The line between “enough” and “too much” - A call to redefine abundance
I've been thinking a lot about the idea of abundance lately. As technology does more for humans and allows us to be more, see more, and even get more… I find myself questioning the wisdom behind that ability, as it relates to being human. And I'm not alone: in talking with consumers (aka humans) lately, the subject of businesses’ desire for more and more has come up more than once, manifesting itself in an essential question: is there such a thing as enough for people and for businesses? And how far apart are people and businesses in how they define enough? And further, if there is a significant divide between how people define abundance for themselves and how businesses define abundance, is it really possible for people and brands to have authentic and reciprocally beneficial relationships?
We've been seeing statistical evidence of the erosion of trust in businesses and CEOs for some time, and some support for those that perpetrate physical violence against corporations as well. I hypothesize the disparity in how abundance is defined is at least partially to blame for this. Let’s dig in.
Historically, abundance has been intertwined with material wealth. The industrial revolution prioritized productivity and profit, leading to a culture that glorified excess. The modern pursuit of abundance—driven by a relentless focus on growth, consumption, and individual success—has paradoxically deepened the divide between the rich and the poor. While technological advances, global markets, and financial innovations have created unimaginable wealth, that prosperity has disproportionately benefited those who already held capital, access, and influence. The promise of abundance has fueled a winner-take-most economy, where the top echelons accumulate assets, data, and power at exponential rates, while lower-income communities struggle with stagnant wages, precarious employment, and eroding safety nets.
Rather than lifting all boats, abundance has created an illusion of shared progress. Luxury, convenience, and technological innovation are marketed as universally accessible, but in reality, they often mask a growing inequality in education, healthcare, housing, and digital access. The result is a society where opportunity is unevenly distributed, and where the pursuit of “more” by a few creates systemic scarcity for many. As abundance becomes concentrated, so too does the power to shape the future—further entrenching cycles of privilege and exclusion.
In 2025, society has more mental illness than ever before - and though we debate the issue of reported MH issues vs. unreported, the fact remains that modern stressors including this wealth gap, digital overload, social disconnection and economic precarity are creating new psychological burdens not faced by past generations. This is where I think redefining abundance may have an important role to play.
As businesses, politicians, and individuals, we often operate under the assumption that abundance is defined solely by accumulation—wealth, power, possessions. However, what if we paused to consider a more nuanced understanding of abundance? What if enough could be redefined as not just sufficient for survival, but as a means to foster happiness, thriving, and generosity?
Positive psychology, particularly Martin Seligman’s PERMA model, provides a framework that encourages us to rethink our relationship with abundance. PERMA stands for Positive Emotion, Engagement, Relationships, Meaning, and Achievement. These elements highlight that true fulfillment doesn’t stem from material wealth alone; instead, it flourishes through meaningful connections and a sense of purpose. In this light, enough can be understood as a state of being where we feel secure, valued, and able to contribute to others.
Yet, the disparity between consumers and corporations is stark. Market research studies reveal a troubling narrative: while consumers strive for enough to live and be happy, corporations and politicians often chase after ever-greater profits and power. This relentless pursuit creates a chasm that fosters disillusionment and fuels an "us versus them" mentality. Many consumers are left feeling marginalized, as if their needs are secondary to the insatiable desires of the corporate world. This gap not only breeds resentment and mental health instability - but also threatens the social fabric that binds us together.
Businesses must ask: when did we decide that enough was no longer enough? When did the pursuit of happiness become synonymous with the pursuit of more? It’s time to challenge this narrative and advocate for a shift in perspective. Happiness should not be measured by the quantity of our possessions but by the quality of our experiences and relationships.
As individuals and brands, we have the power to redefine what enough means in our lives. I’d love to see both businesses and consumers embrace the idea that enough is about thriving—having enough to meet our needs, enough to pursue our passions, and enough to share with others. It’s about crafting a life rich in experiences, connection, and joy, rather than one weighed down by the burden of endless consumption.
This is a call to action: let’s reflect on our values and the impact of our choices. Let’s engage in conversations that provoke thought and foster understanding. When we redefine abundance as “enough”, we pave the way for a more equitable society—one where happiness is not a privilege reserved for the wealthy, but a shared aspiration for all. Because true abundance lies in our ability to live well and give generously.
