Here's a powerful simile, thus i heard.
Five children were playing the wishing game. "If you are granted a wish, what will you want?" In this game, the first child said, "If I have a wish, I'll wish for an ice-cream." Because it's quite a sunny, hot day. The second child said, "I'll wish for an ice-cream factory." Because, if there's an ice-cream factory, you can have all the ice cream you one when you want it. The third child did even better, he said, "If I have a wish, I'll wish for a billion dollars." Because with a billion dollars, you can buy all type of factories. The fourth child is smarter, he said, "If I have a wish, I'll wish for 3 wishes. In my first wish, I can wish for an ice-cream factory, and for my second wish, I can wish for a billion dollars, and for the third wish, I can wish back my 3 wishes." Because with endless wishes, you can get what you want again and again. The fifth child bet all the four children. His wish was more profound and brought more happiness. He said, "If I have a wish, I wish I don't need any more wishes ever again, end of wishing." Because without wishes, one let go, that is contentment and freedom, freedom of desire. If one still needs wishes, one is not happy with the present situation. Worldly beings would rather choose to be the fouth child, but the fifth child IS the idea of Buddha. /\
BUT Contentment must not be misunderstood as complacency and apathy.
Ven P.A. Payutto taught: Contentment While not technically an economic concern, I would like to add a few comments on the subject of contentment. Contentment is a virtue that has often been misunderstood and, as it relates to consumption and satisfaction, it seems to merit some discussion. The tacit objective of economics is a dynamic economy where every demand and desire is supplied and constantly renewed in a never-ending and ever-growing cycle. The entire mechanism is fueled by tanha. From the Buddhist perspective, this tireless search to satisfy desires is itself a kind of suffering. Buddhism proposes the cessation of this kind of desire, or contentment, as a more skillful objective. Traditional economists would probably counter that without desire, the whole economy would grind to a halt. However, this is based on a misunderstanding of the nature of contentment. People misunderstand contentment because they fail to distinguish between the two different kinds of desire, tanha and chanda. We lump them together, and in proposing contentment, dismiss them both. A contented person comes to be seen as one who wants nothing at all. Here lies our mistake. Obviously, people who are content will have fewer wants than those who are discontent. However, a correct definition of contentment must be qualified by the stipulation that it implies only the absence of artificial want, that is tanha; chanda, the desire for true well-being, remains. In other words, the path to true contentment involves reducing the artificial desire for sense-pleasure, while actively encouraging and supporting the desire for quality of life. These two processes -- reducing tanha and encouraging chanda -- are mutually supportive. When we are easily satisfied in material things, we save time and energy that might otherwise be wasted on seeking objects of tanha. The time and energy we save can, in turn, be applied to the development of well-being, which is the objective of chanda. When it comes to developing skillful conditions, however, contentment is not a beneficial quality. Skillful conditions must be realized through effort. Too much contentment with regards to chanda easily turns into complacency and apathy. In this connection, the Buddha pointed out that his own attainment of enlightenment was largely a result of two qualities: unremitting effort, and lack of contentment with skillful conditions. [D.III.214; A.I.50; Dhs. 8, 234] http://www.buddhanet.net/cmdsg/econ3.htm#Contentment
From: “Buddhist Economics: A Middle Way for the Market Place” by Ven P.A. Payutto