show that our criteria for measuring success is markedly different now than it was several years ago. In the past, we typically perceived someone as successful if they boasted possessions that signaled wealth (e.g., car, big house, fancy watch) and appeared to have loads of free time on their hands. We assumed it meant that their net worth was such that they had no real need to work hard. In our minds, they likely spent more time sunbathing in the Caribbean than churning out reports in the office. However, the benchmarks we use to measure success have evolved over time -- not so much when it comes to material possessions, but in terms of overall lifestyle and work ethic. Studies suggest that we are now more likely to perceive someone as being successful if they have little to no time available for leisurely pursuits due to the many responsibilities they shoulder. For example, let's say Joe works 60 hours a week, has kids, and volunteers at a local non-profit. He h...

In my last post, I argued that men's biggest complaint about women is that they generally don't know what they want in the arena of relationships. Some claim to want a nice, sweet guy, but they still end up with the exact opposite. What they say they want and what they actually go for don't always square. Does this mean that all women have a preference for bad boys? Nope, not at all. What all women do want, as I pointed out in that earlier post, is a man with confidence. Because these bad boy types exude self-confidence (sometimes women mistake cockiness for confidence, however), women find themselves drawn to them. A guy can still be nice and romantic as long as he does it in small doses. No woman wants a man to worship the ground she walks on, as it communicates that the guy is needy and trying to supplicate to her. That just isn't the way to build attraction. A guy who doesn't seem sure of himself and always looks to his partner for approval is not do...

An article published recently by CNN reveals that eight men -- Warren Buffett, Carlos Slim, Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, Michael Bloomberg, Larry Ellison, and Amancio Ortega -- are insanely rich. Collectively, they're worth $426 billion, now controlling as much wealth as the world's poorest 3.6 billion people. To put it in perspective, the richest 1% has owned more wealth than the rest of the planet since 2015. In the U.S., the richest 1% control 42% of the wealth. And the problem is only getting worse. . Despite many world leaders sharing a common goal to reduce inequality, the gap between the rich and the rest continues to widen. In fact, seven out of 10 people live in a country where inequality has worsened over the past three decades. And over the past 25 years, the top 1% has gained more income than the bottom 50% combined. In other words, income and wealth are being funneled upwards at a staggering rate -- rather than trickling down. To boot, the...

All of us yearn to win the lottery someday so that we can gleefully hand our bosses a resignation letter and live in the lap of luxury. Or do we? We claim to want to be millionaires, but how can we be sure we would really enjoy that kind of lifestyle? For people like me who aren't heavy spenders and don't necessarily gravitate toward luxury brands, being rich may not be our ultimate goal in life. We may not be all that interested in acquiring more money than we know what to do with. And some of us might feel pressured to live like millionaires -- say, driving around in a Maserati and living in a resplendent mansion -- simply because we have the means to do so. I have never aspired to become a millionaire. I've only wished to have enough saved up to afford me a comfortable life. What's more, I am not -- nor have I ever been -- materialistic. While other people may look forward to their next vacation or contemplate which fancy restaurant they are going to hit up nex...