Rashid Al-Shidhani

Published: 14 July 2026, 10:42 AM GST | Last updated: 14 July 2026, 10:43 AM GST

Reading mode

100% font size

Listen to the article - Audio text automatically generated by an automated system

0:00

4 minutes to read

Societies are witnessing fundamental shifts in the individual's relationship with money, and the main challenge is no longer the scarcity of resources but rather the illusion of their abundance. The reason for this is the changing culture of individuals in consumption and their feeling of illusory abundance in the era of digital liquidity. Here we ask: Why do we never feel money? Actually, the challenge is not in feeling money but in the disconnection of sensation from spending; meaning that the voracity of buying and consuming small amounts, such as drinking a coffee for 3 riyals and subscribing to an electronic game for 10 riyals, leaves the individual facing a real problem at the end of the month by discovering that these small amounts consumed 40% of the monthly income, maybe more. Thus, using an electronic card for payment makes the individual feel illusory abundance because it simply means consume now and pay later, whereas previously reliance was more on paper money in purchases, which limits purchases and consumption as soon as the individual feels a shortage from the wallet. The second approach lies in the transformation of consumption as identity rather than need. The phone is no longer a tool for communication and contact, nor for accomplishing and completing tasks, but rather a criterion for a person's status in society and the work environment. Cafés are no longer a place for drinking coffee but a backdrop for a photo to believe in entitlement. Travel is no longer a desire for exploration and relaxation after a year of hard work, but content on social media to feel superiority and financial ability compared to others. Here we conclude that this approach is dangerous because the individual has shifted from consumption for the purpose of need to consumption to be seen, but he collapses as soon as purchasing stops because identity was built on a fragile basis: spending to be seen by others, not need. The third approach relates to the economy of temptation or behavioral economics; it is linked to our preference for products and our irrational choices, and it may be the weak point that providers of products, goods, services, and merchants generally exploit. Examples include: When visiting markets and shopping malls, you choose one item and are surprised by an enticing offer: buy two and get the third free; even if you need only one item, you will choose the tempting offer for one reason only: not to miss the offer, and it is a valuable opportunity and a temporary feeling of triumph. But in reality, you need only one item, and it may not be durable. Another scene: You pass by a store, an item tempts you with a sticker containing a 70% discount on its price, but you do not need it, and perhaps its real price after the discount forces you to buy it because you think you saved money, but in reality you spent money you did not need to spend, then you regret it later but after it is too late. Another approach is the abundance of vain comparisons and illusory achievements on social media that never end, and the presentation of illusory investment opportunities; for example, investing in buying land or renting a vehicle will give you a profit rate of 50% while the market is going through a growth phase of 100% during that period. Then comparisons begin: So-and-so built a luxurious house, I must build like him; So-and-so traveled to several countries, I must travel like him even if I have to borrow and bear bank interest; So-and-so bought a luxury car, I must buy a car like his or better. The danger in this approach is that a person compares his monthly salary to the best moment in someone else's life, so we are dragged to satisfy desires and fill gaps that are not material but purely psychological, and we do not think that what some people do is for the purpose of filming and showing off, not need. So we start comparing our miserable conditions to those who seek conditions for the purpose of content, filming, and showing off. Indeed, we need to break the barrier of illusion that prevails in society in many matters and return to societal awareness and constantly strengthen it. We do not want austerity solutions or deprivation from enjoying moments or distorting the daily social scene with austerity and deprivation, but rather societal awareness that prevents chronic deficit, encourages saving, enhances security, and frees from suffocating financial obligations such as credit card installments and consumer loans. We need to restore the greatness of contentment with what God has apportioned of sustenance and money, not searching for trends and comparisons on social media, and thus greater financial obligations. We want awareness that makes us lead our consumer project according to our available capabilities, not being part of the consumer project of others. True abundance is not that we own everything, but that we are satisfied with what we own and that we choose what we buy. The battle is not a battle of income, but a battle of will and rejection of what is imposed on us, and not allowing the value of our satisfaction to erode, and not being hostage to financial indebtedness to achieve our psychological desires and drown in luxuries, even if it leads to chronic deficit. To address the illusion of abundance, we propose that relevant government agencies integrate to rebuild societal consumer awareness through enhancing financial education, combating misleading advertisements on social media, and contentment with what God has apportioned to humans of sustenance and money, and refraining from vain comparisons that encourage inadequacy and always demanding more.

Quoted from 'Oman'

Advertising material

Advertising material

Disclaimer: All published articles represent the views of their authors only.